Name:  

                                                            Subject & Section:

Group No.:                      Date Performed:                                Date Submitted:

EXPERIMENT NO. 1
Soil Sampling and Profiling

Introduction

Soil sampling is the initial step in the investigation of the properties of soil. Samples are
obtained from their original location, are prepared, and stored for laboratory testing and analysis.

A graph of the lines connecting plots of different soil strata establishes a soil profile. The data
obtained from bore holes provide an information of the description of the soil (similarities or
dissimilarities) encountered at certain depths are used to construct the graph.

Objectives:
1. To obtain disturb and undisturbed soil samples. 
2.  To collect and store soil samples for future laboratory test
3.  To plot a soil profile
4.  To determine variations of natural soil moisture content at varying depths.

Apparatus/Materials:

Soil Auger  Spade or Shovel

Airtight Sample Containers  Petrowax or Paraffin
Tube Sampler  Pipe Wrench
Sample Extruder   Canvas bag or trays

Procedure: 

1. Clear the selected area of vegetation.

2. Drive the tube sampler into the ground until the tube is filled with soil.

3. Dig a large hole around the tube to retrieve the sampler.

4. Immediately extrude the soil from the tube and coat it by immersing it into a container of

molten wax.
 5. Place the coated sample in an airtight container and store in a cool room. 

6. Continue with the oil extraction using the soil auger. Obtain soil samples as boring progresses

up to the desired depth. Take samples for moisture content determination.

7. Measure and record the depth of each stratum and observe the changes in the physical

characteristics in between strata. 

8. Place the disturbed samples in appropriate containers. Use the jars for small samples. Protect

from moisture loss the samples to be used for moisture content determination. 

9. Plot the soil profile using the data of all class groups. 

Drawing:

Observation

Date:  Weather Sunny

Sample Source Location: Mini Forest Bore Hole No. 1

Elevation of ground surface 20m from sea lvl

Samples obtained:   Bags          Trays         Jars  Cans

Stratum from the ground surface Elev. from ground surface Color Description

1 6 inches brown Slightly compacted

2

4
Results:

0. Plan of Bore Holes

B. Soil Profile

Discussion of Results

This is the most important experiment because all the samples that we needed for other experiments

that we will conduct came from here.

Conclusion

Therefore, we will make sure that all the procedures that we conducted in this experiment are correct.

Post-lab questions:

1. Enumerate constraints in obtaining samples

2. From the result of your experiment, relate depth to visual display of moisture
Name:                                                               Subject & Section:
Group No.:                      Date Performed:                                Date Submitted:

EXPERIMENT NO. 2
Preparation of Disturbed Samples

Introduction

Disturbed samples often do not provide the accurate in-situ characteristics of the soil
but are useful in the determination of specific gravity, grain size analysis, Atterberg Limits,
compaction test and in the visual identification and classification of soils.

Objectives

To prepare and store disturbed soil samples for future laboratory tests.

Apparatus/Materials:

Balance, oven Standard Sieves

Rubber Mallet Sample Splitter

Procedure:
1. Place the sample in a large tray. Air dry. For small quantities, dry the sample in an
oven at 60°C or less.
2. Break the sample with a rubber mullet or a rubber-tipped pestle.
3. Obtain a representative sample. Sieve and mix the materials passing through the No.
10 sieve. Obtain representative samples for tests using the sample splitter or by the
quartering method.
4. Pass the unused materials in step 4 through No. 40 sieve. Grind larger materials
carefully without breaking individual particles and pass-through No. 40 sieve. Mix
sieved materials and prepare the sample for future tests.
5. Discard retained materials.
 Recommended Sample Sizes

Type of Test Weight

Specific Gravity 100 grams
Grain Size Analysis 400 grams
Liquid Limit 250 grams
Compaction 11kg

Observations:

Sample Sizes Prepared

Type of Test Weight

Specific Gravity
Grain Size Analysis
Liquid Limit
Compaction

Discussion of Result

Conclusion

Post-lab questions:

1. What were the difficulties you encounter during the sampling activity
2. In terms of the sampling process, how does soil formation differ from compacted
fills?
Name:                                                               Subject & Section:
Group No.:                      Date Performed:                                Date Submitted:

EXPERIMENT NO. 3
Preparation of Undisturbed Soil Samples

Introduction

Sampling and preparation of undisturbed soil samples require extra care compared to
the sampling and preparation of disturbed soil samples. This is so because undisturbed soil
samples must retain it characteristics in the original natural state so that errors in the
determination and calculation of its properties will be avoided. Undisturbed soil samples are
useful in Consolidation Test, Unconfined Compression Test, Triaxial Shear Test, and most
especially in tests that involves chemical or mineral composition of soils.

