1 EXPERIMENT NO.

1.1 DETERMINATION OF MOISTURE CONTENT (STANDARD METHOD

OVEN-DRYING METHOD)

Water content or moisture content is the quantity of water contained in a material, such
as soil (called soil moisture), rock, ceramics, or wood on a volumetric or gravimetric
basis. The property is used in a wide range of scientific and technical areas, and is
expressed as a ratio, which can range from 0 (completely dry) to the value of the
materials' porosity at saturation. (Wikipedia, 2009)

The water content is the most frequently determined soil characteristics. It is defined as
the ratio of the weight of water to the weight of the dry soil grains in a soil mass. The
water content is a good indication of the strength of clay soils.

The standard method of determining the moisture content is by over-drying at 105-110

degrees C but several other methods are available as rapid alternatives more suitable
to site conditions. In this experiment you are required to compare these tests for a clay
and granular soil.

This method is also used to determine the moisture content of soil samples used in
other tests explained in this manual.

1.2 APPARATUS

No.

Apparatus

Photo

A thermostatically controlled oven set at a

temperature of 105-110 C

A thermostatically controlled oven

2

Sample tins

Sample tins
3

Balance readable and accurate to 0.01 g

Balance readable

Table 1: Apparatus of Experiment no. 1

1.3 PROCEDURES
No.

PROCEDURES

PHOTO

1.

The sample container shall be cleaned, dried and weighted to

0.01g.

Container
2

Place the soil loosely in the container. Weight the container and
contents.

Weight the container

Weight the soil sample in the container

Then place in the oven.

Oven
4

The period required for draying will vary with the type of soil and
the size of sample. In general, 16-24 h is usually sufficient for
drying most soils.

The sample will be deemed to be dry when the differences in

successive weightings of the cooled sample at 4 hourly intervals
do not exceed 0.1% of the original weight of the sample.

Table 2: Procedure of Experiment no. 1

1.4 CALCULATIONS

The moisture content of the soil (m) shall be calculated as a percentage of the dry soil
weight, from the formula:-

m2-m3

x 100%

m3-m1
Where;
m1

mass of container

m2

mass of container and wet soil

m3

mass of container and dry soil

Determine the

a. Water content

= 10.33%

= 14.40%

= 8.12%

b. Void ratio (Sr = 1 and Gs = 2.70)

e = wGs = 0.1033 X 2.70 = 0.28791
e = wGs = 0.144 X 2.70 = 0.3888
e = wGs = 0.0812 X 2.70 = 0.2192

c. Bulk density

= 8.99 kg/m3

= 7.67 kg/m3

= 10.67kg/m3

d. Dry density

= 9.36 kg/m3

= 7.186 kg/m3

= 8.16 kg/m3

1.5 RESULTS

The moisture content of the soil (m) should be reported to two significant figures for
values up to 10% and to the nearest whole number for higher values.

Location
FSPU Soil Laboratory, UiTM Shah Alam

Job. Ref.
Borehole/
Pit no.
Sample no.
Depth

Soil description
Test method
: Part 2 : 1990 : 3.2
Related test
Specimen ref.
Container no.
Mass of wet soil + container (m2)
Mass of dry soil + container (m3)
Mass of container (m1)
Mass of moisture (m2 - m3)
Mass of dry soil (m3 - m1)
Moisture content w
=
m2 - m3
x 100
m3 - m1

BS 1377
Date

g
g
g
g
g

1
62.02
58.80
27.63
3.22
31.17

2
68.51
63.36
27.60
5.15
35.76

5
57.23
55.00
27.55
2.23
27.45

10.33

14.40

8.12

Operator

Table 3: Result of Experiments No. 1

Checked

Approved

17/07/09

2 EXPERIMENT NO. 2

2.1 SIEVE ANALYSIS -DETERMINATION OF PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION BY

DRY SIEVING

This test covers the quantitative determination of the particle size distribution in a soil
down to the fine and size. This method shall not be used unless it has been shown that
for the type of material under test it gives the same results as the methods of analysis
by wet sieving.

