SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

LABORATORY REPORT AND PARTIAL FOOTING DESIGN OF SOIL IN

MAGALANG, PAMPANGA

Compilation of Reports Presented to the

Faculty of Civil Engineering

SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY
Baguio City

In Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirements for the course

CE3231L: GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING 2 - LABORATORY

Prepared by:

GELILIO, CHRISTINE JADE B.

Engr. Kurt Allen F. Paningbatan

Course Adviser

CIVIL ENGINEERING
SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

MAY 2023

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

INTRODUCTION

IMPORTANCE OF SOIL INVESTIGATION AND EXPLORATION (BASED ON RRL,

minimum of 4 pages

1.1. POPULATION AND LOCALE OF THE STUDY

The project site is located at Magalang, Pampanga. Figure 1.6.1 shows the

topographic view of Magalang, Pampanga sourced from Google Earth. According to the

Land and Forest Resources Department of the Provincial Government of Pampanga,

surface soils are composed of 54% sand, 21% silt, and 25% clay. Moreover, they

classified their soil as acidic based pH level except for the Arayat sandy clay loam that is

more alkaline. The project site has a latitude of 15° 14’5’’ N, and longitude of 120° 37’36’’

E. Figure 1.6.2 shows the exact location of the project site.

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

Figure 1.6.1. Topographic Map of Magalang, Pampanga

Figure 1.6.2. Site Location

1.2. OPERATIONAL DEFINITION OF TERMS (List all terms used in an alphabetized

manner)

Atterberg Limit

Moisture

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

Sieve Analysis

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

CHAPTER 2: METHODOLOGY

2.1. LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURE

Laboratory Tests were performed on extracted borehole sample in accordance

with ASTM Procedures. These are the following laboratory tests carried out:

ASTM D2216-10: Standard Test Methods For Laboratory Determination Of Water

(Moisture) Content Of Soil And Rock By Mass

These test methods cover the laboratory determination of the water (moisture)

content by mass of soil, rock, and similar materials where the reduction in mass by

drying is due to loss of water. For simplicity, the word “material” shall refer to soil, rock

or aggregate whichever is most applicable.

Apparatus

 Electric Balance

 Moisture Cans

 Oven (For drying, the temperature of oven is generally kept between 105 ̊C to

110 ̊C. A higher temperature should be avoided to prevent the burning of organic

matter in the soil.)

Experiment Procedure:

1. Determine the mass (g) of the empty moisture cans plus its cover (m1) using the

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

electric balance and also record the number.

2. Place samples of the representative moist soil in moisture cans close the can with

its cover to avoid loss of moisture.

3. Determine the combined mass (g) of the closed can and moist soil (m2).

4. Remove the cover from the top and place it on the bottom of the can.

5. Put it in the oven for at least 24 hours to dry the soil to a constant weight.

6. Determine the combined mass (g) of the dry soil sample plus the can and its cap

(m3).

ASTM D854: Standard Test Methods For Specific Gravity Of Soil Solids By Water

Pycnometer

These test methods cover the determination of the specific gravity of soil solids

passing a sieve by means of a water pycnometer. Soil solids for these test methods do

not include solids which can be altered by these methods, contaminated with a

substance that prohibits the use of these methods, or are highly organic soil solids, such

as fibrous matter which floats in water. Procedures for moist specimens such as organic

soils, highly plastic fine grained soils, tropical soils, and soils containing halloysite and

oven-dry specimens are provided. The apparatus is comprised of water pycnometer

which shall be a stoppered flask, stoppered iodine flask, or volumetric flask; balance;

drying oven; thermometer; dessicator; a system for entrapped air removal which shall

be a hot plate or Bunsen burner or a vacuum pump or water aspirator.

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

Apparatus

 Volumetric Flask (500 mL)

 Thermometer

 Balance sensitive up to 0.01 g

 Vacuum Pump

 Plastic Squeeze Bottle

 Drying Pan

 Drying Oven

 Funnel

 Sieve

Calibration of the Volumetric Flask

1. Clean, dry, and weigh the volumetric flask and record its mass, WF.

2. Carefully fill the flask with distilled water at room temperature up to the 500 mL

mark (bottom of the meniscus should be at the 500 mL mark). Dry the outside of

the flask and blot any water from the inside of the neck above the meniscus using

a long-handled swab.

3. Determine the mass of the flask and the water filled to the 500 mL mark (WFW).

4. Take the temperature of the water in the flask. This observed temperature (Ti) will

be used as the temperature reference. Table 2.2 indicates the relative density of

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

water to be used in determining the variation in the mass of the flask and over the

expected range of temperatures.

Experiment Procedure:

1. Pour off sufficient distilled water so that the flask bulb is approximately 1/3 full.

Place approximately 100 grams of soil from the sample jar into the flask.

2. Add distilled water to wash down any soil particles clinging to the inside of the

neck and to fill the flask slightly above the required to cover the soil.

3. Agitate the flask slightly to ensure that all soil is dispersed. Remove any entrapped

air by applying a vacuum to the flask. During the vacuum phase, samples should

be agitated gently at intervals to assist in the removal of air.

4. Add distilled water to the volumetric flask until the bottom of the meniscus touches

the 500 mL mark. Dry the outside of the flask and blot any water from the inside of

the neck above the meniscus using a long-handled swab.

5. Determine the combined mass of the flask plus soil plus water (WFWS).

6. Record the temperature (TX) of the flask and its content.

7. Weigh the pan and record its mass, WP.

8. Pour the soil and water into a pan. Wash the inside of the flask. Make sure that no

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

soil is left inside.

9. Put the pan in an oven to dry to a constant weight.

10. Determine the mass of the pan and oven-dried soil in pan (WPS).

ASTM D422: Standard Test Method For Particle-Size Analysis of Soils (Historical Method

Standard)

This method covers ASTM D422 on the quantitative determination of the

distribution of particle sizes in soils. The distribution of particle sizes larger than 75 um

(retained on the No. 200 sieve) is determined by sieving, while the distribution of

particle sizes smaller than 75 um is determined by a sedimentation process, using a

hydrometer to secure the necessary data.