Objective:

To prepare and store disturbed soil samples for future laboratory tests.

Apparatus/Materials:

Soil Lathe Wire Saw

Miter Box Knife
Extruder Ruler

Procedure:

1. Prepare the sample in the laboratory. Use cellophane gloves of wax paper to handle the
specimen. Protect the sample from breaking.
2. Remove the protective coating of the sample with a knife or a hacksaw.
3. Cut a portion of the sample form the original sample with a wire saw. Clean the wire saw
after every cut.
4. Trim the finished specimen with the use of the soil lathe and a wire saw.
5. Place the specimen in the miter box and cut to standard heights.
6. Measure dimensions of the specimen using caliper.

Discussion of Result

In our experiment for the preparation of soil samples for undisturbed samples, we
were able to carefully obtain soil samples from the ground by using a hollow cylinder to cut
into the soil. The hollow cylinder is very useful in obtaining undisturbed soil because we
were able to avoid the soil from being moved around. In undisturbed soil, we must always
remember that extra care is needed in order for the soil to keep its original properties.
Maintaining its original property/characteristic is important as it provides the most accurate
information about the soil and its properties for tests that involve the chemical and mineral
composition of soils.

Conclusion

We therefore conclude that, for us to acquire and prepare an undisturbed soil, we must
delicately handle it. To accomplish this, it is necessary to take precautions to ensure that the
soil is not subjected to an excessive amount of stress between the time it is harvested and the
time it is examined.

Post-lab questions:

1. Describe the process of obtaining an undisturbed sample without the use of the
sampler?
An undisturbed sample requires extra care when taken below the ground surface.
Without the use of a sampler, we are unable to guarantee that the sample will remain
undisturbed because the use of any other tools or methods could potentially disrupt the
natural state of the soil.

2. What precautions are to be observed in using the sampling method described in

question No. 1?
In acquiring undisturbed soil sample, we must always consider the natural state of
the sample. This type of sample must keep its original properties in order to avoid
mistakes in the process of determining and calculating the soil's characteristics.
Name:                                                               Subject & Section:
Group No.:                      Date Performed:                                Date Submitted:

EXPERIMENT NO. 4
Determination of Moisture Content

Introduction

Moisture content in a soil sample is the measure of the amount of water present on the
surface of the soil particles and those held in the interstices of the soil bulk. This soil property
influences soil strength and behavior. Although indirectly, it can provide an indication of the
presence of voids in the soil.

Moisture content is the ratio o the weight of water in the soil to the weight of the soil
solids.

Objective:

To determine the water content in a soil specimen by the conventional method.

Apparatus/Materials:

Container Balance Oven

Knife Wire Saw Desiccator
Moisture Cans Spatula

Procedure:
1. Weigh the empty moisture cans.
2. From the sample obtained from the quartering or splitting method (Experiment No.2),
randomly take small quantities of different locations from the representative sample.
Place it in the moisture can. Do this quickly to avoid moisture loss.
3. Weigh the container with the soil sample.
4. Place the container with the sample in an oven to dry the sample to a constant mass at a
constant temperature of 110° ± 5℃. The drying time will depend upon the size and type
of soil (1-6 hours).
5. After the drying period, let the sample cool to room temperature. If the sample is not to be
weighed at once, let the sample cool in a desiccator to covid absorption of moisture from
the atmosphere.
6. Determine and record the weight (or mass) of the dried sample to be able to calculate
moisture content.

