3 views

Uploaded by Kostas Symeonidis

Geotechnical Laboratory Testing, Imperial College

- Class6 Shearstrength Directsheartest 150416085805 Conversion Gate02
- HS Model SPT-N
- tchmechanical
- CML
- Structure Damage Due to Expansive Soils
- Thesis IN M.TECH
- Direct Shear Asti
- Geotechnical Report - 3792-Civil Defense Directorate 31-12-2016.pdf
- STUDIES ON THE USE OF FISH NET FIBERS FOR STABILIZATION OF BLACK COTTON SOIL
- Triaxial Test
- 04 - Soil and Rock for Geoscientist and Engineers
- geotechnical characteristics
- Enhanceing the Properties of Soil by using Synthetic Polypropylene
- Soil Mechanics Ass2 March 2017 1
- Atterberg limits.pdf
- 11566731 Guidelines for Quality Control Inspection
- Correlations for Swelling Pressure From PI PL Results
- 4.0 Unbound Materials
- Roctest Hoek Cell
- Shear Strength of Soils and MSW

You are on page 1of 21

Contents

1. Index Tests ........................................................................................................................ 2

1.1. Atterberg Limits ................................................................................................................ 2

1.2. Particle Size Distribution: Sieve & Sedimentation ............................................................ 2

2. Oedometer Test................................................................................................................ 3

2.1. Tests performed on Sands ................................................................................................ 3

2.2. Tests performed on Clays ................................................................................................. 4

3. Direct Shear Test .............................................................................................................. 5

3.1. Constant height tests........................................................................................................ 6

3.2. Tests on intact and reconstituted Gault Clay ................................................................... 6

Tables

Table 1 Plastic Limit Test Results ............................................................................................... 7

Table 2 liquid Limit Test Results ................................................................................................ 7

Table 3 Oedometer tests performed......................................................................................... 7

Graphs

Graph 1 Casagrande method for LL test results ........................................................................ 8

Graph 2 Cone Penetrometer method for LL test results ........................................................... 8

Graph 3A-Line Chart .................................................................................................................. 9

Graph 4 PL, LL test results ......................................................................................................... 9

Graph 5 Sieving and Hydrometer combined results ............................................................... 10

Graph 6 hydrometer results .................................................................................................... 10

Graph 7 log(v) e curves for Claigan Sand. Upper right corner expected behaviour ......... 11

Graph 8 Comparison of log(v) e curves for Sands ............................................................. 11

Graph 9 Settlement Log(t) and Ue Log(t) for Kaolin and Kss ............................................. 12

Graph 10 log(v) - mv for Kaolin and KSS................................................................................ 13

Graph 11 log(v) -cv for intact Gault Clay and KSS ................................................................. 14

Graph 12 log(v) - k for intact Gault Clay ............................................................................... 14

Graph 13 log(v)- e for intact and reconstituted Gault Clay .................................................. 15

Graph 14 comparison of log(v)- e curves for Clay samples .................................................. 15

Graph 15 log(v)- e curve for Kaolin - creep .......................................................................... 16

Graph 16 v (kPa) - (kPa) ..................................................................................................... 16

Graph 17 (%) (kPa) ........................................................................................................... 17

Graph 18 / v (upper part) and v (lower part) for loose sands............................... 17

Graph 19 / v (upper part) and v (lower part) for dense sands ............................. 18

Graph 20 v/h / v for sand samples.............................................................................. 18

Graph 21 v e final void ratios for sands ............................................................................. 19

Graph 22 v for dense and loose sands ............................................................................ 19

Graph 23 (%) (kPa)............................................................................................................ 20

Graph 24 / v .................................................................................................................. 20

Graph 25 (upper part) and v (lower part) ................................................................ 21

MSc Lab Report 1 Konstantinos Symeonidis

1. Index Tests

1.1. Atterberg Limits

The Atteberg limits determined for fine grained soils in this test are the Liquid Limit

(LL) and the Plastic Limit (PL). PL is determined by the plastic limit test while the

LL is determined by the Casagrande Method and the Cone Penetrometer method. The

average value of the two methods was used to calculate the Plasticity Index PI. Plastic

limit test results are presented on Table 1. The difference between Min and Max PL

values is satisfactory for most of the tests performed yet it is worth to note that this

test is the most operator-dependent test as it can be seen from the deviation of the

results in group 1B performed on Gault Clay samples where the deviation is about

8%. Liquid limit test results for both method applied are shown on Table 2.

