St.

Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING 1: SOIL MECHANICS

Laboratory Exercise No. 1

Distributed Soil Sampling, Labeling and Storage

A report submitted to:

Engr. Ricardo Salvador V. Gayatin

By:

B.S. Civil Engineering 4

Group No. 2

Members:

Pabia, Ram John

Odango, Rona Micah

Sobrino, Carlo James

Date performed: ,2018

Date submitted: ,2018

 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

I. INTRODUCTION/OBJECTIVES

Soil is all the fragmented mineral material at or near the surface of the earth plus the air,

water, organic matter and other substances which may be included therein. Soil is very important

in the field of Civil Engineering. It is used as a material for our construction and serves as a

support for our structural foundation.

In this experiment, we will learn how to describe soil, determine its color, moisture

content, reaction to hydrochloric acid (HCI) and its consistency. Ideas on proper storage and

labelling will also be acquired during the experiment.

Objectives:

1. Be able to correctly obtain a soil sample.

2. Label and store the soil sample.

3. Plot the soil profile.

II. ESSENTIAL MATERIALS and APPARATUS

Soil Auger

Moisture tight sample containers

Spade

Petro wax or paraffin

Shovel

III. PROCEDURE

1. Clear the area of grass and vegetation where the sample is to be obtained.
 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

2. With the use of a soil auger, bore the soil until the desired depth is reached and obtain a

distributed sample.

3. Record the depth of each type of soil strata.

4. If a undistributed sample is to be obtained, a large hole should be dig up but the middle

portion of the hole is not taken off.

5. Trim the middle portions of the soil until the exact size is obtained. Make sure that the

sides are enclosed in a container to prevent crumbling.

6. Place a cover of paraffin wax or other means of covering on the sample. Classify and

label the sample.

7. Place the soil in the container with adequate space such as canvass bags, cans and bins

for large quantities and glass jars for small samples.

8. Place a label on the sample and prepare the corresponding sample data for filling

purposes.

9. For distributed sample, cover sample with petro wax or paraffin after it has been placed

in a container.

10. Store sample in a cool room.

11. Plot the soil profile based on the record of each group.

IV. DATA and CALCULATIONS

Depth
Description
15 cm 30 cm 45 cm 60 cm

Color Gray Gray and brown Brown Reddish brown

 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

Moisture Content dry dry Slightly moist moist

HCL Reaction None None None None

Consistency Slightly firm Slightly firm Almost firm firm

V. DISCUSSION

One of the most important factors in the determination of the properties of soil is the

distributed soil sampling. A correct method for sampling will result to an accurate

outcome. It was made to be distributed to avoid bias on the soil we will be using. The

correct use of the boring apparatus must be practiced to prevent delays during the

experimentation and to acquire decent samples or results. Storage of the acquired samples

must be taken into account. The container must have the necessary features to preserve

the needed characteristics or properties of the sample which we will be looking for and

will be using. Proper preparation methods for the sample, before storing, must be made to

ensure the quality of the sample. Lastly, labelling the sample should be done correctly to

avoid confusion and result to smooth flow experimentation.

Regarding the results, the colours of the soil form different depths were close to each

other. All exhibits brownish colour. The moisture content shows that soil, as we go

deeper, exhibit an increase in moisture content. The soil from all depths was found to be

unreactive to Hydrochloric Acid. Consistency was found to be firm at first and sticky for

the latter depths

 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

VI. CONCLUSION

Laboratory Exercise No.1 only takes a small amount of effort and time. After the

experiment was done, we conclude that it is easier to dig a hole using the auger with the

help of 3-4 persons. The first person will ride the auger to serve as an added weight to

easily penetrate the soil and the rest will be the one to twist the auger as shown in our

documentation below.

The first hole that we dug is 15 cm of deep, it consists of grey, dry and slightly firm

soil. This hole is slightly full of roots from grasses and small amount of aggregates.

The second hole is 30 cm deep, it consists of grey and brown, dry and slightly firm

soil. The tiny aggregates are still present in this hole.

The third hole is 45 cm deep, it consists of brown, slightly moist and almost firm soil.

Only few aggregates where found in this hole.

The last hole is 60 cm deep, it consists of reddish brown, moist and firm soil. Large

aggregates where found at this kind of hole.

The collected soil sample where place inside the container separately, we have

observed that the moisture appears inside the container.

 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING 1: SOIL MECHANICS

Laboratory Exercise No. 2

Preparing a Distributed Soil Sample to be used in various Laboratory Test

A report submitted to:

Engr. Ricardo Salvador V. Gayatin

By:

B.S. Civil Engineering 4

 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

Group No. 2

Members:

Pabia, Ram John

Odango, Rona Micah

Sobrino, Carlo James

Dolendo, Francis Benedic

Esteban, Joyje Mae

Date performed: ,2018

Date submitted: ,2018

 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

I. INTRODUCTION

Preparation of the sample for a certain use is important. Preparation refers to the way in

which a sample is treated prior to each analysis. The two main purposes of sample

preparation are to remove interferences and to increase sensitivity. The prepared sample must

also be in a phase compatible with the analytical instrument. The design of a method of a

sample preparation must be fully integrated with the analytical method. Preparation ensures

positive results from the experiment.

The objectives for this experiment is to be able to know how to prepare a disturbed soil

sample to be use in various laboratory tests.

II. ESSENTIAL EQUIPMENTS and MATERIALS

50 kg balance

Oven or gas stove

Standard sieves

Rubber mallets

Sample splitter

III. PROCEDURE

1. Dry the sample by air with the use of an oven, but the temperature must not exceed 60°C.

2. Break the sample with the use of the rubber mallet or rubber tipped pestle.

3. Obtain representative sample of the amount required to perform the desired test by the

splitting or quartering method.

