FACULTY OF CIVIL AND ENVIRONMENTAL

ENGINEERING
DEPARTMENT OF GEOTECHNICAL AND
TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING

LAB GEOTECHNIC

FULL REPORT
Subject Code BFC 31901
U2 DIRECT SHEAR TEST & UNCONFINED
Code & Experiment Title
COMPRESSION TEST
Course Code 3 BFF
Date th
18 SEPTEMBER 2012
Section / Group SECTION 11 / GROUP 2
Name Mohd Safwan bin Mohd Yusoff AF 100112
Members of Group 1. Eric Cheah Keng Yang AF 100226
2. Fong Kar Guan AF 100240
3. Iryanie binti Rosli AF 100151
4. Lee Chee Aun AF 100246
5. Maryam binti Ramli AF 100203
6. Wan Mohd Ikhwan Shafiq AF 100076
EN. MUSTAFFA BIN ANJANG AHMAD
Lecturer/Instructor/Tutor
EN. BASIL DAVID DANIEL
Received Date 24th SEPTEMBER 2012

Comment by examiner Received

 STUDENT CODE OF ETHIC
(SCE)
DEPARTMENT OF GEOTECHNICAL AND
TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING
FACULTY OF CIVIL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING
UTHM

I, hereby confess that I have prepared this report on my own effort. I also admit not
to receive or give any help during the preparation of this report and pledge
that everything mentioned in the report is true.

_________________
Student Signature

Name : …………………………………………

Matric No. : …………………………………………

Date : …………………………………………
 STUDENT CODE OF ETHIC
(SCE)
DEPARTMENT OF GEOTECHNICAL AND
TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING
FACULTY OF CIVIL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING
UTHM

I, hereby confess that I have prepared this report on my own effort. I also admit not
to receive or give any help during the preparation of this report and pledge
that everything mentioned in the report is true.

_________________
Student Signature

Name : …………………………………………

Matric No. : …………………………………………

Date : …………………………………………
 STUDENT CODE OF ETHIC
(SCE)
DEPARTMENT OF GEOTECHNICAL AND
TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING
FACULTY OF CIVIL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING
UTHM

I, hereby confess that I have prepared this report on my own effort. I also admit not
to receive or give any help during the preparation of this report and pledge
that everything mentioned in the report is true.

_________________
Student Signature

Name : …………………………………………

Matric No. : …………………………………………

Date : …………………………………………
 STUDENT CODE OF ETHIC
(SCE)
DEPARTMENT OF GEOTECHNICAL AND
TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING
FACULTY OF CIVIL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING
UTHM

I, hereby confess that I have prepared this report on my own effort. I also admit not
to receive or give any help during the preparation of this report and pledge
that everything mentioned in the report is true.

_________________
Student Signature

Name : …………………………………………

Matric No. : …………………………………………

Date : …………………………………………
 STUDENT CODE OF ETHIC
(SCE)
DEPARTMENT OF GEOTECHNICAL AND
TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING
FACULTY OF CIVIL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING
UTHM

I, hereby confess that I have prepared this report on my own effort. I also admit not
to receive or give any help during the preparation of this report and pledge
that everything mentioned in the report is true.

_________________
Student Signature

Name : …………………………………………

Matric No. : …………………………………………

Date : …………………………………………
 STUDENT CODE OF ETHIC
(SCE)
DEPARTMENT OF GEOTECHNICAL AND
TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING
FACULTY OF CIVIL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING
UTHM

I, hereby confess that I have prepared this report on my own effort. I also admit not
to receive or give any help during the preparation of this report and pledge
that everything mentioned in the report is true.

_________________
Student Signature

Name : …………………………………………

Matric No. : …………………………………………

Date : …………………………………………
 STUDENT CODE OF ETHIC
(SCE)
DEPARTMENT OF GEOTECHNICAL AND
TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING
FACULTY OF CIVIL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING
UTHM

I, hereby confess that I have prepared this report on my own effort. I also admit not
to receive or give any help during the preparation of this report and pledge
that everything mentioned in the report is true.

_________________
Student Signature

Name : …………………………………………

Matric No. : …………………………………………

Date : …………………………………………
 TEST 1: DIRECT SHEAR TEST

1.0 OBJECTIVE
To determine the parameter of shear strength of soil, cohesion, c and angle of friction, ø
for sand.

2.0 LEARNING OUTCOME

At the end of this experiment, students are able to:
• Determine the shear strength parameter of the soil
• Handle shear strength test, direct shear test

3.0 THEORY
The general relationship between maximum shearing resistance, τ and normal stress, σ for
soils can be represented by the equation and known as Coulomb’s Law:

τ = c + σ tan ø

where:
c = cohesion, which is due to internal forces holding soil particles together in a solid mass
ø = friction, which is due to the interlocking of the particles and the friction between them
when subjected to normal stress.

The friction components increase with increasing normal stress but the cohesion
components remain constant. If there is no normal stress the friction disappears. This
relationship shown in the graph below that is equal to the angle of shearing resistance of
the soil, ø and its intercept on the vertical (shear stress) axis being the apparent cohesion,
denoted by c.
4.0 EQUIPMENTS & MATERIALS
4.1. Shear box carriage
4.2. Loading pad
4.3. Perforated plate
4.4. Porous plate
4.5. Retaining plate
4.6. Weights
4.7. Sand sample

5.0 PROCEDURES
5.1. The internal measurements of the shear box were verified by using vernier calipers.
The length of the sides, L and the overall depth, B.
5.2. The base plate was fixed inside the shear box. Then porous plate was put on the
base plate. Next, perforated grid plate was fitted over porous so that the grid plates
were at right angle to the direction of shear.