Comparing the result it can be concluded that there isnt any significant difference on

the results from the two methods performed on samples of the same materials. More

specifically, the Casagrande method results for LL are shown in Graph 1 and the

Cone Penetrometer method results in Graph 2. In theory the cone penetrometer

method is the more reliable and it is preferred because it is more standardized, with

fixed cone dimensions, fixed drop height etc. and less prone to human errors than the

casagrande method which is dependent on the rate of rotating the handle by the

operator. For example the faster the rate the more reduced the LL values. However,

even in the cone penetrometer method the conditions of the apparatus can influence

the results as for example rough surface of the cone and smaller drop height can

increase the LL values.

The plasticity chart (A-line chart) is shown in the Graph 3. The A-line is from

experimental data and is used as a reference datum separating clays and silts. Clays

are above and silts and organic clays are below the A-line. We can see from the figure

3 that all the soils are above the A-line as expected. The KSS deviates by much from

the other soils due to the content of sand and silt; it is the less plastic and is

characterized as a soil of medium plasticity (CI). From the PL and LL results we can

calculate the Plasticity Index PI for each soil sample and we can get an indication of

the nature of the soil. These results are shown in Graph 4. We can see that the most

plastic soil is the Polish clay (biggest plastic zone) and the less plastic is the KSS as

expected because it is not a pure clay as already mentioned above (50% clay, 25%

silt, 25% sand). Comparing these results with the range of values found in literature

for the samples used in our test we can conclude that our results fall within these

ranges.

From the calculated Atterberg limits an estimation of the state of the soil can be made

by measuring the water content and calculating the Liquidity Index LI. In fact, for the

reconstituted soils the water content is standardized and equal to 1- 1.5 of the LL but

for the natural soils we can measure the natural water content and calculate the LI.

Furthermore, from the Atterberg limits an estimate for the engineering properties of

the soils can be made. There are numerous correlations in the literature relating the

undrained shear strength, the coefficient of compressibility and the coefficient of

consolidation with the PI or the Atterberg limits. The more plastic the soil the most

compressible it is and consolidates over a longer period of time. Yet using these

correlations must be done caution taking into account local condition of the soils.

1.2. Particle Size Distribution: Sieve & Sedimentation

Particle size distribution PSD using the sieving and sedimentation methods was used

with Huisini and Claigan Sand samples and KSS and KS samples respectively. In

MSc Lab Report 1 Konstantinos Symeonidis

Graph 5 the combined results from Sieving and sedimentation methods are shown.

For the KSS the PSD was determined with both sieving and hydrometer tests while

for the sands was determined only with the sieving test. Accordingly, the PSD for KS

was determined only with hydrometer test. The hydrometer analysis test results are

shown in detail in Graph 6. From this graph it can be noted that the curves for the

KSS are very similar while from the curves for KS differences between them can be

observed but they are very small and the curves are of the same shape. Even though it

is expected that the turbulent flow and the non-spherical particles could have led to

significant deviations in grading curves; it seems that in overall the results from the

hydrometer test are uniform and smooth. It can be deduced that Stokes law

assumption doesnt affect the results significantly.

In Graph 5 it can be seen that the curves for KSS exhibit a different grading from the

curves for the sands. More specifically we can see that the curves for the KSS are

smoother and covering a great range of particle sizes thus showing that the KSS (50%

clay, 25% sand, 25% silt) samples are well graded as it is expected. Note however that

they do not join precisely as expected, thus forming a gap that could be attributed to

weight loss because of the shaking machine, the hand sieving, the different speeds and

also to the finer particles being retained in the dry sieve. However the grading curve

shape is realistic. If the sieving test had been carried out in a more standardised way

the total grading curves for the KSS samples would expected to coincide. For the

sands it can be seen that the steeper grading curve is the curve for the Claigan sand.

Thus it can be concluded that Claigan sand is a more uniform and poorly graded

sample. Note that the grading curves for Huisini sand coincide; almost precisely both

having steep curves as expected because Huisini sand sample is uniform.

2. Oedometer Test

The Oedometer test is a simple laboratory test that can provide useful data concerning

one dimensional compression and swelling. Tests were conducted on four Sand

samples and six Clay samples as it is shown in Table 3.

