A MINI PROJECT REPORT

On
LABORATORY INVESTIGATION ON ENGINEERING PROPERTIES
OF SOIL

Submitted in partial fulfillment of requirement for the award of degree

in BACHELOR OF TECHNOLOGY
IN

CIVIL ENGINEERING

Submitted By

V. SAI KIRAN (20911A0169)

P. MAHENDER (20911A0151)

SOHAIL SHARIF (20911A0163)

HRUDAY RANJAN (20911A0147)

MD INAM UL HAQ (20911A0145)

Under the Esteemed Guidance

Of
Mrs T. SARADA Assistant
Professor CE, VJIT

1
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

2023-2024

2
 VIDYA JYOTHI INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
(An Autonomous Institution)
Aziz Nagar Gate, C.B Post, Chilkur Road – 500075

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the project report entitled “LABORATORY

INVESTIGATION ON ENGINEERING PROPERTY OF SOIL” has been submitted
by the following students in partial fulfillment for the award of the degree of “Bachelor
of Technology” in Civil Engineering to Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University,
Hyderabad, during the academic year 2020 – 2024. The results embodied in this project
report have not been submitted to any other university or institute for the award of any
degree.

V. Sai Kiran 20911A0169

P. MAHENDER 20911A0151
SOHAIL SHARIF 20911A0163
HRUDAY RANJAN 20911A0147
MD INAM UL HAQ 20911A1045

Project Guide, Head of the Department,

Mrs T. Sarada Dr. Pallavi Badry

(Assistant Professor - CE) (Professor & Head - CE)

3
 External Examiner

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

It is by the blessings of the god almighty that we are able to complete our investigation
studies successfully and present this work for which we internally indebted.

It affords us an immense pleasure to acknowledge with gratitude the help and able guidance
rendered to us by the host of people, to whom we owe a substantial measure for the
fulfillment of this project work.

First, we would like to thank our advisor and project guide, Professor Mrs T. sarada, for her
advice, support and mentorship. Her encouragement has strongly motivated us to accomplish
this work.

We would like to express our gratitude to the Head of the Department, Dr. Pallavi Badry, for
her valuable suggestions, scholarly guidance and constant encouragement throughout our
graduate studies and project work.

We wish to express our respect and gratitude to the Principal Dr. E. Saibaba Reddy, for their
support and encouragement and lending our all the facilities required to proceed our study.

We are grateful to our entire teaching faculty and non-teaching staff for their assistance and
their kind cooperation throughout our graduation course.

Last but not the least this project is dedicated to our family, for without their blessings nothing
would have been possible.

We our self highly obliged to have every one’s support and encouragement that made
great efforts towards the pursuit of our education.

4
 DECLARATION

This is to certify that the work reported in the present project entitled
(LABORATORY INVESTIGATION ON ENGINEERING PROPERTY OF
SOIL) is a record of work done by us in the Department of Civil Engineering,
Vidya Jyothi Institute of Technology, Jawaharlal Nehru Technological
University, Hyderabad. The reports are based on the project work done entirely
by us and not copied from any other sources.

V. SAI KIRAN (20911A0169)

P. MAHENDER (20911A0151)

SOHAIL SHARIF (20911A0163)

HRUDAY RANJAN (20911A0147)

MD INAM UL HAQ (20911A0145)

1
 ABSTRACT

The bearing capacity of soil is a critical parameter in the design and construction of
foundations for civil engineering structures. This extensive research delves into the
multifaceted aspects of soil behavior under various loading conditions, aiming to
provide a comprehensive understanding of the factors influencing bearing capacity. The
study employs a multi-disciplinary approach, integrating laboratory testing, in-situ
investigations, and advanced numerical simulations to capture the intricate nuances of
soil-structure interaction.

