Experiment 7: Standard Proctor and field density

Name: Ramprasad B Rakhonde Roll No: CE17B126

Group Number: 25 Date: 13.08.2019

Standard Proctor
Aim: To determine the relation between water content and dry unit weight and to find the maximum
dry unit weight and optimum water content.

Apparatus:
1. Compaction mould with base plate and collar
2. Compaction hammer
3. Sample ejector
4. Large mixing pan, scales, moisture cans and measuring jar
.
Procedure:
1. Weigh the standard proctor mould with base and without collar (w1).
2. Take about 3 kg of air-dried soil passing through 4.75 mm sieve.
3. Take known quantity of water (5% by the weight of dry soil) and mix well with the soil and
separate into three equal parts separately.
4. Attach the collar with proctor mould and fill the mixed soils in the mould in three equal
layers.
5. Compact each layer by the rammer weighing 2.6 kg allowing it to drop 25 times from the
height of 310 mm.
6. The total height of the compacted soil should be slightly more than the height of the
mould.
7. Remove the collar and cut out the projected soils to have a level surface with the top of
the mould.
8. Weigh the mould with the soil (w2).
9. Remove the soil from the cylinder and break up the soil by hand. Now increase the
moisture content by 2% and mix thoroughly. Repeat the experiment.
10. In the repeating process each time raise the moisture content by 2% until there is a
considerable fall in the weight of the mould with compacted soil.
11. Take samples from each operation and calculate the moisture content and corresponding
dry density.
12. Draw the graph between dry density and moisture content. Draw the saturation line in the
same graph.
13. Find the dry density and optimum moisture content from the graph.

Observations and calculations:

𝑮𝒔 𝜸𝒘
γ s(av) = 𝒘𝑮𝒔
𝟏+
𝟏𝟎𝟎
Where
γ s(av) = dry density at saturation
Gs = specific gravity of soil particles = 2.7
γw = unit weight of water
w = water content.
Determination of dry density

Empty weight of mould = 2.262 kg

Diameter of the mould = 9.92cm
Height of the mould = 14.982cm
Volume of the mould = 1153.26cc
Weight of the hammer = 2.5kg
Height of fall = 30cm
Number of layers = 3
Number of blows = 25

Weight of Weight of Bulk Water Dry density

Trial mould + soil soil density content (Mg/m3) ZAVL
(kg) (grams) (Mg/m3) (%)
1 5.774 1636 1.673 7.47 1.5567135 2.24683571
2 6.068 1930 1.974 10.32 1.7893401 2.11161859
3 6.250 2112 2.160 13.03 1.91099708 1.99732211
4 6.220 2082 2.130 16.12 1834.30934 1.88121847
5 6.159 2021 2.067 17.71 1.75601053 1.82658287

Moisture content determination:

Weight of cup Weight of cup + Weight of cup + Water content

Trial (grams) wet soil dry soil (%)
(grams) (grams)
1 48.02 156.19 148.67 7.47
2 43.39 148.43 138.60 10.32
3 24.76 136.63 123.73 13.03
4 25.15 133.78 118.70 16.12
5 18.00 169.84 147.00 17.71

dry density vs moisture content

2.5
dry of optimum
wet of optimum
2
dry density (Mg/m3)

max dry density is

1.9 Mg/m3
1.5 dry
density
1 ZAVL

0.5

0
0 5 10 OMC 15 20
13.1%
water content %

Results:

1. Maximum dry density of the soil = 1.9Mg/m3

2. Optimum moisture content. = 13.1%
Discussions:
1. For good results try to uses a good scale for the compaction plot.
2. Laboratory compaction tests are not directly applicable to field compaction since the
compactive efforts in the laboratory test are usually different from those produced by the field
compaction equipment. Further, the lab tests are usually carried out on material with particle
sizes smaller than those likely to be encountered in the field. Laboratory tests provide only a
rough guide to the water content at which the maximum dry density will be obtained in the
field. The main value of the laboratory tests is in the classification and selection of soils for use
in fills and embankments.
3. The dry density achieved after field compaction expressed as a percentage of the maximum
dry density in particular laboratory test is defined as the relative compaction. The required field
standard may be specified in terms of relative compaction. For example, a specification may
state that the dry density should not be less than 95 percent of the maximum dry density
obtained in the laboratory. In addition, water content limits must be specified, compaction
being allowed to proceed only, if the natural water content of the soil is within these specified
limits.
4. Because the physical properties of granular soils are improved by compaction to the maximum
weight, there is a tendency to assume that it applies to all soils. However, in case of fine-
grained soils the shear strength, compressibility, swelling potential and permeability are not
necessarily improved by compaction to the maximum unit weight (because of structure
effects). Establishing the optimum compaction conditions for a given soil usually involves
extensive testing.
5. In general, compaction is likely to increase the shear strength, swell potential, and dry density.
It decreases the shrinkage, permeability and compressibility. Compaction on the wet-side of
optimum permits low permeable soil undergoes large deformation without cracking.
Compaction of clay soil on the dry side of optimum may make it less susceptible to shrinkage
but more susceptible to swelling and brittleness and cracking even under low deformation.
This leads to the conclusion that compaction criteria should be based on consideration of soil
structure and other desired properties apart from increased density. Available data also
indicates that soil structure, density and OMC depend on method of providing compaction
energy versus kneading, vibration and impact and its magnitude.

Inference:
• The dry density versus water content of the graph was observed to increase steadily and then
decrease, as expected.
• The compaction curve is lying below the ZAV line which is a positive sign for accuracy of our
optimum water content value.
• An erroneous observation (outlier) resulted due to depression (causing weight loss) in
compacted soil in the mould, while it was dismantled. Such observations should be omitted
to get accurate results.
• Due to the last observation, the compaction curve starts deviating considerably from ZAV line
for wet of optimum hinting that it might be an outlier as well.
• Dry side of optimum is preferred when we want less shrinkage, less permeability and less
compressibility. Wet side of optimum is preferred when we want to avoid swelling, want more
permeability and compressibility.
 Sand Replacement Method

Aim: To determine the in-situ density of soil by Sand Replacement method.

Apparatus:
1. Large sand pouring cylinder
2. Tools for excavation holes
3. Balance
4. Plane surface
5. Metal cylinder
6. Metal tray with central hole
7. Clean uniformly graded natural sand passing 1mm sieve and retained on 600µ IS sieve
Procedure:
1. The pouring cylinder shall be filled with given initial weight of sand. This weight shall be
maintained constant throughout the test for which calibration is used. A volume of sand
equivalent to excavated hole in soil shall be allowed to run out of pouring cylinder under
gravity.
2. The shutter of pouring cylinder shall be closed and cylinder shall be placed on place surface.
3. The shutter of pouring cylinder is opened and after pouring it is closed and sand that has filled
the cone of pouring cylinder is collected and weighed. The internal volume of calibrating
cylinder should stand on large tray during process to collect sand overflowing from cone when
cylinder is removed. The pouring cylinder shall be placed concentrically on top of calibrating
container and filled with constant weight of sand. The shutter of pouring cylinder shall be
closed during this operation.
4. The shutter is opened and allowed to run out and it is closed when no further movement of
sand takes place.
5. The pouring cylinder shall be removed and sand remaining in it is weighed. The
measurement shall be repeated atleast three times of mean weight is taken.
6. Then a flat area at the place of testing is exposed and trimmed down to level surface.
7. A metal tray with central hole is placed and hole is excavated to a depth upto minimum of
150mm.
8. The excavated soil shall be carefully collected and weighed and a representive sample is kept
for water content determination.
9. The pouring cylinder filled with constant weight of sand shall be placed so that the base of
cylinder covers the hole concentrically.
10. The shutter is opened and soil is filled in excavated hole and cone of pouring cylinder and
the shutter is closed, then the pouring cylinder is weighed.
11. Using data obtained the in-situ density of soil is determined.

Observations:
Calibrating cylinder
Diameter of the Calibrating Cylinder (cm) 9.585
Height of the Calibrating Cylinder (cm) 15.03
Volume of the Calibrating Cylinder (cm3) 1083.95
Weight of calibrating cylinder (g) 1858

Pouring cylinder
Initial weight of pouring cylinder + sand (W1) (g) 5182
Weight of sand which went into calibrating cylinder 1637
(W2) (g)
Weight of sand filled in cone, (W3) (g) 384
 Sand density:
Weight of sand in Calibrating Cylinder
Density of sand = = 1637/1084= 1.51 g/cc
Volume of the Calibrating Cylinder

Measurement of Soil Density

Weight of wet soil from hole, Ww (g) 1637
Weight of sand + cylinder before pouring, 6617
W1 (g)
Weight of sand + cylinder after pouring, W4 (g) 5175

Weight of sand in hole, Wb =(W1-W4-W3) (g) 1058

Serial Empty weight Weight of Weight of Water content Average water

no. of container container + container + (%) (w) content
(g) X wet soil (g) dry soil (g) Z ((Y-Z)/(Z-X)) *
Y 100
1 17.91 79.86 76.04 6.57 6.69
2 20.02 84.51 80.40 6.81

Bulk density of soil = (Ww/Wb) * Bulk density of sand(g/cc) = 1637*1.51/1058=2.336 g/cc Water
content

Dry density of soil= (Bulk density)/(1+w) g/cc = 2.336/(1+0.0669)=2.189 g/cc

Results:
Bulk density of soil = 2.336 g/cc
Dry density of soil = 2.189g/cc
Moisture content = 6.69 %
 Core Cutter Method
Aim: To determine dry density of soil by core cutter method

Apparatus:
1. Cylindrical core cutter, 100mm internal diameter and 130mm long
2. Steel rammer, mass 9 kg, overall length with the foot and staff about 900m.
3. Steel dolley, 25mm high and 100 mm internal diameter
4. Weighing balance, accuracy 1g.
5. Palette knife
6. Straight edge, steel rule etc.

Formula used:

Where, M= mass of the wet soil in the cutter

V= internal volume of the cutter

Procedure:

1. Determine the internal diameter and height of the core cutter to the nearest 0.25mm
2. Determine the mass (M1) of the cutter to the nearest gram.
3. Expose a small area of the soil to be tested. Level the surface, about 300mm square in area.
4. Place the dolley over the top of the core cutter and press the core cutter into the soil mass using
the rammer. Stop the pressing when about 15mm of the dolley protrudes above the soil surface.
5. Remove the soil surrounding the core cutter, and take out the core cutter. Soil soil would
project from the lower end of the cutter.
6. Remove the dolley. Trim the top and bottom surface of the core cutter carefully using a
straight edge.
7. Weigh the core cutter filled with the soil to the nearest gram (M2).
8. Remove the core of the soil from the cutter. Take a representative sample for the water
content determination.
9. Determine the water content.

Observations:

Diameter of the core cutter (cm) 10.22

Length of the core cutter (cm) 13.03
Volume of the core cutter (cm3) (V) 1069
Weight of empty core cutter, W1 (g) 1967
Weight of core cutter + wet soil, W2 (g) 3593
Weight of soil, Ws (g) (W2-W1) 1626
Bulk density = Ws/V=1626/1069=1.521 g/cc
Water content determination

Serial Empty Weight of Weight of Water content Average

no. weight of container + container + (%) (w) water content
container (g) wet soil (g) dry soil (g) ((Y-Z)/(Z-X)) *
X Y Z 100
1 22.53 163.25 153.20 7.69 7.03
2 18.70 119.02 113.01 6.37

Dry unit weight = (Bulk density)/(1+w) = 1.521/(1+0.0703)=1.421 g/cc

Result:
Bulk density of soil = 1.521 g/cc Dry
density of soil = 1.421 g/cc Moisture
content = 7.03 %

Discussions and Inferences:

• The densities obtained from two tests are significantly different (Bulk density-2.336 and
1.521).
• Water content is uniform throughout the soil and hence we taking an average of two
water content values.
• The main uses of soil density test are during field compaction (OMC).
• Soil replacement method can be used for various types of soil while Core-cutter
method is limited to soft soils like clay and cohesive soils.
• Also, results are sand replacement methods are supposedly more reliable than core- cutter
methods. So, if we have to choose one of the two values, we will go with the one obtained
from sand replacement method.