2.1. Tests performed on Sands

Tests were performed on samples from the three different types of sands (Quartz,

Claigan and Huisini) and graphs in terms of log(v) e were plotted as for example

it can be seen in Graph 7. Note that the tests were to be performed on both dense and

loose condition for the three different types of sands, but since the last three groups

havent contacted any tests on sands we can only compare the loose and dense

Claigan sand. From the above figure it can be seen that the loose sand have lower

initial void ratio than the dense and the curves of the two different density samples are

following a parallel trend. As it can be seen in Graph 7 where the expected behavior

is presented on the upper right corner, according to the theory, we were expecting the

loose sample to have higher initial void ratio and the two curves to tend to the same

normal compression line when they were subjected to high stresses. Also, we were

expecting loose sample to yield at lower pressures than dense samples because they

experience higher contact pressures, but as it can be seen from the graph the two

samples tend to yield at almost the same point. In Graph 8 the log(v) e

comparison for the loose sand samples is presented. Huisini and Claigan Sand

samples tend to comply with the theory as they exhibit a reduction in void ratio due to

realignment of the particle and stiff and elastic unloading behaviour. These samples

show similar Compressibility and Swelling characteristics and most of the

deformation past yield is permanent. On the contrary, the Quartz Sand sample did not

exhibit any considerable reduction in the void ratio. Its behaviour may be attributed to

MSc Lab Report 1 Konstantinos Symeonidis

the test operations as the top cap not being installed properly causing a jam and the

incorrect measurements of vertical strain or the sample being extremely strong and

never stressed to a level great enough to cause the particles to break.

2.2. Tests performed on Clays

In Graph 9 the relationship between excess Pore Water Pressure (PWP) and

settlement is shown. It can be deducted that there is tendency to conform to theory,

even though during the experiment sometimes we did not wait for the excess pore

pressure to dissipate before applying the next load. Some differences from theory

were noticed, like the fact that PWP do not immediately reach the maximum point.

In Graph 10 the variation of the Coefficient of Volume Compressibility with vertical

effective stress (log(v) - mv) for Kaolin and KSS samples is shown. It can be seen

that there is a general decrease of the value of the coefficient m v with increasing

effective stress. In theory the coefficient mv remain constant. In Graph 11 the

variation of the Coefficient of Consolidation with vertical effective stress (log(v) -

cv) for intact Gault Clay and KSS samples is shown. It can be seen that the cv values

for KSS exhibit a wide dispersion, while the values for the intact Gault clay show a

sharp reduction initially followed by a small increment and a slow reduction at the

end of the test. In theory the coefficient cv should remain constant. In Graph 12 the

variation of the Coefficient of Permeability with vertical effective stress (log(v) - k)

for intact Gault Clay is shown. It can be seen that there is a general decrease of the

value of the coefficient mv with increasing effective stress. In theory the coefficient k

remains constant. The values obtain by the test cannot be considered representative of

the in situ ground permeability since the permeability is influenced by local state of

the soil and anisotropy, while disturbance and the size of the sample tested in the lab

also influence the results.

Furthermore, a comparison between the behaviour of the intact and the reconstituted

clay samples was made. In theory, the reconstituted samples tend to compress along

the Intrinsic Compression Line (ICL) due to the intrinsic soil properties. In contrast,

the intact sample tend to head towards the Sedimentation Compression Line (SCL)

and as the bonds break between the soil particles and the soil yields it compress

towards the ICL line. In Graph 13 and 14 the relation between void ration and

effective stress for the intact and reconstituted Gault clay is shown. In figure 14 the

reconstituted sample followed the ICL as expected, while the intact trended towards

the SCL line but did not reach. It can be deducted that higher stresses may be need it

for yielding to take place and that the clay particles in Gault clay are lined up and

their bonds cannot be easily broken. From Graph 14 it can be seen that the normal

compression lines and the swelling for the samples are linear, except some

fluctuations which took place due to human error with the application of the loads.

The swelling index Cs for the natural material is expected to be less than the

reconstituted. Results however show greater Cs for the natural Gault Clay, but it must

be to taken into account that there were no PWP measurements for this sample so we

might expect an error. Finally, creep takes place by decreasing the void ratio and

increasing settlement under constant effective stress. When creep takes place there is

a smoothing of the curve as in Graph 15 under constant effective stress. If creep was

conducted at the unloading decrements sample would continue to settle after swelling

is completed.

