PROJECT REPORT

ON
MODIFICATION OF GEOTECHNICAL PROPERTIES OF SOIL MIXED
WITH CEMENT
To be submitted in Partial Fulfilment of the requirement for the Degree of
Bachelor of Technology
in
Civil Engineering

Under the guidance of

SHILPI GUPTA
Assistant Professor
Department of Civil Engineering, Quantum School of Technology
Submitted by:

160430107019
NABIN KUMAR PANDEY
RANJIT KHADKA 160430107021
DEEPENDRA ROKA 1604301070
MADAN KC 160430107014
 QUANTUM SCHOOL OF TECHNOLOGY

UTTARAKHAND TECHINICAL UNIVERSITY, DEHRADUN

SHILPI GUPTA
Assistant Professor
Department of Civil Engineering
Quantum School of Technology
Uttarakhand Technical University
Dehradun
District: Haridwar
Uttarakhand

APPROVAL

This project report entitled “MODIFICATION OF GEOTECHNICAL

PROPERTIES OF SOIL MIXED WITH CEMENT” submitted by Nabin kumar

pandey(160430107019), Ranjit khadka (160430107021), Deependra Roka(1604301070),Madan
kc(160430107014); is hereby approved as credible work of engineering subject carried out &
presented in a satisfactory manner. The undersigned warrant its acceptance as pre-requisite to the
degree for which it has been submitted.

NABIN KUMAR PANDEY 160430107019

RANJIT KHADKA 160430107021
DEEPENDRA ROKA 1604301070
MADAN KC 160430107014
 QUANTUM SCHOOL OF TECHNOLOGY UTTARAKHAND
TECHINICAL UNIVERSITY DEHRADUN, UTTARAKHAND

CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that following students of VII semester of Department of Civil Engineering
have successfully completed and submitted their project work during session 2018-19 entitled as
“EFFECT OF GEOTECHNICAL PROPERTIES OF LOCAL MANDAWAR SOIL BY
USING CEMENT MATERIAL” as stipulated in the syllabus for the award of Bachelor’s
Degree in Civil Engineering from Quantum School of Technology, Uttarakhand Technical
University, Dehradun, Uttarakhand.

SHILPI GUPTA
Assistant Professor
Department of Civil Engineering
 Acknowledgement

We would like to articulate deep gratitude and veneration to SHILPI GUPTA, Assistant
Professor, Department of Civil Engineering for his sincere exhortation, inspiring guidance,
constant encouragement and constructive criticism throughout the project work. We express deep
sense of obligation to her as she made it possible for us to submit the report in the present form.

We are grateful to Mr. Amit Dhiman, staff of Soil Mechanics Laboratory, Department of Civil
Engineering, Uttarakhand Technical University, Dehradun.

We want to give sincere thanks to HOD Er. KARAN BABBAR and also thankful to all other
staff member of Civil Engineering Department, for their assistance and kind cooperation during
the course of experimentation.

NABIN KUMAR PANDEY 160430107019

RANJIT KHADKA 160430107021
DEEPENDRA ROKA 1604301070
MADAN KC 160430107014
 LIST OF CONTENT

1. Introduction
1.1.General 1
1.2.Soil Stabilization with Cement 2
1.3.Ordinary Portland cement 2
1.4.Factor affecting Soil Cement Stabilization 3
1.5.Advantage of Cement 4
1.6.Disadvantage of Stabilization using Cement 4
1.7.Objective of Project 5
2. Literature Review
2.1.General 6
2.2.Research Publication 6
3. Materials Used and Methodology
3.1.General 8
3.2.Materials Used 8
3.2.1. Cement
3.2.2. Natural Soil
3.3.Test performed 9
3.3.1. Determination of Water Content by Oven dry 10
3.3.2. Determination of specific gravity of Soil by using Pycnometer 13
3.3.3. Determination of Relative proportion different Grains Size 15
3.3.4. Determination of Liquid Limit by Casegrande 18
3.3.5. Determination of Plastic Limit 21
3.3.6. Determination of Field Density of Soil by Core Cutter Method 23
3.3.7. Determination of Optimum Moisture Content by Proctor Test 26
4. Result and Discussion 30
 1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 General

Before construction of embankment, road, building or any engineering work, the study of
soil parameters is essential. This gives us an idea about the type of soil on which the foundation
is to be laid. For this many tests are to be conducted on soil to determine its basic index
properties, compressive strength, shear strength and CBR value. However if the soil is not able to
bear the load the strength of the sol can be increase by Stabilization.