 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

4. Thoroughly mix the material passing through #10 sieve with the use of a sample splitter

or by quartering method. Prepare it for grain size analysis and specific gravity

determination.

5. Separate the material which is not used in step 4 by means #40 sieve and grind those that

cannot pass through with a pulverizing apparatus in such a manner as to break up the

aggregation without breaking the individual grains. Disregard the material retained and

again thoroughly mix the materials passing through #40 sieves for physical test.

IV. DATA and RESULTS

Test Test of Sample Weight

Specific Gravity Disturbed 200 g

Grain size Oven Dried 400 g

Liquid Limit Disturbed, Not Dried 250 g

Composition Disturbed, Not Dried 15 g

V. DISCUSSION

In getting the oven dry of soil sample, we pulverized the grains of soil with the use of

rubber mallet and it needs to be scraped off due to the soil that sticks in the mallet. After we

pulverized it, we separate the soil sample using a splitter and we obtained the representative

sample from it. The next step we conduct is that we thoroughly mixed the material that
 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

passes the No. 10 sieve. We use also the No. 40 sieve for the separated materials and grind

those that cannot pass thorough.

VI. CONCLUSIONS/ RECOMMENDATIONS

This experiment in getting the oven dry sample takes a lot of time to ensure that the

moist where evaporated from the sample. The way we pulverized the sample is not quite hard

for us. In line of sieve analysis, we analysed the soil using the equipment which is the

standard sieve.
 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING 1: SOIL MECHANICS

Laboratory Exercise No. 3

Preparation of Undisturbed Soil Sample for Test

A report submitted to:

Engr. Ricardo Salvador V. Gayatin

By:

B.S. Civil Engineering 4

Group No. 2

Members:

Pabia, Ram John

Odango, Rona Micah

Sobrino, Carlo James

Dolendo, Francis Benedic

Esteban, Joyje Mae

Date performed: ,2018

Date submitted: ,2018

 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

I. INTRODUCTION/ OBJECTIVES

Determination of the specific gravity of the soil

II. ESSENTIAL MATERIALA and EQUIPMENT

Distilled water

Pycnometer Bottles

Thermometer

Oven

Digital Balance

III. PROCEDURE

A. Bottle Calibration

1. In a pycnometer, add distilled water at room temperature up to the meniscus

of the calibration mark of the bottle.

2. Dry the outside of the bottle and up to the neck of the inside part.

3. Weigh the bottle plus the water.

4. Measure the room temperature.

 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

5. Place the thumb over the open end of the bottle and turn it upside down and

back to mix the water, and then take the temperature.

6. Heat the bottle by placing it in a warm water bath. Repeat steps 2 to 5 each

time removing enough water to bring the meniscus down to the calibration

mark.

7. Plot the calibration curve.

B. Specific Gravity Determination

a.) Cohesionless Soil

1. Put 150 grams of oven dried soil passing #10 sieve in to a calibrated

pycnometer which is already half full of distilled water.

2. Remove all air which is entrapped in the soil by boiling, accompanied by

continuous agitation for 10 minutes,

3. Cool the bottle within the range of calibration curve of the bottle.

4. Add water to bring the bottom of the meniscus to the calibration curve.

5. Dry the bottle, both the outside and inside portion.

6. Weigh the bottle with the soil and water in it.

7. Record the temperature of the bottle.

b.) Cohesive Soil

1. Make a sample of the soil to be tested in a smooth paste by mixing itwith

distilled water. The sample should be approximately 50 grams passing

through #10 sieve in dry weight.

2. Pour the paste into the pycnometer.

3. Follow steps 2-7 in procedure a.)

 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

4. Pour the entire mixture in the large evaporating dish of known weight. Rinse

the pycnometer to ensure the collection of all the soil.

5. Dry the soil, cool it and determine its weight.

IV. DATA and CALCULATION

A. Bottle Calibration

(Cold) Trial 1 Trial 2

WFLASK + Water (125 ml) 258.3 g 253.6 g

Room temperature 32 ° C 32° C

Temperature 28 ° C 28.5

(Hot)

WFLASK + Water 257.3 g 253.3 g

Room temperature 32 ° C 32° C

Temperature 44 ° C 40° C

Where:

Ws = dry weight of soil = 88.2 g

W1 = weight of pycnometer + soil + water = 422. 7 g

W2 = weight of pycnometer + water = 253.9 g

Gs = 2.632g
 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

k = 0.9376

Gs = kGs

GS =(0.9376)(2.632)

= 2.468

B. Specific Gravity Determination

B. Cohesive Soil

 W dry soil + water = 270.2 g

 W evaporating dish + dry soil = 182 g

 W evaporating dish + water + dry soil = 302.2 g

 W evaporating dish = 32 g

 W pycnometer + soil + water = 403.5 g

 W pycnometer = 133.3 g

 W water = 120.2

 W dry soil = 150 g

First Trial (Normal Water)

 Room Temperature = 32 ° C

 Temperature = 44 ° C

 W sample = 150 g
 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

Second Trial (Cold Water)

 Room Temperature = 32 ° C

 Temperature = 34 ° C

 W sample = 150 g

Gs = 2.632g

k = 0.9376

Gs = kGs

GS =(0.9376)(2.632)

= 2.468

Typical Values of the Gs of Fluids

Soil Specific Gravity

Clean Sands 2.67

Silty Stained Sand 2.67-2.70

Inorganic Clays 2.70- 2.80

Organic Soils 2.80- 4.30

 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

V. DISCUSSION

In order to determine the specific gravity of soil, the room temperature should be

around 20 degrees Celsius and if the temperature is different, it should be multiplied by

the correction factor using the formula in this exercise.

