Highways Soil Testings

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
AND HIGHWAYS
Bureau of Research And Standards
Online Comprehensive Materials

Testing Technology Seminar
ENGR. LIWAYWAY M. DE JESUS
OBJECTIVES
1. To know the values, importance and significance of soil

in the construction materials
2. Identify each kind of tests and its significance
3. To perform actually each test and apparatus use in each

test
4. Interpret test result and requirements

SOIL and SOIL AGGREGATES
Soil – refers to the mineral material at or

near the earth’s surface which consists of
air, moisture and other substances which
may be incorporated there in and which
has resulted from natural processes such
as weathering, decay and other chemical
action.
SOIL TESTS
1. Moisture Content
Determination
– amount of water present at the

sample after oven drying at 110 ± 5° C
– amount of water
present at the sample at air-dried condition after oven
drying at 110 ± 5° C
– amount of water
present from undisturbed sample
2. Sieve Analysis (Grading Test)
- Minor test
- Determination of the compliance of the
particle size distribution of the
delivered material compared to the
DPWH Specifications through the testing
of the representative sample obtained
by standard sampling procedures
2. Sieve Analysis (Grading Test)
MAXIMUM SIZE- the smallest size of sieve in which all materials are
“required” to pass
NOMINAL MAXIMUM SIZE – the smallest size of sieve in which all

materials are “permitted” to pass
Size of Sieve % Passing Requirements Remark

2 1/2 100 - -
Size all are required
2 100 100
to pass
Size all are permitted
1 1/2 97 95-100
to pass
*Failed samples can be corrected through proper blending of materials to

meet the required specifications
3. Plastic Limit and Liquid Limit Test
- Minor test
- Failed samples for Liquid Limit and Plastic Limit can
be corrected through blending of materials finer than
Sieve No. 40
- Non-plastic samples are good materials when used in
confined/enclosed sections like in road with
revetment/retaining wall both sides
- Non-plastic samples means few/no clay materials
present
 SOIL CLASSIFICATION
Grading and Limit Tests are used in

determination of the Soil Classification and
Group Index of Soil, where higher value in
group index means poorer quality of soil
materials
5. Compaction Test (Moisture
Density Relations Test)
- Determination of controlled values to be used

in acceptance of compacted layer
Maximum Dry Density – the highest dry density

of which the layer can be compacted
Optimum Moisture Content – the optimal

amount of water that should be added to the
materials in order to obtain the highest
compaction
5. Compaction Test (Moisture
Density Relations Test)
For embankment materials,

%compaction = 95% (minimum)
For subbase/base course materials,
%compaction = 100% (minimum)
where:
%compaction – ratio of actual dry density to the maximum dry
density
In order to obtain the desired degree of compaction, the materials engineer should
secure that the aggregates materials to be compacted have an actual moisture
content closer to the optimum moisture content
(moisture content)actual ≈ (moisture content)optimum
6. Field Density Test
- A field activity used to determine the actual dry

density of the compacted layer
- The depth of the hole depends on the actual
thickness of the layer
For every 500 sq. m. of compacted layer, 1 set of 3 holes should be done
where locations should be determined by the assigned materials engineer
- Two samples for actual moisture content will be

averaged to get the actual moisture content
- Use of speedy moisture tester as method for
moisture determination is prescribed
7. Organic Content
-Determination of the presence of

injurious/organic materials that can
harm/affect the performance of the
aggregate materials when used in
the project
8. California Bearing Ratio
- A test done in the planning stage in order to determine the design

thickness of the rigid pavement
- A value used in the design to derive the thickness of the pavement
- A test used as confirmation for the actual materials delivered on the site
For Item 200, minimum of 30

For Item 201, minimum of 80
CBR Value means the ratio of the materials strength as compared to the
standard stone.
Material of CBR of 70 is harder than that of material of CBR 50.
↑CBR, ↑ Hardness of material
9. Abrasion
- Materials retained in No. 10 Sieve

(washed, oven-dried) will be used
- A major test used in the

acceptance of the soil material
ENGINEERING
CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL
Materials passing the 75
mm (3”) sieve and retained
A. COARSE - Grained Soil : on No. 200 (0.075 mm)
sieve
B. FINE Grained Soil : Materials passing the No.

200 (0.075 mm) sieve
Inferior than fine grained

C. ORGANIC Soil : soil (unsuitable or
unpredictable material
ENGINEERING
CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL
B. FINE Grained Soil :
1. Silt - Particles passing 0.075 mm (No. 200 sieve) and
larger than 0.002
2. Clay - Smaller than 0.002 mm and larger than

0.001 mm
3. Colloids - Smaller than 0.001 mm
C. Organic Soil :
Smaller than 0.001 mm
ENGINEERING
PROPERTIES OF SOIL
GRANULAR SOILS
1. Good load bearing Qualities
2. Permeable, hence they drained easily
3. Comparatively incompressible when
subjected to static loads
4. Not subject to changes in strength and volume
due to variation in water content. However,
loose granular materials will undergo a
considerable reduction in volume when
subjected to vibratory loads
ENGINEERING
PROPERTIES OF SOIL
FINE GRAINED SOILS
1. Poor load sustaining quality
2. Highly impermeable
3. Compressible under a sustained load
4. Subject to changes in strength and volume

due to variation in water content
ENGINEERING
PROPERTIES OF SOIL
ORGANIC SOILS : inferior than fine grained soil
(unsuitable or unpredictable material)
1. MUCK – Consist of thoroughly decomposed
organic material with considerable amount of
mineral soil finely divided with some fibrous
remains
2. PEAT – there is the presence of considerable

fibrous material
MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR SUBMISSION
OF
SOIL & SOIL AGGREGATES SAMPLE
MINIMUM QUANTITY
MINIMUM TESTING OF MATERIALS FOR
MATERIALS
REQUIREMENTS EACH SAMPLE
SUBMITTED
1. Soil Aggregates 1 sample per 1500 cu.m.
a. Classification 20 kg
b. Routinary Test 50 kg
c. Moisture Density
Relation and CBR 50 kg
2. Aggregates 1 sample per 1500 cu.m.

a. Coarse Aggregates 70 kg
b. Fine Aggregates 50 kg
SOIL SAMPLING
The illustrations in Exhibit II show the proper methods
of placing samples in suitable containers for shipment,
and proper identification.
Time and again the need for accurate and scientific

sampling had been greatly emphasized. If samples are
not truly representative, both sampling and testing are
complete waste of time as the test results will be of no
value. Laboratory testing involves much time and great
expense, therefore considerable care and judgment
must be exercised in sampling. The minimum number of
samples that will furnish adequate and trustworthy data
for design should be taken.
SOIL SAMPLING
The soil sampling the following should be observed:
1. Use new clean containers to avoid contamination.
2. Seal filled containers with clean, dry and tight

fitting lids.
3. Label container clearly and properly

IDENTIFICATION – VISUAL AND TEXTURE
Gravel - Rounded or water – worn pebbles. No plasticity
and cohesion.
Sand - Hard and loose grains. Individual grains readily seen

and felt. No plasticity and cohesion. If dry, a cast
formed in the hands will fall apart. If moist, a cast
will crumble when touched.
Silt - Fine and barely visible grains
When dry pulverized condition, it feels soft and
floury
Can hardly be made in plastic. Exhibit little or no
strength when air – dried
A cast is easily crushed in the hands
IDENTIFICATION – VISUAL AND TEXTURE
In the wet state, an inorganic silt can be rolled into

thin threads, but if the threads are more than a few
inches long they will not support their own weight if held
by one end.
Clay - Can be made plastic by adjusting its water content.
Exhibit considerable strength when air-dried.
Difficult or impossible to crushed in hands. Clay can
be molded and rolled into thin threads without
breaking or crumbling within a moderate to a wide
range in water content, and threads of considerable
length will support their own weight when held by
one end
What is AGGREGATE?
It is a combination of sand, gravel,

crushed stone slug or other material
composition used as a binding medium to
form as bituminous mix, concrete
pavements, macadam, mortal, etc.
CLASSIFICATION OF AGGREGATE
1. Natural aggregate – taken from

natural deposits without change
in their nature during production
2. Manufactured aggregate – includes

blast furnace slug shale clay and light
weight aggregate
AGGREGATE ARE FURTHER CLASSIFIED INTO:
1. Fine aggregate – aggregate

passing 4.75 mm (No. 4 sieve) and
retained on 0.075 mm (No. 200
sieve)
2. Coarse aggregate –aggregate retained

on 4.75mm (No. 4 sieve)
In selecting an aggregate the following criteria should be
considered:
1. Grading of the aggregate should be uniformed

throughout its period of use and should conform to
specifications.
2. Aggregate with unfavorable particle shape should not
necessarily rejected, if other alternatives are very
costly.
3. Aggregate that contain appreciable amount of organic
material which may interfere with the setting of
cement should not be used.
In selecting an aggregate the following criteria should be
considered:
4. Aggregate that will not produce concrete of the
required strength should not be used. If required
strength can be attained with an excessive cement
factor, use of the aggregate is not economical and not
advisable.
5. Aggregate to be used in concrete exposed to serve
weathering should be essentially free of particles that
are soft or friable.
ENGINEERING PROPERTIES OF AGGREGATE
1. Hardness – to determine the wearing resistance of the
aggregate (abrasion)
2. Soundness – chemical action of the aggregate
3. Absorption – determine the porosity of the aggregate
4. Gradation – determine the proper mix proportion of the

aggregate
5. Cleanliness – free from injurious matter
ONLINE COMPREHENSIVE
TRAINING ON MATERIALS TESTING
TECHNOLOGY
FERDINAND P. VERGARA, JR.

