UNIVERSITI TUN HUSSEIN ONN MALAYSIA

Centre for Diploma Studies

________________________________________________________________

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

HIGHWAY AND GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING LABORATORY
LAPORAN MAKMAL
LABORATORY REPORT

Kod & Nama Kursus

DAC 22103 – GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING
Course Name & Code
Tajuk Ujikaji
PROCTOR STANDARD SOIL COMPACTION TEST
Title of Experiment
Seksyen
7
Section
Kumpulan
2
Group
Nama Pensyarah/Pengajar
MOHD IKHMAL HAQEEM BIN HASSAN
Lecturer/Instructor’s Name
Nama Ketua Kumpulan AWANG ALI ZAINUL ABIDIN No. Matrik : AA200641
Name of Group Leader BIN AWANG ALI RAHMAN Matric No. : AA200641

Ahli Kumpulan No. Matrik

Group Members Matric No.
1. MUHAMMAD IMRAN SHAKIR BIN HUSSIN
AA201091
2. CHARVEEIN A/L VIGNES RAU NAIDU
AA200456

3. . DESMUND HAR THING FUNG AA200542

4.

5.

6.
Tarikh Ujikaji
28/3/2022
Date of Experiment
Tarikh Hantar
2/5/2022
Date of Submission

ULASAN PEMERIKSA/COMMENTS COP DITERIMA/RECEIVED STAMP

 Test Title:
Lab Report Rubric DAC 22103 – GEOTECHNICAL
(Assessment Form) ENGINEERING
Criteria 1 2 3 4 5 SCR WT TSCR (%)

Theory, • Theory and other • Theory and other • Theory and other • Theory and other information • Theory and other information
objective, information regarding information regarding information regarding the regarding the laboratory is regarding the laboratory is well
2 0
procedure the laboratory is not the laboratory is laboratory is partly presented presented with some mistakes presented
(10%) presented presented minimally
Analysis / Result • Trends / patterns • Trends / patterns are • Trends / patterns are • Trends / patterns are • Trends / patterns are logically
(25%) are not analyzed not analyzed logically analyzed for the most logically analyzed analyzed
Cognitive 5 0
• Analysis is not • Analysis is part • Analysis is thoughtful • Analysis is insightful
relevant inconsistent • Analysis is general
Reference • Reference was not • Reference was • Reference was partly • Reference was presented in • Reference was presented in
(5%) presented in the minimally presented in presented in somewhat proper format and relevant to proper format and relevant to the
1 0
report the report proper format and relevant to the laboratory work with some laboratory work
the laboratory work minor mistakes /40
Data • Data is not • Data lacks precision • Good representation of the • Accurate representation of • Accurate representation of the
(25%) represented or is not • Greater than 20% data using tables and/or the data using tables and/or data using tables and/or graphs
accurate difference with graphs graphs • Graphs and tables are labeled
5 0
accepted values • Less than 15% difference • Data is fairly precise and titled
with accepted values • Less than 10% difference • Data is precise with less than 5%
Psychomotor
• Precision is acceptable with accepted values difference with accepted values
Participation • Student was hostile • Participation was • Did the job but did not • Used time pretty well. Stayed • Showed interest, used time very
(during about participating minimal appear to be very interested. focused on the experiment well, guide other students and very
1 0
experiment) Focus lost on several most of the time focused on experiment
(5%) occasion /30
Question & • Questions are not • Answers to • Questions are answered in • Questions are answered in • Questions are answered
Discussion answered questions are complete sentences complete sentences thoroughly and in complete
(15%) • No discussion was incomplete • A statement of the results of • Accurate statement of the sentences
included or shows • A statement of the the lab indicates whether results of the lab indicates • Accurate statement of the results
little effort and results is incomplete results support the hypothesis whether results support the of lab indicates whether results 3 0
reflection on the lab with little reflection on hypothesis support hypothesis
the lab • Possible sources of error • Possible sources of error and
Affective identified what was learned from the lab
discussed
Conclusion & • Conclusion & • Conclusion & • Conclusion & • Conclusion & • Conclusion & recommendation
Recommendation recommendation recommendation was recommendation was recommendation was was presented accurately and
(15%) was not presented minimally presented presented somewhat accurate presented accurately and relevant to result obtain from the
3 0
and relevant to result obtain relevant to result obtain from laboratory work
from the laboratory work the laboratory work with minor
mistakes /30

