1 

Chandni Chowk soil profile

NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Friday, May 18, 2012
Document prepared by:
FAWAAD AKHTAR (44) CIVIL ENGINEER (NUST)
With support from:
SAAD AHMAD (153)

MUHAMMAD DANIAL (99)

MAISAM TAMAR (68)

MOHSIN WAQAS (84)

SYED UZAIR US SALAM (179)

MUHAMMAD SHOAIB (116)

2 
 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This document has been prepared with the collaborative effort by the SOIL Department of

The NUST ISLAMABAD, MAQSOOD (LAB TEC) and AHMED (LAB ATTENDENT).

Special dividends paid to SAAD AHMAD, MUHAMMAD DANIAL and MAISAM TAMAR,
MOHSIN WAQAS, SYED UZAIR US SALAM, MUHAMMAD SHOAIB

Above all I would like to acknowledge the special efforts of RABIA HAROON

(ASSITENT PROFESSOR) AND Pakistan for his whole hearted support and help to

Accomplish this task. His guidance and advice on each and every step was the real source of

Encouragement, without which it would have not been possible to complete this document.

CONTACT INFORMATION

FAWAD AKHTAR

Student of civil engineering NUST

Sector h12, NUST

Islamabad, Pakistan

Telephone:

0321 9432664

E-mail:

fawaadakhtar@gmail.com
3 
 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXPIREMENT # 1 PAGE

MOISTURE CONTENT BY OVEN DRY METHOD 4

EXPIREMENT # 2

SIEVE ANALYSIS OF COARSE GRAIN SOIL 5

EXPIREMENT # 3

SPECIFIC GRAVITY OF SOIL 7

EXPIREMENT # 4

ATTERBERG LIMITS 8

EXPIREMENT # 5

CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL 9

EXPIREMENT # 6

SHRINKAGE LIMIT 10

EXPIREMENT # 7

HYDROMETER ANALYSIS OF SOIL 11

EXPIREMENT # 8

STANDARD COMPACTION TEST 12

EXPIREMENT # 9

MODIFIED COMPACTION TEST 14

4 
 

EXPERIMENT NO. 1

MOISTURE CONTENT BY OVEN DRYING 
METHOD 
 
 
Mass of wet soil + container W1 45g

Mass of dry soil + container W2 41g

Mass of empty container W3 11g

Mass of water (W1 -W2) Ww 4g

Mass of soil (W2 -W3) Ws 30g

Moisture content =(Ww/Ws) x100 (%) M.C 13.3%

M.C=13.3%
5 
 

EXPERIMENT NO.2

SIEVE ANALYSIS OF COARSE

GRAIN SOIL
 

Sieve No/ size Mass Retained Cumulated Cumulated % Passing %

gm. mass gm.
4 (4.75mm) 0 0 0 100
10 (2.0 mm) 134 134 26.96 73.04
16 81 215 43.25 56.75
30 94 309 62.17 37.83
60 (250m) 83 392 78.87 21.13
100 (150m) 26 418 84.10 15.9
200 (75m) 18 453 91.75 8.25
Pan 61 497 100 0

Total retained mass=497g

6 
 
120

100

80

60

40

20

0
1 10 100 1000

Retained % of particles on Sieve # 4 =Gravel = 0 %

Particles passing % from Sieve # 4 and retained on sieve # 200 = Sand = 91.75 %
Particles Passing from sieve # 200 = Fines = 8.25 %

D10 (Grain D30 (Grain D60 (Grain Cu= D60/ D10 Cc =(D30)2/(D60X D10)
dia at 10% dia at 30% dia at 60%
passing) passing) passing)
0.095 0.4 2.2 23.15 0.76
7 
 

EXPERIMENT NO. 3

SPECIFIC GRAVITY OF SOIL 

Mass of flask W1 90g

Mass of flask + dry soil W2 130g

Mass of flask + soil + Water W3 363g

Mass of flask + Water W4 339g

Specific gravity =(W2 -W1) / (W4 -W1) - (W3 -W2) x K Gs 2.55

Specific Gravity: - 2.55

8 
 

EXPERIMENT NO. 4

ATTERBERG LIMITS

No of blows → 32 18 15

Wt of wet soil + container W1 34 39 47

Wt of dry soil + container W2 31 34 41

Wt of empty container W3 12 10 13

Wt of water (W1 -W2) Ww 3 5 6

Wt of soil (W2 -W3) Ws 19 24 28

Moisture content =(Ww/Ws) x100 (%) M.C 15.78 20.83 21.42

22

21

20

19

18

17

16

15
14 19 24 29 34

Liquid Limit from graph (L.L) =18.2%

Plastic Limit (P.L) =14.2%
Plasticity Index (P.I) = (LL –PL) = 4%
9 
 

EXPERIMENT NO. 5

CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL 
 
Our soil is coarse grained because passing through no. 200 sieve is 8.25 %. From sieve analysis 
graph  we  get  our  Cu=23.15  and  Cc=0.76.  From  Atterberg  limits  we  get  our  LL=18.2%  and 
PI=4%.  