Figure 5.1: Shear box carriage

 Figure 5.2: Arranging the plates in shear box
5.3. Two halves of the shear box was fixed by means of fixing screws.
5.4. For cohesive soils, the soil sample was transferred from square specimen cutter to
the shear box by pressing down on the top grid plate. For sandy soil, soil was
compacted in layers to the required density in shear box.

Figure 5.3: Preparation of sand specimen using square cutter

Figure 5.4: Sand specimen prepared before being loaded into shear box
 Figure 5.5: Placing the square specimen into shear box
5.5. The shear box assembly was mounted on the loading frame.
5.6. The dial of the proving ring was set to zero.
5.7. The loading yoke was placed on the loading pad and hanger was lifted carefully
onto the top of the loading yoke.
5.8. The correct loading was then applied to the hanger pad.
5.9. The screws clamping the upper half to the lower half were carefully removed.
5.10. The test was conducted by applying horizontal shear load to failure. Rate of strain
were set as 1.6 mm/min.
5.11. Readings of horizontal and force dial gauges were recorded at regular intervals.
5.12. Finally the test was conducted on the three identical soil samples under different
vertical compressive stress, 1.75kg, 2.5kg and 3.25kg.

6.0 RESULTS
From the experiment, the dimensions of the test samples were measured as follows
(dimensions are same for all three samples as the method of preparing them is fixed):
Length, L: 60.00 mm
Width, W: 60.00 mm
Thickness, B: 24.20 mm

a) To find ∆ L (mm): Dial Gauge x 0.002 mm

Example: 50 x 0.002 = 0.1 mm

 b) To find Load, P (kN): Dial Gauge x 0.00204 kN

Example: 8 x 0.00204 = 0.0163 kN

Load, P (kN)
c) To find Shear Stress: τ=
Area (m𝟐 )

0.0163 kN
Example: τ = 0.06 m x 0.06 m

= 4.5278 kNm-2

∆L (mm)
d) To find Strain: ε=
Total Length (mm)

0.1 mm
Example: ε= = 0.0017
60 mm

Specimen No :1
Loading : 1.75 kg

Displacement Proving Ring Shear Stress, Strain, ε

Dial Gauge ΔL (mm) Dial Gauge Load, P (kN) τ (kN/m )
2

50 0.1 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0017

100 0.2 8 0.0163 4.5278 0.0033
150 0.3 14 0.0286 7.9444 0.0050
200 0.4 18 0.0367 10.1944 0.0067
250 0.5 23 0.0469 13.0278 0.0083
300 0.6 27 0.0551 15.3056 0.0100
350 0.7 32 0.0653 18.1389 0.0117
400 0.8 36 0.0734 20.3889 0.0133
450 0.9 40 0.0816 22.6667 0.0150
500 1.0 44 0.0898 24.9444 0.0167
550 1.1 47 0.0959 26.6389 0.0183
600 1.2 49 0.1000 27.7778 0.0200
650 1.3 51 0.1040 28.8889 0.0217
700 1.4 54 0.1102 30.6111 0.0233
750 1.5 55 0.1122 31.1667 0.0250
800 1.6 57 0.1163 32.3056 0.0267
850 1.7 59 0.1204 33.4444 0.0283
900 1.8 60 0.1224 34.0000 0.0300
950 1.9 61 0.1224 34.5556 0.0317
1000 2.0 62 0.1265 35.1389 0.0333
1050 2.1 63 0.1285 35.6944 0.0350
1100 2.2 64 0.1306 36.2778 0.0367
1150 2.3 65 0.1326 36.8333 0.0383
1200 2.4 66 0.1346 37.3889 0.0400
1250 2.5 66 0.1346 37.3889 0.0417
1300 2.6 66 0.1346 37.3889 0.0433
1350 2.7 67 0.1367 37.9722 0.0450
1400 2.8 67 0.1367 37.9722 0.0467
1450 2.9 68 0.1387 38.5278 0.0483
1500 3.0 68 0.1387 38.5278 0.0500
1550 3.1 68 0.1387 38.5278 0.0517
1600 3.2 68 0.1387 38.5278 0.0533
Table 6.1: Data tabulation for Specimen 1
Specimen No :2
Loading : 2.50 kg