Smith (1998) said that a standardized system of classification helps to eliminates

human error. The usual method is based on the determination of the particle size
distribution by shaking a dried sample of the soil (usually after washing) through a set of
sieves and recording the mass retained on each sieve. The classification system
adopted by the British Standards Institution is the MIT (Massachusetts Institute of
Technology) system. The boundaries defined by this system can be seen on the
particles size distribution graph. The results of the sieve analysis are plotted with the
particle sizes horizontal and the summation percentages vertical. As soil particles vary
in size from molecular to boulder it is necessary to use a log scale for the horizontal plot
so that the full range can be shown on the one graph.

The smallest aperture generally used in soils work is that of the 0.063 mm size
sieve. Below this size (i.e. silt sizes) the distribution curve must be obtained by
sedimentation (pipette or hydrometer).

2.2 APPARATUS

APPARATUS

PHOTO

British Standard test sieves as follows:5 mm, 2 mm, 1.18 mm,0.60u mm,0.425u
mm,0.30u
mm,0.063u

mm,0.212u
mm

and

an

mm,0.15u
appropriate

receiver.
Test sieves
A balance accurate to 0.5g.
A balance accurate to 0.01g.

Balance
Sample dividers (e.g. rifle boxes)

Sample divider
A thermostatically controlled oven set at a
temperature of 105-110 C

Thermostatically controlled oven

10

Sieve brushes

Sieve brushes
At least six metal trays

Metal trays
A light hammer and/or a mortar and rubber
pestle
A scoop

Scoop
A mechanical sieve shaker

Mechanical sieve shaker

Table 4: Apparatus of Experiment no. 2

11

2.3 PROCEDURES
GUIDE FOR THE SELECTION OF THE MASS OF SOIL TO BE SIEVED

Maximum size of material

Minimum mass of sample to

Present in substantial

Be taken for sieving

Proportion (more than 10%)

Retained on B.S. test sieve
(mm)

(kg)

63

50

50

35

37.5

15

28

20

14

10

0.5

6.3

0.2

Passing 2 mm, 0.60u mm, 0.30u mm, or

0.1

0.063u mm
Table 5: Guide for the selection of the mass of soil to be sieved

12

No.
1.

PROCEDURES

PHOTO

Sufficient material, oven dried at a temperature 105100 C, shall be taken to give the minimum mass in
accordance with the table following. It should be
weighted to 0.1% of its total mass. The oven dried
sample

will

have

already

been

obtained

in

accordance with procedure for the preparation of

disturbed samples recommended in B.S. 1377.
Soil samples

2.

A selection of sieves should be stacked together

ranging from, at the top, the largest size test sieve
appropriate to the maximum size of material present
down to the 63 m size. Eight sieves will usually be
sufficient. Beneath the bottom sieve a receiver pan
should be fixed. The sample should now be placed
in the top sieve, a cover placed over the sieve and

Soil place in the sieve

the whole assembly fixed in a mechanical shaker

and agitated for a minimum of 10 minutes.

Mechanical sieve shaker

If any test sieve becomes overloaded the material
on the test sieve should be sieved in parts, the parts
not to exceed the masses given in the table
following.

13

Brush the sieve

The material from each of the sieve should be
rubbed with the rubber pestle in the mortar and resieved to make sure that only individual particles are
retained. The amount retained on each sieve to be
weighted before and after the re-sieving. Perform
this re-sieving on only one sieve.
Weighting
Table 6: Procedures of Experiment no. 2

14

2.4 CALCULATIONS

The percentage by mass of material retained on each test sieve should be calculated.
The percentage passing the 63u m B.S. test sieve should be obtained by difference and
checked by weighting the amount in the receiver. The cumulative percentages (by mass
of the total sample) passing each of the sieves should be calculated. The results
obtained should be reported on a semi-logarithmic chart. Comment on the shape of the
curve obtained.

