SCOTTISH llWZu3m?

T EPARmZT

CHIEF ROAD XNGIKXEZ

!PEZHNICAL MEM3- SH 7/53

SPEIFICATION F'OR ROAD Al!! BRTDGEWOKS

sOILSuITABIlXYFOR EARTHWXKINC- USE OF THE KIST'UX COKZ:TIOIZ APPARATUS

This Memorandum introduces the Xoisture Condition Apparatus (MCA) ad a new soil
parameter, the Moisture ConWtion Value (XV), for predicting and assessing
suitability of soils for eafihwork%ng.
TECHNICAL HEMORAXW'ld SH 7 /83

SPECIF'ICATIONFCRRCADBNDERIM;MORKS

SOIL SUITABILITY FOR EKRTHWORIZNG- USE OF THE MOISTURE CONDITION APPtiTUS

1. INTROIXJCTION

1 .l The assessment of soil suitability is important to road constmction.

E&Ming techniques are based either on the recognition of undesirable soil
types or on the establishment of au upper limit of moisture content beyond
which the soil becomes unworkable. This upper limit is at present set by
reference to the results of two standard soil teStsI one for cohesive and
another for pmilar soils, the results being 'adjusted@ according to
simple guidelines and tsperienoe. Althou& qrienced Engineers have a
fair degree of success, many crperience difficulty in predicting and
sssessing suitability.
1.2 Research indicates that-there is a relationship between competive
effort, bulk density and moisture content and also that shear strength is
an effective meamare of suitability of soil for earthuorting. To exploit
theee facto- a new apparatus - the Moitiure Condition Apparatus - was
developed byTlUU. Hith this apparatus the shear strength on compaction of
widely differing soil types my be predicted. Trials, carried out on 'kink
Road contracts over a mmber of years, have shown the procedure to be
superior to -sting techniques for predicting and determining suitability
for earthworking.

2. SCOPE
This Memorandnm introduces the Moisfure Condition Apatus #GA) and a new soil
prefer, the Moisture Condition Value (EV), for predicting and assessing
suitability of soils for earthworking. A substitution of Specification Clause
601.1 (iii) (f) US- necessary and is given in Appendix A. The corresponding
amentie& wphs of the Notes for Guidance are included as Appendix B. Detailed
instructions for ~arrging out the tests and applflng the results are given in SDD
Applications Guide No 1, 1983, a copy of which is attached.

3.1 For all site investigation and work contracts on trunk roads the suita-
bility of soil for dhworking shall be determined by means of the Moisture
Condition Apparatus using the procedure set out in the SDD Applications
Guide Ro 1.

3.2 Clause 601, as amended try the redefinition of section 7 (iii) (f)
according to Appendix A, skll be usea to define the Suitability of materials
used in earkhworh.

3.3 The Notes for Guidance to the Specifications shall be amended according
to Appendix B.

3.4 In all calculations of MCV the *beti fit * line shall be used.
 .

3.5 The Moisture Condition oalibrafiap line of each mjor soil tgpe
having a potential suitability problem shall be established at the site
invssfigation stage anda rqresentatiw range 0fWVs atnatuFslmoi6ture
contents determined in the tiield.
3.6 Ihtring contract worlds the MCA till be ueed to detemiae suitability.
Soils in an unsuitable skate are defined as those having an MCV less than
the limit set for the contract.
3.7 Nience and competence in the use of the XCA and in the interc
vet&ion of results is consideti essential. All sfaff inwlved in the
use of the MCA must have completed, to the satisfaction of this De-me&,
anappropriate course of training.

49 ADvICEAYBdSSIsTANCE
Advice and guidance on the interpretation of this Technial ~wwrandurp or matters a
relating to the Moisture Condition Appeugtus includiagtmning of at&f c8tl be
obtained fmm the Chief Road E@neer,.Scottish Developarent lkment, Room 3/86,
New St Andrew18 Rouse, Minburgh. Telephone Ho 031 556 8400 W 5584.

I
J M MACKEZZIE
Ch ef Road Engineer

2.
-A

REZJZFINITION OF CLAUSE 601

Clause 601, section 1, subsection (iii), paragraph (f) shall be amended to read as
follows:-

(f) materials having a moisture condition value (WV) less than the limit
mrmitted in the Contract for such materials, unless otherwise directed
by the &gineer.
A. The following replaces paras 143 on page 29.

1. The earthworks clau6es have been drawn up in the interests of econov;.,

to encourage the best use of all materials. Schemes should be designed on
the basis that, with the exception of material 8 defined in Clause 601.1 (iii)
(4 to (4, maximum use cap be made of all materials on site where this is
a&ant ageous . It is vital that site investigations should be thorough and
carried out sufficiatly in advance of the design and tender stages to enable
a proper appaisal to be made of the materials which will be encountered.
The use of trial pits for this purpose is strongly advocated. Where trial
pits cannot be used, for instance in the case of materials at depth, then
boreholes, or similar techniques, will be required. Care should be taken to
ensure that samples taken for testing are representative of the material being
maImpled.

2. To estimate the volumes of suitable and unsuitable material in a particular

soheme it will be necessary to characterise each major soil type in terms of.
suitability. This is best accomplished through the use of the Koisture Condition
Apparatus @CA). &tail6 Of the apparatus, test procedures and applications can
be found in SDD Applications Guide No.1 , 1983. Moisture condition calibration
lines should be established for all Soil ws having a potential suitability
moblem. H-6 of interpreting the results and special procedures to identify
soils not having suitability problems are given in the abovmentioaed SDD
Guide MCV tests at natural moisture contents will enable the i-situ state
of the material to be evaluated in terms of calibration line. Estimates of
quantities of rmitable and unsuitable mterials derived from the site investi-
gation do not allow for seasonal, climatic, local or other variations in weather
and moisture cantents and these must be allowed for during the constmction stage,

3. Coneideratim should be given at the site investigation stage to l atab-

lishing, in addition to the relationship of MCI7 and moisture content, their
correlation with CER and shear strength for the major soil types. This is
Ukcly to be useful at both design and ehworking 6-s.

4s Coasidemtion should be given at the design stage, when setting an NV

limit for the contract or portion of the contract, to the ertent to which
Mnage lasers OT lasers with a hi&cr XCV can be incorporated into the fill
and be effedive. Depending on prkfcdar contract circumstances the adoption
of Stronger material in the top metre of an embankment mery be advisable. Where
material of doubtful value for fill or subgrade is encountered then conrpction
trial6 will be ncoesmzy. These can be caxried out a6 part of the site ime-
tigation or as a separate exercise during the design stage for the main contract.
 _ .i

5 In general the principle should be that if materials can be excavated,

-amported aad compacted they are suitable for most esrthworks. me MCA
26 effective in detemiairrg suitability for both earthmoving and compaction.
MCV tests carried out on material6 imediately prior to u6e will enable their
suitabili~ to be established. As a eneral guide an Mcv of 8.5 is recwaded
a6 the lower u&t of etitabilitg; a soil hay* an XV less than this limit
is thus deemed unsuitable. Specific condition6 on site may require that the
8.5 1Mt be lowered or rsised ~&ally. 'ihis is the responsibility of the
mincer and should be based on the local situation, the bwn behaviour of the
material 6nd the type of plant a orunpetentcontractor couldbe expectedtouse on
the Site. Matiriale with h&j& Stone Contx!ntB, for ersmple Boulder Tills, may
field ahiaerbulk s~ngthoncompactioathanthat predictedbytheMCV test.
-6 should be t&en into consideration when eettiag xv l-t6 on the Site apd a
cozTeBpondi&y lower Mcp Ut oray be able to be used.

