Di Pa Finalllllllll

SOIL SAMPLING
Introduction
A soil sample is the representative of the whole lot from which it is taken. It completely
represents all the characteristics of the lot from which it is recovered. There are two types of
samples which are generally retrieved in geotechnical engineering, the disturbed and undisturbed
soil samples.
Objective(s)
 To collect undisturbed and disturbed samples from Brgy. Buhaynasapa, San Juan,
Batangas
 To determine of analyse the visual type of soil that have been taken.
Experimental Procedure:
1. Clean the work area.
2. Set 1x1 meter area in the field.
3. For the disturbed soil samples, assign three points A, B, and C. For each point, dig for
about 1 feet of depth. Put the obtained samples in separate labelled plastic bags.
4. For the undisturbed soil sample, excavate the soil shaped like a square. dig for about
1 feet depth. Isolate the sample using cling wrap.
5. Return the removed soil and clean the area. Clean the equipment and tools used for
the extraction.
6. Put the samples to the lab promptly. If samples will not be shipped for several days,
use cling wrap to soil until they can be transfer to avoid changes in the chemical
composition of the sample that could alter the analysis.
Materials and Equipment:
1. Shovel
2. Trowel
3. Crowbar
4. Measuring Tape
5. Cling wrap
6. Trash Bags
7. Empty container
Documentation:
1|Page
Data
Type of Soil Sample Disturbed and Undisturbed
Depth of Soil Sample 1 feet
Date and Time of Extraction
Location
Latitude
Longitude
Temperature
Weather Before the Date of the Experiment Cloudy
Weather on the Date of the Experiment Scattered showers and thunderstorms
Conclusion
In the determination of texture of soil, it can be concluded that soil sample from housing area
has the highest percentage of stone component whereas soil sample from farm has the highest
percentage of sand component. Soil sample from pond has the highest percentage of slit and
clay.
2|Page
SIEVE ANALYSIS
Introduction
Aggregate is one of the basic constituents of concrete. Its quality is of considerable
importance because about three-quarter of the volume of concrete is occupied by aggregates.
One of the physical properties of aggregate that influence the property of concrete is the grading
of aggregate. The grading of aggregate defines the proportions of particles of different size in the
aggregate. The grading of fine (size < 5 mm) and coarse (size > 5 mm) aggregates are generally
required to be within the limits specified in BS 882: 1992.
Objective(s)
 The objective of this laboratory experiment is to be able to determine the particle size
distribution curve of te representative sample using sieve analysis.
Materials and Equipment
1. Set of sieves (#4, #10, #20, #40, #60, #140, and #200) + PAN
2. Mortar and pestle
3. Weighing scale
Experimental Procedure
1. Obtain 500 g of oven-dry representative soil sample (for the largest particle of 4.75 mm).
2. Clean and weigh #4, #10, #20, #40, #60, #140, and #200 sieves and pan to nearest 0.1.
Compare the size of the soil grains to the chosen sieves. Add sieves if necessary
3. Stack sieves on a pan from No. 200 progressing up to increasing larger sizes. It is desired
to have 100% passing for the top sieve; this sieve may be excluded from the stack. Pour
the soil in the top sieve. Place cover on top sieve
4. Place the stack in a mechanical shaker. Shake for approximately 10 to 15 minutes
5. Weigh the amount of soil retained on each sieve and in the bottom pan.
Documentation
3|Page
DATA
Cumulative mass % agg.
U.S. Sieve Opening (mm) Mass Retained retained above each passing of
on Each Sieve sieve (g) each sieve
(g)
4 4.75 11 11 97.79
10 2.00 27 38 92.38
20 0.850 94 132 73.54
40 0.425 94 226 54.70
60 0.250 50 276 44.69
100 0.150 55 331 33.67
200 0.075 87 418 16.23
Pan --- 81 499
Total 500 g
Analysis/Computation
Calculations
1. Calculate the mass retained, percent retained, and cumulative percent passing the sieves.
Check that the sum of the mass of soil retained is close to the mass of the soil with which
you started the test (discrepancies may exist due to soil particles retained on the sieves).
2. Plot the cumulative percent passing versus particle size (mm) on a semi-log scale (GSD
curve). Determine Cu and Cc.
If the percent fines in the soil (sizes passing sieve #200) was in excess of 5%, the LL and PL
tests must to also be run (minus #40) in order to classify the soil according to the USCS.
Results presentation
Grain size(mm)
120
100
80
60
40
4|Page
20
0
D60 = 0.5201 mm
D30 = 0.1296 mm
D10 = 0.0578 mm
Cu = D60/D10 = 0.5201/0.0578
= 8.99
Cc = D30^2/ D60 x D10 = (0.1296)^2/0.5201 x 0.0578
= 0.5587
Error = Total Gram – Sieve Gram / Total Gram x 100 %
= 500 – 499/ 500 x 100 %
= 0.2%
Conclusion
It is evident that sieves can be used to separate both fine and coarse aggregates into different
particle sizes. The number sieves describes what size aggregate fall through to the next. We
conclude that sieve analysis is the simple and easy way to determine the particle size distribution
of aggregate and this sieve analysis procedure can be used by people who are working in the
laboratory like government laboratory and private independent laboratory.
References
file:///C:/Users/PC/Downloads/218967293-Sieve-Analysis.pdf
https://www.coursehero.com/file/p54k4po/sieve-analysis-is-a-very-important-test-in/
Fundamentals of Geotechnical Engineering 5th Edition, Braja M. Das
Soil Mechanic Laboratory Manual, 6th Edition, Braja M. Das
5|Page
WATER CONTENT DETERMINATION
Introduction
Water content, w, is defined as the ratio, expressed as a percentage, of the weight of water in
a given soil mass to the weight of solid particles
Objective
 To be able to determine the natural content of the given soil sample.
1. Non-corrodible air-tight container.
2. Electric oven, maintain the temperature between 1050 C to 1100 C.
3. Balance/scales
Experimental Procedures
1. Determine and record the mass (in grams) of the empty moisture can plus its cap (W1).
2. Place a sample of representative moist soil in the can. Place the cap on the can in order to
prevent loss of moisture.
3. Determine the combined mass of the closed can and moist soil (W2).
4. Remove the cap from the top and place it on the bottom of the can.
5. Place the open can, with its lid, into the oven in order to dry the soil to a constant weight. In
most cases, this should take no more than 24 hours.
6. Determine the combined mass of dry soil sample plus the can and its cap (W3)
7. Perform these steps for a total of three samples.
Documentation
6|Page
DATA
Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3
Weight of container 19 22 20.1
Weight of container and wet soil 43.5 52.2 39.4
Weight of container and dry-oven soil 39.9 47.6 36.1
Mass of moisture 3.6 4.6 3.3
Mass of dry soil 20.9 25.6 16
ANALYSIS/COMPUTATION
𝒎𝒂𝒔𝒔 𝒐𝒇 𝒎𝒐𝒊𝒔𝒕 𝒔𝒐𝒊𝒍−𝒎𝒂𝒔𝒔 𝒐𝒇 𝒅𝒓𝒚 𝒔𝒐𝒊𝒍
w= 𝒙 𝟏𝟎𝟎
𝒎𝒂𝒔𝒔 𝒐𝒇 𝒅𝒓𝒚 𝒔𝒐𝒊𝒍
Sample 1: Sample 2: Sample 3:

43.5𝑔−39.9𝑔 52.2𝑔−47.6𝑔 39.4𝑔−36.1𝑔
w= 𝑥 100 w= 𝑥 100 w= 𝑥 100
20.9𝑔 25.6𝑔 16𝑔
w1= 17.22% w2 = 17.99% w3 = 20.63%
Average moisture content = (w1 + w2 + w4)/3

w = (17.22% + 17.99% + 20.63%)/3
w = 18.61%
Result presentation
Sample Mass of moist soil Mass of Dry soil Moisture content
(g) (g) (%)
1 24.5 20.9 17.22
2 30.2 25.6 17.99
3 19.3 16 20.63
w = 18.61%
Conclusion
In conclusion, the determination of soil water content is to show gravimetric measurement of
soil water content is based on removal of water from the sample. Sample water is removed by
evaporation, leaching or chemical reaction. Once sample water is removed, the amount of water
removed from the sample is determined and used to calculate soil moisture content.
Determination of water content removed is done using several methods. The simplest method to
7|Page
determine water content removed is by measurement of loss of weight of the sample. Extraction
of substances which replace sample water and measurement of a physical or chemical property
of the extracting material that is affected by water content is another method. Finally, sample
water content can be determined by quantitative measurement of reaction products displaced
from a sample. In each of these methods the water and soil are separated and the amount of water
removed is measured or inferred. Oven drying is the most widely used of all gravimetric
methods. The oven dry method is the standard for the calibration of all other soil moisture
determination techniques.
References
https://www.coursehero.com/file/p3lq5gi/
http://www.academia.edu/11292879/DETERMINATION_OF_WATER_CONTENT_OF_SOIL
_SAMPLE_BY_DIFFERENT_METHODS
DETERMINATION OF SOIL SOLID

Introduction
Specific gravity of a materials says how heavy it is compared to water. It is the ratio of
the density of material to the density of water. The specific gravity of the soil solids is used in
various calculations in soil mechanics.
Objective(s)
 To acquired a good cubed undisturbed soil
 To know the specific gravity using its weight and volume and the density of water
1. Spoon
2. Small container
3. Ruler
Experimental Procedure:
1. Get some sample from the undisturbed soil using spoon and make it cube using a ruler.
2. Then measure the soil sample's weight using a weighing scale.
3. Get the volume
Documentation
8|Page
Length 69mm
Height 39mm
Width 60mm
Weight of the soil sample 221.7grams
Data
LENGTH (cm) WIDTH (cm) HEIGHT (cm) WEIGHT (g)

SAMPLE 1 4 3 3 38
SAMPLE 2 3.6 5 3 46.9
SAMPLE 3 3 3.5 2 78.6
Solution:
𝑊 0.038𝑘𝑔
𝛾soil solids= = 0.36𝑚^3 = 0.10556 kg/m3
𝑉
𝑊 0.0469𝑘𝑔
𝛾soil solids= = = 0.08685 kg/m3
𝑉 0.54
𝑊 0.0786𝑘𝑔
𝛾soil solids= = = 0.37429kg/m3
𝑉 0.21𝑚^3
9|Page
𝑊𝑠𝑜𝑖𝑙
( ) 𝟎.𝟏𝟎𝟓𝟓𝟔 𝐤𝐠/𝐦𝟑
𝐿𝑥𝑊𝑥𝐻
Gs = =
𝜌𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟 1000 𝑘𝑔/𝑚3
( ) 𝟎.𝟎𝟖𝟔𝟖𝟓 𝐤𝐠/𝐦𝟑
Gs = =
( ) 𝟎.𝟑𝟕𝟒𝟐𝟗𝐤𝐠/𝐦𝟑
Gs = =
1.0555x10^-4
8.685x10^-4
3.7429x10^-4
Results and Presentation
SAMPLE 1 SAMPLE 2 SAMPLE 3

SPECIFIC 1.0555x10^-4 8.685x10^-4 3.7429x10^-4
GRAVITY
Conclusion
The specific gravity of the soil particles lies within the range of 1.0555x10^-4
8.685x10^-4 AND 3.7429x10^-4.
Reference
https://m.youtube.com/results?search_query=specific+gravity+of+cube+soil
https://www.engineeringcivil.com/determine-the-specific-gravity-of-soil.html
Fundamentals of Geotechnical Engineering; Braja M.Das Philippine Edition
DETERMINATION OF SPECIFIC GRAVITY OF SOIL SOLID

(DISTILLED WATER)
Introduction
The specific gravity of a substance, designated as Gs, is defined as the ratio of the density of
that substance to the density of distilled water at a specified temperature. Since it is a ratio, the
value of Gs does not depend on the system of units used and is a numerical value having no
units.
Objective(s)
 Determine the specific gravity of soil fraction passing 4.75 mm I.S sieve by density
bottle.
1. Density bottle of 50 ml with stopper having capillary hole.
2. Balance to weigh the materials (accuracy 10gm).
3. Wash bottle with distilled water.
4. Alcohol and ether.
10 | P a g e
1. Clean and dry the density bottle
1. wash the bottle with water and allow it to drain.
2. Wash it with alcohol and drain it to remove water.
3. Wash it with ether, to remove alcohol and drain ether.
2. Weigh the empty bottle with stopper (W1)
3. Take about 10 to 20 gm of oven soil sample which is cooled in a desiccator. Transfer it to
the bottle. Find the weight of the bottle and soil (W2).
4. Put 10ml of distilled water in the bottle to allow the soil to soak completely. Leave it for
about 2 hours.
5. Again fill the bottle completely with distilled water put the stopper and keep the bottle
4. under constant temperature water baths (Tx0 ).
5. Take the bottle outside and wipe it clean and dry note. Now determine the weight of the
bottle and the contents (W3).
6. Now empty the bottle and thoroughly clean it. Fill the bottle with only disttiled water and
weigh it. Let it be W4 at temperature (Tx0 C).
7. Repeat the same process for 2 to 3 times, to take the average reading of it.
Documentation
11 | P a g e
Data Analysis and Computation:
Table 1.1
Trial(s Cover + container + Cover + Cover + container Cover + container +
) dry soil (W1) container (W2) +dry soil + distilled distilled water (W4)
water (W3)
1 99.4g 86.4g 342.8g 337g
2 99.6g 86.4g 341.8g 337.3g
3 100.3g 86.3g 343.1g 337.1g
12 | P a g e
Trial 1:
𝑤1 − 𝑤2
𝒔. 𝒈. =
𝑤𝟒 − [𝑤𝟑 − (𝑤𝟏 − 𝑤𝟐 )]
99.4 − 86.4
𝒔. 𝒈. =
337 − [342.8 − (99.4 − 86.4)]
𝒔. 𝒈.𝟏 = 𝟏. 𝟖𝟎𝟓𝟓
Trial 2:
𝑤1 − 𝑤2
𝒔. 𝒈. =
𝑤𝟒 − [𝑤𝟑 − (𝑤𝟏 − 𝑤𝟐 )]
99.6 − 86.4
𝒔. 𝒈. =
337.3 − [341.8 − (99.6 − 86.4)]
𝒔. 𝒈.𝟐 = 𝟏. 𝟓𝟏𝟕𝟒
Trial 3:
𝑤1 − 𝑤2
𝒔. 𝒈. =
𝑤𝟒 − [𝑤𝟑 − (𝑤𝟏 − 𝑤𝟐 )]
100.3 − 86.3
𝒔. 𝒈. =
337.1 − [343.1 − (100.3 − 86.3)]
𝒔. 𝒈.𝟑 = 𝟏. 𝟕𝟓
Result
Average Specific Gravity:

𝑠.𝑔.1 + 𝑠.𝑔.2 +𝑠.𝑔.3
s.g. = 3
1.8055+1.5174+1.75
s.g. = 3
s.g = 1.6910
13 | P a g e
Results Presentation:
Table 1.2
Trial Cover + Cover + Cover + Cover + S.G
(s) container + dry container container +dry container +
soil (W1) (W2) soil + distilled distilled water
water (W3) (W4)
1 99.4g 86.4g 342.8g 337g 1.8055
2 99.6g 86.4g 341.8g 337.3g 1.5174
3 100.3g 86.3g 343.1g 337.1g 1.75
S.G = 1.6910
Conclusion
Based on the accuracy of the test with sand, it can be assumed that this value is also very
accurate; it is most likely accurate enough to wager a guess as to what type of soil it is. Having
minimal experience in dealing with soils on a scientific level. Future tests on this sample will be
done which will allow us to identify the soil. Fortunately, this experiment has narrowed the
choices, assuming that there was as little error in this iteration of the experiment as there was
with the sand
Reference
http://home.iitk.ac.in/~madhav/expt2.html

14 | P a g e
PLASTIC LIMIT HYDROMETER ANALYSIS
Introduction
The hydrometer analysis determines the relative proportions of fine sand, silt and clay
contained in a given soil sample. Knowledge of the range of moisture content over which a soil
will exhibit a certain consistency is beneficial to the understanding of how a soil might behave
when used as a construction material
Objective
 To determine the particle-size distribution of a soil sample where the particle size is
smaller than0.075 mm in size
1. Hydrometer
2. Mixer
3. Dispersing agent
4. Two graduated cylinder (1000ml)
5. Thermometer
6. Balance sensitive to 0.1g
7. Timer
8. Measuring cylinder
9. Distilled water
10. drying oven
11. syringe
12. large evaporation dishes
13. spatula
1. 50g of soil was accurately weighted. Weighted soil was placed in a beaker and 125 ml of
the Sodium Hexametaphosphate solution (40g/litre) was added. Mixture was stirred using
a mixture and kept to soak for 16 hours. Base solution of 1000ml and the same amount of
dispersing agent was prepared ina separate measuring cylinder.
2. Soaked soil sample was transferred to the cup of mixer. Water was added to half fill the
cup and it was stirred for 3 minutes.
3. Soil water slurry was transferred to the glass sedimentation cylinder, and distilled water
was added until the total water is 1000 ml.
4. Cylinder was shaken vigorously by turning it upside down and back using the palm of the
handover the open end of the cylinder, for a period of 1 min or more, until a uniform
suspension is formed.
5. Hydrometer was inserted carefully into the soil-water suspension.
6. Hydrometer readings were taken at following time intervals. ½ min, 1min, 2min, 4min,
8min,15min, 30min, 1hr, 1.5 hrs and 24 hrs
15 | P a g e
DOCUMENTATION
16 | P a g e
Data
Time (min) HYDROMETER L (cm) Gs ( 2.60 ) Temp
READING ( 27 C )
0.5 34 10.7 0.0128
1 32 11.1 0.0128
5 29 11.5 0.0128
10 27 11.9 0.0128
15 26 12 0.0128
30 24 12.4 0.0128
45 23 12.5 0.0128
60 22 12.7 0.0128
75 22 12.7 0.0128
90 22 12.7 0.0128
105 21 12.9 0.0128
120 20 13 0.0128
150 19 13.2 0.0128
Analysis/computation
K = squareroot 30N/ ( Gs -1 )
D (mm) = K squareroot L (cm) / t ( min )
N = dynamic viscosity of water
D = Diameter of soil Grains
T = Time
Gs = Specific Gravity
L = ( cm )
17 | P a g e
Result presentation
Time (min) HYDROMETER L (cm) Gs ( 2.60 ) D ( mm)
READING Temp ( 27 C )
0.5 34 10.7 0.0128 1.89
1 32 11.1 0.0128 1.36
5 29 11.5 0.0128 0.62
10 27 11.9 0.0128 0.45
15 26 12 0.0128 0.37
30 24 12.4 0.0128 0.26
45 23 12.5 0.0128 0.22
60 22 12.7 0.0128 0.188
75 22 12.7 0.0128 0.168
90 22 12.7 0.0128 0.15
105 21 12.9 0.0128 0.143
120 20 13 0.0128 0.134
150 19 13.2 0.0128 0.121
Conclusion
As a conclusion based on the experiment, the hydrometer analysis is used to determine the
grain size distribution for the fraction of soil that is smaller than 0.063mm of diameter from
sieves analysis. Finer soil particles are dispersed by soaking the soil sample in a dispersing agent
and by rapid stirring to neutralize the charges between the soil particles. During this experiment,
its used a type of 152H hydrometer calibrated to give the mass of solids with specific gravity
equal to 2.65 in suspension. Therefore, as particles get larger, the variance from spherical
increase, a minor error will be caused
Reference
https://www.scribd.com/document/348499626/Sieve-Analysis-and-Hydrometer-tests-Lab-Report
18 | P a g e
LIQUID LIMIT CASA GRANDE
Introduction
The liquid limit (LL) is arbitrarily defined as the water content, in percent, at which a pat of
soil in a standard cup and cut by a groove of standard dimensions will flow together at the base
of the groove for a distance of 13 mm (1/2 in.) when subjected to 25 shocks from the cup being
dropped 10 mm in a standard liquid limit apparatus operated at a rate of two shocks per second.
The plastic limit (PL) is the water content, in percent, at which a soil can no longer be deformed
by rolling into 3.2 mm (1/8 in.) diameter threads without crumbling.
Objective(s)
 Prepare soil specimen as per specification.
 Find the relationship between water content and number of blows.
 Draw flow curve.
 Find out liquid limit.
1. Weighing scale
2. Liquid limit device (casa grande)
3. Grooving tool
4. Mixing dishes
5. Spatula
6. Electrical Oven
1. About 120 gm of air-dried soil from thoroughly mixed portion of material passing
425 micron I.S sieve is to be obtained.
2. Distilled water is mixed to the soil thus obtained in a mixing disc to form uniform
paste. The paste shall have a consistency that would require 30 to 35 drops of cup to
cause closer of standard groove for sufficient length.
3. A portion of the paste is placed in the cup of LIQUID LIMIT device and spread
into portion with few strokes of spatula.
4. Trim it to a depth of 1cm at the point of maximum thickness and return excess of soil
to the dish.
5. The soil in the cup shall be divided by the firm strokes of the grooving tool along
the diameter through the centre line of the follower so that clean sharp groove of
proper dimension is formed.
6. Lift and drop the cup by turning crank at the rate of two revolutions per second until
the two halves of soil cake come in contact with each other for a length of about 1 cm
by flow only.
7. The number of blows required to cause the groove close for about 1 cm shall be recorded.
8. A representative portion of soil is taken from the cup for water content determination.
9. Repeat the test with different moisture contents at least three more times for blows
between 10 and 40.
19 | P a g e
DOCUMENTATION
20 | P a g e
DATA
TRIAL 1 TRIAL 2 TRIAL 3
Numbers of blows 20 blows 21 blows 17 blows
Weight of container 20.1g 19g 22g
Weight of container 63.8g 65g 66.3g
and wet soil
Weight of container 57.7g 60.4g 60.3g
and oven-dry soil
Weight of wet soil 43.7g 46g 44.3g
Weight of oven dry 37.6g 41.4g 38.3g
soil
Moisture content 16.22% 11.11% 15.67%
Analysis/computation
LL = W (N / 25) ^ tanB
LL = Liquid Limit
W = Moisture Content
N = Number of blows
tanB = 0.121 ( but note that tanB is not equal to 0.121 for all soils)
Result presentation
Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3
Liquid Limit ( %) 15.79 10.88 14.96
Conclusion
The liquid limit of a soil is determined, using the Casa grande apparatus, by measuring the
moisture content at which a standard groove in a minus No. 40 sieve, pre-moistened soil pat, will
flow together for a distance of 13 mm (112in) under the impact of 25 blows. But the use of this
method was quiet difficult compared to fall cone test.
Difficulty of cutting a groove in certain soil, The tendency of low plasticity soils to slide along
the surface of the cup rather than flow plastically, tendency of certain low plasticity soils to
liquefy when subjected to impact, sensitivity to small manufacturing or wear differences in the
apparatus, sensitivity to operator technique in preparing the soil and adjusting the apparatus, and
performing the test are some of the faults of present test.
21 | P a g e
Reference
https://www.academia.edu/19626054/LAB_EXPERIMENT_4
Soil Mechanic Laboratory Manual, 6th Edition, Braja M. Da
22 | P a g e
PLASTIC LIMIT TEST (HAND ROLLING METHOD)
Introduction
The plastic limit, PL of a soil is the lowest water content at which the soil
remains plastic, and when plotted against the liquid limit on the plasticity chart enables the
classifcation of cohesive soils. The plasticity index of a soil is the numerical difference between
the liquid limit and the plastic limit. It is the moisture content at which the soil is in a plastic
state.
Objective
 To determine the samples of soil which the limit between plastic state and semi plastic
state
1. Porcelain dish
2. Glass plate for rolling the specimen.
3. Air tight containers to determine the moisture content.
4. Balance of capacity 200gm and sensitive to 0.01gm
5. Oven thermostatically controlled with interior of non-corroding material to maintain the
temperature around 1050 and 1100C.
1. Take about 20gm of thoroughly mixed portion of the material passing through 425
micron I.S. sieve obtained in accordance with I.S. 2720 (part 1).
2. Mix it thoroughly with distilled water in the evaporating dish till the soil mass
becomes plastic enough to be easily molded with fingers.
3. Allow it to season for sufficient time (for 24 hours) to allow water to permeate
throughout the soil mass
4. Take about 10gms of this plastic soil mass and roll it between fingers and glass plate
with just sufficient pressure to roll the mass into a threaded of uniform diameter
throughout its length. The rate of rolling shall be between 60 and 90 strokes per minute.
5. Continue rolling till you get a threaded of 3 mm diameter.
6. Kneed the soil together to a uniform mass and re-roll.
7. Continue the process until the thread crumbles when the diameter is 3 mm.
8. Collect the pieces of the crumbled thread in air tight container for moisture
content determination.
9. Repeat the test to at least 3 times and take the average of the results calculated to the
nearest whole number.
23 | P a g e
Documentation
24 | P a g e
Data
Trial Mass of soil (before Mass of soil (after Moisture content

