UNIVERSITY OF ZIMBABWE

FACULTY OF ENGINEERING AND THE BUILT

ENVIRONMENT
DEPARTMENT OF CONSTRUCTION AND CIVIL
ENGINEERING
STUDENT NAME: VUSHE MOSES T
REG NUMBER: R213377D
LEVEL: 3.1
PROGRAM CODE: HENCENG
COURSE CODE: CENG303
LABORATORY REPORT ON THE CARLIFORNIA BEARING
RATIO.
CARLIFORNIA BEARING RATIO(CBR)
INTRODUCTION
The CBR test which is a penetration test is an important step in the road and pavement
foundation design process. The test is done in laboratories to evaluate the strength of the soil
subgrades and the base course materials. This helps in selecting the pavement and base thickness.
This is done by measuring the resistance of the material to penetration of standard plunger under
controlled density and moisture conditions. CBR can be conducted in remoulded or undisturbed
sample. Engineers can determine if this strength is adequate to handle the desired road design or
if additional procedures need to be done to increase this strength. If the CBR value of a material
is too low, the layer thickness will be higher and it would not be cost-effective to work with such
a material.

OBJECTIVE OF THE EXPERIMENT

 To determine the bearing ratio of the sample of soil collected.

APPARATUS

 10-centimeter diameter cylindrical compaction mould equipped with a base and a collar
 Proctor hammer weighing 4,5kg
 Tares
 1000ml cylinders
 Mixer
 Controlled oven
 Metallic tray and a scoop
 Compression testing machine fitted with a hardened steel cylindrical plunger
 Curing basin
 Metal annular surcharge mass of 5.5 kg
 Moulds with wet soil obtained after carrying out compaction, with their contents still not
disturbed
 Perforated metal soaking plate with a central, vertical adjustable stem
 Supply of 5 kg and 10 kg metal annular soaking masses
PROCEDURE

COMPACTION

1. 7kg of soil sample determined to be clay was obtained.

2. The metallic tray and mixer were used to mix the soil and water added in 200ml
quantities from the cylinders.
3. A filter paper is placed on the base of the mould then the wet soil is added in three layers
applying 60 moulds per layer using the hammer provided.
4. A sample of 400g is also put into tares to determine the moisture content of the sample
5. The soil mass should fill the mould and extend into the collar but not more than a
centimetre.
6. The collar is then carefully removed and the soil that extends above the mould is trimmed
with a sharpened straight edge.
7. The mould and its contents are then weighed.
8. The procedure is repeated with different amounts of water being added to the soil
samples to produce three more moulds making them 4 in total.
9. Mould is the soaked for4 days

PENETRATION

1. The mould from the curing room was placed in the press and a 5.5 kg annular surcharge
mass was put centrally on top of the material.
2. Penetration plunger was lowered through the centre of the annular mass and an initial
load of 50 N applied to ensure correct seating and contact with the surface of the
material.
3. Proving ring micrometre gauge and the penetration micrometre gauge were set to zero.
4. The load was applied so that the plunger penetrated the material at a rate of one
millimetre per minute and readings of the applied load at the following penetrations:
0.5mm, 1.0mm, 1.5mm, 2.0mm, 2.5mm, 3.0mm, 4.0mm, 5.0mm, 7.5mm, 10.0mm and
12.5mm.
 5. A sample from the top 25 mm of the material in the mould was taken to determine its
moisture content.
6. Procedure was repeated on all the moulded specimens.
RESULTS
mass of water m2−m3
Moisture Content , w= ×100= ×100
mass of solids m3 −m1
mass of wet soil
Wet density , P=
volume of mould
P P
Dry Density= =
1+moisture content 1+ w

Volume of mould = 2250cm3

Table 1. RECORED VALUES FROM COMPACTION

MOULD NUMBER 06 9 12 32s

MASS OF MOULD 3350 4625 4597 4426
MASS OF 7156 8890 8806 8120
MOULD+WET
SOIL
WET DENSITY 1.690 1.896 1.871 1.642
MASS OF SAMPLE 3806 4265 4209 3644
TARE NUMBER AM3 13C 4BX AM9
MASS OF EMPTY 276 275 278 279
TARE
MASS OF TARE 676 675 678 679
+WET SOIL
MASS OF TARE + 613.37
DRY SOIL
MASS OF DRY 337.37
SOIL
MASS OF WATER 62.63
MOISTURE 18.56
CONTENT(%)
WATER ADDED 1400 1600 1800 1200
 DRY DENSITY 1427
LOAD IN N = DIAL GAUGE READING × 23

load
Percentage CBR at 2.5 mm= ×100
13250

load
Percentage CBR at 5 mm= ×100
20000

Table 2. PENETRATION RESULTS

MOULD 32 MOULD 06 MOULD 12 MOULD 9

Penetration
Dial gauge Load Dial gauge Load Dial gauge Load Dial gauge Load
(mm)
reading(mm) (N) reading(mm) (N) reading(mm) (N) reading (mm) (N)

0.5 3 69 0 0 12 276 7 161

1 4 92 1 23 22 506 34 782

1.5 5 115 4 92 31 713 50 1150

2 5 115 14 322 34 782 58 1334

2.5 6 138 24 522 41 943 63 1449

3 6 138 33 759 45 1035 67 1541

4 9 207 39 897 49 1127 72 1656

5 14 322 42 966 55 1265 77 1771

7.5 17 371 44 1012 58 1334 81 1863

10 19 437 50 1150 63 1449 87 2001

12.5 21 483 54 1242 65 1495 89 2047

Table 3. CBR values for the moulds

CBR at 2.5mm CBR at 5.0mm Mould number

2.430 2.76 14
3.645 3.105 32
3.125 3.22 4
3.645 3.45 U

The greater CBR of the two is the actual CBR for the mould hence CBR for 14 is 2.76, for 32 is
3.645, for 4 is 3.125 and for U is 3.645.

RESULT ANALYSIS

Figure 1. GRAPH OF DRY DENSITY AGAINST MOISTURE CONTENT

From the graph the optimum moisture content is

From the graph the maximum dry density is g/cm3

Figure 2. CBR AGAINST MOISTURE CONTENT GRAPH

From the graph in figure 3, the CBR that corresponds to the optimum moisture content is 3.51 as
a percentage and this is known as the design CBR.

POSSIBLE REASONS WHY THE GRAPH IS CONCAVE.

 Presence of air voids in the sample

 Improper compaction during the compaction process
 Top layer is soft
 Soaking the moulds for 1 day instead of 4 days.

CONCLUSION

SOURCES OF ERROR.

 Blows not being evenly distributed during compaction

  Different densities across the moulds

References

Head, K., 1982. Manual of Soil Lab Testing, s.l.: Pentech Press.
K.R, A., 2004. Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering. 6th Edition ed. NaiSakar Delhi:
Standard Publisher Distributors.
R.F., C., 2005. Craig's Soil Mechanics. 7th ed. New York: Taylor & Francis Group.