DPWH-BRS
DIFFERENT TYPES OF SOIL TESTING FOR
CONSTRUCTION
Moisture Test
• The moisture content of soil is the quantity of water it contains. Water
content is used in a wide range of scientific and technical areas and is
expressed as a ratio, which can range from 0 (completely dry) to the
value of the materials’ porosity at saturation.
Sieve Analysis
• Sieve analysis determines the particle size distribution of a given soil
sample and hence helps in easy identification of a soil's mechanical
properties. These mechanical properties determine whether a given
soil can support the proposed engineering structure.
Atterberg Limits Test
• Atterberg limits test on soil is performed at 3 levels. The component
for testing is done with fine grained soil and if any critical component
from water is present then it can be determined with it. The three
limits that are evaluated:
• Liquid Limit
• Plastic Limit
• Shrinkage Limit
Organic Content
• Determination of the presence of injurious/organic materials that can
harm/affect the performance of the aggregate materials when used in
the project.
Proctor’s Compaction Test
• Compaction in soil is one of the most important elements that are to
find during Proctor’s Compaction Test on soil. It is to do the
densification by reducing the air voids in soil. The level of Compaction
is estimated as far as dry thickness of soil.
California Bearing Ratio Test
• The california bearing ratio test is penetration test meant for the
evaluation of subgrade strength of roads and pavements. The results
obtained by these tests are used with the empirical curves to
determine the thickness of pavement and its component layers.
Abrasion Test
• Abrasion testing determines the relative quality, toughness, and
hardness of mineral aggregates subjected to impact and abrasion.
Soil has four constituent parts:
• Gravel is any soil particle from 2 – 75 millimeters.
• Sand is any soil particle larger than 0.05 millimeters (0.002 inches).
• Silt is any soil particle from 0.002 - 0.05 millimeters.
• Clay is any soil particle below 0.002 millimeters, including colloidal clay
so small it does not settle out of suspension in water.
MECHANICAL ANALYSIS OF SOIL
• There are two methods generally used to find the particle size
distribution of soil:
• Sieve analysis - for particle sizes larger than 0.075 mm (No.
200) in diameter, and;
• Hydrometer analysis - for particle sizes smaller than 0.075
mm (No. 200) in diameter.
• Particle size distribution is widely used in the classification and
identification of soils. It is an important criteria in the classification of
highway subgrade materials.
SIEVE ANALYSIS PROCEDURE OF SOIL
(VIDEO)
• Maximum Size
• The smallest sieve opening through which the entire amount is
required to pass.
• Nominal Maximum Size
• the smallest sieve opening through which the entire amount is
permitted to pass.
SIEVE ANALYSIS (COMPUTATION)
METHOD A (INDIVIDUAL MASS RETAINED)

• Determine and record the individual mass retained for each sieve
and in the pan. Ensure that all material trapped in full openings of
the sieve are removed and included in the mass retained.
• Perform the Check Sum (CS) calculation - Verify the total mass
after sieving agrees with the dry mass before sieving to within 0.3
percent.
• The dry mass before sieving is the dry mass after wash (WOD) or
the original dry mass (OD) if performing the sieve analysis without
washing. Do not use test results for acceptance if the Check Sum
result is greater than 0.3 percent.
• Calculate the total percentages passing, and the individual

percentages retained to the nearest 0.1 percent by dividing the
individual sieve masses by the oven-dried weight (OD)
• Report total percent passing to 1 percent except report the 75 μm
(No. 200) sieve to 0.1 percent.

Method A calculations:
• Check Sum (CS)
𝑾𝑶𝑫 𝒃𝒆𝒇𝒐𝒓𝒆 𝒔𝒊𝒆𝒗𝒆 𝑾𝑶𝑫(𝒂𝒇𝒕𝒆𝒓 𝒔𝒊𝒆𝒗𝒆)
• CS 𝑾𝑶𝑫 (𝒃𝒆𝒇𝒐𝒓𝒆 𝒔𝒊𝒆𝒗𝒆)
x 100
Percent Retained
𝑰𝑴𝑹
• IPR 𝑶𝑫
x 100
Where:
• IPR = Individual Percent Retained
• OD = Oven Dried Weight
• IMR = Individual Mass Retained
• WOD = Wash Oven Dried Weight
Method A calculations
• Percent Passing (PP)
• PP = PPP - IPR
Where:
• PP = Percent Passing
• PPP = Previous Percent Passing
EXAMPLE
Method A calculations
• OD = 8339 g
• WOD = 8051 g (before sieve)
• Total mass after sieving equals:
• Sum of IMR including Pan (WOD) = 8043 g (after sieve)
• Check Sum
• CS x 100 = 0.1%
• The result is less than 0.3 percent therefore the results can be
used for acceptance purposes.
• Then, determine the Reported Percent Passing of the
given data.
Sieve size Determine Determine
IMR IPR PP Reported PP
(in.) IPR PPP
𝟎
2 0 x100 = 0 100 100
𝟖𝟑𝟑𝟗
𝟏𝟑𝟒𝟓
1 1/2 1345 𝟖𝟑𝟑𝟗
x100 = 16.1 100 - 16.1 = 83.9 84
𝟕𝟖𝟗
1 789 𝟖𝟑𝟑𝟗
x100 = 9.5 83.9 - 9.5 = 74.4 74
𝟐𝟎𝟎
3/4 200 𝟖𝟑𝟑𝟗
x100 2.4 74.4 – 2.4 72.0 72
1/2 135
3/8 220
No. 4 2645
No. 10 1789
No. 40 843
No. 200 65
Pan 12
Sieve size Determine Determine
IMR IPR PP Reported PP
(in.) IPR PPP
𝟎
2 0 x100 0.0 100.0 100
𝟖𝟑𝟑𝟗
𝟏𝟑𝟒𝟓
1 1/2 1345 𝟖𝟑𝟑𝟗
x100 16.1 100 - 16.1 83.9 84
𝟕𝟖𝟗
1 789 𝟖𝟑𝟑𝟗
x100 9.5 83.9 - 9.5 74.4 74
𝟐𝟎𝟎
3/4 200 𝟖𝟑𝟑𝟗
x100 2.4 74.4 – 2.4 72.0 72
1/2 135 70.4 70
3/8 220 67.8 68
No. 4 2645 36.0 36
No. 10 1789 14.6 15
No. 40 843 4.5 5
No. 200 65 3.7 3.7
Pan 12
METHOD B (CUMULATIVE MASS RETAINED)

• Determine and record the cumulative mass retained for each sieve
and in the pan. Ensure that all material trapped in full openings of
the sieve are removed and included in the mass retained.
percent.
result is greater than 0.3 percent.
• Calculate the total percentages passing, and the cumulative

percentages retained to the nearest 0.1 percent by dividing the
cumulative sieve masses by the oven-dried weight (OD)
(No. 200) sieve to 0.1 percent.

• Check Sum (CS)
x 100
Percent Retained
𝑪𝑴𝑹
• CPR 𝑶𝑫
x 100
Where:
• CPR = Cumulative Percent Retained
• CMR = Cumulative Mass Retained
Method B calculations
• Percent Passing (PP)
• PP = 100 - CPR
Sieve size Determine Determine Reported
IMR CMR CPR PP
(in.) CMR PP PP
2 0 0 0 100 100.0 100
1 1/2 1345 0+1345 = 1345 16.1 100 – 16.1 = 83.9 84
1 789 1345+789 = 2134 25.6 100 – 25.6 = 74.4 74
3/4 200 2,334 72.0 72
1/2 135 2,469 70.4 70
3/8 220 2,689 67.8 68
No. 4 2645 5,334 36.0 36
No. 10 1789 7,123 14.6 15
No. 40 843 7,966 4.5 5
No. 200 65 8,031 3.7 3.7
Pan 12
METHOD C (CUMULATIVE MASS PASSING)

• Determine the Wash Loss (WL)
• WL = OD - WOD
• Determine and record the cumulative mass passing for each sieve
from wash loss up to the smallest sieve opening through which the
entire amount is required to pass. Ensure that all material trapped
in full openings of the sieve are removed and included in the mass
retained.
percent.

result is greater than 0.3 percent
• Calculate the total percentages passing, and the cumulative
percentages passing to the nearest 0.1 percent by dividing the
cumulative sieve masses by the oven-dried weight (OD)
(No. 200) sieve to 0.1 percent..

