Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Several laboratory tests used in soil mechanics to determine various soil properties. It includes procedures for wet sieving, permeability tests, specific gravity tests, atterberg limits, direct shear tests, and compaction tests. Each test's objective, apparatus, and method are detailed, along with calculations and interpretations of results. A comprehensive overview of essential soil testing techniques used in geotechnical engineering, emphasizing the importance of understanding soil behavior for civil engineering projects. It covers topics such as particle size distribution, water flow through soils, soil density, plasticity, shear strength, and compaction characteristics, offering practical insights into soil analysis and design considerations. Useful for students and professionals in civil engineering, geotechnical engineering, and related fields, providing a solid foundation in soil testing methodologies and their applications in engineering practice. (498 characters)
Typology: Study notes
1 / 49
This page cannot be seen from the preview
Don't miss anything!
We declare that this report is our work. This report is to be submitted to the Course Instructor of Soil Mechanics, Dr. Festus Kunkyin-Saadaari at the University of Mines and Technology (UMaT), Tarkwa for assessing students. It has not been submitted for any degree or examination in any other University. …………………………………….. (Signature of group leader) Submitted on this 4th^ day of August, 2025
This laboratory exercise introduces mining engineering students to Soil Mechanics test methods, and terminology. The report covers nine (9) chapters, including test procedures. Practical sessions are held every Monday from 9h:00am to 11h:00am at the University of Mines and Technology's Geotechnical laboratory.
Firstly, we would like to thank the Almighty God for the privilege of attending this prestigious university, the University of Mines and Technology (UMaT), and also for His strength and direction, which helped us successfully complete this report. Secondly, we would like to thank our course lecturer, Dr. Festus Kunkyin-Saadaari, for teaching us the Construction Materials course. We would also like to express our profound gratitude to the laboratory technician Mr. Endswell Newlove Cudjoe, and the teaching assistants, for taking us through the practical session and explaining in depth all the procedures and issues surrounding this program.
On the first day at the lab, we were taken through induction where the lab technician took us through the rules and safety precautions with the use of the lab. We observed the safety measures at the lab and followed all the procedures diligently as the laboratory technicians guided us through the experiment. These practicals were performed at the geotechnical laboratory 1 and 2 by Group I2. The laboratory experiments began at 9: 00 am and ends at 11: 00 am every Monday. 1.2 General Safety Precaution in the Laboratory Before one can go through a laboratory experiment, he / she must be taken through some laboratory protocols to prevent accidents in the laboratory. Therefore, some of the general rules in the Geotech laboratory are as follows;
2.1 Objective/ Aim To determine the particle size distribution of a soil sample using the wet sieving method, especially for soils with significant amounts of fine particles that may clog dry sieves. 2.2 Apparatus
2.5 Interpretation of Graph From the graph, the percentage finer of the soil sample passing through a specified sieve size can be determined by drawing a line from that specific sieve size to touch the curve and then extend it to touch the percentage passing. 2.6 Precautions to be taken
Table 2.1 Size distribution table Figure 2.2 showing the distribution curve in wet sieve analysis
MARA SORI Compilation of all notes taken. MENSAH AGNES Typing and formatting. MENSAH DESIRE Critical observation. MENSAH GEORGE Assisted the technician during the test. MENSAH EMMANUELLA AFUA Critical observation MENSAH GABRIEL Picture taking MENSAH EVELYN ENYONAM Confirmation of all calculations. MAX-DARKO VERASHA BEMAH Assisted in the calculations.
millions of springs standard (BS 1377-5:1990), maintain quality techniques whereby the constant head test has become a common method for sands and gravels due to its ease of use and its stability in controlling hydraulics; 3 .1.2 Problem Statement An experiment to determine the rate at which water penetrates the pores of the soil by the use of the constant head method as specified in the BS 1377-5: 1990. 3 .1.3 Aims Aims of the experiment i. To determine the coefficient of permeability of a soil sample using the constant head method as outlined in the BS 1377-5: 1990; and ii. To analyze the flow characteristics of water through the soil specimen under an applied hydraulic gradient. 3 .1.4 Scope of Work The test focuses on: i. The selection and preparation of a soil sample; ii. Execution of the permeability test under controlled laboratory conditions; iii. Analysis of test data to compute the coefficient of permeability; and iv. The interpretation of the results for practical engineering applications.
3 .2.1 Test Standards The standard experiment used for the experiment was BS 1377-5: 1990. 3 .2.2 Apparatus The apparatus used are: i. Piezometer; ii. Stop clock; iii. Tape measure; iv. Volumetric cylinder; and v. Cell permeameter; vi. Manometer; vii. Stop watch; viii. Tamping rod. 3 .2.3 Precaution Precautions taken in the laboratory, i. It was ensured that the manometers had no blockage within them; ii. It was ensured that errors were avoided during the reading of the manometers; iii. It was ensured that the permeameter cell was properly sealed to avoid leakage. iv. It was ensured that the stopwatch was monitored closely whenever we spilled some water away; and 3 .2.4 Procedure The test procedures are as follows:
i. The calibrations of the measurement devices were confirmed before the testing; ii. Multiple trials were performed to verify repeatability; iii. Care was taken to ensure a uniform compaction of the sample in the permeameter cell; iv. The joints of the permeameter cell was checked to ensure that there was no sign of leakage before starting the test; and v. The test was performed at least two times to reduce the effect of random errors. Figure 3 .2 Piezometer Reading 3 .2.6 Environmental Control The test was performed at approximately 20^0 C in a laboratory environment as recommended by the standard BS 1377-5: 1990. 3 .3 Results and Analysis 3 .3.1 Raw data Presentation The Table 3 .1 shows the results from the constant head permeability test
3 .3.2 Calculation The coefficient of permeability was calculated using the following formula: 𝑞 = 𝑄 𝑡
𝜋𝑑^2 4
∆ℎ ∆𝑦
Where: A= Cross sectional area, Q= Discharged volume, ∆ℎ= Change in manometer readings, ∆𝑦= Permeameter glance interval, K= Coefficient of permeability, d= Diameter. q= Discharge Trial Manometer Reading (h)cm Time(s) Discharged volume(Q)cm^3 Temperature(^0 C) Diameter(d) cm 1 29.81 10 53 26 7. 2 30 15 168.54 26 7.
For trial two: 𝑄 = 168. 54 𝑐𝑚^3 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑡 = 15 𝑠, Therefore, 𝑞 = 𝑄 𝑡
But the temperature factor for 26oC is 0.86, hence the coefficient of permeability becomes: 𝑘 = 0. 669 × 0. 86 , 𝑘 = 0. 575 𝑐𝑚/𝑠.
Figure 3 .3 4 Permeability Graph 3 .3.5 Results Interpretation The results were interpreted as: i. The values are typical of well-draining materials, which means soil would not retain water well; and ii. The slight variation between trial 1 and 2 could be due to minor differences in measurement accuracy. 3 .3.6 Error Analysis Errors that could have occurred were: 1.Stopwatch reaction time introduced small timing errors; 2.Slight variations in maintaining the water head could influence results; and 3.Temperature fluctuations were minor but still could affect viscosity. 0 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 Coefficient of permeability Time
2.Single sample cannot capture spatial variability of field conditions. 3 .4.5 Engineering Applications The results inform designs where seepage must be managed, such as: Designing filters and drainage layers; Estimating rate of consolidation for foundations on sandy soils; and Evaluating risk of internal erosion under hydraulic gradients. 3 .5. 1 Summary of Key Findings The coefficient of permeability determined were k=0.11352cm/s and k=0.18146cm/s. These values as said before indicates highly permeable sandy soil. 3 .5.2 Achievement Of Objectives The test successfully determined the coefficient of permeability using the BS 1377-5 constant head method, fulfilling the objectives of characterizing seepage behavior of the soil. 3 .5. 3 Recommendations for Improvement We recommend that: Include temperature corrections to adjust k to a standard 20oC conditions for more precise comparative studies; Minimize the air entrapment in the manometers. Ensure the sample is homogeneous, undisturbed and saturated properly before testing; and Maintain a steady head difference (change in h) during the test.
3 .5. 3 Suggestions for Future Use Further research should focus on the below list of areas: Repeat tests with varying densities to develop a relationship between void ratio and permeability; and Incorporate tests under triaxial stress conditions to simulate more realistic in-situ stress paths affecting permeability 3.5. 4 Factors Affecting Permeability
