SOILMECHANICS Laboratory Manual 11 Experiments

Experiment No.
1
DISTURBED SOIL SAMPLING, LABELING AND STORAGE
1. Objective(s):
This activity aims to introduce the use of hand auger for obtaining disturbed soil samples and the
standard method of storage of soil for future laboratory use.
2. Intended Learning Outcomes (ILOs):

The students shall be able to:
• understand the standard procedure in soil sampling and handling
• perform the soil profiling as observed from the results of the experiment
3. Discussion:
The simplest method of soil investigation and sampling is through the use of auger borings. This method is
applicable for retrieving disturbed soil samples that are to be tested in the laboratory to further determine
its engineering properties. However, it is important to be reminded that improper handling and storage of
the sample can compromise the integrity of the soil investigation conducted.
A standardized labeling of the sample is beneficial as the soil sample, in general, is handled by different
personnel in the field investigation and in the laboratory. It is important that all pertinent data observed on
the field are to be written down in the sample label in addition to the primary record book of the site
engineer. The data in the sample label will direct the laboratory personnel in finalizing the borehole log
which is to be counterchecked by the site engineers’ primary record book.
4. Resources:
1. Soil auger
2. Spade or shovel
3. Moisture tight sample containers
4. Pans
5. Procedure:
1. Clear the area of grass and vegetation where the sample is to be obtained. Create an alignment
of three (3) boreholes that are about 3.0 meters away from each other.
2. With the use of soil auger, the soil is bored until desired depth is reached. After a half (0.50) meter
advancement, withdraw the auger to the hole and remove the soil for examination and testing.
Record the depth and the observations on the soil sample retrieved.
3. Seal the soil sample in a moisture tight container and label appropriately.
4. Extract again the soil in the succeeding borehole advancement until a depth of 2.0 to 3.0 meters
is reached.
5. Repeat procedures 1 to 4 for Borehole no. 2. Draw the stratigraphy of the site to determine the
geometry of the soil layers.
1
Course: Experiment No.:
Group No.: Section:
Name: Date Performed:
Date Submitted:
Instructor:
6. Data and Results:
Borehole No. 1
Depth Description
0.00 to 0.30
0.30 to 0.60
0.60 to 0.90
Borehole Location Map:
Stratigraphy:
2
7. Conclusion:
8. Assessment (Rubric for Laboratory Performance):
BEGINNER ACCEPTABLE PROFICIENT

CRITERIA SCORE
1 2 3
I. Laboratory Skills
Members do not Members occasionally
Manipulative Members always
demonstrate needed demonstrate needed
Skills demonstrate needed skills.
skills. skills
Members are unable Members are able to Members are able to set-up
Experimental
to set-up the set-up the materials the material with minimum
Set-up
materials. with supervision. supervision.
Members do not Members occasionally Members always
Process Skills demonstrate targeted demonstrate targeted demonstrate targeted
process skills. process skills. process skills.
Members do not Members follow safety
Safety Members follow safety
follow safety precautions most of
Precautions precautions at all times.
precautions. the time.
II. Work Habits
Time
Members do not finish Members finish on Members finish ahead of
Management /
on time with time with incomplete time with complete data
Conduct of
incomplete data. data. and time to revise data.
Experiment
Members have
Members do not know
defined Members are on tasks and
their tasks and have
responsibilities most have defined
no defined
Cooperative of the time. Group responsibilities at all times.
responsibilities.
and Teamwork conflicts are Group conflicts are
Group conflicts have
cooperatively cooperatively managed at
to be settled by the
managed most of the all times.
teacher.
time.
Neatness and Messy workplace Clean and orderly Clean and orderly
3
workplace with
workplace at all times
during and after the occasional mess
Orderliness during and after the
experiment. during and after the
experiment.
experiment.
Members require
Ability to do Members require
occasional Members do not need to be
independent supervision by the
supervision by the supervised by the teacher.
work teacher.
teacher.
Other Comments/Observations: Total Score
(Total Score)
Rating= ×100
24
9. References
Murthy, V.N.S. (2011). Textbook of Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering . Singapore: Alken
Company
American Society for Testing and Materials (1999). Standard Test Method for Penetration Test and Split
Barrel Sampling of Soils(D-1586). Pennsylvania: ASTM International
4
Experiment No. 2
DRY PREPARATION OF DISTURBED SOIL SAMPLES
1. Objective(s):
The activity aims to impart the standard preparation of disturbed soil samples.
• prepare disturbed soil samples for future laboratory experiments.
• distinquish unacceptable practices in preparation of soil samples
3. Discussion:
The method of dry preparation of soil samples is used to prepare soil samples in various laboratory
experiments such as moisture content determination, particle size analysis and in determination of
Atterberg limits. It is proper that the samples be prepared in an orderly manner to avoid compromising the
results of the laboratory experiments because of errors in the preparation. Proper preparation also will
allow sufficient amount of samples for each laboratory experiment.
4. Resources:
1. Triple Beam Balance

2. Oven with temperature control
3. Pans
4. Standard Sieves #4 and #10
5. Rubber Mallet or Rubber-covered Pestle
6. Mortar and Rubber Pestle
7. Trowel
8. Sample Splitter
5. Procedure:
1. Allow the soil sample recovered from the field to dry thoroughly on room temperature. Using a
mortar and pestle, break up the aggregations thoroughly. Select about 75 grams of the sample for
the conduct of moisture content determination.
2. Separate the test sample using Sieve No. 10. Break up again the soil fraction retained in Sieve #
10 to break the grains thoroughly. Separate again the grinded soil into two fractions using Sieve
#10.
3. Determine the weight of the fraction retained in Sieve #10. Wash the soil fraction of all fine
material, dry and weigh. Record the mass as the mass of the coarse material.
4. After being washed and dried, sieve the coarse the material using the Sieve No. 4 and record the
mass retained.
5. Thoroughly mix together the soil fraction passing Sieve No.10 on the previous sieving operations.
Using a sample splitter, select a portion of approximately 120 g for the Particle size analysis.
Select a portion passing Sieve # 40 of approximately 200 grams in determining the soil constants.
5
Group No.: Section:
Group Leader: Date Performed:
Group Members: Date Submitted:
1. Instructor:
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Sample # Weight (g) Purpose Description

Particle Size
1
Analysis
2 Soil Constants
7. Conclusion:

CRITERIA SCORE
1 2 3
skills. skills
Experimental
Set-up
Process Skills Members do not Members occasionally Members always
6
demonstrate targeted demonstrate targeted demonstrate targeted
II. Work Habits
Time
Management /
Conduct of
Experiment
Members have
Members do not know
no defined
responsibilities.
teacher.
time.
Clean and orderly
Clean and orderly
Messy workplace workplace with
Neatness and workplace at all times
experiment.
experiment.
Members require
work teacher.
teacher.
(Total Score)
Rating= ×100
24
9. References
Company
American Society for Testing and Materials (1998). Dry Preparation of Samples for Particle Size Analysis
(D-421). Pennsylvania: ASTM International
7
8
Experiment No. 3
WET PREPARATION OF DISTURBED SOIL SAMPLES
1. Objective(s):
The activity aims to impart an alternative method for preparation of disturbed soil samples.
• prepare disturbed soil samples for future laboratory experiments.
• distinguish standard practices in preparation of soil samples
3. Discussion:
The method of wet preparation of soil samples is an alternative method used to prepare soil samples in
various laboratory experiments such as moisture content determination, particle size analysis and in
determination of Atterberg limits.
For cases wherein removal of fine-grained soil that are attached to coarse particles is difficult, wet
preparation is more appropriate than dry preparation. This is also applicable for coarse-grained particles of
the sample are soft and pulverize readily.
4. Resources:
1. Triple Beam Balance or Digital Weighing Scale.