6. The'tJrpee of plarLtwbich can be used on earthwork6 and their efficieacy of

operafioaisrelated to theIEVof the material6 be-worked. Rcovidiagthatthe
site investigation is adequate and gives info=tion on the insitu soil
chazacteristic6 then the responsibility is that of the Conbactor to select snd
use plant which can opemte effectively ia the particular condition6 and not to
a6~ that he can tiway6 use machine6 with the highest potential productioifg
available. Guidance on the selection of plant in tenna of MCV c8n be oblxined
from'IgBLB.eport LR 10%.

B. The follow* replaces 1oG 608.6 on page 32:- ?

6. It is recognired that the compaction specified could exceptionally

produce oper6tress of some soils, even when the KCV is above the
limit specified in the contract, or if the Contractor persists in
workiag in unmibble weather conditions or by methods which allow the
EV to decrease below the 6pecified limit or by the use of unsuitable
plant on weaker soils.

C. 'fbs following is a replaoement of E 608.9 on page 33:-

9. Yhil6t pexmission to u6e matedal having an NCV below the specified

limitwillencourage the m pBe of available material it will
require a continwu8 appreciation by the Engineer of the e&Work6
situation during copstruction azxd he should be satisfied that such
material is capable of forming a stable fill and will not impair the
satisfactory operation of the consmtion plant.

D. The follow- replace6 the first pwaph only of NG 608.11 on page 33:-
11. FOX the moses of Cvi6On of the state of compaction of slspect
and approved areas it i6 Vital fhat fe6t6 are camied Out on -a6
in which material6 are of the same cla66ification, have approximately
the 82me r2nge of MCVs and lie within the Specification requirement6
for,I!m.
 TECHNICAL MEhlORAhDUlil SH7 183

AMENDMENT NO 1

SDD APPLICATIONS GUIDE NO 1

(REVISED 1989)

THE USE AND APPLICATION OF THE

MOISTURE CONDITION APPARATUS
IN TESTING SOIL SUITABILITY
FOR EARTHWORKING

Printed and Published by the

Scottish Development Demnt 0c CMWTJ Copyright 1989
February 1989

CO200226.108
 Table of Contents

LIST OF FIGURES
1. INTRODUCTION 1

2. PRINCIPLES OF COMPACTION 1
3. MOISTURE CONDITION TESTING 2
3.1 The apparatus 2
3.2 Prindples 3
3.3 Test Procedures
3.3.1 Determination of MCV :
3.3.2 Determination of MCV on a Sample
after Saturation 4
3.3.3 Calibration Lines 5
3.4 General Guidance 6
3.4.1 MCV 6
0 3.4.2 Calculation
Testing of MCV 6
3.4.3 Calibration Testing 7
4. APPLICATION 8
4.1 Site Investigation 8
4.2 EarthworHng 9
4.2.1 Earthmoving 9
4.2.2 Compaction 9
5. RECOMMENDED PROCEDURES 10
5.1 Site Investigation 10
5.2 Earthworking 11
6. REFERENCES 12
APPENDIX 1 Instructions for Mdsttm Condition Testing
APPENDIX 2 Forms MCAl and MCA?
APPENDIX 3 Examples

CO200226.108
1. Application potential of the MCA.

2. Relationship bulk density and moisture content during compa&tion

tesdng .
3. Displacement of compaction curve with different compacdve efforts.

4. The moisture condition app~atus.

5. Flowchart - Sample preparation for determination of MCV,

6. Flowchati - Procedure for determination of MCV.

7. Flowchart - MCV testing of saturated sample.

8. Flowchart - Sample preparation for Ctibration testing.

9. Flowchart - Procedure for CaHbradon testing

10. Characteristic test curve.

11. Test Curve - Sample with relatively low moisture content.

12. Test Curve - Sample with relatively high moisture content.

13. Cabradon Line - relatively wet conditions.

14. Calibration Une - relatively dry conditions.

15. Characteristics of calibration ties.

16. Slope v. Intercept plot.

17. Flowchart - Use in Site Investlgatlon.

18. Flowchart - Use in Earthworldng.

CO200226.108
 I
KEY
Cl
:

MCA CAN BE USED

a
30
MCA MAY If USABLE

MCA CANNO IE USED

100 80 60

FIG 1 APPLICATION
(<O-Obmm)

POTENTIAL OF THE MCA

a
::/ \

AM YOIOS LINE

FIG 2 REIATIONSHIP of BULK 0Erdsm

MOISTURE

a mmmE
CONTENT

CoNTENt aunruc
Ihl

tp*rLfmm ?Lzfw;
a
2-3

2.2

2-l

2-o
BULK
DENSITY
(Mglm31 kg

I-8

I.7

1.6
III 12 14 I6 IS 20 22 24
a
MOISTURE COKTENT r%)

fI; 3 DISPIACEMEKI Of COMPACTION CURVE WITH DIFfEREm CDMPAtTlm EffDRlZj

1. INTRODUCTION
The assessment of acceptabiRty for eerthworkfng is important to road
construction. Early techniques were based either on a visual recognition
of undesirable soil types 0r On the estabushment of s,n upper limit of
moisture content beyond which the 6oL! was deemed to be unworkable,
This upper Himit WS met by reference to the results of 2 standard SOLZ
tests, one for cohesive and one for granular soils, the reBUk6 being
adjusted according to simple guidelines and experience. Although
experienced Engineers had a fsir degree of BUCC~BB difficulty was
regularly found in predicting end asmssfng acceptabKtty.

Research (Refs 1,2) indicates that a relationship eldsts between maximum

bulk density. compactive effort and moisture content, and that shear
strength $6 an effective measure of acceptability. To exploit these points
the Moisture Condltlon Apparatus (MCA) has been developed by TRRL.
Using results obtsined from the .MCA it is possible to predict the potential
shear strength of widely dIffe&g soil types. A guide to determinlng
whether the MCA test csn be applied csn be obtained by considering the
proportion8 of fines, sand and gravel (deduced from a particle size
distribution test performed on the as-dug soil). Three categories can
thus be de5ed:-
1 .l Soils which can be teeted using the MCA generally have a 5es
content greater t= or equal to 18%.
1.2 Soils which csnnot be tested using the MCA have a 5es content
less than that B by the line joWng the points at 5% fines,
0% gravel and 10% 5es, 90% gravel, on Fig 1.

1.3 If the fines content Hes between the Units de5ed above (ie 1.1
and 1.2) then the MCA may sdll be useable, but this should be
determined by carefully attemptig a calibration line. If a ctibration
line with a clearly de&led section, a negative slope ; and a
correlation coeffkient above 0.9, is obtained then the MCA can be
used over that specific range of moisture rontents. A single MCA
test performed on the material in a saturated state can pro-de
further guidance on whether a calibredon Rne should be attempted.

Test6 using the MCA replace the previous techmlques of de5ing an upper
&nit of moisture content for acceptability.

This guide exphdns the basic prindplee of the MCA for soils 8ati8fyirrg
categories 1 .l and 1.3 above. It gives detsiled instructions for test
procedures and offers guidance on the interpretation and use of results.
Forms for reccrrding data and carrying out evaluations are given along
with worked examples. The procedure6 have been used 6uecessfuRp
(refs 3, 4) on Trunk Road Projects over a period of 8 years.

2. PRINCIPLES OF COMPACTION

In compaction testing (BS1377:1975 Test 121, bulk density and mcdsture

content ideally show a relationship (Fig 2) in which bulk density initially
increases untlt the zero air voids Hne is approached, reaches a 6mXimUm
and then decreases with increasing moisture content. This is the
compaction curve and its highest point de5ss both the msximum bulk
density snd the optimum moisture content for that soil. Soils compacted
at their optimum moisture content will thus give maximum bulk density.