Drawing:

Moisture Can / Sample No.: 1 2 3

Weight of Wet Sample 0.064 kg 0.078kg 0.069kg
Weight of Dry Sample 0.047 kg 0.051kg 0.057kg
Weight of Water in the Sample 0.017 kg 0.027kg 0.012kg
Weight of empty can 0.01kg 0.012kg 0.013kg
Weight of can & wet sample 0.074kg 0.090kg 0.082kg
Weight of can & dry sample 0.057kg 0.063kg 0.070kg
 Data Analysis:
1. Weight of wet sample = Wt. of can & wet sample – Wt. of empty can

2. Weight of dry sample = Wt. of can & dry sample – Wt. of empty can

3. Weight of dry sample = Wt. of can & dry sample – Wt. of empty can

4. Weight of water in the sample = Wt. of wet sample – Wt. of dry sample

Weight of water in the sample

5. Moisture Content, w% = x 100%
Wt. of dried sample

Calculations:
Results:
Moisture Can / Sample No.: 1 2 3

Weight of Wet Sample 0.064kg 0.078kg 0.082kg

Weight of Dried Sample 0.047kg 0.051kg 0.057kg
Weight of water in the Sample 0.017kg 0.027kg 0.012kg
Moisture Content 36.7% 52.94% 21.05%

Discussion of Result

In doing the experiment we noticed that the factor that affects the moisture content of
the soil is water itself, but when the amount of dried soil is higher than the amount of water in
the sample. Then, the water moisture of the soil decreases.

Conclusion

In conclusion, and considering the outcomes of the test, the depth has a significant
impact on the moisture content of the soil. Additionally, the soil type also impacts both the
soil's water content and its resistance to penetration. Throughout the test, as we have dug
farther into the earth, we have noticed certain variations in the soil's qualities. Until we
descended three feet to the ground. Initially under the surface of the earth (1ft below the
ground), despite having a high moisture content, the earth changes when we descend three
feet. Sandy Loam gradually loses moisture.

Post-lab questions:

1. After testing a soil sample, the following measurements were found:

Total original weight of the sample . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200 grams

Weight of container with the air-dried sample . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225 grams
Weight of container with the oven-dried sample . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .210 grams
 Weight of the container . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 grams

Determine: a.) hygroscopic moisture content

b.) natural moisture content

2. Explain the difference of the result of the calculations in 1a and 1b above.

Compared to an oven-dried sample, the air-dried sample contains more moisture

because the sample is exposed to the air and can pick up some moisture while drying. Due to
the fact that the sample was dried in an oven, it has decreased moisture content sample.

Name:                                                               Subject & Section:

Group No.:                      Date Performed:                                Date Submitted:

EXPERIMENT NO. 5
Determination of the Unit Weight of a Soil Sample

Introduction
 The unit weight of a soil sample is defined as the total weight of a unit volume of the
sample. It is commonly expressed in terms of Newton per cubic meter (or kN/ m3) and is
considered synonymous to mass density which is in terms of grams per cubic centimeter (or
kg/m3). Unit weight is either in the dry mass state or in the wet condition. In the wet
condition, the unit weight is dependent on the total weight of the soil sample, while in the dry
condition, the unit weight considers the weight of soil solids in the sample.

Objective:

To determine the unit weigh of a soil specimen.

Apparatus/Materials:

Balance Wire Saw Miter box

Paraffin wax Graduated Cylinder
Soil sample Knife

Procedure:
1. Obtain the sample prepared in Experiment No. 3. Using the knife, the wire saw and the
miter box, trim the specimen to about 37.50 mm diameter and 50 mm to 75 mm long.
Smoothen out the surface.
2. Weigh the trimmed specimen using a balance accurate to 0.1 gram.
3. Melt the paraffin wax in a container. Dip and cover the sample with a thin coating of the
wax. The specific gravity of the paraffin wax is about 0.9.
4. Weigh the coated sample using the balance accurate to 0.1 gram.
5. Fill the graduated cylinder with water up to predetermined level. Record the initial
volume. Immerse the coated sample in the cylinder.
6. Read and record the final volume (with the sample in water). The displaced volume is the
volume of the coated specimen. The volume of the specimen is the difference between the
volume of the displacement and the volume of the wax coating.
7. Compute the unit weight of the sample.
Drawing:

Observations:

Sample No. 1 2 3
Dimensions of sample 4.5 x 3 4.5 x 3 4.5 x 4
Weight of the trimmed sample 0.096 kg 0.084 kg 0.102 kg
Weight of the coated sample 0.098 kg 0.086 kg 0.104kg
Initial volume of water in the cylinder 200 mL 200 mL 200 mL
Final volume after immersion 270 mL 260 mL 275 mL

Data Analysis:

1. Volume of Sample, V in cu. cm. (by measurement)

V=πr 2h

Where: r = radius of the sample, cm.

h= height of the sample, cm.

2. Weight of wax = Weight of coated sample – Weight of sample w/o wax

Weight of wax
3. Volume of paraffin wax =
Gwax ( ρw ¿

Where: Gwax = specific gravity of the paraffin wax (assume as 0.9)

ρ w = density of water
 4. Volume of the sample (by displacement)
Volume of the sample = displaced volume – volume of paraffin wax

5. Unit weight of the sample, γ in kN/m3

Weight of the sample w/o wax

γ=
Volume of the sample w/o wax

Calculations:

Results:
Sample No. 1 2 3
Volume of sample by formula
Volume of sample by displacement
Weight of the coated sample
Weight of the wax coating
Weight of the sample w/o wax
Unit weight of the sample

Discussion of Results:
 The result shows that, as the sample was coated by wax, there were no voids that let
the water fill in the sample. The initial volume of water in the cylinder is much lower
compared to the final volume that it increases when the sample is submerged.

Conclusion:
In conclusion, the initial volume was estimated to be 200 mL but, when the soil
sample coated with paraffin wax was submerged into the sample, it increased its volume. The
highest volume in the sample was the third sample, with the weight of the coated sample of
0.104 kg. The final volume in immersion was 275 mL.

Post-lab questions:
1. Is there a difference between the values of the volume of the sample using the formula
and the displacement method? What could be the sources of the discrepancies?

2. If you are to compute for the weight of the sample without the wax by using the
formula: Ws= VsGsγw, what data would you need to arrive at exactly the same value
that you have obtained from the experiment?
Name:                                                               Subject & Section:
Group No.:                      Date Performed:                                Date Submitted:

EXPERIMENT NO. 7
Grain Size Analysis
(Mechanical Method)

Introduction

Grading of soil aids in classifying soils and in determining its suitability for
engineering and construction use. Most grains contained in a soil bulk are neither of the same
size nor shape.

This test is used to determine the fractions of the various sizes of soil grains that make
up a soil mass. The data obtained from the sieving processes is then plotted on a
semilogarithmic paper or to visualize the distribution of the grain sizes. From the distributed
curve the effective size, the coefficient of concavity and the coefficient of uniformity can be
determined.

Objective:

1. To determine the distribution of grain size by mechanical analysis.

2. To plot the grain size distribution curve.

Apparatus/Materials:

Set of Sieves Balance

Oven Mechanical shaker(optional)
Moisture cans

Procedure:

1. Weigh all sieves accurate to the nearest to 0.1 gram.

2. Prepare a representative air-dried sample using the procedure in experiment #2.
3. Take a quantity from step 2 (minimum of 500 grams). Weigh actual quantity obtained and
record.
4. Stack the sieves in the order of decreasing sizes from depending on the sizes of the soil
particles (usually 75mm to 0.075 mm). The pan follows the smallest sieve size.
5. Pass the soil through the stack of sieves by shaking or jarring by hand for at least 10
minutes.
6. Determine the weight of the soil retained on each the sieves. The sum of the weights of
the fractions retained on the sieves and on the pan must be approximately equal to the
original weight.