NAME OF LECTURER : SIGNATURE : DATE :

Note : SCR = SCORE, WT = WEIGHTAGE, TSCR = TOTAL SCORE

 STUDENT CODE OF ETHIC
(SCE)
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING
CENTRE OF DIPLOMA STUDIES

We, hereby confess that we have prepared this report on our own effort. We also admit not to
receive any help from any third party during the preparation of this report and pledge that
everything mentioned in the report is true.

_________________
Student Signature (Group Representative)

Name : MUHAMMAD IMRAN SHAKIR BIN HUSSIN

Matric No. : AA201091

Date : 31/5/2022
 PROCTOR STANDARD SOIL COMPACTION TEST

LEARNING OUTCOMES

At the end of this experiment, students should be able to:

• Understand the relationship between dry density and moisture content for
a given degree of compaction effort
• Understand the moisture content for the most efficient compaction.
• Obtain the maximum dry density can be achieved for particular type of soil.

1.1 INTRODUCTION

Proctor compaction test generally consist of compacting soil at known moisture

content into a cylindrical mold of standard dimensions using a compaction effort
of controlled magnitude. The soil is usually compacted into the mold to a certain
amount of equal layers, each receiving a number of blows from a standard
weighted hammer at a specified height. This process is then repeated for various
moisture contents and the dry densities are determined for each. The graphical
relationship of the dry density to moisture content is then plotted to establish the
compaction curve. The maximum dry density is finally obtained from the peak
point of the compaction curve and its corresponding moisture content, also known
as the optimal moisture content.

1.2 OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this experiment are to obtain the maximum value of dry density
and the optimum moisture content.

1.3 THEORY
Compaction of soil the process by which the solid particles are packed more
closely together by mechanical means, thus increasing the dry density, Markwick,
1994. It is achieved through the reduction of the air voids in the soil. At low
moisture content, the soil grain is surrounded by a thin film of water, which tends
to keep the grains apart even when compacted. In addition of more water, up to
certain point, more air to be expelled during compaction. At the point, soil grains
become as closely packed together as they can, that is at the dry density is at its
maximum. When the amount of water exceeds the required to achieve this
condition, the excess water begin to push particles apart, so the dry density
reduced.

The moisture content at which the greatest value of dry density achieved for the
given compaction effort is the optimum moisture content, (OMC), and the
corresponding dry density is the maximum dry density

Figure 1: Relationship between dry density (ρd) against moisture content w for
several types of soil.
1.4 APPARATUS
1. Cylindrical metal mould, internal dimensions 105mm diameter and
115.5mm high (Fitted with a detachable and removable extension collar).
2. Metal rammer with 50mm diameter face weighing 2.5kg, sliding freely in a
tube which controls the height of drop to 300mm.
3. Measuring cylinder; 200ml or 500ml (plastic)
4. 20mm BS sieve and receiver
5. Large metal tray
6. Electronic balance
7. Jacking apparatus for extracting compacted material from mould.
8. Small tools: palette knife, steel-straight edge, 300mm long, steel rule,
scoop or garden trowel
9. Drying oven, 105-110°C and other equipment for moisture content
determination.

Figure 2: Mould base plate and the metal rammer

1.5 PROCEDURES
1. Verify the mould, base plate; extension, collar and rammer to be used are
those that conform to BS 1377. Weight the mould to the nearest 1g (m 1).
Measure its internal diameter (D) mm and length (L) mm in several places
and calculate the mean dimensions.
2. Calculate the internal volume of the mould (V)mm3 using
  D2  L
V =
4000
Apply with an oily cloth on the internal surface of mould to ease the removal
of soil later on.
3. Measure the empty metal tray and ± 5kg of air dried soil sample that the has
passing through sieve no.4 (4.75mm)
4. Place the mould assembly on a solid base, such as concrete floor. Add loose
soil so that after each sequence of compaction the mould will be one-third
filled.
5. Compact the soil by applying 27 blows of the rammer dropping from the
controlled height of the 300mm. Make sure that the rammer is properly in
place before releasing, Figure 3, Note: do not attempt to grab the lifting knob
before the rammer has come to rest. The sequence as shown in Figure 4
has to be followed. Repeat for the second and third layer that the final shall
not more than 6mm above the mould, as shown in Figure 5.

