Introduction:

This test method covers the determination of the CBR

(California Bearing Ratio) of pavement subgrade, subbase,
and base course materials from laboratory compacted
specimens. The test method is primarily intended for but
not limited to, evaluating the strength of cohesive
materials having maximum particle sizes less than 3/4 in.
(19 mm).
The CBR is the ratio of the unit stress required to obtain a
certain depth of penetration into a compacted specimen of
soil (at some water content and density) to the unit stress
required to obtain the same depth of penetration on a
standard sample of crushed stone.
While the other test we made in this laboratory is the
stripping test, this test measures and evaluates the
preservation of a bituminous film on an aggregate surface
in the presence of water.

Objectives:
The aim of this experiment is:
1. To be familiar with the CBR test method for highway
and airports.
2. From the CBR value we can determined the resilient
modulus of subgrade.

Procedure:
For CBR test:
1. A sample of soil is prepared to compact two
CBR molds of soil.
2. It is desirable to cure the soil sample for a more
uniform moisture distribution.
3. At least 100g of sample is taken to measure the
water content.

4. The soil is compacted in the mold, and then the

excess soil is trimmed.
5. The base plate and a spacer disc are removed.
The net weight (mass), density, and unit weight
are recorded.
6. The penetration resistance or stress is plotted
versus penetration.
7. The pen. Resistance is obtained for (2.5, 5.0)
mm penetrations.
For stripping test:
1. A four samples agg. (Granite, basalt, limestone,
gravel) is weighted (100g).
2. The samples are placed in an oven at a temp. of
135c for one hour.
3. A sample of asphalt cement is also heated.
4. The asphalt cement is added to the four samples.
5. After mixing and the aggregate are fully coated
the aggregate is kept immersed in water.
6. Mix the specimens with spoon for 10 min.
7. then by visual observation we found the
percentage of coated aggregate with asphalt.

Data:
For CBR:
pen

load
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
300
320
Table 1: pen. Vs. load
For stripping:
agg.
%
Type
coated
granite
15
basalt
80

113
162
200
238
266
300
330
360
381
407
431
456
483
510
537
570

limestone
97
gravel
28
Table 2: type of agg. vs. %coated

Results:
CBR@ 100 pen. =266
CBR@ 200 pen. =407

Discussion:
Conclusion:
From this experiment we can conclude that:
1. Absorption capacity for coarse aggregate is less
than the one for fine aggregate
2. The bulk specific gravity for coarse aggregate is
greater then the one for fine aggregate.
3. There are many forms of bulk specific gravity, used
to describe any sample of aggregate, based on the
definition of each of them.

References:
1.
2.
3.
4.

Laboratory manual.
ASTM, D1664, D1883.
Pavement analysis and design, by Yang H. Huang.
Notes.

Appendix:

Fig. 1: pen. Vs. load