The main goal of soil stabilization the main objective is to increase the strength or
stability of soil and to reduce the construction cost by making best use of locally available
materials. Soil stabilization is an efficient and unfailing technique for enhancing soil strength and
firmness. The material which is use to mix with soil for stabilization of soil is known as the soil
stabilizer. The soil stabilization can be accomplished by many methods. All these methods are
defined in two different categories namely;

Mechanical Stabilization

Chemical Stabilization

Mechanical Stabilization

Soil Stabilization under mechanical stabilization can be achieved through physical

process by changing the physical nature of soil particles by either induced vibration or
compaction. The dynamic compaction and vibro-compaction are generally used as a mechanical
method for soil stabilization.

Chemical Stabilization

In chemical stabilization, soil is stabilized by adding different chemicals. The main advantage
of chemical stabilization is that setting time and curing time can be controlled. Chemical stabilization
is however generally more expensive than other types of stabilization. Through chemical
stabilization, soils can be stabilized by means of cementitious materials such as:

1
 Soil Stabilization with Cement

Soil Stabilization with Lime

Soil Stabilization with Bitumen

Chemical Stabilization of Soil

1.2 Soil Stabilization with Cement : An Overview Soil Stabilization with Cement

The soil stabilized with cement is known as soil cement. The cementing action is believed
to be the result of chemical reactions of cement with siliceous soil during hydration reaction. The
important factors affecting the soil-cement are nature of soil content, conditions of mixing,
compaction, curing and admixtures used. The soil cement becomes a hard and durable structural
material as the cement hydrates and develops strength. When we add cement, Cement
stabilization is done while the compaction process is continuing. During the compaction process
we use some amount of cement. Some void space can be found in soil particle. Cement is just
like paw, so cement can fill the void space of soil easily. As a result, void ratio of soil may
reduce. After this primary tasks, when water is added in the compaction the cement reacts with
water and become hard. So unit weight of soil may also increase. Because of the hardening of
cement, shear strength and bearing capacity will be increased. Because of the stabilization,
permeability of soil may decrease.

The Engineering properties like Specific gravity, Optimum Moisture Content, Maximum
Dry Density, Liquid limit, Plastic limit and Grain size analysis of the collected samples are
identified by suitable laboratory tests. Unconfined compressive strength test and California
bearing ratio tests are conducted to determine the strength of stabilized soil.

1.3 Ordinary Portland Cement

Cement can be defined as the bonding material having cohesive & adhesive properties which
makes it capable to unite the different construction materials and form the compacted assembly.
Ordinary Portland cement is one of the most widely used type of Portland Cement. The

2
 name Portland cement was given by Joseph Aspdin in 1824 due to its similarity in colour and its
quality when it hardens like Portland stone. Portland stone is white grey limestone in island of
Portland, Dorset. The chief chemical components of ordinary Portland cement are:

Calcium
Silica
Alumina
Iron

Calcium is usually derived from limestone, marl or chalk while silica, alumina and
iron come from the sands, clays & iron ores. Other raw materials may include shale, shells and
industrial by-products.

Basic Composition of cement:

Contents %
CaO 60-67
SiO2 17-25
Al2O3 3-8
Fe2O3 0.5-6.0
MgO 0.5-4.0
Alkalis 0.3-1.2
SO3 2.0-3.5

1.4 Factors Affecting Soil Cement Stabilization

During soil cement stabilization the following factors are affecting.

Type of soil: Cement stabilization may be applied in fine or granular soil, however granular is
preferable for cement stabilization.
Quantity of cement: A large amount of cement is needed for cement stabilization.
Quantity of water: Adequate water is needed for the stabilization.

3
Mixing, compaction and curing: Adequate mixing, compaction and curing is needed for cement
stabilization.
Admixtures: Cement has some important admixtures itself which helps them to create a proper bond.
These admixtures pay a vital role in case of reaction between cement and water.