Drawing

Observations:

Original weight of sample for sieving

US Standard Size of Opening Weight of Sieve Wt. of Sieve with

Sieve No. (mm) (grams) retained sample, g
10 2.000 mm 485 g 318 + 485 = 803
40 0.425 mm 373 g 424 + 373 = 797
Data Analysis:

1. Weight retained on each sieve = Weight of sieve with sample – t of empty sieve
2. Percent retained on each sieve = wt. retained on the sieve divided by the original
total weight of the sample
3. Percent passing = 100 - Σ% retained
4. Coefficient of uniformity, Cu = D60 / D10

Where D 60 = diameter corresponding to 60% finer

D 10 = effective size

2
5. Coefficient of concavity, Cc = D30/( D10 ¿ ( D 60 ¿

Where D30 = diameter corresponding to 30% finer

Calculations:
Results:

Date of test:
Visual Description of soil:
Total Weight of soil for the test:

Sieve No. Opening Wt. retained % Retained %Passing

Grain Size Distribution

Discussion of Results

Conclusion

Post-lab questions:

1. Using the results of your experiment, plot the bar graph of:
a. The mass retained on each sieve (sieve size as the abscissa)
b. The cumulative mass retained above each sieve (sieve size as the abscissa)

2. Name a specific application where a soil inn your experiment might be useful. Justify
your answer.
Name:                                                               Subject & Section:
Group No.:                      Date Performed:                                Date Submitted:

EXPERIMENT NO. 9
Determination of Liquid Limit of Soil

Introduction

The Liquid Limit is a measure of the amount of moisture present in soil that reduces
the soil’s resistance to shearing and causes soil to flow. This Atterberg Limit is useful in
identifying and classifying soils and its suitability to construction and engineering uses.

Objective:

To determine the liquid limit of a soil sample.

To plot the flow curve.

Apparatus/Materials:

Liquid Limit Device Grooving Tool

Mixing Dish Distilled Water
Spatula Moisture cans
Balance

Procedure:

1. In a mixing dish, place a sample of soil passing No. 40 sieve. Add and stir into it
enough distilled water to make a uniform paste.
2. Place the sample on the brass cup of the liquid limit device to a depth of 8-10 mm.
Cut a groove at the middle of the soil pat. The groove must divide the soil pat in the
cup at about 2 mm wide at the bottom and 11mm wide at the surface of the soil pat.
3. Lift and drop the brass cup with the pat by turning the crank at a rate of 2
revolutions/seconds until the edges of the soil in the groove closes at a distance of
 1
12.7mm ( inch). While cranking, count the number of revolutions until the closure.
2
Take a fraction of the soil pat for water content determination.
4. Conduct at least three (3) tests to achieve moisture content at varying number of
blows (preferably with N within the range of 15-40)
5. Plot the flow curve and determine the liquid limit.

Drawing:

Observations

Test Run No. Weight of Weight of wet Weight of No. of blows

empty can, soil & can, dried soil & can, to closure,
W1 W2 W3 N
1 0.01 kg 0.154 kg 0.08 kg 6
2 0.012 kg 0.145 kg 0.082 kg 27
3 0.013 kg 0.149 kg 0.083 kg 21
4
5

Data Analysis

1. Weight of water in the soil, W w = W 2 - W 3

Ww
2. Moisture Content, w% = x 100%
W3

1
3. Liquid Limit = the moisture content in soil to close the groove in the soil pat at
2
″
4. Flow Index = the slope of the line of the plotted points of N and w%
Calculations

Results
Test Run No. No. of Blows Moisture Content
1 6 92.5%
2 27 76.83%
3 21 79.52%
4
5
6
7

Flow Curve

W%

Number of Blows, N

Discussion of Results
According to the data collected, soil with a higher moisture content requires fewer
blows to reform. For example, Test 1 has a higher moisture content of 92.5% with a fewer
number of blows of 6 blows. Test 2 has a lower moisture content of 76.83% with more
number of blows of 27 blows. Test 3 has a moisture content of 79.52% which is less than
test 1 but greater than test 2 and with a number of blows of 21 blows which is also greater
than test 1 and less than test 2.
Conclusion
In conclusion and based on the data results, when the moisture content decreases the
number of blows increases and vice versa. Therefore, the relationship between moisture
content and the number of blows is inversely proportional. And the liquid limit of a
sample at 25 blows is 77%.

