A compaction test was conducted in a soils laboratory using the Standard Proctor Method B test procedure. The weight of the compact soil specimen plus mold and baseplate was determined to be 3841 g. The volume and mass of the mold were 943.7 cm³ and 2066.0 g, respectively. A moisture content test was carried out on a representative portion of the sample and the results were 9.8%. Required Determine the dry unit weight in metric units, to the nearest 100th. Your Answer:

A compaction test was conducted in a soils laboratory using the Standard Proctor Method B test procedure. The weight of the compact soil specimen plus mold and baseplate was determined to be 3841 g. The volume and mass of the mold were 943.7 cm³ and 2066.0 g, respectively. A moisture content test was carried out on a representative portion of the sample and the results were 9.8%. Required Determine the dry unit weight in metric units, to the nearest 100th. Your Answer:

Fundamentals of Geotechnical Engineering (MindTap Course List)

5th Edition

ISBN:9781305635180

Author:Braja M. Das, Nagaratnam Sivakugan

Publisher:Braja M. Das, Nagaratnam Sivakugan

Chapter5: Soil Compaction

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 5.15P

See similar textbooks

Related questions

Q: A 35 cc volume of core sampler was used in bulk density determination. The fresh soil in the sampler…

Q: The results of a standard Proctor test are given in the following table. Determine the maximum dry…

A: Data given vol. of mold (cm3) weight of wet soil (N) moisture content 943.3 14.42 10 943.3…

Q: A laboratory proctor test was conducted and the following data were obtained for the 5 trial…

A: Proctor test results are given, we need to plot compaction curve and determine dry unit weight and…

Q: A dry sand is placed in a containerhaving a volume of 0.0089 cm3. The dry weight of the sample is…

Q: A compacted fill with a unit weight of 121 lb/ft^3 and a moisture content of 12.5% will be used for…

A: The dry unit weight of the soil in compacted fill is calculated as, γd=γb1+w=1211+0.125=107.56…

Q: A hydrometer analysis was completed on a fine grain soil having a Specific Gravity of 2.85. The…

A: Hydrometer Analysis Hydrometer analysis is a way of determining the particle size of soil in a…

Q: A Sample of soil was tested in the laboratory, and the test results were listed as follows. Classify…

A: Mechanical Grain Size Analysis Sieve Number Percentage Passing Retained % 1 in 100 0 0.75 in…

Q: PROBLEM 1 The results of a standard Proctor test are given in the following table. Mass of moist…

Q: The results of a sieve analysis are reported in table 1. The total weight of the sample was 500 g.…

A: Due to lack of graph I am using interpolation method…

Q: The table below shows the laboratory results of the sieve analysis of a sample. The soil has a…

A: Solution: Given Data:Liquid limit of soil=35%Plastic Limit=9%

Question

A compaction test was conducted in a soils laboratory using the Standard Proctor
Method B test procedure. The weight of the compact soil specimen plus mold and
baseplate was determined to be 3841 g. The volume and mass of the mold were
943.7 cm³ and 2066.0 g, respectively. A moisture content test was carried out on a
representative portion of the sample and the results were 9.8%.
Required
Determine the dry unit weight in metric units, to the nearest 100th.
Your Answer:

Expert Solution

This question has been solved!

Explore an expertly crafted, step-by-step solution for a thorough understanding of key concepts.

SEE SOLUTION Check out a sample Q&A here

Step 1

VIEW

Step 2

VIEW

Step by step

Solved in 2 steps with 2 images

SEE SOLUTION Check out a sample Q&A here

Knowledge Booster

Learn more about

Need a deep-dive on the concept behind this application? Look no further. Learn more about this topic, civil-engineering and related others by exploring similar questions and additional content below.