Laboratory testing forms the foundation of this research, encompassing a range of soil
types including sandy, clayey, and silty soils. Standard penetration tests (SPT), cone
penetration tests (CPT), and triaxial tests are conducted to meticulously characterize the
geotechnical properties of the soils. The data obtained from these tests serve as a basis
for understanding the shear strength, compressibility, and other key parameters that
directly impact the bearing capacity.

In this mini project, significantly contributes to the body of knowledge in geotechnical

engineering. The insights gained from the laboratory testing, field investigations, and
numerical simulations collectively provide a holistic understanding of soil behavior and
its direct relevance to bearing capacity. As the foundation is a critical element in any
structure, the findings of this research have far-reaching implications for the safety,
stability, and longevity of civil engineering projects.

2
CONTENTS

3
CHAPTER - 1

4
INTRODUCTION

1.1 INTRODUCTION

The bearing capacity of soil stands as a critical determinant in the successful design and
construction of foundations for civil engineering structures. As the point of interface
between the constructed edifice and the underlying earth, soil bears the onus of
supporting loads while minimizing deformations. This geotechnical parameter is a
cornerstone in ensuring structural stability, longevity, and overall safety. In this
introduction, we embark on a journey to explore the multifaceted dimensions of soil
bearing capacity, emphasizing its pivotal role in the broader context of civil engineering.

Fig.1.1 Load Bearing capacity of soil

The bearing capacity of soil depends on various factors, including soil type, moisture
content, compaction, and the geometry of the foundation. There are three primary modes
of failure associated with bearing capacity:

General Shear Failure: This occurs when the soil undergoes shear failure along a plane.
The failure surface is typically a shallow, inclined plane beneath the foundation.

Local Shear Failure: This type of failure is characterized by the formation of a narrow,
vertical shear zone beneath the foundation. It is more common in cohesive soils.
1
Punching Shear Failure: This failure mode is observed in granular soils, and it involves
the formation of a punch-shaped failure surface beneath the foundation.

Geotechnical engineers employ these equations to assess the bearing capacity of soil
during the design phase of a construction project. Comprehensive geotechnical
investigations are conducted to determine soil properties and conditions at a site. The
collected data, including soil type, moisture content, and other relevant parameters, are
then used to calculate the bearing capacity and inform the foundation design.

The bearing capacity is not a fixed value but rather a dynamic parameter that depends on
the specific conditions at a given site. As such, it is imperative to consider the variability
of soil properties and conditions when designing foundations. Engineers aim to ensure
that the calculated bearing capacity exceeds the loads imposed by the structure, providing
a factor of safety to account for uncertainties and unforeseen conditions.

In conclusion, the bearing capacity of soil is a cornerstone of geotechnical engineering,

influencing the stability and safety of structures. It reflects the soil's ability to support
applied loads and is a crucial consideration in the design and construction of foundations.
By understanding the bearing capacity and employing appropriate engineering methods,
professionals can ensure the resilience and longevity of structures in diverse geotechnical
settings.

CHAPTER – 2

2
 LITERATURE SURVEY

2.1 LITERATURE SURVEY

Several literature surveys have been conducted :

1. Experimental analysis of bearing capacity of soil with the addition of

processed E-waste
The production of electronic waste is rapidly increasing with the updates in
technological world being developed on a daily basis, making the predecessors
obsolete. Improper handling of e-waste has made it a major contributor towards
waste generation and a potential threat to the environment. This study is aimed at
providing two solutions, one towards soil stabilization and second towards handling
e-waste effectively. This paper focuses on using the e-waste, processed in a
powdered form along with soil and comparing the improvement in geotechnical
properties. Tests were conducted to identify the properties of materials being used in
this study, and also over combination of soil with e-waste at different percentages
such as 3, 6, 9 and 12. Apart from basic soil tests, the samples were subjected
to shear strength, unconfined compression and CBR tests. Results indicate a healthy
increase in properties like shear strength, stability of the soil against failure of
slopes.