CO200226.108 1.
 Upper cross-member
\

Handle Handle

Sliding cross member

II im

Rammer

c Penetration seal*
+ on rammer
1
1

Guide rods
Oropheight
vcrnief-scales

I-r Recess tv locate

base plate

FIG L MDtSfURE CONDITION APPARATUS

An increase in the COBJPactfVe effort, resu1ti.m for instance from an
inereaee in weight or height of fall of the compac?on rammer, produces a
ourve which is displaced upwards and to the left. Conversely, a decrease
in eompactfve effort moves the curve downwards and to the right (Fig 3) l

Above each optimum moisture content all such curve6 converge to form a
single Hne approx&atlng to the 5 per cent air voids line. The pojnt of
Intersection of each compaction curve and convergenn hne therefore
relates maximum bulk den&y, moisture content and compactlve effort.
Using the degree to which ti voids have been eliminated as a measure of
the degree of compaction, the convergence line corresponds to the
maximum practical level of compaction achieved during testig.
The bulk den&y at full compaction ie related to the oompactive effort
z&azEl$ed and does not neceesarlly equate to the highest bulk dent&y
In the field the terms tm&mum bulk density and full
eompactio~ are therefore only meaningful when they are linked to the
plant used.
At moisture contents below optimum full compaction will only be achieved
when the convergence line is reached. SoUs which are compacted at too
low a moisture content therefore require extra compactive effort to achieve
a state of full compaction.
The compaction test is carried out in undrained conditions, water is not
peradtted to escape from the sample mould. The bulk density increases in
each test with moisture content until the convergence line is reached. At
this point no further increase in bulk density LB possible unless water is
allowed to escape, further compactive effort being abeorbed by the
incompressible water and appearing mainly as pore water pressures which
dissipate with time. In drained conditions, a~ found in most natural
conditions, the bulk density increases to the convergence line and then
moves upwards along the convergence line as water is forced out. The
time taken to final compaction and the extent to which pore water
pressures are developed are a function of the permeability of the soil.
Those aoils compacted at very high moieture contents develop pore water
pressures related to the compactive effort applied and the permeability.
A test procedure attempting to airnulate the above conditions must
therefore be carried out in controlled or measured conditions of compactive
effort, maximum bulk density and moisture content in an environment
allowing water to escape from the system if pore pressures develop.
These requirements are satisfied during moisture condition testing.
3. MOISTURE CONDlTION TESTING
The Moisture Condition Test is a form of strength test fn which the
compactlve effort for near full compaction of a sample of soil is
determined. A new parameter - the Moisture Condition Value (MCV) - is
used to quantify the compactive effort and correlates with shear strength
and with CBR at the same level of compaction.
3.1 The apparatus

The MCA (Fig 4) consfsts basic&y of a frame containing a drop

rammer and a mould to hold the sample. Both the weight of the
rammer and the height of fell are kept constant. Each blow of the
rammer is triggered during the lifting operation, A counter

CO200226.108 2,
 OBTAIN
SOIL SAMPLE

APPROX. 24 Kg.

I *
RECORD SAMPLE
OETAlLS ON
* MOISTURECOIIIDITION
TEST FORM HCA I

*
PASS SAhdPLE
THROUGH
20mm SIEVE

1
TAKE FRACTION
PASSING 20mm
SIEVE& WEIGH I3Kg
CORRECf TO $204
,
i
PLACE SAMPLE IN
MCA MOlllD & AOD
FIBRE DISC TO TOP

FIG 5 FLOW&HART- SAMPLE PREPARATlON FOR DnERMlNATlON OF MC V

 recording the brows accumulated a!lows the compacthe effort to be
meaBured.
A HBt of equipment necessary to carry out the test ia given In
Appendix 1 Section 1.
3.2 Prindples
As described in SeCtion 2, 3 basic parameters de5ne 8 sof2 system
being compacted - compactive effort, mdsture content and maximum
bulk density. The MCA i.6 &B@ied with these in mind. The
mdsture oontent, cakuhtted as a percentage of the dry weight of the
sample, remains oonstant throughout the test. The compacdve effort
applied is measured by counting the number of blows of a rammer of
5xed weight falling from a constent height onto the eample contained
in a mould. The bulk density at any stage during compaction i.8
equal to the of the sample
weight ctlvided by the volume occupied.
Since the weight is constant maxI.mum bulk den&y will occur at
IrIinblum vohme. Full compaction therefore OCCU~B when the rammer
attains maximum penetration Wo the mould. In order to dmulate
5eld conditions slots are incorporated tit0 the base of the mould.
Onset of pore water pressure can consequently be judged from the
appearance of water at the base of the mould. This also indicates
that the bulk density plot at constant moisture content has reached
the convergence line. Further reduction in volume can only occur
by a loss of water from the system. Testing in therefore normally
stopped when water appears at the base of the mould.
3.3 Test Procedures
The MCV is defined in terms of the effort required to compact a
1.5 kg sample of the SC& Each MCV relates to a sped& moisture
content and the moisture content can be varied to give a calibration
line typifying the material. Determination of the MCV on a saturated
sample can protrlde guidance on whether a caHbration line should be
attempted for aoils in category 1.3 a~ de5ed in Section 1.
Two forms, MCAl and MCAt (Appendix 2), allows results to be
recorded systematicaDy. Their u8e is strongly recommended. PuU
instruct/on6 for teeting are given fn Appendix 1.
3.3.1 Determination of MCV
3.3.1.1 Sample Preparation
Sample preparation for an MCV test is 8treightforward.
A sample of the coil is pW3ed through a 20 mm sieve,
1.5 kg weighed out and then placed airectiy tit0 the
sample mould. A 5bre &SC is placed on top of the
sample to avold rammer contamination. A 5owchart shows
the procedure to be followed Wig 5).
3.3.1.2 Testing
As a preBminary to testing the apparatus should be
checked in accordance with Appendix 1, section 2 to
ensure that the height of drop of the rammer is 250 mm
and that the rammer tia not foul the mould during

CO200226.108 3.
 LOCK RAMMER UP

IPLACE MDlJLD ON
BASE DF APPARATUS
AND LOCK IN PLACE I

GENrLY LOWER
RAMMER ON TO
FIBRE DISC
4
SET TRIP CDUNTER
TD ZERO
b
J OBTAIN SAMPLE
SET HElGHTOF OROP DF SOIL

RAlSE RAMMER
* READINGS TAHENAFlER 1.2.34.6.8.l2J6.
1 24.32.48.64.96.128.
192.266.6wwS THROUGH Mmm
TAKE PENElRATlDN-
READING

TAKE 2-5Kg OF
FRACTIUN PASSING
Zllmm ADD VWTER
UNTIL SAJURATILI
SEEPAGEOCCURRED 1

COMWE READlNG
(461 wm
READING (81

A
I

- .. .. -..-,-
rk

IU
STDP TEST

RAISE RAMMER
r-l
prneEl.SKg OF
sAnR?Am SAMPLE
IN MC4 MDUID

1
ADD Fl6RE DISC TD
DSSl6LE ?
. A I AND LOCKIN I TOP OF MWLD
I

CARRY OUT NDRWL

McvTEsl mmRwG
WATER SEEPAGE
CLEAN AND DRY
MDIJlD.FI6RE DISC.
RAMMER AND BASE

FIG 6 FLOWCHART- TEST W FOR DEfERMlNATlDN FIG 7 FlDWH4RT - MCV TESTINGOF S4llJWED
m
OF MCV
 descent. Checks should also be made to ascertaIn that
the drop height vernier assembly i6 6eCUrdy fastened
and that alt socket screws are secure.

The mould is placed in position on the base of the

apparatus, secured, and tesdng commenced. The
penetration of rammer into mould is measured at eet
numbers of blows (B) until a state of near full
compaction is reached or until water is expelled from the
base of the mould. Near fuU compaction is ticognised
when the penetration difference between the readings
at 4B and B blows drops below 5 mm. Dutig the test
the height of the rammer drop is regularly checked and
if necessary adjusted. Test measurements should be
meticulously recorded on Form MCAl as they are being
gathered. Detailed instructions (Appendix 1,
section 3.1) and a flowchart (Fig 6) give the procedures
to be followed.