Figure 3: Hand position when releasing rammer

 Figure 4: Sequence of blows using hand rammer

Figure 5: Soil in mould after compaction

6. Trimming of by removing the extension collar, cut away the excess soil and
level off to the top of the mould. Any cavities resulting from removal of stones
at the surface should be filled with fine material.
7. Remove the baseplate carefully, trim the soil at the lower end of the mould.
Weigh soil and mould to the nearest g.
8. Fit the mould on to the extruder and jack out the soil. Break up the sample
on the tray.
9. Take up to three representative samples in moisture content containers for
measurement of moisture content. This must be done immediately before
 the soil dry out. The average of three measurements is w%. (Preferably one
from each layer).
10. Break up the material on the tray and mix with the remainder of the prepared
sample. Add an increment of water, approximately as follows:
(i) Sandy and gravelly soils: 1 – 2% (50 – 100 ml of water to 5 kg of soil)
(ii) Cohesive soils: 2 – 4 % (100 – 200 ml of water to 5 kg of soil)

1.6 CALCULATION EXAMPLE

1. Calculate the bulk density, ρ of each compacted specimen from the

equation
m2 − m1
= Mg / m 3
1000 (if volume = 1000 cm3)
Where, m1 = mass of mould
m2 = mass of soil and mould

m2 − m1
= Mg / m 3
V (if volume = V cm3)
D 2 L
V=
4 (Check all conversion of unit)

2. Calculate moisture content, wn% for each compacted specimen.

w2 − w1
wn =  100
w1 − w0
Where, w2 = weight of moist soil + container,
w1 = weight of dry soil + container
w0 = weight of empty container

3. Calculate the average value of moisture content, w% for each compacted

specimen.
 w1 + w2 + w3
w=
3

4. Calculate corresponding dry density, ρd

 100 
d =  
 100 + w  Mg/m3

5. Plot of graph dry density, ρd against moisture content, w. Draw a smooth

curve through the points.

6. Sample calculation:

A: TEST CRITERIA
Serial no.: Test No : Location : Location No:

No. of layer : Rammer mass : Soil Description : Sample No.:

3 2.5 kg Brown sandy clay with a little fine gravel
Blows per layer : No. of separate Sample preparation :
27 batch: Air dried and riffled

B: DENSITY CALCULATION VOLUME OF CYLINDER = 1002 cm3

Measurement No. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
Cylinder + soil = A 3786 3907 3999 3962 3908
g
Cylinder = B g 1917 1917 1917 1917 1917
Soil mass = A – B 1869 1990 2082 2045 1991
g
Wet density = ρ 1.865 1.986 2.078 2.041 1.987

C: Plotting of air voids line, Va = 0%, 5% AND 10% (Use Gs = ρS = 2.65)

Use the equation below using ρw = 1Mg/m3
V
1− a
d = 100 Mg / m 3
1 w
+
 S 100
7. Final plot of a graph along with the air voids line
1.7 ADDITIONAL THEORY

Soil Compaction is the process in which stress is applied to a soil which causes
densification as the voids are filled with solids. This plays a vital part in
construction for soils are mainly used as supports for a lot of infrastructures.
Compaction is greatly affected by soil type, moisture content, and compaction
effort and is usually test using ASTM D698. In this report it is concluded that the
soil sample reaches its highest compact state when the dry unit weight is as its
maximum value of 16kN/m3 and 15% moisturecontent
1.8 DATA

A: TEST CRITERIA
Serial no. Test No : Location : Location No:

No. of layer : Rammer Soil Description : Sample No.:

3 mass :
2.5 kg
Blows per No. of Sample preparation :
layer : separate Air dried and riffled
27 batch :

