SCOTTISH DvLDPMDT

CHI ROAD

GiJ

PA'T

TIUJICAL MORA1WJM SB 7/53

SPIFICATION
SOIL SVITABILITT FOR
E&RTHW)RKING

FOR ROAD AND

BRDGOS

USE OF THE ICISTUHE COITIOI APPARATJS

SU(ART

This Pleinorandum introduces the Moisture Condition Apparatus (MCA) and a new soil paraneter, the Moisture Condition Value (MCV), for predicting and assessing

suitability of soils for earthworking.

This document

contains

53

pa!J

TECICAL I1D(0RA13M

SB

/83

SPECIFICATIONFOR ROAD AND IDG1OR1(S

SOIL JIT&BILITY FOR E&RTBWOR1NG

- USE OF TI MOISTURE CONDiTION APPARATUS

is
to road construction.

1.

IBTROUJCTION

which the

suitability important techniques are based. either on the recognition of undesirable soil isting or on the establishment of an
upper limit of moisture content beyond soil becomes unworhable. This upper limit is at present set by reference to the results of two BtaedaTd soil tests, one for cohesive and another for granular soils, the results being 'adjusted.' according to simple guidelines and experience. Although experienced. Engineers have a fair degree of success, many experience difficulty in predicting and assessing suitability. 1.2 Research indicates that there is a relationship between compective effort, bulk density and moisture content and also that shear strength is an effective measure of suitability of soil for eathworking. To exploit types

11

The assessment of

soil

these factors a new apparatus the )loisture Condition Apparatus was developed by TRRL. With this apparatus the shear strength on compaction of widely differing soil types may be predicted. Trials, carried out on Trunk Road contracts over a mimber of years, have shown the procedure to be superior to existing techniques for predictingand determining suitability

for earthworking.
2.
SCOPE

This Memorandum introduces the Moisture Condition Apparatus (lick) and a new soil parameter, the Moisture Condition Value (XCV), for predicting and assessing suitability of soils for earthworlo.ng. A substitution of Specification Clause 601.1 (iii) (f) is necessary and. is given in Appendix A. The corresponding amended paragraphs of the Notes for Guidance are included as Appe1!4ix B. Detailed. instructions for carrying out the tests and applying the results are given in SDD Applications Guide No 1, 1983, a copy of which is attached.
3.

RJrS
bility
Guide

3.1 For

Condition Apparatus using the

Mo 1.

of soil for earthworlcingshall be determined by means of

procedure

all site investigation and work contracts on trunk roads the maitaset
out in

the

SDD

the Moisture Applications

3.2 Clause 601, as amended by the redefinition of section 1 (iii) (f) define the suitability of materials according Appendix A, shall be used used in earthworlcs.

to

to

to Appendix B. 3.4 In all calculations of XCV the 'best fit' line shall be used.
fl

3.3 The Notes for Guidance to the Specifications shall be

amended according

3.5 The Koisture Coition caliation line of each sajor soil type having a potential suitability problem shall be established at the site investigation stage a3 a representative range of IICVs at natural moisture contents determined in the field..

the IC& will be used to determine suitability. luing contract work Soils in an unsuitable state are defined as those having an MCV less than
3.6
3.7

the limit set for the contract.

in the use of the XCL and. in the interperience and competence is considered essential. All staff involved in the of results pretation mist have nec of the ICA completed, to the satisfaction of this Department,
an appropriate course of training. 4.

L'ICE AJD SSIS'I!&NCE

Advice

guidance on the interpretation of this Technical Itemorndum or sattera can be relating to the Iloisture Condition Apparatus including trainng of staff Room obtained from the Chief Road gineer, Scottish Develoent Department, 3/86, New St Andrew's Rouse, inbargh. Telephone No 031 556 8400 5584.

I
J
CI4ef Road igineer
4 N

NLCZIE

III

1PPfl'uflX A

nrflITION OP ClAUSE 601

Clause 601, section 1, subsection (iii), paragraph
follows:

(r) shall be amended to read as

(f) materials havizig a moisture condition value !CV) less than the limit permitted in the Contract for such materials, unless otherwise directed
by the

gineer.

'V

APIJX B
AJCE2DEI)

NTE FOR GUIDANCE

sIis 600 A.

ARWS
29.

The following replaces paras 16 on page

GLL
1,

to

the basis that, carried

with Clause 601.1 exception of materials defined is (a) to (e), ma.mtsn use can be made of all materials on site where It is vital that should be and advantageous. investigations thorough out eufficiently advance design and tender stages to enable a proper appraisal to be made materials which be encountered. The use of this j*zrpose strongly advcated. Where trial cannot case materials used, for instance in depth, then boreholes, techniques, will be required. Care should be taken ensure samples taken material being representative

The earthworks clauses have been drawn up in the interests of economy, encourage the best use of all materials. Schemes should be designed on

the

in

in

site

this

(iii)

pits

trial pits for

be or similar

of the

of the

that

sampled.
2.

the for testing are

is

will

of

at

of the

to

of suitable and unsuitable material in a particular will be necessai to characterise each ma3or soil type in terms of suitability. This is best accomplished through the use of the Moisture Condition Apparatus (MCA). Details of the apparatu , test procedures and applications can be found in SDD Applications Guide No. I , 1983. Moisture condition calibration lines should be established for all soil types having a potential suitability problem. Means of interpreting the results and special procedures to identify sojiB not having ruitability problems are given in the above-mentioned XCV tests at natural moisture contents will enable the insitu state Guide of the material to be evaluated in of calibration line. Estimates of of suitable unsuitable materials derived from the site investi quantities and gation do not allow for seasonal, climatic, local or other variations in weather and moisture contents and these must be allowed for during the construction stage.
To estimate the volumes
scheme it

tes

3. Consideration should be given at the site investigation stage to establihi'g, in addition to the relationship of XCV and. moisture content, their correlation with CBR and shear strength for the major soil types. This is

likely to be useful
4.

at

both design and earthwozting stages.

the design stage, when Betting an XCV contract or of the limit for the portion contract, to the extent to which a XCV can be incorporated into the fill drainage layers or layers with higher contract circumstances the adoption and be effective. Depending on particular of an etnbax,Janent of stronger material in the top metre may be advisable. Where or is encountered then compaction material of doubtful value for fill subgrade out as of part the site investrials wil]. be necessary. These can be carried tigation or as a separate exercise during the design stage for the main contract.

Consideration should be given at

In general the principle should be that if materials can be excavated, and compacted they are suitable for most earthworks. The XCA is effective date m1YlT1g suitability for both earthmoving and compaction. XCV test, carried out on materials imoediately prior to use will enable their suitability to be established. As a general guide an XCV of 8.5 is recoended as the lower limit of suitability; a soil having an XCV less than this limit is thus deemed unsuitable. Specific c'nditions on site may require that the 8.5 limit be lowered or raised margi1ly. This is the responsibility of the gineer and should be based on the local situation, the biown behaviour of the material and the type of plant a competent Contractor could be expected to use on the Site Naterial. with hiet' stone contents, for erample Boulder Tills, may yield a )'gher bulk strength on compaction than that predicted by the XCV test. This should be taken into consideration when setting XCV limits on the Site and a correspo'4ngly lower XCV may be able to be used.

. tnsported in

l(t

6. The types of plant which can be used on earthworks and their efficiency of operation is related to the XCV of the materials being worked. Providing that the site investigation is adequate and gives information on the insitu soil characteristics then the responsibility is that of the Contractor to select and use plant which can operate effectively in the particular conditions and not to that be can always use macM,i,a with the highest potential productivity available. Guidance on the selection of plant in terms of XCV can be obtaimed

ass

from '!W!. Report LE

1O3L. NG

3.

The following replaces

608.6 on page32:

6.

C.

D.

satisfactory operation of the construction plant. The following replaces the first paraaph only of NC 608.11 on page 33: 11. Por the puLposes of comparison of the state of compaction of suspect and approved areas it is vital that tests are carried out on areas in which materials are of the same classification, have approximately the sane range of XCVs and lie within the Specification requirements

limit specified in the contract, or if the Contractor persists in working in unsuitable weather conditions or by methods which allow the XCV to decrease below the specified limit or by the use of unsuitable plant on weaker soils. The following is a replacement of NC 608.9 on page 33: 9. Whilst permissionto use material having an XCV below the specified limit will encourage the maximi use of available material it will require a continuous appreciation by the Engineer of the earthworks situation during construction and he should be satisfied that such material is capable of foi'ing a stable fill and will not impair the

It is recoguised that the compaction specified could exceptionally produce overstress of some soils, even when the XCV is above the

for XCV.

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM SH7183

AMENDMENT NO 1

SDD APPLICATIONS GUIDE NO 1

(REVISED 1989)

THE USE AND APPLICATION OF THE MOISTURE CONDITION APPARATUS

IN TESTING SOIL SUITABILITY FOR EARTHWORKING

Printed and Published by the

Scottish Development Department

Crown Copyright 1989

February 1989

C0200226.108

Vt'

Table of Contents
LIST OF FIGURES

1. 2.
3.