Each test can be expected to take between 6 and

10 minutes to perform.
3.3 .1.3 Processing of Results

Differences in penetration are calculated by subtracting

each penetration reading for 8 given number of blows
from the reading at 4 times that number of blows. This
technique facilitates recognition of the state of near full
compaction. For convenience the change in penetration
is recorded against the lower number of blows. The
resultant differences ale then plotted against the number
of blows, the latter on a log scale. MCV is defined a6
10 times the log of the number of blow6 required to
produce a 5 mm change in penetration on the plotted
curve. In practice MCV can be read directly from an
appropriate scale on the graph.
Detailed instructions are given in Appendix 1,
section 3.2.

3.3.2 Determination of MCV on a Sample after Saturation

3.3.2.1 Sample Preparation

Water is added to the sample in a container untU an
excess over that required to saturate the soil is reached.
Free-standing water should be visible on top of the
sample. Further water is added as required and the
8mple allowed to attain a uniform moisture content.
This moisture content need not be measured. A
flowchart shows the preparation required (Fig 7).

3.3.2.2 Testing

The procedure followed is that for a normal MCV except

th8t water escaping from the mould is ignored.
Instructions for testing are given in Appendix 1,
section 5.

CO200226.108 4.
 I08tAlN BULK

PASS ttmlGH2lhm
SIM GREAKING
DowNAG-
ri
REmKE SAMPLE
To 1.5Kg

t
PUCE SAMPLE IN
MolJwANo AOD
FlBREDlSClOlDP
TAKEFRAcmN
-f1
PASSING 2omm ?-.
NOTE ~O~IDN
RETAINED FORM
MCA2 &ECTION6 1
MAKfUPSlX
KEPlESENTAlM
2.5Ka SANIPLES

I--
MIX EACHSAMPLETO
DIFFERENTMttlSTuRE
WNTEN? to GM
NOTE RESULTSON
FORM MCA2
SAMPLE

FIG 9 FLOWCHART- PROCEDUREFOR CAUBfUtlON TESTING

 3.3.2.3 Processing of Reeults

Results are processed according to procedures for a

normal MCV (Section 3.3.1.3).

3.3.3 Ctibration Lines

A calibration fine characterises the relationship of MCV to
moisture content in a soil type and is obt&ed by determining
WV v83ues over a range of moisture contents.
3.3 3.1l Sample PZWpaZ8tiOn
A bulk sample weighing approximately 25 ldlogrammes is
obtained, air dtied and then passed through a 20 mm
sieve. The percent8ge rettied should be noted. At
least 4 and preferably 6 representative samples weighing
approaately 2.5 kg each are then made up at 8 range
of moisture contents such that the range of resultant
MCVs is approldmately 3 to 15. A flowchert shows the
procedure to be followed (Fig 8). Detailed instructions
are given in Appendix 1, section 4.1.
3.3.3.2 Testing

Each sample should be prepared and tested according to

Section 3.3.1 and its MCV determined. Immediately on
completion of each test the sample should be removed
from the mould and a determination of moisture content
initiated. This is the true moisture content of the tested
sample and mey differ fros, thrt theoretically aimed 8t.
The true moisture content is of course used in
8Ub8eqUent CdCUl8tiOn6. Rclu!t& should be recorded on
Forms WA1 and MCA2. A flowchart shows the
procedure to be followed (Fig 9 1.
3.3.3.3 Processing of Reeultr

When the MCV of e8Ch sample hu Mn determined 8 plot

of sample moisture contunt 8pinrt MCV is drawn up.
The p&t8 should lie on l rtrdght or near-straight tie.
This is the oa?ibradon lint for the &I. The Hne should
be negatively rloping, contrin 3 or preferably 4 or more
points and have a comlatlon coefficient greater than
0.90. The intercept on the arcdstu~ content axis end
8hpe of line are then determined. The aengftlvity of the
soil to moisture ccrntent changes is 8n important property
and ie easily calculated by taking the inVerSe of the
value obtained for the alope. Results should be recorded
in the relevant sections of forms MCAl and MCAS.

Except for the manual determination of intercept, it is

important not to extrapolate the calibration line beyond
the points on which the calibration is baaed (See
SectIon 3.4.2).

DetaKed instructions 8Xe given in Appendix 1,

eecdon 4.2.
L
CO200226.108 5.
FIG 10 EHARACTERlSnC TEST CURVE

BLOWS(B)

MCV
FIG 11 TEST CURVE - SAMPLE WITH RELATIVELYLOW
#OMURE CONTENT

WCW
FIG 12 TEST CURVE
- SAMPLEWITH RELATIVELY
HIGH
MOlSTlJFiE
CONTENT
 3.4 General Guidance
3.4.1 MCV Testing
NO dffficultywill be experienced with the majority of soils,
particulerly those of a cohesive nature and characteristic curves
(Fig 10) can be obtained. However problems may arise during
the testing of samples having either a reladvely low or a
relatively high m&ture content. This wfll be pwticularly true
In the testing of granular Glad& Tills.
Samples which are of a relatively low moisture content usually
produce a plot Wig 11) in which the change in penetration ia
uniformly low and the 5 mm line is either not reached or crowed
repeatedly. A total of over 256 blows may be necessary for a
change In penetradon of less than 5 mm. The test consequently
takes appredably longer. It is arguable whether continuing the
test to such a high number of blows is necessary.
Tests on samples of relatively high moisture content (Fig 12)
may experience seepage of water from the base of the mould.
Unless the amount of water escaping from the base of the sample
is measured or an accurate determination of moisture content
made prior to testing, it is Imperative that testing is stopped
when seepage is seen. Conthuing the test after the seepage
point is reached leads to an incorrect moisture content
detemimtion on completion of the test. It also alters the
system by allowing a change in modsture content to take place
and this may affect results. In this context seepage is
differentiated from the occasional spurt of water ejecting from
the base slots aa air escapes from the sample. Warning of the
seepage condition can be obtained by observing the condition of
the rammer sides a6 testtng progresses. Noticeable liquid
(usually in the form of a mud slurry) occurring on the lower
face indicates that the saturated state is being reached. The
possibility of obtaining a valid MCV on such samples depends on
the number and value of the penetrations taken before seepage.
Insuffident paints can lead to a 5 mm intersecdon not being
achieved or one inaccurately determined. This behaviour can be
expected in samples with a low fines content and relatively high
permeability.
3.4.2 Calculadon of MCV
The mechanism involved Ln the compaction of a cohesive 6oil is
one. almost solely involving densiflcadon in Its origfnal state.
The original concept of the MCV test, as introduced in SR 522
recognised this by cakuladng graphically the MCV from the
steepest straight Hne on the change in penetration plot to eve
MCV (es). Any difference from an MCV calculated from the
beet fit line (MCV (bf)) was minjmal and explained 88 arising
from processes other than simple dendflcadon and which were
assumed not to be of importance to norm& earthworking on &e.
Such differences that were observed were aseumed to &se only
as a result of mould condinement and a6 such were unique to the
test procedure. In any event MCV (as) gave a conservative
(pessimistic) result favouring rejection of the soil rather than

CO200226.108 6.
 2, 4 6MDdJRE IO 12 !E ;MC 18 20
CONOlTlON 1

FIG 13 CAUBRATION
UNE- RELATlVELY
WET CONDlTlDNS

0 2 4 6 8 IO 12 14 16 18 20
MOISTURE CONDITIONVALUE IHCVV)

FIG 1~ CALIBRATIONLINE-RELATIVELYDRYCONDITIONS

0.
/I(
0 INEFFECTIVE

LOWESTMOISTURE
~-..&.-.-f~~~.~- I - .f
f#RT OFLINE

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
MOISTURECONOlTlDNVALUE (MCVI

FIG 15 C~Rlsflcs OF cAll8RATlON LINES

 acceptance. For most cohesive s&s there is effectively no
difference between MCV (8s) and MCV (bf).