B: DENSITY CALCULATION VOLUME OF CYLINDER = 1002 cm3

Measurement
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
No.
Cylinder + soil = 5600 5600 5600 5600 5600
Ag

Cylinder = B g 5300 5300 5300 5300 5300

Soil mass = A – B 300 300 300 300 300

g
Wet density = ρ 2565 3574 4585 5800 5600
 C: MOISTURE CONTENT
Measurement No. 1 (1) (2) (3)
Wet soil + container,w2 (g) 0.031 0.031 0.031

Dry soil + container,w1 (g) 0.029 0.029

0.029
Empty container, w0 (g) 0.019 0.019 0.019

Moisture content, wn (%), 20 20 20

AVERAGE MOISTURE, 20
w%

Measurement No. 2 (1) (2) (3)

Wet soil + container,w2 (g) 0.037 0.037 0.037
Dry soil + container,w1 (g) 0.034 0.034 0.034

Empty container, w0 (g) 0.019 0.019 0.019

Moisture content, wn (%), 23 23 23

AVERAGE MOISTURE, 23
w%
Measurement No. 3 (1) (2) (3)

Wet soil + container,w2 (g)

0.044 0.044 0.044

Dry soil + container,w1 (g)

0.039 0.039 0.039

Empty container, w0 (g)

0.019 0.019 0.019

Moisture content, wn (%),

25 25 25

AVERAGE MOISTURE,
25
w%

Measurement No. 4 (1) (2) (3)

Wet soil + container,w2 (g) 0.070 0.070 0.070
Dry soil + container,w1 (g) 0.055 0.055 0.055
0.019 0.019 0.019
Empty container, w0 (g)

Moisture content, wn (%),

42 42 42
AVERAGE MOISTURE,
w% 42
 Measurement No. 5 (1) (2) (3)
0.136 0.136 0.136
Wet soil + container,w2 (g)

0.105 0.105 0.105

Dry soil + container,w1 (g)

Empty container, w0 (g) 0.019 0.019 0.019

Moisture content, wn (%), 36 36

36
AVERAGE MOISTURE, 36
w%

D: DRY DENSITY CALCULATION (USE ACTUAL VOLUME OF CYLINDER)

Measurement
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
No.
AVG 20 23 25 42 36
MOISTURE, w%

Dry density, ρd 2137.5 2905.64 3668 4084.51 3970

E: PLOTTING OF DRY DENSITY AGAINST MOISTURE CONTENT WITH AIR
VOIDS LINE AT 0%, 5% AND 10%. USE PROPER GRAPH PAPER
 1.9 ANALYSIS & RESULT

The maximum dry density is calculated from the compaction curve's high point of
4082.52 and its decline to 3970 at sample 5. The moisture content that
corresponds to it, also known as the ideal moisture content. The sample with the
highest moisture content is sample 4, which has a moisture content of 9 percent.
At sample 5, the graph shows a modest reduction. This is due to the fact that the
earth has become quite damp.The soil will be torn up until the density becomes
too high/ When the density becomes too high, the soil will be too compact. Sample
4 has a moisture content of 42 percent, while sample 1 has a moisture content of
20 percent and sample 2 has a moisture content of 23 percent. Sample 3 has a
25% success rate, whereas sample 5 has a 36% success rate.

1.10 QUESTION & DISCUSSION

1. Define and explain what is meant by optimum moisture content, and

how it is determined in the laboratory.

At a given water content, the greatest dry unit weight that a soil may be compacted
to with a given compactive effort. The maximum dry density value is determined in
the experiment to be the maximum peak point of the estimated soil compaction
curve. The optimal water content (O.W.C) or optimum moisture content is the water
content that corresponds to this point (O.M.C).

2. Explain fully the principles and methods involved in soil compaction.

How do you use the Proctor test apparatus in the field for checking the
soil compaction?