Displacement Proving Ring Shear Stress, Strain, ε

Dial Gauge ΔL (mm) Dial Gauge Load, P (kN) τ (kN/m2)
50 0.1 13 0.0265 7.3611 0.0017
100 0.2 25 0.0510 14.1667 0.0033
150 0.3 40 0.0816 22.6667 0.0050
200 0.4 50 0.1020 28.3333 0.0067
250 0.5 58 0.1183 32.8611 0.0083
300 0.6 66 0.1346 37.3889 0.0100
350 0.7 72 0.1469 40.8056 0.0117
400 0.8 77 0.1571 43.6389 0.0133
450 0.9 82 0.1673 46.4722 0.0150
500 1.0 85 0.1734 48.1667 0.0167
550 1.1 87 0.1775 49.3056 0.0183
600 1.2 89 0.1816 50.4444 0.0200
650 1.3 91 0.1856 51.5556 0.0217
700 1.4 92 0.1877 52.1389 0.0233
750 1.5 93 0.1897 52.6944 0.0250
800 1.6 95 0.1938 53.8333 0.0267
850 1.7 95 0.1938 53.8333 0.0283
900 1.8 96 0.1958 54.3889 0.0300
950 1.9 97 0.1979 54.9722 0.0317
1000 2.0 97 0.1979 54.9722 0.0333
1050 2.1 97 0.1979 54.9722 0.0350
1100 2.2 97 0.1979 54.9722 0.0367
1150 2.3 98 0.1999 55.5278 0.0383
1200 2.4 98 0.1999 55.5278 0.0400
1250 2.5 99 0.2020 56.1111 0.0417
1300 2.6 99 0.2020 56.1111 0.0433
1350 2.7 100 0.2040 56.1111 0.0450
1400 2.8 101 0.2060 57.2222 0.0467
1450 2.9 101 0.2060 57.2222 0.0483
1500 3.0 101 0.2060 57.2222 0.0500
1550 3.1 101 0.2060 57.2222 0.0517
Table 6.2: Data tabulation for Specimen 2
Specimen No :3
Loading : 3.25 kg

Displacement Proving Ring Shear Stress, Strain, ε

Dial Gauge ΔL (mm) Dial Gauge Load, P (kN) τ (kN/m2)
50 0.1 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0017
100 0.2 40 0.0816 22.6667 0.0033
150 0.3 55 0.1122 31.1667 0.0050
200 0.4 64 0.1306 36.2778 0.0067
250 0.5 71 0.1448 40.2222 0.0083
300 0.6 80 0.1632 45.3333 0.0100
350 0.7 87 0.1775 49.3056 0.0117
400 0.8 92 0.1877 52.1389 0.0133
450 0.9 97 0.1979 54.9722 0.0150
500 1.0 101 0.2060 57.2222 0.0167
550 1.1 105 0.2142 59.5000 0.0183
600 1.2 107 0.2183 60.6389 0.0200
650 1.3 110 0.2244 62.3333 0.0217
700 1.4 112 0.2285 63.4722 0.0233
750 1.5 113 0.2305 64.0278 0.0250
800 1.6 114 0.2326 64.6111 0.0267
850 1.7 115 0.2346 65.1667 0.0283
900 1.8 116 0.2366 65.7222 0.0300
950 1.9 117 0.2387 66.3056 0.0317
1000 2.0 118 0.2407 66.8611 0.0333
1050 2.1 119 0.2428 67.4444 0.0350
1100 2.2 118 0.2407 66.8611 0.0367
1150 2.3 118 0.2407 66.8611 0.0383
1200 2.4 118 0.2407 66.8611 0.0400
1250 2.5 118 0.2407 66.8611 0.0417
Table 6.3: Data tabulation for Specimen 3
7.0 DATA ANALYSIS
7.1. Graph of Shear Stress, τ (kN/m2) versus Strain, ε

Shear Stress, τ vs Strain, ε

80

70

60
Shear Stress, τ (kN/m2)

50

40 Specimen 1
Specimen 2
30
Specimen 3

20

10

0
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06
Strain, ε

Figure 7.1: Graph of Shear stress, τ against Strain, ε for all specimens
7.2. Graph of Shear Stress, τ (kN/m2) versus Normal Stress, σ (kN/m2)
Normal stress, σ is the element of pressure created when a force acts directly
perpendicular to a surface area. Therefore, its equation can be described as
Force, F
σ = Area, , where in this experiment, the force acting perpendicular equals to the
A

applied loading on the hanger.

1.75 kg x 9.81ms -2
For specimen 1, σ = 0.06 m x 0.06 m

= 4.769 kNm-2
2.50 kg x 9.81ms -2
For specimen 2, σ = 0.06 m x 0.06 m

= 6.813 kNm-2
3.25 kg x 9.81ms -2
For specimen 3, σ = 0.06 m x 0.06 m

= 8.856 kNm-2
 When plotting shear stress, τ against normal stress, σ the result will be a straight
vertical line for all specimens since the loading does not gradually increase with the
same specimen. Therefore, we use the shear stress value achieved by each specimen
when the displacement dial gauge reads 150, to be plotted with the specimen’s
normal stress calculated with their respective weights.

Shear Stress, τ vs Normal Stress, σ

35

30
Shear Stress, τ (kN/m2)

25

20

15
36°
10

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Normal Stress, σ (kN/m2)
0 kN/m2

Figure 7.2: Graph of Shear stress, τ against Normal stress, σ for all specimens
From Figure 7.2, it is found that the angle of the gradient of the graph is 36° whereas
the gradient line touches the y-axis at a value of 0 kN/m2. Therefore experimentally,
cohesion, c = 0 kN/m2 and the angle of friction, ø = 36°. In theory, the cohesion, c
value should be approximately zero because the sample used in this test is none other
than loose and coarse sand grains, not soil. As such, cohesion factor rarely exists
when sand particles are involved unless under special conditions. There are random
factors which will affect the results such as human’s limitations, not uniformly
compacted sand and nature of the sand itself and so on. Thus, the results obtained
may not be as ideal as one imagined. Nevertheless, it is still proven through this
experiment that sand has little or no cohesion at all (c = 0 kN/m2).