MSc Lab Report 1 Konstantinos Symeonidis

For the direct shear test we assume that shear takes place to the entire sample because

we are using nominal values of shear strain and we also assume a pre-oriented

surface. Also there is no control on drainage and all tests are drained. Furthermore

only a certain level of strain can be applied to the samples.

In Graph 16 the stress paths in terms of v are shown, for all the performed tests

on sands at =50kPa, 350kPa and 800kPa. Failure envelopes (angles of shearing

resistance at peak) for loose and sands are shown. For both loose and dense sands

Critical State has not been reached and a unique Critical State (Strength) Line was

estimated to be close to the PEAK value for the loose sands. It can be seen that C.S.L.

is close to the peak strength line of loose sands while for the dense sands the stress

path rises up to a peak strength and then reduces gradually towards the C.S.L. Note

that C.S.L. can only be estimated by this test due to the test limitation and its

estimation is due to be influenced by potential errors of the tests performed. However,

it is a good approximation of the sand behaviour. In general, dense sands are of higher

peak strength than loose sands while they are of equal critical strength. Also, it

appears that shear strength increases with stress level. Peak strength values for loose

and dense sands are within the range of values reported in literature.

In Graph 17 the effect of density on the shear strength in terms of is shown. As

the constant normal stress (v) applied to the sample is increased, shear strength

increases. This is true for both dense and loose samples, although effect is more

obvious in the dense samples. Stiffness increases with constant normal stress as

follows: G800kPa> G350kPa>G50kPa. In Graph 18 and 19 the behaviour of loose

and dense sands in terms of / v and v is summarized. More specifically,

Graph 18 shows that loose sands gradually increase strength when sheared and stress

ratio increases, while concurrently they exhibit an obvious contraction. The rate of

contraction decreases as the critical strength is approached and expected to become

zero when critical strength is finally reached. On the other hand, as shown in Graph

19, once the dense sands reach peak strength they gradually fall to the Critical

Strength with increasing shearing. Shear box cannot impose very large strains;

therefore C.S. is not reached in all cases. This is clearly seen that in the / v

graph where the critical state is not clearly identified due to this limitation of the

apparatus. From Graph 19, it is clearly seen that dense sands tend to dilate when

sheared (i.e. when increases) while the maximum rate of dilation corresponds to the

peak strength of the / v graph. Note that dense samples from groups 2b and 3b,

initially contracts and then dilate rapidly. The maximum rate of dilation in the dense

samples corresponds well with the peak shear stress. The calculated for dense sand

angle is = 11.31, as shown in Graph 19, giving = 40 in plasticity theory. After

peak strength is reached (i.e. the maximum / v value), the rate of dilation is

gradually decreasing (suppression of volume change) until it becomes zero when

critical strength is achieved. Graph 20 indicates that both loose and dense samples,

when sheared, tend to a unique critical stress state ratio where the rate of contraction

or dilation respectively is zero. The lines drawn show the tendency of the samples to

contract or dilate until they reach a critical state. In the first case, loose sands

suddenly present an increase in the rate of contraction as stress ratio increases but this

rate is gradually decreasing as we approach the critical strength (critical stress ratio)

where dv/dh becomes zero. Opposed to the behaviour described for loose sands,

dense sands seem to contract at the beginning of shearing. The rate of dilation mainly

increases up to the point where it is expected that the peak strength is reached (peak

MSc Lab Report 1 Konstantinos Symeonidis

stress ratio) and after that the rate of dilation gradually decreases and reaches the

critical stress ratio which in turn correspond to zero dilation. The estimated critical

stress ratio coincides for both loose and dense samples. According to theory, when

sand is sheared under a specific normal stress, irrespectively of density, should reach

at the same critical void ratio. In Graph 21 final the void ratio against the normal

stress for the dense and loose sands is shown. Apparently from all the tests conducted

dense sands do not have lower void ratio compared to the loose sands as normally

expected. Thus, this graph, just indicates in accordance with the theory, that loose

sand tend to contract therefore the void ratio is decreased while dense sands tend to

dilate and hence the void ratio is increased. Note that this graph, a unique critical state

void ratio line has not been reached and therefore the C.S.L. can only roughly

estimated and drawn. This is possibly due to inaccuracies of the direct shear box test

such as: the loss of sample from the lateral gap between the two halves of the

apparatus or the fact that very large strains cannot be imposed hence the critical state

is not always reached.