The goal of compaction is to get the compacted soil to have the highest feasible dry
density. At low water content, the soil becomes stiff, and the particles resist moving
closer together, resulting in a low dry density. Water forms a lubricating coating around
particles, forcing them to compact and come closer together, resulting in a higher dry
density. As the water content rises, the dry density rises as well, until it reaches its
maximum dry density (MDD). When the water content in the soil surpasses the optimal
moisture content (OMC), compaction stops working and water begins to demand more
space, resulting in an increase in the volume of voids and total volume, as well as a
drop in dry density. In the laboratory, a sample of soil is compacted using typical
compaction energy at various water concentrations. The dry density of compacted soil
is determined for each water content, and a graph with the water content on the x-axis
and the dry density on the y-axis is shown. Then figure out what the maximum dry
density is that corresponds to the water content. Static compaction, kneading
compaction, vibration compaction, and tamping are all methods of soil compaction that
can be used in the field. It depends on the aim of the compaction and the type of
construction whether the water used is equal to OMC, less (dry of OMC), or more (wet
of OMC) for soil compaction in the field (wet of OMC). In the field, the same amount of
compaction energy per unit volume of soil is employed as in the laboratory compaction
test. The proctor test technique in the field is essentially the same as the procedure in
the lab.

3. Discussion

In this experiment, we'll strive to prevent making any mistakes that may arise
throughout the execution of the test. The most visible fault is human error. It's likely
that the individual who compacted each layer by blowing didn't count correctly while
using the hammer, or that the blows weren't equally distributed across the layer's
surface. It's also conceivable that the desired water content was estimated incorrectly.
A source of error could also be measuring inaccuracy. When tare weights are ignored
or the appropriate curve is calibrated with an offset, bias errors result.

For each Proctor compaction test, the dry density and water content of the sample are
determined when the sample is removed and dried at the end of the test. Based on all
of the data, a curve for dry unit weight (or density) as a function of water content is
shown. The maximum dry density can be estimated using the peak point of the
 compaction curve and its concomitant moisture content, also known as the optimum
moisture content. The maximum dry density is reached at very high moisture levels
when the soil is compressed to nearly saturation and (almost) all the air is forced
out.The soil wouldbecome entirely saturated or have zero air voids if all of the air in the
soil could be evacuatedthrough compaction.

1.11 CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATION

. As a result, we may conclude that the compaction process is critical because it

aids in the attainment of specific physical properties that are required for correct
loading behaviour. Proper compaction of an earthen dam or a highway
embankment, for example, minimises the likelihood of settlement, increases the
soil's shear strength due to greater density, and reduces the soil's permeability.
We had previously given it our all and successfully completed the proctor
compaction test, resulting in a curve that met the objectives. As a precaution, we
recommend allowing ample time after the soil has been mixed with water before
compacting it to prevent mould. It's because the water hasn't been thoroughly
absorbed into the dry soil. Aside from that, it is hard to apply the same compaction
energy to each layer when employing a hand rammer. As a result, one precaution
that may be taken is to ensure that the strikes are applied by the same individual
to each layer.

1.12 REFERENCES

1. Lab report on Standard Proctor Compaction test - Content and Article Writing. (2019,
October). Content and Article Writing. https://contentfence.com/lab-report-on-
standard- proctor-compaction-test/

2. Nur-Ranji Jajurie. (2016, August 30). Lab Report #3: Standard Proctor Test for
 Soils.Academia.edu.
https://www.academia.edu/28124223/Lab_Report_3_Standard_Proctor_Test_for_Soil
s
3. Guest. (2021). Standard Proctor Test - PDFCOFFEE.COM. Pdfcoffee.com;
PDFCOFFEE.COM. https://pdfcoffee.com/standard-proctor-test-pdf-free.html
4. Kodikara, J., Islam, T., & Sounthararajah, A. (2018). Review of soil compaction: History
and recent developments. Transportation Geotechnics, 17, 24–34.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trgeo.2018.09.006
5. Poncelet, N., & François, B. (2022). Effect of laboratory compaction mode, density and
suction on the tensile strength of a lime-treated silty soil. Transportation Geotechnics,
34, 100763. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trgeo.2022.100763
6. Report Standard Compaction Test. (2022). Scribd.
https://www.scribd.com/document/170840227/Report-Standard-Compaction-Test