STUDENT CODE OF ETHIC

(SCE)
DEPT.OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

FACULTY OF CIVIL ENGINEERING & BUILT ENVIRONMENT

I, hereby confess that I have prepared this report on my own effort. I also admit not
to receive or give any help during the preparation of this report and pledge
that everything mentioned in the report is true.

ABID
_________________
Student Signature

MUHAMAD ABID BIN MOHD SHARIF

Name : …………………………………………
CF190240
Matric No.: …………………………………………
13 JUNE 2022
Date :…………………………………………
 GEOTECHNICS LAB

GROUP REPORT
Code of Subject BFC 31901
Code of Experiment U5
Title of Experiment FIELD DENSITY-SAND REPLACEMENT METHOD
Date of Experiment 23 MAY 2022
Session/ Group No. 20212022/GROUP B4
Name of Group Leader MUHAMAD ABID BIN MOHD SHARIF
Members of Group 1.MUHAMAD ABID BIN MOHD SHARIF (CF190240)
2.MUHAMMAD SYAHMI AFHAM BIN MOHD SABRI (AF210026)
3.ABDIAZIZ AHMED WARSAME (CF190185)
4.SULAIMAN ABDIRASID ABI (BF190015)
Lecturer/Instructor/Tutor IR. MUSTAFA KAMAL BIN SHAMSUDIN
Date of Submission 13 JUNE 2022
Criteria 1 2 3 4 5 SCR WT TSCR (%)

• Report is not • Report is lacks • Good representation • Accurate • Accurate

well precision of the report using representation of representation of the
represented tables and/or graphs the report using report using tables
• Precision of report is tables and/or and/or graphs
acceptable graphs • Graphs and tables are
Report • Report is fairly labeled and titled
precise • Report is precise
6

• Trends/ • Trends/ • Trends/patterns are • Trends/ patterns are • Trends/ patterns are
patterns are patterns are not logically analyzed for logically analyzed logically analyzed
not analyzed analyzed the most part • Questions are • Questions are
• Questions are • Answers to • Questions are answered in answered thoroughly
Analysis questions are answered in complete sentences and in complete
not answered
6
• Analysis is not incomplete complete sentences • Analysis is sentences
relevant • Analysis is • Analysis is general thoughtful • Analysis is insightful
inconsistent

• No discussion • A discussion • A discussion • Accurate discussion • Accurate discussion

and conclusion statement and statement and statement and statement and
were included conclusion of conclusion of the conclusion of the conclusion of the
or showed the results is results of the results of the results of the
little effort and incomplete with experiment indicates experiment experiment indicates
reflection on little reflection whether results indicates whether whether results
Discussion &
the experiment on the support the results support the support the
Conclusion 8
experiment hypothesis hypothesis hypothesis
• Possible sources of • Possible sources of
error identified error identified and
lesson learnt from
the experiment was
discussed and
concluded

Name of Accessor: Signature: Date: Total Score

/100

Comment by Assessor Acknowledgement of Receive

 FACULTY: CIVIL ENG. & BUILT ENVIRONNMENTAL PAGE NO.:
EDITION:
DEPARTMENT: CIVIL ENGINEERING
REVIEW NO.:
TEST TITLE : FIELD DENSITY - SAND EFFECTIVE 14/05/20
REPLACEMENT METHOD DATE:
AMENDMENT 14/05/20
DATE:

1.0 OBJECTIVE
Determine the in situ density of natural or compacted soils using sand pouring cylinders.

2.0 LEARNING OUTCOME

At the end of this experiment, students are able to:

• Understand the relationship between compaction effort and the density of soil on site.
• Obtain the in situ density of natural soil and compacted soil.

3.0 THEORY

Sometimes it is important to know the density of in-situ for design purpose. This can be done by mean
of the sand replacement method. Determining the in situ density of natural or compacted soils using
sand pouring cylinders requires a simple method of analysis. The in situ density of natural soil is needed
for the determination of bearing capacity of soils, for the purpose of stability analysis of slopes, for the
determination of pressures on the underlying strata for the calculation of settlement and the design of
underground structures. This along with the Core Cutter is one of the older, more labor intensive
methods of determining density. It is used on boulder clays and granular fills.

FIGURE 1 Sand Cone Replacement Equipments

4.0 TEST EQUIPMENTS

1. Sand pouring cylinder of 3 litre/16.5 litre capacity, mounted above a pouring cone and
separated by a shutter cover plate.

2. Tools for excavating holes; suitable tools such as scraper tool to make a level surface.

3. Cylindrical calibrating container with an internal diameter of 100 mm/200 mm and an internal
depth of 150 mm/250 mm fitted with a flange 50 mm/75 mm wide and about 5 mm thick
surrounding the open end.

4. Balance to weigh into an accuracy of 1 g.

5. Metal containers to collect excavated soil.

6. Metal tray with 300 mm/450 mm square and 40 mm/50 mm deep with a 100 mm/200 mm
diameter hole in the centre.

7. Suitable non-corrodible airtight containers.

8. Thermostatically controlled oven with interior on non-corroding material to maintain the

temperature between 105°C to 110°C.

