Custom Limits of Consistency essay paper writing service

← DiatomsAtmospheric Changes in Carbon →

Buy Limits of Consistency essay paper online

Soil was taken and water was eventually added to every sample in order to ascertain the Plastic Limit (PL) and the Liquid Limit (LL) and which moistures contents depicted the soil’s consistency boundaries. The table below displays the first four samples which were tested for the Liquid limit while the last three samples were tested for the PL. The samples were then placed in an oven and subjected to temperatures of 105 degrees Celsius. After being removed from the oven after 24 hours, the values indicated ion red was obtained:

Number of Tin

Tin’s Mass

Sample + Tin

1st Reading

2nd Reading

Penetration

Mass obtained after 24 hrs

-

g

g

-

-

Mm

g

11

15.91

28.03

70

207

13.7

25.08

26

15.88

29.95

70

268

19.8

26.20

72

16.24

34.74

70

300

23.0

29.49

110

16.06

33.78

70

345

27.5

28.57

 

 

 

-

-

-

 

 

129

17.25

22.65

-

21.80

148

15.89

21.14

-

20.33

181

15.64

21.47

-

20.57

Introduction

In order to perform an Atterberg Limit Test, a sample of soil was obtained. This comprised the testing of the PL where two of the tests from it had a penetration which was less than 20mm while the other two had a penetration which was more than 20mm. Three more tests were performed for the LL state of the soil sample. The sample of soil obtained in each of the test was weighed and then placed in an oven with 105 degrees Celsius. The results obtained from the experiment were later discussed and a conclusion made.

Procedure

A soil sample was obtained and put in a tray and gradually, water was mixed into it. A portion of the sample was then placed in a tin, assigned with a number and weighed. Eventually, additional water was added to the sample and then mixed. The process was then repeated. The tins having the sample soils was then taken and placed in a oven, temperatures set to 105 degrees Celsius and left for 24 hours. Each tin was then removed from the oven and weighted.

Results and Analysis of the tests

The equation m=Mw/Ms (mass of wet sample/mass of dry sample) is used in calculating moisture content. For each sample, the moisture content was calculated and the results obtained depicted below:

Tin 110m=(33.78-28.57/28.57-16.06)*100=41.6%

Tin 72m=(34.74-29.49/29.49-16.24)*100=39.6%

Tin 26m=(29.95-26.20/26.20-15.88)*100=36.3%

Tin 11 m=(28.03-25.08/25.08-15.91)*100=32.2%

Tin 129 m=(22.65-21.8/21.8-17.25)*100=18.7%

Tin 181 m=(21.47-20.57/20.57-15.64)*100=18.3%

Tin 148 m=(21.14-20.33/20.33-15.89)*100=18.2%

In order to obtain a value that is directly down from 20mm penetration the 20mm LL test displays the graph showing it as 0.37 or 37%. The PL is calculated through the remaining three samples in Tins 181, 129, 148 as displayed below

PL= (18.7+18.2+18.3)/3=18.4

It is now easier to ascertain the Plasticity Index after calculating the Plasticity Limit. The Plasticity Index is required to ascertain the two letters to categorize the soil.

PI=LL-PL=37-18.4=18.1

The plasticity chart is used in comparing soils at equal liquid limit and the dryness and toughness strength is known to increase with the increasing plasticity index. It can be ascertained from the chart that the soil sample is CL and thus it can be correctly referred to be as low Plasticity Clay.

LAB REPORT ON SOIL COMPACTION

A proctor test was conducted and it comprised compaction through the use of a metal hammer which was dropped at a height of 300mm. The empty proctor’s weight was then determined and the base and collar plate was then fixed. The soil is then compacted into three layers receiving 25 blows each at specific moisture content. The process was then repeated with contents of different moisture.

Table showing results from the compaction test

Number of test

Number of Tin

Mass of Empty tin (g)

Wet Soil Mass (g)

Dry Soil Mass (g)

Mass of Compacted soil + Base (g0

Mass of compacted Soil (g)

1

13

15.9

20.5

32.93

5296.1

1938.2

2

26

15.5

20.7

37.61

5418.1

2061.2

3

120

15.9

20.5

46.45

5563.7

2206.8

4

37

15.6

18.6

38.09

5564

2207.1

5

44

15.7

20.7

38.05

5464.3

2107.4

6

65

16.1

20.8

45.48

5365.1

2008.2

Used Formulas

Moisture Content (m) %= x100

Bulk Unit Weight ( bulk)

Dry Unit Weight (dry) = 

A=0:  Dry =

A=10%:  Dry =     

Specific Volume v=                           

Compaction Curve

Test Number

Content of Moisture %

Wet mass g

Bulk Unit Weight (KN/M3

Dry Unit Weight (KN/m3)

1

4.36

33.66

19.4

18.6

2

6.72

39.07

20.61

19.31

3

9.16

49.26

22.1

20.25

4

13.29

41.00

22.07

19.5

5

17.4

41.91

21.07

17.9

6

19.6

51.31

21.7

16.75

Maximum dry unit Weight (KN/m3)=20.25

Opt Moisture Content (%)= 9%

Compaction Efficiency (%)=97.35

Figure showing the compaction curve

The air Voids Curve

Water Content in %

Dry Unit Weight (KN/m3)

A=0

A=10%

4.36

23.76

21.38

6.72

22.5

20.25

9.16

21.32

19.9

13.29

 

 

19.6

17.64

17.4

18.14

16.33

19.6

17.32

15.59

Limit dry density (KN/m3)=20.27

Moisture Content

Compaction curve displaying 0 and 10% Voids Line

Conclusion

The soil under test has a high compaction that makes it suitable for motorways and embankments. The PL and LL tests imply that the soil is low plasticity or CL which can be used in construction in putting on foundations because it is capable of resisting compression. This idea, however is not used in all nations because it might result in cracking issues potential shrink problems and greater pressure on the walls of basements.  

Buy Limits of Consistency essay paper online

Related essays

  1. Atmospheric Changes in Carbon
  2. Ecosystem and Living Organisms
  3. Diatoms
  4. Human Development
 
order now
Live chat!
Planets Live support online chat Live support phone
Our Advantages
300 Words per page
Bottom line
12 pt Times New Roman Double-spaced typed page
Bottom line
MBA and PhD Writers
Bottom line
Relevant and up-to-date
Bottom line
US Writers
Bottom line
100% Quality Guarantee
Bottom line
24/7 Support
Bottom line
24/7 Live Chat
Bottom line
Flexible Discount Program
Bottom line
ANY Difficulty Level!
Testimonials

Please, thank writer #2412 for helping me finish my thesis. I do not think I could have completed it on time if not for his or her assistance. The next time I need help with a writing project, I will be sure to come back to EssaysProfessors.com. You are a sterling example of what a writing service should be. I appreciate what you did for me and will recommend you highly to my friends.


Margaret A., New Orleans, LA

This is one of the best quality essays I have had to hand in to my lecturer and for the first time in my school work I handed in my work on time. Thanks once again for the exemplary service to students. I wish I knew about you guys earlier but all the same it's not too late.


Trent H., Little Rock, Arkansas

The writer who worked on my thesis could not have been any better! His skillful writing gained an A+ for the thesis. I am very pleased with the whole transaction. Given the amount of work he put into this paper, I appreciate your reasonable prices more than ever! Thanks, EssaysProfessors.com, for coming through for me yet again. I know I can always count on your writing service to deliver premium content right when I need it most. You have never disappointed me, and I will keep coming back. Thanks so much!


Carol S., Austin, TX, USA

X
-15% first order  Order now