3.1. Constant height tests

Constant height tests were also performed on loose and dense sands and specifically

two tests on quartz sand: group1a: dense sand with initial stress 450 kPa and group1b:

loose sand with initial stress 1000 kPa. The conditions of constant height test are: no

change in volume, no change in vertical height v and constant void ratio einitial.

Constant Height is maintained by varying normal stress 'v. In Graph 22 the stress

paths in terms of v are shown for both dense and loose sands. Loose sand

contracted during the test as the normal stress was reduced to keep the height of the

sample constant. The dense sample initially contracts because the normal stress is

decreased until a value about 200kPa in order to maintain a constant volume. Then the

sample dilates and the normal stress increases continuously until the control over the

test was lost. In Graph 23, peak strength of dense sand was found greater than the

peak strength of loose as expected. Possibly, as theory dictates, if the constant height

tests had reached larger displacements and the C.S. then the curves would have

merged in a unique critical value. It is evident from the figure that the results

especially for the dense sample deviate from the expected values and the expected

behavior, as because group 1a lost the control of the constant height during the test.

3.2. Tests on intact and reconstituted Gault Clay

Direct drained shear tests were conducted on intact and reconstituted Gault Clay.

In Graph 24 the behaviour of the materials in terms of / v is presented and the

intact clay appears behaving as slightly stiffer material. Yet it does not have such a

brittle behaviour because it was loaded under an intermediate confined pressure.

Furthermore the intact clay has also greater shear strength compared to the

reconstituted clay, because of the breaking of the bonds that took place in the

reconstituted sample and thus the material became weaker than the intact. In Graph

25 the behavior of the samples in terms of and v are shown, for the

performed tests on Gault Clay at =60kPa (reconstituted) and 300kPa (intact). The

behavior of the intact sample is similar to that predicted however only very little

contraction exist and no dilation, while theory suggests that the sample should

contract initially and then continuously dilate because Gault clay is an

overconsolidated (O-C) clay. It is possible that if the test had reached larger shear

strains then the sample would have indeed dilate.The reconstituted samples peak

strength did not reach during the test, while the sample exhibit continuous contraction

as expected.