VI. CONCLUSION/RECOMMENDATION

In order to determine the specific gravity of the soil, the temperature and the weight

of soil must be considered in this experiment. We conclude that the greater the

temperature the lesser the specific gravity of soil; the lesser the temperature the greater

the specific gravity of soil. The sample must be free from any excess particles that may

affect the experiment.

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING 1: SOIL MECHANICS

Laboratory Exercise No. 4

Specific Gravity Test

A report submitted to:

Engr. Ricardo Salvador V. Gayatin

 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

By:

B.S. Civil Engineering 4

Group No. 2

Members:

Pabia, Ram John

Odango, Rona Micah

Sobrino, Carlo James

Dolendo, Francis Benedic

Esteban, Joyje Mae

Date performed: ,2018

Date submitted: ,2018

 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

VII. INTRODUCTION/ OBJECTIVES

Determination of the specific gravity of the soil

VIII. ESSENTIAL MATERIALA and EQUIPMENT

Distilled water

Pycnometer Bottles

Thermometer

Oven

Digital Balance

IX. PROCEDURE

C. Bottle Calibration

8. In a pycnometer, add distilled water at room temperature up to the meniscus

of the calibration mark of the bottle.

9. Dry the outside of the bottle and up to the neck of the inside part.

10. Weigh the bottle plus the water.

11. Measure the room temperature.

12. Place the thumb over the open end of the bottle and turn it upside down and

back to mix the water, and then take the temperature.

 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

13. Heat the bottle by placing it in a warm water bath. Repeat steps 2 to 5 each

time removing enough water to bring the meniscus down to the calibration

mark.

14. Plot the calibration curve.

D. Specific Gravity Determination

c.) Cohesionless Soil

8. Put 150 grams of oven dried soil passing #10 sieve in to a calibrated

pycnometer which is already half full of distilled water.

9. Remove all air which is entrapped in the soil by boiling, accompanied by

continuous agitation for 10 minutes,

10. Cool the bottle within the range of calibration curve of the bottle.

11. Add water to bring the bottom of the meniscus to the calibration curve.

12. Dry the bottle, both the outside and inside portion.

13. Weigh the bottle with the soil and water in it.

14. Record the temperature of the bottle.

d.) Cohesive Soil

6. Make a sample of the soil to be tested in a smooth paste by mixing itwith

distilled water. The sample should be approximately 50 grams passing

through #10 sieve in dry weight.

7. Pour the paste into the pycnometer.

8. Follow steps 2-7 in procedure a.)

9. Pour the entire mixture in the large evaporating dish of known weight. Rinse

the pycnometer to ensure the collection of all the soil.

 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

10. Dry the soil, cool it and determine its weight.

X. DATA and CALCULATION

A. Bottle Calibration

(Cold) Trial 1 Trial 2

WFLASK + Water (125 ml) 258.3 g 253.6 g

Room temperature 32 ° C 32° C

Temperature 28 ° C 28.5

(Hot)

WFLASK + Water 257.3 g 253.3 g

Room temperature 32 ° C 32° C

Temperature 44 ° C 40° C

Where:

Ws = dry weight of soil = 88.2 g

W1 = weight of pycnometer + soil + water = 422. 7 g

W2 = weight of pycnometer + water = 253.9 g

Gs = 2.632g

k = 0.9376

Gs = kGs
 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

GS =(0.9376)(2.632)

= 2.468

B. Specific Gravity Determination

B. Cohesive Soil

 W dry soil + water = 270.2 g

 W evaporating dish + dry soil = 182 g

 W evaporating dish + water + dry soil = 302.2 g

 W evaporating dish = 32 g

 W pycnometer + soil + water = 403.5 g

 W pycnometer = 133.3 g

 W water = 120.2

 W dry soil = 150 g

First Trial (Normal Water)

 Room Temperature = 32 ° C

 Temperature = 44 ° C

 W sample = 150 g

Second Trial (Cold Water)

 Room Temperature = 32 ° C

 Temperature = 34 ° C
 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

 W sample = 150 g

Gs = 2.632g

k = 0.9376

Gs = kGs

GS =(0.9376)(2.632)

= 2.468

Typical Values of the Gs of Fluids

Soil Specific Gravity

Clean Sands 2.67

Silty Stained Sand 2.67-2.70

Inorganic Clays 2.70- 2.80

Organic Soils 2.80- 4.30

B. DISCUSSION

C. CONCLUSION/RECOMMENDATION
 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING 1: SOIL MECHANICS

Laboratory Exercise No. 5

Determination of Water Content, Unit Weight, Void Ratio and Degree of Saturation

A report submitted to:

Engr. Ricardo Salvador V. Gayatin

By:

B.S. Civil Engineering 4

 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

Group No. 2

Members:

Pabia, Ram John

Odango, Rona Micah

Sobrino, Carlo James

Dolendo, Francis Benedic

Esteban, Joyje Mae

Date performed: ,2018

Date submitted: ,2018

I. OBJECTIVE
 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

To be able to know the water content, unit weight and void ratio and degree of

saturation of a soil sample through a laboratory process, formula and yielded or

gathered data.

II. ESSENTIAL EQUIPMENTS, MATERIALS and APPARATUS

Container

Balance

Oven

Desiccator

Large knife

Wire saw

Spatula

Small metal can

III. POCEDURE

A. Water Content

1. Weigh the container without soil sample.

2. Weigh the container and soil sample.

3. Dry the container with soil sample at a constant temperature between 105°C to

110°C.