• Check Sum (CS)
x 100
Percent Retained
𝑪𝑴𝑷
• PP 𝑶𝑫
x 100
Where:
• PP = Percent Passing
• CMP = Cumulative Mass Passing
Sieve size (in.) IMR Determine CMP CMP PP Reported PP
2 0
1 1/2 1345
1 789
3/4 200
1/2 135
3/8 220
No. 4 2645
𝟏𝟐𝟎𝟖
No. 10 1789 365+843 = 1,208 𝟖𝟑𝟑𝟗 x100 = 14.5 15
𝟑𝟔𝟓
No. 40 843 300+65 = 365 x100= 4.4 4
𝟖𝟑𝟑𝟗
𝟑𝟎𝟎
No. 200 65 288+12 = 300 x100= 3.6 3.6
𝟖𝟑𝟑𝟗
Pan 12
WL OD-WOD = 288
Sieve size (in.) IMR Determine CMP CMP PP Reported PP
2 0 8,331 100.0 100
1 1/2 1345 6,986 83.8 84
1 789 6,197 74.3 74
3/4 200 5,997 71.9 72
1/2 135 5,862 70.3 70
3/8 220 5,642 67.7 68
No. 4 2645 2,997 35.9 36
No. 10 1789 365+843 = 1,208 14.5 15

𝟑𝟔𝟓
No. 40 843 300+65 = 365 x100= 4.4 4
𝟖𝟑𝟑𝟗
𝟑𝟎𝟎
No. 200 65 288+12 = 300 x100= 3.6 3.6
𝟖𝟑𝟑𝟗
Pan 12
WL OD-WOD = 288
ACTIVITY NO. 1 (LAB. NO. 1234)
OD = 8254 g
WOD = 8191 g
Sieve Size Mass Retained

2 0
1 1/2 1,567
1 1,235
3/4 345
1/2 178
3/8 408
No. 4 1,768
No. 10 1,789
No. 40 807
No. 200 79
Pan 7
15 MINS
(LAB. NO. 1234)
OD = 8254 g
WOD = 8191 g
Sieve Size Mass Retained Percent Passing

2 0 100
1 1/2 1,567 81
1 1,235 66
3/4 345 62
1/2 178 60
3/8 408 55
No. 4 1,768 33
No. 10 1,789 12
No. 40 807 2
No. 200 79 0.9
Pan 7
ITEM 200-AGGREGATE SUBBASE COURSE
SIEVE (mm) US Standard Mass Percent Passing
50 2” 100
25 1” 55 - 85
9.5 3/8” 40 - 75
0.075 No. 200 0 - 12

MOISTURE CONTENT
• Moisture content is defined as quantity of water that exists in the
soil mass. It can represent either the naturally present (In-Situ) or
water which is manually added.
• By definition, moisture content, MC, is the ratio of the weight of
water to the weight of the solids (dry soil) in a given mass of soil.
This ratio is usually expressed as percentage.
• Hygroscopic moisture, as defined by the soils engineer, is the water
content of an air‐dry soil as determined by oven‐drying at 105 ±
110 °C and expressed as a percentage of the oven‐dry weight.
MOISTURE CONTENT
(VIDEO)
MOISTURE CONTENT
Moisture Content (MC)/In-situ

𝑾𝒆𝒕 𝑺𝒐𝒊𝒍 𝑫𝒓𝒚 𝑺𝒐𝒊𝒍
• MC 𝑫𝒓𝒚 𝑺𝒐𝒊𝒍
x 100
Hygroscopic Moisture Content (HMC)

𝑨𝒊𝒓 𝑫𝒓𝒚 𝑺𝒐𝒊𝒍 𝑫𝒓𝒚 𝑺𝒐𝒊𝒍
• HMC 𝑫𝒓𝒚 𝑺𝒐𝒊𝒍
x 100
EXAMPLE
SAMPLE A SAMPLE B
Wet soil 50.2
Air-dry soil 40.3
Dry soil 45.7 39.8
Determine the moisture content of the two samples.
Sample A Sample B
𝑾𝒆𝒕 𝑺𝒐𝒊𝒍 𝑫𝒓𝒚 𝑺𝒐𝒊𝒍 𝑨𝒊𝒓 𝑫𝒓𝒚 𝑺𝒐𝒊𝒍 𝑫𝒓𝒚 𝑺𝒐𝒊𝒍

MC = x 100 HMC = x 100
𝑫𝒓𝒚 𝑺𝒐𝒊𝒍 𝑫𝒓𝒚 𝑺𝒐𝒊𝒍
𝟓𝟎.𝟐 𝟒𝟓.𝟕 𝟒𝟎.𝟑 𝟑𝟗.𝟖
MC = x 100 = 9.85% HMC = x 100 = 1.26%
𝟒𝟓.𝟕 𝟑𝟗.𝟖
ACTIVITY NO. 2
Sample A Sample B (Lab No. 1234)
Container + wet soil (in-situ) 49.8 49.4
Dry soil 30.4
container 11.2 11.2
Container + air-dry soil 44.6
Container + dry soil 44. 1
Determine the in-situ and hygroscopic moisture content of the two samples.
5 MINS
COMPUTATIONS
• Sample A
𝟒𝟗.𝟖 𝟏𝟏.𝟐 𝟑𝟎.𝟒
• In-situ MC 𝟑𝟎.𝟒
x 100 = 26.97%
• Sample B (Lab No. 1234)

𝟒𝟗.𝟒 𝟒𝟒.𝟏
• In-situ MC 𝟒𝟒.𝟏 𝟏𝟏.𝟐
x 100 = 16.11%
𝟒𝟒.𝟔 𝟒𝟒.𝟏
• HMC 𝟒𝟒.𝟏 𝟏𝟏.𝟐
x 100 = 1.52%
LIQUID LIMIT (LL)
• The liquid limit is defined as the lowest moisture content at which
the soil will flow upon the application of a very small shearing
force. The liquid limit gives a certain measure of the shearing
resistance of a soil when mixed with water.
• It is a measure of the potential cohesion which in turn depends
upon the total size of the contact areas, or the fineness and shape
of the grains.
• The liquid limit is expressed as the moisture content corresponding
to 25 shocks
LIQUID LIMIT
(VIDEO)
PLASTIC LIMIT (PL)
• The plastic limit is defined as the minimum moisture content at

which the soil can be readily molded without breaking or
crumbling.
• Plastic limit is the water content in which the soil will pass from
plastic state to semi-solid state. Soil can no longer behave as
plastic; any change in shape will cause the soil to show visible
cracks.
PLASTIC LIMIT
(VIDEO)
ATTERBERG LIMITS AND INDICES
• Atterberg defined the boundaries of four states of soil in the terms of “limits”. A
fine-grained soil exists in different states depending on the amount of water in the
soil system. The water content at which the soils change from one state to the other
is known as consistency limits or Atterberg limit.
• So the states are :
• The liquid state is the state of a fine-grained soil at which the soil will flow on
its own weight.
• The plastic state is the condition at which the soil can be remolded to any
shape without any development or cracks.
• Semi-solid is the state at which the soil can remold but only with the
development of cracks.
• In the solid-state, the soil cannot be remolded at all, if done the soil specimen
would get broken.
ATTERBERG LIMITS AND INDICES
PLASTICITY INDEX (PI)
• This is equal to difference between liquid limit and plastic limit of soil.
• PI = LL - PL
• Plasticity index is a measure of degree of plasticity of soil which
indicates qualities of binding particles exist in clay soil.
• Plasticity index of soil depends chiefly on clay content in soil.
• Soils having high plasticity index are considered clay and those having
lower value are considered silt. In case of zero value, soil are
considered to have little/no clay or silt and called non-plastic (NP)
soil.
• Plasticity index in relation with liquid limit and sieve analysis will
provide us valuable information for soil classification.
IMPORTANCE OF ATTERBERG LIMITS
• As the particle size decreases, both the liquid and plastic limits
increase, but the liquid limit increases at a greater rate. Therefore, the
plasticity index increases at a rapid rate. Plasticity index, therefore,
measures of the fineness of the particles.
• The liquid limit of a soil is an indicator of the compressibility of a soil.
The compressibility of the soil generally increases with an increase in
liquid limit.
EXAMPLE (LAB NO. 1234)
COMPUTATION
Lab No. 1234 LIQUID LIMIT PLASTIC LIMIT
Cont. number A B C D E
Cont. + wet soil 29.80 33.30 30.00 25.40 31.80
Cont. + dry soil 26.80 29.50 26.50 23.70 29.60
Wt. of water 3.00 3.80 3.50 1.70 2.20
container 13.70 14.10 13.90 12.50 15.30
Dry soil 13.10 15.40 12.60 11.20 14.30
Moisture content (y-axis) 22.90 24.68 27.78 15.18 15.38
No. of shocks (x-axis) 31 29 20
Average (PL) 15.28

Atterberg Limit Chart
29
28 (20 , 27.78)
27
MOISTURE CONTENT
26
LL @ 25 shocks = 25.80
25 25.80
(29 , 24.68)
24
23
(31 , 22.90)
22
21
20
1 10
25 shocks 100
NO. OF SHOCKS
COMPUTATIONS
• Liquid limit (LL) (@ 25 shocks) = 25.80%
• Plastic limit (PL)

𝟏𝟓.𝟏𝟖 𝟏𝟓.𝟑𝟖
• PL 𝟐
x 100 = 15.28%
• Plasticity index (PI)

• PI = LL – PL = 25.80 – 15.28 =10.52%
DPWH BLUEBOOK SPECS
• Item 200 – Aggregate Subbase Course

• “the fraction passing the No. 40 sieve shall have a LL not greater
than 35 and PI not greater than 12 as determined by AASHTO T89
& T90, respectively”.
• Item 201 – Aggregate Base Course

• “the fraction passing the No. 40 sieve shall have a LL not greater
than 25 and PI not greater than 6 as determined by AASHTO T89
& T90, respectively”.
AASHTO SOIL CLASSIFICATION
CLASSIFICATION SYSTEMS
• Two commonly used systems for classifying soils based on particle size distribution
and Atterberg limits:
1. AASHTO SYSTEM: American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials
• The AASHTO system uses both grain-size distribution and Atterberg limits
data to assign a group classification and a group index to the soi.
2. USCS: Unified Soil Classification System
• USCS is based on the recognition of the type and predominance of the
constituents considering grain-size, gradation, plasticity and compressibility.
It classifies soils into Four major categories:
• 1. Coarse-grained
• 2. Fine-grained
• 3. Organic soils
• 4. Peat
AASHTO SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
• Origin: AASHTO system of soil classification was developed by