INTRODUCTION

1 1

PRINCIPLES OF COMPACTION
MOISTURE CONDITION TESTING

3.1 The apparatus 3.2 PrInciples 33 Test Procedures

3.3.1 DetermInation of MCV 3.3.2 DetermInation of MCV on a Sample 3.3.3 Calibration LInes

2 2 3 3 3 4 5 6 6 6 7 8 8 9 9 9
10 10 11 12

after SaturatIon

3.4 General Guidance

3.4.1 MCV TestIng 3.4.2 Calculation of MCV 3.4.3 Calibration TestIng

4.

APPLICATION 4 1 SIte Investigation

4.2 Earthworldng 4.2.1 Earthmovlng

4.2.2 Compaction

5.

RECOMMENDED PROCEDURES

51 Site Investigation 5.2 Earthworldng

REFERENCES APPENDIX 1 APPENDIX 2 APPENDIX 3

6.

Instructions for Moisture Condition Testing Forms MCA1 and MCA2

Examples

C0200226.108

LIST OF FIGURES

1. 2. 3. 4, 5.
6

testing.

Application potential of the MCA. RelatIonship bulk density and moisture content during compaction
DIsplacement

of compaction curve with different compactive efforts.

The moisture condition apparatus.

Flowchart flowchart

- Sample preparation for determination of MCV.

7. 8.
9.
11.

- Procedure for determination of MCVI Flowchart - MCV testing of saturated sample. Flowchart - Sample preparation for Calibration testing. Flowchart - Procedure for Calibration testing - Sample with relatively low moisture content. Test Curve - Sample with relatively high moisture content. Calibration line - relatively wet conditions. CalibratIon line - relatively dry conditions.
Test Curve

10. Characteristic test curve.

12. 13. 14.

15. CharacterIstics of calibration lines. 16. Slope

18.

v. Intercept plot.

17. Flowchart

- Use In Site Investigation. Flowchart - Use In Earthworldng.

C0200226 .108

G
100,0F

'0 KEY:
MCA CAN
BE USED

EJ
40

MCA MAY BE MCA CANNOT BE USED

[J
%SAND (006 to2mm)

%GRAVEL

(2mm)

F
100

so

60

%FINESCI0Y&siIs)
(CD.Omm)

S%F.O%G

FIG
23 22

APPLICATION

POTENTIAL OF THE MCA

DENSITY

20
BUU( DENSITY

(M;

'
AIR VOIDS LINE
I-s CURVE

I-i
III

Il

I MOISTURE I OPJTENT
IS

OPTIMUM

lb

15

20

22

24

MOISTURE CONTENT FIG 2

(%)

RELATIQ45$JP Of SIJUJ( DENSITY& MOISTURE CONTENT DURING COMPACTIONTESTRIG

2-3
2-2

21 2O BULK DENSITY (M91m3)

AIR VOIDS LIJE

'4
'.7
LOW
EFFORT

LINE

10

14

lb

15

1U

11 1%)

24

MOISTURE CONTENT FIG

DISPLACEMENT OF COMPACTION CURVE WITH DIFFERENT COMPAeT1VE EFFORTS

1.

INTRODUCTION

This upper limit was set by reference to the results of 2 standard soil tests, one for cohesive and one for granular soils, the results being 'adjusted' according to simple guidelines and experience. Although experienced Engineers had a fair degree of success difficulty was regularly found In predicting and assessing acceptability. bulk density, couipactlve effort and moisture content, and that shear To exploit these points strength Is an effective measure of acceptability. the Moisture Condition Apparatus (MCA) has been developed by TRRL. to predict the potential Using results obtained from the MCA it is possible shear strength of widely differing soil types. A guide to determining whether the MCA test can be applied can be obtained by considering the a particle size proportions of fines, sand and gravel (deduced from distribution test performed on the "as-dug" soil). Three categories can thus be defined:1.1 Soils which can be tested using the MCA generally have a fines content greater
Research (Refs 1,2) IndIcates

The assessment of acceptability for earthworklng is Important to road construction. Early techniques were based either on a visual recognition of undesirable soil types or On the establishment of an upper limit of moisture content beyond which the soil was deemed to be unworkable.

that a relationship exists between

mu1mum

t1 or equal to

18%.

1.2 SoIls which cannot be tested using the MCA have a fines content less than that defined by the line joining the points at 5% fines, 0% gravel and 10% fines, 90% gravel, on FIg 1. content lies between the limits defined above (Ia 11 13 If the finesthe MCA still be useable, but this should be and 1.2) then determined by carefully attempting a calibration line. If a calibration line with a clearly defined section, a negative slope and a correlation coefficient above 0.9, Is obtained then the MCA can be used over that specific range of moisture contents. A single MCA test performed on the material In a saturated state can provide further guidance on whether a calibration line should be attempted. TestB using the MCA replace the previous techniques of defining an upper limit of moisture content for acceptability. This guide explains the basic principles of the MCA for soils satisfying for test categories 11 and 13 above. It gives detailed Instructions and use of results. procedures and offers guidance on the interpretation Forms for recording data and carrying out evaluations are given along with worked examples. The procedures have been used successfully (refs 3, 4) on Trunk Road Projects over a period of 8 years.

2.

PRINCIPLES OF COMPACTION

In compaction testing (BS1377:1975 TeBt 12), bulk density and moisture content ideally show a relationship (Fig 2) In which bulk density Initially increases until the zero air voids line is approached, reaches a maximum the and then decreases with increasing moisture content. This is bulk maximum both the defines and its highest point compaction curve compacted density and the optimum moisture content for that soil. Soils bulk density. will thus maximum content at their optimum moisture give
C0200226.108

1.

Uppercross-member

csamp

Strikersupportcross member with striker to release automaticcatci

u.-4(,

Handle

Handle

Retaining-pin

Vernier

supportrod

Rammer guides Penetration scale

on rammer

Guide rods Drop-height

vernier-scales

Cylindrical mould

Detachable base plate

Base

flG 4

MOISTURE CONDITION APPARATUS

An Increase In the compactive effort, resulting for Instance from en Increase In weight or height of fall of the compaction rammer, produces a curve which Is displaced upwards and to the left. Conversely, a decrease In compactive effort moves the curve downwards and to the right (FIg 3). Above each optimum moisture content all such curves converge to form a single line approximating to the 5 per cent sir voids line. The point of intersection of each compaction curve and convergence line therefore relates maximum bulk density, moisture content and compactive effort. Using the degree to which air voids have been elin1nated as a measure of the degree of compaction, the convergence line corresponds to the m4mum practical level of compaction achieved during testing. The bulk density at full compaction Is related to the compactive effort being applied and does not necessarily equate to the highest bulk density attainable. In the field the terms 'maximum bulk density' and 'full compaction' are therefore only meaningful when they are linked to the plant used.

At moisture contents below optimum full compaction will only be achieved when the convergence line is reached. Soils which are compacted at too low a moisture content therefore require extra compactive effort to achieve a state of full compaction. The compaction test is carried out In undrained conditions, water is not permitted to escape from the sample mould. The bulk density increases in each test with moisture content until the convergence line Is reached. At this point no further Increase in bulk density Is possible unless water Is allowed to escape, further compactive effort being absorbed by the Incompressible water and appearing mainly as pore water pressures which dissipate with time. In drained conditions, as found In most natural conditions, the bulk density increases to the convergence line and then moves upwards along, the convergence line as water Is forced out. The time taken to final compaction and the extent to which pore water pressures are developed are a function of the permeability of the soil. Those soils compacted at very high moisture contents develop pore water pressures related to the compactive effort applied and the permeability.
A test procedure attempting to simulate the above conditions must therefore be carried out In controlled or measured conditlonB of compactlve effort, maximum bulk density and moisture content In an environment allowing water to escape from the system If pore pressures develop. These requirements are satisfied during moisture condition testing. 3. MOiSTURE CONDITION TESTING

The Moisture Condition Teat Is a form of strength test In which the compactive effort for near full compaction of a sample of soil Is determined. A new parameter - the Moisture Condition Value (MCV) - Is used to quantify the compactive effort and correlates with shear strength and with CBR at the same level of compaction. 3.1 The apparatus
MCA (fig 4) consists basically of a frame containing a drop rammer and a mould to hold the sample. Both the weight of the rammer and the height of fall are kept constant. Each blow of the rammer Is triggered during the lifting operation. A counter

The

C0200226.108

2.

OBTAIN SOIL SAMPLE APPROX.