To calculate the shear strength of the soil/sand, use Coulomb’s Law:

 f  c   tan 
 Specimen 1:

Shear strength, τf1 = 0 + 4.769 tan 36°

= 3.465 kN/m2

Specimen 2:

Shear strength, τf2 = 0 + 6.813 tan 36°

= 4.950 kN/m2

Specimen 3:

Shear strength, τf3 = 0 + 8.856 tan 36°

= 6.434 kN/m2

8.0 DISCUSSION
8.1. In loose sand, the resisting shear stress increases with shear displacement until a
failure shear stress value is reached. After that, the shear resistance remains
approximately constant with any further increase in the shear displacement. This is
clearly visible in Figure 7.1 where all three specimens reached a maximum value
of shear stress 38.5278 kN/m2, 57.2222 kN/m2 and 66.8611 kN/m2 respectively.
8.2. In Figure 7.2, the line of best fit in the graph intersects the y-axis at a value of 0
kN/m2. The angle of this line measured to the horizontal is 36°, simply by using a
protractor. We may say the cohesion property of sand is 0 kN/m2 in this experiment
because in truth, cohesion rarely exists in a coarse-grained soil such as sand. Hence,
we can conclude that the sand has less or none cohesion properties.
8.3. From the trends of these 3 specimens, it can be deducted that a higher applied load
will enable the sand to reach its maximum shear stress faster. Moreover, a higher
load also inevitably means a higher maximum shear stress. Thus, the larger the
load applied on the sand under a constant strain environment, the greater the
maximum shear stress achieved.
8.4. Results may vary for each sample depending on the accuracy and precision of the
data observed. Since obtaining data in this experiment requires manual observation,
some inaccuracies may be contributed by human’s incapability to immediately read
the gauge when required to.
 8.5. Some precautions that can be taken to minimise the errors that might be created are
as follows:
8.5.1. Before starting the test, the upper half of the box should be brought in proper
contact with the proving ring.
8.5.2. The arrangement of the plates should be such that porous plate’s grids are
perpendicular to perforated grid plates.
8.5.3. Another important factor is to ensure the horizontal position of the hanger at
the bottom of the shear box. This is done by using a leveller where levelling
bubbles are provided to enable the object to achieve truly horizontal position.
Once this is done, the leveller should be removed so that it would not disrupt
the test.
8.5.4. Before subjecting the specimen to shear, the fixing screws should be taken out.
In other words, the fixing screws have to be released before turning on the
shear box at the same time.
8.5.5. Similarly, ensure the dial gauges are adjusted to zero value before beginning
the test.
8.5.6. When conducting the test, no external force or vibrations should be
transmitted onto the shear box.
8.6. The benefit of conducting this type of test includes the ease of sample preparation
and its swift and inexpensive procedures. The shear strength parameters of both
fine and coarse grained soils can be obtained either in undisturbed or remolded
state.
8.7. However, to every pro there exists con. For instance, drainage cannot be controlled
and pore water pressure cannot be measured. Moreover, the failure plane is always
forced horizontal which is not the weakest plane in the case of in situ conditions.

9.0 CONCLUSION
The aim of this direct shear test is to get the ultimate shear resistance, peak shear
resistance cohesion, angle of shearing resistance and stress-strain characteristics of the
soils. Shear parameters are used in the design of earthen dams and embankments. These
are usually used in calculating the bearing capacity of soil-foundation systems and also
help in estimating the earth pressures behind the retaining walls. The values of these
parameters are used in checking the stability to natural slopes, cuts and fills.
 As acquired, the shear strength of soil, cohesion and the friction angle of sand have all
been computed from the results of this experiment. The maximum shear strength of sand
acquired is 6.434 kN/m2, being the highest among all three samples. The other two values
of shear strength consist of 3.465 kN/m2 and 4.950 kN/m2 for specimen 1 and 2
respectively. Cohesion of sand on the other hand is 0 kN/m2 by referring to Figure 7.2 and
its angle of friction amounts to 36°.
The direct shear test is rather simple to perform but it has some inherent shortcomings.
The reliability of the results may be questioned. This is due to the fact that in this test the
soil is not allowed fail along the weakest plane but is forced to fail along the plane of split
of the shear box. Furthermore, the shear stress distribution over the shear surface of the
specimen is not uniform. In spite of these weaknesses, the direct shear test is the easiest
and most cost-saving for a dry or saturated sandy soil.

10.0 QUESTIONS & ANSWERS

10.1. Why perforated plates in this test with teeth?
The perforated plates have teeth because they are required to produce a firm
gripping force between the plate and the sand sample and they are also helpful in
distributing the shear stress evenly among the surface of the specimen.

10.2. What maximum value of displacement before stop the test?

The maximum value of displacement is when the proving ring readings become
constant for three or more times. Besides that, the maximum value can also be
identified when the value suddenly drops or in other words, the proving ring dial
gauge turns the opposite way/reduces.