Sieve size (mm)

Mass retained (g)

Percentage

Percentage

retained (%)

passing (%)

5 .000mm

0/250 x 100 = 0

100 0 = 100

2.000 mm

15

15/250 x 100 = 6.0

100 - 6 = 94

1.180 mm

42

42/250 x 100 = 16.8

94- 16.8 = 77.2

0.600mm

66

66/250 x 100 = 26.4

77.2- 26.4 = 50.8

0.425 mm

29

29/250 x 100 = 11.6

50.8 11.6 = 39.2

0.300 mm

33

33/250 x 100 = 13.2

39.2 13.2 = 26.0

0.212 mm

30

30/250 x 100 = 12.0

26 12 = 14.0

0.150 mm

18

18/250 x 100 = 6.8

14 6.8 = 7.2

0.063 mm

16

16/250 x 100 = 6.4

7.2 6.4 = 0.8

PAN

2/250 x100 = 0.8

0.8 0.8 = 0

250
Table 7: Calculation of Experiment no. 2

15

LOCATION

JOB REF.
BOREHOLE /
PIT NO.
SAMPLE NO.

SOIL DESCRIPTION

DEPTH

TEST METHOD

BS

DATE

1337:PART2:1990:9.2/9.3/9.4*
INITIAL DRY MASS

m1

BS TEST SIEVE

SIZE

MASS RETAINED

PARTICLE
[W] gm

ACTUAL

PERCENTAGE

CUMULATIVE

CORRECTED

RETAINED

PERCENTAGE

[m]

[m/m1] 100

PASSING

5 .000mm

409

409

100

2.000 mm

482

497

15

6.0

94

1.180 mm

437

479

42

16.8

77.2

0.600mm

335

401

66

26.4

50.8

0.425 mm

379

408

29

11.6

39.2

0.300 mm

305

338

33

13.2

26.0

0.212 mm

300

330

30

12.0

14.0

0.150 mm

285

302

18

6.8

7.2

0.063 mm

338

354

16

6.4

0.8

PAN

247

249

0.8

TOTAL [check with m1]

250
Table 8: Result of Experiment no. 2

16

2.5 PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION CHART

2.5.1

THE EFFECTIVE SIZE OF A DISTRIBUTION, D10

An important particle size within a soil distribution is the effective size which is the
largest size of the smallest 10%. It is given the symbol D10. Other particle sizes, such
as D60 and D85 are defined in the same manner. (Smith, 1998)

2.5.2

GRADING OF A DISTRIBUTION

For a granular soil the shape of its grading curve indicates the distribution of the soil
particles within it. If the shape of the curve is not too steep and is more or less constant
over the full range of the soils particle sizes then the particle size distribution extends
evenly over the range of the particle sizes within the soil and there is no deficiency or
excess of any particular particle size. Such a soil is said to be well graded. (Smith,
1998)

Smith (1998) stated that, Iif the soil has any other form of distribution curve then
it is said to be poorly graded. According to their distribution curves there are two types
of poorly graded soil:

a. If the major part of the curve is steep then the soil has a particle size distribution
extending over a limited range with most particles tending to be about the same
size. The soil is said to be closely graded or, more commonly, uniformly graded.

b. If a soil has large percentages of its bigger and smaller particles and only a small
percentage of the intermediate sizes then its grading curve will exhibit a
significantly flat section or plateau. Such a soil is said to be gap graded.

17

2.5.3

THE UNIFORMLY COEFFICIENT, Cu

Smith (1998) described that, the grading of a soil is best determined by direct
observation of its particle size distribution curve. This can be difficult for those studying
the subject for the first time but some guidance can be obtained by the use of a grading
parameter, known as the uniformity coefficient.

Cu

D60 / D10

If Cu < 4.0 then the soil is uniformly graded

If Cu > 4.0 then the soil is either well graded or gap and a glance at the grading
curve should be sufficient for the reader to decide which the correct description is.