oven) oven) (w)
(g) (g)
1 2.9 2 45
2 4.2 3 40
3 3.4 2.2 54.54
Analysis/ Computation
𝒎𝒂𝒔𝒔 𝒐𝒇 𝒎𝒐𝒊𝒔𝒕 𝒔𝒐𝒊𝒍−𝒎𝒂𝒔𝒔 𝒐𝒇 𝒅𝒓𝒚 𝒔𝒐𝒊𝒍

w= 𝒙 𝟏𝟎𝟎
𝒎𝒂𝒔𝒔 𝒐𝒇 𝒅𝒓𝒚 𝒔𝒐𝒊𝒍
Average moisture content = (w1 + w2 + w4)/3

w = (45% + 40% + 54.54%)/3
P.L = 46.51%
Results Presentation
SAMPLE 1 SAMPLE 2 SAMPLE 3
PLASTIC LIMIT(%) 45 40 54.54
Conclusion
The linear model of clay ratio versus soil properties has been developed on the basis of soil
type in the form of clay ratio which helps to test the suitability of the rolling device over other
methods to determine the plastic limit. Rolling device has been found suitable to determine the
values. The plastic limits of cohesive soil obtained from this device are almost same to those
obtained from Casagrande method and cone penetrometer method. These values are well
correlated. This method is of less operator dependent and expected to be more feasible means of
measuring plastic limit. But this technique is incompatible for non-cohesive soils. Hence the
rolling device could be successfully applied for measuring plastic limit of cohesive soils.
Reference
25 | P a g e
LIQUID LIMIT FALL CONE METHOD
Introduction
The fall cone method is said to eliminate most of the drawbacks of the Casa grande method,
and results in improved accuracy and repeatability. Since the method has the potential for
improving the test
Objective (s)
 To determine the liquid limits of soil using cone penetrometer methods
1. Penetrometer apparatus complying with the requirements of BS 1377 : Part 2: 1990.
2. Cone for the penetrometer
3. Sharpness gauge for cone, consisting of a small steel plate
4. Flat glass plate, about 500mm square and 10mm thick, with bevelled edges and rounded
corners
5. Metal cups, of brass or aluminium alloy
6. Wash bottle containing distilled or de-ionised water
7. Metal straight-edge, about 100 mm long8.
8. Palette knives or spatulas ( two 200 mm long x 30 mm, one 150 mm long x 25mm,
one100mm long x 20mm)
Procedure
1. Check the apparatus so that :
a. Mass of falling cone assembly to 0.1g.
b. Stem falls freely when released.
c. Tip of cone can be felt through gauge when brushed with finger.
2. Mix the soil (paste with the spatulas for at least 10 minutes, distilled water must be
added in successive stages to give a cone penetration of about 15mm and mix well in.
3. Press the soil paste against the side of the cup to avoid trapping air. Press more paste
well into the bottom of the cup, without an air pocket. The small spatula is convenient
for these operations. The top surface is finally smoothed off level with the rim using the
straight edge.
4. Adjust the tip of the cone with a few millimetres of the surface of the soil in the cup.
Hold the cone, press the release button and adjust the height of the cone so that the tip
just touches the soil surface.
5. Lower the stem of the dial gauge to make contact with the top of the cone shaft. Record
the reading of the dial gauge to the nearest 0.1mm (R1). Alternatively if the pointer is
mounted on a friction sleeve, adjust the pointer to read zero.
6. Set the timer to 5 second and then press the button and release it immediately.
Automatic re-locking of the stem is indicated by a click. The apparatus must remain
steady and must not be jerked.
7. Record the dial reading to the nearest 0.1mm (R2). Record the difference between R1
and R2 as the cone penetration. If the pointer was initially set to read zero, the reading
R2 gives the cone penetration directly.
26 | P a g e
8. Lift out the cone and clean it carefully. Avoid touching the sliding stem. Add a little
more wet soil to the cup, without entrapping air, smooth off and repeat procedure (5),
(6) and (7).
9. Two consecutive penetrations should be within 0.5mm or three within 1mm.
10. Take a moisture content sample of about 10g from the area penetrated by the cone
using the tip of a small spatula. Placed in a numbered moisture content container, which
is weighed, oven dried and weighed as in the standard moisture content procedure in
experiment 1.
11. The soil remaining in the cup is remixed with the rest of the sample on the glass plate
together with a little more distilled water, until a uniform softer consistency is obtained.
12. Penetration range of the soil sample should be within 15 – 25mm. Repeat the procedure
(3) – (10) with different volume of water to get at least 4 points evenly spaced.
13. The moisture content of the soil from each penetration reading is calculated from wet
and dry weighing as in the moisture content test. Each cone penetration (mm) is plotted
as ordinate, against the corresponding moisture content (%) as abscissa, both to the
linear scales. The best straight line fitting these points is drawn.
14. From the graph, the moisture content corresponding to a cone penetration of 20mm is
read off to the nearest 0.1%. The result is reported to the nearest whole number as the
liquid limit (cone test).
Documentation
27 | P a g e
Data
CONTAINER READING (mm) MASS MOIST MASS DRY Water Content
%
SAMPLE 1 19.1 29.9 27 10.74
SAMPLE 2 15.2 29 27 7.407
SAMPLE 3 20.3 36.2 33 9.6969
SAMPLE 4 20.4 38.8 34 14.118
1. Cone penetration = Dial gauge reading end – Dial gauge reading start
2. Mass of dry soil (Ms) = [mass of can + dry soil (Mcs)] – [mass of can (Mc)]
3. Mass of water (Mw) = [mass of can + moist soil (Mcws)] – [mass of can (Mc)] – [ mass
of dry soil (Ms)]
4. Moisture content, w = [ Mw / Ms ] x 100
5. Liquid Limit = w/ 0.65 + 0.0175d
Result Presentation
Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Sample 4
Liquid Limit 10.91 8.8089 9.645 14.02
(%)
Conclusion
The fall cone test is a simple and quick method for determining the undrained shear strength,
which can be interpreted in terms of simple mechanics. Factors affecting the fall cone
penetration are the angle of the cone tip, the cone surface roughness, and the rate of shear strain
during penetration.
References
https://www.scribd.com/doc/173275190/Liquid-Limit-Test
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/252818715_Theory_and_practice_of_the_fall_cone_te
st
28 | P a g e
SHRINKAGE LIMIT
Introduction
A shrinkage limit test gives a quantitative indication of how much moisture can change before
any significant volume change and to also indication of change in volume. The shrinkage limit is
useful in areas where soils undergo large volume changes when going through wet and dry
cycles. This test method provides a procedure for obtaining the data which are used to calculate
the shrinkage limit and the shrinkage ratio
Objective(s)
 To determine the shrinkage limit and calculate the shrinkage ratio for the given soil
1. Balance/scale
2. Shrinkage dish
3. Drying oven
4. Mortar and pestle
5. Spatula
6. Straightedge
7. Sieve No.40
8. Wax
9. Sewing thread
10. Water bath
11. Glass/clear plastic plate
12. Petroleum base lubricant
13. Liquid limit device and grooving tool
1. select a shrinkage dish and record its identification designation and its volume
2. determine the mass of the greased shrinkage dish and record the value as the mass of the
empty shrinkage dish
3. place, in the center of the dish an amount of the wetted soil equal to abput one-hird the
volume of the dish and cause the soil to flow to the edges by tapping the dish on a firm
surface cushioned by several layers of blotting paper or similar materials.
4. Add an amount of soil approximately equal to the first portion, and tap the dish until the
soil is thoroughly compacted and all included air has been brought to the surface.
5. Add more soil and continue the tapping until the dish is completely filled and excess soil
stands out its edge.
6. Strike off the excess soil with a straightedge and wipe off all soil adhering to the outside
of the dish
7. Determine the mss of the dish immediately after it is filled and record the struck measure
value as the mass of dish plus wet soil pat.
8. Allow the soil pat to dry in air until the color of the pat turns from dark to light
29 | P a g e
9. Drying the soil pat in the air may produce cracking of the soil pat due to rapid moisture
loss. This is concern in dry climates. If this problem is encountered, slow the rate of
moisture loss by drying the soil pat in a humidity controlled environment
10. Determine and record the mass of dish plus dry soil pat
11. Coat the dry soil pat with wax
12. Allow the wax coating and soil pat to cool to room temperature.