2. Oven.
3. Pans with at least 300 mm f and 75 mm deep.
4. Standard Sieves #10 and #40.
5. Funnel.
6. Filter Paper
5. Procedure:
1. Allow the soil sample recovered from the field to dry thoroughly on room temperature. Using a
mortar and pestle, break up the aggregations thoroughly.
2. Select about 120 grams of the sample for the conduct of particle size analysis. For the
determination of Atterberg limits, set aside the soil fraction passing Sieve No. 4 and weigh about
150 grams of the sample. Select a portion of about 50 grams for the determination of moisture
content.
3. Separate the material set aside for the Particle size analysis into two portions using Sieve #10.
Set aside the portion passing Sieve #10 as washing is to be performed on the portion retained
4. The portion retained is to be soaked in a pan until particle aggregations become soft. Place the
Sieve #10 on a clean pan. Allow the soaked soil with water to flow to the sieve until the height of
the water is about 12.7 mm above the mesh of the sieve. Crumble any lumps observed on the
sieve using the thumb or the fingers. Transfer the washed material on a clean pan before placing
another increment of soaked material into the sieve.
5. Dry the materials retained on Sieve #10 and add the material on Procedure no. 3. Set aside the
9
material for use in the Particle size analysis.
6. Remove most of the water in the washings by allowing it to pass through a funnel fitted with a filter
paper. Remove the moist soil in the filter paper and allow to dry at a temperature not exceeding
60oC. Combine the soil with material obtained in Procedure No. 3.
10
Group No.: Section:
1. Instructor:
2.
3.
4.
Sample # Weight (g) Purpose Description

Particle Size
1
Analysis
2 Soil Constants
7. Conclusion:

CRITERIA SCORE
1 2 3
skills. skills
Experimental
Set-up
Safety Members do not Members follow safety Members follow safety
Precautions follow safety precautions most of precautions at all times.
11
II. Work Habits
Time
Management /
Conduct of
Experiment
Members have
Members do not know
no defined
responsibilities.
teacher.
time.
Clean and orderly
Clean and orderly
experiment.
experiment.
Members require
work teacher.
teacher.
(Total Score)
Rating= ×100
24
9. References
Company
American Society for Testing and Materials (1999). Wet Preparation of Soil Samples for Particle-Size
Analysis and Determination of Soil Constants (D-2217) . Pennsylvania: ASTM International
12
Experiment No. 4
PREPARATION OF UNDISTURBED SOIL SAMPLE
1. Objective(s):
The activity aim to orient the students the concepts involved in the extraction and preparation of
undisturbed soil samples.
• Understand the principles regarding the extraction of undisturbed soil samples.
• Acquire engineering judgment in deciding when to extract undisturbed soil samples in a soil
investigation.
• Understand the importance of achieving an undisturbed sample to represent the condition of the
subsurface.
3. Discussion:
Sample disturbance is attributed to be caused by the thickness of the sampler and its diameter. A sampler
with a bigger diameter will minimize the disturbance during extraction. Meanwhile a relatively thick
sampler would cause sample disturbance. It is important to minimize sample disturbance as it could
influence the result of certain laboratory experiments.
4. Resources:
1. Thin-walled sampler
2. Spade or shovel
3. Hand auger
4. Hydraulic jack
5. Paraffin wax
5. Procedure:
A. For extraction of undisturbed soil sample

1. Select a site which is predominantly clayey. Clear the site using a spade or a shovel. Using a
hand auger, drill the soil until the required depth is achieved to begin the sampling.
2. Lower the thin-walled sampler to the bottom of the borehole and apply a continuous pressure
to advance the sampler in a rapid downward motion.
3. Determine the length of advance. Minimize the length of advance to about 10 to 15 diameter
of the tube.
4. Carefully withdraw the sampler from the soil formation as to minimize disturbance of the
sample. The tube can be slowly rotated to shear the material at the end of the tube, and to
relieve water and/or suction pressures and achieve a better recovery. For soft soil formation,
a delay before withdraw of the sampler (typically 5 to 30 minutes) may improve sample
recovery.
5. Measure the overall sample length. Seal the lower end of the tube using a paraffin wax.
6. Repeat procedures 1 to 5 until 3 samples are obtained.
13
B. For removal of undisturbed soil sample
1. Using an especially made hydraulic jack, extrude the sample in a swift, continuous speed.
2. Record the observations in a field log book.
14
Group No.: Section:
1. Instructor:
2.
3.
4.
Sample # Length (cm) Weight (g) Description

1
2
3
7. Conclusion:

CRITERIA SCORE
1 2 3
skills. skills
Experimental
Set-up
Process Skills Members do not Members occasionally Members always
demonstrate targeted demonstrate targeted demonstrate targeted
15
II. Work Habits
Time
Management /
Conduct of
Experiment
Members have
Members do not know
no defined
responsibilities.
teacher.
time.
Clean and orderly
Clean and orderly
experiment.
experiment.
Members require
work teacher.
teacher.
(Total Score)
Rating= ×100
24
9. References
Company
American Society for Testing and Materials (2000). Thin-Walled Tube Sampling of Soils for Geotechnical
Purposes (D-1587). Pennsylvania: ASTM International
16
Experiment No. 5
DESCRIPTION AND IDENTIFICATION OF SOILS
1. Objective(s):
The activity aims to impart the manual and visual procedures for soil description and identification
prior to detailed site investigation.
• understand the soil parameters that are being understood through the conduct of the experiment
• conceptualize a procedure for conduct of initial investigation on a site proposed by the instructor
3. Discussion:
It is common in engineering practice that site investigation is under time constraint and engineering
decisions are need to be made even before the release of the results of laboratory experiments. To aid the
engineer in his judgment, visual and manual procedures are proposed which allows gathering of reliable
data in the shortest time possible.
4. Resources:
1. Erlen meyer flask with diluted Hydrochloric acid
2. Pan
3. Sieve #40
4. Spatula
5. Procedure:
General
1. For every defined soil layer in the boring test, get a representative soil sample to be subjected for
visual examination.
2. Examine the soil if it is fine-grained or coarse-grained. A coarse-grained soil is abrasive in texture
and does not exhibit any interparticle attraction A fine-grained soil is smooth in texture and
exhibits interparticle attraction. . Observe if it exhibits the property of a peat soil. Peat soil is a
problematic soil which is composed primarily of vegetable tissue in various stages of
decomposition and usually in dark brown to black in color with organic odor.
For coarse-grained soil

1. Describe the angularity of the particles if it is angular, subangular, rounded or subrounded.
Angular particles have sharp edges and relatively plane sides with unpolished surfaces. If the
particles are similar to angular particles but have rounded edges, classify as subangular.
Rounded particles have smoothly curved sides and no evident edges. Subrounded particles have
have nearly plane sides but have well-rounded corners and edges.
2. Describe the color and the odor of the soil. Color and odor are important in identifying presence of
organic soil shown by presence of decaying vegetative material. Through the smell, presence of
petroleum and various chemicals can also be identified.
3. Describe the moisture content of the soil. If the soil is observed to be dry to the touch, note as dry.
If the soil is damp however, no visible water is found, classify as moist. Presence of visible water
17
especially if the soil is underneath the water table will classify the soil as wet.
4. Determine the presence of calcium carbonate as a cementing agent in the soil through the use of
dilute hydrochloric acid (HCl). Describe if the reaction is none, weak if limited bubbles are present
or strong if violent reaction is observed.
5. Describe the cementation of the soil. Soil that breaks easily with little finger pressure is classified
as weak. If considerable pressure is needed, classify the soil as moderate. Should the soil not
break under finger pressure, the cementation of the soil is strong.
6. Repeat until 4 samples are obtained.
For fine-grained soil