Apparatus

 Sieves, a Bottom Pan, and a Cover

 Balance Sensitive up to 0.1 g

 Mortar and Rubber – Tipped Pestle

 Oven

 Mechanical Sieve Shaker (if available)

Experiment Procedure:

1. Collect a representative oven dry soil sample. Samples having largest particles of

the size of No. 4 sieve openings (4.75 mm) should be about 500 grams. For soils

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

having largest particles of size greater than 4.75 mm, larger weights are needed.

2. Break the soil sample into individual particles using a mortar and a rubber – tipped

pestle. Apply rolling process, and not pounding. (NOTE: the idea of break up the

soil into individual particles, not to break the particles themselves.)

3. Determine the mass of the sample accurately to 0.1 g.

4. Prepare a stack of sieves. A sieve with larger openings is placed above a sieve

with smaller openings. The sieve at the bottom should be the No. 200. A bottom

pan should be placed under sieve No. 200. The sieves that are generally used in a

stack are Nos. 4, 10, 20, 40, 60, 100, and 200; however, more sieves can be placed

in between.

5. Weigh the sieves and bottom pan and record its mass.

6. Pour the soil prepared in Steps 1 and 2 into the stack of sieves from the top.

7. Place the cover on the top of the stack of sieves.

8. Run the stack of sieves through a mechanical sieve shaker, or shake manually for

about 10 to 15 minutes.

9. Stop the sieve shaker and remove the stack of sieves carefully.

10. Weigh the sieves and pan with soil retained.

11. If a considerable amount of soil with silty and clayey fractions is retained on the

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

No. 200 sieve, it has to be washed. Washing is done by taking the No. 200 sieve

with the soil retained on it and pouring water through the sieve from a tap in the

laboratory.

12. Plot the percent finer versus particle size (use the logarithmic graph). Connect the

points with a smooth curve. Determine the values of diameter of soils

corresponding to 10, 25, 30, 60 and 75 percent finer.

ASTM D4318: Standard Test Methods For Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, Plasticity Index Of

Soils

These test methods are used as an integral part of several engineering

classification systems to characterize the fine-grained fractions of soils and to specify the

fine-grained fraction of construction materials. The liquid limit, plastic limit, and

plasticity index of soils are also used extensively, either individually or together, with

other soil properties to correlate with engineering behavior such as compressibility,

hydraulic conductivity (permeability), compactibility, shrink-swell, and shear strength. 

Apparatus

Liquid Limit Test

 Casagrande Liquid Limit Device

 Grooving Tool

 Porcelain Evaporating Dish

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

 Spatula

 Electronic Balance Sensitive up to 0.01g

 Plastic Squeeze Bottle with water

 Paper Towels

 Oven

 Moisture Cans

Plastic Limit Test

 Porcelain Evaporating Dish

 Spatula

 Plastic Squeeze Bottle with water

 Moisture Cans

 Ground Glass Plate

 Balance Sensitive up to 0.01g

Experiment Procedure:

Liquid Limit Test

1. Determine the mass (g) of the empty moisture cans plus its cover (m1) using the

electric balance and also record the number.

2. An air-dried sample weighing about 100grams shall be taken from material

passing the 0.425 mm sieve which has been obtained in accordance with the

standard procedures in preparation of disturbed soil sample for test.

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

3. Mix the sample with 15 to 20 mL of distilled water (or tap water for this experiment).

Mix thoroughly by alternately stirring and kneading with the spatula. Further

addition of water shall be made by 1 to 3 mL increments.

4. Place a portion of the mixed sample in the brass cup of the liquid limit device.

5. Level off the sample through its surface with a spatula to a maximum depth of

10mm.

6. Divide the soil pat into two segments using the standard grooving tool,

7. Mount the brass cup to the carriage such that it can be raised and allowed to

drop sharply on the base through a height of 10mm by rotating the crank at an

approximate of two rotations per second until the closure of the groove is evident

from the bottom.

NOTE: The closure should be by flow of the soil and not by sup page on the cup.

8. Take a slice of approximately width of spatula extending from the edge to edge

of the soil cake at right angles to the groove.

9. Place the removed sample in a moisture can and determine the total mass of the

moist sample and moisture can with cover (m2).

10. Remove the cover from the top and place it on the bottom of the can.

11. Put it in the oven for at least 24 hours to dry the soil to a constant weight.

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

12. Repeat steps (4) to (12) with different moisture contents of the soil in the range of

10 – 40 blows.

13. A total of 4 determinations should be made.

14. Determine the combined mass (g) of the dry soil sample plus the can and its cover

(m3).

15. Plot the moisture content (Y-axis) against logarithmic number of blows (X-axis) and

draw a mean line (flow line). Determine the soil’s liquid limit by projecting the 25

blows and getting the corresponding value of moisture content.

Plastic Limit Test

1. Determine the mass (g) of the empty moisture cans plus its cover (m1) using the

electric balance and also record the number.

2. An air-dried sample shall be taken from material passing the 0.425 mm sieve which

has been obtained in accordance with the standard procedures in preparation

of disturbed soil sample for test. Mix thoroughly with distilled water (tap water) until

the mass is plastic enough to be shaped.

3. Take a portion of the mixture. Squeeze and form the sample into ball.

4. Roll the ball of soil between the fingers and the glass plate (or any non-absorbent

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

material) with just sufficient value of pressure into thread of uniform diameter

through its length.

NOTE: Hands should be dry before handling the soil sample to prevent the addition

or absorption of moisture of the soil.

5. When the diameter of the thread becomes 1/8 of an inch, break the thread into

6 or 8 pieces.

6. Squeeze the pieces together between the thumbs and fingers into a uniform mass

and reroll.

7. Continue the alternate rolling to a thread of about 1/8 of an inch until the thread

crumbles and the soil can no longer be rolled into threads.

8. Take some of the crumbled soil and place in a drying can.

9. Place the sample in a moisture can and determine the total mass of the moist

sample and moisture can with cover (m2).

10. Put it in the oven for at least 24 hours to dry the soil to a constant weight.

11. A total of 3 determinations should be made.

12. Determine the combined mass (g) of the dry soil sample plus the can and its cover

(m3).

13. Determine the moisture content of the soil samples. Obtain the Plastic Limit of the

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

soil by getting the average of these moisture contents.