2. Analysis study of soil bearing capacity and settlement of single pile

foundation based on N-SPT data
Foundation is a very important structural element in a building. The bearing capacity
of the soil is the support for the foundation, where a foundation is defined as a most
basic part of the construction of a building that transmits the load originating from
the weight of the building itself and the load acting on the building to the
surrounding ground. The purpose of this research is to determine the bearing
capacity of the foundation and the settlement of a single pile that occurs and to
determine of the size of ship's collision force against the building. The foundation

3
 used in the construction of the Sultan Suriansyah Mosque Port is a 45 cm diameter
pile foundation. The calculation of bearing capacity of a single pile was carried out
using the Mayerhoff method based on the N-SPT results of 399.802 tons. The
settlement of a single pile foundation using the Semi Empirical Method is 0.036 m
with an allowable drop of 0.045 m. The collision force of the ship against the Port is
0.0032 tons

3. Estimating the Bearing Capacity of Rough Footings by the Stress

Characteristic Lines Method
In this study, to evaluate the bearing capacity of rough strip footing located on
horizontal ground, a numerical algorithm has been proposed based on the stress
characteristic lines method. To solve the aperture problem created beneath the
footing, a solution procedure is suggested. The triple bearing capacity factors, the
stress characteristics fields as well as geometric properties of plastic and non-plastic
regions under the footing have been extracted. The obtained results are in an
extremely good agreement with those presented in the literature. It was found that as
the angle of internal friction increased, the bearing capacity factors and plastic span
along the ground surface continuously increased. The maximum depth of the plastic
domain affected by the stress characteristics fields was 1.63 times the footing's width
and gradually moves toward footing edges. The depth of the non-plastic region is
also increased and for φ=45∘ reaches 75% of the footing's width. Moreover, the
width of the non-plastic region coincides with the footing base gradually moving
toward the footing edges so that the ratio of the maximum width of the non-plastic
curved wedge to footing width tends to one.

4. Neural Computing Improvement Using Four Metaheuristic

Optimizers in Bearing Capacity Analysis of Footings Settled on Two-
Layer Soils
This study outlines the applicability of four metaheuristic algorithms, namely, whale
optimization algorithm (WOA), league champion optimization (LCA), moth–flame
optimization (MFO), and ant colony optimization (ACO), for performance
improvement of an artificial neural network (ANN) in analyzing the bearing capacity
of footings settled on two-layered soils. To this end, the models estimate the

4
 stability/failure of the system by taking into consideration soil key factors. The
complexity of each network is optimized through a sensitivity analysis process. The
performance of the ensembles is compared with a typical ANN to evaluate the
efficiency of the applied optimizers. It was shown that the incorporation of the WOA,
LCA, MFO, and ACO algorithms resulted in 14.49%, 13.41%, 18.30%, and 35.75%
reductions in the prediction error of the ANN, respectively. Moreover, a ranking
system is developed to compare the efficiency of the used models. The results
revealed that the ACO–ANN performs most accurately, followed by the MFO–ANN,
WOA–ANN, and LCA–ANN. Lastly, the outcomes demonstrated that the ACO–
ANN can be a promising alternative to traditional methods used for analyzing the
bearing capacity of two-layered soils.

2.2.1 LITERATURE SURVEY TABLE

S.NO TITLE TECHNIQUES AUTHORS YEAR

1. Experimental analysis Atterberg’s Onkar Nath

of bearing capacity of limit, specific gravity Mishra , Chatrabhuj 2022
soil with the addition of and California Bearing and Bipin Prajapati
processed E-waste Ratio (CBR)

2. Analysis study of soil Mayerhoff method, Gazali, Fathurrahman

bearing capacity and Semi Empirical and 2021
settlement of single pile Method Muthmainnah
foundation based on N-
SPT data

3. Estimating the Bearing Stress Characteristic Shervin

Capacity of Rough Lines Method Ahmadi,Mohsen 2020
Footings by the Stress kamalian,Faradjollah
Characteristic Lines Askari
5
 Method

4. Neural Computing backpropagation (BP) Hossein Moaedi,Dieu

Improvement Using learning method Tien Bui, Phuong 2019
Four Metaheuristic Thao Thi Ngo
Optimizers in Bearing
Capacity Analysis of
Footings Settled on
Two-Layer Soils

6
 CHAPTER - 3
METHOD ANALYSIS

SOIL BEARING CAPACITY METHODOLOGY

Determining the soil bearing capacity is a crucial aspect of geotechnical engineering,
especially in the design and construction of structures. The bearing capacity of soil
refers to its ability to support applied loads without undergoing detrimental settlement or
shear failure. The methodology for evaluating soil bearing capacity involves a
comprehensive understanding of the soil properties and the application of appropriate
analysis and testing techniques. In this extensive exploration, we will delve into the
various aspects of soil bearing capacity determination, covering theoretical foundations,
field investigations, laboratory tests, and design considerations.

3.1 TYPES OF BEARING CAPACITY OF SOIL

 GROSS SAFE BEARING CAPACITY OF SOIL

 NET ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY OF SOIL
 ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY OF SOIL
 NET SAFE BEARING CAPACITY OF SOIL

3.1.1 Gross Safe Bearing Capacity of Soil

Maximum gross intensity of loading that the soil can safely carry with adequate safety
against failure in shear is called the gross safe bearing capacity of soil.
Mathematically;
qs = qnuF.O.S + γDf

3.1.1 Net Ultimate Bearing capacity of Soil

The maximum net intensity of loading at the base of the foundation that soil can support
before failing in shear is called the net ultimate bearing capacity of soil.
Mathematically;
qnu = qu − γDf

7
Where
qu = ultimate bearing capacity
qnu= net ultimate bearing capacity

γ= unit weight of soil and

Df = depth of foundation.

3.1.1 Ultimate Bearing Capacity of Soil

The maximum gross intensity of loading that soil can support before it fails in shear is
called Ultimate bearing capacity.

3.1.1 Net Safe Bearing Capacity of Soil

When a certain factor of safety is considered in the net ultimate bearing capacity of soil,
it is called the net safe bearing capacity of soil.
Mathematically;
qns = qnuF.O.S

3.2 CALCULATION OF BEARING CAPACITY OF SOIL

3.2.1 Analytical Method

Analytical method is based on shear criteria. There are 3 types of failure as far as shear
is concerned. They are described below:

General Shear Failure :

1. General shear failure occurs in soil possessing a Brittle-type shear stress curve.
Dense sand, silt, over consolidated clay etc., i.e., in the soil of low compressibility.
2. In this case, the failure pattern is well-defined and a sudden shear failure is
experienced with the bulging (heaving) of the ground surface adjacent to the
foundation at both sides. However, the final slip moment will occur only on one side
accompanied by tilting of the foundation.
3. As the pressure increases towards the ultimate value, the state of plastic equilibrium
is reached initially in the soil around the edge of the footing and gradually spreads
downwards and outwards.
4. Ultimately, the state of plastic equilibrium is fully developed throughout the soil.
8
 Generally, General shear failure occurs in soil having a relative density greater than
70%.

Local Shear Failure :

1. In local shear failure, there is considerable compression of soil under the footing and
there is only partial development of the state of plastic equilibrium.
2. Failure surface does not reach the ground surface and only slight heaving of soil
adjacent to the foundation occurs.
3. Tilting of the foundation does not occur.
4. Ultimate bearing capacity is not well defined on the load settlement curve.
5. In this case, failure is not sudden.
6. Generally occurs in soil having a somewhat plastic stress-strain curve. E.g. Loose
sand with Relative Density between 30-70%.

Punching Shear Failure :

1. Punching shear failure occurs when there is relatively high compression of soil
under the footing.
2. It is accompanied by shearing in the vertical direction around the edge of the
footing.
3. No heaving of soil adjacent to footing occurs in this case
4. No tilting of foundation occurs
5. Ultimate bearing capacity is not well defined.
6. Generally occurs in very loose sand with a relative density of less than 30%.
7. Shallow foundations in loose sand and Deep foundations generally have punching
shear failure.

8. Relatively large settlement occurs in this case.

3.3 Theoretical Background

3.2.1 Terzaghi’s Bearing Capacity Theory

 The ultimate bearing capacity of shallow foundations are usually determined by

using a bearing

 capacity theory in which a failure mechanism is analysed and the load intensity at
failure is expressed in terms of the shearing resistance mobilised and the
9
 geometry of the failure. The theory is based on a limiting equilibrium approach
where the forces acting on the soil wedge immediately beneath the foundations
are examined for static equilibrium conditions and the ultimate bearing capacity
of soil is determined.

 Soil above the base of the footing is not considered to be contributing to the
strength of the foundation i.e shear failure is not considered in the soil above the
base of the footing. Thus the footing is considered as surface footing. Terzaghi
developed the bearing capacity of the soil equation for general shear failure for a
uniformly loaded strip footing of width B and infinite length carrying a uniform
pressure q on the surface of a mass of homogeneous, isotropic soil. Shear strength
parameters for the soil are 𝛟 and C.

3.2.2 Terzaghi's effective stress principle

Rocks disintegrate with weathering. In the processes of sedimentary geology when

rivers discharge sediments into a pool, various grades of soil grain are deposited at
different distances from the point of discharge. The ancient 'soft rock' termed the
Cambridge gault clay in the city of Cambridge in England is a 20 m thick layer of silt or
clay size soil grains, deposited on the bed of an ancient ocean. It now outcrops around
Girton, just west of Cambridge. Above it, when the ancient warm sea bed was far away
from points where rivers were depositing sediment, coral could grow. This coral formed
the chalk rock that extends far across Europe. Locally near Cambridge, it outcrops in the
Gog Magog Hills and along a line through Newmarket, Royston and Luton. There are
ripples in the chalk that rise up to form the North Downs and dip in the South Downs.
This chalk rock forms the White Cliffs of Dover. Vertical cracks form when lateral
pressure falls in this chalk. These cracks can leave a heavy cliff face resting on a
foundation of gault clay that, when it fails, lets the cliff face fall into the English
Channel.

Anywhere that a sediment of strong durable grains accumulates as a uniform aggregate of

sand or gravel that can be excavated for use in construction, such aggregate will be
mixed with water and cement powder as a component of mortar in brickwork, or in
structural concrete reinforced with mild steel bars. Where natural ground is soft enough,
ungraded soil can be excavated, hauled to site and spread out in layers to be compacted
with rollers to build up large road or dam embankments. In natural or compacted soft
ground the strong soil grains form an effectively stressed aggregate structure in which
forces are transmitted from grain to grain through the ground. In a volume of ground part
of the volume is occupied by solid soil grains and the pore space between grains in
saturated ground contains incompressible pore water. Whenever soft ground is loaded
there will be pore pressure gradients. Terzaghi's primary consolidation theory analysed
transient flow of ground water and surface settlements.

Terzaghi’s effective stress principle applied to sand recognises that sand needs to have

10
strength if a slope of sand is not to slump. A slope can only be stable if there are
intergranular compressive stresses. The total compressive stress that is applied normal to
a particular plane, σ, is equal to σ' + u, where σ' is an effective compressive stress normal
to a plane and u is pore water pressure. This is Terzaghi’s effective stress principle.

Terzaghi's work laid the foundation for understanding the behavior of soils under
various loading conditions. His contributions significantly influenced the field of
geotechnical engineering. One of his major contributions is known as "Terzaghi's theory
of consolidation."

3.2.2 Terzaghi's Values For Local Shear and General Shear

3.2.4 Assumptions of Terzaghi’s Theory

1. Footing is a strip footing (L>> B)

2. Soil is Homogeneous.
3. The 2-D plane strain condition prevails.
4. Base of footing is rough
5. The base of footing is laid down at shallow depth (DfB≤1) i.e., shallow
foundation.
6. Loading is vertical and symmetric i.e. (moment = 0)
7. General shear failure occurs.

11
 8. Ground is Horizontal
9. Shearing resistance of soil between the ground surface and base of footing is
neglected.
10. Thus, the footing is considered as a surface footing with a uniform surcharge.
Shear strength of soil is governed by Mohr's coulomb criteria.

Fig 3.3.1 Terzaghi’s Theory

3.3 Liquid Limit Test

The Indian Standard Code (IS 2720 Part 5: 1985) for liquid limit in soil defines the
procedure to determine the moisture content at which soil transitions from a plastic to a
liquid state. This involves using the Casagrande apparatus to measure the soil's behavior
as it's gradually mixed with water, determining the point when it shows specific flow
characteristics. The code provides guidelines on conducting the test, calculating the
liquid limit, and interpreting the results for soil classification and engineering purposes.

The liquid limit is the moisture content at which the groove, formed by a standard tool
into the same soil taken in the standard cup, closes for 10 mm on being given 25 blows in
a standard manner. At thi, the soil possess low shear strength.

12
 Fig 3.3 Liquid Limit of Soil Sample

3.4 Plastic Limit Test

The Indian Standard Code for determination of the plastic limit in soil (IS 2720
Part 5: 1985) outlines the method to determine the moisture content at which soil
transitions from a plastic to a semi-solid state. It involves rolling a soil sample to form
threads and observing the point at which the threads crumble. soil is used for making
bricks, tiles and soil cement blocks in addition to its use as foundation for structures.This
code specifies the procedure for conducting the test and interpreting the results, aiding in
soil classification and engineering assessments.

Fig 3.4 Plastic Limit of soil Sample

3.5 Compaction Factor Test

The Indian Standard Code (IS 1199:1959) for compaction factor test outlines a method
to assess the workability of concrete by determining the compaction factor. This involves
measuring the degree of compaction of freshly mixed concrete using a specific apparatus.
The test helps evaluate the consistency and workability of concrete mixes, aiding in

13
determining the water content required for proper compaction during construction.

The compaction test is a laboratory method used to determine the optimal moisture
content and maximum dry density of a soil sample. This test is crucial for assessing the
compactibility of soils and establishing proper moisture-density relationships, especially
in construction projects where achieving the desired soil compaction is essential for
structural stability.

Fig 3.5 Compaction of Soil Sample

3.6 Unconfined Compression Strength Test

The Indian Standard Code (IS 9143:1979) for Unconfined Compressive Strength (UCS)
test provides guidelines for determining the compressive strength of cylindrical
specimens of cohesive soils without confinement. It details the procedure for preparing
and testing soil samples under axial loading to measure their strength characteristics. The
UCS test is crucial in evaluating the load-bearing capacity and stability of soils for
construction purposes.
The unconfined compression test is a common laboratory test used to determine the shear
14
strength of a soil sample when it is subjected to an axial load without lateral support.
This test is particularly relevant for cohesive soils, such as clays and silts, which exhibit
significant strength along their natural failure planes.

Fig 3.6 (a) Unconfined Compression Strength of Soil Sample

Fig 3.6 (b) Two Soil Samples

15
Fig 3.6 (c) 3rd day Soil Sample Fig 3.6 (d) 7th day Soil Sample

Stress – Strain Values For 3rd day Soil Sample

STRESS STRAIN
0 0
0.0138 0.0065
0.0151 0.0130
0.0152 0.0197
0.0162 0.0263
0.0175 0.0328
0.0179 0.0394
0.0184 0.0460
0.0184 0.0526
0.0189 0.0592
0.0250 0.0657
0.0257 0.0723
0.0262 0.0789
0.0266 0.0855
0.0268 0.0921
0.0274 0.0986
0.0273 0.1052
0.0275 0.1118
0.0281 0.1184

Stress – Strain Values For 7th day Soil Sample

STRESS STRAIN
0 0
0.0110 0.0065
0.0164 0.0130
0.0190 0.0197
0.0216 0.0263
0.0241 0.0328
0.0266 0.0394
0.0291 0.0460
0.0315 0.0526
0.0326 0.0592
0.0337 0.0657
0.0347 0.0723
16
0.0358 0.0789
0.0368 0.0855
0.0378 0.0921
0.0388 0.0986

17
 CHAPTER – 4

RESULTS

4.1 Liquid Limit Test

From liquid limit test, the compression index may be estimated, which is used in
settlement analysis. If the natural moisture content of soil is higher than liquid limit, the
soil can be considered as soft and if the moisture content is lesser than liquid limit, the
soil is brittle and stiffer.

SNO NO OF BLOWS WATER CONTENT%

1 16 35.82
2 22 34.81
3 28 33.93
4 35 33.27

Fig 4.1 Liquid Limit Graph

 The liquid limit of soil sample from the graph is 38%.

18
4.2 Plastic Limit Test
Plastic Limit (PL) is the water content at the change from a plastic to a semi-solid state.
This test involves repeatedly rolling a soil sample into a thread until it reaches a point
where it crumbles.

Fig 4.2 Plastic Limit of Soil Sample Graph

 The plastic limit of soil sample from the graph is 27%.

4.3 Plastic Index

Plastic Index = Liquid limit – Plastic Limit
= 38 % - 27 %
= 11 %

4.4 Compaction Factor Test

Compaction Factor Test of Concrete is the workability test for concrete conducted
in the laboratory. The compaction factor is the ratio of weights of partially
compacted to fully compacted concrete. It was developed by Road Research
Laboratory in the United Kingdom and is used to determine the workability of

19
 concrete

Fig 4.4 The Graph between dry density and optimum moisture content
of soil

 The dry density of the soil sample is 1.826 gm/cc.

 The optimum moisture content for the soil sample is 27.9 %

 The maximum dry density of given soil at optimum moisture content of 24.6% in
1500 gm/cc

4.5 Unconfined Compression Strength Test

Unconfined Compressive Strength (UCS) stands for the maximum axial compressive
stress that a cohesive soil specimen can bear under zero confining stress. Unconfined
compression test is one of the fastest and cheapest methods of measuring shear strength
of clayey soil.

20
 Fig 4.5 (a) Soil Sample in UCS
Machine

Fig 4.5 (b) 3rd day Soil Sample Graph

 For 3rd day soil sample

C = 0.014 kg/cm2

Ø = 0 ( for cohesive soil )

21
 Fig 4.5 (c) 7th day Soil Sample Graph

 For 7th day soil sample

C = 0.0194 kg/cm2

Ø = 0 ( for cohesive soil )

4.6 The virgin soil value for different properties of soil

S.n Properties of Soil Sample Virgin Soil

o
1 Liquid limit of soil 38 %
2 Plastic limit of soil 27 %
3 Plastic index of soil 11 %
4 Optimum moisture content of soil 27.9 %
5 Maximum dry density of soil 1.826 gm/cc.
6 Unconfined compression strength of soil
For 3rd day soil C = 0.014 kg/cm2
Ø=0
For 7th day soil C = 0.0194 kg/cm2
Ø=0