Referring to the results of a sieve analysis experiment no. 2 on a soil sample was:
409 g passed through the 0.063 mm sieve.
Plot the particle size distribution curve and determine the uniformity coefficient, Cu of
the soil.

Solution
The aim is to determine the percentage of soil (by mass) passing through each sieve.
To do this the percentage retained on each sieve is determined and subtracted this from
the percentage passing through the previous sieve. This gives the percentage passing
through the current sieve. (Refer Table 7: Calculation of Experiment no. 2 and Table 8:
Result of Experiment no. 2 above)

18

The particle size distribution curve is shown in the graph. The soil has
approximately proportions of 6% gravel and 94% sand.

D10

0.18 mm;

D60

0.70 mm

Cu

D60 / D10

0.70 / 0.18

19

3.89

3 EXPERIMENT NO. 3

3.1 LIQUID LIMIT CONE PENETROMETER - DETERMINATION OF LIQUID

LIMIT USING THE CONE PENETROMETER
The liquid limit is defined as the moisture content corresponding to a cone penetration
of 20 mm.

3.2 APPARATUS
A flat surface
Palette knives

Palette, container and steel tray

Penetrometer Apparatus

Cone penetrometer
20

A cone of stainless steel or duralumin

approximately 35 mm long, with a smooth,
polished surface and an angle of 30 + 1.
A metal cup approximately 55 mm in
diameter and 40 mm deep with the rim
parallel to the flat base

Metal cup
An evaporating dish, or a damp cloth
A plastic wash battle containing distilled
water

Plastic wash battle

A metal straight edge (use edge of
spatula)

Spatula

21

3.3 PROCEDURES
NO

PROCEDURES

PHOTO

A sample weighting at least 200 g

shall be taken from material passing
the 425 m BS test sieve. The sample
shall be placed on the flat surface
and mixed thoroughly for 10 minutes
with distilled water using the palette
knives until the mass becomes a

Weighting sample

thick homogenous paste. The soil

shall then be pushed into a cup with
a palate knife, taking care not to trap
air. The excess soil shall be struck
off and leveled to five a smooth
surface.

The

Penetrometer

cone

shall be lowered so that it just

Mixed with distilled water

touches the surface of the soil. When

the cone is in the correct position, a
slight movement of the cup will just
mark the surface of the soil and the
reading of redial gauge shall be
noted to the nearest 0.1 mm. The

Push soil into a metal cup

cone shall then be released for a

period of 5 + 1 second.

22

Care should be taken not to jerk the

apparatus during these operations.
After the cone has been locked in
position the dial gauge shall be
lowered to the new position of the
cone shaft and the reading noted to
the nearest 0.1 mm. The difference
between

the

readings

at

the

beginning and end of the test shall

Cone penetration

be recorded as the cone penetration.

The cone shall be lifted out and

cleaned carefully. A little more wet
soil shall be added to the cup and the
process repeated. If the difference
between

the

first

and

second

penetration readings is less than 0.5

mm and less than 1 mm difference
from the first a third test shall be
carried out.

23

If the overall range is then not more

than 1 mm the average of the three
penetrations shall be recorded.
If the overall range is more than 1
mm the soil shall be removed from
the

cup,

remixed

and

the

test

repeated until consistent results are

obtained.

Once

the

results

are

Take sample to be put into container

consistent a moisture content sample

(about 10 g) shall be taken from the
area penetrated by the cone and the
moisture content determined by the
oven drying method.

Soil sample will be put in oven

5

The

operations

described

above

shall be repeated at least four times

using the same sample to which
further increments of distilled water
have been added. The amount of
water added shall be chosen so that
a range of penetration values of
approximately 15 mm to 25 mm is
covered during the test.

24

3.4 RESULTS

The relationship between the moisture content and the cone penetration shall be plotted
with the percentage moisture contents as abscissae and the cone penetrations as
ordinates, both on liner scales. The moisture content corresponding to a cone
penetration of 20 mm shall be taken as the liquid limit of the soil is 47.5%.