Post-lab questions:
1. What are the indications of liquid limit value being:
a. Less than one - the soil is a plastic material
b. Approximately equal to zero - the soil has low compressibility
c. A negative value - the soil is at the solid state

2. Which of the soil classification systems does not require the use of liquid limit
value? Why not?
Gravel does not require the use of liquid limit because it does not possess
plasticity and is classified as non-plastic. Liquid limit is determined by the amount
and type of clay present in soil.
Name:                                                               Subject & Section:
Group No.:                      Date Performed:                                Date Submitted:

EXPERIMENT NO. 10
Determination of Plastic Limit and Plasticity Index of Soil

Introduction

Plastic Limit, one of the Atterberg Limits, aids in the classification and identification
of fine-grained soils. Laboratory test finds this limit as the minimum water content that
allows a soil sample to be remolded, after which, further remolding causes the sample to
crumble. It is the transition between the moisture contents in the plastic and the semi-solid
state of the soil. As the grain size of the soil increase, plastic limit decreases.

Objective:

1. To determine the plastic limit of a soil sample.

2. To use the liquid limit of the sample to calculate its plasticity index.

Apparatus/Materials:

Mixing Dish Distilled Water

Spatula Moisture cans
Balance Glass Plate

Procedure:

1. Use the unused portion of the sample prepared in Experiment No. 9 (Liquid Limit
Determination). Place the air-dried sample in a mixing dish. Pour distilled water into
the dish with the sample. Produce a plastic mass from mixture and shaped into a ball.
2. Using the glass plate and fingers, roll the soil mass between fingers on a piece of
glass. Apply enough pressure (80-90 stokes per minute) to create a thread that will
have a diameter of 3.2 mm throughout its length.
3. Break the thread into pieces, squeeze, knead and roll again to form a 3.2 mm diameter
thread. Rerolling/remolding causes the sample to decrease its moisture content.
Continue the rerolling/remolding process until the sample crumbles and can no longer
be remolded into a thread.
4. Place the crumbled sample into the drying can and into the oven for moisture content
determination.

Drawing:

Observation:

Test Run No. Weight of Weight of wet Weight of

empty can, soil & can, dried soil &
W1 W2 can, W 3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7

Data Analysis:

1. Weight of water in the soil, W w = W 2 - W 3

2. Weight of oven-dried soil, W s = W 3 - W 1

Ww
3. Moisture Content, w% = x 100%
Ws
4. Plastic limit, PL= the moisture content at which the remolded soil crumbles and
cannot be further remolded.
5. Plasticity Index, PI = PL – LL
 Where: LL = the liquid limit obtained from Experiment No. 9

Results:

Sample No. 1 Sample No. 2

Moisture Content, w%
Plastic Limit, PL%
Liquid Limit, LL %
Plasticity Index, PI%

Description of the sample

Discussion of Results:

Plastic limits are one of the Atterberg limits, under the classification and
determination of fine-grained soils. The laboratory test finds an experiment or procedure to
determine the minimum water content that allows the soil sample to be remolded after which
condition the sample is further molded until such time that the sample reaches its limits and
begins to crumble. With this being said the soil sample undergoes its transition of its moisture
content from plastic to its semi solid state of the soil sample. Take note that as the grain size
of the soil increases the plastic limit of the soil decreases. As we begin molding our soil
sample and attaining the desired diameter of the thread, the thread begins to have cracks and
crumbles into pieces. After performing and putting it into the oven and drying it completely.
The data must show that the weight of the soil sample must decrease because of the absence
of water from the sample. And from the data gathered we were able to calculate the plastic
limit of the soil sample and the plasticity index with the existing value of the liquid limit.

Conclusion

From what we've observed from performing the experiment and calculating the data
we've gathered; we are able to identify the difference in value between plastic limit and liquid
limit. With this being said, identifying the values were able to profile what is the plasticity
index of the soil, and with it were able to understand or interpret our soil sample properties
where they fall to in the existing data.

Post-lab questions:

1. What information does a plasticity chart provide?

2. If a soil has a plasticity index between 20 and 30, and a liquid limit between 35 and
45%, what does it tell you?