9. Glass plate about 450 mm/600 mm square and 10mm thick.

10. MATERIAL: Clean, uniformly graded natural sand passing through 1.00 mm IS. Sieve and
retained on the 600 micron IS sieve. It shall be free from organic matter and shall have been
oven dried and exposed to atmospheric humidity.

11. A desiccator with any desiccating agent other than sulfuric acid.
5.0 PROCEDURES

(I) Calibration of the cylinder:

1. Measure the internal dimensions of the calibrating container and find its volume.

2. Fill the clean, uniformly graded standard sand in the sand pouring cylinder up to a height of 1cm
below the top with the shutter closed. Find out the initial mass of the sand, (M0). This mass
should be maintained constant throughout the test for which the calibration is used.

3. Allow the sand of volume equal to that of the calibrating container to run out of the cylinder by
opening the shutter. Close the shutter.

4. Place the sand cone-pouring cylinder on a paper placed on a horizontal table. Open the shutter
again and allow the sand to flow and fill the cone.

5. Close the shutter. Find the mass of sand on paper, (M)

6. Repeat steps 2-4 at least thrice and find the mean mass, (Mi).

(II) Determination of bulk density of sand:

1. Place the sand-pouring cylinder concentrically on the top of the calibrating container with the
shutter closed, making sure that a constant mass (M0) is maintained.

2. Open the shutter of the cylinder and allow the sand to move into the container. When no further
movement is seen, close the shutter and find the mass of sand left in the cylinder, (M 2).

3. Repeat steps 2-3 at least thrice and find the mean mass (M2).

(III) Determination of field density of soil

1. Level surface of the soil in the open field.

2. Place a metal tray on the surface haring a circular hole of 10 cm diameter at the centre. Dig a
hole of this diameter up to about 15 cm depth. Collect all the excavated soil in a tray and find the
mass of excavated soil, (M).

3. Remove the tray and place the sand-purring cylinder concentrically on the hole. Open the shutter
and allow the sand to run into the hole till no further movement of sand is noticed. Close the
shutter and determine mass of sand which is left in the cylinder, (M3).

4. The representative sample is taken from the excavated soil for determination of water content.
6.0 RESULT AND CALCULATIONS

A) Determination of Mass of sand in the cone

1 .Volume of calibrating container (Vc) (m3)

1.178 x 10-3
2. Mass of sand in the cylinder before pouring (M0) (g.)
7000
3. Mean mass of sand in cone (Mi) (g.)
350

B) Determination of bulk density of sand

1. The mean mass of sand left in the cylinder after pouring (M2)
5200
(g)
2. Mass of sand filling calibrating container, Mc=M0-Mi-M2 (g.)
1450
3. Bulk density of sand p s =MC/VC (g/cm3) 1.23

C) Bulk density and unit weight of soil

1 .Mass of wet soil from the hole (M) (g)

3000
2. Mass of sand in the cylinder after pouring into the hole (M3)
5800
(g)
3. Mass of sand in the hole MS=M0- MI - M3 (g) 850

M
4. Bulk density of soil, =  s (g/cm3) 4.34
Ms

5. Dry density of soil d = (g/cm3)
1+ w 3.74

C) Moisture content (w)

Weight of wet soil (g) 58

Weight of dry soil (g) 50
Weight of container (g) 32
7.0 QUESTIONS

1. Field engineers are often found talking of optimum moisture content (OMC) conditions while
constructing of road sub-grade. Define and explain this term, bringing out clearly the importance it
possess and the methods by which it is controlled.

- Optimum moisture content (OMC) is the moisture content at which the soil attains maximum dry
density. This OMC value is with respect to the specific amount of compaction energy applied
to the soil to ensure the soil have no voids in between the soil layers. Improper compaction
may lead to settlement of soils which can cause failure to the building and collapse. Method to
obtainthe control value can be obtained by performing standard proctor test but it is best to use
modifiedproctor test to represent the actual condition at site.

2. Discuss the method of compaction of (a) cohesion less soil (b) cohesive soils.

(a) cohesion less soil

- Cohesion less soil such as sandy and gravely soil can be compacted with vibratory rollers or
smooth wheel roller. As pressure is applied on these type of soil, voids between them can be easily
be compacted as they have larger particle and larger voids.

(b) cohesive soils.

- Cohesive soil such as clayey soil is not suitable to be compacted using vibratory rollers as it has
larger surface area. Sheepsfoot roller is suitable to compact cohesive soil as it has smaller surface
area to break in the clods and filling large spaces.

8.0 CONCLUSION

Sand replacement method is used to determine the field unit weight of soil at site to verify the degree of
compaction with the modified proctor test performed at lab. This is to ensure the soil is well-compacted
to avoid major settlement of soil after constructing building on top of the soil. It is also important to
identify the proper ways and equipments for different type of soil to reach the highest degree of
compaction.