25 Kg.
RECORD SAMPLE DETAILS ON

MrnmON
TEST FORM

MCAI

PASS SAMPLE THROUGH

20mm SIEVE

TAKE FRACTION PASSING 20m,n StEVE WEIGH15Kg

CORRECT TO209

PLACE SAMPLE IN

MCAMOULD& ADD FIBRE D1SC TO TOP

FIG 5

FLOWCHART SAMPLE PREPARATION FOR DETERMINATION

OF MCV

recording the blows accumulated allows the compactive effort to be

measured.
A

Appendix 1 Section 1. 32 PrInciples

list of equipment necessary to carry out the test is given In

As described in Section 2, 3 basic parameters define a soil system being compacted compactly. effort, moisture content and maximum bulk density. The MCA is designed with these In mind. The moisture content, calculated as a percentage of the dry weight of the sample, remains constant throughout the test. The compactive effort applied is measured by counting the number of blows of a rammer of fixed weight f*Thrig from a constant height onto the sample contained In a mould. The bulk density at any stage during compaction is equal to the weight of the sample divided by the volume occupied. Since the weight is constant mrlmum bulk density will occur at ininlmuni volume Pull compaction therefore occurs when the rammer attains madmum penetration Into the mould. In order to simulate field conditions slots are incorporated into the base of the mould.

Onset of pore water pressure can consequently be judged from the appearance of water at the base of the mould. This also indicates that the bulk density plot at constant moisture content has reached the convergence line. Further reduction In volume can only occur by a loss of water from the system. Testing Is therefore normally stopped when water appears at the base of the mould.
33

Test Procedures

The MCV is defined In terms of the effort required to compact a 1.5 kg sample of the soil. Each MCV relates to a specific moisture content and the moisture content can be varied to give a calibration line typifying the material. Determination of the MCV on a saturated sample can provide guidance on whether a calibration line should be attempted for soils In category 1.3 as defined In Section 1.

2), allows results to be recorded systematically. Their use is strongly recommended. Full Instructions for testing are given In AppendIx 1.
Two forms, MCA1 and MCA2 (AppendIx

3.3.1 DetermInation of MCV 3.3.1.1 Sample Preparation Sample preparation for an MCV test is straightforward. A sample of the .1l I. passed through a 20 mm sieve, 1.5 kg weighed out and then placed directly into the sample mould. A fibre disc is placed on top of the 3.3.1.2 Testing

sample to avoid rammer contamination A flowchart shows the procedure to be followed (Pig 5).

a preliminary to testing the apparatus should be checked In accordance with AppendIx 1, section 2 to ensure that the height of drop of the rammer is 250 mm and that the rammer does not foul the mould during
As
C0200226.108

3.

LOCK RAMMER UP PLACE MOULDON BASE OFAPPARATUS AND LOCKIN PLACE

4
GENTLY LOWER

RAMMER DPI TO FIBRE DISC

4
SET TRIP COUNTER

TO ZERO

4
SETHEiGHTOF

pp

OBTAIN SAMPLE OF SOIL

APPROX

OF RAMMER TO

"OF DROP 25Omm)XI-4

_
RAISERAMMER
UNTIL HAMMER

____ ____

3Kg

CA1,
RECORD DETAILS

IS TRIGGERED

(
TAKE PENETRATION
READING

* READINGS /
ON
FORM

TAKEN AFTER

1.U46.$12.16.
PASS SAMPLE THROUGH Zhniu SIEVE

24.32.4&64.9612L 192.256.BLOWS

RECORD DETAILS

MCA I
TAKE

2SKOF

WATER

SEEPAGE

py

FRACTIUN PASSING NOTE NUMBER OF SEEPAGEOCCURRED

2Ovm ADO WATER

MOUlD?
NO COMPARE READiNG

_____________
PLACE15KgOF
SATURATED SAMPLE

_________________

14B) WITH READING(B)

STOP TEST

IN MCA MOULD

NO

CO

_____
YES NO

RAiSE RAMMER

ADD FIBRE DISC TO

ANDLCKIN
PLACE

TOPOFMOULD

REMOVE MOULD

5mm

DETACH BASE AND

____
REMOVE SAMPLE

CARRY OUT NORMAL MCVTEST

ORBG

CLEAN AND DRY MDULD.FIBRE DISC. RAMMER AND BASE

WATERSEEPAGE

(FIGSi

FIG 6

FLOWCHART TEST PROCEDURE FOR DETERMINATION OF

FIG 7 FLOWCHART MCV TESTINGOF SATURATED

MC V

descent. Checks should also be made to ascertain that the drop height vernier assembly is securely fastened and that all socket screws are secure.
The mould is placed In position on the base of the apparatus, secured, and testing commenced. The penetration of rammer into mould Is measured at set numbers of blows (B) until a state of near full compaction Is reached or until water Is expelled from the base of the mould. Near full compaction Is recognised when the penetration difference between the readings at 4B and B blows drops below 5 mm. During the test the height of the rammer drop is regularly checked and If necessary adjusted. Test measurements should be meticulously recorded on Form MCA1 as they are being Detailed Instructions (Appendix 1, gathered. section 3.1) and a flowchart (fig 6) gIve the procedures to be followed. Each test can be expected to take between 6 and 10 minutes to perform.

3.3.1.3 Processing of Results

Differences in penetration are calculated by subtracting each penetration reading for a given number of blows from the reading at 4 tunes that number of blows. This technique facilitates recognition of the state of near full compaction. For convenience the change In penetration is recorded against the lower number of blows. The resultant differences are then plotted against the number of blows, the latter on a log scale. MCV Is defined as 10 tImes the log of the number of blows required to produce a 5 mm change In penetration on the plotted curve. In practice MCV can be read directly from an appropriate scale on the graph. Detailed instructions

section 3.2.

are

given

in

Appendix

1,

3.3.2 DetermInation of MCV on a Sample after Saturation 3.3.2.1 Sample Preparation

Water Is added to the sample In a container until an excess over that required to saturate the soil Is reached. Free-standing water should be visible on top of the sample. Further water is added as required and the sample allowed to attain a uniform moisture content. A This moisture content need not be measured. flowchart shows the preparation required (Fig 7).

3.3.2.2

Testing

Is that for a normal MCV except that water escaping from the mould is ignored.
The procedure followed

Instructions for testing are given In sectIon 5. 4.

Appendix 1,

C0200226.108

ORTAIN BULK

SAMPLE

PASS THROUGH 20mm SIEVE

MCA4.
ON TEST FORMS PASS

RECORD DETAILS

APPROX. 25Kg

*
REDUCESAMPLE TO 15K0

2Oav SiEVE BREAKING DOWN AGGRATIOP6

ThRO

______$________
PL.ACE SAMPLE

IN

MOULDAND ADD FIBREDISC TO TOP

TAKE FRACTION PASSING 20mm NOTE PROPORTION RETAINED FORM

______t________
CARRYOUT MCV

[
NOTE RESULTS ON MAKE LJPSIX TEST FORMS MCA I

TEST

(FIG 5

MCA2 ($Ej;ig5
REPRESITATM

b MCA 2

25Kg SAMPLES
1&

CONDUCTMOISTURE CONTENTTEST ON SAMPLE NOTE RESULTSDPI

MIX EACHSAMPLE TO
DIFFERENT MOISTURE

CONTENT TO GIVE

,SWTABLE
tNOTEPRREO
1MOISTURE SAMPLE NLNBERS 101d
CONTENTS

TE

ALL

FORMSLJ
I

\,
FOR TESTING

PIG B

FLOWDIBTSAMPtON
CAUBRAflON TESTING

fl LJ
INANAIRTIGHT
CONTAINER FOR 24

I I

FIG 9

FLOWCHARTPROCEDURE FOR CAUBRATION TESTiNG

3.3.2.3 ProcessIng of Results Results are processed according to procedures for a

normal MCV (SectIon 3.3.1.3).

3.3.3 Calibration Lines

calibration line characterlses the relationship of MCV to moisture content In a soil type and is obtained by determining MCV values over a range of moisture contents.
A

3.3.3.1 Sample Preparation

A bulk sample weighing approxImately 25 Idlogrammes is obtained, air dried and then passed through a 20 mm sieve. The percentage retained should be noted. At least 4 and preferably 6 representative samples weighing approximately 2.5 kg each are then made up at a range

of moisture contents such that the range of resultant MCVs Is approxImately 3 to 15 A flowchart shows the procedure to be followed (Fig 8). Detailed Instructions are given in Appendix 1, section 4.1. 3.3.3.2 Testing Each sample should be prepared and tested according to Section 3.3.1 and Its MCV determined. Immediately on completion of each test the sample should be removed initiated. This Is the true moisture content of the tested sample and may differ from that theoretically aimed at. The true moisture content is of course used In subsequent calculations. Results should be recorded on
Forms MCA1 from

the mould and a determination of moisture content

procedure to be followed (Fig 9). 3.3.3.3 Processing of Results When the MCV of each sample has been determined a plot of sample moisture content against MCV Is drawn up. The points should lie on a straight or near-straight line.

and

MCA2.

flowchart

shows the

This is the calibration line for the soil. The line should be negatively sloping, contain 3 or preferably 4 or more points and have a correlation coefficient greater than 0.90. The intercept on the moisture content axis and slope of line are then determined. The sensitivity of the soil to moisture content changes Is an Important property end Is easily calculated by taldng the Inverse of the value obtained for the slope. Results should be recorded In the relevant sections of forms MCA1 and MCA2. Except for the manual determination of Intercept, it Is important not to extrapolate the calibration line beyond the points on which the calibration is based (see Section 3.4.2).
Detailed

section 4.2.
C0200226.108

instructions

are

given

In

AppendIx 1,

5.