1. Select a representative sample and remove the particles that will not pass Sieve #40. The
specimen is to be tested for dry strength, dilatancy and toughness strength.
2. For the dry strength, select a material that will allow it to form into a ball of about 25 mm in
diameter. Add water if necessary. Then, divide it into three (3) portions and form it into a ball of 12
mm in diameter. Allow it to dry to the sun or air dry. Test the dry strength of the ball by crushing it
in between the fingers. Classify the dry strength as None, Low, Medium, High or Very High.
3. For the dilatancy test, select a material that will form the soil into 12 mm ball. Add water if
necessary until it has a soft but not sticky consistency. Using a spatula, smoothen the ball in the
palm of one hand. Shake the soil by striking the side of the hand against the other hand several
times and note the reaction of water on the surface of the soil. Squeeze the soil and note if the
water disappears. Note the dilatancy as None, Slow or rapid.
4. For the toughness test, select a portion of the specimen wherein the soil is to be rolled into
threads 3 mm in diameter. Fold and reroll the sample until the soil is about to crumble at a
diameter of about 3 mm. Note the pressure required to roll the thread as Low, Medium or High.
18
Group No.: Section:
1. Instructor:
2.
3.
4.
Coarse grained soil

Description Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Sample 4
Angularity
Color
Odor
Moisture content
Reaction with HCl
Cementation
Fine grained soil
Description Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Sample 4
Dry Strength
Dilatancy
Toughness
7. Conclusion:
19

CRITERIA SCORE
1 2 3
skills. skills
Experimental
Set-up
II. Work Habits
Time
Management /
Conduct of
Experiment
Members have
Members do not know
no defined
responsibilities.
teacher.
time.
Clean and orderly
Clean and orderly
experiment.
experiment.
Members require
work teacher.
teacher.
(Total Score)
Rating= ×100
24
20
9. References
Company
American Society for Testing and Materials (2000). Standard Practice for Description and Identification of
Soils by Visual-Manual Procedure (D-2488) . Pennsylvania: ASTM International
21
Experiment No. 6
DETERMINATION OF WATER CONTENT, UNIT WEIGHT, VOID RATIO
AND DEGREE OF SATURATION OF SOIL
1. Objective(s):
To introduce to the student the procedure in determining the weight-volume characteristics of the soil.
• connect the relationship of water content, unit weight, void ratio and degree of saturation.
• describe methods in determining water content, unit weight, void ratio and degree of saturation.
3. Discussion:
The determination of water content, unit weight and void ratio is an important requirement in laboratory
tests and is part of the test included in more elaborate tests. Water content is an important measure in the
compaction of soil. In order that correct water content is obtained from a soil sample, several samples at
different points must be taken. They are then mixed and the water content is then obtained from this soil
sample.
Various methodologies have been devised to determine the unit weight of the soil in the field such as
calibrated bucket method, nuclear method to name a few. For determination of the unit weight in a
laboratory setting, paraffin wax can be used in determining the unit weight. The paraffin coating applied on
the soil will allow determination of its volume as it is submerged in water.
The specific gravity of the solid grains of the soil is an engineering parameter which is dependent on the
mineralogy of the soil and the structure of its solid grains. Upon determination of the specific gravity, the
void ratio and degree of saturation of the soil can then be determined mathematically.
4. Resources:
1. Tin cup
2. Triple-beam Balance
3. Oven
4. Pycnometer
5. Bunsen burner
6. Paraffin wax
5. Procedure:
Note: For this experiment, coarse-grained soil sample is to be utilized to expedite the oven-drying of the
sample.
Water Content Determination

1. Weigh a tin cup including its cover; identify the cover and its lid. Determine the weight of the tin
cup.
22
2. Place a representative sample of wet soil in the cup. Determine the weight of wet soul and tin cup.
3. Place the sample in the oven for at least 3 hours.
4. When the sample has dried to constant weight, obtain the weight of cup and dry soil
5. Compute the water content. The difference between weight of wet soil plus cup and weight of dry
soil plus cup is the weight of water (W w). Also compute the weight of dry soil (W s).
6. To determine the water content ().
 = Ww/Ws x 100
7. Repeat until three (3) trials are achieved. Determine the average moisture content.
Unit Weight Determination

1. Trim a sample of soil to about 1 ½ inches diameter and 2 to 3 inches long. Surface should be
smooth and rounded. Weigh to up to the nearest 0.1 gram.
2. Cover with a thin coating of paraffin and weigh again. Compute the volume of paraffin from weight
of paraffin. The specific gravity of paraffin is about 0.9
3. Immerse the coated sample in water in the graduated cylinder and determine its displacement.
The volume of the sample is the volume of the water displaced minus the volume of the paraffin.
4. Compute the unit weight in grams/cu. cm.
Calculations:
• The volume of the paraffin is equal to the weight of paraffin used to coat sample divided by the
density of paraffin. Density of paraffin is 0.90
Wt. of paraffin = Wt. Soil coated with paraffin – wt. of soil uncoated with paraffin
• The volume of the paraffin—coated sample is equal to the weight in air minus the weight in water,
(express the weight in gm)
• Wet density of soil = wt of soil g/cc or kg/m
vol of soil
Specific Gravity Determination:
Calibration of Pycnometer
1. Transfer carefully the 25 gm sample to the calibrated bottle and add distilled water until about ½
full. Care must be exercised so as not to lose any of the soil in the transfer.
2. Expel the entrapped air by boiling gently for at least 10 minutes. Roll the bottle occasionally to
facilitate the removal of air.
3. Cool the sample to room temperature or to a temperature within the range of the calibration curve
of the bottle used.
Determination of Specific Gravity

1. Fill the bottle with distilled water to the calibration mark as discussed in step 2 from calibration of
bottle.
2. Dry the outside of the bottle, as in step 3, pycnometer calibration.
23
3. Weigh the bottle with water and soil, and record as W b.
4. Read and record the temperature of the contents to 0.1 °C, as in step 5, pycnometer calibration.
5. Repeat procedure for at least 3 trials.
Note: An alternative heating device that can be used is an electric plate stove with wire gauze.
G t (Ws)
Gs = W + W – W
s a b
Where:
Gs – Specific gravity
Gt – Specific gravity of distilled water at the temperature when
Wb was obtained (refer to Table A)
Ws – Weight of oven-dried sample
Wa – weight of bottle + water (from calibration curve)
Wb – weight of bottle + soil and water
Determination of Void Ratio and Degree of Saturation:
The void ratio can be determined from the formula shown below:
wGs (1+w)
e= - 1

The degree of saturation can be determined from the formula shown below:
S = Gs/e
24
Group No.: Section:
1. Instructor:
2.
3.
4.
5
Moisture Content Determination

Description Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3
Wt of tin cup (Wc)
Wt. of tin cup + Wet Soil (Wc+ws)
Wt. of tin cup and dry soil (Wc+dc)
Wt. of water (Ww)
Wt. of dry soil (Wds)
Water Content ()
Average
Unit Weight Determination