Hogentogler and Terzaghi in 1929 as the Public Road Administration
classification system. It has undergone several revisions, with the
present version proposed by the Committee on Classification of
Materials for Subgrades and Granular Type Roads of the Highway
Research Board in 1945 (ASTM designation D-3282; AASHTO method
M145).
• The system is based on the following three soil properties:
• 1. Particle-size distribution (AASHTO T-11 and AASHTO T-27 test)
• 2. Liquid Limit (AASHTO T-89 test).
• 3. Plasticity Index (AASHTO T-90 test).
• Key Elements:
• 1. Grain Size:
• Gravel: Fraction passing 75mm sieve and retained on #10 (2mm) US sieve
• Sand: Fraction passing #10 sieve and retained #200 sieve
• Silt and Clay: Fraction passing #200 sieve
• 2. Plasticity:
• Term silty is applied when fine fractions have a PI < 10
• Term clayey is applied when fine fractions have PI > 11
• 3. Groups: (see Tables)
• Soils are classified into eight groups, A-1 through A-8.
• The major groups A-1, A-2, and A-3 represent the coarse grained soils.
• The A-4, A-5, A-6, and A-7 represent fine grained soils.
• The A-8 are identified by visual inspection.
A-7-5 A-7-6
Note:
If the soil is A-1 or A-3, we cannot use this chart
(mainly non-plastic soils)
• DESCRIPTION OF GROUPS & SUBGROUPS
• Group A-1: The typical material of this group is a well-graded
mixture of stone fragments or gravels, coarse sand, fine sand, and a
non-plastic or slightly plastic soil binder. This group also includes
stone fragments, gravels, coarse sand, volcanic cinders etc., without a
well-graded binder of fine material.
• Subgroup A-1-a: includes those materials consisting
predominantly of stone fragments or gravel, either with or without
a well-graded binder of fine material.
• Subgroup A-1-b: includes those materials consisting
predominantly of coarse sand with or without a well-graded soil
binder.
• Group A-3: The typical material of this group is fine beach sand or fine
desert blown sand without silty or clayey fines or with a small amount of
non-plastic silt. This group includes also stream-deposited mixtures of
poorly graded fine sand and limited amounts of coarse sand and gravel.
• Group A-2: This group includes a wide variety of “granular” materials,
which are at the borderline between the materials falling in groups A-1
and A-3 and the silty-clay materials of group A-4 through A-7. It include
any materials not more than 35% of which passes a #200 sieve and
which cannot be classified as A-1 or A-3 because of having fines content
or plasticity, or both, in excess of the limitations for those groups.
• Group A-4: The typical material of this group is a non-plastic or moderately
plastic silty soil 75% or more of which usually passes the #200 sieve. The
group also includes mixture of fine silty soil and up to 64% of sand and
gravel retained on the #200 sieve.
• Group A-5:The typical material of this group is similar to that described
under Group A-4, but it may be highly elastic, as indicated by high liquid
limit.
• GroupA-6: The typical material of this group is a plastic clay soil 75% or
more of which usually passes the #200 sieve. The group also includes
mixtures of fine clayey soil and up to 64% of sand and gravel retained on
the #200 sieve. Materials of this group usually have high volume change
between wet and dry states.
• Group A-7: The typical material of this group is similar to that described under
Group A-6, but it has the high liquid limits characteristics of the A-5 group and
may be elastic as well as subject to high volume change.
• Subgroup A-7-5: includes those materials which have moderate plasticity
indexes in relation to liquid limit and which may be highly elastic as well as
subject to considerable volume change.
• Subgroup A-7-6: includes those materials which have high plasticity
indexes in relation to liquid limit and which are subject to extremely high
volume change.
• Group A-8: The typical material of this group is peat and muck soil ordinarily
found in obviously unstable, swampy areas. Characterized by: - low density -
high compressibility - high water content and - high organic matter content.
• Group Index (GI)
• Soils containing fine-grained material are further identified by a
number called GROUP INDEX (GI). This was to establish the
relative RANKING of a soil within a subgroup or a group. This help in
evaluating the quality of a soil as a highway subgrade material. The
group index is given by the equation:
• GI = (F-35) [0.2+0.005(LL - 40)] + 0.01(F-15)(PI - 10)
• Where
• F = % passing #200 sieves expressed as whole number
• LL = Liquid Limit of soil
• PI = Plasticity Index of soil
• A higher value of the group index means that the poorer the soil as
subgrade material.
• The higher the value of GI the weaker will be the soil and vice versa.
Thus, quality of performance of a soil as a subgrade material is
inversely proportional to GI.
• A soil having GI of zero is considered as the best.
• If the equation gives negative value for GI, consider it zero.
• Always round off the GI to nearest whole number.
• GI = 0 for soils of groups A-1-a, A-1-b, A-2-4, A-2-5, and A-3.
• For groups A-2-6 and A-2-7 use partial GI for PI only:
• GI = 0.01(F-15)(PI - 10)
EXAMPLE
• Classify the soil data from Lab No. 1234 according to AASHTO
soil classification system.
SIEVE ANALYSIS (Lab No. 1234)

No. 10 12
No. 40 2
No. 200 0.9
• LL = 25.80
• PI = 10.52 ≈ 11
• F = 0.9 ≈ 1
SOLUTION
• Using AASHTO TABLE. Classify the soil (Top to bottom, then left to right)
A-7-5 A-7-6
SOLUTION
• Using AASHTO TABLE. Classify the soil (apply left to right, top to bottom)
A-7-5 A-7-6
SOLUTION
• Lab No. 1234 classify as A-2-6 (Silty, clayey gravel and sand)
• Use Partial GI
• GI = 0.01(F-15)(PI - 10)
• GI = 0.01(1-15)(11 - 10)
• GI = (-0.14)(1)
• GI = -0.14 ≈ 0
• Therefore, Lab No. 1234 classify as A-2-6 (0) Silty, clayey
gravel and sand.
SOLUTION
• Using PLASTICITY CHART. If the soil is A-1 or A-3, we cannot use this chart (mainly
non-plastic soils)
SOLUTION
• Given LL = 25.80 and PI = 11
Because %passing #200 < 35%.

The soil is classified as A-2-6
and not A-6. Then compute for PGI.
ACTIVITY NO. 3
• The sieve analysis and plasticity data are given in the table below.
Classify soils according to AASHTO soil classification system.
Sieve Size Mass Retained
LL = 5338 g 2 0
PL = 5236 g 1 1/2 657
1 564
3/4 490 LL = 110
1/2 497 PL = 50
3/8 476
No. 4 554
No. 10 321
No. 40 1232
No. 200 399
Pan 34
15 MINS
SOLUTION
Sieve Size Mass Retained %PASSING

2 0 100
1 1/2 657 88
1 564 77
3/4 490 68
1/2 497 59
3/8 476 50
No. 4 554 39
No. 10 321 33
No. 40 1232 10
No. 200 399 2.8
Pan 34
SOLUTION
A-7-5 A-7-6
SOLUTION
• Lab No. 1234 classify as A-2-7 (Silty, clayey gravel and sand)
• Use Partial GI
• GI = 0.01(F-15)(PI - 10)
• GI = 0.01(3-15)(60 - 10)
• GI = (-0.12)(50)
• GI = -6 ≈ 0
• Therefore, Lab No. 1234 classify as A-2-7 (0) Silty, clayey
gravel and sand.
ACTIVITY NO. 4
• The sieve analysis and plasticity data are given in the table below.
Classify soils according to AASHTO soil classification system.
SIEVE SIZE % FINER

No. 10 100
No. 40 99
N0. 100 90
N0. 200 75
LL 110
PL 50
10 MINS
SOLUTION
A-7-5 A-7-6
SOLUTION
• Soil classify as A-7
• For A-7-5 • For A-7-6
PI ≤ LL – 30 PI ≤ LL – 30
PI = LL-PL = 110 – 50 = 60 PI = LL-PL = 110 – 50 = 60
LL – 30 = 110 – 30 = 80
LL – 30 = 110 – 30 = 80
60 > 80 ×
60 ≤ 80 √ (OK)
• GI = (F-35) [0.2+0.005(LL - 40)] + 0.01(F-15)(PI - 10)
• GI = (75-35)[0.2+0.005(110-40)] + 0.01(75-15)(60-10)
• GI = 52
• Therefore, the soil classify as A-7-5 (52) clayey soils.
AND HIGHWAYS
Bureau of Research
and Standards
Online Comprehensive Materials Testing

Technology Seminar
ENGR. JEFFERSON ALBERT P. AN

Module 1- Soil and Soil Aggregates
DETERMINATION OF DENSITY OF SOIL IN-PLACE BY THE SAND-
CONE METHOD
Density of soil is defined as the weight/mass per unit volume. It is

a very significant engineering property of soils as strength is
dependent upon density.
The field density test is widely used as a control test in

embankment construction to ensure adequate compaction.
Highway specifications usually require that embankment should be
compacted to not less than 95% of a maximum density. Another
application of the test in highway work is in connection with the
determination of “pay quantity” of borrow materials, when the
borrow pit is not amenable to direct volumetric measurements.
CONE METHOD
What Is Field Density Test?
Various types of field density tests are being practiced in different

parts of the world for the evaluation of in-situ soil compaction and knowing
the relative degree of Compaction.
FDT, Full name is Field Density Test, is a Quality Control test carried out at
the site for knowing the increased Compaction or Density or achieved at a
site on the soil layer.
The FDT is carried out by Laboratory persons of Contractor under the

supervision of the QC team by the Consultant after completion of the
required number of passes by compactor/roller determined in test fills at
the site.
https://civiljungle.com/field-dry-density-test/
CONE METHOD
CONE METHOD
Degree of Compaction Requirement for Commonly Used Items
Item 104 Embankment
a. For Earth 95% minimum
b. For Berms 90% minimum
Item 200 Aggregate Sub-base Course 100% minimum
Item 201 Aggregate Base Course Same as Item 200
Item 202 Crushed Aggregate Base Course Same as Item 201
Item 203 Lime Stabilized Road Mix Base Same as Item 201
Course
Item 204 Portland Cement Stabilized Road Mix Same as Item 201
Base Course
Item 300 Aggregate Surface Course Same as Item 201
NOTE: Please always refer to Blue Book for the standard specifications of
different Items of Works
CONE METHOD
REQUIREMENT FOR SAND TO BE USED FOR FDT
1.Any Ordinary Sand