234 BLOWS(B) 6$ 1216 21 32

-ii0 FIG 10 2 1
6

1 MCV

r.i
10 12 14 16
1$

CHARACTERISTIC TEST CURVE

BLOWB)
E E

2 C
2 2 =
FIG 11

46

MCV

TEST CURVE SAMPLE WITH RELATIVELY LOW

MOISTURE CONTIT

aLows(B) E E

2 0 =

2
2
LlJ

=
MCV

FIG 12

TEST CURVE SAMPLE WITH

RELATIVELY HIGH

MOISTURE CONTENT

3.4 General Guidance

3.4.1

MCV Testing

be experienced with the majority of soils, those of a cohesive nature and characteristic curves particularly 10) can be obtained. However problems may arise during (Fig the testing of samples having either a relatively low or a relatively high moisture content. This will be particularly true In the testing of granular Glacial Tills.
No difficulty will

are of a relatively low moisture content usually a produce plot (FIg 11) In which the change In penetration is uniformly low and the 5 mm line is either not reached or crossed repeatedly. A total of over 256 blows may be necessary for a change in penetration of less than 5 mm. The test consequently takes appreciably longer. It Is arguable whether continuing the test to such a high number of blows Is necessary.
Samples which

is measured or an accurate determination of moisture content made prior to testing, It Is Imperative that testing is stopped when seepage Is seen. Continuing the test after the seepage point Is reached leads to an incorrect moisture content determination on completion of the test. It also alters the system by allowing a change in moisture content to take place and this may affect results. In this context seepage is differentiated from the occasional spurt of water ejecting from the base slots as air escapes from the sample. Warning of the seepage condition can be obtained by observing the condition of

Tests on samples of relatively high moisture content (Fig 12) may experience seepage of water from the base of the mould. Unless the amount of water escaping from the base of the sample

the rammer sides as testing progresses. Noticeable liquid (usually In the form of a mud slurry) occurring on the lower face Indicates that the saturated state Is being reached. The possibility of obtaining a valid MCV on such samples depends on the number and value of the penetrations taken before seepage. Insufficient points can lead to a 5 mm Intersection not being achieved or one Inaccurately determined. This behaviour can be expected In samples with a low fines content and relatively high
permeability.

3.4.2 Calculation of MCV

The mechanism Involved In the compaction of a cohesive soil is one almost solely Involving denslficatlon In Its original state. The original concept of the MCV test, as Introduced In SR 522 recognised this by calculating graphically the MCV from the
MCV

steepest straight line on the change In penetration plot to give (is). Any difference from an MCV calculated from the 'best fit' line (MCV (bf)) was minimal and explained as arising from processes other than simple densificatlon and which were assumed not to be of Importance to normal .arthworklng on site. Such differences that were observed were assumed to arise only as a result of mould confinement and as such were unique to the test procedure. In any event MCV (as) gave a conservative (pessimistic) result favouring rejection of the soil rather than
C0200226.108

6.

.40
530
0

"20
U' C
10

MOISTURE

12 14 16 lB CONDITION VALUE (MCVI

IC

20

FIG 13

CALIBRATION LINE RELATIVELYWET CONDITIONS

.. 20

I5
C

"IC
=
U'

IC 12 14 B MOISTURE CONDITION VALUE

16

lB

20

(MCV)

FIG

ii.

CALIBRATiON LINE-RELATIVELY DRY CONDITIONS

Is
PROJECTIONTO
15

MDISTLME CONTENT
RICHEST

AXIS

14

MOISTURE

___ COU U
CALIBRATION

LINE

POINT

LOWEST_MOISTURE CONTENT TESTED

___

___

___

___

/ ,/_
11

'INEFFECTiVE1

FARTOF LINE

10

12

13

14

15

UOISTIJRE CONDITION VALUE (MCVI

FIG 15

CIIARACTEIBSTICS OF CALIBRATION LINES

acceptance. For most cohesive soils there Is effectively no difference between MCV (as) and MCV (bf).

In the case of granular soils (particularly Glacial Tills) the situation can be different and substantial difference between MCV (as) and MCV (bf) can occur. Such differences Imply that energy Is being used up In processes other than simple densificatlon. Movement of air, water and grain rounding and/or crushing are possibilities. An understanding of the compaction process actually occurring with any soil and the degree to which the MCV teat simulates this process will be the deciding factor In whether MCV (as) will be perfectly adequate. MCV (bf) will however give an accurate result with all soil types providing the mechanism of compaction Is simulated by the test. Experience with granular tills In Scotland Indicates that MCV (bf) Is the more satisfactory of the 2 techniques of
calculating MCV. Important therefore to realise that for granular soils In particular MCV (as) and MCV (bf) may be different. Consistent use of one method at both site Investigation and contract stages of a project Is thus vital. Simfl'ly conclusions reached through the use of MCV (as) regarding correlations with undrained shear strength and plant performance (SR 522 and LR 1034) may not be able to be applied directly to MCV (bf). This applies particularly to granular material In a relatively dry state.

It Is

3.4.3 Calibration Testing

The quality of calibration lines can be linked directly to the certainty by which individual MCV points are obtained. Characteristic curves lead to calibration lines with an excellent degree of correlation. Off-line values are nearly always the result of poor or suspect test data. MCVs used In drawing up calibration lines should therefore be assessed for quality before being accepted. Attempts to use all test results without regard to validity can lead to very poor lines. Until experience is gained difficulty Is often found In obtaining an artificial moisture content range to cover the optimum MCV spread. Samples which are relatively too wet yield either Incorrect MCVs or no MCV at all, samples which are relatively too dry yield MCVs lower than expected. This Is particularly true of soils having a calibration line with a low slope. Reasons for this have already been described (Section 3.4.1). The solution In most cases lies In reducing the range and carefully selecting the moisture content values. The range is determined by the position and slope of the calibration line, those with a low gradient requiring samples prepared over a narrow range of moisture contents. Experience of similar sail types is the best

guide.

insufficient for good calibration. In the latter 2 lines are apparent, that with a positive slope resulting from the relatively low MCVs. Positive slopes of this nature are referred to as the
C0200226108

to calibrate soil tending towards a very wet state Is in given Fig 13 and one tending towards a very dry state In Fig 14. In the former the number of points obtained is
An attempt

ii
14 13
12
11

w 1.0:

aa aa

aaaaa
S
S

.7 .5

.5
.4

a a Saa aa
aa a

.3

i0

ij

14

16
INTERCEPT

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

32

FiG 16

SLOPE

v INTERCEPT PLOT

'ineffective' part of the calibration line, and are at least In part due to the complex relationship betwefl Intergranulaz' friction and moisture content.

are usually uniformly graded sands, and gravels. In contract terminology they are classed as 'all weather' materials which will
not develop excess pore water pressures during compaction. Calibration of such sails should not be attempted. A simple method of rscogdIng such soils Is to use the MCV teat on a sample In a saturated state (Section 3.3.2).

Testing of freely-draining sails will give most trouble. They

Except for the manual determination of intercept ft Is Important not to extrapolate calibration lines beyond established limits. Such extrapolation can hide the effect of high permeability and the existence of an Ineffective part to the line.

The characteristics of calibration lines as described above are shown diagrammaticallyIn Fig 15. 4.
APPLICATION

4 1 SIte Investigation The objective of using the Moisture Condition Apparatus at the site Investigation stage Is to allow recognition of those soils likely to cause problems during construction and to prepare calibration lines for later use. The existence of a calibration line for the soil type considerably speeds up determination of unacceptability Immediately

prior to and during earthworklng. To define a calibration line the intercept on the moisture content axis, the elope and limits of the line, Including any Ineffective part, are required. The higher the Intercept the greater the potential of the soil to retain moisture In a state of very low compaction, the lower the elope of the line the more sensitive the soil Is to moisture content changes. This forms the basis of a very useful classification for earthworklng purposes and clearly allows differentiation of those soils particularly sensitive to moisture content changes. It Is suggested that this Information Is vital to efficient earthworking. For maximum benefit ft should be collected during site investigation.
A elope intercept plot should be made from .11 calibratIon lines obtained. This will allow easy differentiation. An eampl. of such a

plot, including a grouping of the soil types according to sensitivity, Is given In FIg 16. Early recognition of those soils In the 'all weather' category Is
Important.
low end

Is not recommended.

Attempted calibration testing

of fr.ely-drfrdng material

In terms of the calibration line, increasing permeability restricts the of the range of MCV values obtained during calibration. A freely drinIng 'all weather' material is one In which MCVs below the Specified limit for the Contract cannot be obtained during testing no matter how much water Is added to the sample during preparation. If an MCV equal to or greater than the specified limit is obtained then the permeability of the material is such that porewater pressures are dissipating quickly and that no loss in shear strength
C0200226.108 8.

is experienced during compaction. It is suggested that a test In a saturated state be carried out on all granular soils before calibration Is attempted. It Is Important to note that such materials must be

used In freely draining environments. Classification of soils In categories as defined In sectIon 1 should be carried out at an early stage. The need to obtain calibration lines on all soil types with a potential acceptability problem is of vital Importance if on-site testing of acceptability Is envisaged during construction. The presence of an ineffective part to the calibration line can make the Interpretation erroneous If Its presence Is not realised - a single MCV value could have 2 possible moisture content equivalents.
4.2 Eartbworklng Earthworklng can be divided into earthmovlng and compaction. In earthmoving soil Is excavated, transported and deposited In a disturbed state some distance from its source. When used as fill it is then formed according to the design and strengthened by compaction until it is capable of withstanding the stresses of the expected loading. Both processes are essential features of any

construction contract and require separate treatment for

application.