Description Description
Wt. of soil (Ws) Wt. of paraffin (Wp)
Wt. of soil and paraffin Volume of paraffin (Vp)
(Ws+p)
Volume of soil+paraffin Volume of soil (Vs)
(Vs+p)
Unit weight ()
Specific Gravity Determination

Description Description
SG of distilled water (Gt) Wt. of bottle + water (Wa)
Wt. of oven-dried Weight of bottle + soil +
sample (Ws) water (Wb)
Specific gravity of soil (Gs)
Determination of Void Ratio and Degree of Saturation

Void ratio
Degree of Saturation
25
7. Conclusion:

CRITERIA SCORE
1 2 3
skills. skills
Experimental
Set-up
II. Work Habits
Time
Management /
Conduct of
Experiment
Cooperative Members do not know Members have Members are on tasks and
and Teamwork their tasks and have defined have defined
no defined responsibilities most responsibilities at all times.
26
of the time. Group
responsibilities.
conflicts are Group conflicts are
teacher.
time.
Clean and orderly
Clean and orderly
experiment.
experiment.
Members require
work teacher.
teacher.
(Total Score)
Rating= ×100
24
9. References
Company
American Society for Testing and Materials (2000). Standard Test Method for Determination of Water
Content of Soil by Direct Heating Method (D-4959) . Pennsylvania: ASTM International
American Society for Testing and Materials (2002). Standard Test Methods for Determination of Specific
Gravity of Soil Solids by Water Pycnometer (D-854) . Pennsylvania: ASTM International
27
Documentation
Coating the spherical soil sample with Measuring the displaced volume in the
graduated cylinder
Paraffin wax for volume determination
Preparing the pycnometer for specific Using a rolled paper to successfully

gravity determination transfer soil sample into the
pycnometer
The 3 samples placed into the

pycnometer
28
Experiment No. 7
CONSISTENCY LIMITS OF THE SOIL
1. Objective(s):
The activity aims to impart how the moisture content influences the behavior of fine-grained soils.
 understand the concept of Atterberg limits and how it influences the behavior of the soil.
 determine the liquid limit, plastic limit and shrinkage limit of the given soil sample.
 describe the relationship of liquid limit and plastic limit in soil identification.
3. Discussion:
The liquid limit and plastic limit are used internationally for soil identification, soil classification and for
strength co-relation. It is also helpful in determining consolidation and settlement of soil. The liquid limit is
arbitrarily defined as the moisture content at which a soil pat placed in a brass cup cut with a standard
groove and dropped from a height of 1cm will undergo a groove closure of 12.7mm after 25 drops.
Plastic limit is the moisture content at which soil threads start to crumble when rolled to 3mm diameter
threads. The difference of the plastic limit and liquid limit is the plasticity index. This is the range of water
content wherein the soil will act like a plastic.
The shrinkage limit is the moisture content wherein the volume of the soil will cease to reduce in relation to
reduction of moisture content. Shrinkage limit is important in earthworks for predicting the shrinkage and
swelling potential of soil.
4. Resources:
1. Liquid limit device with groove tool

2. Tin can
3. spatula
4. Triple beam balance
5. Soil oven, pan
6. Shrinkage dish
7. Paraffin wax with sewing thread
8. Spring balance
5. Procedure:
Liquid Limit Test

1. Prepare at least 250g of representative air dry soil sample passing the no. 40 sieve. Pulverize this
soil sample. Be sure to break all lumps to elemental particles.
2. Prepare at least 3 moisture tin cans. Mix the prepared sample with a small amount of water. Mix
the sample of soil thoroughly until it becomes uniform and consistent in appearance (no lumps). A
major source of error is poor mixing.
3. On the liquid limit device cup, place an amount of sol. Smooth the pat surface. Using the grooving
tool, cut a groove at the middle.
29
4. Fasten the brass cup to the hinge of the liquid limit device.
5. Using the 1cm. block at the end of the grooving tool, adjust the height of the fall to exactly 1
centimeter. Height of fall is very critical and as little as 0.1cm can affect the liquid limit by several
percent.
6. Prepare 3 different consistencies of soil based on the number of blows in the liquid limit device:
25-35, 20-30 and 15-25 blows. This is done carefully by adding water to the soil.
7. Mix the soil sample until the consistency would require 25-35 blows to close the groove for about
12.5 mm. Take moisture content near the groove using 30g of soil to determine the moisture
content by placing in the oven. Keep the temperature at 105 oC.
8. Add additional water to test the remaining consistencies of soil. Repeat procedure 7.
9. Draw the flow curve wherein the data is recorded with the water content in the domain and the log
N in the abscissa. The water content that would require 25 blows to close the groove is the liquid
limit of the sample.
Plastic Limit Test

1. Take a sample of about 100 grams..
2. Start rolling the soil between the finger and the glass plate with adequate pressure to form a soil
thread approximately 3mm with 80-90 strokes per minute. When the diameter of the threads of
soil becomes 3mm, break the threads in smaller pieces, reform into a ball and re-roll. Continue
this re-balling and re-rolling until threads crumble under pressure and soil can no longer be rolled
into threads.
3. When the threads crumbles at a diameter greater than 3mm this is satisfactory to define the
plastic limit.
4. Place the crumbled soil in a tin can until a weight of about 30grams is achieved. Do this until two
(2) samples are achieved. Place it in an oven to oven dry. Maintain the temperature at 105 oC.
5. After determining the moisture content, determine its average. The result is the plastic limit of the
soil.
Shinkage Limit Test

1. Weigh the shrinkage dish (Wsd). Fill the shrinkage dish with water and weigh again (W sd+water).
Determine the volume (V) by getting the difference of W sd+water and Wsd and divide it by the unit
weight of water.
V = (Wsd+water - Wsd) / w
2. Grease the inside surface of the shrinkage dish. Place a small portion of the soil pat and carefully
tap the dish to allow the soil pat to flow at the edges. Repeat again until the whole shrinkage dish
is filled. Strike of the excess soil using a straight edge. Record the mass of the soil and dish.
3. Allow the soil to dry into the air until its color turns from dark to light. Oven dry the sample to the
oven kept at 105 oC. Record the mass of the soil and shrinkage dish. Determine the weight of the
dry soil (mdry). Determine its moisture content.
4. Securely tie the soil pat in a sewing thread. Immerse the soil in molten wax. Allow the wax coating
to cool. Determine the mass of the soil with wax (m dry+wax). Determine the mass of the wax (mwax).
Determine its volume by dividing the mass with the unit weight of the wax (V wax).
Vwax = (mdry+wax - mdry) / wax
30
5. Using a spring balance, determine the mass of the soil and wax in air (m swa). Immerse the soil and
wax in water and determine its mass in water (m sww). Determine the volume of the wax and soil
using the formula:
Vsoil+wax = (mswa-msww)/w
6. Determine the dry volume of soil (Vd) by the difference of the Vsoil+wax and Vwax.
7. Calculate the shrinkage limit of the soil using the formula:
SL = w – (V-Vd)w/ms
31
Group No.: Section:
1. Instructor:
2.
3.
4.
Determination of the Liquid Limit

Description Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3
Range 15 – 25 20 – 30 25 – 35
No. of Blows
Wt of tin cup (Wc)
Wt. of tin cup + Wet Soil
(Wc+ws)
Wt. of tin cup and dry
soil (Wc+dc)
Wt. of water (Ww)
Water Content ()
Liquid Limit
Flow Curve
32
Determination of the Plastic Limit
Description Sample 1 Sample 2
Wt of tin cup (Wc)
Wt. of tin cup + Wet Soil (Wc+ws)
Wt. of tin cup and dry soil (Wc+dc)
Wt. of water (Ww)
Water Content ()
Plastic Limit (Average)
Determination of the Shrinkage Limit