1.5 Advantages of Cement

While several reagents can be used for soil stabilization, Portland cement has advantages
that make it more economical and easy to use than others.

It is widely available.
Cost is relatively low.
It is highly durable.
Cement is manufactured under strict ASTM standards, ensuring uniformity of quality and
performance.
Soil cement is quite weather resistant and strong.
Granular soils with sufficient fines are ideally suited for cement stabilization as it requires least
amount of cement.
Soil cement reduces the swelling characteristics of the soil.
It is commonly used for stabilizing sandy and other low plasticity soils. Cement interacts with the
silt and clay fractions and reduces their affinity for water.

1.6 Disadvantages of stabilization using cement

Cracks may form in soil cement.

It is harmful for environment.
It requires extra labour.
The quantity of water must be sufficient for hydration of cement and making the mixture
workable.

4
 1.7 Objective of Project

To study the following geotechnical parameters of soil of Sitarganj:

C.B.R. value.
Optimum Moisture Content and Maximum Dry Density
Shear Strength
Study the effect on geotechnical parameters using different proportions of cement.

5
 2. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 General

Engineers are often faced with the problem of constructing roadbeds on or with soils, which
do not possess sufficient strength to support wheel loads imposed upon them either in construction or
during the service life of the pavement. It is, at times, necessary to treat these soils to provide a stable
subgrade or a working platform for the construction of the pavement. These treatments result in less
time and energy required for the production, handling, and placement of road and bridge fills and
subgrades and therefore, less time to complete the construction process thus reducing the disruption
and delays to traffic. These treatments are generally classified into two processes, soil modification
or soil stabilization. The purpose of subgrade modification is to create a working platform for
construction equipment. This modification in the pavement has no role in the design process. The
purpose of subgrade stabilization is to enhance the strength of the subgrade and this increased
strength is taken into account in the pavement design process.

2.2 Research Publications

Manikant Mandal and Dr. Mayajit Mazumdar (1995), a study was made on the effect of additives
on lateritic soil stabilization with cement and lime. Particularly, the strength and fatigue behavior,
under repeated flexture, of stabilized latertic soil treated with additives, have not been studied in our
country till now. Sodium carbonate analytical reagent grade was used as an additive. Static and
dynamic tests were carried out on specimens of soil-cement and soil-lime mixtures prepared under
standard as well as modified compaction. It has been found that sodium carbonate used as an additive
in trace amounts, improves the strength of soil-cement and soil-lime. Also, the additive increases the
value of modulus of rupture and durability of the stabilized soil.

Azm S. Al-Homoud, Taisir Khedaywi and Abdullah M. Al. Ajlouni (1999), This research was
undertaken to compare the effectiveness and economic feasibility of bitumen, lime, and cement as
stabilizing agents for reduction of swell potential of a swelling soil from Northern Jordan. The results
of this study showed that for a soil containing high percent fines, cutback bitumen treatment

6
causes more reduction in swell potential than cement and less reduction than limebitumen is the
economical agent compared to lime and cement. Virender Kumar (2002), A study on the effect of
lime as stabilizing agent and Na2 CO3 as an additive, when added to the soil-flyash combination
has also been investigated.

7
 3. MATERIALS USED AND METHODOLOGY

3.1 General

This includes a brief description of the materials and various tests which are to be
carried out for the materials and soil cement mix for pursuing the present study.

3.2 Materials Used

• Cement

• Natural Soil

3.2.1 Cement

Portland cement (often referred to OPC, from ordinary Portland cement) is the most
common type of cement in general use around the world because it is a basic ingredient of
concrete, mortar, stucco and most non-specialty grout. It is affine powder produce by grinding
Portland cement clinker (more than 90%) a limited amount of calcium sulfate (which controls the
set time) and up to 5% minor constituent as allowed by various standards. The bureau of Indian
standards has issued specific codes for various type of cement manufactured in country, which
forms the basic guidelines for the quality parameters to be adopted by manufactured.

It is mandatory for the manufacturer to display the relevant is code on the bag for easy
identification of the type of cement in the bag. The variation in % composition of compounds
influences the property of cement. Its chemical composition and physical properties are provided
in table below.

8
 Table 3.1. Chemical Composition of Portland Cement (as per IS 8112:1989)
Sr. Name of Oxide composition Abbreviation Approx. % Function
No compound

1 Tri-calcium 3CaO.SiO2 C3S 45-55 Mainly responsible

Silicate for early strength(1 to
7 days)

2 Di-calcium 2CaO.SiO2 C2S 20-30 Mainly responsible

silicate for later strength
(7days and beyond)

3 Tri-calcium 3CaO.Al2O3 C3A 6-10 C3A increases the

aluminate rate of hydration of
C3S

4 Tetra calcium 4CaO.Al2O3.Fe2O3 C4AF 15-20 It hydrates rapidly

aluminoferrite but its contribution to
strength is uncertain
and generally very
low

3.3 Test Performed in Laboratory

S No. Test To Be Performed Property Determined

1 Oven Dried Method Water Content
2 Core Cutter Method Unit Weight (Dry Density)
3 Pycnometer Method Specific Gravity
4 Casagrande Tool Liquid Limit
5 Atterberg Method Plastic
6 Seive Analysis Particle Size distribution
7 Standard Proctor Test Optimum Moisture Content And Maximum Dry
Density

8 Soil Index Plasticity Index, Relative Consistency, Liquidity

Index

9
3.3.1 DETERMINATION OF WATER CONTENT BY OVEN DRY
METHOD:

Water Content:

A soil is an aggregate of soil particles having a porous structure. The pores may have water
and or air. The pores are also known as voids. If voids are fully filled with water. the soil is called
saturated soil and if voids have only air, the soil is called dry. Moisture content is defined as the
ratio of the mass/weight of water to the mass /weight of water to the mass/weight of soil solids
(Fig 1.1)

W=Ww/Ws

Where, W = water content

Ww = Weight/ mass of water

Ws = Weight/ mass of soil solids

(mass of oven dry soil)

The mass of water used in the above expression is the mass of free pore water only. Hence
for moisture content determination the soil samples are dried to the temperature at which only
pore water is evaporated. This temperature was standardized 1050 C to 1100 C. Soils having
gypsum are dried at 600 C to 800 C.

The quantity of soil sample needed for the determination of moisture content depends on
the gradation and the maximum size of particles. Following quantities are recommended

10
 Soil Max. quantity used (gm)
Coarse gravel 1000 to2000
Fine gravel 300 to500

Coarse sand 200

Medium sand 50

Fine sand 25

Silt and clays 10 to25

The methods to determine moisture content in the laboratory are oven-drying, pycnometer,
infrared lamp with torsion balance moisture meter. The approximate Methods are alcohol
burning method and calcium carbide method.

PROCEDURE:

Clean the container, dry it and weigh it with the lid (Weight ‘W1‘).

Take the required quantity of the wet soil specimen in the container and weigh it with the lid
(Weight ‘W2‘).

11
Place the container, with its lid removed, in the oven till its weight becomes constant (Normally
for 24hrs.).

When the soil has dried, remove the container from the oven, using tongs.

Find the weight ‘W3‘ of the container with the lid and the dry soil sample.

S.N DESCRIPTION SAMPLE-1 SAMPLE-2

1 Wt. of container(W1) 14 14

2 Wt. of container + natural soil(W2) 46 41

3 Wt. of container + dry soil(W3) 42 37.6

4 Water content(w)=(W2-W3)/(W3-W1)*100 14.28 14.4

5 Average natural water content(w) 14.34

12
3.3.2 DETERMINATION OF SPECIFIC GRAVITY OF SOIL BY USING
PYCNOMETER:

This lab is performed to determine the specific gravity of soil by using a pycnometer. Specific
gravity is the ratio of the mass of unit volume of soil at a stated temperature to the mass of the
same volume of gas-free distilled water at a stated temperature.

The specific gravity of a soil is used in the phase relationship of air, water, and solids in a given
volume of the soil.

PROCEDURE:

(1)Determine and record the weight of the empty clean and dry pycnometer, WP.
Place 125g of a dry soil sample (passed through the sieve No. 10) in the pycnometer. Determine
and record the weight of the pycnometer containing the dry soil, WPS.
Add distilled water to fill about half to three-fourth of the pycnometer. Soak the sample for 10
minutes.
Apply a partial vacuum to the contents for 10 minutes longer, to remove the entrapped air.
Stop the vacuum and carefully remove the vacuum line from pycnometer.
Fill the pycnometer with distilled (water to the mark), clean the exterior surface of the
pycnometer with a clean, dry cloth. Determine the weight of the pycnometer and contents, WB.
Empty the pycnometer and clean it. Then fill it with distilled water only (to the mark). Clean the
exterior surface of the pycnometer with a clean, dry cloth. Determine the weight of the
pycnometer and distilled water, WA.
Empty the pycnometer and clean it.

Data Analysis:
Calculate the specific gravity of the soil solids using the following formula:
specific gravity(G) = (W2 − W1)
(W2 − W1) + (W4 − W3)

13
SN. DESCRIPTION SAMPLE1 SAMPLE2 SAMPLE3
1 Wt. of pycnometer(W1) 634 634 634
2 Wt. of pycnometer + dry soil (W2) 84.6 976 916
3 Wt. of pycnometer + soil + water (W3) 1651 1722 1689
4 Wt. of pycnometer + water (W4) 1536 1536 1536
5 Specific gravity (G) 2.185 2.192 2.186
. + . + .
. ()= = 2.2

14
 3.3.3 DETERMINATION OF RELATIVE PROPORTION OF THE
DIFFERENT GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION:

The grain size analysis is widely used in classification of soils. The data obtained from grain size
distribution curves is used in the design of filters for earth dams and to determine suitability of
soil for road construction, air field etc. Information obtained from grain size analysis can be used
to predict soil water movement although permeability tests are more generally used.

For determining the grain size distribution of soil sample, usually mechanical analysis (sieve
analysis) is carried out in which the finer sieve used is 63 micron or the nearer opening. If a soil
contains appreciable quantities of fine fractions in (less than 63 micron) wet analysis is done.
One form of the analysis is hydrometer analysis. It is very much helpful to classify the soil as per
ISI classification. The properties of the soil are very much influenced by the amount of clay and
other fractions.

PROCEDURE:

For soil samples of soil retained on 75 micron I.S sieve

The proportion of soil sample retained on 75 micron I.S sieve is weighed and recorded weight of soil
sample is as per I.S 2720.

I.S sieves are selected and arranged in the order as shown in the table.

The soil sample is separated into various fractions by sieving through above sieves placed in the
above mentioned order.

The weight of soil retained on each sieve is recorded.

The moisture content of soil if above 5% it is to be measured and recorded. 2.

No particle of soil sample shall be pushed through the sieves.

15
 Fig: Sieve Analysis

WT. (%) CUMMULATIVE (%)

S.N. SIEVE SIZE RETAINED WEIGHT
(%) RETAINED FINER
(GM) RETAINED

1 4.75 mm 298 29.8 29.8 70.2

2 2.36 mm 151 15.1 44.9 55.1
3 1.18 micron 141 14.1 59 41
4 600 micron 74 7.4 66.4 33.6
5 300 micron 129 12.9 79.3 20.7
6 150 micron 98 9.8 89.1 10.9
7 75 micron 75 7.5 96.6 3.4
8 pan 34 - - -

16
D60 CALCULATION 2− 1
( − 1) = 2 − 1 X ( − 1)

− 4750 = 2360−475055.1−70.2 X(60 − 70.2)

D60 = 3136 micron

D30
30 − 300 = 33.6−20.7600−300 X (30 − 20.7)
2
( 30)
D30 = 516micron
= 60 X 10

= 0.6 (poorly graded curve)

150 − 75
10 − 75 = 10.9 − 3.4 (10 − 3.4) = 141

D60 3136
= D10 = 141 = 22.24 (well graded sand)

17
3.3.4 DETERMINATION OF LIQUID LIMIT BY CASEGRANDE
METHOD:

LIQUID LIMIT: The liquid limit of a soil is the water content at which the soil behaves
practically like a liquid, but has small shear strength. It flows to close the groove in just 25 blows
in Casagrande’s liquid limit device.

As it is difficult to get exactly 25 blows in a test, 3 to 4 tests are conducted and the
number of blows (N) required in each test is determined. A semi-log plot is then drawn between
log N and the water content (w). The liquid limit is the water content corresponding to N=25, as
obtained from the plot.