ASTM D-3282: Standard Practice for Classification of Soils and Soil-Aggregate Mixtures

for Highway Construction Purposes

This practice covers a procedure for classifying mineral and organomineral soils

into seven groups based on laboratory determination of particle-size distribution, liquid

limit, and plasticity index. It may be used when a precise engineering classification is

required, especially for highway construction purposes. Evaluation of soils within each

group is made by means of a group index, which is a value calculated from an empirical

formula.

AASHTO METHOD M145: Standard Specification for Classification of Soils and Soil–

Aggregate Mixtures for Highway Construction Purposes

This recommended practice describes a procedure for classifying soils into seven

groups based on laboratory determination of particle size distribution, liquid limit, and

plasticity index. Evaluation of soils within each group is made by means of a “group

index,” which is a value calculated from an empirical formula. The group classification,

including group index, should be useful in determining the relative quality of the soil

material for use in earthwork structures, particularly embankments, subgrades,

subbases, and bases. However, for the detailed design of important structures, additional

data concerning strength or performance characteristics of the soil under field

conditions will usually be required.

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

ASTM DESIGNATION D-2487: Standard Practice for Classification of Soils for

Engineering Purposes (Unified Soil Classification System

This classification system is based on particle-size characteristics, liquid limit,

and plasticity index. According to ASTM D2487-17, there are three major soil divisions:

coarse-grained soils, fine-grained soils, and highly organic soils. These are subdivided

further into 15 basic groups, each with its own group symbol (e.g. GW).

AASHTO Classification System:

- Used by highway departments for classifying soil as a highway subgrade

material

Experiment Procedure:

1. Identify soil group

- Done per column, from left to right, top to base

 start at A – 1 – a for granular soil, A – 4 for silt – clay materials

- Check identified limits, if 1 criterion is not met, consider next classification

2. Solve the group index

Group Index, GI:

- Indicator of the quality of soil as Highway Subgrade Material

- GI is inversely proportional to soil quality

- ↓GI = ↑Quality of Soil

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

GI = (F200 − 35)[0.2 + 0.005(LL − 40)] + 0.01(F200 − 15)(PI − 10)

where:

F200 = %Passing through sieve no. 200

LL = Liquid limit

PI = plasticity index

Unified Soil Classification System (USCS):

– used by geotechnical engineers

Experiment Procedure:

1. Identify soil group (for 1st to 3rd column of Table 4.2)

- Done per column, from left to right, top to base

- Compare identified limits

a. Check if soil is coarse or fine – grained:

- Compare F200 to 50% limit

a.1. Coarse: F200 < 50%

b. Check if gravels or sand

- Compare R4 to 50% of CF

b.1. Gravels: R4 > 50%CF

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

c. Check if clean gravels, gravel with fines or dual classification

- Check F200

c.1. Clean gravels: F200 < 5%

c.2. Gravel with fines: F200 > 12%

c.3. Dual Symbol: 5% < F200 < 12%

b.2. Sand: R4 ≤ 50%CF

c. Check if clean sands, sand with fines or dual classification

- Check F200

c.1. Clean sands: F200 < 5%

c.2. Sand with fines: F200 > 12%

c.3. Dual Symbol: 5% < F200 < 12%

a.2. Fine: F200 ≥ 50%

b. Check LL to 50%

2. Check criteria of the 4th column of Table 4.2 and identify Group Symbol at the 5th

column.

- Compare Cu and Cc with the limits

- Compare PI with the limits

- Plot (LL, PI) in plasticity chart to check if above, on, or below A - line

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

3. If group symbol is already available, determine the group name using Figures 4.4, 4.5,

and 4.6.

ASTM D2166: Standard Test Method For Unconfined Compressive Strength Of Cohesive

Soil

This test method is applicable only to cohesive materials which will not expel or

bleed water (water expelled from the soil due to deformation or compaction) during the

loading portion of the test and which will retain intrinsic strength after removal of

confining pressures, such as clays or cemented soils. Dry and crumbly soils, fissured or

varved materials, silts, peats, and sands cannot be tested with this method to obtain

valid unconfined compression strength values.

Apparatus:

 Loading frame of capacity of 2 t, with constant rate of movement. What is the

least count of the dial gauge attached to the proving ring.

 Proving ring of 0.01 kg sensitivity for soft soils; 0.05 kg for stiff soils.

 Soil trimmer.

 Frictionless end plates of 75 mm diameter (Perspex plate with silicon grease

coating).

 Evaporating dish (Aluminum container).

 Soil sample of 75 mm length.

 Dial gauge (0.01 mm accuracy).

 Balance of capacity 200 g and sensitivity to weigh 0.01 g.

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

 Oven, thermostatically controlled with interior of non-corroding material to

maintain the emperature at the desired level. What is the range of the

temperature used for drying the soil.

 Sample extractor and split sampler.

 Dial gauge (sensitivity 0.01mm).

 Vernier calipers

Experiment Procedure:

1. Place the sampling soil specimen at the desired water content and density in the

large mould.

2. Push the sampling tube into the large mould and remove the sampling tube filled

with the soil. For undisturbed samples, push the sampling tube into the clay

sample.

3. Saturate the soil sample in the sampling tube by a suitable method.

4. Coat the split mould lightly with a thin layer of grease. Weigh the mould.

5. Extrude the sample out of the sampling tube into the split mould, using the

sample extractor and the knife.

6. Trim the two ends of the specimen in the split mould. Weigh the mould with the

specimen.

7. Remove the specimen from the split mould by splitting the mould into two parts.

8. Measure the length and diameter of the specimen with vernier calipers.

9. Place the specimen on the bottom plate of the compression machine. Adjust the

upper plate to make contact with the specimen.

10. Adjust the dial gauge and the proving ring gauge to zero.

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

11. Apply the compression load to cause an axial strain at the rate of ½ to 2% per

minute.

12. Record the dial gauge reading, and the proving ring reading every thirty seconds

up to a strain of 6%. The reading may be taken after every 60 seconds for a strain

between 6%, 12% and every 2minutes or so beyond 12%.

13. Continue the test until failure surfaces have clearly developed or until an axial

strain of 20% is reached.

14. Measure the angle between the failure surface and the horizontal, if possible.

15. Take the sample from the failure zone of the specimen for the water content

determination.

ASTM D3080: Standard Test Method For Direct Shear Test Of Soils Under Consolidated

Drained Conditions

This test method covers the determination of the consolidated drained shear

strength of a soil material in direct shear. The test is performed by deforming a specimen

at a controlled strain rate on or near a single shear plane determined by the

configuration of the apparatus. Generally, three or more specimens are tested, each

under a different normal load, to determine the effects upon shear resistance and

displacement, and strength properties such as Mohr strength envelopes.

Apparatus:

 Direct shear device

 Load and deformation dial gauges

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

 Balance.

Experiment Procedure:

1. Weigh the initial mass of soil in the pan.

2. Measure the diameter and height of the shear box. Compute 15% of the

diameter in millimeters.

3. Carefully assemble the shear box and place it in the direct shear device. Then

place a porous stone and a filter paper in the shear box.

4. Place the sand into the shear box and level off the top. Place a filter paper, a

porous stone, and a top plate (with ball) on top of the sand

5. Remove the large alignment screws from the shear box. Open the gap between

the shear box halves to approximately 0.025 in. using the gap screws, and then

back out the gap screws.

6. Weigh the pan of soil again and compute the mass of soil used.

7. Complete the assembly of the direct shear device and initialize the three gauges

(Horizontal displacement gage, vertical displacement gage and shear load gage)

to zero.

8. Set the vertical load (or pressure) to a predetermined value, and then close

bleeder valve and apply the load to the soil specimen by raising the toggle

switch.

9. Start the motor with selected speed so that the rate of shearing is at a selected

constant rate, and take the horizontal displacement gauge, vertical displacement

gage and shear load gage readings. Record the readings on the data sheet. (Note:

Record the vertical displacement gage readings, if needed).

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

10. Continue taking readings until the horizontal shear load peaks and then falls, or

the horizontal displacement reaches 15% of the diameter.

2.2. LABORATORY TEST CALCULATIONS

EXPT. 1: DETERMINATION OF MOISTURE CONTENT

 Mass of Moisture :

Mass 1 - Mass 2

 Mass 1 = Mass of Can + Cover + Soil

 Mass 2 = Mass of Can + Cover + Dry Soil

 Mass of Dry Soil :

Mass 2 - Mass 3

 Mass 3 =Mass of Can plus Cover

 Moisture Content:

Mass of Moisture
MC =
Mass of Dry Soil

 Average Moisture Content:

MC1 + MC 2 + MC 3
¿):
3

EXPT. 2: DETERMINATION OF THE SPECIFIC GRAVITY OF SOIL SOLIDS USING A

VOLUMETRIC FLASK OR PYCNOMETER

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

 Mass of Soil:

Ms = W ps +W P

 Specific Gravity of Soil:

K (W S )
Gs =
W S +W FW @T x −W FWS

EXPT. 3: SIEVE ANALYSIS

 Mass of Soil Retained:

Mass of Soil Retained = (mass of sieve plus soil retained) - (mass of sieve)

 Total Mass:

Total Mass: ∑ mass of soil retained

 % Mass Retained On Each Sieve:

Mass of Soil Retained

x 100 %
Total Mass

 (Cumulative % Retained)n:

(cumulative % retained)n −1 +(mass of soil retained)n

 % Passing:

= 100% - cumulative % mass retained on each sieve

 Uniformity Coefficient, C u:

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

D60
Cu =
D10

 Coefficient of Gradation, C c :

( D30 )2
Cc =
D 10 x D6 0

 Sorting Coefficient, So :

So =
√ D75
D25

EXPT. 4: ATTEBERG LIMITS

LIQUID LIMIT TEST

Mass of Moisture (mw ¿=m 2 −m3

Mass of Dry Soil (m s ¿=m3 −m1

mw
Moisture Content, % = x 100 %
ms

PLASTIC LIMIT

Mass of Moisture (mw ¿=m 2 −m3

Mass of Dry Soil (m s ¿=m3 −m1

mw
Moisture Content, % = x 100 %
ms

w 1 + w 2+ w 3
Plastic Limit, % =
3

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

Plasticity Index (PI), % = LL - PL

SHRINKAGE LIMIT

A-Line PI = 0.73 (LL - 20)

B-Line PI = 0.90 (LL - 8)

EXPT. 5: SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM

USDA

% Sand
M.% Sand = x (100 %)
100 % −%Gravel

% Silt
M.% Silt = x (100 %)
100 % −%Gravel

% Clay
M.% Clay = x (100 %)
100 % −%Gravel

AASHTO

GI = ( F 200 −35 ¿[0.2+0.005(¿− 40)]+0.01 ( F 200 −15 ¿(PI − 10)

USCS

Gravel Fraction, GF = % Gravel

GF = R4 = 100% - F 4

Sand Fraction, SF = % Sand

SF = F 4= F 4 − F 200

Coarse Fraction, CF = total of % Gravel and % Sand

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

CF = R200 = 100 % − F 200

Fines Fraction, FF = % Fines

FF = F 200

EXPT. 6: UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST

AREA, Ao :

π
( D )2
4 o

VOLUME OF THE SOIL:

2
πr h

SAMPLE DEFORMATION, γ :

γ = deformation dial div x deformation dial

UNIT STRAIN, ε :

γ
ε= x 100 %
LO

TOTAL LOAD SAMPLE, P:

P = Load dial div x Load dial reading

CORRECTION FACTOR, CF:

1
CF = ε
1−
100 %

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

SAMPLE STRESS:

P x 1000
q u=
CA

CORRECTED AREA, CA:

CA = CF x Ao

UNCONFINED COMPRESSION STRENGTH

UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH

EXPT. 7: DIRECT SHEAR TEST

NORMAL LOAD, P:

P = m 1+ m 2

NORMAL STRESS, ϑ ' :

P
ϑ' =
Ao

SHEAR:

V = DR x LD

SHEAR STRESS:

V
τ=
Ao

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

CHAPTER 3: DATA AND RESULTS

Following are the results of the different tests conducted in the geotechnical laboratory

at Saint Louis University.

Present all tables with graph (PSDC, DIRECT SHEAR, etc)

Figure 3.1. Uncofined Compression Strength of Sample A1

With the following data presented in the unconfined compression test, the average UCS

and USS of the soil is xx and xx, respectively. With this …. (add a brief discussion based

on your observation and conclusion)

*For data that doesn’t require a graph, present your data in a paragraph. (In the

moisture content investigation, it was observed that the calculated average moisture of

the soil is xx%.

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

..and so on. (The soil sample was found to be SP-SM under the USCS classification, A-5-6

(0) in AASHTO, ………

CHAPTER 4: FOOTING DESIGN

With the gathered data of the soil, bearing capacity calculation can be determined based

on Terzaghi’s Equation with the following limitations:

Df =

Pu =

Groundwater table is located 2m below the footing depth, and Correlations were used in

obtaining SPT-N value equivalent, and Unit Weight of soil by Kulhawy and Mayne (1990)

and. …….

Present all equations used in the correlations and calculation of the bearing capacity.

Settlement was also found to be 12mm(example) which is lesser than the allowable

settlement of 25mm by Terzaghi’s Eqaution.

CHAPTER 5: COMPUTATIONS

Present all calculations and tables not included in the Data and results.

Table 5.1. Summarized data for UCS of Sample A1.

EXPT. 4: ATTEBERG LIMITS

LIQUID LIMIT TEST

 Mass of Moisture (m w ¿

T1: m w =m2 −m3=29.31 g −27.59 g=1.72 g

T2: m w =m2 −m3=30.87 g −28.85 g=2.02 g

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

T3: m w =m2 −m3=30.28 g −28.30 g=1.98 g

 Mass of Dry Soil (m s ¿

T1: m s =m3 − m1=27.59 g −23.90 g=3.69 g

T2: m s =m3 − m1=28.85 g −24.47 g=4.38 g

T3: m s =m3 − m1=28.30 g −23.92 g=4.38 g

 Moisture Content (w)

mw 1.72 g
T1: w (%)=¿ ×100 %= ×100 %=46.612 %
ms 3.69 g
mw 2.02 g
T2: w (%)=¿ ×100 %= × 100 %=46.119 %
ms 4.38 g
mw 1.98 g
T3: w (%)= × 100 %= ×100 %=45.205 %
ms 4.38 g

PLASTIC LIMIT TEST

 Mass of Moisture (m w ¿

T1: m w =m2 −m3=28.92 g −27.67 g=1.25 g

T2: m w =m2 −m3=29.26 g −27.81 g=1.45 g

T3: m w =m2 −m3=30.03 g −28.26 g=1.77 g

 Mass of Dry Soil (m s ¿

T1: m s =m3 − m1=27.67 g − 24.86 g=2.81 g

T2: m s =m3 − m1=27.81 g −24.36 g=3.45 g

T3: m s =m3 − m1=28.26 g − 24.20 g=4.06 g

 Moisture Content (w)

mw 1.25 g
T1: w (%)=¿ ×100 %= ×100 %=¿ 44.484 %
ms 2.81 g
mw 1.45 g
T2: w (%)=¿ ×100 %= ×100 %=42.029 %
ms 3.45 g
mw 1.77 g
T3: w (%)= × 100 %= ×100 %=43.596 %
ms 4.06 g

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

 Plastic Limit (PL)

w1 + w2+ w3 (44.484+ 42.029+43.596)%
PL (%)=¿ = =43.370 %
3 3
 Plasticity Index (PI)
PI (%)= LL - PL = 46.376 % − 43.370 %=3.006 %
SHRINKAGE LIMIT TEST
 C-Line
PI (%)= 0.73(LL - 20) = 0.73(46.376 - 20) = 19.254%
 D-Line
PI (%)= 0.90(LL - 8) = 0.90(46.376 - 8) = 34.538%

EXPT. 5: SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM

USDA
Modified Percent:
 Modified % Sand
% Sand 78.40 %
M.% Sand ¿ × 100 %= × 100 %=100 %
100 % −%Gravel 100 % − 21.60 %
 Modified % Silt
% S ilt 0%
M.% Silt ¿ × 100 %= × 100 %=0 %
100 % −%Gravel 100 % − 21.60 %
 Modified % Clay
% Clay 0%
M.% Clay ¿ × 100 %= × 100 %=0 %
100 % −%Gravel 100 % − 21.60 %

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

Classification of Soil based on the Figure 4.1:

∴ Gravelly-Sandy Soil

AASHTO
Soil Sample:
No.200 = 17.76% ≤ 35% ∴ Granular Material

Notes:
For the following classifications: A–1–a, A–1–b, A–3, A–2–4, and A–2 –5
∴ GI = 0
∴ A–1–b (0) = Excellent to Good

USCS
Soil Sample:
FF = F200 ¿ 17.76 %
CF = R200 ¿ 100 % −17.76 %=82.24 %
Table 4.2:

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

∴ Coarse-Grained Soil
GF = R4 ¿ 100 % − 91.308 %=8.692 %<50 %
∴ Sands
Since FF ¿ 17.76 %> 12%
∴ Sands with fines
Since PI ¿ 3.006 % <4∧¿=46.376 % (Plots Below A Line )
Group Symbol: SM
Figure 4.4:
GF = R4 ¿ 8.692 %<15 % Gravel
∴ Silty Sand
∴ Soil Sample: SM; Silty Sand

EXPT. 6: UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST

 Area ( Ao )
π 2 π 2 2
Ao = (Do ) = (89.30 mm) =6263.1498 mm
4 4
 Volume of the Soil (V)

89.30 mm 2
V=V =π r 2 h=π ( ) (130.473 mm)=204,292.986mm
3
2
 Sample Deformation ( γ )
γ = deformation dial div ×deformation dial
25.4 mm
¿ 0.001 ¿ ×
*Deformation Dial ¿ mm
1∈¿=0.0254 ¿
¿
mm