4. The drying time will depend upon the size and type of soil. (1-6 hrs)

5. Remove the container and let it cool to room temperature.

6. If the soil sample is to be weighed within one hour, cool it at room temperature. If the

sample is not weighed at once, it should be placed in a desiccator for cooling.

 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

B. Weight Determination

1. Trim a sample of soil about ½ “diameter and 2” to 3” long. Surface should be smooth

and rounded.

2. Weigh the 0.1 gram.

3. Cover with a thin coating of paraffin and weigh again. Compute the volume of

paraffin from the weight of the paraffin. The specific gravity of the paraffin is about

0.9.

4. Immerse the coated sample in the graduated cylinder and determine its displacement.

The volume of the sample paraffin.

5. Compute the unit weight in grains/cu. m. or pound/ cu. ft.

C. Void Ratio

1. Assume specific gravity of the soil or the value form Lab. Ex. No. 3.

2. Compute the unit weight, water content, void ratio and degree of saturation of the

soil.

IV. DATA and CALULATIONS

A. Water Content

 Wcontainer = 54.3 g

 Wcontainer + soil = 402 g

 Wsoil = 347.7 g

 Wdry soil = 275.7 g

 Wwater = 72 g

𝑊 72
Water content = 𝑊 𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟 = 275.7 𝑥 100 = 26.12 %
𝑑𝑟𝑦 𝑠𝑜𝑖𝑙
 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

B. Unit Weight Determination

 Wsample= 44.9 g

 Wsample+ paraffin = 49.6 g

 Wparaffin = 4.7 g

𝑘𝑔 1000𝑔 𝑔
 Density paraffin = 0.9×1000𝑚3 × = 900,000 𝑚3
1𝑘𝑔

𝑊 4.7𝑔
 𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑎𝑓𝑓𝑖𝑛
Vparaffin=𝐷𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑦 = 𝑔 = 5.22𝑚3
𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑎𝑓𝑓𝑖𝑛 900000 3
𝑚

 Vcontainer = 55 ml

 Vcontainer + sample + paraffin = 73 ml

 Vsample +paraffin = 18 ml

 Vsample = 12.78 cu.cm

𝑊𝑠𝑎𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑒 44.9
Unit Weight = =12.78
𝑉𝑠𝑎𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑒

Unit Weight = 3.5 𝑔⁄𝑐𝑢. 𝑐𝑚

V. DISCUSSION

VI. CONCLUSION
 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING 1: SOIL MECHANICS

Laboratory Exercise No. 6

Determination of Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit and Plasticity Index

A report submitted to:

Engr. Ricardo Salvador V. Gayatin

By:

B.S. Civil Engineering 4

Group No. 2

Members:

Pabia, Ram John

Odango, Rona Micah

Sobrino, Carlo James

Dolendo, Francis Benedic

 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

Esteban, Joyje Mae

Date performed: ,2018

Date submitted: ,2018

I. OBJECTIVE

To obtain data to be used for soil classification and identification and fo strength

conclusions.

II. ESSENTIAL EQUIPMENTS, MATERIALS and APPARATUS

1. Liquid Limit

Liquid Limit Device

Grooving Tool

Mixing Dish

2. Plastic Limit Set

 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

Glass Plate

3. Spatula

4. Dry Cans

5. Oven

6. Desiccator

7. Balance

8. Distilled Water

9. Falling Cone Penetrometer

III. PROCEDURE

All samples to be used should have passed the No. 4 sieve.

A. Liquid Limit Determination

1. Place the sample on a mixi9ng dish and add to it 15 – 20 ml of distilled water,

then stir the sample, knead and chop with a spatula. Additional (1-3) water is

added and the same procedure is under taken.

2. Place the sample on the liquid limit device to a depth of 10 mm at the point of

maximum thickness. Make a groove at the middle of the sample with the use of a

grooving tool, allowing maximum of 6 strokes for it.

3. Turn the crank at a rate of 2 revolutions per seconds until the two sides of the

sample come in contact along distance of ½ inch. Record the number of

revolutions and take a sample for water content determination. A minimum of 10

revolutions must be made before the sample comes in contact by ½ inch.

 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

4. Repeat the same operation for samples with more than 2 revolutions. This is done

by adding soil to the sample.

5. Plot the flow curve and determine the LL.

B. Plastic Limit Determination

1. Place an air dried sample in a mixing dish and thoroughly mix it with distilled water

until the mass become plastic enough to be easily shaped into a ball. Tale a portion of

sample (8 grams) and use it for the test.

2. Form sample into an ellipsoidal shaped mass. Roll this mass between fingers in a

piece of glass. The pressure should be sufficient to roll the mass into a thread of

uniform diameter through its length the rate of rolling should be between 80-90

strokes per minute.

3. When the diameter of the thread becomes 3.2 mm (1/8 in), break the thread into 8

pieces and squeeze it between the thumb and finger of both hands into a uniform

mass roughly ellipsoidal in shape and reroll it. Continue this alternate rolling to a

thread of 3.2 mm (1/8 in) in diameter, gathering together kneading and rerolling until

the thread crumbles. Under the pressure required for rolling and the soil can no longer

be rerolled into a thread.

4. Determine the water content of the sample.

IV. DATA and CALCULATIONS

1. The liquid limit is expressed as the moisture content in percentage of the oven dry weight

corresponding to 25 blows.
w1 −w2
Water Content = x 100
w2
 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

W1 = weight of wet sample

W2 = weight of oven dry

Plot the percent moisture as ordinate on an arithmetic scale against the number of blows

as abscissa on the logarithmic scale.