Fig: Casegrande Apparatus

Apparatus:

Casagrande’s liquid limit device

Grooving tolls of both standard and ASTM types

Oven

Evaporating dish or glass sheet

18
Spatula

425 IS sieve

Weighing balance accuracy 0.01g

Wash bottle.

PROCEDURE:

Adjust the drop of the cup of the liquid limit device by releasing the two screws at the top and by
using the handle of the grooving tool or a gauge. The drop should be exactly 1cm at the point of
contact on the base. Tighten the screw after adjustment.

Take about 120g of the air-dried soil sample passing 425 IS sieve.

Mix the sample thoroughly with distilled water in an evaporating dish or a glass plate to form a
uniform paste. Mixing should be continued for about 15 to 30 min, till a uniform mix is obtained.

Keep the mix under humid conditions for obtaining uniform moisture distribution for sufficient
period. For some fat clays. This maturing time may be upto 24 hours.

Take a portion of the matured paste and remix it thoroughly. Place it in the cup of the device by a
spatula and level it by a spatula or a straight edge to have a minimum depth of the soil as 1cm at
the point of the maximum thickness. The excess soil, if any should be transferred to the
evaporating dish.

Cut a groove in the sample in the cup by using the appropriate tool. Draw the grooving tool
through the paste in the cup along the symmetrical axis, along the diameter through the centre
line of the cup. Hold the tool perpendicular to the cup.

Turn the handle of the device at a rate of 2 revolutions per second. Count the number of blows
until the two halves of the soil specimen come in contact at the bottom of the groove along a
distance of 12mm due to flow and not by sliding.

19
Collect a representative sample of the soil by moving spatula width-wise from one edge to the
other edge of the soil cake at right angles to the groove.

Change the water content of the mix in the evaporating dish either by adding more water if the
water content is to be increased or by kneading the soil, if the water content is to be decreased. In
no case the dry soil should be added to reduce the water content.

Repeat the steps 4 to 10 and determine the number of blows (N) and the water content in each
case.

Draw the flow curve between log N and w, and determine the liquid limit corresponding to
N=25.

S.N DESCRIPTION SAMPLE-1 SAMPLE-2 SAMPLE-3 SAMPLE-4

1 Wt. of container (W1) 14 14 14 14
2 Wt. of container + wet soil 30 36 35 34
(W2)
3 Wt. of container + dry soil 25.07 29.8 29.7 29.56
(W3)
4 Wt. of dry soil (W3-W1) 11.07 15.8 15.7 15.56
5 Moisture content w (%) = 44.5 39.28 33.78 28.57
(W2-W3)/(W3-W1) X 100
6 No. of blows (N) 8 12 20 32

The liquid limit corresponding to 25 number of blows (from the semi-log graph) =31.5%

20
3.3.5 DETERMINATION OF PLASTIC LIMIT:
PLASTIC LIMIT: The plastic limit of a soil is the water content of the soil below which it
ceases to be plastic. It begins to crumble when rolled into threads of 3mm diameter.

Apparatus :

Porcelain evaporating dish about 120mm diameter or a glass plate 450mm square and 10mm
thick.

Ground glass plate about 200mm x 150mm

Metallic rod 3mm dia and 100mm long

Oven

Spatula or plate knife

Moisture content can

21
PROCEDURE:

Take about 30g of air dried soil from a thoroughly mixed sample of the soil passing 425
sieve.
Mix the soil with distilled water in an evaporating dish or on a glass plate o make it plastic
enough to shape into a small ball.
Leave the plastic soil mass for some time for maturing. For some fat clay, this period may be
even upto 24 hours.

Take about 8g of the plastic soil, and roll it with fingers on a glass plate. The rate of rolling
should be about 80 to 90 strokes per minute to form a thread of 3mm diameter counting one
stroke when the hand moves forward and backward to the starting point.
If the diameter of the thread becomes less than 3mm without cracks, it shows that the water
content is more than plastic limit. Knead the soil to reduce the water content and roll it again into
thread. Repeat the process of alternate rolling and kneading until the tread crumbles and the soil
can no longer be rolled into thread.