The plastic limit is determined thus:

wp

mass of wet soil + container mass of dry soil + container x 100

mass of dry soil + container - mass of container

47.00 43.89 x 100

43.89 26.00

17.38%

I. Determine the plasticity index of the soil, i.e. PI = LL PL and classify the soil
according the Casagrandes Chart.
PI = LL PL
PI = 47.5% - 17.38%
PI = 30.12%

II. The liquidity index can be determined if the natural moisture content of the soil
know.

LI

m PL
LL PL

LI

33.33 17.38
47.5 17.38

LI

0.53%
25

Plasticity Chart

To use the plasticity chart it is necessary to plot a point whose coordinates are the liquid
limit and the plasticity index of the soil to be identified. The soil is classified by observing
the position of the point relative to the sloping straight line drawn across the diagram.

This line, known as the A-line, is an empirical boundary between inorganic clays,
whose points lie above the line, and organic silts and clays whose points lie below. The
A- line goes through the base line at plasticity index = 0, liquid limit = 20% so that its
equation is:

Plasticity Index, PI =

0.73 (Liquid Limit, LL 20%)

PI =

0.73 (47.5% - 20%)

PI =

20%

26

Location

Job. Ref.
Borehole/
Pit no.
Sample no.
Depth

Soil description
Test method
1990 : 4.3/4,4'
PLASTIC LIMIT
Container no.
Mass of wet soil +
container
Mass of dry soil +
container
Mass of container
Mass of moisture
Mass of dry soil
Moisture content
LIQUID LIMIT
Initial dial gauge
Final dial gauge
Average penetration
Container no.
Mass of wet soil +
container
Mass of dry soil +
container
Mass of container
Mass of moisture
Mass of dry soil
Moisture content

BS 1377 : Part 2 :
Date
Test
no.

1
g

47

g
g
g
g
%

43.89
26
3.11
17.89
17.38

Test
no.
1
mm
mm 4.9
6.0
mm
5.17
14

4.6

7.7 4.4
6.47
15

7.3

11.9 17.1 17.2 21..9 21.9

15.40
21.30
13
16

30

36

32

34

g
g
g
g
%

28
22
2
6
33.33

32
22
4
10
40

29
22
3
7
42.86

30
22
4
9
44.44

Table 9: Result of Experiment no. 3

27

average

20.1

4 EXPERIMENT NO. 4

4.1 PROCTOR COMPACTION TEST

In this test a relationship between the moisture content and the dry density of a soil is
establish for a standard compactive effort. Hence, it is possible to determine the
optimum moisture content to give the maximum dry density, i.e. the densest state to
compaction.

It is important, when water is added to a soil sample, that it is mixed thoroughly to

give a uniform dispersion. Inadequate mixing can lead to varying test results and some
form of mechanical mixer should be used. Adequate mixing is particularly important with
cohesive soils and with highly plastic soils it may be necessary to place the mixed
sample in an air tight container for at least 16 hours, in order to allow the moisture to
migrate throughout the soil. (Smith, 1998)

28

4.2 APPARATUS
APPARATUS
Proctor mould of internal diameter 102mm,
height 116mm and volume 994ml. The
mould is fitted with a detachable base
plate and an extension collar 52mm high.

PHOTO

Proctor mould
2.5kg rammer with a 305mm fall (manual
apparatus or the automatic mechanical
apparatus).

2.5 kg Rammer

Balance of 7kg capacity and accurate to

1g.

Balance

Metal straight edge and spatula.

Spatula
Table 10: Apparatus of Experimen no. 4

29

4.3 PROCEDURES

NO

PROCEDURES

PHOTO

Weight the mould with its base plate attached but without its
collar.

Weighting the mould

2

Mix 2.5kg of the soil under test with a 180ml of water

(representing an initial moisture content of 6%).

Mix the soil with water

30

Attach the collar to the mould and compact the soil in three equal
layers by giving each layer 25 uniformly distributed blows of the
rammer falling freely through a distance of 305mm onto the soil.