2. The plastic limit is expressed as the MC in percentage of the oven – dried weight of the

crumbled soil thread.

wa −wb
Plastic Limit = x 100
wb

Wa= weight of crumbled soil thread

Wb = weight of oven dried soil thread

Description of Soil based on P.I.

PI Description

0 Non – Plastic

1–5 Slightly Plastic

5 – 10 Low Plasticity

10 – 20 Medium Plasticity

20 – 40 High Plasticity

>40 Very High Plasticity

 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

I. TEST RESULTS

Test Number 1 2

Number of Blows 10 26

Weight of Wet Soil + 65.7 76.3

Container, g

Weight of Dry Soil + 49.6 49.6

Container, g

Weight of Container, g 13.7 13.7

Weight of Water, g 20 20

Weight of Dry Soil, g 35.9 35.9

Water Content, % 30.44 26.21

Average of water content, % 28.33

Calculations:

A. Liquid Limit

w1 −w2
Water Content = x 100
w2

Where:

W1 = weight of wet sample

W2 = weight of oven dry

 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

Trial 1:

W1 + container = 65.7 g

W2 + container = 49.6 g

Wcontainer= 13.7 g

W1 = 65.7 g – 13.7 = 52 g

W2 = 49.6 – 13.7 = 35.9 g

Water Content = 30.44 %

Trial 2:

W1 + container = 76. 3 g

W2 + container = 49.6 g

Wcontainer= 13.7 g

W1 = 76.3 g – 13.7 = 62.6 g

W2 = 49.6 – 13.7 = 35.9 g

Water Content = 26.21%

Plasticity Index = LL – PL

LL = 30.1

PL = 26.4

PI = 30.5 – 26.4 = 3.7

 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

Therefore slightly plastic

B. Plastic Limit
wa −wb
Plastic Limit = x 100
wb

Where:

Wa= weight of crumbled soil thread

Wb= weight of oven dried soil thread

Crumbled Soil Thread 1:

Wa+ container = 20.9 g

Wb+ container = 19.3 g

Wcontainer= 13.7 g

Wa= 7.2 g

Wb = 5.6 g

wa −wb
Plastic Limit = x 100 = 22.22%
wb

Crumbled Soil Thread 2:

Wa+ container = 20.8 g

Wb+ container = 19.7 g

 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

Wcontainer= 13.7 g

Wa= 7.1 g

Wb = 6 g

wa −wb
Plastic Limit = x 100 = 15.49%
wb

V. DISCUSSION

VI. CONCLUSION
 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING 1: SOIL MECHANICS

Laboratory Exercise No. 7

Determination of Density of Soil In – Place by the Sand – Cone Method

A report submitted to:

Engr. Ricardo Salvador V. Gayatin

By:
 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

B.S. Civil Engineering 4

Group No. 2

Members:

Pabia, Ram John

Odango, Rona Micah

Sobrino, Carlo James

Dolendo, Francis Benedic

Esteban, Joyje Mae

Date performed: ,2018

Date submitted: ,2018

 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

I. SIGNIFICANCE

Density of soil is defined as the weight/mass per unit volume. It is very significant

engineering property of soil as strength in dependent upon density.

The field density test is widely used as control test in embankment construction to

ensure adequate compaction. Highway specification usually required the 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

measurement.

II. APPARATUS/MATERIALS

1. Density apparatus – shall consist of 4 liters capacity (1 gal.) jar and a detachable

cone consisting of a cylindrical valve with an orifice 12.7 mm (1/2 inch.) in

diameter. The valve shall have stops to prevent rotating the valve past the

completely open or completely closed positions. A guide or base plate shall be

provided for more constant base for tests of soft soils.

 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

2. Sand – any clean, dry, free-flowing, uncemented sand having few, if any, particles

passing the 0.075 mm. (no. 200) or retained on the 2.00 mm (No. 10) sieves.

3. Balances – 10kg capacity accurate to 1.0g and balance of 500g capacity accurate to

0.1g.

4. Oven with temperature control.

5. Digging tools, such as earth auger, crowbar or chisel.

6. Soil pans, MC cans, plastic bags, labeling materials.

III. PROCEDURE

A. Determination of volume of density jar

1. Weigh the assemble apparatus and record.

2. Place the apparatus upright and open the valve.

3. Fill the apparatus with water until it appears over the valve.

4. Close the valve and remove the excess water.

5. Weigh the apparatus and water.

6. Repeat the procedure describe in steps (1) to (5) at least twice.

B. Determination of Bulk Density of the Sand to be used in the field.

1. Place the empty apparatus upright on a firm level surface, close the valve and

fill the funnel with sand.

2. Open the valve, keeping funnel at least half full of sand, fill the apparatus.

3. Close the valve sharply and empty excess sand.

4. Weigh the apparatus with sand.

 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

C. Determination of Mass of Sand required to fill the funnel.

1. Put sand in the apparatus and secure mass of the apparatus sand.

2. Seat the invert apparatus on a clean, level, plane surface.

3. Close the valve sharply, weigh the apparatus with remaining sand and

determine the loss of sand. This loss of sand represents the mass of sand

required to fill the funnel.

D. Determination of the Soil Density in Place.

1. Smooth off a representative spot of sufficient size and lay flat the guide plate

on the surface of the soil layer to be tested.

2. Dig the test hole inside the center hole in the base plate with an auger, knife or

any digging tool to the full depth of the layer under test. Trim the hole

carefully to make the sides more or less vertical and bottom, level.

3. Place all the loosened soil in a container being careful to avoid losing any

material.

Protect the material from any loss of moisture. Weigh the material.

4. Weigh the density apparatus and sand.

5. Position the density apparatus to the inverted position leveled to the guide

plate above the test hole. Open the valve to release the calibrated sand. Take

care to avoid jarring or vibrating the apparatus on the ground during this step.

Close the valve after the sand has stopped and determines the mass of sand

used in the test.

6. Mix the material thoroughly and obtained a representative sample for moisture

sample.
 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

7. Remove the sand from the test hole, clean for future use.

The minimum test hole volume suggested in determining the in-place density of soil

mixture are given in table 1.

Maximum Particle Minimum Test Minimum Test Minimum

Size Hole Volume (cm.) Hole Volume (ft.) Moisture Content

Sample (g.)

4.75 710 0.025 100

12.5 1420 0.050 250

22 2120 0.075 500

50 2830 0.100 1000

IV. TEST RESULTS and COMPUTATIONS

I. TEST RESULTS and COMPUTATIONS

Unit weight of air-dry sand:

TRIAL 1 TRIAL 2

CONTAINER FULL OF WATER (EG) 6 6.2

CONTAINER 0.33 0.33

WATER 5.67 5.87

CONTAINER VOLUME 0.005 0.005

 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

CONTAINER FILLED WITH AIR- 11.6 11.6

DRY SAND

AIR-DRY SAND (KG) 9.8 9.8

UNIT WEIGHT OF DRY SAND 1621.4 1627.1

Mass of Sand to Fill Funnel:

TRIAL 1 TRIAL 2

SAND IN FUNNEL 1398 1406

Actual Moisture Content (Soil from the Hole):

TRIAL 1 TRIAL 2

CONTAINER + WET 123.2 126.4

SOIL

CONTAINER + DRY 121.6 124.3

SOIL

MOISTURE 1.6 2.1

CONTAINER 82.6 82.6

DRY SOIL 39 41.7

ACTUAL MOISTURE 4.10% 5.04%

CONTENT
 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

Field Density:

TRIAL 1 TRIAL 2

TOTAL MATERIAL TAKEN 3972.1 kg 3995.2 kg

FROM HOLE

SAND TO FILL HOLE 3972.8 kg 3995 kg

VOLUME OF HOLE 1.49 1.51

UNIT WEIGHT (WET) 0.0031 0.0031

8% MC 10% MC 8% MC 10% MC

DRY UNIT WEIGHT 1701 1671 1733 1693

LABORATORY COMPACTION

TEST DATA

MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY 1254 1254

OPTIMUM MOISTURE 10.21% 10.21%

CONTENT

DEGREE OF COMPACTION 129% 132%

II. DISCUSSION

Density Test is the method of determining the optimal moisture content at which

a given soil type will become most dense and achieve its maximum dry density .

The soil is usually compacted into the mold to a certain amount of equal layers,

each receiving a number of blows from a standard weighted hammer at a

specified height.

In our experiment, we used the sand-cone method. Using the data from the

previous experiment, we determined the MDD for the sand to be use as our
 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

sample. As the experiment goes on, we were able to get the degree of

compaction. We assumed that the moisture content in calculating the dry unit of

the sand is between 8-10%. Due to the calibrated sand, the degree of compaction

we acquired is above 100%. This is only natural because the source of soil is

already compacted by the passing vehicles and people.

III. CONCLUSION

This experiment is quite hard for us because it needs an utmost care before

conducting it. There are many factors to take in consideration so that we will get

the desired values and results for this experiment. The OMC and MDD are the

values derived from the previous experiment which is the grain size analysis. I

highly recommend that there will be an instructor to serve as guide for this kind

of laboratory to avoid misconduct and if possible, record every detail and label it

properly.
 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING 1: SOIL MECHANICS

Laboratory Exercise No. 8

Grain Size Analysis

A report submitted to:

Engr. Ricardo Salvador V. Gayatin

By:

B.S. Civil Engineering 4

 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

Group No. 2

Members:

Pabia, Ram John

Odango, Rona Micah

Sobrino, Carlo James

Dolendo, Francis Benedic

Esteban, Joyje Mae

Date performed: ,2018

Date submitted: ,2018

 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

I. INTRODUCTION/OBJECTIVE:

To determine the classification of soil based on its grain size distribution.

II. DISCUSSION

A sieve analysis is a practice or procedure used to assess the particle size

distribution of a granular material. The size distribution is often of critical importance

to the way the material performs in use. A sieve analysis can be performed on any

type of non-organic or organic granular materials including sands, crushed rock,

clays, granite, feldspars, coal, and soil, a wide range of manufactured powders, grain

and seeds, down to a minimum size depending on the exact method. Being such a

simple technique of particle sizing, it is probably the most common. Sieve analysis is

one type of mechanical analysis which determines the size range of particles present

in a soil, expressed as a percentage of the total dry weight or mass.

Sieve analysis consists of shaking the soil sample through a set of sieves that have

progressively smaller openings. The results of sieve analysis are generally expressed

as the percentage of total weight of soil that passed through different sieve. From the

results, the total mass sample after sieving is smaller than the total mass before

sieving. This is probably because the small particles of soil is missing during the

sieves are being vibrated. Therefore, the total mass is corrected by adding the mass

retained with the corrected mass of soil.

III. ESSENTIAL LABORATORY EQUIPMENT

 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

 Set of Sieves

 Balance

IV. PROCEDURE

Sieve Analysis

1. Weigh all sieves to be used up to 0.1 gram.

2. Select test sample and break soil into its individual particles with the fingers or a

rubber-tipped pestle.

3. Weigh the specimen of approximately 400 grams.

4. Sieve the soil through a nest of sieves by hand for at least 10 minutes.

5. Weight the 0.1 gram each sieve with soil in it.

6. Subtract the weight obtained in step 1 from those of step 5 to give the soil retained

in no. 200 sieve.