MCV

4.2.1 Earthmovlng (llaia1 Tills are very common In Scottish Projects and have a relatively high proportion of cobbles and boulders. Problems of working mainly arise from a Ices of shear strength In the matrix. The MCV test Is performed on a sieved sample corresponding to the matrix of such soils and consequently Is successful In predicting acceptability for .arthmovlng. Under site conditions plant operate either on soil in a naturally compacted .arthmovlng or In a disturbed state. Depending on plant size compaction of both the in-situ and the disturbed soil Is likely to take place. Under wet conditions significant reductions In sheer strength can result. The economics of making use of on-site soils are critically dependent on the selection of appropriate plant for the soil conditions. The productivity of various types of earthmovlng plant baa been related to the soil condition. measured by means of the moisture condition test (Ref 5). Factors that have been related to the MCV Include speed of travel while loaded speed of travel when empty, depth of rut produced by a single pass, loss of productivity due to bogging down, and the times of loading end unloading. ?.flnimum MCV values at which various types of plant can operate effectively have also been predicted and a formula derived which relates MCV to travel speed of motorised scrapers and dump trucks.
4.2.2 Compaction
Compaction generally follows earthmovtng. The disturbed soil Is used In a series of layers as fill to form earth structures such as embanknients. Each layer is compacted after placement with
C0200226.108

9.

the prime Intention of Increasing Iti shear strength. Generally the ma7lmum bulk density at the pertaining (natural) moisture cantent Is aimed at. To assist plant operation the Specification (Ref 6) tabulates the compactly. effort required in terms of the number of passes for different types of plant. The process of taking a disturbed soil and compactIng it to its maximum possibl. density Is followed In the moisture condition

test therefore broadly simulates construction to measure the potential MCV. Consequently on-site compaction MCV testing allows acceptability for compaction to be determined and Indicates the compactive effort required to produce a state of near full compaction. As already discussed (Section 2) a soil
tt.
The

In a relatively dry state will require higher compactly. effort to achieve compaction than one In a relatively wet state.. Indeed once the moisture content drops below a particular level It may not be possible to compact it sufficiently using reasonable campactive effort. Conversely de-watering or stockpiling may be necessary In very wet soils. Such requirements can be predicted by the use of the MCA. The MCA Indicates the potential shear strength (In terms of MCV) of a 1.5 kg sample passing a 20 mm sieve. In soils cont*fr4ng a very coarse fraction an Increase In the overall shear strength can be expected after Incorporation Into an earth structure such as an embankment. An increase In overall shear strength beyond that predicted by the MCV test can therefore be expected when using materials such as Boulder Tills providing that near full compaction is achieved. It will be necessary to Increase the cocipactive effort due to the effect of the large boulders, or it may be possible to use material at a lower MCV than normal. 5.
RECOMMENDED PROCEDURES

5.1 Site Investigation

Testing should be carried out on each major variety of soil likely to prove problematical In terms of acceptability. Calibration lines should be drawn up for each soil type. A plot of Slope against Intercept will enable the most problematical soils (those with the highest sensitivity) to be recognised. Calibration lines are Important In the characterisation of the relationship between MCV and moisture content and can be the basis of any subsequent moisture condition

testing for acceptability. Samples taken for testing must be representative. Bulk samples formed by the aggregation of smaller samples may not reflect the true properties of the components or the performance of the material

during earthworklng. MCV tests carried out on samples as they are obtained during site investigation will give an indication as to the existing acceptability provided that the sample is representative and at its natural moisture content However, such results should be used with caution as natural moisture contents are likely to vary considerably both In the host soil and In the period between site Investigation and contract
earthworldng.
C0200226.108

10.

OBTAIN SAMPLESOF SWL TYPES ON SIIE.APPROX OF EACH TYPE

PT

FIG

17. FLOWCHART-USEtd SiTE PIVESTIGATIOt

ACCEPTABLE

UNACCEPTABLE:

FIG 18

FLOWCHART- USE IN EARTIJORJ(JPJJ3

In the Site the MCV lower limit(s) for Interpretative report regarding the In contract It Is Important when setting this acceptability realistic and ma4mum use of on-site to be to allow the figure materials, as well as taking Into consideration the type of plant a competent contractor could be expected to use. Estimate, of the quantities of acceptable/unacceptable materiel will of course depend on the accuracy of the MCVs at natural moisture content and the
Recommendations

should

be

made

lnvga

variations occurring between site Investigation end contract working. Seasonal, climatic, local and other possible variations In weather and moisture content must therefore be taken into consideration. As a general guide an
MCV of 8.5 Is recommended as the lower limit of acceptability; a soil having an MCV less than this limit Is thus deemed unacceptable. Specific conditions may however require that the 85 limIt be lowered or raised marginally. In addition, flexibility to marginally alter the limit on the contract should be allowed for. This of course would be the responsibility of the Engineer and should be based on the local situation, the known behaviour of the material and the type of plant proposed and used by the Contractor.

MCV test Indicates the potential acceptability of material In a drained condition. Attempts to conduct cannot escape - such earthmovlng In an environment where moisture as found In conditions of closed drainage can fall even though saturation tests showed MCVs above the. specified limit. Natural moisture contents In excess of the moisture content at MCV limit In '.11 weather' materials Indicate the need for advanced drainage prior to earthworklng.

It Is

Important

to realise that the

A flowchart of the recommended procedure for site investigation

given In Fig 17.

is

5.2 Earthworldng Difficulties In earthworklng of most soils should be expected when the MCV drops below the lower limit(s) set for the contract. Soil, having MCVa of equal to or above this limit will generally be able to be moved and compacted satisfactorily. The procedure recommended to study the existing calibration line for the soil type and then to conduct single MCV determinations whenever and wherever a measure of acceptability is required. As already Indicated this can be carried out under site conditions wIthln6 to lOminutes. The need to refer MCV points to a calibration line has been pointed out In Section 4,1.

Pml4srlty with each soil type considerably facilitates the interpretation and use of MCV test results. Even faster MCV test techniques (2 to 3 mIne) are possible (Appendix 1, section 6). Such rapid techniques are not recommended until familiarity with the soil type has been obtained. It should also be noted that the rapid technique is approximate and does not determine the MCV - only the acceptability or otherwise of the soil.
It Is suggested that appropriate times for the testing of soils during earthworldng could be as follows:-

C0200226,108

11.

1.

PrIor to serthmoving

2. 3. 4.
5

DurIng ssrthmoving PrIor to use on haul roads trsfflcidng of haul roads At Intervals on stockpiled material
During

6.

Prior to compaction
Prior

I
A

given In PIg 18.

to placement - on previously compacted surfaces flowchart of the recommended procedure during earthworldng is

ll

- on fli material ready for compaction

6.
1.

REFERENCES

Parsons A

The rapid determination of the moisture condition of earthwork material. Dept of the Environment
TERL Report LR 750, Crowthorne 1976. The moisture condition test and Its potential applications In earthworks. Dept of the Environment, Dept of Transport, TRRL Report SR 522,

J B Boden

2. Parsons A

W &

Crowthorne 1979.

3. Matheson C D
Matheson G D Keir

Moisture condition trials In Scotland. LivIngston 1979. Preliminary Guidance for the controlled Introduction of the moisture condition apparatus to Scottish Trunk Road Projects. TRRL Scottish Branch Worng Paper 1980/2, LivIngston 1980.
197911,

TRRL Scottish Branch Worng

Paper

4.

&

W G

S Parsons A W

P Darley

&

The effect of conditions on the operation of earthmovlng plant.

sc

Department of Environment Department of Transport, TRRL Report LR 1034, Crowthorne 1982.

6. Dept of Transport,
Department of the Environment for

Scottish Development Department, Welsh Office, Northern Ireland

Specification for Highway Works. London 1986 (EM Stationery Office).

C0200226.108

12.

APPENDIX 1

INSTRUCTIONS FOR MOISTURE CONDITION TESTING

SDD

Applicaons Guide No

1 (Revised 1989)

C0200226.108

APPENDIX 1

INSTRUCTIONS FOR MOISTURE CONDITION TESTING

1.