22
 CHAPTER – 5

CONCLUSION

5.1 Conclusion for Laboratory Investigation of Engineering Properties

of Soil

5.1.1 Atterberg’s Limit

 The main measurement of the nature of fine- grained soil is Atterberg limits test.
Fine soil can be classifydue to it liquid and plastic limits.
 Depending on the water content, the soil can be solid, semi-solid, or liquid state.
In each state of those the soil could have different behavior so that many
properties could change due to changing soil's behavior. So that it is so important
to know each limit of these states.
 The main source of error in this experiment is careless of operator. All procedures
should perform exactly. Any error through weighing, number of blows, or rolling
the samples could lead.
 To destroy the data.All the results in this experiment seems to be reasonable.
Drying the soil before the test could have an impact on the results especially for
the organic samples. So that liquid limit and plastic limit could be change.
 Atterburg limits are crucial for classifying fine-grained soils according to the
United Soils Classification System.
 These few moisture contents allow an engineer to know various properties of the
soil and how it will act under the pressure of a structure.
 Atterburg limits also help engineers know what areas to avoid building in due to
poor numbers from sampled soils. Errors and differences in values between the
lab groups are generally due to the qualitative nature of the experiments and the
human error that comes into play due to that nature.
 There could also be small differences in water content due to the amount of time
the samples were left in the oven.

5.1.2 Compaction Factor Test

 For the normal range of concrete the compaction factor lies between (0.8 – 0.92).
23
  This test is particularly useful for dryer mixes for which the slump test is not
satisfactory.
 The sensitivity of the compaction factor is reduced outside the normal range of
workability and is generally unsatisfactory for compacting factor greater than
0.92.

5.1.3 Unconfined Compression Strength Test

 Unconfined Compressive Strength (UCS) stands for the maximum axial

compressive stress that a cohesive soil specimen can bear under zero confining
stress.
 Unconfined compression test is one of the fastest and cheapest methods of
measuring shear strength of clayey soil.
 Unconfined Compressive Strength (UCS) is the load per unit area at which an
unconfined cylindrical specimen of soil will fail in the axial compression test. If
the axial compression force per unit area has not reached a maximum value even
at 20 percent axial strain, the UCS shall be taken as the value obtained at 20
percent axial strain.
 From the laboratory testing investigation on unconfined compressive strength of
soil , the following concluding remarks are drawn.
 The unconfined compression test is a type of unconsolidated undrained test that is
commonly used for clay specimens.
 In this test, the confining pressure is 0. An axial load is rapidly applied to the
specimen to cause failure. At failure, the total load minor principal stress is zero.
 Test specimens with soil did not show significant improvement in unconfined
compressive strength after 7 curing days in water.

24
 CHAPTER - 6

REFERENCES

6.1 References

 Gurgul A, Szczepaniak W, Zabłocka-Malicka M. Incineration and pyrolysis vs.

steam gasification of electronic waste....

 Rahul Gupta, Anand Kumar Raghuwanshi. Utilization of e-waste in strength

enhancement of black cotton soil. Journal of...

 P. Pathak et al.Assessment of legislation and practices for the sustainable

management of waste electrical and electronic equipment in India

 Kumar et al.E-waste: An overview on generation, collection, legislation and

recycling practices

 [1] Hardiyatmo and Harry C 1996 Teknik Fondasi I (Jakarta: PT. Gramedia
Pustaka Utama)

 Momeni, E.; Nazir, R.; Armaghani, D.J.; Sohaie, H. Bearing capacity of precast
thin-walled foundation in sand. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. Geotech. Eng. 2015, 168,
539–550.

 Ritika Garg, Shweta Dang, Pammi Gauba. E-waste: A Concern. International

Journal of Bio-Technology & Pharmaceutical...

 Kundan Meshram, Nitu Yana, Jain PK. Estimation of swelling characteristics of

expansive soils with influence of clay...

 Ahmadi, S., M. Kamalian, and F. Askari. 2021a. “Considerations on bearing

capacity factors of rough strip footing using the stress characteristics method.”
Iran. J. Sci. Technol. Trans. Civ. Eng. 45 (4): 2611–2621
25
 Bolton, M. D., and C. K. Lau. 1993. “Vertical bearing capacity factors for
circular and strip footings on Mohr–Coulomb soil.” Can. Geotech. J. 30 (6):
1024–1033

 Griffiths, D. V. 1982. “Computation of bearing capacity factors using finite

elements.” Géotechnique 32 (3): 195–202.

26