Attach the collar to mould

Compact the soil into three equal layer

25 uniformly distributed blowing of the rammer

31

The last layer should project into the collar. Remove the collar
and trim off the soil level with the top of the mould and take a
representative sample for moisture content determination.

Trim off the soil level

Take the sample

5

Re-mix the extruded soil with the remainder of the original

sample and increase the moisture content by 3 per cent.

Re-mix the extruded soil

6

Repeat the above procedure and continue until there is no

change in the weight of the compacted soil required to fill the
mould or the weight decreases.
Table 11: Procedure of Experiment no. 4

32

4.4 CALCULATION

ITEM

CONTAINER

CONTAINER

CONTAINER

NO.11

NO. 8

NO. 3

61

50

57

57

46

51

33

27

29

61 57 = 4

50 46 = 4

57 51 = 6

57 33 = 24

46 27 = 19

51 29 = 22

61 57 x 100

50 46 x 100

57 51 x 100

w =

57 33

46 27

51 29

(m2-m3) x 100

= 16.67

= 21.05

= 27.27

Mass of

dry

soil

container (m2)
Mass of

dry

soil

container (m3)
Mass

of

container (m1)
Mass

of

moisture (m2m3)
Mass of

dry

soil (m3-m1)
Moisture
content

(m3-m1)

Table 12: Calculation of moisture content for experiment no. 4

33

Determine the bulk density of the compacted soil in the mould from the formula:-

m2 m1

kg/m3

1000
Where;

m1

mass of mould and base plate (g)

m2

mass of mould, base plate and soil (g)

Determine the dry density of the soil from the bulk density and moisture content using
the relation.

pd

100p

kg/m3

100 + m
Where;

moisture content (per cent)

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

ITEM
Bulk density
P = (m2-m1)
1000
Dry density
Pd = 100p
100 + w

Test no. 1

Test no. 2

Test no. 3

= 6724 4945

= 6903 4945

= 6785 4945

1000

1000

1000

= 1.78 Mg/m3

= 1.96 Mg/m3

= 1.84 Mg/m3

= 100 x 1.78

= 100 x 1.96

= 100 x 1.84

100 + 16.67

100 + 21.05

100 + 27.27

= 1.43 Mg/m3

= 1.62 Mg/m3

= 1.51 Mg/m3

Table 13: Calculation of bulk density and dry density for Experiment no. 4

34

Test no.

Mass of mould + base + compacted specimen (m2)

6724

6903

6785

Mass of mould + base (m2)

4945

4945

4945

Mass of compacted specimen (m2-m1)

1779

1958

1840

Mg/m3

1.78

1.96

1.84

11

16.67

21.05

27.27

Mg/m3

1.43

1.62

1.51

Water

ml

180

180

180

Container no.

11

Mass of dry soil + container (m2)

61.00

50.00

57.00

Mass of dry soil + container (m3)

57.00

46.00

51.00

Mass of container (m1)

33.00

27.00

29.00

Mass of moisture (m2-m3)

4.00

4.00

6.00

Mass of dry soil (m3-m1)

24.00

19.00

22.00

Moisture content w = (m2-m3) x 100

16.67

21.05

27.27

Bulk density p = (m2-m2)

1000
Moisture content container no.
Moisture content (w)
Dry density pd = 100p
100 + w

(m3-m1)
Table 14: Result of Experiment no. 4

35

5 REFERENCES

I.

Rahmat, D. H. (2009). Soil Laboratory Manual. Shah Alam: Department of

Building, FSPU.

II.

Smith, G. S. (1998). Element of Soil Mechanics 7th Edition. Cambridge:

Blackwell Science.

III.

Smith, M. J. (1978). Soil Mechanics Third Edition. London: ELBS and Macdonald
and Evans Ltd.

IV.

Wikipedia.

(2009).

Retrieved

www.wikipedia.com/watercontent

36

from

Wikipedia

Web

Site: