UNIVERSITI TUN HUSSEIN ONN MALAYSIA

Centre for Diploma Studies

________________________________________________________________

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

HIGHWAY AND GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING LABORATORY
LAPORAN MAKMAL
LABORATORY REPORT

Kod & Nama Kursus

DAC 20803 – GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING
Course Name & Code
Tajuk Ujikaji
PROCTOR STANDARD SOIL COMPACTION TEST
Title of Experiment
Seksyen
SECTION 1
Section
Kumpulan
GROUP 4
Group
Nama Pensyarah/Pengajar
EN. AHMAD HAKIMI BIN
Lecturer/Instructor’s Name
Nama Ketua Kumpulan MUHAMMAD ZULHILMI BIN No. Matrik AA181059
Name of Group Leader MOHAMAD NAZLI Matric No.

Ahli Kumpulan No. Matrik

Group Members Matric No.
1. ALIAH SHAZREEN BINTI AZMI
AA180849
2. AINNUR YASMINE BINTI SHUIB
AA181907

3. MUHAMMAD NUR AZMIZI BIN RAZAK AA180965

4.

5.

6.
Tarikh Ujikaji
23 FEBRUARY 2020
Date of Experiment
TarikhULASAN
Hantar PEMERIKSA/COMMENTS
Date of Submission

COP DITERIMA/RECEIVED STAMP

 Test Title:
Lab Report Rubric DAC 20803 – GEOTECHNICAL
(Assessment Form) ENGINEERING
Criteria 1 2 3 4 5 SCR WT TSCR (%)

Theory,  Theory and other  Theory and other  Theory and other  Theory and other information  Theory and other information
objective, information regarding information regarding information regarding the regarding the laboratory is regarding the laboratory is well
  2 0
procedure the laboratory is not the laboratory is laboratory is partly presented presented with some mistakes presented
(10%) presented presented minimally
Analysis / Result  Trends / patterns  Trends / patterns are  Trends / patterns are  Trends / patterns are  Trends / patterns are logically
(25%) are not analyzed not analyzed logically analyzed for the logically analyzed analyzed
Cognitive   5 0
 Analysis is not  Analysis is most part  Analysis is thoughtful  Analysis is insightful
relevant inconsistent  Analysis is general
Reference  Reference was not  Reference was  Reference was partly  Reference was presented in  Reference was presented in
(5%) presented in the minimally presented in presented in somewhat proper format and relevant to proper format and relevant to the
  1 0
report the report proper format and relevant to the laboratory work with some laboratory work
the laboratory work minor mistakes /40
Data  Data is not  Data lacks precision  Good representation of the  Accurate representation of  Accurate representation of the
(25%) represented or is not  Greater than 20% data using tables and/or the data using tables and/or data using tables and/or graphs
accurate difference with graphs graphs  Graphs and tables are labeled
  5 0
accepted values  Less than 15% difference  Data is fairly precise and titled
Psychomoto with accepted values  Less than 10% difference  Data is precise with less than 5%
r  Precision is acceptable with accepted values difference with accepted values
Participation Student was hostile  Participation was  Did the job but did not  Used time pretty well.  Showed interest, used time very
(during about participating minimal appear to be very interested. Stayed focused on the well, guide other students and very
  1 0
experiment) Focus lost on several experiment most of the time focused on experiment
(5%) occasion /30
Question &  Questions are not Answers to Questions are answered in  Questions are answered in  Questions are answered
Discussion answered questions are complete sentences complete sentences thoroughly and in complete
(15%)  No discussion was incomplete A statement of the results Accurate statement of the sentences
included or shows A statement of the of the lab indicates whether results of the lab indicates  Accurate statement of the results
little effort and results is incomplete results support the hypothesis whether results support the of lab indicates whether results   3 0
reflection on the lab with little reflection on hypothesis support hypothesis
the lab  Possible sources of error  Possible sources of error and
Affective identified what was learned from the lab
discussed
Conclusion &  Conclusion &  Conclusion &  Conclusion &  Conclusion &  Conclusion & recommendation
Recommendation recommendation recommendation was recommendation was recommendation was was presented accurately and
(15%) was not presented minimally presented presented somewhat presented accurately and relevant to result obtain from the
  3 0
accurate and relevant to relevant to result obtain from laboratory work
result obtain from the the laboratory work with minor
laboratory work mistakes /30

NAME OF LECTURER : SIGNATURE : DATE :

Note : SCR = SCORE, WT = WEIGHTAGE, TSCR = TOTAL SCORE

 STUDENT CODE OF ETHIC
(SCE)
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING
CENTRE OF DIPLOMA STUDIES

We, hereby confess that we have prepared this report on our own effort. We also admit not to
receive any help from any third party during the preparation of this report and pledge that
everything mentioned in the report is true.

Ainnur Yasmine
_________________
Student Signature (Group Representative)

Name : AINNUR YASMINE BINTI SHUIB

Matric No. : AA181907

Date : 8/6/2020
1. INTRODUCTION
Proctor compaction test generally consist of compacting soil at known moisture
content into a cylindrical mold of standard dimensions using a compaction effort
of controlled magnitude. The soil is usually compacted into the mold to a certain
amount of equal layers, each receiving a number of blows from a standard
weighted hammer at a specified height. This process is then repeated for various
moisture contents and the dry densities are determined for each. The graphical
relationship of the dry density to moisture content is then plotted to establish the
compaction curve. The maximum dry density is finally obtained from the peak
point of the compaction curve and its corresponding moisture content, also
known as the optimal moisture content.

1.1. OBJECTIVE
The objectives of this experiment are to obtain the maximum value of dry
density and the optimum moisture content.

1.2. THEORY
Compaction of soil the process by which the solid particles are packed more
closely together by mechanical means, thus increasing the dry density,
Markwick, 1994. It is achieved through the reduction of the air voids in the
soil. At low moisture content, the soil grain is surrounded by a thin film of
water, which tends to keep the grains apart even when compacted. In
addition of more water, up to certain point, more air to be expelled during
compaction. At the point, soil grains become as closely packed together as
they can, that is at the dry density is at its maximum. When the amount of
water exceeds the required to achieve this condition, the excess water begin
to push particles apart, so the dry density reduced.

The moisture content at which the greatest value of dry density achieved for
the given compaction effort is the optimum moisture content, (OMC), and
the corresponding dry density is the maximum dry density
Figure 1: Relationship between dry density (ρd) against moisture content w for
several types of soil.

1.3. INSTRUMENT
1) Cylindrical metal mould, internal dimensions 105mm diameter and 115.5mm
high (Fitted with a detachable and removable extension collar).
2) Metal rammer with 50mm diameter face weighing 2.5kg, sliding freely in a
tube which controls the height of drop to 300mm.
3) Measuring cylinder; 200ml or 500ml (plastic)
4) 20mm BS sieve and receiver
5) Large metal tray
6) Electronic balance
7) Jacking apparatus for extracting compacted material from mould.
8) Small tools: palette knife, steel-straight edge, 300mm long, steel rule, scoop
or garden trowel
9) Drying oven, 105-110°C and other equipment for moisture content
determination.
2. PROCEDURES
1) The mould, base plate; extension, collar and rammer are verified to be used
are those that conform to BS 1377. The mould should be weighted to the
nearest 1g (m1). The internal diameter (D) mm and length (L) mm in several
places is measured and the mean dimensions is calculated.
2) The internal volume is calculated of the mould (V) mm3 using the formula
below:
π × D2 × L
V=
4000
Oily cloth is applied on the internal surface of mould to ease the removal of
soil later on.
3) The empty metal tray is measured and ± 5kg of air dried soil sample that the
has passing through sieve no.4 (4.75mm)
4) The mould is placed assembly on a solid base, such as concrete floor. Loose
soil is added so that after each sequence of compaction the mould will be
one-third filled.
5) The soil is compacted by applying 27 blows of the rammer dropping from the
controlled height of the 300mm. Make sure that the rammer is properly in
place before releasing.
6) The extension collar is removed in order to cut away the excess soil and level
off to the top of the mould. Any cavities resulting from removal of stones at
the surface should be filled with fine material.
7) The baseplate is removed carefully, the soil is trimmed at the lower end of the
mould. Soil is weighed and mould to the nearest g.
8) The mould is fitted on to the extruder and the soil is jacked out. The sample
on the tray is broke up.
9) Three representative samples in moisture content containers are taken up for
measurement of moisture content. This must be done immediately before the
soil dry out. The average of three measurements is w%. (Preferably one from
each layer).
10) Break up the material on the tray and mix with the remainder of the prepared
sample. Add an increment of water, approximately as follows:
Sandy and gravelly soils: 1 – 2% (50 – 100 ml of water to 5 kg of soil)
Cohesive soils: 2 – 4 % (100 – 200 ml of water to 5 kg of soil)
3. DATA/RESULT

A: TEST CRITERIA
Serial no. Test No : Location : Location No:

No. of layer : Rammer Soil Description : Sample No.:

3 mass :
2.5 kg
Blows per No. of Sample preparation :
layer : separate Air dried and riffled
27 batch :

B: DENSITY CALCULATION VOLUME OF CYLINDER = 1002 cm 3

Measurement
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
No.

Cylinder + soil
5705.0 5744.9 5871.2 6079.5 6024.0
=Ag

Cylinder = B g
4224.2 4224.2 4224.2 4224.2 4224.2

Soil mass = A –
1480.8 1520.7 1647.0 1865.3 1799.8
Bg

Wet density = ρ 1.478 1.518 1.644 1.862 1.796

C: MOISTURE CONTENT
Measurement No. 1 (1) (2) (3)

Wet soil + container,w2 (g) 40.20

Dry soil + container,w1 (g) 38.90

Empty container, w0 (g) 23.90

Moisture content, wn (%), 8.67

AVERAGE MOISTURE, w
% -

Measurement No. 2 (1) (2) (3)

Wet soil + container,w2 (g) 52.30

Dry soil + container,w1 (g) 49.40

Empty container, w0 (g) 23.90

Moisture content, wn (%), 8.67

AVERAGE MOISTURE, w
-
%

Measurement No. 3 (1) (2) (3)

Wet soil + container,w2 (g) 46.70

Dry soil + container,w1 (g) 43.10

Empty container, w0 (g) 23.90

Moisture content, wn (%), 18.76

AVERAGE MOISTURE, w
-
%

Measurement No. 4 (1) (2) (3)

Wet soil + container,w2 (g) 53.60

Dry soil + container,w1 (g) 47.70

Empty container, w0 (g) 23.90

Moisture content, wn (%), 24.79

AVERAGE MOISTURE, w
-
%

Measurement No. 5 (1) (2) (3)

Wet soil + container,w2 (g) 55.10

Dry soil + container,w1 (g) 47.20

Empty container, w0 (g) 23.90

Moisture content, wn (%), 33.91

AVERAGE MOISTURE, w
-
%
 D: DRY DENSITY CALCULATION (USE ACTUAL VOLUME OF
CYLINDER)

Measurement
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
No.
AVG
8.67 11.27 18.79 24.79 33.91
MOISTURE, w%
Dry density, ρd 1.360 1.364 1.384 1.492 1.341
Calculation
Measurement No. 1
Mass of soil
1. Wet density = ρ ¿
Volume
1480.8
¿
1002
¿ 1.478 g /cm 3
W 2−W 1
2. Moisture content, wn (%) ¿ x 100
W 1−W 0
40.20−38.90
¿ x 100
38.90−23.90
¿ 8.67 %
100
( 100+
3. Dry density, ρd ¿
w)
ρ

100
¿(
100+8.67 )
1.478

¿ 1.360 g /cm 3

Measurement No. 2
Mass of soil
1. Wet density = ρ ¿
Volume
1520.7
¿
1002
¿ 1.518 g /cm3
W 2−W 1
2. Moisture content, wn (%) ¿ x 100
W 1−W 0
 52.30−49.40
¿ x 100
49.40−23.90
¿ 11.27 %
100
( 100+
3. Dry density, ρd ¿
w)
ρ

100
¿(
100+11.27 )
1.518

¿ 1.364 g/ cm3

Measurement No. 3
Mass of soil
1. Wet density = ρ ¿
Volume
1647.0
¿
1002
¿ 1.644 g/cm3

W 2−W 1
2. Moisture content, wn (%) ¿ x 100
W 1−W 0
46.70−43.10
¿ x 100
43.10−23.90
¿ 18.76 %
100
( 100+
3. Dry density, ρd ¿
w)
ρ

100
¿(
100+18.76 )
1.644

¿ 1.384 g/ cm3

Measurement No. 4
Mass of soil
1. Wet density = ρ ¿
Volume
 1865.3
¿
1002
¿ 1.862 g /cm3
W 2−W 1
2. Moisture content, wn (%) ¿ x 100
W 1−W 0
53.60−47.70
¿ x 100
47.70−23.90
¿ 24.79 %
100
( 100+
3. Dry density, ρd ¿
w)
ρ

100
¿(
100+24.79 )
1.862

¿ 1.492 g /cm3

Measurement No. 5
Mass of soil
1. Wet density = ρ ¿
Volume
1799.8
¿
1002
¿ 1.796 g/cm3
W 2−W 1
2. Moisture content, wn (%) ¿ x 100
W 1−W 0
55.10−47.20
¿ x 100
47.20−23.90
¿ 33.91 %
100
( 100+
3. Dry density, ρd ¿
w)
ρ

100
¿(
100+33.91 )
1.796

¿ 1.341 g /cm3
E: PLOTTING OF DRY DENSITY AGAINST MOISTURE CONTENT WITH
AIR VOIDS LINE AT 0%, 5% AND 10%. USE PROPER GRAPH PAPER

1.55

1.50
1.49

1.45
Dry Density, g/cm3

1.40
1.38
1.36 1.36
1.35
1.34

1.30

1.25
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Moisture Content, w%

The Maximum Dry Density of the Soil = 1.492 g/cm3

The Optimum Moisture Content (OMC) = 24.79 %

4. QUESTION & DISCUSSION

1) Define and explain what is meant by optimum moisture content, and how it is
determined in the laboratory.
 Optimum moisture content (OMC) is the percentage of water present in
soil mass at which a specific compaction force can dry the soil mass to its
maximum dry weight. It is the water content at which maximum dry unit
weight can be achieved after a given compaction effort. A maximum dry
unit weight have no voids in it. Compaction of soil increases the density,
shear strength, bearing capacity, thus reducing the voids, settlement and
permeability. Hence the optimum moisture content and the maximum dry
density are useful in the stability of field problems like earthen dams,
embankments, roads and airfields. Compaction in the field is controlled
by the value of the optimum moisture content determined by laboratory
compaction test. In other words, the laboratory compaction tests results
 are used to write the compaction specifications for field compaction of the
soil.

2) Explain fully the principles and methods involved in soil compaction. How
do you use the Proctor test apparatus in the field for checking the soil
compaction?
 The principle of compaction of soils is achieved by reducing the volume
of voids. It is assumed that the compaction process does not decrease the
volume of the solids or soil grains. The degree of compaction of a soil is
measured by the dry unit weight of the skeleton. The dry unit weight
correlates with the degree of packing of the soil grains.
Gs γ w
Recall that γd =
1+ e
Compaction of soils in the field can be done by a variety of compaction
equipment such as static compaction (smooth wheel rollers), kneading
compaction (sheep’s foot rollers), vibration compaction (vibratory rollers)
and tamping (tampers). The compaction test results in the lab cannot be
used directly for compaction on the site because the solids or compaction
energy in the lab is different, and imposed by which differ from the use of
equipment on the site. The laboratory test results are only a rough guide
to the water supposed to be obtained for the maximum dry density value
obtained. The strictly compaction test results in the lab are useful for the
purpose of classification and selection of soil suitable for earthwork. The
compaction of soil on the required site can be determined according to the
percentage of the maximum dry density produced in one of the standard
laboratory tests. For example, it may be noted in the specification that the
dry density must be not less than 95% of the maximum dry density
obtained from the standard Proctor test in the laboratory. In addition, the
water content limit must be stated. That is to say, compaction will be
achieved as a result of the presence of natural groundwater within the
limits.
 3) Discussion
 From the data table above that has been obtained from laboratory shows
that percentage of moisture content is increasing when the percentage of
water content increased. Water may not have been thoroughly absorbed
into the dry soil. As a precaution an adequate period should be allowed to
mature the soil after it is mixed with water. Each layer of soil may not
have been the same depth into the collar of the mould as a precaution
proper care should be taken to make sure that each layer is nearly equal in
weight. To avoid stratification each compacted layer should be scratched
with spatula before next layer is placed. Human error in operating the
hand rammer, it is impossible to apply the same compaction energy to
each layer. A possible precaution that could be taken is to ensure that the
same person applies the blows to each layer. Another will be to ensure the
rammer blows are uniformly distributed over the surface. More accurate
results could be obtained if the manual compacting hammer was replaced
with a mechanical arm along with using a fixed height and fixed force to
uniformly compact the sample.

5. CONCLUSION
Compaction of soil is an important process, as it helps it of achieve certain
physical properties necessary for its proper behaviour under loading: for example
proper compaction of an earthen dam or a highway Embankment reduces the
chances of its settlement, increases the shear strength of the soil due to its
increased density and reduces the permeability of the soil. The proctor
compaction test was carried out successfully and obtained a curve that satisfied
the objectives. The relationship between the dry density and the water content of
a soil can be identified clearly. This is to ensure soil of this construction site can
accommodate the loads from above and safety of building users
6. REFERENCES
 https://www.soilmanagementindia.com/soil/soil-compaction/compaction-
of-soil-definition-principle-and-effect-soil-engineering/13769
 https://bmsit.ac.in/system/study_materials/documents/000/000/022/origin
al/compaction.pdf?1477115557
 https://theconstructor.org/geotechnical/compaction-of-soils-3/1053/
 https://www.globalgilson.com/blog/proctor-compaction-test-a-basic-
guide
 https://civilseek.com/standard-proctor-test/