In the case of gram&r soils (particularly Glacial Tiue) the

situation can be different and sub6t8ntial difference
between MCV (68) ad MCV (bf) CIUI OCCUT. Such differences
Imply that energy is berg ueed up in processes other than
aimple densiflcaUon . Movement of 8ir, water and grain rounding
and/or crushing am possibikkies. An understanding of the
compaction process actually occurring tith any soil and the
degree to which the MCV test simulates this process will be the
decidng factor in whether MCV (68) WLU be perfectly adequate.
MCV (bf) will however give an accurate result tith aII eoD
ZB providing the mechanism of compaction Is simulated by the
Experience with granular tKla in Scotland indicates that
MCV (bf) is the more satisfactory of the 2 techniques of
calculating MCV.

It is important therefore to reaIise that for granular soUs in

particular MCV (86) and MCV (bf) may be different. Consistent
use of one method at both site investigation and contract stages
of a project is thus vital. SimihAy conclusions reached through
the use of MCV (8s) regarding correlations with undrained
shear strength and plant performance (SR 522 and LR 1034) may
not be able to be applied directly to MCV Cbf). This applies
particularly to granular mate&l in a rektive2y dry state.

3.4.3 CaHbration Testfng

The quality of calibration Hnes can be linked directly to the

certainty by which individual MCV points are obtained.
Characteristic curve6 lead to caHbration Hnes with an excellent
degree of correlation. Off-Hne values are nearly always the
result of poor or suspect test data. MCVs used in drawhg up
caHbraUon Unes should therefore be assessed for quaHty before
being accepted. Attempts to use all test results without regard
to validity can lead to very poor lines.

UnW experience is gained dif&uRy is often found in obt&ing

an arti- moisture content rangeto cover the optimum MCV
spread. Samples which afe relatively too wet yield either
incorrect MCVs or no MCV at all. samples which are relatively
too dry yield MCVa lower than expected. This is particularly
true of aoils having a caHbration Hne with a low slope. Reasons
for this have Wdy been described (Section 3.4.1). The
solution in most cases Hes fn reducing the range and carefully
selecting the moisture content values. The range is determined
by the position and slope of the caIibratlon tie, those with a
low gradient requiring eamples prepared over a narrow range of
moisture contents. Expedenoe of similar soil types is the best
guide.

An attempt to calibrate soil tending

towards a very wet state is
given in fig 13 and one tending towards a very dry state in
Fig 14. In the former the number of points obtained is
insufficient for goQd calibration. In the latter 2 lines are
apparent, that with a positive slope resulting from the relatively
low MCVs. Positive slopes of this nature are referred to &b: the

CO200226 .fOS 7.
 1-s

i
i
.
l-2

t-1

--
E '-O -
5
Ln
-9

-8
a i
:
-7 i
:
0
-6

-5 rr---v--s-
l ---w-c- --- ---
:
s
-4
e :

--------II-----C-Ct-C----- a
*3 a

-2
i
:.
-1 I
i
w
0 2 4 6 8 19 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 26 30

INTERCEPT

FIG 16 SLOPEvlNTERSEFt PLOT

 fngdfecttve part of the cdibratton line, and are at least in part
due to the complex reIaUonship between intergratu&.r ftictlon
and maisturt? Cont=t.

TeeUng of freely-drainingBOKS will give most trouble. They

are usually uniformly graded sands, and gravels, In contract
terminology they are classed aa all weather materials which will
not develop excess pore water pressures during compaction.
CaHbratlon of such soil6 should not be attempted. A simple
method of recognising such SOLZSis to use the MCV test on a
sample in a seturated state (Section 3.3.2).
Except for the manual determination of intercept it is important
not to extrapolate caHbraUon lines beyond estabHshed limits.
Such extrapolation can hide the effect of high permeabiHty and
the existence of an ineffective part to the line.
The characteristics of calibration Hnes as described above are
shown diagrammatically in Mg 15.
4. APPLICATION
4.1 Site Investigation
The objectfve of usiug the Maisture Condition Apparatus at the site
Lnvestlgetion stage is to allow recognition- of those soils likely to
cause problems during construction and to prepare calibration 2ines
for later use. The existence of a calibration Hne for the aoil type
considerably speeds up determination of unacceptabtity immediately
prior to and during earthworking.
To define a caHbraUon Hne the intercept on the moisture content
axis, the slope and knits of the line, including any ineffective part,
are requted. The higher the Intercept the greater the potential of
the soil to retain moisture in a state of very low compaction, the
lower the slope of the Hne the more sensftive the so9 is to moisture
content changes. This forms the basis of a very useful classification
for earthworking purpoees and clearly allows differentiation of those
BOKB particularly sea&Uve to modsture content changes. It is _
suggested that this Information Ls vital to effklent earthworldng.
For maximum benefit it should be collected during site investigation.
A slope intercept plot should be made from all ctibration ties
obtained. This will allow eaey differendatlon. An example of such a
plot, including a grouping of the sail types according to eensitivfty ,
is gfven in Fig 16.
Early recognition of those sails in the all weather category is
l.mportmlt. Attempted WibraUon testing of freely-draining material
IB not recommended.
In terms of the calibraUon Hne, increasing permeabiHty reetricte the
low end of the range of MCV values obthed during caHbraUon. A
freely dr&ning Wl weather material is one in which MCVs below the
Specified Iimit for the Contract cannot be obtained during testing no
matter how much water is added to the sample during preparation.
If an MCV equal to or greater than the spedfied Hmit is obtained
then the permeability of the material is such that porewater
pressures are dissipating quickly and that no loss in shear strength

CO200226.108 8.
 is experl8nced during compaction. It is suggested that a test in a
saturated State be csded out on before
all c&ibraUon
granular soils
i.6 attempted. It is important to note that such materials must be
used in f-y draining environments, Classification of soils in
categori86 6.6 defined in s&ion 1 should be carried out at an early
stage.

The need to obt6in Wibratlon lines on all soil types with a potential
acceptability problem i6 Of tit& tip0136nCe if On-site testing Of
acceptability i.6 envisaged during construction. The presence of an
ti8ff8Cdve part to the C6Xbration line can make the interpretation
8rromoUs if at6 present28 is nut realised - a single MCV value could
have 2 possible modstUr6 COZltePt 8qUiV&!lltS.

4.2 &irthworIdng

Barthworking 86x1 be divided into earthmoving and compaction. In

earthmovIng soU is excavated, trsasported and deposited in a
disturbed Stat8 6ome distance from ft6 6ource. When used 6.6 m it
$6 then formed according to the dedgn and str8ngthened by
compaction until it is capable of withstanding the stresses of the
expected loading. Both processes are ceeential feature6 of any
constlucUon contract and require separate treatment for MCV
appkation.

4.2.1 Eatthmoving

Gladal m are very common ti Scot&h Projects and have a

re.hatfVely high proportion of oObbi86 and boulders. Problems of
working mainly arise from a h66 of sheer 6W8ngth in the
met*. The MCV test ie performed on a Sieved sample
corresponding to the matrix of such 6oiiis and consequently is
6uCC866ful in p&iCtig acc8ptabfUt-y for Sarthmoving.

Under site conditions earthmoving plant operate either on eoU in

a natur&y compacted or in a dbturbed state. Depending on
plant size compactiOn of both the in-situ and tbe &IIsturb8d soil
is Hkely to take place, Under W8t conditions SignifiCallt
reductions in 6h86Z strength can reStit. The economics of
m&ing u8e of on-sfte soils 6re criUcally dependant on the
68ecU0n of appropriate p-t for the 8oLt conditions.