10.3. What is the purpose of a direct shear test? Which soil properties does it measure?
The purpose of a direct shear test is to obtain the shear strength parameters of both
fine and coarse grained soils either in undisturbed or remolded state. Often it is
used for most of the geotechnical designs concerning foundations, earthworks and
slope stability issues. In general, this test measures the angle of friction (ø),
cohesion (c), and shear strength (τ) parameters of the material.
 10.4. Why do we use fixing screw in this test? What happen if you do not removed them
during test?
Fixing screw is used so that shear does not occur before the experiment is
conducted. If there is no fixing screw to counter the applied loading, there will be a
hard time controlling the experiment and eventually, things might go wrongly. The
fixing screw is needed so that when the test starts, there will be shear on the sample
and the results obtain will be accurate given that no other malevolent factors take
place.

11.0 REFERENCES

…Braja M. Das. (2005). Fundamentals of Geotechnical Engineering (2nd ed.). United

States of America, US: Thomson Canada Limited.

…Braja M. Das. (2010). Principles of Geotechnical Engineering (7th ed.). United States
of America, US: Cengage Laerning.

…http://virtual-labs.ac.in/labs/CEVL/CEVL02-
SM/Data%20files/09%20Direct_Shear_Test.pdf

…http://www.scribd.com/doc/39758363/Direct-Shear-Test

…http://www.uta.edu/ce/geotech/lab/Main/Soil%20Lab/Direct%20Shear%20test/DS.pdf
 TEST 2: UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST

1.0 OBJECTIVE
To determine the shear strength of the cohesive soil sample. We will measure this with
the unconfined compression test, which is an unconsolidated undrained (UU or Q-type)
test where the lateral confining pressure is equal to zero (atmospheric pressure).

2.0 LEARNING OUTCOME

At the end of this experiment, students are able to:
• Describe the deflection of the jet generates forces on the vane.
• Identify the relationship between force and rate of momentum flow in the jet
• Measure the force generated by a jet of water striking a plate.

3.0 INTRODUCTION
The unconfined compression test is by far the most popular method of soil shear testing
because it is one of the fastest and cheapest methods of measuring shear strength. The
method is used primarily for saturated, cohesive soils recovered from thin-walled
sampling tubes. The unconfined compression test is inappropriate for dry sands or
crumbly clays because the materials would fall apart without some land of lateral
confinement.
To perform an unconfined compression test, the sample is extruded from the sampling
tube. A cylindrical sample of soil is trimmed such that the ends are reasonably smooth
and the length-to-diameter ratio is on the order of two. The soil sample is placed in a
loading frame on a metal plate; by turning a crank, the operator raises the level of the
bottom plate. The top of the soil sample is restrained by the top plate, which is attached to
a calibrated proving ring. As the bottom plate is raised, an axial load is applied to the
sample. The operator turns the crank at a specified rate so that there is constant strain rate.
The load is gradually increased to shear the sample, and readings are taken periodically of
the force applied to the sample and the resulting deformation. The loading is continued
until the soil develops an obvious shearing plane or the deformations become excessive.
The measured data are used to determine the strength of the soil specimen and the stress
 strain characteristics. Finally, the sample is oven dried to determine its water content. The
maximum load per unit area is defined as the unconfined compressive strength, qu.
In the unconfined compression test, we assume that no pore water is lost from the
sample during set-up or during the shearing process. A saturated sample will thus remain
saturated during the test with no change in the sample volume, water content, or void
ratio. More significantly, the sample is held together by an effective confining stress that
results from negative pore water pressures (generated by menisci forming between
particles on the sample surface). Pore pressures are not measured in an unconfined
compression test; consequently, the effective stress is unknown. Hence, the undrained
shear strength measured in an unconfined test is expressed in terms of the total stress.

4.0 THEORY

The unconfined compressive strength, qu is defined as the maximum unit axial

compressive stress at failure or at 20% strain, whichever occurs first.

The unconfined compression test is very popular and used worldwide. It is simple test
where atmospheric pressure surrounds the soil sample. The test is also called an
unconsolidated-undrained (U or UU) test.

The unconfined compression test is a form of triaxial test in which the major principal
stress (σ1) is equal to the applied axial stress and the minor principal stresses (σ3) is equal
to zero.

At failure, the relationship between the two principal stresses is given by:

Where,

As σ3 = 0 for an unconfined compression test,

 For clayed soil, Ø = 0°, σ1 = 2c

The vertical stress s1 at failure is known as the unconfined compressive strength (qu)

Hence, qu = 2c
qu is obtained by dividing the normal load at failure by the corrected area as given by:

Where,

The axial load may be applied to the specimen either by the controlled strain procedure,
in which the stress is applied to produce a pre-determined rate of strain, or by the
controlled stress procedure, in which the stress is applied in pre-determined increments of
load. IS: 2720 (Part 10) -1973 recommend use of controlled strain test.

5.0 EQUIPMENTS & MATERIALS

5.1. Compression device of any suitable type (loading frame of capacity 2t, with
constant rate of movement)
5.2. Sample extractor

5.3. Split mould 3.5 cm diameter and 7 cm long

5.4. Frictionless end plates of 7.5 cm diameter (Perspex plate with silicon grease
coating)
5.5. Oven
5.6. Balance Sensitive to weigh 0.01 g

5.7. Containers for moisture content determination

5.8. Proving ring of 0.01 kg sensitivity for soft soils and 0.05 kg for stiff soils.
5.9. Dial gauge (sensitivity 0.01 mm)
5.10. Vernier calipers
5.11. Soil sample = Wet clayed soil
 5.12. Wooden hammer and wooden compactor

6.0 PREPARATION OF SAMPLE

6.1. The split mould is oiled lightly from inside.

6.2. Remoulded soil sample is prepared by compacting the soil at desired water content
and dry density in the split mould.