13. Determine the mass of the wax-coated pat soil in air and record the value as the mass air
of the dry soil and wax
14. Determine the mass of water displaced by the submerged wax-coated pat. Make sure that
there are no air bubbles clinging to the surface of the wax-coated pat or thread during this
measurement
15. Record the mass indicated when the wax coated pat of soil is submerged in a water bath
placed on the balance or scale. This is the mass of water displaced by the dry soil pat and
wax
Documentation
30 | P a g e
DATA
Trial 1 Trail 2 Trail 3
Weight of Wet Soil 25.9 26.5 25.5
Weight of shrinkage 0.4 0.3 0.4
dish
Weight of shrinkage 0.6 0.6 0.6
dish with petroleum
jelly ( g )
Weight of compacted 26.5 27.1 26.1
soil in shrinkage dish
Volume of shrinkage 10 mL 10 mL 10 mL
dish (mL )
Weight of the oven 20.4 20.1 19.6
dry (m2)
Wi (%) 29.9% 34.83% 33.16%
1Volume of waxed (Vf)
1 8.3 mL
2 9 mL
Where:
3 7.8 mL
m1= mass of wet soils in dish
m2= mass of dry soils in dish
∆ W (%)
Trial 1 8.33%
Trial 2 4.98%
Vi= initial volume of wet soil Trial 3 11.22%
Vf= volume of oven dried (in wax)
φω= denisity of water (g/cm ³)
31 | P a g e
sL= Wi (%) - ∆ W (%) Shrinkage Limit
Trial 1 = SL 21.57%
Trial 2 = SL 29.85%
Trial 3 = SL 21.94%
Result presentation
Shrinkage Limit
Trial 1 = SL 21.57%
Shrinkage Limit = 24.45%
Trial 2 = SL 29.85%
Trial 3 = SL 21.94%
Conclusion
The present day practice to determine the shrinkage limit of soil involves the use of mercury,
which is a health hazardous substance. To prevent its usage in the laboratory, the volume of the
wet soil mass can be determined by measuring the inner dimensions of the shrinkage dish using
slide calipers, and the volume of dry soil pat can be determined by the water displacement
method after coating the dry soil pat with a thin layer of wax. The shrinkage limit of the soil
calculated from the wax method is within the acceptable statistical bounds. The wax method of
determining the shrinkage limit of the soil is simple and is free from mercury poisoning effects.
References
https://theconstructor.org/geotechnical/determination-of-shrinkage-limit-of-remoulded-soil/2950/
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/245403642_Determination_of_Shrinkage_Limit_of_Fi
ne-Grained_Soils_by_Wax_Method
32 | P a g e
RUBBER BALLOON TEST
Introduction
The procedure for rubber balloon method is similar to that for the sand cone method; a test
hole is made, and the moist weight of the soil remove from the hole and its moisture content are
determined.The difference is the volume of a hole is determined by introducing rubber balloon
filled with water from a calibrated vessel into the hole, from which the volume can be read
directly
Objective(s)
 To determine the in-place density and unit weight of natural inorganic soil deposits, soil-
aggregate mixtures, or other similar firm materials.
1. Balloon density apparatus
2. Balances
3. Base plate
4. Drying apparatus (oven)
5. Miscellaneous equipment
1. Position the density plate on a flat surface and set the volume measuring (A) apparatus in
the recessed hole in the density plate
2. Hold the apparatus down firmly in position, open the control valve, pump the balloon
down with the rubber bulb until the water level in the graduated cylinder has reached its
lowest position, and record this volume which is the initial reading.
3. Pump the balloon back into the cylinder by inverting the rubber bulb, and close the control
valve.
4. Place the density plate in a level position on the material to be tested, dig a test hole about4
in. in diameter and 4 in. deep, retain all the material which is removed from the hole, then
measure and record the mass of the excavated soil.
5. Set the apparatus in the recess in the density plate, hold it down firmly, open the control
valve, pump the balloon into the hole, and record the lowest point reached by the water in
cylinder which is the final reading.
6. Invert the pressure-vacuum bulb and pump the balloon back into the cylinder.
7. Subtract the initial reading from the final reading and obtain the volume of the hole feet.
8. Mix the material thoroughly and secure a representative sample of not less than 100 gm for
moisture determination.
9. Make density calculations based on volume of the test hole and dry or wet weight (as
required) of materials removed.
Volume Determination (A)
1. After initial reading has been taken, dig the density hole using the field density plate as a
template.
2. Pumping the balloon into the density hole.
3. Operator takes reading at lowest point on the graduated cylinder.
33 | P a g e
4. Replacing the actuator bulb in the quick coupler changing from a pressure operation to a
vacuum operation, pump water and balloon back into the cylinder.
Documentation
34 | P a g e
Data
Weight of soil excavated = 247g
Moisture content = 13.91%
V2 = 1382 cm2
V1 = 1222 cm2
Wd = 246.657g
Analysis/ Computation
It is one of the methods used to find the unit weight of soil in field after compaction. The test is
carried out with the rubber balloon filled with water with a calibration vessel. After compacting
the soil in field, the small hole is excavated. Take the weight soil excavated in field and find
moisture content in the soil. Then, the compacted soil dry weight in field is computed using the
formula below.
𝑤𝑚
𝑤𝑑 = 𝑤
1 + 100
𝑉2
𝑉=
𝑉1
𝑤
𝑑𝑤 =
𝑉
(𝑑𝑤 × 100)
𝑑=
(100 + 𝑤)
Result Presentation
Wd = 246.657g V = 0.8842 Dw = 0.1573 D = 1.1308
Where:
V1 = Volume measure initial reading
V2= Volume measure final reading, cubic centimeters
V = Volume of hole
W = Weight of wet soil taken from test hole
DW = Wet density
D = Dry density
w = Moisture content of sample expressed as a percentage of the weight of the dry soil.
35 | P a g e
Conclusion
In this experiment it is proven that the rubber balloon method is as accurate as the sand cone
method, but the volumeter is easy to operate and can the volume can be measured more quickly
than in the sand cone method. It also is suitable for a wide range of soils, except those with large
quantities of heavy gravel.
References
36 | P a g e
SAND CONE TEST
Introduction
This method of test is use for determining the density of the soil using sand cone device
consists of a plastic jar with a metal cone attached at its top.
Objective(s)
 To check the compacted dry unit of soil and compare it with the specification drawn up
for the construction
1. Sand cone apparatus.
2. Base plate.
3. One gallon can with cap
4. Tools to dig a small hole in the field.
5. Balance.
6. 20-30 Ottawa sand
7. Steel straight edge
8. proctor compaction mould without attached extension
Laboratory work
1. Determine the dry unit weight of the Ottawa sand that will be used in the field. This can
be done by taking a proctor compaction mold and using a spoon, when the mold is full
strike off the top of the mold with the steel straight edge. Determine the weight of sand in
the mold (W1).
1. γd (sand) = W1\V1
2. V1 = volume of proctor hammer (1/30) cf
3. Calibrate the cone. That is we need to determine the weight of Ottawa sand that is
required to fill the cone to do this fill the gallon with Ottawa sand determine the weight
of the bottle + cone + sand (W2) then determine the weight of the sand in the cone (W3)
4. Wc = W2 – W3
2. Determine the weight of the gallon can without the cap (W4)4. before proceeding to the
field , fill the one gallon bottle , determine the weight of the bottle + cone + sand (W5) "
before using
5. But the gallon can with the moist soil in the oven to dry a constant weight and determine
the weight of the can plus oven dry soil.*
Field work
6. After proceeding to the field place the base plate on a level ground in the field under the
centre hole of the base plate, dig the hole in the ground using digging tools. The volume
should be smaller than the volume of the sand in the bottle minus the volume of the cone
7. Remove all the loose soil from the hall and put it in the gallon can.
8. Turn the gallon bottle filled with sand with cone attached to it upside down and place it
on the centre of the base plate. Open the valve of the cone sand will flow from the bottle
37 | P a g e
to fill the hole in the ground and the cone, When the flow of the sand from the bottle
stops, close the valve of the cone and remove it .