Description Data Description Data
 Volume of Volume of Wax
Shrinkage Dish
Weight of Shrinkage Mass of dry soil and wax
Dish (Wsd) (mdry+wax)
Weight of Shrinkage Volume of wax (Vwax)
Dish and Water
(Wsd+water)
Volume of Shrinkage
Dish (V)
Volume of Soil
 Water Content mass of the soil and wax
in air (mswa)
Wt of tin cup (mc) mass of soil and wax in
water (msww)
Wt. of tin cup + Wet Soil volume of the wax and soil
(mc+ws) (Vwax+soil)
Wt. of tin cup and dry Volume of Soil (Vd)
soil (mc+dc)
Wt. of water (mw)
Wt. of dry soil (mdry) Shrinkage Limit (SL)
Water Content ()
7. Conclusion:
33

CRITERIA SCORE
1 2 3
skills. skills
Experimental
Set-up
II. Work Habits
Time
Management /
Conduct of
Experiment
Members have
Members do not know
no defined
responsibilities.
teacher.
time.
Clean and orderly
Clean and orderly
experiment.
experiment.
34
Members require
work teacher.
teacher.
(Total Score)
Rating= ×100
24
9. References
Company
American Society for Testing and Materials (2000). Standard Test Methods for Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit
and Plasticity Index of Soils (D-4318) . Pennsylvania: ASTM International
American Society for Testing and Materials (2002). Standard Test Methods for Shrinkage Factors of Soils
by the Wax Method (D-4943). Pennsylvania: ASTM International
35
Mixing the sample with a
little amount of water
Rolling the sample until it

reaches about 3mm
diameter
Using the liquid limit tool
Determining the number

of blows required
36
Experiment No. 8
GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS: SIEVE TEST AND HYDROMETER TEST
1. Objective(s):
The activity aims to introduce to the student the method of conducting a mechanical grain size analysis of
a soil and presenting the resulting data.
 determine the grain size distribution of the soil.
 determine the soil classification of the sample based from USCS method.
3. Discussion:
A grain size analysis is performed in the laboratory for the purpose of determining the grain size
distribution of the soil. In reporting the results of this test, the common practice is to express the total
weight finer than a given size, as a percentage of the total weight of the soil. The most direct method for
separating the soil particles into various size fractions is by the use of sieve.
The results of a given grain size analysis are usually presented in the form of grain size distribution curve.
The percentage of material finer than a given size, P, is plotted as the ordinate in a natural scale and the
corresponding particle diameter, D in mm, as the abscissa in a logarithmic scale. The slope of the curve is
indicative of the grading. The more uniform the particle size; the steeper is the slope of the curve. A
vertical line represents a soil whose particles are all of the same size. Well-graded soils or those whose
particles distributed from coarse to fine have S-shaped curves that extend several cycles of the
logarithmic scale. The advantage of plotting a semi-log scale is that materials of equal uniformity are
represented by curves of identical shape whether the soil is fine-grained. The curve is also used to
interpolate values of p (percent finer) corresponding to sizes different from the sieve openings.
The Unified Soil Classification System is a soil classification scheme to determine the group name of the
soil to further determine its engineering properties. This is useful in correlating the behavior the behavior
of the soil based from its group description.
4. Resources:
Sieve Test.
1. Set of Standard Sieves.
2. Oven with temperature control.
3. Balance.
4. Pans.
5. Pair of tongs.
6. Manual or Mechanical Sieve Shaker.
7. Mortar and Pestle.
Hydrometer Test.
1. Balance, sensitive to at least 0.10 gram.
2. Mechanical Stirring Apparatus and Dispersion Cup.
37
3. Hydrometer, heavy and calibrated for soil.
4. 1-liter graduated cylinder.
5. Thermometer.
6. Set of Standard Sieves.
7. Water Bath of constant temperature.
8. Oven with temperature control.
9. Beaker, 400 ml capacity.
10. Timer or Stopwatch.
11. Sodium Silicate.
12. Distilled Water.
13. Drying Pans.
14. Dessicator
5. Procedure:
Sieve Analysis
1. Each group will obtain exactly 500g of oven-dry soil from the bag of stock material. Use sampling
or sampling splitter.
2. If the samples contain appreciable gravel, very few fines or if at the discretion of the instructor,
washing is to be omitted. Otherwise place the test sample on the no. 200 sieve and wash the
material through the sieve using the tap water until the water is clear.
3. Carefully pour the residue, using the back-washing, into a large weighed dish and let it sit for a
short period of time until the top of the suspension becomes clear. Then, place the dish and
remaining soil-water suspension in the oven for drying.
4. On the following day, weigh the oven-dry residue. (Omit this step if you do not wash). Then run
your sample through a stack of sieves from top down.
5. Place the stacks of sieves in a mechanical sieves shaker (if available) and sieve for 5 to 10
minutes until the top few sieves can be removed from the stack. If there is no mechanical shaker,
shake by hand for about 10 minutes. Do not shake in a defined pattern.
6. Remove the stack of sieves from the shaker and obtain the weight of material remaining on each
sieve. Sum these weights and compare with original. Loss of weights should not exceed 2%,
otherwise repeat the sieve test.
7. Compute the percent retained on each sieve by dividing the weight on each sieve to the original
sample weight Ws.
8. Compute the percent passing or percent finer by starting with 100 percent and subtracting the
percent retained on each sieve as a cumulative procedure.
9. Prepare a logarithmic log of percent finer versus grain size.
Note:
• If less than 12% of the soil sample passes the number 200 sieve, compute Cc and Cu and
show in the logarithmic graph.
• If more than 12% of the soil sample passes the number 200 sieve, conduct a hydrometer
analysis.
Calculation:
Cum. % retained = Total mass retained from largest sieve to current sieve/ Total mass of sample
% finer = 100% - Cum. Mass retained
38
Preparation of Sample for Hydrometer Test
1. Weigh about 50.0 gram of the air-dried sample (100 grams for sandy soil). Place in a beaker, fill
with distilled water to about half-full and allow to soak for at least 18 hours.
Note to Instructor: In performing 5 this test, prepare the said sample a day before the testing time.
2. After soaking, add 20 ml of sodium silicate as a deflocculating agent, then wash the contents into
the dispersion cup. ( A liter can be used as dispersion cup)
3. Determine the zero correction of the hydrometer. A positive correction (+) is achieved wherein the
reading is between zero and 60. A negative correction is a reading less than zero.
B. Hydrometer Test
1. Transfer the mixture to the graduated cylinder and add more distilled water to bring the water level
to the 100-ml mark.
2. Place the cylinder in the constant temperature bath. In the absence of the constant temperature
bath, you may use an electric plate stove set at the minimum heat (Luke warm) with wire gauze
underneath. Stir the suspension frequently to avoid settlement of the particles.
3. Remove the cylinder from the water bath or from the improvised bath as soon as the temperature
of the suspension and the water bath are the same. Shake thoroughly the mixture for 1 minute by
turning the cylinder upside-down and back, using the palm of the hand as the stopper. The soil
should not stick to the bottom of the cylinder when upside-down.
Note: Care should be exercised in this operation. The cylinder shall not reach temperature intolerable for
handling of the apparatus.
4. Replace the cylinder in the water bath, insert carefully the hydrometer in the suspension and start
the timer.
5. Take hydrometer readings after ½, 1 and 2 minutes without removing the hydrometer from the
suspension. Read the hydrometer at the top of the meniscus formed around its stem. Repeat the
shaking and reading procedure until a consistent set of readings are obtained.
6. Restart the test tube but this time take readings after 2, 5, 15, 30, 60, 250, and 1440 minutes.
Insert carefully the hydrometer about 15 to 20 seconds before each of these readings. Dry the
stem of the hydrometer before insertion. It should be removed carefully and placed in a cylinder of
distilled water after each reading.
7. Determine the equivalent values for Tables 1, 2, 3 and 4 for all hydrometer readings conducted.
Note:
a.) Take the temperature of the suspension immediately each hydrometer reading and record.
b.) Between hydrometer readings, cover the top of the cylinder to minimize evaporation and prevent
collection of dust or dirt from the air.
8. After the final reading, wash the suspension on a no. 200 sieve. Dry the fractions retained and
perform the sieve analysis using no.40, 60, and 200 sieves.
Calculations:
39
Particle Size Diameter (D):
L
D=K T
Where:
K = derived from Table 2
L = derived from Table 3
T = elapsed time in minutes
Corrected Hydrometer reading (Rc):
Rc = Ractual – C0 – CT
Where:
Ractual = actual hydrometer reading
C0 = zero correction
CT = correction factor due to temperature as shown on Table 4
%Finer (P):
P = Rc () / Ws
Where:
Rc = corrected hydrometer reading
 = correction factor from Table 1
ws = mass of soil sample (g)
Adjusted percent fines (Pa):
Pa = P x F200
Where:
F200 = %finer than sieve 200
Table 1: Values of  vs. Specific Gravity of the Soil (taken from ASTM D422)
40
Specific Gravity Correction Factor
2.95 0.94
2.90 0.95
2.85 0.96
2.80 0.97
2.75 0.98
2.70 0.99
2.65 1.00
2.60 1.01
2.55 1.02
2.50 1.03
2.45 1.05
Table 2: Values of K vs. Specific Gravity of the Soil (taken from ASTM D422)
Table 3: Values of Effective Depth L vs. Hydrometer Reading (taken from ASTM D422)
41
Actual Effective Actual Effective Actual Effective Actual Effective
Hydromet Depth, L Hydromet Depth, L Hydromet Depth, L Hydromet Depth, L
er er er er
Reading Reading Reading Reading
0 16.3 16 13.7 32 11.1 48 8.4
1 16.1 17 13.5 33 10.9 49 8.3
2 16.0 18 13.3 34 10.7 50 8.1
3 15.8 19 13.2 35 10.6 51 7.9
4 15.6 20 13.0 36 10.4 52 7.8
5 15.5 21 12.9 37 10.2 53 7.6
6 15.3 22 12.7 38 10.1 54 7.4
7 15.2 23 12.5 39 9.9 55 7.3
8 15.0 24 12.4 40 9.7 56 7.1
9 14.8 25 12.2 41 9.6 57 7.0
10 14.7 26 12.0 42 9.4 58 6.8
11 14.5 27 11.9 43 9.2 59 6.6
12 14.3 28 11.7 44 9.1 60 6.5
13 14.2 29 11.5 45 8.9
14 14.0 30 11.4 46 8.7
15 13.8 31 11.2 47 8.6
Table 4: Correction Factors due to Temperature
Temperature oC Correction Factor, CT Temperature oC Correction Factor, CT