γ 1=5÷×0.0254 =0.127 mm
¿
mm

γ 2=10÷×0.0254 =0.254 mm
¿
mm

γ 3=1 5÷× 0.0254 =0.381 mm
¿

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

mm

γ 4 =20÷× 0.0254 =0.508 mm
¿
mm

γ 5=2 5÷×0.0254 =0.635 mm
¿
mm

γ 6=30÷× 0.0254 =0.762mm
¿
mm

γ 7=3 5÷×0.0254 =0.889mm
¿

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

mm

γ 8=40÷× 0.0254 =1.016 mm
¿
mm

γ 9=4 5÷×0.0254 =1.143 mm
¿
mm

γ 10=50÷×0.0254 =1.270 mm
¿
mm

γ 11=55÷×0.0254 =1.397 mm
¿
mm

γ 12=60÷×0.0254 =1.524 mm
¿
mm

γ 13=6 5÷×0.0254 =1.651 mm
¿
mm

γ 14=70÷×0.0254 =1.778 mm
¿
mm

γ 15=7 5÷×0.0254 =1.905 mm
¿
mm

γ 16=80÷×0.0254 =2.032mm
¿
mm

γ 17=8 5÷×0.0254 =2.159 mm
¿
mm

γ 18=90÷×0.0254 =2.286 mm
¿
mm

γ 19=9 5÷×0.0254 =2.413 mm
¿
mm

γ 20=100÷×0.0254 =2.540 mm
¿
mm

γ 21=10 5÷× 0.0254 =2.667 mm
¿
mm

γ 22=110÷×0.0254 =2.794 mm
¿
mm

γ 23=115÷×0.0254 =2,921 mm
¿
mm

γ 24=120÷×0.0254 =3.048 mm
¿
 Unit Strain (ɛ)
γ
ε= ×100 %
LO

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

γ 0.127 mm
 ε 1= ×100 %= ×100 %=0.097 %
LO 130.473mm
γ 0.254 mm
 ε 2= ×100 %= ×100 %=0.195 %
LO 130.473mm
γ 0.381 mm
 ε 3= ×100 %= ×100 %=0.292 %
LO 130.473 mm
γ 0.508 mm
 ε 4= × 100 %= × 100 %=0.389 %
LO 130.473 mm
γ 0.635 mm
 ε 5= ×100 %= ×100 %=0.487 %
LO 130.473 mm
γ 0.762 mm
 ε 6= ×100 %= ×100 %=0.584 %
LO 130.473 mm
γ 0.889 mm
 ε 7= ×100 %= ×100 %=0.681 %
LO 130.473 mm
γ 1.016 mm
 ε 8= ×100 %= ×100 %=0.779 %
LO 130.473 mm
γ 1.143 mm
 ε 9= ×100 %= ×100 %=0.876 %
LO 130.473 mm
γ 1.270 mm
 ε 10= ×100 %= ×100 %=0.973 %
LO 130.473 mm
γ 1.397 mm
 ε 11= × 100 %= ×100 %=1.071 %
LO 130.473 mm
γ 1.524 mm
 ε 12= × 100 %= ×100 %=1.168 %
LO 130.473 mm
γ 1.651mm
 ε 13= ×100 %= ×100 %=1.265 %
LO 130.473 mm
γ 1.778 mm
 ε 14= ×100 %= ×100 %=1.362 %
LO 130.473 mm
γ 1.905 mm
 ε 15= ×100 %= ×100 %=1.460 %
LO 130.473 mm
γ 2.032mm
 ε 16= ×100 %= ×100 %=1.557 %
LO 130.473mm

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

γ 2.159mm
 ε 17= ×100 %= ×100 %=1.655 %
LO 130.473mm
γ 2.286 mm
 ε 18= ×100 %= ×100 %=1.752 %
LO 130.473 mm
γ 2.413 mm
 ε 19= × 100 %= ×100 %=1.849 %
LO 130.473 mm
γ 2.540 mm
 ε 20= ×100 %= ×100 %=1.947 %
LO 130.473 mm
γ 2.667 mm
 ε 21= × 100 %= ×100 %=2.044 %
LO 130.473 mm
γ 2.794 mm
 ε 22= × 100 %= ×100 %=2.141 %
LO 130.473 mm
γ 2,921mm
 ε 23= ×100 %= ×100 %=2.239 %
LO 130.473 mm
γ 3.048 mm
 ε 24= ×100 %= ×100 %=2.336 %
LO 130.473 mm
 Total Load Sample (P)
P = Load Dial Div ×Load Dial Reading; Load Dial = 1.90 N/Div
N

P1=1.90 ×8÷¿ 15.20 N
¿
N

P2=1.90 ×10.5÷¿ 19.95 N
¿
N

P3=1.90 ×15÷¿ 28.50 N
¿
N

P4 =1.90 × 19÷¿ 36.10 N
¿
N

P5=1.90 ×23÷¿ 43.70 N
¿
N

P6=1.90 ×26.5÷¿ 50.35 N
¿
N

P7=1.90 ×30÷¿ 57.00 N
¿
N

P8=1.90 ×34÷¿64.60 N
¿

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

N

P9=1.90 ×38÷¿ 72.20 N
¿
N

P10 =1.90 × 42÷¿ 79.80 N
¿
N

P11 =1.90 ×47÷¿ 89.30 N
¿
N

P12 =1.90 ×50.5÷¿ 95.95 N
¿
N

P13=1.90 ×55÷¿ 104.50 N
¿
N

P14 =1.90 ×58÷¿ 110.20 N
¿
N

P15 =1.90 ×62÷¿117.80 N
¿
N

P16 =1.90 ×67÷¿ 127.30 N
¿
N

P17=1.90 ×70.5÷¿ 133.95 N
¿
N

P18=1.90 ×75÷¿ 142.50 N
¿
N

P19=1.90 ×75.5÷¿143.45 N
¿
N

P20 =1.90 ×80÷¿ 152.00 N
¿
N

P21 =1.90 ×80÷¿ 152.00 N
¿
N

P22 =1.90 ×82÷¿155.80 N
¿
N

P23 =1.90 ×79.5÷¿ 157.05 N
¿
N

P24 =1.90 × 80÷¿ 152.00 N
¿
 Correction Factor (CF)
1
CF = ε
1−
100 %

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

1 1
CF 1= = =1.001
 ε 0.097 %
1− 1−
100 % 100 %
1 1
CF 2 = = =1.002
 ε 0.195 %
1− 1−
100 % 100 %
1 1
CF 3 = = =1.003
 ε 0.292 %
1− 1−
100 % 100 %
1 1
CF 4= = =1.004
 ε 0.389 %
1− 1−
100 % 100 %
1 1
CF 5 = = =1.005
 ε 0.487 %
1− 1−
100 % 100 %
1 1
CF 6 = = =1.006
 ε 0.584 %
1− 1−
100 % 100 %
1 1
CF 7 = = =1.007
 ε 0681 %
1− 1−
100 % 100 %
1 1
CF 8 = = =1.008
 ε 0.779 %
1− 1−
100 % 100 %
1 1
CF 9= = =1.009
 ε 0.876 %
1− 1−
100 % 100 %
1 1
CF 10= = =1.010
 ε 0.973 %
1− 1−
100 % 100 %
1 1
CF 11= = =1.011
 ε 1.071%
1− 1−
100 % 100 %
1 1
CF 12= = =1.012
 ε 1.168 %
1− 1−
100 % 100 %