Note: If the crumbling occurs when the thread has a diameter slightly greater than 3mm it may
be taken as plastic limit, provided the soil had been rolled into a thread of 3mm diameter
immediately before kneading. Do not attempt to produce failure exactly at 3mm diameter.
Collect the pieces of the crumbled soil thread in a moisture content container.
Repeat the procedure at least twice more with a fresh samples of plastic soil each time.

S.N DESCRIPTION SAMPLE-1 SAMPLE-2 SAMPLE-3

1 Wt. of container (W1) 14 14 14

2 Wt. of container + wet soil (W2) 38 28 31

3 Wt. of container + dry soil (W3) 35 26.2 28.91

4 2− 3

∗ 100
14.29 14.75 14.02
Moisture content (w%) == 3− 1

= 14.34 %

14.24+14.40
Avg. natural water content w (%) =
2

22
3.3.6 DETERMINATION OF FIELD DENSITY OF SOIL BY CORE
CUTTER METHOD:

A cylindrical core cutter is a seamless steel tube. For determination of the

dry density of the soil, the cutter is pressed into the soil mass so that it is
filled with the soil. The cutter filled with the soil is lifted up. The mass of
the soil in the cutter is determined. The dry density is obtained as

/
= =
+ +

Where M= mass of the wet soil in the cutter

V= internal volume of the cutter

PROCEDURE:

Measure the height (h) and internal diameter (d) of the core cutter and apply grease to the inside
of the core cutter

Weigh the empty core cutter (W1)

Clean and level the place where density is to be determined.

Drive the core cutter, with a steel dolly on its top, into the soil to its full depth with the help of a
steel rammer.

Excavate the soil around the cutter with a crow bar and gently lift the cutter without disturbing
the soil in it.

Trim the top and bottom surfaces of the sample and clean the outside surface of the cutter.

Weigh the core cutter with soil (W2)

23
Remove the soil from the core cutter, using a sample ejector and take representative soil sample
from it to determine the moisture content.

Fig: Core Cutter Apparatus

SN. DESCRIPTION SAMPLE-1 SAMPLE-2

1 Wt. of container (W1) 14 14

2 Wt. of container + natural soil (W2) 30 38

3 Wt. of container + dry soil (W3) 30.5 37

4 2− 3
9.09% 4.348%

( ) = 3 − 1 ∗ 100

Height of core cutter = 15 cm

Internal diameter = 10 cm
2
Volume = π*5 *15
3
= 1178 cm

24
SN. DESCRIPTION SAMPLE-1 SAMPLE-2

1. Mass of core cutter (W1) 945 908

2. Mass of core cutter + soil sample (W2) 2816 2592

3. ( )=
2− 1

(gm/cc) 1.588 1.430

4. ( )=
1.456 1.370
+

5. Avg. dry density (gm/cc) 1.413

25
 3.3.7DETERMININATION OF OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT BY
PROCTOR TEST:

Proctor Test:

In this method, the maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of soils is
obtained by using the results of one point on a standard proctor curve to enter a family of curves
from which the maximum dry density and optimum moisture content can be determined. A soil
sample is compacted in a mold having a capacity of 1/30 of a cubic foot and having an internal
diameter of 4 inches. The soil in the mold is compacted in three layers with 25 blows per layer
from a 5.5 pound hammer dropped from a height of 12 inches. The wet density and moisture
content of the compacted specimen is plotted on a family of curves and a maximum dry density
and optimum moisture content is selected from the family of curves for use in compaction
calculations.

Dry density of soil:

, Where M = total mass of the soil, V= volume of soil, w= water content.

PROCEDURE:

Take about 20kg of air-dried soil. Sieve it through 20mm and 4.7mm sieve.

Calculate the percentage retained on 20mm sieve and 4.75mm sieve, and the percentage passing
4.75mm sieve.

If the percentage retained on 4.75mm sieve is greater than 20, use the large mould of 150mm
diameter. If it is less than 20%, the standard mould of 100mm diameter can be used. The
following procedure is for the standard mould.

Mix the soil retained on 4.75mm sieve and that passing 4.75mm sieve in proportions determined
in step (2) to obtain about 20kg of soil specimen.

Clean and dry the mould and the base plate. Grease them lightly.