Similar questions

Refer to the soil in Problem 4.5. Using the Casagrande plasticity chart, graphically estimate the shrinkage limit of the soil as shown in Figure 4.22. 4.5 The following data were obtained by conducting liquid limit and plastic limit tests on a soil collected from the site. Liquid limit tests: Plastic limit test: PL = 19.3% a. Draw the flow curve and determine the liquid limit. b. Using the Casagrande plasticity chart (Figure 4.21), determine the soil type.
Following results are obtained for a liquid limit test using a fall cone device. Estimate the liquid limit of the soil and the flow index.
The following data were obtained by conducting liquid limit and plastic limit tests on a soil collected from the site. Liquid limit tests: Plastic limit test: PL = 19.3% a. Draw the flow curve and determine the liquid limit. b. Using the Casagrande plasticity chart (Figure 4.21), determine the soil type.
The subsurface characteristics for a highway pavement rehabilitation project in the southeastern United States are shown in a boring log in Figure 5.13. The highway structure consists of the asphalt pavement underlain by four different soil strata up to a depth of 20 ft, after which the boring was terminated. Some data on the grain size and plasticity characteristics are also provided for each stratum. Perform the following tasks: 1. Determine the AASHTO soil classification and the group index (GI) for each layer. 2. Determine the most probable group symbols and group names for the various layers according to the Unified soil classification system. Use Table 5.3 and the soil characteristics given in the boring log.
The properties of seven different clayey soils are shown below (Skempton and Northey, 1952). Investigate the relationship between the strength and plasticity characteristics by performing the following tasks: a. Estimate the plasticity index for each soil using Skemptons definition of activity [Eq. (4.28)]. b. Estimate the probable mineral composition of the clay soils based on PI and A (use Table 4.3) c. Sensitivity (St) refers to the loss of strength when the soil is remolded or disturbed. It is defined as the ratio of the undisturbed strength (f-undisturbed) to the remolded strength (f-remolded)) at the same moisture content [Eq. (12.49)]. From the given data, estimate f-remolded for the clay soils. d. Plot the variations of undisturbed and remolded shear strengths with the activity, A, and explain the observed behavior.
Refer to Problem 2.C.1. Results of the sieve analysis for Soils A, B, and C are given below. To obtain a more representative sample for further geotechnical testing, a ternary blend is created by uniformly mixing 8000 kg of each soil. Answer the following questions. a. If a sieve analysis is conducted on the mixture using the same set of sieves as shown above, compute the mass retained (as a percentage) and cumulative percent passing in each sieve. b. What would be the uniformity coefficient (Cu) and the coefficient of gradation (Cc) of the mixture?
Three groups of students from the Geotechnical Engineering class collected soil-aggregate samples for laboratory testing from a recycled aggregate processing plant in Palm Beach County, Florida. Three samples, denoted by Soil A, Soil B, and Soil C, were collected from three locations of the aggregate stockpile, and sieve analyses were conducted (see Figure 2.35). (a) (b) Figure 2.35 (a) Soil-aggregate stockpile; (b) sieve analysis (Courtesy of Khaled Sobhan, Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton, Florida) a. Determine the coefficient of uniformity and the coefficient of gradation for Soils A, B, and C. b. Which one is coarser: Soil A or Soil C? Justify your answer. c. Although the soils are obtained from the same stockpile, why are the curves so different? (Hint: Comment on particle segregation and representative field sampling.) d. Determine the percentages of gravel, sand and fines according to Unified Soil Classification System.
How is the plasticity index of a soil determined?
Since laboratory or field experiments are generally expensive and time consuming, geotechnical engineers often have to rely on empirical relationships to predict design parameters. Section 6.6 presents such relationships for predicting optimum moisture content and maximum dry unit weight. Let us use some of these equations and compare our results with known experimental data. The following table presents the results from laboratory compaction tests conducted on a wide range of fine-grained soils using various compactive efforts (E). Based on the soil data given in the table, determine the optimum moisture content and maximum dry unit weight using the empirical relationships presented in Section 6.6. a. Use the Osman et al. (2008) method [Eqs. (6.15) through (6.18)]. b. Use the Gurtug and Sridharan (2004) method [Eqs. (6.13) and (6.14)]. c. Use the Matteo et al. (2009) method [Eqs. (6.19) and (6.20)]. d. Plot the calculated wopt against the experimental wopt, and the calculated d(max) with the experimental d(max). Draw a 45 line of equality on each plot. e. Comment on the predictive capabilities of various methods. What can you say about the inherent nature of empirical models?