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

1 1
CF 13= = =1.013
 ε 1.265 %
1− 1−
100 % 100 %
1 1
CF 14 = = =1.014
 ε 1.363 %
1− 1−
100 % 100 %
1 1
CF 15= = =1.015
 ε 1.460 %
1− 1−
100 % 100 %
1 1
CF 16= = =1.016
 ε 1.557 %
1− 1−
100 % 100 %
1 1
CF 17= = =1.017
 ε 1.655 %
1− 1−
100 % 100 %
1 1
CF 18= = =1.018
 ε 1.752 %
1− 1−
100 % 100 %
1 1
CF 19= = =1.019
 ε 1.849 %
1− 1−
100 % 100 %
1 1
CF 20= = =1.020
 ε 1.947 %
1− 1−
100 % 100 %
1 1
CF 21= = =1.021
 ε 2.044 %
1− 1−
100 % 100 %
1 1
CF 22= = =1.022
 ε 2.141%
1− 1−
100 % 100 %
1 1
CF 23= = =1.023
 ε 2.239 %
1− 1−
100 % 100 %
1 1
CF 24 = = =1.024
 ε 2.336 %
1− 1−
100 % 100 %

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

 Correction Area (CA)

CA = CF × A o
2 2
 CA 1=CF × A o =1.001× 6263.1498mm =6269.252 mm
2 2
 CA 2=CF × A o =1.002× 6263.1498mm =6275.366 mm
 CA 3 =CF × Ao =1.003× 6263.1498 mm2=6281.493 mm2
2 2
 CA 4=CF × A o=1.004 × 6263.1498 mm =6287.631 mm
2 2
 CA 5 =CF × Ao =1.005× 6263.1498 mm =6293.781 mm
2 2
 CA 6 =CF × Ao =1.006 ×6263.1498 mm =6299.943mm
 CA 7 =CF × Ao =1.007 ×6263.1498 mm2=6306.118mm 2
2 2
 CA 8 =CF × Ao =1.008 ×6263.1498 mm =6312.304 mm
2 2
 CA 9 =CF × Ao =1.009 ×6263.1498 mm =6318.503 mm
2 2
 CA 10=CF × A o=1.010× 6263.1498 mm =6324.713 mm
2 2
 CA 11=CF × A o=1.011 ×6263.1498 mm =6330.936 mm
2 2
 CA 12=CF × A o=1.012 ×6263.1498 mm =6337.172mm
2 2
 CA 13=CF × A o=1.013× 6263.1498 mm =6343.419 mm
2 2
 CA 14 =CF × Ao =1.014 ×6263.1498 mm =6349.679mm
2 2
 CA 15=CF × A o=1.015× 6263.1498 mm =6355.951 mm
2 2
 CA 16=CF × A o =1.016× 6263.1498 mm =6362.236 mm
 CA 17=CF × A o =1.017× 6263.1498 mm2=6368.533 mm2
2 2
 CA 18=CF × A o=1.018× 6263.1498 mm =6374.843 mm
2 2
 CA 19=CF × A o=1.019 × 6263.1498mm =6381.165 mm
2 2
 CA 20=CF × A o =1.020× 6263.1498 mm =6387.499 mm
 CA 21=CF × A o=1.021 ×6263.1498 mm2 =6393.846 mm2
2 2
 CA 22=CF × A o=1.022 ×6263.1498 mm =6400.206 mm

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

 CA 23=CF × A o =1.023× 6263.1498 mm2=6406.579 mm2

2 2
 CA 24 =CF × Ao =1.024 ×6263.1498 mm =6412.964 mm

 Sample Stress (q u)
P × 1000
q u=
CA
P ×1000 15.20 ×1000
 q u1= = =2.425 KPa
CA 6269.252 mm
2

P ×1000 19.95 ×1000

 q u2= = =3.179 KPa
CA 6275.366 mm2
P × 1000 28.50 ×1000
 q u3= = =4.537 KPa
CA 6281.493 mm
2

P ×1000 36.10 × 1000

 q u4= = =5 . 741 KPa
CA 6287.631mm
2

P × 1000 43.70 ×1000

 q u5= = =6.943 KPa
CA 6293.781 mm
2

P× 1000 50.35 ×1000

 q u6= = =7.992 KPa
CA 6299.943 mm2
P× 1000 57.00 ×1000
 q u7= = =9.039 KPa
CA 6306.118 mm2
P× 1000 64.60 × 1000
 q u8= = =10.234 KPa
CA 6312.304 mm2
P× 1000 72.20 ×1000
 q u9= = =11.427 KPa
CA 6318.503 mm2
P ×1000 79.80 ×1000
 q u10= = =12.617 KPa
CA 6324.713 mm
2

P ×1000 89.30 ×1000

 q u11= = =14.105 KPa
CA 6330.936 mm2
P ×1000 95.95× 1000
 q u12= = =15.141 KPa
CA 6337.172 mm
2

P ×1000 104.50 ×1000

 q u13= = =16.474 KPa
CA 6343.419 mm
2

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

P × 1000 110.20 ×1000

 q u14= = =17.355 KPa
CA 6349.679 mm2
P ×1000 117.80 ×1000
 q u15= = =18.534 KPa
CA 6355.951 mm2
P ×1000 127.30 ×1000
 q u16= = =20.009 KPa
CA 6362.236 mm
2

P ×1000 133.95 ×1000

 q u17= = =21.033 KPa
CA 6368.533 mm
2

P ×1000 142.50 ×1000

 q u18= = =22.353 KPa
CA 6374.843 mm
2

P ×1000 143.45 ×1000

 q u19= = =22.480 KPa
CA 6381.165 mm
2

P ×1000 152.00 ×1000

 q u20= = =23.796 KPa
CA 6387.499 mm
2

P ×1000 152.00 ×1000

 q u21= = =23.773 KPa
CA 6393.846 mm2
P ×1000 155.80 ×1000
 q u22= = =24.343 KPa
CA 6400.206 mm2
P ×1000 151.05 ×1000
 q u23= = =23.577 KPa
CA 6406.579 mm2
P × 1000 152.00 ×1000
 q u24= = =23 .702 KPa
CA 6412.964 mm2
 Unconfined Compression Strength (q ucs)
q ucs=2 4.34 KPa