CONCLUSIONS: poorly graded sand with silty clay 
 
10 
 

EXPERIMENT NO.6

Shrinkage limit

Wt of dish+mercury=296 gms 

Wt of coated dish=11, 12 gms 

Sample 1: 

Wt of coated dish+wet sample=42g 

Wt of dry sample=24 

7 Gms of water 

Sample 2: 

Wt of coated dish+wet sample=48 

Wt of dry sample=28 

8 Gms of water   

Shrinkage limit (S.L) = [w – [(V-Vo)ƿw/Wo] x 100]

Weight  of  Weight  of  Volume  of  Volume  of  Moisture  Shrinkage  Shrinkage 
wet soil (Mw)  dry soil  container (V)  soil cake (VO)  content (w)  Limit (SL)  Ratio (R) 
(MO) 
36  28    14.74  28.57 %     
31  24    12.21  29.16 %     
 11 
 

EXPERIMENT NO.7

HYDROMETER ANALYSIS OF SOIL
Temp Time Hydromet Corrected Percentage Hydrometer Elapsed L/t K Diamete
(0C) (min) er hydrometer finer correction length (from r
reading reading % only for (from table) table) D
(Ra) (Rc) meniscus (mm)
(Rm)
17.1 1 46 39 99.48 47 8.6 8.6 0.0146 0.0428
17.2 2 41 34 86.73 42 9.4 4.7 0.0146 0.0316
17.2 4 36 29 73.95 37 10.5 2.625 0.0146 0.0236
17.2 8 30 23 58.68 31 11.2 1.4 0.0146 0.0173
17.2 16 26 19 48.48 27 11.9 0.743 0.0146 0.0125
17.7 30 23 16 40.83 24 12.4 0.413 0.0144 0.0092
18.1 60 19.5 12.5 31.91 20.5 13.05 0.217 0.0144 0.0067
19.1 120 17.5 10.5 26.81 18.5 13.1 0.109 0.0142 0.0047
20.3 240 15.5 8.5 21.71 16.5 13.3 0.055 0.0141 0.0033
22.2 480 14 7 17.88 15 13.6 0.283 0.0137 0.0023
28.5 1440 13 6 15.33 14 14 0.009 0.0128 0.0012

110

90

70
% finer
50

30

10

‐10 0.01 0.001

diameter
 
12 
 

EXPERIMENT NO. 8

STANDARD COMPACTION TEST 

g. Observation and Data Collection:‐  
   

 Internal diameter of proctor mold   = 10.16 Cm (4”)  
 Height of proctor mold       = 11.64 Cm (4.584”) 
 Volume of proctor mold      = 943 Cm3 (0.0333 C ft.) 
 Standard rammer fall      = 30.5 Cm (12”) 
 Standard rammer   weight     = 2.5Kg (5.5 lb.) 
 Number of layers         = 3 
 

Moisture Content

Observation 1 2 3 4 5
Wt of container + Wet soil W1 58 59 69 60 60
(gm.)
Wt of container + Dry soil W2 56 56 65 56 56
(gm.)
Wt of container (gm.) W3 29 28 33 29 30

Wt of water (gm.) Ww 2 3 4 4 4

Wt of dry soil (gm.) Ws 28 28 32 27 26

13 
 

Density Trial No

Observation 1 2 3 4 5
Wt of mold + Compacted W1  3182  3363  3504  3495  3463 
soil (gm.)
Wt of mold                           W2  1444  1444  1444  1444  1444 
(gm.) 
Wt of compacted soil             W3  1738  1919  2059  2060  2019 
(gm.) 
Volume of mold                    V   944  944  944  944  944 
Cm3 
Wet density of soil, wet      W3/V  1.84  2.032  2.181  2.182  2.138 
(gm./Cc) 
Dry density of soil, dry       wet  1.97  2.24  2.45  2.50  2.46 
(gm./Cc)  /(1+mc/100) 

2.7

2.6

2.5

2.4
dry density

2.3

2.2

2.1

1.9
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
moisture content

Conclusion: - Max dry density is 2.5 at optimum moisture content

14.4
 
14 
 

EXPERIMENT NO. 9

MODIFIED COMPACTION TEST 
 

 Internal diameter of proctor mold = 10.16 Cm (4”)

 Height of proctor mold = 11.64 Cm (4.584”)
 Volume of proctor mold = 2123 Cm3
 Modified rammer fall = 42.7 Cm (18”)
 Modified rammer weight = 4.54Kg (10 lb.)
 Number of layers =5

Moisture Content

Observation 1 2 3
Wt of container + Wet soil W1 52 58 66
(gm.)
Wt of container + Dry soil (gm.) W2 50 54 61

Wt of container (gm.) W3 32 28 32

Wt of water (gm.) Ww 2 4 5

Wt of dry soil (gm.) Ws 18 26 29

Moisture content (M.C) % ( Ww/Ws)x100 11.11 15.38 17.24

15 
 

Density

Observation 1 2 3
Wt of mold + Compacted soil W1 9247 9463  9098 
(gm.)
Wt of mold                           W2 4302 4302  4302 
(gm.) 

Wt of compacted soil             W3 4945 5161  4796 

(gm.) 

Volume of mold                    V 2123 2123  2123 

Cm3 

Wet density of soil, wet      W3/V 2.05 2.43 2.25 

(gm./Cc) 

Dry density of soil, dry       wet  2.27 2.80  2.63 

(gm./Cc)  /(1+mc/100)

2.9

2.8

2.7
dry density

2.6

2.5

2.4

2.3

2.2
10.5 11 11.5 12 12.5 13 13.5 14 14.5 15 15.5 16 16.5 17 17.5 18
moisture content %

Conclusion: - Max dry density is 2.81 at optimum moisture content

15.57