2.Clean and Un-cemented
3.Free-flowing
4.Passing No. 10 Sieve
5.Retained No. 200 Sieve
DETERMINATION OF DENSITY OF SOIL IN-PLACE BY THE SAND-CONE METHOD
Laboratory Testing
Procedure
Video Presentation
SAMPLE COMPUTATION
NUMBER 1
CONE METHOD
Unit weight of air-dry sand Actual moisture content
1. Container full of water 8.175 Trial I Trial II
2. Container, kg 6.067 11. Container + wet soil, g 604 664
3. Water, kg (1) – (2) 2.108 12. Container + dry soil, g 570 625
4. Volume of container, m3 (3)/1000 0.002108 13. Moisture, g (11) – (12) 34 39
5. Container filled w/air 14. Container, g 134 128
dry sand, kg 9.269 15. Dry soil, g (12) – (14) 436 497
6. Air-dry sand, kg (5) – (2) 3.202 16. Actual moisture content,
7. Unit weight of dry sand, % (13) / (15) x 100 7.8 7.85
kg/m3 (6) / (4) 1519 17. Average actual moisture
content, % 7.83
Mass of Sand to Fill Funnel

8. Mass of Jar + Sand, kg 10.885 SAMPLE IS ITEM 104: EMBANKMENT
9. Mass of Jar + Sand, kg
(after pouring) 10.435
10. Sand in Funnel, kg (8) – (9) 0.457
CONE METHOD
Field Density
18. Total material taken from hole, kg 5.873 24. Dry unit weight,
kg/m3 (23) / (17) / 100) + 1 1966
19. Mass of Jar + Sand, kg 10.885
25. Lab. compaction test data
20. Mass of Jar + Sand, kg (after pouring) 6.227 a. Maximum dry density, kg/m3 2006
b. Optimum moisture content, % 8.1
21. Sand to fill hole, kg (19) – (20) – (10) 4.201
26. Degree of compaction,
22. Volume of hole, m3 (21) / (7) 0.00277 % (24) / (25a) X 100 98%
23. Wet unit weight, kg/m3 (18) / (22) 2120

SAMPLE COMPUTATION
NUMBER 2
CONE METHOD
Unit weight of air-dry sand Actual moisture content
1. Container full of water 8.175 Trial I Trial II
2. Container, kg 6.067 11. Container + wet soil, g 635 659
3. Water, kg (1) – (2) 2.108 12. Container + dry soil, g 579 600
4. Volume of container, m3 (3)/1000 0.002108 13. Moisture, g (11) – (12) 56 59
5. Container filled w/air 14. Container, g 131 132
dry sand, kg 9.556 15. Dry soil, g (12) – (14) 448 468
6. Air-dry sand, kg (5) – (2) 3.489 16. Actual moisture content,
7. Unit weight of dry sand, % (13) / (15) x 100 12.5 12.6
kg/m3 (6) / (4) 1655 17. Average actual moisture
content, % 12.55
Mass of Sand to Fill Funnel

8. Mass of Jar + Sand, kg 10.974 SAMPLE IS ITEM 201: AGGREGATE BASE COURSE
9. Mass of Jar + Sand, kg
(after pouring) 10.495
10. Sand in Funnel, kg (8) – (9) 0.479
CONE METHOD
Field Density
18. Total material taken from hole, kg 5.356 24. Dry unit weight,
kg/m3 (23) / (17) / 100) + 1 2232
19. Mass of Jar + Sand, kg 10.974
25. Lab. compaction test data
20. Mass of Jar + Sand, kg (after pouring) 6.577 a. Maximum dry density, kg/m3 2320
b. Optimum moisture content, % 7.8
21. Sand to fill hole, kg (19) – (20) – (10) 3.918
26. Degree of compaction,
22. Volume of hole, m3 (21) / (7) 0.00237 % (24) / (25a) X 100 96%
23. Wet unit weight, kg/m3 (18) / (22) 2260

END OF SLIDES
Thank you for Listening
MOISTURE-DENSITY RELATION /
COMPACTION TEST
COMPACTION OF SOIL
 Compaction increases the strength characteristics of soils, which

increase the bearing capacity of foundations constructed over
them.
 Compaction also decreases the amount of undesirable settlement
of structures and increases the stability of slopes of
embankments.
 Compaction, in general, is the densification of soil by removal of
air, which requires mechanical energy. Simplistically, compaction
may be defined as the process in which soil particles are forced
closer together with the resultant reduction in air voids
COMPACTION OF SOIL
 Compaction of soils is achieved by reducing the volume of voids.

It is assumed that the compaction process does not decrease the
volume of the solids or soil grains.
 Compaction effect
MOISTURE-DENSITY RELATION /
COMPACTION TEST - VIDEO
EXAMPLE (Lab No. 1234)
GENERAL PRINCIPLE
 The degree of compaction of soil is measured by its dry unit
weight. When water is added during compaction it acts as a
softening agent on the soil particles.
Optimum moisture content (OMC) is the water content

at which the maximum dry unit weight is attained
PURPOSES OF COMPACTING SOIL
 Increased Shear Strength
 This means that larger loads can be applied to compacted
soils since they are typically stronger. Increased Shear
Strength equals increased bearing capacity, slope stability,
and pavement system strength.
 Reduced Permeability
 This inhibits soils’ ability to absorb water, and therefore
reduces the tendency to expand/shrink and potentially
liquefy .
 Reduced Compressibility
 Thisalso means that larger loads can be applied to
compacted soils since they will produce smaller settlements.
Types of Compaction Methods in the Laboratory
 The laboratory test generally used to obtain the maximum dry unit
weight of compaction and the optimum moisture content is called the
Proctor compaction test.
 It is named after R. R. Proctor (engineer in LA). He established that
compaction is a function of four variables:
 Dry density,
 Moisture Content
 Compactive Effort
 Soil Type
 There are two methods or tests:
 Standard Proctor test (AASHTO T99)
 Modified Proctor test (AASHTO T180)
COMPACTION CURVE
 The compaction curve is relationship between a soil water content
and dry unit weight.
 Soil sample was computed at different water contents in a cylinder of
volume 1000 cc and dry unit weight were obtained.
𝒀𝑾
 𝑫 𝟏 𝒎𝒄
 Where
 𝒀𝑫 = dry unit weight
 𝒀𝒘 = wet unit weight
 mc = moisture content
 Compaction curve is plotted between the water content as abscissa
and the dry density as ordinate
COMPACTION CURVE
 It is observed that the dry density increases with an increase in
water content till the maximum density is attained. With Further
increase in water content, the dry density decreases.
COMPACTION CURVE
 Optimum moisture content (OMC)
 The water content corresponding to maximum dry unit weight is
called optimum moisture content.
 Note that the maximum dry unit weight is only a maximum for a
specific compactive effort and method of compaction.
FACTORS AFFECTING COMPACTION
 Water content of the soil
 As water is added to a soil ( at low moisture content) it acts as a
softening agent on the soil particles and becomes easier for the
particles to move past one another during the application of the
compacting forces. As the soil compacts the voids are reduced and
this causes the dry unit weight ( or dry density) to increase.
 Soil type
 Soil type, grain size, shape of the soil grains, amount and type of clay
minerals present and the specific gravity of the soil solids, have a
great influence on the dry unit weight and optimum moisture
content. Uniformly graded sand or poorly graded in nature is difficult
to compact.
 Compactive Effort
 Increase compactive effort enables greater dry unit weight. For this
reason it is important when giving values of maximum dry unit
weight and Optimum moisture content to also specify the compaction
procedure (for example, standard (AASHTO T99) or modified
(AASHTO T180)).
 From the preceding observation we can see that
 1.As the compaction effort is increased, the maximum dry unit
weight of compaction is also increased.
 2.As the compaction effort is increased, the optimum moisture
content is decreased to some extent.
PROCESS OF COMPACTION
 Several samples are mixed at different water contents

 Compact according to the compaction test (standard or
modified).
 For each test find the moisture content of the compacted
soil.
 The dry unit weight is given by
𝒀𝑾
 𝑫
𝟏 𝒎𝒄
 Plot 𝑫 vs. mc
 From the plot, find OMC and 𝐃 (𝐦𝐚𝐱.)
EXAMPLE (Lab No. 1234)
COMPUTATION
Trial Number 1 2 3 4 5
Water added in ml 80 160 240 320 400
Mold + wet soil, g 5781 5821 5858 5883 5841
M o l d, g 3650 3650 3650 3650 3650
Wet soil, g 5781-3650= 2131 5821-3650= 2171 5858-3650= 2208 5883-3650= 2233 5841-3650= 2191
WET DENSITY, kg/m3
Container Number A B C D E
Weight of Container, g 44.02 44.02 40.26 47.25 47.44
Container + wet soil, g 153.7 145.2 140.8 130.7 137.8
Container + dry soil, g 145.2 136.9 131.8 122.1 127.9
Water, g 153.7-145.2= 8.5 8.3 9 8.6 9.9