6.3. Split mould is opened carefully and sample is taken out.

6.4. Place this soil sample in an air-tight container for 24 hrs.
6.5. Minimum three soil samples should be prepared for test.

7.0 PROCEDURES
7.1. The initial length and diameter of the soil specimen were measured.
7.2. The specimen on the base plate of the load frame was placed (sandwiched between
the end plates).
7.3. Hardened steel ball was placed on the bearing plate. The centreline of specimen was
adjusted such that the proving ring and the steel ball are in the same line.
 7.4. Dial gauge was fixed to measure vertical compression of the specimen.
7.5. Gear position on the load frame was adjusted to give suitable vertical displacement.
7.6. The reading of proving ring and dial gauge were set to zero.
7.7. The load was start being applied and the readings of the proving ring dial and strain
dial were recorded for every 5 mm compression.

7.8. The loading was continued till failure occurs or 20% vertical deformation is reached.
7.9. The failure pattern was sketched; measure the angle between the cracks and the
horizontal if possible.

8.0 EXPERIMENTAL DATA

9.0 EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS

Sample 1

Elapsed Strain Axial Corrected Proving Axial Compressive

Time dial Strain area ring load stress
‘t’ reading (ε) 1-ε 𝑨𝒄 = (𝑨𝟎 /1- readings P σ = P/𝑨𝒄
(minutes) (ΔL) ΔL/𝑳𝟎 ε) (cm²) (div.) (kg) (kg/cm2)
(mm)
0 0 0 1 9.6376 0 0 0
50 0.1 0.0014 0.9986 9.6511 0 0 0
100 0.2 0.0028 0.9972 9.6647 1 0.002 0.0002
150 0.3 0.0042 0.9958 9.6782 2 0.004 0.0004
200 0.4 0.0056 0.9944 9.6919 3 0.006 0.0006
250 0.5 0.0070 0.9930 9.7055 4 0.008 0.0008
300 0.6 0.0085 0.9915 9.7202 5 0.010 0.0010
350 0.7 0.0099 0.9901 9.7340 7 0.014 0.0014
400 0.8 0.0113 0.9887 9.7477 8 0.016 0.0016
450 0.9 0.0127 0.9873 9.7616 11 0.022 0.0023
500 1.0 0.0141 0.9859 9.7754 15 0.030 0.0031
550 1.1 0.0155 0.9845 9.7893 22 0.044 0.0045
600 1.2 0.0169 0.9831 9.8033 26 0.052 0.0053
650 1.3 0.0183 0.9817 9.8173 28 0.056 0.0057
700 1.4 0.0198 0.9802 9.8323 30 0.060 0.0061
750 1.5 0.0212 0.9788 9.8463 32 0.064 0.0065
800 1.6 0.0226 0.9774 9.8604 44 0.088 0.0089
850 1.7 0.0240 0.9760 9.8746 46 0.092 0.0093
900 1.8 0.0254 0.9746 9.8888 48 0.096 0.0097
950 1.9 0.0268 0.9732 9.9030 49 0.098 0.0099
1000 2.0 0.0282 0.9718 9.9173 50 0.100 0.0101
1050 2.1 0.0296 0.9704 9.9316 52 0.104 0.0105
1100 2.2 0.0310 0.9690 9.9459 54 0.108 0.0109
1150 2.3 0.0325 0.9675 9.9613 56 0.112 0.0112
1200 2.4 0.0339 0.9661 9.9758 58 0.116 0.0116
1250 2.5 0.0353 0.9647 9.9903 59 0.118 0.0118
1300 2.6 0.0367 0.9633 10.0048 60 0.120 0.0120
1350 2.7 0.0381 0.9619 10.0193 61 0.122 0.0122
1400 2.8 0.0395 0.9605 10.0339 62 0.124 0.0124
1450 2.9 0.0409 0.9591 10.0486 64 0.128 0.0127
1500 3.0 0.0423 0.9577 10.0633 65 0.130 0.0129
1550 3.1 0.0437 0.9563 10.0780 66 0.132 0.0131
1600 3.2 0.0452 0.9548 10.0938 68 0.136 0.0135
1650 3.3 0.0466 0.9534 10.1087 69 0.138 0.0137
1700 3.4 0.0480 0.9520 10.1235 70 0.140 0.0138
1750 3.5 0.0494 0.9506 10.1384 71 0.142 0.0140
1800 3.6 0.0508 0.9492 10.1534 72 0.144 0.0142
1850 3.7 0.0522 0.9478 10.1684 72 0.144 0.0142
1900 3.8 0.0536 0.9464 10.1834 73 0.146 0.0143
 1950 3.9 0.0550 0.9450 10.1985 74 0.148 0.0145
2000 4.0 0.0564 0.9436 10.2136 74 0.148 0.0145
2050 4.1 0.0579 0.9421 10.2299 75 0.150 0.0147
2100 4.2 0.0593 0.9407 10.2451 75 0.150 0.0146
2150 4.3 0.0607 0.9393 10.2604 75 0.150 0.0146