9. Determine the weight of (the gallon + moist soil ) W6 , Also determine the weight of the
( bottle + can + sand ) " after using " W7
10. put the gallon can with the moist soil in the oven to dry to a constant weight , Determine
the weight of ( can + oven dry soil )
Documentation
38 | P a g e
Data
Container + Sand 9368 grams
Container - Sand Cone (flat surface) 7853 grams
Container - Sand Cone (excavated surface) 2813 grams
Excavated Soil 4648 grams
Unit weight of sand 1120kg/m^3
Analysis/ Calculations
A hole of specified dimensions is excavated in the ground. The mass of the excavated soil is
determined.
Determining the weight of (the gallon + moist soil) W6. We also determine the weight of the
(bottle + can + sand) "after using" W7.
Put the gallon can with the moist soil in the oven to dry to a constant weight. Determine the
weight of (can + oven dry soil).
W5= W1-W4
W5= 9368-2813
W5= 6555 grams
V=(W5-Wc) / unit weight of dry
V= (6555-1515)/ 1120 kg/m^3
V= 4.5 m^3
Unit weight = W3/V
Unit weight = 4648/4.5
Unit weight = 1032.89 kg/m^3
Result Presentation
Using sand cone method we compute that the unit weight of the sand is 1032.89 kg/m^3
Conclusion
Compaction of soil is very important because it's increase the strength of soil, so it's
important for construction of highways, airports and other structures .the sand cone method
consider as an easy and simple method of determining the field unit weight of the compaction .
However ,there also another two method for determining field unit weight the first one is the
rubber balloon method and the second one i s Nuclear density meters .the good compacted soil
will have at least a relative compaction(%) about a 90%
39 | P a g e
References
http://www.academia.edu/7006195/Lab_soil_exp_6
40 | P a g e
COMPACTION TEST
Introduction
For construction of highways, airports, and other structures, it is often necessary to compact
soil to improve its strength. This test is referred to as the' standard Proctor compaction test and is
based on the compaction of the soil fraction passing No, 4 U.S. sieve
Objectives
 To determine the maximum dry unit weight of compaction of soils which can be used for
specification of field compaction.
1. Compaction mold
2. No.4 U.S. sieve
3. Standard Proctor hammer (5.5lb)
4. Balance sensitive up to 0.01 lb
5. Balance sensitive up to 0.1 g
6. Large flat pan
7. Jack
8. Steel straight edge
9. Moisture cans
10. Drying oven
11. Plastic squeeze bottle with water
1. Obtain about 10 lb (4.5 kg) of air-dry soil on which the compaction test is to be
conducted. Break all the soil lumps.
2. Sieve the soil on a No.4 U.S. sieve. Collect all of the minus-4 material in a large pan.
This should be about 6lb (2.7 kg) or more. .
3. Add enough water to the minus-4 material and mix it in thoroughly to bring the moisture
content up to about ~.
4. Determine the weight of the Proctor mold + base plate (not the extension), WI' (lb).
5. Now attach the extension to the top of the mold.
6. Remove the top attachment from the mold. Be careful not to break off any of the
compacted soil inside the mold while removing the top attachment.
7. Using a straight edge, trim the excess soil above the mold. Now the top of the compacted
soil will be even with the top of the mold.
8. Determine the weight of the mold + base plate +- compacted moist soil in the mold, Wz
(lb).
9. Remove the base plate from the mold. Using a jack, extrude the compacted soil cylinder
from the mold.
10. Take a moisture can and determine its mass, W3 (g).
11. From the moist soil extruded in Step 10, collect a moisture sample in the moisture can
(Step II) and determine the mass of the can + moist soil, W4 (g).
12. Place the moisture can with the moist soil in the oven to dry to a constant weight.
41 | P a g e
13. Break the rest of the compacted soil (to No.4 size) by hand and mix it with the leftover
moist soil in the pan. Add more water and mix it to raise the moisture content by about
2%
Documentation
42 | P a g e
43 | P a g e
Conclusion
The primary values determined in a compaction test are, of course the optimum moisture
content and maximum dry unit weight, however, the written report would normally also include
the compaction curve data form. In addition, the origin of the material tested, as well as a
description of it, would normally be included, together with an indication of the method used (A,
B, or C) and the preparation(moist or dry).
References
44 | P a g e
CONSTANT HEAD AND FALLING HEAD
PERMEABILITY TEST IN SAND
Introduction
Permeability is the measure of the soil’s ability to permit water to flow through its pores or
voids. It is one of the most important soil properties of interest to geotechnical engineers
Objectives
 To determine the coefficient of permeability of sand sample by constant head
permeability test
 To determine the coefficient of permeability of soil by variable head test
Equipment
1. Constant head permeameter
2. Graduated cylinder (250cc or 500cc)
3. Balance, sensitive up to 0.1g
4. Thermometer
5. Rubber tubing
6. Stop watch
Constant Head
1. Determine the mass of the plastic specimen tube, the porous stones, the spring, and the
two rubber stoppers (WI)
2. Slip the bottom porous stone into the specimen tube, and then fix the bottom rubber
stopper to the specimen tube.
3. Collect oven-dry sand in a container. Use a spoon, pour the sand into the specimen tube
in small layers, and compact it by vibration and/or other compacting means.
4. When the length of the specimen tube is about two-third the length of the tube, slip the
top porous stone into the tube to rest firmly on the specimen.
5. Place a spring on the top porous stone, if necessary.
6. Fix a rubber stopper to the top of the specimen tube.
7. Determine the mass of the assembly (Step 6 - W2) •.
8. Measure the length (L) of the compacted specimen in the tube.
9. Assemble the permeameter near a sink
10. Run water into the top of the large funnel fixed to the stand through a plastic tube from
the water inlet. The water will flow through the specimen to the constant head chamber.
After some time, the water will flow into the sink through the outlet in the constant head
chamber.
11. Adjust the supply of water to the funnel so that the water level in the funnel remains
constant. At the same time, allow the flow to continue for about 10 minutes in order to
saturate the specimen.
12. After a steady flow is established (that is, once the head difference h is constant), collect
the water flowing out of the constant head chamber (Q) in a graduated cylinder. Record
the collection time (t) with a stop watch.
45 | P a g e
13. Repeat Step 12 three times. Keep the collection time (t) the same and determine Q. Then
find the average value of Q.' '
14. Change the head difference, h, and repeat Steps II, 12 and 13 about three times.
15. Record the temperature, T, of the water to the nearest degree. Note: This value is
sufficiently accurate for this type of test.
Falling Head
Steps 1 through 9: ·Follow the same procedure as described in Constant Head for the preparation
of the specimen then;
1. Supply water using a plastic tube from the water inlet to the burette. The water will flow
from the burette to the specimen and then to the funnel. Check to see that there is no leak.
Remove all air bubbles.
2. Allow the water to flow for some time in order to saturate the specimen. When the funnel
is full, water will flow out of it into the sink.
3. Using the pinch cock, close the flow of water through the specimen. The pinch cock is
located on the plastic pipe connecting the bottom of the specimen to the funnel.
4. Measure the head difference, hI (cm)
5. Open the pinch cock. Water will flow through the burette to the specimen and then out of
the funnel. Record time (t) with a stop watch until the head difference is equal to h2
(cm).Close the flow of water through the specimen using the pinch cock.
6. Determine the volume (Vw) of water that is drained from burette in cm3.
7. Add more water to the burette to make another run. Repeat Steps 4, 5·and 6. However, hi
and h2 should be changed for each run.
8. Record the temperature, T, of the water to the nearest degree (0C).
Documentation
46 | P a g e
47 | P a g e
Data
CONSTANT HEAD TEST DATA
Discharge 8.631x10^-7 cm/s
Area of permeameter 77.913cm^2
Height of soil specimen 10cm
Height 100cm
Duration of water collection 23.17s
FALLING HEAD DATA