145.2 - 44.02 =
Dry Soil, g 92.88 91.54 74.85 80.46
101.18
𝟖.𝟓
MOISTURE CONTENT, % (x-axis) 𝟏𝟎𝟏.𝟏𝟖
x 100 = 8.40 8.94 9.83 11.49 12.30
DRY DENSITY, kg/m3 (y-axis)

COMPUTATION
 Calculate the wet unit weight ( 𝑾)
𝑾𝒆𝒊𝒈𝒉𝒕 𝟐.𝟏𝟑𝟏 𝒌𝒈
 𝒘 = = 2259.81≈ 2260 kg/m3
𝑽𝒐𝒍𝒖𝒎𝒆 𝟎.𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟗𝟒𝟑 𝒎𝟑 (𝒗𝒐𝒍𝒖𝒎𝒆 𝒐𝒇 𝟒 𝒊𝒏.𝒎𝒐𝒍𝒅)
 The dry unit weight is given by

𝒀𝑾 𝟐𝟐𝟔𝟎
 𝑫 = = 2084.87 ≈ 2085 kg/m3
𝟏 𝒎𝒄 𝟏 𝟎.𝟎𝟖𝟒
 Plot 𝑫 vs. moisture content
 From the plot, find OMC and 𝐃 (𝐦𝐚𝐱.)

COMPUTATION
Trial Number 1 2 3 4 5
Water added in ml 80 160 240 320 400
Mold + wet soil, g 5781 5821 5858 5883 5841
M o l d, g 3650 3650 3650 3650 3650
Wet soil, g 5781-3650= 2131 5821-3650= 2171 5858-3650= 2208 5883-3650= 2233 5841-3650= 2191
𝟐.𝟏𝟑𝟏
WET DENSITY, kg/m3 = 2260 2302 2341 2368 2323
𝟎.𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟗𝟒𝟑
Container Number A B C D E
Weight of Container, g 44.02 44.02 40.26 47.25 47.44
Container + wet soil, g 153.7 145.2 140.8 130.7 137.8
Container + dry soil, g 145.2 136.9 131.8 122.1 127.9
Water, g 153.7-145.2= 8.5 8.3 9 8.6 9.9

145.2 - 44.02 =
Dry Soil, g 92.88 91.54 74.85 80.46
101.18
𝟖.𝟓
MOISTURE CONTENT, % (x-axis) 𝟏𝟎𝟏.𝟏𝟖
x 100 = 8.40 8.94 9.83 11.49 12.30
𝟐𝟐𝟔𝟎
DRY DENSITY, kg/m3 (y-axis) 𝟏 𝟎 𝟎𝟖𝟒
= 2085 2113 2132 2124 2069
MOISTURE-DENSITY RELATION
2140
MDD = 2133 kg/m3

2130 OMC = 10.40%
(9.83,2132)
2120 (11.49,2124)
DRY WEIGHT (kg/m3)
2110
(8.94,2113)
2100
2090
2080 (8.40,2085)
2070 (12.30,2069)
2060
8.00 8.50 9.00 9.50 10.00 10.50 11.00 11.50 12.00 12.50 13.00
MOISTURE CONTENT (%)

ACTIVITY NO.1
TRIAL NO. 1 2 3 4 5
Wt. of wet soil

1478 1590 1662 1672 1641
(grams)
Moisture
20 24 28 33 37
content
Volume of the mold: 1/30 ft3
For the five compaction tests shown in the table above.

Find the maximum dry unit weight (KN/m3) and its OMC
10 MINS
SOLUTION
 mass of wet soil = 14.50N x = 0.0145KN

.
 volume of mold = ft3 x ( x( = 0.000944 m3
𝑾𝒆𝒊𝒈𝒉𝒕 𝟎.𝟎𝟏𝟒𝟓𝑲𝑵
 wet unit weight = 𝒘 = = 15.4 KN/m3
𝑽𝒐𝒍𝒖𝒎𝒆 𝟎.𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟗𝟒𝟒𝒎𝟑
𝒀𝑾 𝟏𝟓.𝟒𝟎𝑲𝑵/𝒎𝟑
 Dry unit weight = 𝑫 = = 12.8 KN/m3
𝟏 𝒎𝒄 𝟏 𝟎.𝟐
SOLUTION
TRIAL NO. 1 2 3 4 5
wet unit
weight 15.4 16.5 17.3 17.4 17.1
(KN/m3)
Moisture
20 24 28 33 37
content
TRIAL NO. 1 2 3 4 5
wet unit
weight 15.4 16.5 17.3 17.4 17.1
(KN/m3)
dry unit weight
12.80 13.3 13.5 13.1 12.5
(KN/m3)
Moisture
20 24 28 33 37
content
MOISTURE-DENSITY RELATION
13.60
13.40
13.20
13.00
DRY WEIGHT (KN/m3)
12.80
MDD = 13.55 KN/m3
OMC ≈ (27.2%)
12.60
12.40
12.20
12.00
20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38
MOISTURE CONTENT (%)

AND HIGHWAYS
Bureau of Research
and Standards
Online Comprehensive Materials Testing
Technology Seminar
CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO (CBR)
What is CBR Testing?
• CBR Testing (California Bearing Ratio) is primarily undertaken
to provide data for road pavement design. It was first
developed by the California State Highway Department.
• It is a penetration test which is used to evaluate the subgrade
strength primarily of roads, pavements and foundations.
• The CBR test often forms part of the overall site investigation
and is useful for determining the thickness of materials
needed for the proposed construction.
Reference: https://www.ems-geotech.co.uk/cbr-testing/
This method covers the determination of the bearing ratio of soil when
compacted and tested in the laboratory by comparing the penetration load
of the soil to that of a standard material. Basically the test involves
measuring the resistance of soil to penetration by a standard cylindrical
piston, expressed as a percentage fraction of a standard resistance which
was originally measured in tests on a good quality crushed rock.
Thus, to say that a soil or aggregate has a CBR value of 20 means that in
the condition tested, the resistance to penetration of the standard piston
was 20% of the standard resistance of a compacted crushed stone (1360.8
kg load at a penetration of 2.54).
CBR Requirement for Commonly Used Items

Item 200 Aggregate Sub-base Course 30 Minimum
Item 201 Aggregate Base Course 80 Minimum
Item 202 Crushed Aggregate Base Course Same as Item 201
Item 203 Lime Stabilized Road Mix Base 100 Minimum
Course
Item 204 Portland Cement Stabilized Road Same as Item 203
Mix Base Course
Item 300 Aggregate Surface Course 80 Minimum
NOTE: Please always refer to Blue Book for the standard specifications of different
Items of Works
Laboratory Testing Procedure

Video Presentation
SAMPLE COMPUTATION
Density Determination
Number of Blows 10 30 65 Number of Blows 10 30 65
Test sample ID A B C Test sample ID 1 2 1 2 1 2
1. Compacted + 10190 10672 10958 4. Wet sample + can, g 563 645 618 542 581 594
sample mold, g
2. Mold, g 5,456 5,462 5,455 528 604 580 509 545 557
5. Can + OD sample, g
3. Sample, g, (1-2) 4,734 5,210 5,503 6. Dry Sample, g (5-8) 407 461 447 384 404 420
Compute Wet Unit Wt. kg/m3 2228 2452 7. Moisture, g, (4-5)

2590 35 41 38 33 36 37
first the MC Dry Unit Wt. kg/m3 2048 2256 2378 8. Can, g 121 143 133 125 141 137
Note :Allowable variation from 9. MC, %, (7/6) * 100 8.6 8.9 8.5 8.6 8.9 8.8
optimum is plus or minus 0.5%. If
10. Average, MC % 8.8 8.6 8.9
variation exceeds allowable, discard
specimen and mold another to meet MC after penetration, %
requirements. (Average)
USE: Calibration Factor of 5.2
Penetration
Test sample : 10 blows Test sample : 30 blows
Date & Time : Molded 09/03/2021 Date & Time : Molded 09/03/2021
(inch)
Tested 09/07/2021 Tested 09/07/2021
LOAD ÷3 LOA D ÷3
Dial Reading Total pounds psi Corrected psi Dial Reading Total pounds psi Corrected psi
0.0125 2.9 15 5 4.0 21 7

0.0250 6.3 33 11 8.7 45 15
0.0375 11.5 60 20 14.4 75 25
0.0500 17.3 90 30 21.9 114 38
x CF x CF
0.0750 34.6 180 60 44.4 231 77
0.1000 75.0 390 130 92.3 480 160
0.2000 288.5 1500 500 340.4 1770 590
0.3000 432.7 2250 750 490.4 2550 850
0.4000 525.0 2730 910 568.3 2955 985
0.5000 588.5 3060 1020 614.4 3195 1065
Corrected psi Corrected psi

CBR at 0.1 = x 100 = CBR at 0.1 = x 100 =
1000 1000

CBR at 0.2 = x 100 = CBR at 0.2 = x 100 =
1500 1500
USE: Calibration Factor of 5.2
Test sample : 65 blows Test sample :
Penetration
Date & Time : Molded Date & Time : Molded
(inch)
Tested Tested
LOAD ÷3 LOAD
Dial Reading Total pounds psi Corrected psi Dial Reading Total pounds psi Corrected psi
0.0125 6.9 36 12
0.0250 13.3 69 23
0.0375 20.2 105 35
0.0500 31.7 165 55
x CF
0.0750 63.5 330 110
0.1000 118.3 615 205
0.2000 398.1 2070 690
0.3000 568.3 2955 985
0.4000 634.6 3300 1100
0.5000 646.2 3360 1120