EQUIPMENT REQUIRED

1.1 A moisture condition apparatus and mould as described In LR 750. 1.2 A circular

bre dIsc, 99 mm diameter and 5 mm thick.

or a depth gaug. of the same accuracy. 1.4 Abalancereadableto2.5kgandaccurateto+-20g. 1.5 A 20 mm BS test sieve and receiver. 1.6 A metal tray (a conv,nInt size Is 600 mm x 500 mm x 80 mm
1.3 A 9 mm vernier scale, deep). 1.7 Apparatusfor extracting specimens from the mould. 1.8 Forms MCA1 and MCA2 for recording and plotting results (Appendix 2).

2.

CHECKS PRIOR TO TESTING

2 1 PrIor

ascertain that:-

to a series of tests the apparatus should be checked to

2.2 The height of drop of the rammer is 250 mm.

This can easily be achieved by laying the apparatus on Its side and resting the upper cross member on a suitable support such as a spare sample mould. The retaining pin Is removed and the rammer arid the sliding cross member Is moved a short distance down along the guide rods. The rammer and sliding cross member are then pulled gently upwards along the guide rods until the automac catch just releases the rammer. The distance between the top mark on the vernier scale on the rammer guide and the zero mark on the vernier support rod scale is then the drop height. The height can be adjusted by loosening the screw clamping the vernier support rod to the striker support cross member and sliding the rod through the clamp as necessary.
2.3 The rammer falls freely and does not foul the mould during

descent.

2.4 The drop height vernier Is securely fastened to the vernier

support rod.

25 AU the socket head screws on the apparatus are secure. 2.6 The vernier support rod is securely held by the clamp. This should be checked before each test.

C0200226.108

13.

3.

DETERMINATION OF MCV (Form MCA1)

3 1 Procedure
3.1.1 Information on site, date, sample number, soil type and fines content shall be recorded on form MCA1 In the appropriate
places.

3.1.2 The .oil shall be passed through a 20 mm BS sieve, removing only Individual particles coarser than 20 mm, and a 15 kg sample taken Note the proportion retained by the sieve. 3.1.3 The 1.5 kg sample shall be placed loosely In a clean mould (the soil may be pushed into the mould If necessary) and the fibre disc placed en top of the soil. 3.1.4 With the sliding cross member and rammer held In the raised position by the retslnthg pin, the mould shall be placed In the recess on the base of the apparatus and clamped in
position.

3.1.5 The sliding cross member supporting the rammer shall be held steady and the retiibg pin removed. The rammer shall then be lowered gently on to the fibre disc and allowed to penetrate into the mould under its own weight until it comes to

rest.

3.1.6 The counter shall be zeroed. 3.1.7 Tb. heightof the drop shall be t at 250 mmby moving the striker support cross member to give an approximate zero (+- 5 mm) on the drop height vernier scale. 3.1.8 The sample shall then be given one blow of the rammer by raising the sliding cross member with rammer attached until the rammer Is released by the automatic catch.
31.9 The penetration of the rammer Into the mould shall be measured by using the vernier scale provided and the drop

height vernier re-zeroed by adjusting the striker support cross member. The measurement stall be recorded against 1 Blow under the correct sample number on Form MCA1 section 1.
rammer from the mould measured.

Alternatively a depth guage can be used and the protrusion of 3.1.10 The process shall then be repeated with readings of penetration baing taken after selected numbers of blows, and the drop height vernier re-zeroed as necessary until the change Ira penetration between B and 4B blows Is less than 5 mm. The results shall be recorded In the appropriate positions In Form MCA1 section 1. 3.1.11 The rammer attached to the sliding cross member shall then be carefully raised and the ret1ning pin inserted.

C0200226.108

14.

3.1.12 The mould shall be unclamped from the apparatus, its and the

base removed

specimen extracted.

3.1.13 The mould and base of the rammer shall be cleaned

ready for further testing.

3,1 14 If samples from the same site are tested on the same day up to 6 test results can be recorded on the same form. 3.2 Calculations 3.2.1 The change In penetration between any given number of blows, B, and 4 times that number of blows (eg 1 and 4, 2 and 8, .tc) shall be calculated and recorded on Form MCA1 section 1.

the Initial number of blows (B)

322

Tb. above change In penetration shall be plotted against

cm Form MCA1 section

2.

3.2.3 A best-ft line shall be drawn through the points. 3.2.4 The Intersection of the beat-fit line, or In cases where the 5 mm line Is not crossed th. steepest possible extrapolation of this line, with the 5 mm line shall be determIned.
3.2.5 The MCV is then deflned to the nearest 0.1, as 10 x Log(B), where B is the number of blows at which the change in penetration equals 5 mm, as read from the beat-ft line. MCV may be read directly by projection onto the horizontal aids on

the plot.

4.

3.2.6 information as to the sample number, MCV determined and the Inferred suitability should be summarised on Form MCA1 section 3 with any comments. CALIBRATION TESTING (Forms MCA1 and MCA2)
4.1 Procedure

4.1.1 The site and date shall be recorded on both Form and Form MCA2.

MCA1

4 12 information as to the location of the bulk sample and the soil type shall be recorded on MCA2 section 1.

air dried.

4.1.3 A sample (approx 25kg) of the soil to be tested shall be

4.1.4 The sample shall be passed through a 20 mm BS test sieve, removing only Individual particles coarser then 20 mm. Note the proportion retained by the sieve on form MCA2 section 6 With cohesive soils a mortar and rubber pestle may have to be used to break up the soil before sieving. 4.1.5 At least 4, and preferably 6, 2.5 kg samples of soil shall be taken The samplesshall be mixed thoroughly with different amounts of water to give a suitable range of moisture contents. The moisture contents should be such as to give MCVs
C0200226.108

15.

between 3 and 15. Sample numbers and estimated moisture contents should be recorded on Form MCA2 section 1. These sample numbers shall also be recorded on Form MCA1 sectIon 1.

4.1.6

a.

Granular .oiu.

(&es < 18%)

For granular soils the 2.5 kg sample shall be reduced to 1.5 kg and may be tested Immediately.

b.

Cohesive soils (fires

> 18%)

AppendIx 1, section 3 usIng Form MCA1 section 1 and 2. A summary of sample number and MCV should be made on Form MCA1 section 3 and any relevant 000m)ents added. Particular attention should be made to the validity of MCVs as desoribed In Section 3.4.3 in the tnair' text.

For cohesive .011. the 2.5 kg sample shall be allowed to II. In a sssled container for at least 24 hours after with the calculated amount of water to ensure uniform moisture distribution. Th. sample shall then be passed through a 20 mm sieve ensuring that any aggregations of clay are broken down. 4.1.7 The MCV of each sample shall be determined according to

"g

41.8 After each test the mould shall be unclanped from the apparatus and Its base removed. The specimen shall then be extracted from the mould and placed on a metal tray and the moisture content determined according to BS 1337:1977 test 1A. Results shall be recorded on Form MCA2 section 2 and the relationship of MCV and true moisture content summarised on Form MCA2 section 3. At least 4 and If possible 6 tests shOuld be carried out for each calibration line.
4.2 Calculations 42 1 The moisture content of each sample shall then be plotted against MCV on Form MCA2 section 4. The best straight line through points lying on the true part of the calibration should then be drawn.

It is important to note that this may not be the best straight line through all th. points present. The line drawn shall not be extrapolated otwith the plotted points at this stags. 422 The intercept on the Moisture Content sais shall then be estimated by extrapolation or be calculated and recorded on Form MCA2 sectIon 5. Any extrapolation should be clearly distinguishable from the calibration line.
423 The slope of the line shall then be determined and the sensitivity calculated and recorded on Form MCA2 section 5.

the Form.
C0200226.108

4.2.4 Rlevant comments can be recorded on Form MCA2 Section 6. Additional Information can be written on the back of
16.

In front.
5.

4.2.5 Form MCA2 shall be attached to Form

MCA1, Form MCA2

DETERMINATION OF MCV AFTER SATURATION

taken.

5.1 A 2.5 kg sample

of the soil passing a

20 mm sieve shall be

5.2 The sample shall be placed In a suitable container, water added, and the sample mixed until excess water Is evident after ft Is allowed to stand for a short period (eg 1 mInute). 5.8 An MCV determination on a 1.5 kg sample of the saturated soil shall then be carried out In accordance with AppendIx 1, sections 3.1.3 to 3.1.13. Water seepage during the testing should

be ignored.

5.4 The MCV of the sample shall then be calculated according to AppendIx 1, sections 3.2.1 to 3.2.5. ThIs is the MCV at mvrfrnum moisture content under drained conditions.

6.

RAPID DETERMINATION OF ACCEPTABILITY

This method should only be used when f*rn4lisrity with the soil type has been gained. It does not determine the MCV of the sample.
6.1 The number of blows (B) corresponding to the specified MCV limit of acceptability shall be calculated or read off Form MCA1 'B' should be rounded up to the nearest integer value.

the

6.2 The sample shall be prepared according to section 3.3.1.1 of

main

text.

the cross

6.3 The sample shall be given one blow of the rammer by raising member with rammer attached until the rammer is released by the automatic catch. 64 The vernier shall be re-zeroed to correct the height of drop for the decrease In height of the sample. 6,5 Further blows shall be applied, resetting the height of drop as necessary, until 'B' blows have accumulated. The penetration of the rammer into the mould after the Initial 'B' blows shall be measured and recorded. 66 The striker support cross member shall then be adjusted to give an approximate zero reading on the drop height vernier scale. 6.7 Further blows shall then be applied until the total reaches 4 x 'B', without any further adjustment of the striker support cross
member.