Sample 2

Elapsed Strain Axial Corrected Proving Axial Compressive

Time dial Strain area ring load P stress
‘t’ reading (ε) 1-ε 𝑨𝒄 = (𝑨𝟎 /1- reading (kg) σ = P/𝑨𝒄
(minutes) (ΔL) ΔL/𝑳𝟎 ε) (cm²) s (kg/cm2)
(mm) (div.)
0 0 0 1 9.6652 0 0 0
50 0.1 0.0014 0.9986 9.6788 2 0.004 0.0004
100 0.2 0.0028 0.9972 9.6923 6 0.012 0.0012
150 0.3 0.0042 0.9958 9.7060 9 0.018 0.0019
200 0.4 0.0056 0.9944 9.7196 13 0.026 0.0027
250 0.5 0.0070 0.9930 9.7333 15 0.030 0.0031
300 0.6 0.0085 0.9915 9.7481 29 0.058 0.0059
350 0.7 0.0099 0.9901 9.7618 32 0.064 0.0066
400 0.8 0.0113 0.9887 9.7757 34 0.068 0.0070
450 0.9 0.0127 0.9873 9.7895 40 0.080 0.0082
500 1.0 0.0141 0.9859 9.8034 44 0.088 0.0090
550 1.1 0.0155 0.9845 9.8174 46 0.092 0.0094
600 1.2 0.0169 0.9831 9.8313 50 0.100 0.0102
650 1.3 0.0183 0.9817 9.8454 51 0.102 0.0104
700 1.4 0.0197 0.9803 9.8594 54 0.108 0.0110
750 1.5 0.0211 0.9789 9.8735 56 0.112 0.0113
800 1.6 0.0226 0.9774 9.8887 59 0.118 0.0119
850 1.7 0.0240 0.9760 9.9029 61 0.122 0.0123
900 1.8 0.0254 0.9746 9.9171 63 0.126 0.0127
950 1.9 0.0268 0.9732 9.9314 65 0.130 0.0131
1000 2.0 0.0282 0.9718 9.9457 67 0.134 0.0135
1050 2.1 0.0296 0.9704 9.9600 69 0.138 0.0139
1100 2.2 0.0310 0.9690 9.9744 72 0.144 0.0144
1150 2.3 0.0324 0.9676 9.9888 73 0.146 0.0146
1200 2.4 0.0338 0.9662 10.0033 74 0.148 0.0148
1250 2.5 0.0352 0.9648 10.0178 74 0.148 0.0148
1300 2.6 0.0367 0.9633 10.0334 75 0.150 0.0150
1350 2.7 0.0381 0.9619 10.0480 75 0.150 0.0150
1400 2.8 0.0395 0.9605 10.0627 75 0.150 0.0149
Sample 3

Elapsed Strain Axial Corrected Proving Axial Compressive

Time dial Strain area ring load P stress
‘t’ reading (ε) 1-ε 𝑨𝒄 = (𝑨𝟎 /1- reading (kg) σ = P/𝑨𝒄
(minutes) (ΔL) ΔL/𝑳𝟎 ε) (cm²) s (kg/cm2)
(mm) (div.)
0 0 0 1 9.6486 0 0 0
50 0.1 0.0014 0.9986 9.6621 0 0 0
100 0.2 0.0028 0.9972 9.6757 2 0.004 0.0004
150 0.3 0.0042 0.9958 9.6893 3 0.006 0.0006
200 0.4 0.0057 0.9943 9.7039 4 0.008 0.0008
250 0.5 0.0071 0.9929 9.7176 5 0.010 0.0010
300 0.6 0.0085 0.9915 9.7313 9 0.018 0.0018
350 0.7 0.0099 0.9901 9.7451 16 0.032 0.0033
400 0.8 0.0113 0.9887 9.7589 18 0.036 0.0037
450 0.9 0.0127 0.9873 9.7727 20 0.040 0.0041
500 1.0 0.0142 0.9858 9.7876 22 0.044 0.0045
550 1.1 0.0156 0.9844 9.8015 24 0.048 0.0049
600 1.2 0.0170 0.9830 9.8155 26 0.052 0.0053
650 1.3 0.0184 0.9816 9.8295 28 0.056 0.0057
700 1.4 0.0198 0.9802 9.8435 30 0.060 0.0061
750 1.5 0.0212 0.9788 9.8576 39 0.078 0.0079
800 1.6 0.0226 0.9774 9.8717 46 0.092 0.0093
850 1.7 0.0241 0.9759 9.8869 50 0.100 0.0101
900 1.8 0.0255 0.9745 9.9011 52 0.104 0.0105
950 1.9 0.0269 0.9731 9.9153 53 0.106 0.0107
1000 2.0 0.0283 0.9717 9.9296 56 0.112 0.0113
1050 2.1 0.0297 0.9703 9.9439 58 0.116 0.0117
1100 2.2 0.0311 0.9689 9.9583 59 0.118 0.0118
1150 2.3 0.0326 0.9674 9.9737 60 0.120 0.0120
1200 2.4 0.0340 0.9660 9.9882 61 0.122 0.0122
1250 2.5 0.0354 0.9646 10.0027 62 0.124 0.0124
1300 2.6 0.0368 0.9632 10.0172 64 0.128 0.0128
1350 2.7 0.0382 0.9618 10.0318 66 0.132 0.0132
1400 2.8 0.0396 0.9604 10.0464 68 0.136 0.0135
1450 2.9 0.0410 0.9590 10.0611 69 0.138 0.0137
1500 3.0 0.0425 0.9575 10.0769 70 0.140 0.0139
1550 3.1 0.0439 0.9561 10.0916 71 0.142 0.0141
1600 3.2 0.0453 0.9547 10.1064 72 0.144 0.0142
1650 3.3 0.0467 0.9533 10.1213 73 0.146 0.0144
1700 3.4 0.0481 0.9519 10.1361 74 0.148 0.0146
1750 3.5 0.0495 0.9505 10.1511 75 0.150 0.0148
1800 3.6 0.0510 0.9490 10.1671 75 0.150 0.0148
1850 3.7 0.0524 0.9476 10.1821 75 0.150 0.0147
 9.1 EXPERIMENTAL DATA

Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3

Initial diameter of
35.03 35.08 35.05
specimen (mm)
Initial length of
70.86 70.94 70.65
specimen (mm)
Initial c/s area of
963.76 966.52 964.86
specimen (mm²)

Figure 9.1: Failure of soil sample under test

10.0 DATA ANALYSIS

Curtailment, ∆L = Strain dail (DIV) x 0.002

= 50 x 0.002
= 0.1 mm
ε = ∆L where L0 = length of specimen
L0 ∆L = curtailment
= 0.10
70.86
= 0.0014

1 – ε = 1 – 0.0014
= 0.9986
 AC = A0 where A0 = area of specimen
1–ε
= 963.76
0.9986
= 965.1112 mm2
= 9.651112 cm2

Load, P = proving ring reading X 0.002

= 10 X 0.002
= 0.02 kg
σ = P
Ac
= 0.02
9.651112
= 2.07 x 10-3 kg/cm2

(all the calculations for sample 2 and 3 are same as above)

Graph of Compressive Stress vs Axial Strain

0.016
0.014
Compressive stress, σ (kg/cm2)

0.012
0.01
0.008 Sample 1
0.006 Sample 2

0.004 Sample 3

0.002
0
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07
-0.002
Axial Strain, ε

Figure 10.1: Graph of compressive stress, σ against axial strain, ε

 Sample 1: Sample 2: Sample 3:
c = 0.0146 c = 0.0149 c = 0.0147
qu = 0.0292 qu = 0.0298 qu = 0.0294

The graph may not look smooth because we use the compression device manually. By
doing it in manual mode, our data will contain some reading error and recording error
because we cannot achieve constant speed when rotating the wheel. However, the line
of the graph is still within its range of value, so it is acceptable.

11.0 DISCUSSION
In the unconfined test, no radial stress is applied to the sample (σ3 = 0). The plunger
load, P is increased rapidly until the soil sample fail, that is cannot support any
additional load. The loading is applied quickly so that the pore water cannot drain from
the soil. The effect stress path is unknown since pore water pressure changes are not
normally measured.

This test is considered as undrained shear test assuming that there is no moisture loss
from the specimen during the test. The specimen must not certain any fissures, silt
seams, varves, or other defects, this mean that the specimen must be intact, homogenous
clay. Rarely are over-consolidated clays intact, and often even normally consolidated
clays have some fissures.

11.1. What are the differences between unconfined compression test and confined
compression test?
The differences between unconfined compression test and confined compression
test are sample used for unconfined compression test is not covered by any mould
or casing but sample used for confined compression test is enclosed between rigid
end-caps inside a thin rubber membrane to seal it from cell water, rubber O-ring
are fitted over the membrane at the cap to provide a seal.

11.2. What are the advantages of doing unconfined compression test?

The advantage of doing unconfined compression test is without any calculation the
confining pressure σ3 is equal to 0. From the test result we get the maximum
 unconfined compression strength (qu) is determined, using qu = σ1and σ3 is equal to
0 plot in graph where normal stress versus shear stress to determine the undrained
strength Cu where Cu = qu/2 of the unconfined compression strength we obtained.

11.3. What are the limitations of unconfined compression test?

The limitations of the unconfined compression test is applicable to the fully
saturated non-fissured clays, and only the undrained strength Cu can be measured.
11.4. Give 4 common laboratory errors for unconfined compression test?
The common laboratory errors for unconfined compression test are:
 Getting wrong reading from dial gauge during the test was running.
 The soil sample prepared is too wet.
 Insensitivity of measurements at low strains due to high early soil stiffness.

The application of the load to the soil sample was not equal, either too fast or too slow.

12.0 CONCLUSION
The unconfined compressive strength is considered to be equal to the load at which the
failure of the soil occurs. The consistency of soil samples will have different
compressive strength due to different porosity, moisture content and existing of
microorganism in the soil.

13.0 REFERENCES
…http://civilengineeringlaboratory.blogspot.com/2012/02/unconfined-compression-
test.html
…http://spin.mohawkcollege.ca/courses/smeatonk/CV504%20PDFs/Lab%20Manual/U
nconfined%20Compression%20Procedure.pdf
…http://www.cyut.edu.tw/~jrlai/CE7334/Unconfined.pdf
…http://www.uic.edu/classes/cemm/cemmlab/Experiment%2013-
Unconfined%20Compression.pdf
…http://www.uta.edu/ce/geotech/lab/Main/Soil%20Lab/09_UCS/UCS.pdf