V. TEST RESULTS and COMPUTATIONS

Sieve Diameter Weight Sample + Weight Weight %

No. (mm) of Sieve Sieve Retained Passing Passing

(g)
 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

4 4.76 505.6 509.1 3.5 396.5 99.125

8 2.38 495.1 540.5 45.4 351.1 87.775

10 2 483 505.9 22.9 328.2 82.05

20 0.84 427.9 538.4 110.5 217.7 54.45

40 0.42 385 487.9 102.9 114.8 28.7

60 0.25 357.8 409 51.2 63.6 15.9

100 0.149 344 379.4 35.4 28.2 7.05

200 0.074 326.2 349.6 23.4 4.8 1.2

Pan 382.9 387 4.1 0.7 0.175

Total =

400

Weight Passing
% Passing = x 100
W

Grain Size Curve

Computations:

396.5
% Passing = x 100 = 𝟗𝟗. 𝟏𝟑
400

351.1
% Passing = x 100 = 𝟖𝟕. 𝟕𝟖
400

328.2
% Passing = x 100 = 𝟖𝟐. 𝟎𝟓
400
 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

217.7
% Passing = x 100 = 𝟓𝟒. 𝟒𝟑
400

114.8
% Passing = x 100 = 𝟐𝟖. 𝟕
400

63.6
% Passing = x 100 = 𝟏𝟓. 𝟗
400

28.2
% Passing = x 100 = 𝟕. 𝟎𝟓
400

4.8
% Passing = x 100 = 𝟏. 𝟐
400

0.7
% Passing = 400 x 100 = 𝟎. 𝟏𝟕𝟓

A. According to Unified Soil Classification System (USCS)

Passing No. 200

Passing No. 4

D10 =

D30 =

D60 =

D
Cu = D60 =
10

Cu =

(D30 )2
Cc =D =
60 xD10

B. According to AASHTO:
 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

Passing No. 200

% Passing No. 10 =

% Passing No. 40 =

% Passing No. 200 =

GI =

Thus, the soil is

VI. DISCUSSION

A sieve analysis (or gradation test) is a practice or procedure used (commonly

used in civil engineering ) to assess the particle size distribution (also called

gradation) of a granular material by allowing the material to pass through a

series of sieves of progressively smaller mesh size and weighing the amount of

material that is stopped by each sieve as a fraction of the whole mass.

In this experiment, a representative weighed sample is poured into the top sieve

which has the largest screen openings. Each lower sieve in the column has

smaller openings than the one above. At the base is a round pan, called the

receiver. Getting the retained weight of soil in each sieve will allow us to

determine the percent passing for each sieve. Percent passing is determined by

using retained weight divided by its total dry weight.

VII. CONCLUSION

VIII. DOCUMENTATION
 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department
 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department
 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING 1: SOIL MECHANICS

Laboratory Exercise No. 9

Compaction Test

A report submitted to:

Engr. Ricardo Salvador V. Gayatin

By:

B.S. Civil Engineering 4

Group No. 2

Members:

Pabia, Ram John

Odango, Rona Micah

Sobrino, Carlo James

Dolendo, Francis Benedic

Esteban, Joyje Mae

 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

Date performed: ,2018

Date submitted: ,2018

 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

I. OBJECTIVE:

To determine the maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of soil.

II. ESSENTIAL EQUIPMENTS, MATERIALS, and APPARATUS

 Compaction Mold and Hammer

 Moisture Sprayer

 No. 4 sieve

 No. 10 sieve

 Rubber Tipped Pestle

 Scoop

 Straight Edge and Knife

 Large Mixing Pan

 Balance

 Drying Oven

 Desiccator

 Drying Cans

III. PROCEDURE

1. Weigh the empty mold.

2. Obtain 6lb of a representative sample obtain by quartering the soil. Use the

sample passing No. 4 sieve and retained at No. 10 sieve.

 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

3. Form a 2 to 3 inch layer using the soil passing No. 4 and retained at No. 10.

4. Press soil until it is smooth and compact it with 56 evenly distributed blows of the

hammer, using a foot drop. Rotate the hammer to ensure uniformly distributed

blows.

5. After 5 layers of compaction, filling up the mold up to the collar, remove the

collar and trim off the soil from the top of the old. Start trimming along the center

and work towards the end of the mold.

6. After the soil has been made even with the top of the mold and all the base soil is

cleaned from the outside, weigh the cylinder and he sample.

7. Remove the soil from the cylinder and obtain a representative sample for a

specimen from the top, middle and bottom of the compacted soil.

8. Break up by hand the soil removed from the cylinder and remix with the original

sample and raise its water content. Use a graduated cylinder to measure the

amount of water added. Mix the soil thoroughly.

9. Continue making different trials until the weight of the compacted soil decreases.

10. Oven the representative sample. Compute the dry density of each sample and plot

on a graphing paper.