CBR at 0.1 = x 100 = CBR at 0.1 = x 100 =
1000 1500

CBR at 0.2 = x 100 = CBR at 0.2 = x 100 =
1500 1500
SWELL VALUES
Dial Reading, in. (96 h)
# Blows Initial Reading Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 Day 4 Swell

I 10 0.05 0.07 0.08 0.12 0.16 2.39%
II 30 0.04 0.05 0.07 0.10 0.14 2.18%
III 65 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.08 0.1 1.31%
Change in length in in. during

% Swell = soaking x 100
4.584 in.
Change in Length=
Reading in Day 4 minus
Reading in Day 1
Maximum Dry Density, kg/m3 2320
Optimum Moisture Content, % 8.8

1200
CBR@0.2 > CBR@0.1,

retest the sample. If CBR Value at 10 blows
1000
latter is still larger, use with Correction:
its value
800 PSI @ 0.1= 130
PSI @ 0.2= 500
LOAD (PSI)
600
Corrected PSI @ 0.1= 400
400
CBR @ 0.1 = (400/1000)x 100
= 40%
200 CBR @ 0.2 = (690/1500)x 100
= 46%
PENETRATION (mm)
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
0 0.1 0.2
1200
CBR@0.2 > CBR@0.1,

retest the sample. If CBR Value at 30 blows
1000
latter is still larger, use with Correction:
its value
800 PSI @ 0.1= 160
PSI @ 0.2= 590
LOAD (PSI)
600
400
CBR @ 0.1 = (490/1000)x 100
= 49%
200 CBR @ 0.2 = (790/1500)x 100
= 53%
PENETRATION (mm)
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
0 0.1 0.2
1200
CBR@0.2 > CBR@0.1,
retest the sample. If
CBR Value at 65 blows
1000 latter is still larger, use
with Correction:
its value
800 PSI @ 0.1= 205

PSI @ 0.2= 690
LOAD (PSI)
600
400
CBR @ 0.1 = (520/1000)x 100
= 52%
200 CBR @ 0.2 = (900/1500)x 100
= 60%
PENETRATION (mm)
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
0 0.1 0.2
10 BLOWS 30 BLOWS 65 BLOWS
CBR Values 46 53 60
Dry Density, kg/cu.m 2048 2256 2378
CBR Value at 100% MDD, where MDD= 2,320 kg/cu.m.

70
60
50
CBR VALUE
40
The CBR Value of
30
the Sample at
20
100% MDD is
10
approximately 56%
0
2000 2050 2100 2150 2200 2250 2300 2350 2400
DRY DENSITY
END OF SLIDES
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC
WORKS AND HIGHWAYS
BUREAU OF RESEARCH
AND STANDARDS
ONLINE COMPREHENSIVE MATERIALS TESTING

TECHNOLOGY SEMINAR

ABRASION TEST BY USE OF LOS ANGELES MACHINE
Abrasion test is carried out to test the hardness property of aggregates.
The principle of Los Angeles abrasion test is to find the percentage wear
due to relative rubbing action between the aggregate and
steel balls used as abrasive charge.
Reference: https://www.iricen.gov.in/LAB/res/pdf/test-15.pdf
Significance
This test evaluates the structural strength of coarse

aggregate. It gives an indication of quality as determined by
resistance to impact and wear. The results do not
automatically permit valid comparisons to be made
between sources distinctly different in origin, composition
or structure.
Abrasion Requirement for Commonly Used Items

Item 200 Aggregate Sub-base Course 50% maximum
Item 201 Aggregate Base Course Same as Item 200
Item 202 Crushed Aggregate Base Course 45% maximum
Item 203 Lime Stabilized Road Mix Base Course 50% maximum
Item 204 Portland Cement Stabilized Road Mix Same as Item 203
Base Course
Item 300 Aggregate Surface Course 45% maximum
Item 310 Bituminous Concrete Surface Course 40% maximum
Item 311 Portland Cement Concrete Pavement 40% maximum
Item 405 Structural Concrete Same as Item 311
NOTE: Please always refer to Blue Book for the standard specifications of different
Items of Works

Video Presentation
SAMPLE COMPUTATION
ABRASION SAMPLE A (Item 200) B (Item 201) C (Item 311)

1. Original Mass of
5005 5010 5003
Sample, g
2. Sample Retained on No.
2789 2447 2952
1.70 mm sieve, g
3. Percent Wear in %, [(1-
44.3 51.2 41
2) / 1] x 100
END OF SLIDES
AND HIGHWAYS
Bureau of Research
and Standards

MODULE 1- SOIL AND SOIL AGGREGATES
SPECIFIC GRAVITY AND ABSORPTION OF
COARSE AND FINE AGGREGATES
Significance
Bulk specific gravity is the characteristic generally used for calculation
of the volume occupied by the aggregate in various mixtures
containing aggregate including Portland cement concrete,
bituminous concrete, and other mixtures that are proportioned or
analyzed on an absolute volume basis.
Absorption values are used to calculate the change in the weight of

an aggregate due to water absorbed in the pore spaces within the
constituent particles, compacted to the dry condition, when it is
deemed that the aggregate has been in contact with water long
enough to satisfy most of the absorption potential.
SPECIFIC GRAVITY AND ABSORPTION OF COARSE AND FINE AGGREGATES
Absorption: The increase in weight due to water contained in the

pores of the material.
Bulk Specific Gravity (also known as Bulk Dry Specific Gravity): The
ratio of the weight in air of a unit volume of aggregate at a stated
temperature to the weight in air of an equal volume of gas-free
distilled water at the stated temperature.
Bulk SSD Specific Gravity: The ratio of the weight in air of a unit volume
of aggregate, including the weight of water within the voids filled to
the extent achieved by submerging in water for approximately 15
hours, to the weight in air of an equal volume of gas-free distilled water
at the stated temperature.
Apparent Specific Gravity: The ratio of the weight in air of a

unit volume of the impermeable portion of aggregate (does
not include the permeable pores in aggregate) to the
weight in air of an equal volume of gas-free distilled water at
the stated temperature.
SSD – Saturated Surface Dry: The condition in which the

aggregate has been soaked in water and has absorbed
water into its pore spaces. The excess, free surface moisture
has be removed so that the particles are still saturated, but
the surface of the particle is essentially dry.

Video Presentation
SAMPLE COMPUTATION
COARSE AGGREGATES
Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3
1. Weight in air of Saturated Surface Dry
4.56 5.12 4.42
Sample, kg
2. Weight in air of oven-dried sample, kg 4.51 5.06 4.37
3. Weight of Sample in water, kg 2.76 3.11 2.68
4. Absorption [(1-2)/ 2]*100 1.2% 1.18% 1.22%
Average: 1.2%
5. Bulk Specific Gravity (SSD) [1/ (1-3)] 2.53 2.55 2.54
Average: 2.54
6. Bulk Specific Gravity [2/ (1-3)] 2.51 2.52 2.51
Average: 2.51
7. Apparent Specific Gravity [2/ (2-3)] 2.58 2.60 2.59
Average: 2.59
END OF PART 1
FINE AGGREGATES

Video Presentation
SAMPLE COMPUTATION
FINE AGGREGATES
Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3
1. Weight in air of Saturated Surface Dry
0.505 0.502 0.495
Sample, kg
2. Weight in air of oven-dried sample, kg 0.492 0.489 0.482
3. Weight of Pycnometer bottle filled with
0.662 0.662 0.662
water, kg
4. Weight of Pycnometer + water + sample, kg 0.974 0.972 0.970
5. Absorption %, [(1-2) / 2] 2.64 2.66 2.70
Average: 2.67
6. Bulk Specific Gravity (SSD), [1 / (1+3-4)] 2.62 2.61 2.65
Average: 2.63
7. Bulk Specific Gravity, [2 / (1+3-4)] 2.55 2.55 2.58
Average: 2.56
8. Apparent Specific Gravity, [2 / (2+3-4)] 2.73 2.73 2.77
Average: 2.74
END OF SLIDES
What is Unit Weight of Aggregates?
 The unit weight of aggregates, as determined by AASHTO T 19, is an
important aggregate property for fresh PCC. The unit weight (or dry rodded
unit weight) is a measure of the weight of a specific volume of graded
aggregates and is used for monitoring aggregate consistency and in the
mix proportioning process.
 Consistent unit weights are a good indicator of uniformity in the aggregate
gradation and characteristics (from a single source).
 Widely varying unit weights have a significant impact on the mix
proportions. This will typically show up as a change in workability and water
demand.
 Changes to the aggregate characteristics, particularly gradation, will result
in changes to the unit weight
Reference:
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/pavement/materials/hmec/pubs/module_d/lesson10_wbt.pdf/
Significance
Values of unit weight/mass are used in

volumetric-gravimetric calculations. In volumetric
batching of concrete aggregates, the unit
weight/mass should be known to convert
weight/mass into loose volume.
Video Presentation CA and FA
SAMPLE COMPUTATION
FINE AGGREGATES LOOSE RODDED
1. Container + sample, kg 9.875 10.125
2. Container, kg 4.568 4.568
3. Sample, kg (1) - (2) 5.307 5.557
4. Vol. of Container, cu.m. 0.00281 0.00281
5. Unit weight/mass, kg/m3 (3)/(4) 1889 1976