 Undrained Shear Strength (C u)

qu 24.34
C u= = =12.17 KPa
2 2

EXPT. 7: DIRECT SHEAR TEST

 Area of Specimen ( AO )
L1 + L2 + L3 2
Average Lengtℎ= ; AO =( Average Lengtℎ)
3

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY
2
1m 2

Ao1 =[4.9+ 4.9+ 4.6 ¿ cm× ¿ ¿ 3] =0.002304 m
100 cm
2
1m 2

Ao2 =[5.1+4.7+ 4.8 ¿ cm× ¿ ¿ 3] =0.002401 m
100 cm
2
1m 2

Ao3 =[5.3+ 4.9+ 5.0 ¿ cm× ¿ ¿ 3] =0.002601 m
100 cm
 Load Dial ( LD )
lbs. 4.448 N N
LD=0.31 × =1.379
¿ 1 lb . ¿

 Weight Added, kg
0.4535924 kg
 Specimen1=10 lbs .× =4.536 kg
1 lb.
0.4535924 kg
 Specimen2=2 0 lbs. × =9.072 kg
1lb .
0.4535924 kg
 Specimen3=3 0 lbs .× =13.608 kg
1 lb.
 Normal Load (P)
P = m 1+ m 2
 P1=7.5 kg +4.535934 kg=12.036 kg

 P2=7.5 kg +9.071848 kg=16.572 kg

 P3=7.5 kg +13.607772 kg=21.108 kg

 Normal Load (ϑ )
P
ϑ' =
Ao
m 1 KN
12.036 kg × 9.81 ×
s 1000 N KPa
2

P
ϑ '1 = = 2
=51.247
Ao 0.002304 m
m 1 KN
16.572 kg × 9.81 ×

P s 1000 N
2 KPa
ϑ ' 2= = =67.709
Ao 0.002401 m 2

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

m 1 KN
21.108 kg ×9.81 ×

P s2 1000 N KPa
ϑ '3 = = 2
=79.611
Ao 0.002601m
 Shear ( V)
V = DR ×LD
N

V 1=1.379 ×75÷¿ 103.425 N
¿
N

V 2=1.379 ×68÷¿ 93.772 N
¿
N

V 3=1.379 × 97÷¿ 133.763 N
¿
 Shear Stress ( τ )
V
τ=
Ao
1 KN
103.425 N ×
 1000 N
τ1= =44.88 9 KPa
0.002304 m2
1 KN
93.772 N ×
 1000 N
τ 2= 2
=39.055 KPa
0.002401m
1 KN
133.763 N ×
 1000 N
τ3= =51.428 KPa
0.002601m2
Cohesion, C’
C’ = 32 KPa
Angle of Friction, Ø’
Ø’= 11˚
Shear Stress , τ
41.961+45.161+ 47.475
τ= =44.866 K Pa
3

CIVIL ENGINEERING
SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

APPENDICES

A. REPORT ON BEARING CAPACITY

B. REPORT ON CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM

C. Documentation

Add two pictures per test conducted including soil gathering

D. Tables Used

Add here all tables like the once used in Classification System, tables for Nc, Nq, and

Ngamma, and so on.

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

REFERENCES

[1] Manfred R. Hausmann (1990). Engineering Principles of Ground Modification.

McGraw-Hill Publishing Company. New York, New York

[2] M.P. Moseley and K. Kirsch (2004). Ground Improvement 2 nd Edition. Spoon Press.

270 Madison Avenue, New York, New York

[3] Peter G. Nicholson (2015). Soil Improvement and Ground Modification Methods.

Butterworth Heinemann. The Boulevard, Langford Lane, Kidlington, Oxford,

Massachusetts, USA

[4] Klaus Kirsch and Allan Bell (2013). Ground Improvement 3 rd Edition. CRC Press.

6000 Broken Sound Parkway NW, Suite 300

[5] Jie Han (2015). Principles and Practice of Ground Improvement. John Wiley & Sons,

Inc. Hoboken, New Jersey

[6] Paolo Croce et.al. (2014). Jet Grouting: Technology, Design and Control. CRC Press.

6000 Broken Sound Parkway NW, Suite 300

[7] Keller UK. Jet Grouting: An efficient and versatile method for soil treatment.

Retrieved from https://www.keller.co.uk/sites/keller-uk/files/2019-03/jet-grouting-

brochure-keller-uk.pdf on November 20,2022

[8] Joanna Bzowka (2012). Analysis of Bearing Capacity and Settlement of Jet Grouting

Columns. Journal on Architecture and Civil Engineering Environment on Silesian

University of Technology. Retrieved from

https://delibra.bg.polsl.pl/Content/28060/BCPS_31626_-_Analysis-of-bearing-

_0000.pdf

CIVIL ENGINEERING
 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY

[9] Muge K. Akin (2016). Experimental Studies on the Physio-mechanical Properties of

Jet-grouted Columns In Sandy and Silty Soils. Journal on African Earth Sciences.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jafrearsci.2016.01.011

[10] American Society for Civil Engineers (2014). Case Histories of Ground Treatment

with Jet Grouting Solutions. https://doi.org/10.1061/40663(2003)116

[11] Modoni Giuseppe et.al. (2019). Strength of Sandy and Clayey Soils Cemented with

Single and Double Fluid Jet Grouting. Journal on Soils and Foundation.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sandf.2019.03.007

[12] Onder Akcakal et.al. (2016). Deep Foundation under Wind Turbines: A Case Study.

Journal Entry on Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering. Retrieved from

https://ascelibrary.org/doi/book/10.1061/9780784480137 on November 20, 2022

[13] Department of Public Works and Highways (2015). Design Guidelines, Criteria and

Standards 2015 Edition. Retrieved from

https://www.dpwh.gov.ph/dpwh/sites/default/files/issuances/DO_179_s2015.pdf on

November 20, 2022

CIVIL ENGINEERING