The productivity of VeriouB type8of WWthtnoving plant h&6 b88n

related to the B& condith~ls measured by m86ns of the mod6ture
condition test (Ref 5). Factors that have been relsted to the
MCV include speed of travel while hded, speed of travel When
8mPtp I depth of rut produced by 8 single ~666, lose of
producthity due to bogging down, and the time6 of -ding end
UZdO&di!Ig. Nlinimum Mcv V6h86 at which VariollS tppee of pht
c6n Operate effectively have 6&o been predicted end a formula
derived which rslates MCV to bavel speed of motori68d scraper8
and dump trucks.

4.2.2 CompactiOn

Compaction generally follows earthmoving. The disturbed 6ail ie

used in 8 seties of layers 88 fill to form 86rth str~ctiree such
66 embankments. Each layer is compacted after placement with

c0200226.108 9.
 the prime intention of increasing its shear strength. Generally
the maximum bulk density at the pertaining (natural) modsture
content is akaed at. To as&t plant operation the Spedflcation
(Ref 6) tabulates the compactive effort requbed in terms of the
number of passes for different types of plant.
The process of taldng a dIsturbed aoil and compacting it to its
maximum possible density is followed Sn the modaure condition
test. The test therefore broadIy simulates construction
compaction to measure the potential MCV. Consequently on-site
MCV testing allows acceptabilIty for compaction to be determined
and indicates the compactive effort required to produce a state
of near fu& compaction. As a2ready discussed (Section 2) a adI
in a relatively dry state Ww require higher compactive effort to
achieve compaction than one in a relatfvely wet state.. Indeed
once the moieture content drops below a par&&r level it may
not be possible to compact it suffdentlp utzing reasonable
rompactive effort. Conversely de-watering or stockpmng may
be necessary in very wet a&8. Such requfrements can be
predicted by the use of the MCA.
The MCA indicates the potential shear strength (in terms of
MCV) of a 1.5 kg sample pasdng a 20 mm sieve. In edIs
containing a very coarse fraction en fncreaee in the overaIl
ehear strength can be expected after 3ncorporation into an earth
structure such aa an embankment. An increase in overall shear
strength beyond that predicted by the MCV teat can therefore
be expected when using materials such as Boulder Tills -
providing that near fuII compactlon is achieved. It wiH be
necessary to increase the compactive effort due to the effect of
the Iarge boulders, or it may be possible to use material at a
lower MCV than normal.
5. RECOMMENDED PROCEDURES
5.1 Site Investigation
Testing should be carried out on each major variety of aoiI likely to
prove problematical in terms of acceptability. Calibradon lines
should be drawn up for each SOP type. A plot of Slope against .
Intercept wfIl enable the most problematical soils (those with the
highest sensitltity) to be recogx&ed. CaIibratfon Hnea are important
in the characterisation of the relationehip between MCV and moisture
content and can be the baeie of any subsequent ~&tUre condition
tesdng for acoeptabiUty .
Samples taken for tesUng must be representative. BuIk samples
formed by the aggregadon of smaller samples may not reflect the true
properties of the components or the performance of the material
during earthworldng.

MCV tests carried out on samples 88 they are obtsSned during site
investigation will give an indication 88 to the existing acceptabmty
provided that the sample is representative and at itts natural moisture
content. However, such results should be used with cauUon 86
natural moisture contents are IikeIy to vary considerabIy both in the
host soil and in the period between site investigation and contract
earthwordng .

CO200226.108 10.
 DETAIN SAMPIES OF
SOlLlYPEs PmsENT
ON SIT&AM
3llKgoFEAcHnPE

I
I FORMS
MEA 1 l-

PRODUCEPLof DF

FIG 17 . FLOWMART-USEIN SITE WVESTIGAlWN

L-J
TAKE SWPLE

I CDNDUCTMCV TE5t

(FIGS 4 & 5 I I

FIG 18 FLDWCHAW- USE IN E~THWQRKING

 --_-- -

Recommendation8 should be made in the Site investigation

interpretative report regarding the MCV lower limit( 8) for
WceptabWty in the contract. It is important when mtting this
figure to be reabtlc and to allow the m&mum uBe of on-site
materials- 86 well 88 takhg into conslderatlon the type of plant a
competent contractor could be expected to use. Estimates of the
quantities of acceptable/unacceptable materid wiU of cmree depend
on the accuracy of the MCVs at natural moisture content end the
variations occurring between dte investigation and contract working.
Seamnal, cHmatic, local and other possible veriations in weather and
moisture content must therefore be taken 5nto ooneiderntion.

As a general guide an MCV of 8.5 is recommended as the lower Hmlt

of acceptability; a soil having an MCV less than this Hmlt la thus
deemed unacceptable. Specific conditions may however require that
the 8 S tit be lowered or reised margina219. In addition, l3exibUty
to mar-y alter the Hmit on the contract should be allowed for.
This of course would be the responsibility of the Engineer and
should be bELsed on the local situation, the known behaviour of tbe
material and the type of plant proposed and used by the Contractor.
It is important to reaHse that the MCV test indicates the potential
acceptability of materiel in a drained condition. Attempts to conduct
earthmoving in an environment where moisture cannot escape - such
as found in conditions of closed drainage - can fail even though
saturation teats
showed MCVs above the spedfled limit. Natural
moisture in excess of the moisture content at MCV &tit in
contents
W weather materials indicate the need for advanced drainage prior
to earthworklng.

A flowchart of the recommended procedure for site investigation is

given in Fig 17.
5.2 Earthworldng
Diffkulties in earthworking of most sons should be expected when
the MCV drops below the lower limit (6) set for the contract. Soils
having MCVe of equal to or above this Hmlt wilz generally be able to
be moved and compacted aatisfactori2y.
The procedure recommended is to study tbe existing calibration Hne
for the soil tppe and then to conduct single MCV determinations
whenever and wherever a measure of acceptabMty ie required. As
already indicated this can be carried out under site condltlons
within 6 to 10 minutes. The need to refer MCV mt.6 to a
calibration line has heen pointed out in Section 4.1.
FamDiarity with each eoD type condderab2y facilitates the interpretation
end use of MCV test results. Even faster MCV test techniques (2 to
3 mins) are possible (Appendix 1, BBcfIon 6). Such rapid techniques are
not recommended untLz famikrity with the aoil type has been obthetd. It
should also be noted that the rapid technique is approtiate and does not
determine the MCV - only the acceptability or otherwise of the soil.
It is suggested that appropriate &es for the testing of tis during
earthworking could be as foUows: -

CO200226.108 11.
 1. mar to sarthmovtng
2. Dueg earthmoving

3. Pdor to use on haul made

4. During bkf%ldng of haul road8
5. At interval8 on etockpiled material

6. Prh to compacdon - on du m&daI reedy for compactron

7. Rior to 5ll pl8cSmSnt - on P=Viou82Y Compacted 8llrfe8
A flowchart of the recommended procedure dutig aarthworkhg is
~venixaFig18.
6. REFERENCES

1. hZ73OXl8A~ The rapid detkdnadon of the

madsture condition of earthwork
8liBted6I. Dept of the Environment
TRILL Report LR 750,
Crowthome 1976.
2. Parsons A W & The ma&&me condition tert and !ttr
J B Boden potenW appHcatla8 in eerthworks.
Dept of the Environment, Dept of
Transport, TRRL Report SR 522,
Crowthome 1979.
3. Matheson G D Moisture condition triab in Scotland.
TRRL Scottish Branch Working
Paper 1979/l, Wingston 1979.
Matheson G D L PreHminury Guidance for the
hk?lr controlled LntlpducUon of the mcdsture
condition apparatus to Scottish Trunk
Road Projects. TRRL Scottieh Branch
Worldng Paper 1980/Z,
LhiJlg8tOXl 1980.
5. Parsons A W& The effect of eodl conditione on the
P Darley opera- of emthmovlng plant.
Dep8rtment of EnHronmeat
Department of Transport, TRRL
Report LR 1034, CrowthoFne 1982.