COARSE AGGREGATES LOOSE RODDED
1. Container + sample, kg 9.995 10.275
2. Container, kg 4.568 4.568
3. Sample, kg (1) - (2) 5.427 5.707
4. Vol. of Container, cu.m. 0.00281 0.00281
5. Unit weight/mass, kg/m3 (3)/(4) 1931 2031

SOUNDNESS OF AGGREGATE BY USE OF
SODIUM SULFATE
SOUNDNESS
 This test is used to determine the resistance of aggregates

to disintegrate by saturated solutions of sodium sulphate.
 This test method furnishes information helpful in judging

the soundness of aggregates subject to weathering action,
particularly when adequate information is not available
from service records of the material exposed to actual
weathering conditions.
 If the sample contain less than 5 percent of any of the
sizes (CA & FA), that size shall not be tested
SOUNDNESS OF AGGREGATE BY USE OF
SODIUM SULFATE - VIDEO
EXAMPLE
Lab No. 2321

SOLUTION
Lab No. 2321
OD = 2366 g
WOD = 2324 g
SIEVE SIZES WT. RETAINED
3/8” (9.50mm) 0
No. 4 (4.75mm) 71
No. 8 (2.36mm) 284
No. 16 (1.18mm) 662
No. 30 (0.600mm) 449
No. 50 (0.300mm0 308
No. 100 (0.150mm) 402
No. 200 (0.075mm) 142
Pan 5
SOLUTION
SIEVE SIZES WT. RETAINED % PASSING

3/8” (9.50mm) 0 100
No. 4 (4.75mm) 71 97
No. 8 (2.36mm) 284 85
No. 16 (1.18mm) 662 57
No. 30 (0.600mm) 449 38
No. 50 (0.300mm0 308 25
No. 100 (0.150mm) 402 8
No. 200 (0.075mm) 142 2
Pan 5
 Note:
 For fine aggregates with less than 10 percent coarser than
the 9.5-mm (3/8-in.) sieve, assume sizes finer than the 300-
μm (No. 50) sieve to have zero-percent loss and sizes
coarser than the 9.5-mm (3/8-in.) sieve to have the same
loss as the next smaller size for which test data are available.
 For coarse aggregate with less than 10 percent finer than the
4.75-mm (No. 4) sieve, assume sizes finer than the 4.75-
mm (No. 4) sieve to have the same loss as the next larger
size for which test data are available.
 Note:
 For the purpose of calculating the weighted average,
consider any size in FA & CA that contains less than 5
percent of the sample to have the same loss as the average
of the next smaller and the next larger size, or if one of
these sizes is absent, to have the same loss as the next
larger or next smaller size, whichever is present
SOLUTION
SIEVE SIZES 1 2 3 4 5 6
0.150 - 8-2=6 100 99.5 - - -
0.300 0.150 25-8=17 100 99.8 - - -
0.600 0.300 38-25=13 100 95.6 4.4 4.4 0.572
1.18 0.600 57-38=19 100 93.4 6.6 6.6 1.254
2.36 1.18 85-57=28 100 91.8 8.2 8.2 2.296
4.75 2.36 97-85=12 100 96.7 3.3 3.3 0.396
9.5 4.75 100-97= 3 100 96.9 - 3.3* 0.099
TOTAL 4.617
𝟒 𝟓𝑿𝟏
2–3 X 100
𝟐 𝟏𝟎𝟎
DPWH ITEM 311.2.2 (FINE AGGREGATE)
“Ifthe Fine Aggregate is

subjected to five (5) cycles of the
sodium sulfate soundness Test,
the weighted loss shall not exceed
10 mass percent”.
ACTIVITY NO. 1
Lab No. 2322
OD = 4943 g
WOD = 4931 g
SIEVE SIZES WT. RETAINED
2 ½” (63mm) 0
2” (50mm) 134
1 ½” (37.5mm) 1679
1” (25mm) 1312
¾” (19mm) 567
½” (12.5mm) 234
3/8” (9.5mm) 988
No. 4 (4.75mm) 12
No. 200
3
(0.075mm)
Pan 1
15 MINS
SOLUTION
SIEVE SIZES WT. RETAINED %PASSING

2 ½” (63mm) 0 100
2” (50mm) 134 97
1 ½” (37.5mm) 1679 63
1” (25mm) 1312 37
¾” (19mm) 567 25
½” (12.5mm) 234 21
3/8” (9.5mm) 988 1
No. 4 (4.75mm) 12 0
No. 200 (0.075mm) 3 0.3
Pan 1
SOLUTION
SIEVE SIZES 1 2 3 4 5 6
63.0 37.5 37 5000 4776 224 4.480 1.643
37.5 19.0 38 1500 1456 44 2.933 1.115
19.0 9.5 24 1000 975 25 2.5 0.600
9.5 4.75 1 300 278 - 2.5 0.025
TOTAL 3.383
EFFECT OF ORGANIC IMPURITIES IN FINE
AGGREGATES ON STRENGTH OF MORTAR
ORGANIC IMPURITIES IN FINE AGGREGATES
 Organic impurities, usually in the form of tannic acid and its

derivatives, are typically present in fine aggregates such as
sand.
 These may interfere with the chemical reaction of hydration

and may effect the strength of the mortar or concrete
where the aggregates are used
Effect of Organic Impurities in Fine Aggregates
on Strength of Mortar
 This test method is of significance in making a final
determination of the acceptability of fine aggregates with
respect to the requirements of M 6(Standard Specification
for Fine Aggregate for Hydraulic Cement Concrete)
concerning organic impurities.
 This test method is only applicable to those samples which,

when tested in accordance with T 21 (Standard Method of
Test for Organic Impurities in Fine Aggregates for
Concrete), have produced a supernatant liquid with a color
darker than that of organic plate No. 3 or color solution
EFFECT OF ORGANIC IMPURITIES IN FINE
AGGREGATES ON STRENGTH OF MORTAR- VIDEO
Example
COMPUTATION
 Get the average of sample (unwashed aggregate)

. . .
 Average = 22.9
 Get the average of standard (washed aggregate)

. . .
 Average = 22.47
 Compute the Percent of standard / Relative Strength (RS)

.
 RS x 100 = x 100 = 102%
.
DPWH ITEM 311.2.2 (FINE AGGREGATE)
 “The fine aggregate shall be free from injurious

amounts of organic impurities. If subjected to the
colorimatic test for organic impurities and a color
darker than the standard is produced, it shall be
rejected. However, when tested for the effect of
organic impurities on strength of mortar by
AASHTO T 71, the fine aggregate may be used if
the relative strength at 7 & 28 days is not less than
95 percent”.

Highways Soil Testings

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

Highways Soil Testings

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS

Online Comprehensive Materials

1. To know the values, importance and significance of soil

2. Identify each kind of tests and its significance

3. To perform actually each test and apparatus use in each

4. Interpret test result and requirements

Soil – refers to the mineral material at or

– amount of water present at the

NOMINAL MAXIMUM SIZE – the smallest size of sieve in which all

Size of Sieve % Passing Requirements Remark

*Failed samples can be corrected through proper blending of materials to

Grading and Limit Tests are used in

- Determination of controlled values to be used

Maximum Dry Density – the highest dry density

Optimum Moisture Content – the optimal

For embankment materials,

- A field activity used to determine the actual dry

- Two samples for actual moisture content will be

-Determination of the presence of

- A test done in the planning stage in order to determine the design

For Item 200, minimum of 30

- Materials retained in No. 10 Sieve

- A major test used in the

B. FINE Grained Soil : Materials passing the No.

Inferior than fine grained

2. Clay - Smaller than 0.002 mm and larger than

4. Subject to changes in strength and volume

2. PEAT – there is the presence of considerable

2. Aggregates 1 sample per 1500 cu.m.

Time and again the need for accurate and scientific

The soil sampling the following should be observed:

1. Use new clean containers to avoid contamination.

2. Seal filled containers with clean, dry and tight

3. Label container clearly and properly

Sand - Hard and loose grains. Individual grains readily seen

In the wet state, an inorganic silt can be rolled into

It is a combination of sand, gravel,

1. Natural aggregate – taken from

2. Manufactured aggregate – includes

1. Fine aggregate – aggregate

2. Coarse aggregate –aggregate retained

1. Grading of the aggregate should be uniformed

3. Absorption – determine the porosity of the aggregate

4. Gradation – determine the proper mix proportion of the

FERDINAND P. VERGARA, JR.

METHOD A (INDIVIDUAL MASS RETAINED)

METHOD A (INDIVIDUAL MASS RETAINED)

• Calculate the total percentages passing, and the individual

METHOD A (INDIVIDUAL MASS RETAINED)

METHOD A (INDIVIDUAL MASS RETAINED)

1/2 135 70.4 70

3/8 220 67.8 68

No. 4 2645 36.0 36

No. 10 1789 14.6 15

No. 40 843 4.5 5

No. 200 65 3.7 3.7

METHOD B (CUMULATIVE MASS RETAINED)

METHOD B (CUMULATIVE MASS RETAINED)

• Calculate the total percentages passing, and the cumulative

METHOD B (CUMULATIVE MASS RETAINED)

METHOD B (CUMULATIVE MASS RETAINED)

2 0 0 0 100 100.0 100

1 1/2 1345 0+1345 = 1345 16.1 100 – 16.1 = 83.9 84

1 789 1345+789 = 2134 25.6 100 – 25.6 = 74.4 74