6.8 The rammer vernier scale shall be accurately read and the penetration of the rammer Into the mould after 4 x 'B' blows recorded. The difference between the Initial and final readings shall be calculated. A difference of more than 5 mm Indicates that the soil is suitable, a difference of less than 5 mm indicates that it Is
unsuitable.

C0200226.108

17.

APPENDIX 2

FORMS MCA1 AND MCA2

SDD Applications Guide No 1 (RevIsed 1989)

C0200226.108

I.

M.CSV.

TESTING

SITE

Form MCA

ut

PENETRATION MEASUREMENTS
.

TEeeeeeS.
c*i.ii,S M PN$)-PIB
(p)

S,.OW$

)
I
2 3 4 6 $

.isItst.s CIi.iu a aa aa

Paistts*isi, Cli.ii. PSmSIaSS.b UStI.I Psns,NSI P$S1-PIS)

C'sms a
P4ma-PS)

.a

P(4$)-PS)

aa

*a

IP)

P*It$t. PS)-P$)

c. . ISS ca.',. a

Pu.st'a )-P_

12
16

24 32 4$ 64
.

96
12$ 192 256

2. CHANGE ,IN
2!

PNETRATION PLOTS

I'

2 NOS$TU cio?iow

EVALUATION

WE (VCV)

MOISTURE CONDITION TEST CALIBRATION LINE

Form MCA2 Site: Bulk Location SoulType: Fines Content:

I
2

SAMPLE DETAILS

DATE
1 :

SAMPLE No. ESTIMATED MOISTURE CONTENT

MOISTURE CONTENT DETERMINATION(after MCVtesting)

CONTAINER No. CONTAINER MASS Massof wet soil +

(C)

container
Massofdrysoil +

container

(D)
MOISTURE CONTENT

M=()x100

MOISTURE CONDITION VALUES & MOISTURE CONTENTS

MCA 1.3

MCV R0M

MOISTURE ROM CONTENT MCA2.2

4
35

CALIBRATIONLINE

30 2 U 25 w
i&a

I-.

'2

"a

z20

15
0
5

1c

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

MOISTURECONDITIONVALUE (MCV)

[iNTERCEPT (extrapolation to M% axis) SLOPE(tan <between IineandMCVaxis) SENSITIVITY (1/slope)

5 CHARACTERISTICSOF CALIBRATION LINE

.SuWC

M1%$CSNIe'

COMMENTS

APPENDIX 3

EXAMPLES

EXAMPLE 1

Calibration test on Sandy Silty Clayey Till

E0201209.118

SDD Applications Guide No 1 (RevIsed 1989)

It

I.

M.C.V. TESTING

sim
4

B7
5

Form MCA

PENETRATION MEASUREMENTS

$at
i,.DW$ IS)

I 1.1
2 3 4

j
i

'1

IqSlMN CIlSA

*
.*
IP)

hIIi*
P111)-PS) IP)

o.sl

PK$)PIS)

.i*

Sj__ * Cigi* _4,i Peei'it*i PSIISI N1)-PI$) PMSI

c.

s'f__ c...,s *
k4.6 zo8

11

2s'.S

%,

9.3
4.4

6 96.(O

%.

12
16

9 94

9b'.O

B4. j.4
99.4

322 58.8
2i'.

34.2

..jj o.

99.8
foo.4
4004

24 32 4$ 64 56
128 192

40Z6

843 24.2 232 1.9 49B 873 465 84.0 20.9 65 Q.B 88.0 45.9 45g 4Q 98 52 928 44 az. 8.5
1038 1o3S

.S 21.2 72B 2s9

47.2. ZE.(c 44.'5

5.B jj. 3.2 2.S

25.9

S. P05) PIP) a. .* 23. 4B 48.0

20.7

6.8

2c.o 66B 20.?

loo.4

...j 1oI9
44t'
o4.5

jj 2 ia3
1o4.5

94.6 98o 4o45

4oZ4

94.

j
9.8
3S
21

,,,

eis,s slss,i

P11S-P

403.9

403.3
1o3.3

256

2. CHANGE
21

-_ ____ ___ __ ___

IN PENETRATION PLOTS

_U

OP S&OW$

5)

II

SI

='_]

.-:4:

____

5aw.pl.

j
COMMENT

; fflU15 '' 3. EVALUATION

SAMPLE .

_____ *ISCONTINT

HnijI
!Ifl
.

1
2.

3
4 5

J .8
42.2 44.0

s.c.v. PTALl__.#U.s*,TAjL

26
21

4.O

MOiSTURE CONDITION TEST CALIBRATION LINE SAMPLE DETAILS

SAMPLE No. ESTIMATED MOISTURE CONTENT

ite:MB Bulk Location :,cxky o O 4180

SoilType:S.4j Fines Content:

Form MCA2
5V1.a/f I

cg-

2ATE

3 21

4
132'

__L_is2

MOISTURE CONTENT DETERMINATION(after MCV testing)

CONTAINERNo. CONTAINERMASS
(C)

71
49&
419$9

73

74

495 1985

49?

49
1986 dBoB
13.5

5
4%
1980
1833

Massofwetsoil container container

Massof dry soil +
CD)

472
.21.4

MOISTURE CONTENT

19B2
'1q93

M=Jx1OO

/83

146

44.0

MOISTURE CONDITION VALUES & MOISTURECONTENTS

MCV1OM MCA 1.3!

MOISTUREIFROM CONTENT tMCA2.2)

'

3.9 .24-4

1.7.

'14.0

10
11.

1$-3

14.

13.

CALIBRATION LINE

MOISTURECONDITIONVALUE (MCV)

5 CHARACTERISTICSOF CALIBRATIONLINE I INTERCEPT(extrapolation to M% axis) ISLOPE(tan <between line and MCV axis) SENSITIVITY (/slope) 6
COMMENTS

24.5 I
S

Suc

.1.2@ corr. CDC$I. 0-999 voJ'.on itne no 'I ff.ctnie port

1-s

APPENDIX 3

EXAMPLE 2

Cslibraon test Cu Silty Sandy Till

E0201209.118

SDD Applications Guide No 1 (Revised 1989)

M.C.V. TESTING

SITE A9 CAJVPtC-

(+y

Form MCI

.1. PENETRATION MEASUREMENTS

, TYPI
mw WI
1WS"

1
iW%j IPI

g(47k.i s
P4s5>-PiII

Ps_
55
(P1

os4___
C$IuSSS

I
2
3

4 6 9
12 16

9
4. 2 12
1o84

b9.9

9.4 g30
92.0 9s.9

94.4 965
4008

gg.

g6.4 6.4 98.0 64 6.3 4&).b 6(o 4Oo.t .....12 402.1

%.

.
5

'' 9
4.3
.

4
PMI-P($I

1)-PS)

(P)

832 g.B g.o .lo.3 84 93.2. 8.9 925 9.'l

8.4

sS-Pti> a5

iii Cai, PSIIS*ISI

24 32 4$

9o29

6.5 1o2 62 4b37 los'4 4.1 4b .3

4 .O Ip7
404.2.

'

a 4

oi 4
S.

'

a.

IP)

P01)-PS)

'.O

6.9 doo.o 6.3 404(o 403.(

... 9.z 9.3

94
6.'
4.5
401.4

94.Z

964

4o3.5

6.0 4o49

6 L2 96
12$ 192 256

4o9

4o.4.
4o9.2
41O.S

1o4

4.8 l0b0

Io.4
4o?.0

9.9

.9 49 loB.4
WJev

1o23

9b

a.

.P-

' Psi,i

( 'L..

io..o

..J

d0('
40B4

Ao. b

4oZ

409?

L!

2.
2L

CHANGE IN PENETRATION PLOTS

_____ ___ _____ ___ _____ ___

= ____ __ ____ ____ __ ____ __ ____ __ ____ __

C.

___ __ ___ __ ___ __

.umiits.i 3.
EVALUATION
NO.

LI'
COMMENT

SAMPlE

M.C.V.

AcPTAsu_,UNACa,TML!

PINtSCONT!W1

ddJ.3

3
4

12.0 10.8
40.2

2o
.1

S
(o

64

3.(c

oe al 40

bk.L,.

QJcfra?oJo.tt
I

MOISTURE CONDITION TEST CALIBRATION LINE SAMPLE DETAILS

'SAMPLE No.
ESTiMATED IMOISTURE ICONTENT

Site: A9 tv,ng - Co,tj

Fines Content:

Form MCA2

Bulk Location: CM. 2S4bO Soil Type: S;%P,Sc4 "u-

2OT

5
400 SO1

4
4o1

I I I
I

c
4o4

(
jL
0

MOISTURE CONTENT DETERMINATION(after MCV testing) 4o2

CONTAINERNo. CONTAINERMASS (C)

103

'los

49$

O1
2401
499(0

502

Massofwetsoil.
Cofltarner

o4
2130
4993

499
:

Zo8z
(D)

208$
198$

.211

243

Massofdrysoil +
Container
MOISTURE CONTENT

2001

iqqi 8.0

995
41Z

IMb00
3
IMCV10M
MOISTURE

0
14.3

9.2

MOISTURE CONDITION VALUES & MOISTURE CONTENTS

MCA1.3I

ICONTENT

(M2.