15 -1.10 23 +0.70
16 -0.90 24 +1.00
C -0.70 25 +1.30
18 -0.50 26 +1.65
19 -0.30 27 +2.00
20 0.00 28 +2.50
21 +0.20 29 +3.05
22 +0.40 30 +3.80
Soil Classification using USCS Method
Determine the %gravel, % sand, %silt and clay of the sample. Determine the value of the
uniformity coefficient, Cu and coefficient of concavity, CC. For fine-grained soil using the formula:
Cu = D60 / D10
Cc = D302 / (D10 x D60)

Group No.: Section:
42
1. Instructor:
2.
3.
4.
Sieve Analysis of Coarse-grained Soil

Sieve No. Mass retained Cumulative Mass Percent Finer
Retained
Total
Hydrometer Test Method for Fine-grained Soil

Elapse Temp Actual L (from K (from D CT (from a (from Corrected % Finer Adjusted
d Time Hydro. Table 1) Table 2) (mm) Table 3) Table 4) Hydromete (P) % Finer
(min) Rdg. r
Rdg
½
1
2
5
15
30
60
250
1440
Hydrometer No: Specific gravity:

Weight of soil sample: Zero correction:
% Gravel: ___________ Cu: ___________

% Sand: ___________ Cc: ___________
% Silt: ___________
43
% Clay: ___________
Particle Size Distribution:
7. Conclusion:
44
CRITERIA SCORE
1 2 3
skills. skills
Experimental
Set-up
II. Work Habits
Time
Management /
Conduct of
Experiment
Members have
Members do not know
no defined
responsibilities.
teacher.
time.
Clean and orderly
Clean and orderly
experiment.
experiment.
Members require
work teacher.
teacher.
(Total Score)
Rating= ×100
24
9. References
45
Company
American Society for Testing and Materials (1998). Standard Test Method for Particle Size Analysis of
Soils (D-422). Pennsylvania: ASTM International
46
Experiment No. 9
COMPACTION TEST
1. Objective(s):
The activity aims to introduce the concept of compaction and the relationship of moisture content
to the dry unit weight of the soil.
 Connect the significance of compaction test in other properties of soil.
 determine the relative density of soils by compaction test.
 describe the use of water in relation to the dry density of the soil.
3. Discussion:
Soil Compaction is generally the cheapest method of improving the engineering properties of the soil. In
compaction, the soil solids are forced to a tighter state in order to achieve a higher unit weight and reduce
the air voids.
The process of compaction is better understood by comprehension of the behavior of a soil mass under
compaction. In a dry condition, the frictional resistance of the soil would resist granular rearrangement;
therefore, the compacting force is not quite effective. Introduction of a lubricant such as a predetermined
amount of water is mixed, would then be absorbed by soil particles, forming minutely thin and coherent
water films around the particles. In this condition, the soil particles will readily move closer together under
the compacting pressure due to the lubricating effect of water and reduced frictional resistance. When a
certain amount of water, called the optimum, has been added, the compacting force completely
overcomes the frictional resistance and maximum density of the soil mass is attained.
4. Resources:
1. Compaction mold and hammer

2. Moisture sprayer
3. No. 4 sieve
4. Rubbed tipped pestle
5. Scoop
6. Spatula
7. Large mixing pan
8. Balance
9. Drying oven
5. Procedure:
1. Weigh the empty mold.