MSc Lab Report 1 Konstantinos Symeonidis

Casagrande method penetrometer

1a KSS Clay 35 38

1b Gault Clay 75 72

2a Polish Clay 85 76

2b Polish Clay 64 67

3a Gault Clay 79 83

3b Oxford Clay 67 67

Table 2 liquid Limit Test Results

MSc Lab Report 1 Konstantinos Symeonidis

MSc Lab Report 1 Konstantinos Symeonidis

MSc Lab Report 1 Konstantinos Symeonidis

MSc Lab Report 1 Konstantinos Symeonidis

Graph 7 log(v) e curves for Claigan Sand. Upper right corner expected behaviour

MSc Lab Report 1 Konstantinos Symeonidis

MSc Lab Report 1 Konstantinos Symeonidis

MSc Lab Report 1 Konstantinos Symeonidis

MSc Lab Report 1 Konstantinos Symeonidis

MSc Lab Report 1 Konstantinos Symeonidis

MSc Lab Report 1 Konstantinos Symeonidis

MSc Lab Report 1 Konstantinos Symeonidis

MSc Lab Report 1 Konstantinos Symeonidis

Group 1a

Lost Control

of Constant

Height

MSc Lab Report 1 Konstantinos Symeonidis

Graph 24 / v

MSc Lab Report 1 Konstantinos Symeonidis

- Class6 Shearstrength Directsheartest 150416085805 Conversion Gate02Uploaded byFaizal Akbar
- HS Model SPT-NUploaded byFrans van der Merwe
- tchmechanicalUploaded bysatishgeo
- CMLUploaded byAllen Kizito
- Structure Damage Due to Expansive SoilsUploaded byBolton Alonso Yanqui Soto
- Thesis IN M.TECHUploaded byShashank Tiwari
- Direct Shear AstiUploaded byAsti Diar Safitri
- Geotechnical Report - 3792-Civil Defense Directorate 31-12-2016.pdfUploaded byHaitham Ali
- STUDIES ON THE USE OF FISH NET FIBERS FOR STABILIZATION OF BLACK COTTON SOILUploaded byijaert
- Triaxial TestUploaded byForex Dar
- 04 - Soil and Rock for Geoscientist and EngineersUploaded byim23world
- geotechnical characteristicsUploaded byalistugui
- Enhanceing the Properties of Soil by using Synthetic PolypropyleneUploaded byEditor IJTSRD
- Soil Mechanics Ass2 March 2017 1Uploaded byErDKushwaha
- Atterberg limits.pdfUploaded bytutisarmiento1
- 11566731 Guidelines for Quality Control InspectionUploaded bySrinivas P
- Correlations for Swelling Pressure From PI PL ResultsUploaded bySheril Chandrabose
- 4.0 Unbound MaterialsUploaded byJeffjr Vallente
- Roctest Hoek CellUploaded byjoe
- Shear Strength of Soils and MSWUploaded byJanssen Gerardo Valbuena
- Study(1).pdfUploaded byamintaka1025
- JDS Presentation new.pptxUploaded byTarhata M. Pantao Kalim
- Strength Characteristics of Diesel Oil Contaminated Marine ClayUploaded byIRJET Journal
- Geotechnical Characterization of a Pyroclastic Sand and TuffUploaded bysophe87
- Arch-2.4-Disposal of Surplus MaterialUploaded bySheraz
- Arch-2.4-DISPOSAL OF SURPLUS MATERIAL.pdfUploaded bySheraz
- 109476_data Tanah JembatanUploaded byCaca
- Da-5 06-15 Icone VaneUploaded byCristian Miguel Daza Perez
- PrakashShrinkageWaxMethod.Uploaded byCj Sumilang
- Document from Shafqat.pdfUploaded byinsaf scaling

- The Failure of Carsington DamUploaded byKostas Symeonidis
- Coursework II FinalUploaded byKostas Symeonidis
- Coursework I FinalUploaded byKostas Symeonidis
- Instalation Report TA- SHQDSQ- EX-0001 (05836)(1)Uploaded byKostas Symeonidis
- Peat (Final)Uploaded byKostas Symeonidis
- Case Summary PEAT (FINAL)Uploaded byKostas Symeonidis
- Unified Soil ClassUploaded byjdav1206
- Seismic Source Characterisation KUNLUNFaultUploaded byKostas Symeonidis

- Modular Labelling System, Labeling Equipment - Tronics America Series S1000 Brochure, CatalogUploaded bytronicsamerica
- Lecture12-FiniteStateMachinesUploaded byOsane Lannaman
- 1st Sem 2018-Managerial EconomicsUploaded bySt. Anthony of Padua
- h26IX.pdfUploaded byPurece Eugen
- cx-one_r134-e1_11_2_csm2120Uploaded byirfanWPK
- Airbus AcronymesUploaded byJehan Ichhaporia
- 1701ad Gold ManualUploaded bySingensai
- November 2016 - International (Chemical Engineering).pdfUploaded byelfelix
- The Ultimate Guide to Starting Your #1 ecommerce businessUploaded byVytas
- XL2 ManualUploaded byanhnguyenhai
- PGA11 Pres How Guide MalaysiaUploaded byShihlinElectric
- API 2018 EXAM SCHEDULE.pdfUploaded byramakrishna333781
- Utility TurbinesUploaded byPremkumar Vasudevan
- Comodo Programs Manager Ver.1.3 User GuideUploaded byAli Hassan
- SmartLink_ModbusUploaded bycsongasz
- YTM225DXNUploaded byDaniel Harris
- Memory NewUploaded byTariq Shahrum
- Bosch SHX7ER55UCUploaded byPurcellMurray
- wireless data encryption and decryption using RFUploaded bysanthosh
- Important 1Uploaded bymohancrescent
- Tricks for Determining Customer RequirementsUploaded bysstamen
- Statistical Trends in the Obliquity Distribution of Exoplanet SystemsUploaded byLiviu Aur
- S11 1 ITIL2011 Roadshow 1Uploaded byGaurav Agarwal
- Mosquito Trap MapUploaded byTucson News Now
- c85e.ashxUploaded byRanaJafary
- Sap Engineering Control CenterUploaded byRuben D Acero
- Pump IPPUploaded bymartin.ruben
- DeclarationUploaded bySneha Mulchandani
- the-state-in-capitalist-society.pdfUploaded byHendix Gorrixe
- Soal 4Uploaded byalfin