PROM

4'

42.0

10.8

k7.2

.B
9.Z'Z

8.o't

i.z

4
35

CALIBRATION LINE

30 z
w U

2S U

z2 w
Iz

I-.

15

1o
0

5
0
1

78

1011

12131415 161718
13.0

MOISTURECONDITION VALUE (MCV)

5 CHARACTERISTICSOF CALIBRATIONLINE
I1NTERCEPT(extrapolationtoM% axis) I SLOPE (tan < between line and MCV axis)
SENSITIVITY(1/slope)

COMMENTS MCV

swpIa 6 OMkJTLd

cow,

w-f

l_,O.53Id1
1 I

5iC

I 1. 89

u..set

short .+r.qo(.ti.n 1o

.993

APPENDIX 3

EXAMPLE

Calibration test on Sandy Till under relatively dry conditions

E0201209.118

SDD Applications Guide No 1 (RevIsed 1989)

MOISTURE CONDITION TEST CALIBRATION LINE

Form MCA2

SAMPLE DETAILS

Site A9 A'L.XMM4-SLOCMD Bulk Location : Soil Type: 5ca4TU.L Fines Content:

1AMPLE No.
ESTIMATED MOISTURE

ATE
J

CONTENT

5 'L
do

J______
41

B
oo
21o
.1991

85'
14

9(
IS
s'oo
:

MOISTURE CONTENT DETERMINATION(after MCV testing)

CONTAINER No. CONTAINER MASS (C)

O0

43

Eo4

Massofwetsoil.
container Mass ofdry soil +
Container

o2
2419

'o4

2o3
4998

2082
4990

24
4989

2439 2004

(D)
MOISTURE
:ONTENT

499

100

0
1

62

7Z
'93.8

92

MOISTURE CONDITION VALUES & MOISTURE CONTENTS

IMCV(R0M MCA1iJ

f MOISTURE FROM tT

43.1

43.4

4.'.4

ICONTENT MCA2.2)

)0

&z9

B.2'

3.

9.S

q.z

92

4
35

CAUBRATIONLINE

a I-. z
U.,

'I 25
z20
p-

z 15
1O

5
0
0
1

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

MOISTURECONDITiON VALUE (MCV)

j INTERCEPT(extrapolation to M% axis)
1SLOPE (tan

5 CHARACTERISTICSOF CALIBRATION LINE

< betweenline and MCV axis)
I 40.8 I
1

ENSITIVITY (1/slope)

COMMENTS

AJ:

'lecdv' *rr r&ton nq.

CDrr

42

APPENDIX 3

EXAMPLE 4
MCV

tests for the assessment of acceptability

E0201209.118

SDD

Applicaons Guide No

1 (Revised 1989)

I.
L

SITE MB% O44Form M.CV TESTING PENETRATION MEASUREMENTS Z &3 bi 64TYPt UWU$jSa

MCA

SLOWS IS)

2 3

4 6 $ 99.8 12 404.4
16

* I 4- 2f.6 23.2 B4 .3 4.0

I)
( 4oC.2

PIIS)-P($)

CsA(

S.

24 6. S 32 19o.O 4$ 4ol.o $4

'

6.5 24.4 59. 24-. 4 z4 42 2.S 482 B.9 41.t' 24.0 i2. 9z( d.9 4.3 14.o 4O. 9S .B 9o. I04 3.0 .O &i4 .2 2. Q4. 44 4o2.6 I*,.s 9 .- 19.4

M 56.8 2.4 9.5 252

IP)

P$S)-PS)

(P)

P1.5,-Pill
-.

IP)

di...,. S'Uil P$$)-PIS

m
-

,,.. PS.St,hu
... P$SS)-P(S)

P.._,.t

cl_,.,.

P1.1)-PU

.$ 6 .j 2
9S. 9

iff
4oS

%'.8

i' &I
4 4o1.4
404.4
12

N
121 192 256

-__

2.

CHANGE IN PENETRATION PLOTS I

&

_______I

_____ _______ ____

r ____ __ ____ __

\1.Lt4
12 12

3.

iiii.
EVALUATION
M.C.V.

ii1i
EINES

S*MPLI ISO

61

".#'uNacanaJu

csniir

3 4

8.3
9.4

trYI p?Jp.

AcrabIe

rf in
COMMENT

APPENDIX 3

EXAMPLE 5
MCV

test on granular TW at saturation

E0201209.118

SDD Applications Guide No 1 (RevIsed 1989)

I.
lOlL

M.C.V. TESTING
T?fl
IS)

SITE

'4Te'4
c..q.

Form MC

PENETRATION MEASUREMENTS
4 z.iqkt'oiH%c MDs.(

saigu

IP)

PNS)PIS)
MM

2 3 BO.3 4 B2.2.
6 8
12 16

I 4.S 10.4

IP)

NS$PS) Mm

ca..,. StttUl

MM

P*,II PISS)-,.)

PsasltsI

c,.
m

PKSPPSI

PISSI-Pli)

P._..t,.t,

E
p.m..,
P1ms

.3 6.9
6.3
6.4

24

32 96
128 192

.4 94.4

B94

9O 94.

'.o

256

2.

CHANGE

,IN_PE2NETRATION

PLOTS

__

a)
11

.-.
S

.. ii

12

1'

EVALUATION
2AMPIE NO.
N.C.V.

.120

Mt

eY

ESCCNT!NT

. Nc

dad 20...i=2f
32.

uq4L(y MW 'AU. WEM1W ,hs';oJ

GNT Vu,'Yed XtrigJ Mc1

'th

I.

M.C.V. TESTING
4 CIiu tiSti
P)P(S) Pssst.sSi CM.,,.
PPM.S$I*I
m

sim A9 4vcv C,, Ps.iiuii PsrM

P$$)-PIR)

Form MCA'

PENETRATION MEASUREMENTS

$'S"
&.OWSSI

34
1

PuiusS,s.,

p&.p5)

12
16

Ai, 4 p.4 '.4 i.&Q I 9b.3 13.0

2

62.0

2.4

..

II
__
C''S NI

DJki.41L
()
PWS)-PlS
NI CMis PS.US,.

pq.p5% m

NI

PS.US,II

SIPS

24 32 4$

. ..
O.4
4o9J
44.4

403.2

SR

'4 441.
56 444.6
128 182

AI4.

444.5

256

2.

CHANGE IN PENETRATION PLOTS

ss .1 P' 3?

_
3.
$hNPIE '1
NO.

= _______ ____ -'-__ ____ _______ __ ____ ____ _______ =

____________ _______

HI
JI
1Lc1Ov

'.fflllIHH
43?

EVALUATION
M.C.V. AcaPTAIu,.lu.IAccE,TA,u

IfflUWfflIJE
F*E$ONTEWT

I
NeNt
41..

Act1,

tontd 2O Of
.33

P3f Vt.LUVtd

sgtuvg

MJ.;i

SCOTTISH DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CHIEF ROAD ENGINEER TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM SH7183

SPECIFICATION FOR ROAD AND BRIDGE WORKS: SOIL SUITABILITY FOR EARTHWORKING USE OF THE MOISTURE CONDITION APPARATUS

AMENDMENT NO 1

INTRODUCTION

Technical Memorandum SH7/83 introduced the SDD Applications Guide No 1 which set out the procedures for the use and application of the moisture condition apparatus in testing soil suitability for earthworking. The Applications Guide No 1 has been revised and replaces the original issued with Technical Memorandum SH7183.
AMENDMENT S

1. The new SDD Applications Guide No 1 (Revised 1989) is now available and shall be used for all trunk road earthworking and site investigation contracts from the date of this Amendment.

The SDD Applications Guide (Revised 1989) will also be appropriate for future earthworking and site investigation contracts let under the Specification for Highway Works 6th Edition.
2.

There is one minor text alteration to the attached revised Applications Guide and the following addendum should be entered: Addendum No 1

3.

At 2. PRINCIPLES OF COMPACTION on page 1, line 6, after "sOil", add "where in this case optimum moisture content corresponds to bulk density and not dry density"
ENQUIRIES

Copies of the SDD Applications Guide No 1 (Revised 1989) cost 2.85 and may be obtained from the Scottish Office Library, Official Publications Section (Sales), Room 1 /44, New St Andrew's House, Edinburgh EH1 3SZ.
1.

Andrew's House, St James Centre, Edinburgh EH1 3SZ

2. Technical enquiries should be in writing and addressed to the Chief Road Engineer, Scottish Development Department, Room 3/62, New St

.
J

INNES

Deputy Chief Engineer

February 1989

00301909.029
Pnnted intheUKfor HMSO Demand 298855C2 6/95