H1 90cm
H2 50cm
Height of soil specimen 10cm
Area of permeameter 77.913 cm^2
Area of stand pipe 2.8353 cm^2
CONSTANT HEAD
K = QL / Aht
FALLING HEAD
K = 2.303 al/At log 10 (H1/H2)
Results Presentation
The hydraulic conductivity in constant head is 4.7816 x 10 ^-8 cm per second and the
hydraulic conductivity in falling head test is 0.0959 cm per second
Conclusion
Constant head test is based on the assumption of laminar flow where k is independent of
i (low values of i) wherein in the Falling Head test used both for coarse-grained soils as well as
fine-grained soils. In the said test we and base on our computation we conclude that since the
vakue of hydraulic conductivity is higher than the coefficient of permeability the degree of
permeabilirty is very high.
References
48 | P a g e
CE 412
GEOTECHNICAL ENGNEERING I:
SOIL MECHANICS
LABORATORY 1
Soil Sampling
Engr. Erwin Rafael Cabral
Group 12
Members:
Braga, Precious L.
Guevarra, Mark Jason P.
Hernandez, John Paul M.
Magbanlag, Loury Joy N.
Saban, Krisian Yvette M.
Tuble, Rey S.
49 | P a g e
CE 412
SOIL MECHANICS
LABORATORY 2
Sieve Analysis
Group 12
Members:
Braga, Precious L.
Tuble, Rey S.
50 | P a g e
CE 412
SOIL MECHANICS
LABORATORY 3
Water Content Determination
Group 12
Members:
Braga, Precious L.
Tuble, Rey S.
51 | P a g e
CE 412
SOIL MECHANICS
LABORATORY 4
Determination of Specific Gravity of Soil Solid
Group 12
Members:
Braga, Precious L.
Tuble, Rey S.
52 | P a g e
CE 412
SOIL MECHANICS
LABORATORY 5
Determination of Specific Gravity of Soil Solid (Distilled Water)
Group 12
Members:
Braga, Precious L.
Tuble, Rey S.
53 | P a g e
CE 412
SOIL MECHANICS
LABORATORY 6
Plastic Limit
Group 12
Members:
Braga, Precious L.
Tuble, Rey S.
54 | P a g e
CE 412
SOIL MECHANICS
LABORATORY 7
Hydrometer Analysis
Group 12
Members:
Braga, Precious L.
Tuble, Rey S.
55 | P a g e
CE 412
SOIL MECHANICS
LABORATORY 8
Liquid Limit Casagrande
Group 12
Members:
Braga, Precious L.
Tuble, Rey S.
56 | P a g e
CE 412
SOIL MECHANICS
LABORATORY 9
Liquid Limit Fall Cone Method
Group 12
Members:
Braga, Precious L.
Tuble, Rey S.
57 | P a g e
CE 412
SOIL MECHANICS
LABORATORY 10
Shrinkage Limit
Group 12
Members:
Braga, Precious L.
Tuble, Rey S.
58 | P a g e
CE 412
SOIL MECHANICS
LABORATORY 11
Rubber Balloon Test
Group 12
Members:
Braga, Precious L.
Tuble, Rey S.
59 | P a g e
CE 412
SOIL MECHANICS
LABORATORY 12
Sand Cone Test
Group 12
Members:
Braga, Precious L.
Tuble, Rey S.
60 | P a g e
CE 412
SOIL MECHANICS
LABORATORY 13
Soil Compaction
Group 12
Members:
Braga, Precious L.
Tuble, Rey S.
61 | P a g e
CE 412
SOIL MECHANICS
LABORATORY 14
Constant head and falling head
Permeability test in sand
Group 12
Members:
Braga, Precious L.
Tuble, Rey S.
62 | P a g e