6. bptof %-8pOti, SpeciflcaUon for Highway Worke.

Swttish Development Undon 1986 CHM Stationery Offlee).
Depertment; Walsh Of5ce.
Department of the
Envdronment for
Northern Ireland

CO200226.108 12.
 APPENDIX 1

INSTRUCTIONS FOR MOISTURE~CONDITION TESTING

SDD Applications Guide No 1 (Revised 1989)

CO200226.108
APPENDIX 1
INSTRUCTIONS FOR MOISTURE CONDITION TES,TING

1. EQUIPMENT REQUIRED
1 .l A moi6ture condition apparatus and mould 88 described $n
LR 750.
1.2 A drcular ilbre disc, 99 mm diameter and 5 mm thick.
1.3 A 9 mm vernier 6&e, or 8 depth gauge of the 66me accuracy.
1.4 A balance readable to 2.5 kg and accurate to +- 20 g.

1.5 A 20 mm BS test sieve and receker.

1.6 A metal tray (a conven$ent size i.6 600 mm x 500 mm x 80 mm
deep).
1.7 Apparatus for extracting spedmens from the mould.
1.8 FOIXCIB MCAl and MCA2 for recording and plotting results
(Appendix 2 I.

2. CHECKS PRIOR TO TESTING

2.1 Prior to a series oi tests the apparatus should be checked to
BBcertdn that:-
2.2 The height of drop of the rammer is 250 mm.
This cm easily be achieved by laying the apparatus on !tts side and
mesUng the upper cross member on a suitable support 6uch a6 6
6pare sample mould. The retaining pin is removed and the rammer
and the eliding ~1086 member i.6 moved a short distance down 6.Iong
the guide rOd6. The rammer and s3lding cm66 member are then
pulled gently upwards 6long the guide rods until the automatic catch
just rehatses the rammer. The distance between the top mark on the
vernier scale on the rammer guide and the zero meek on the vernier
support rod e&e is then the drop height. The height can be
adjusted by loosening the 6crew chimping the vernier support rod to
the 6tiker 6upport C~BB member and sliding the rod through the
clamp a.6 necess6ry.

2.3 The rammer falls fmely and does not foul the mould during
descent.

2.4 The drop height vernier is securely fastened to the vernier

6Upport rod.

2.5 AU the socket head 6cmw6 on the apparatus 6re Becure.

2.6 The vernier support rod is securely held by the clamp. This
should be checked before each test.

CO200226.108 13.
3. DETERMINATION OF MCV (Form MCAl)
3.1 prvlcedllre
3.1.1 Information on site, d-ate, sample number, soil type and
ties content shall be recorded on form MCAl in the appropriate
plecee.
3.1.2 The 6oU shall be passed through a 20 mm BS mieve,
removing only fndivldual pmtlclee marwr then 20 mm, and a
1.5 kg sample taken. Note the proportion retbed by the
sieve.

3 .I .3 The 1.5 kg sample shaIl be p2aced loosely in a clean

mould (the 6oU may be pushed into the mould if necessary) and
theilbredi.mplacedontopofthemoL
3.1.4 With the sliding cro188 member and rammer held in the
rdwd po6ition by the retaining pin, the mould shall be placed
in the recess on the base of the apparatus and clamped in
po6iuon.
3.1.5 The sliding cross member supporting the rammer shall be
heId steady and the tiaining pin removed. The rammer shall
then be Ioweied gently on to the fIbFe disc and allowed to
penetrate into the mould under its own weight uudl it comes to
rest.

3.1.6 The oounter shall be zeroed.

3.1.7 The height of the drop shatl be set a? 250 mm by moving

the strfker support cross member to give III approtiate zero
(+- 5 mm) on the drop height vernier tit.
3.1.8 The sample shall then be given B blow of the rammer
by raking the 8Hding cross member w!th rammer attached until
the rammer ie released by the automatic catch.
3.1.9 The penetration of the mammer into the mould ehaU be
measured by u&g the vernier male pnnldod and the drop
height vernier *zeroed by adjusting tb mtrlker rapport cmBS
memb6r. The measurement shell bs md egeinst 1 Blow
under the correct rample number on Form MCAl wcH.on 1.

Alternadvelp a depth guage csn be need rad the protrusion of

ramber from the mould measucsd.

3.1.10 The procase #h&I then be repeated with readings of

penetration b&g taken after reelected numbers of blows. and
the drop height vernier re-zeroed 88 neceseery unffl the change
in penetration between B and 4B blows is less than 5 mm. The
results shell be recorded in the appropriate posftione in
Form MCAl section 1,

3.1.11 The rammer attached to the s?iding cross member shall

then be carefully raised and the retaining pin inserted.

CO200226.108 14.
 3.1.12 The mould shall be unclamped from the apparatus, its
base removed and the spedmen extracted.

3 .l. 13 The mould and base of the rammer shall be cleaned

Feadp for further tesdng.
3.1.14 If samples from the fame mfte are tested on the same day
up to 6 test results can be recorded on the same form.
3.2 C8kulauone
3.2.1 The change in penetration between any given number of
blows, B, and 4 time6 that number of blows (eg 1 and 4, 2 and
8, stc) ahall be calculated and reEorded on Form WA1
ssction 1.
3.2.2 The above change in penetration shall be plotted agsinet
the initial number of blows (B) on Form MCAl SecUon 2.
3.2.3 A best-fit Hne shell be drawn through the pofnts.

3.2.4 The intereedon of the best-fit Hne, or in cases where

the 5 mm Iine is not cromed, the steepest possible extrapolation
of this Hne. with the 5 mm line shall be determined.
3.2.5 The MCV is then deiLied to ,the nearest 0.1, as 10 x
Log(B), where B is the number of blows at which the change in
penetration equals 5 mm, 88 read from the best-fit Une. MCV
may be wad directly by projection onto the horizontal a& on
the plot.
3.2.6 Information as to the sample number, MCV determined
end the inferred suitabUity should be summarised on Form MCAl
ecction 3 with any comments.

4. CALIBRATION TESTING (Forms MCAl and MCA23

4.1 Procedure
4.1.1 The site and date shall be recorded on both Form MCAl
and Form MCA2.
4.1.2 Information as to the location of the bulk sample and the
soil type shall be recorded on MCA2 mction 1.
4.1.3 A sample (approx 25kg) of the 6oQ to be tested ehatl be
a& dried.

4.1.4 The sample shaR be pamed ulrough a 20 mm BS test

sieve, remodng only inditidual particles coarmr than 20 mm.
Note the proportion retained by the sieve on form MCA2
sectton 6. With ooheslve boas a mortar and -rubber .pestle may
have to be used to break up the eoil before fdevlng.