26
Weigh the mould with the base plate to the nearest 1 gram.

Take about 20kg of soil specimen. Add water to it to bring the water content to about 4% if the
soil is sandy and to about 8% if the soil is clayey.

Keep the soil in an air-tight container for about 18 to 20 hours for maturing. Mix the soil
thoroughly. Divide the processed soil into 6 to 8 parts. 9. Attach the collar to the mould. Place the
mould on a solid base.

Take about 4kg of the processed soil, and hence place it in the mould in 3 equal layers. Take
about one-third the quantity first, and compact it by giving 25 blows of the rammer. The blows
should be uniformly distributed over the surface of each layer.

The top surface of the first layer be scratched with spatula before placing the second layer. The
second layer should also be compacted by 25 blows of rammer. Likewise, place the third layer
and compact it.

The amount of the soil used should be just sufficient to fill the mould ad leaving about 5 mm
above the top of the mould to be struck off when the collar is removed.

Remove the collar and trim off the excess soil projecting above the mould using a straight edge.

Clean the base plate and the mould from outside. Weigh it to the nearest gram.

Remove the soil from the mould. The soil may also be ejected out.

Take the soil samples for the water content determination from the top, middle and bottom
portions. Determine the water content.

Add about 4% of the water to a fresh portion of the processed soil, and repeat the steps 10 to 1

27
 Fig : Rammer

S.N DESCRIPTION SAM-1 SAM-2 SAM-3 SAM-4 SAM-5

1 Water to be added (%) 0 4 8 12 16

2 Wt. of water to be added (ml) 0 160 320 480 640

3 Wt. of cylinder + compacted soil (gm) 3724 3886 4040 4182 4176

4 Wt. of compacted soil (gm) 1608 1770 1924 2066 2060

5 Wet density (gm/cm )

3 1.60 1.76 1.91 2.06 2.05

6 Dry density (gm/cm )

3 1.60 1.67 1.73 1.78 1.70

7 Wt. of container (gm) 14 14 14 14 14

8 Wt. of container + wet soil (gm) 29 34 46 44 38

9 Wt. of container + dry soil (gm) 29 33 43 40 34

10 Water content (w%) 0 5.26 10.34 15.38 20

28
Wt. of empty cylinder = 2116gm

Diameter of cylinder =10 cm

Height of cylinder = 12.8 cm

2 2
Volume = 3.14* r *h =3.14*5 *12.8

3
=1000cm

29
 4.RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Test Results of Natural soil

S.No. PROPERTIES RESULT

1. WATER CONTENT 14.34%

2. SPECIFIC GRAVITY 2.2

• SILT AND CLAY:

3. PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION 3.4%
• SAND: 66.8%
• GRAVEL: 29.8%

4. LIQUID LIMIT 31.5%

5. PLASTIC LIMIT 14.35%

6. SRINKAGE LIMIT

7. PLASTICITY INDEX 17.15%

15%
8. OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT

9. MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY 1.78 gm/cc

10. FIELD DENSITY 1.413gm/cc

11. RELATIVE CONSISTENCY 1

12. LIQUIDITY INDEX 0

30
 REFERENCES

Amudhavalli, N.K., Mathew, J., (2012), “Effect of Silica Fume on Strength and Durability
Parameters of Concrete”, International Journal of Engineering Sciences and Emerging
Technologies, Aug. 2012, Vol. 3, Issue 1, ISSN: 2231-6604.

Design of Concrete Structure by-B C Punmia.

Erdog, K., Turker, P., (1998), “Effects of Fly Ash Particle Size on Strength of Portland Cement Fly
Ash Mortars”, Turkish Cement Manufacturers Association, Research and Development Institute,
July (1998).
Holtz, R.D. Kovacs, W.D., An Introduction to Geotechnical Engineering, Prentice Hall. (1981)
Couduto, D.P., Geotechnical Engineering- principles and practices.” Prentice Hall Of India. (2002)
Ranjan, G. and Rao, A.S.R.,” Basic and Applied Soil Mechanics”., New Age International
Publishers.(2007)
Das, B.M., “Principal of Geotechnical Engineering”, Thomson Asia. (2002)
Lambe, T.W. and Whitman, R.V. “Soil Mechanics”, John Wiley and Sons.

31