Di Pa Finalllllllll

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Di Pa Finalllllllll

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

SOIL SAMPLING

Sample 1: Sample 2: Sample 3:

w1= 17.22% w2 = 17.99% w3 = 20.63%

Average moisture content = (w1 + w2 + w4)/3

DETERMINATION OF SOIL SOLID

LENGTH (cm) WIDTH (cm) HEIGHT (cm) WEIGHT (g)

SAMPLE 1 SAMPLE 2 SAMPLE 3

DETERMINATION OF SPECIFIC GRAVITY OF SOIL SOLID

1 99.4g 86.4g 342.8g 337g

2 99.6g 86.4g 341.8g 337.3g

3 100.3g 86.3g 343.1g 337.1g

Average Specific Gravity:

2 99.6g 86.4g 341.8g 337.3g 1.5174

3 100.3g 86.3g 343.1g 337.1g 1.75

Fundamentals of Geotechnical Engineering 5th Edition, Braja M. Das

Materials and Equipment

Trial Mass of soil (before Mass of soil (after Moisture content

𝒎𝒂𝒔𝒔 𝒐𝒇 𝒎𝒐𝒊𝒔𝒕 𝒔𝒐𝒊𝒍−𝒎𝒂𝒔𝒔 𝒐𝒇 𝒅𝒓𝒚 𝒔𝒐𝒊𝒍

Average moisture content = (w1 + w2 + w4)/3

1Volume of waxed (Vf)

Moisture content = 13.91%

FALLING HEAD DATA

Engr. Erwin Rafael Cabral

Engr. Erwin Rafael Cabral

Engr. Erwin Rafael Cabral

Engr. Erwin Rafael Cabral

Engr. Erwin Rafael Cabral

Engr. Erwin Rafael Cabral

Engr. Erwin Rafael Cabral

Engr. Erwin Rafael Cabral

Engr. Erwin Rafael Cabral

Engr. Erwin Rafael Cabral

Engr. Erwin Rafael Cabral

Engr. Erwin Rafael Cabral

Engr. Erwin Rafael Cabral

Engr. Erwin Rafael Cabral

S-ar putea să vă placă și