IV. DATA and CALCULATIONS

V. For first sample (sand)

 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

DESCRIPTION TRIAL

1 2 3 4 5

Weight of mold 9.8 kg 9.4 kg I0.2 kg 10.1 kg 10 kg

+ soil

Weight of empty 5.3 kg 5.3 kg 5.3 kg 5.3 kg 5.3 kg

mold

Weight of soil 4.5 kg 4.1 kg 4.9 kg 4.8 kg 4.7 kg

sample

Volume of mold 3243.33 cu. Cm

Can Can Can Can Can Can Can Can Can Can

1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2

Weight of Can, g 29.3 27.3 35.2 35.8 25.9 27.8 40.8 52.6 41.9 44.2

Weight of can +

representative 207.9 210.8 231.8 258.8 187.4 165.3 384.9 419.7 275.5 259.9

sample

Weight of can +

dry 205.5 208.2 226.8 251.3 181.8 161.9 377.8 411.6 268.2 254.6

representative

sample

Weight of water 2.4 2.6 5 7.5 5.6 3.4 7.1 8.1 7.3 5.3
 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

Weight of dry 176.2 180.9 191.6 215.5 155.9 134.1 337 359 226.3 210.4

soil sample

Moisture 1.36 1.44 2.61 3.48 3.59 2.54 2.11 2.26 3.23 2.52

Content, %

Average

Moisture 1.4% 3.05% 3.07% 2.19% 2.88%

Content for each

trial

Dry Density 1.369 1.368 1.232 1.222 1.458 1.473 1.449 1.447 1.404 1.414

Average Dry

Density for each 1.3685 1.227 1.4655 1.448 1.409

trial

VI.

VII. Computations:

Weig1ht of water, g
Moisture Content, % = x 100%
weight of soil

2.4
Moisture Content TRIAL 1 CAN 1=176.2 x 100% = 𝟏. 𝟑𝟔%

2.6
Moisture Content TRIAL 1 CAN 2=180.9 x 100% = 𝟏. 𝟒𝟒%

1.36+1.44
Ave. MC for trial 1 = = 𝟏. 𝟒%
2
 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

5
Moisture Content TRIAL 2 CAN 1=191.6 x 100% = 𝟐. 𝟔𝟏%

7.5
Moisture Content TRIAL 2 CAN 2=215.5 x 100% = 𝟑. 𝟒𝟖%

2.61+3.48
Ave. MC for trial 2 = = 𝟑. 𝟎𝟓%
2

5.6
Moisture Content TRIAL 3 CAN 1=155.9 x 100% = 𝟑. 𝟓𝟗%

3.4
Moisture Content TRIAL 3 CAN 2= x 100% = 𝟐. 𝟓𝟒%
134.1

3.59+2.54
Ave. MC for trial 3 = = 𝟑. 𝟎𝟕%
2

7.1
Moisture Content TRIAL 4 CAN 1=337 x 100% = 𝟐. 𝟏𝟏%

8.1
Moisture Content TRIAL 4 CAN 2=359 x 100% = 𝟐. 𝟐𝟔%

2.11+2.26
Ave. MC for trial 4 = = 𝟐. 𝟏𝟗%
2

7.3
Moisture Content TRIAL 5 CAN 1=226.3 x 100% = 𝟑. 𝟐𝟑%

5.3
Moisture Content TRIAL 5 CAN 2=210.4 x 100% = 𝟐. 𝟓𝟐%

3.23+2.52
Ave. MC for trial 5 = = 𝟐. 𝟖𝟖%
2

w
Dry Density, g/cc = v (1+MC)

4500
Dry Density TRIAL 1 CAN 1 = 3243.33(1+0.0136) =1.369
 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

4500
Dry Density TRIAL 1 CAN 2 = 3243.33(1+0.0144) =1.368

1.369+1.368
Ave. Dry Density TRIAL 1 = = 𝟏. 𝟑𝟔𝟖𝟓
2

4100
Dry Density TRIAL 2 CAN 1 = 3243.33(1+0.0261) =1.232

4100
Dry Density TRIAL 2 CAN 2 = 3243.33(1+0.0348) =1.222

1.232+1.222
Ave. Dry Density TRIAL 2 = = 𝟏. 𝟐𝟐𝟕
2

4900
Dry Density TRIAL 3 CAN 1 = 3243.33(1+0.0359) =1.458

4900
Dry Density TRIAL 3 CAN 2 = 3243.33(1+0.0254) =1.473

1.458+1.473
Ave. Dry Density TRIAL 3 = = 𝟏. 𝟒𝟔𝟓𝟓
2

4800
Dry Density TRIAL 4 CAN 1 = 3243.33(1+0.0211) =1.449

4800
Dry Density TRIAL 4 CAN 2 = 3243.33(1+0.0226) =1.447

1.449+1.447
Ave. Dry Density TRIAL 4 = = 𝟏. 𝟒𝟒𝟖
2

4700
Dry Density TRIAL 5 CAN 1 = 3243.33(1+0.0323) =1.404

4700
Dry Density TRIAL 5 CAN 2 = 3243.33(1+0.0252) =1.414

1.404+1.414
Ave. Dry Density TRIAL 5 = = 𝟏. 𝟒𝟎𝟗
2
 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department

VIII. DISCUSSION

Soil Compaction Compaction can be generally defined as the densification of soil by

the removal of air and rearrangement of soil particles through the addition of

mechanical energy. The energy exerted by compaction forces the soil to fill available

voids, and the additional frictional forces between the soil particles improves the

mechanical properties of the soil. Because a wide range of particles are needed in

order to fill all available voids, well-graded soils tend to compact better than poorly

graded soils.

IX. CONCLUSION

After the experiment, we conclude that the degree of compaction of a soil can be

measured by its dry unit weight, γd. When water is added to the soil, it functions as a

softening agent on the soil particles, causing them to slide between one another more

easily. At first, the dry unit weight after compaction increases as the moisture content

( ω ) increases, but after the optimum moisture content ( ω opt ) percentage is

exceeded, any added water will result in a reduction in dry unit weight because the

pore water pressure (pressure of water in-between each soil particle) will be pushing

the soil particles apart, decreasing the friction between them.

 St. Anthony’s College
San Jose, Antique
Engineering and Technology Department