2. Obtain a 6 lb. representative specimen of the soil sample to be tested. Break sample with the use
of rubber pestle and pass through No. 4 sieve.
3. Form a 2 to 3 inch layer using the soil passing though No. 4 sieve.
4. Press soil until it is smooth and compact it with a specific number of evenly distributed blows of
47
the hammer, using a one foot drop. Rotate the hammer to ensure a uniform distribution of blows.
5. Repeat the same procedure for the second and third layers seeing to it that a uniform distribution
of blows.
6. After compaction of the third layer the soil should be slightly above the top rim of the mold.
7. Remove the collar and trim off the soil from the top of the mold. Tart trimming along the center
and work towards end of the mold.
8. After the soil has been made even with the top of the mold and all base soil cleaned from the
outside, weigh the cylinder sample to 10 lb.
9. Remove the soil from cylinder and obtain a representative sample of 50gm for a water content
determination. The water content sample should be made up with specimens from the top, middle
and bottom of the compacted soil.
10. Break up by hand then removed from the cylinder and remix with the original sample and raise its
water content by 3% by adding water to the sample with sprayer. Mix the soil thoroughly. By
weighing the sprayer before and after the spraying, the amount of water added is known.
11. Keep repeating the procedures for 5 to six times until soil is sticky. Use 3% approximate water
content.
12. Compute dry density of each sample and plot the compaction curve. Determine the Optimum
Moisture Content of the sample.
48
Group No.: Section:
1. Instructor:
2.
3.
4.
Determination of Optimum Moisture Content

Description Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Sample 4 Sample 5
Weight of mold
(Wm)
Weight of mold
+ compacted
soil (Wm+s)
Weight of
compacted soil
(Ws)
Volume of
Mold
Wet Unit
Weight (wet)
Wt of tin cup
(Wc)
Wt. of tin cup +
Wet Soil
(Wc+ws)
Wt. of tin cup
and dry soil
(Wc+dc)
Wt. of water
(Ww)
Wt. of dry soil
(Wds)
Water Content
()
Dry unit weight
(dry)
Optimum
Moisture
Content (OMC)
49
Compaction Curve:
7. Conclusion:
50

CRITERIA SCORE
1 2 3
skills. skills
Experimental
Set-up
II. Work Habits
Time
Management /
Conduct of
Experiment
Members have
Members do not know
no defined
responsibilities.
teacher.
time.
Clean and orderly
Clean and orderly
experiment.
experiment.
Members require
work teacher.
teacher.
(Total Score)
Rating= ×100
24
51
9. References
Company
American Society for Testing and Materials (2000). Standard Test Method for Laboratory Compaction
Characteristics using Modified Effort (D-1557) . Pennsylvania: ASTM International
52
Experiment No. 10
FIELD DENSITY TEST
1. Objective(s):
The activity aims to impart the various methods of conducting field density test and aid the students in
understanding its relationship to other engineering parameters.
 Connect the significance of field density test in other properties of soil.
 Differentiate the various methodologies used in field density test.
3. Discussion:
Field test is necessary in the conduct of earthworks as the weight-volume relatioship of the soil will aid the
engineer in preliminary judgment of the engineering properties of the soil. In addition, field test are
conducted as this is part of quality control measures in embankment construction to insure adequate
compaction. Highway specifications usually require that embankment should be compacted to not less
than 95% of a maximum density, as obtained from a specified laboratory compaction test. Another test
used in highway work is the determination of “pay quantity” of borrow materials, when the borrow pit is not
amenable to direct volumetric
In the field test, a hole is dug in the soil and the in-place volume of soil excavated is determined by back
filling with a substance of known specific gravity. One-size, dry sand is commonly used in highway
engineering work, especially when the soil is dry and pervious.
In the field density test, the method to be used is dependent on its size. For small-scale projects and
nearly all large-scale projects, the determination is either the sand-cone or balloon-density method. On
few large projects, nuclear devices have been and are being used. The nuclear method is beyond the
scope of this experiment and will not be considered further.
4. Resources:
1. Compaction mold and hammer

2. Moisture sprayer
3. No. 4 sieve
4. Rubbed tipped pestle
5. Scoop
6. Spatula
7. Large mixing pan
8. Balance
9. Drying oven
5. Procedure:
Calibration of Bucket and Sand
1. Calibrate the bucket to be used as a volumetric measure by using water, (known specific gravity,
53
1.0 at 4°C). Weigh the empty bucket, fill with water to overflowing and weigh.
2. Calibrate the dry sand by pouring it into the bucket through a funnel. The height of fall above the
deposited sand should be constant in order to maintain a uniform density from the bottom to top of
container. Strike off the excess sand with a straight edge and weigh the bucket filled with sand.
3. Repeat steps (1) and (2) and perform at least two determinations for each calibration and use the
average value.
Field Density Determination

1. Smooth off a representative of sufficient size and lay flat the guide plate on the surface of the soil
layer to be tested.
2. Dig a 4 inch (100 mm) to 6 inch (150 mm) diameter hole with a knife or any digging tool to the full
depth of the layer under test. Trim the hole carefully to make the sides more or less vertical and
the bottom, level.
3. Remove all soil excavated from the hole and pulverize with the mortar and rubber-covered pestle.
Pass through the no. 4 sieve. Weigh the portion passing. Save the portion retained and return to
the hole when hole is backfilled with the sand.
4. Take a representative sample from the portion passing the no. 4 sieve for water content
determination.
5. Weigh a portion of the calibrated sand in excess of that required to fill the test hole.
6. Pour the calibrated sand into the test hole through a funnel. The height of fall above that
deposited should be constant. Return the portion of the soil excavated retained on the no. 4 sieve,
if any, to the hole while pouring the sand. Strike off the excess sand level with the ground surface
with a straight edge and return all excess to the sand container.
7. Weigh the sand remaining in the container to determine the weight of sand used to fill the test
hole.
8. Remove the sand foam the test hole, clean for future use.
CALCULATIONS:
1. Wet density of soil = wt of soil g/cc or kg/m

vol of soil
2. Volume of Bucket = wt. of water to fill Bucket (gm)

1 g/cc
3. Volume of Hole = wt of sand to fill hole

Density of sand
4. Wet Density of soil = wt. of wet soil

Volume of hole
5. Dry Density of Soil = Wet Density of Soil

(1+w)
54
Group No.: Section:
1. Instructor:
2.
3.
4.
Description Sample 1 Sample 2

Wt. of Bucket & Dry Sand, gm
Wt. of Bucket, gm
Volume of Bucket, cc
Density of Dry Sand, gm/cc
Description Data
Wt. of wet soil, gm
Wt. of Dry Sand Backfilled, gm
Volume of Wet Soil, cc
Wet Density of Soil, gm/cc
Water Content, % (w)
Dry Density of Soil, g/cc
7. Conclusion:

CRITERIA SCORE
1 2 3
skills. skills
Experimental Members are unable Members are able to Members are able to set-up
55
Set-up
II. Work Habits
Time
Management /
Conduct of
Experiment
Members have
Members do not know
no defined
responsibilities.
teacher.
time.
Clean and orderly
Clean and orderly
experiment.
experiment.
Members require
work teacher.
teacher.
(Total Score)
Rating= ×100
24
9. References
Company
American Society for Testing and Materials (1999). Standard Test Method for Density and Unit Weight of
Soil in Place by the Sand-Cone Apparatus (D-1556) . Pennsylvania: ASTM International
56
Experiment No. 11
PERMEABILITY TEST
1. Objective(s):
The activity aims to introduce to the student the method of determining the coefficient of permeability of
coarse grained and fine grained soils.
 determine how the type of soil affects its coefficient of permeability
 understand the concepts of the two different methods of determining the coefficient of
permeability
3. Discussion:
The presence of void spaces in the soil grains allows the passage of water through the soil. In 1856,
Darcy proposed an equation to determine the relationship of the velocity of the fluid withe the hydraulic
head:
v = ki
wherein v is the flow velocity, i is the hydraulic gradient and k as the coefficient of permeability.
The coefficient of permeability is dependent on the grain size distribution, wherein the larger soil grains
such as sand and gravel will provide larger values of k. On the other hand, smaller soil grains such as silt
and clay will give smaller values of k. In civil engineering, permeable soil media are used to facilitate
drainage in earth retaining structures such as a retaining wall. On the other hand, impermeable soil media
are used as a barrier to prevent the migration of contaminated fluids to the groundwater table such as the
use of clay liner for a sanitary landfill.
There are two (2) laboratory tests for determination of the coefficient of permeability, the constant head
test and falling head test. The constant head test is used for permeable soils which has coefficient of
permeability greater than 10 -4 cm/s while the falling head test is for less permeable soils. The constant
head test is standardized on ASTM D 2434 while the falling head test is not yet standardized. This
experiment is limited only to the constant head permeability test.
4. Resources:
1. Permeameter Set. The set must be complete with pipe fittings and head with air escape valve and
fitting
2. Standpipe
3. Vacuum Pump
4. Balance, sensitive to 0.10g
5. Sieve #200
6. Distilled Water
7. Thermometer, sensitive to 0.10oC
8. Stop Watch
57
9. Tamping Device
10. Graduated Cylinder
11. Oven, with temperature control
12. Drying Cans
13. Calipers
14. Scoop
15. Funnel
16. Graduated Flask
17. Meterstick
18. Rubber Tubing
19. Support Frames, and Clamps
20. Filter Paper
5. Procedure:
1. Open the permeameter and determine the inside diameter of the upper and lower chambers.
Record the average inside diameter of the permeameter (D). Set the porous stone on the inner
support ring and place a filter paper on top of the porous stone.
2. Determine the initial mass of the pan along with the dry soil. Mix the soil with sufficient amount of
distilled water. Record as Mws+pan. This is to prevent segregation of particles during placement into
the permeameter and thereby allowing the mixture to flow freely.
3. Using a scoop, pour the soil uniformly at a height of 1.50 cm. Apply a circular motion on the
pouring to evenly place the soil throughout the permeameter.
4. Using the tamping device, compact the soil by an average of 10 blows per layer. Evenly apply the
compactive effort throughout the cross-sectional area of the soil. Terminate the compaction when
the soil is within 2.0 cm of the top of the lower chamber section.
5. Place the rubber gasket, and then fasten the upper chamber to the lower chamber. Continue the
placement of soil and its compaction until the soil is within 2.0 cm of the rim of the lower chamber
section.
6. Level the top surface of the soil. Place then the filter paper and the upper porous stone. Assemble
them the compression spring, chamber cap, sealing gasket and cap nuts to cover the upper
chamber.
7. Take four (4) measures of the sample length at different locations of the permeameter. Calculate
the average and record it as the sample length (l).
8. Take the remaining soil for determining the moisture content of the sample. After oven drying the
sample, determine the mass of dry soil and pan (M ds+pan). Determine the wet mass of the soil (M ws)
and dry mass (Mds). Calculate the moisture content ().
9. Set the alignment of the funnel to allow constant water level in it to remain a few inches above the
top of the soil.
10. Open the valves at the top of the permeameter. Connect the bottom outlet to the tail of the funnel
using a rubber tubing. Set the top outlet of the permeameter near the sink to collect the water that
may come out.
11. Open the bottom valve to allow the water to flow to the permeameter. As the water begins to flow
out of the top outlet, close the top control valve while letting the water to flow out for some time.
12. Close the bottom outlet valve and remove the rubber tubing. Place it on the top inlet valve.
13. Open the bottom valve. Raise the funnel at a considerable height to allow steady flow of water.
58
Allow adequate time for the flow pattern to stabilize.
14. Using a 1000 mL graduated cylinder, determine the time it takes to fill a 1000 mL volume while
simultaneously recording the temperature. Repeat the process three times while recording the
time (t), volume (V) and temperature (T). Determine the average time (t), average volume, V and
temperature (T).
15. Measure the vertical distance between the head of the funnel and the outflow level of the
permeameter. Record the distance as h.
16. Repeat the test again with different vertical distance, h.
Calculations:
Coefficient of permeability, kT at temperature T

QL
k T= Ath
where:
Q = volume of discharge
A = Area of the chamber
t = time
h = hydraulic head difference
Dry density:
dry = wet/(1+)
59
Group No.: Section:
1. Instructor:
2.
3.
4.
Mass of wet soil and Mass of specimen (M)

pan (Mws+pan)
Mass of dry soil and Volume of specimen
pan (Mds+pan) (V)
Mass of pan (Mpan) Wet unit weight (wet)
Mass of wet soil (Mws) Dry unit weight (dry)
Mass of dry soil (Mds)
MoistureContent
Trial Number Constant Elapsed time, t Volume (V) Water Coefficient of

Head, h (cm) (sec) Temperature permeability,
(T) KT
1
2
3
7. Conclusion:
60
CRITERIA SCORE
1 2 3
skills. skills
Experimental
Set-up
II. Work Habits
Time
Management /
Conduct of
Experiment
Members have
Members do not know
no defined
responsibilities.
teacher.
time.
Clean and orderly
Clean and orderly
experiment.
experiment.
Members require
work teacher.
teacher.
(Total Score)
Rating= ×100
24
61
9. References
Company
American Society for Testing and Materials (1999). Standard Test Method for Permeability of Granular
Soils (D-2434). Pennsylvania: ASTM International
62

SOILMECHANICS Laboratory Manual 11 Experiments

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

SOILMECHANICS Laboratory Manual 11 Experiments

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Experiment No.

2. Intended Learning Outcomes (ILOs):

6. Data and Results:

Borehole Location Map:

8. Assessment (Rubric for Laboratory Performance):

BEGINNER ACCEPTABLE PROFICIENT

1. Triple Beam Balance

6. Data and Results:

Sample # Weight (g) Purpose Description

BEGINNER ACCEPTABLE PROFICIENT

1. Triple Beam Balance or Digital Weighing Scale.

6. Data and Results:

Sample # Weight (g) Purpose Description

8. Assessment (Rubric for Laboratory Performance):

BEGINNER ACCEPTABLE PROFICIENT

A. For extraction of undisturbed soil sample

6. Data and Results:

Sample # Length (cm) Weight (g) Description

8. Assessment (Rubric for Laboratory Performance):

BEGINNER ACCEPTABLE PROFICIENT

For coarse-grained soil

For fine-grained soil

6. Data and Results:

Coarse grained soil

BEGINNER ACCEPTABLE PROFICIENT

Water Content Determination

Unit Weight Determination

Specific Gravity Determination:

Determination of Specific Gravity

Determination of Void Ratio and Degree of Saturation:

Moisture Content Determination

Unit Weight Determination

Specific Gravity Determination

Determination of Void Ratio and Degree of Saturation

8. Assessment (Rubric for Laboratory Performance):

BEGINNER ACCEPTABLE PROFICIENT

Preparing the pycnometer for specific Using a rolled paper to successfully

The 3 samples placed into the

1. Liquid limit device with groove tool

Liquid Limit Test

Plastic Limit Test

Shinkage Limit Test

Vwax = (mdry+wax - mdry) / wax

6. Data and Results:

Determination of the Liquid Limit

Determination of the Shrinkage Limit

BEGINNER ACCEPTABLE PROFICIENT

Rolling the sample until it

Using the liquid limit tool

Determining the number

Corrected Hydrometer reading (Rc):

Adjusted percent fines (Pa):

Table 4: Correction Factors due to Temperature

Temperature oC Correction Factor, CT Temperature oC Correction Factor, CT

Soil Classification using USCS Method

Cc = D302 / (D10 x D60)

Course: Experiment No.:

6. Data and Results:

Sieve Analysis of Coarse-grained Soil

Hydrometer Test Method for Fine-grained Soil

Hydrometer No: Specific gravity:

% Gravel: ___________ Cu: ___________

% Gravel: _ Cu: _