4.1.5 At least 4, and preferably 6, 2.5 kg samples of soil shaLZ

be taken. The eamples shall be mixed thoroughly with different
amounta of water to give a suitable range of maieture contents.
The moisture contents should be such BB to give MCVB

CO200226.108 15.
 between3 andSample numbers and estimated
15. mdsture
contents be recorded on Form MCA2 section 1. These
should
eample numbers ahall &so be recorded on Form MCAl sectton 1.
4.1.6
8. Gmaulnr nob (fl.nes < 18%)
For granular mile the 2.5 kg sample ahall be reduced to
1.5 kg and may be tested immediately.
b. Cohedve B&B W#IB > 18%)
For oohedve sails the 2.5 kg sample ehaU be allowed to
I&I la a mealed coatdner for at leaat 24 houra after
mixfng with the calculated amount of water to ensure
uniform moisture disMbuUon. The rample aha then be
passed thtough a 20 mm deve ensu.riag that any
aggregations of day am broken down.
4.3.7 The MCV of each sample shall be determined according to
-
Appendix 1, aecdon 3 using Form MCAl eecUon 1 and 2. A
summary of sampIe aumber and MCV ehould be made on
Fom MCAl se&on 3 and any relevant comments added.
PsrtlcuLer attention should be made to the oaUlty of MCVs as
da&bed ia Section 3.4.3 in the main text.
4.1.8 After each test the mould shall be unclamped from the
apparatus md itts base removed. The specimen ehaD then be
extracted from the mould and placed on a metal tray and the
m&tax= content dete&ned according to BS 1337: 1977 test IA.
Results shall be recorded on Form MCA2 mectlon 2 end the
&ationahip of MCV and true madsture content summarised on
Form MCA2 section 3. At lead 4 and If posdble 6 tests ehtiuld
be carried out for each cdibration tbs.
4.2 CakllIauone
4.2 .l The moi~ture content of each eample
plotted ageinet MCV on Form MCA2 hn
ahall then be
4. The best
a-,
straight line through points lying on the tme part of the
cdlbration ahauld then be &awn.
It is hporbat to note that this may not be the bed straight
lbe through rll the p&ta present. The Hne drawn shall not
be atrapolated outweh the plotted pdats at thi6 aage.

4.2.2 The intercept on the M&ti Content &.a shall then be

estimated by extrapolation or be calculated and recorded on
Form MCA2 mcdoa 5. Any estrapoIsUoa should be clearly
didagdsbble from the cdlbratlon Hna.
4.2.3 The slope of the line ehnU then be deterxlaed and the
aendtitrity calculated end recorded on Form MCA2 section 5.
4.2.4 Relevant comments can be recorded on Form MCA2
Section 6. Additional informdon
the Form.
can be written on the back of
a
CO200226.108 16,
 4.2.5 Form MCA2 shaU be attached to Form MCAl, Form MCA2
Ln front.

5. DETERMINATION OF MCV AFTER SATURATION

5.1 A 2.5 kg sample of the soil passing a 20 mm sieve shaU be
taken.
5.2 The sample shall be placed in a suitable container, water
added, and the sample mixed until excess water is evident after it is
allowed to stand for a short pedod (eg 1 minute).
5.3 An MCV determination on a 1.5 kg samph of the saturated soil
shall then be carried out in accordance with Appenti 1,
eecUon6 3.1.3 to 3.1.13. Water seepage during the testing ehould
be ignored.
5.4 The MCV of the sample shell then be calculated according to

a Appendix 1, BBcfions 3.2.1 to 3.2.5. This is the MCV at maxlmum

moisture content under drained conditions.

6. RAPID CETERMINATION OF ACCEPTABILITY

This method should only be used when familiarity with the eoiI type has
been geined. It does not determine the MCV of the sample.

6 .l The number of blows (B 1 corresponding to the spedfied MCV

limit of acceptability shall be calculated or mad off Form MCAl B
should be rounded up to the nearest integer value.

6.2 The sample shall be prepared according to aecdon 3.3.1 .l of

the mdn text.
6.3 The sample shall be given one blow of the rammer by raising
the cross member with rammer attached untU the rammer is released
by the automatic catch.

a 6.4 The vernier shall be R-zeroed

the decrease in height of the sampIe.
to correct the height of drop for

6.5 Further blows shall be appHed , reset&g the height of drop as

necessary, undo Br blows have accumulated. The penetration of the
rammer into the mould after the initial .Br blows shaII be measured
and recorded.
6.6 The stdker support cross member shall then be adjusted to
give an approximate zero mading on the drop height vernier scale.

6.7 Further blows shaU then be applied until the total reaches 4 x
B, tithout any further adjustment of the striker support crows
member.

6.8 The rammer vernier scale shall be accurately read and the
penetration of the rammer into the mould after 4 x Br blow6
recorded. The difference between the iniUal and flnal readings shti
be calculated. A difference of more than 5 mm indicates that the
6oil is suitable, a difference of lees than 5 mm indicates that it is
unsuitable.

CO200226.108 17.
.

APPENDIX 2

FORMS MCAl AND MCA2

SDD Applications Guide No 1 (Revised 1989)

CO200226.108
I

ivi.c.v. TESTING SITE Form MCA

* -1 l PENETRATION MEASUREMENTS OILTE
------rrrer- .
0

0 128 I I I 1 I 1
192 I
256 I

2. a 1 8 8 l2 SCBR # BLOWS
FHANGE 2 IN PENETRATION PLOTS a2III 24 U u

EVALUATION
 MOISTURE CONDITION TEST
CALIBRATION LINE Form MCA2
Site:
Bulk Location :
Soil Type:
1 SAMPI
I -- F nITAllI #-nIba
Ib c Fines Content:
DATE .~..................~..~..~.
SAMPLE No. -
ESTIMATED
MOISTURE
1CONTENT I I I I
2 MOISTURE CONTENT DETERMINATION (after MCV testing)
CONTAINER No.
CONTAINER MASS

Mass of wet soi I?

container
0
Mass of dry soil +
container
(0)
MOISTURE
CONTENT
M

3 MOISTURE CONDITION VALUES & MOISTURE CONTENTS

MCV lFRoM
..-a I -.1 I 1 I 1 I

4 CALIBRATION LINE

MOISTURE CONDITION VALUE (MCV)

CHARACTERISTKS OF CALIBRATION LINE

INTFRf FPT ~nv+r=rrnl+i-- l
 APPENDIX 3

EXAMPLES

EXAMPLE 1

Calibration test on Sandy SKty Clayey Till

E0201209.118 SDD App~cstions Guide No 1 (Revised 1989)

 M.C.V. TESTING SITE M 876 Form MCA
1 l PENETRATION MEASUREMENTS Mm --4779
-- -*e--w

. CHANGE IN PENETRATION PLOTS

3. EVALUATION
 ,
Form MCI42
MOISTURE CbNDlTlON TEST
I CALIBRATION LINE Site : Location
Bu!k M 8W :6&h cut a 4180
l
1 SAMPLE DETAILS 1
SAMPLE No. f 2 3 4 s
ESTIMATED
MOISTURE 27 % M YSf a t
CONTENT

2 MOISTURE CONTENT DETERMINATION (after MCV testing)

73 74 7s

497 496 496

MOlSTURE CONDITION VALUE (MN)

5 CHARACTERISTICS nF CALIBRATION
C~ LINE
INTERCEPT (extrapolation to MD16axis)
- 0 .?y\ ;&&;--
\--. . 4z between line and MCV axis)
St OPF - ftan
---,
+ 26 Ycv*"l%
Yolstvrm
cam-1
SENSITIVITY (1 /slope)
co**. co-&f. o-999 .
6 C
2
prl
 APPENDIX 3

EXAMPLE 2
CaHbration test on Silty Sandy Till

E0201209.118 SDD Applications Guide No 1 (Revised 1989)

 M.C.V. TESTING SITE A9 Calvine- biy Form MCI
1
r,.. - I PENETRATION MEASUREMENTS
bwrdaq
DATE.ux3A --

2- CHANGE IN PENETRATION PLOTS

3. EVALUATION
YWPLL No. ut.v. *cIcEm-/baAEEEmu FYES CWTEUT I COYWENT
. . -.
4 14.3 1 \
2 42.0 A
a 3 40-8 \ 20%
I m.7 I I
h
*

MOISTURE CONDITION TEST Form MU2

v ,, * CALIBRATION LINE Site : A9 C&k - GYm3 bndavy
Bulk Location : CU. 25 +w
Soil Type: Silry Sa Y nu-
a Fines Content: 20
1 SAMPLE DETAILS $ ATE .I..
d$:k??c8
. .. ... .. . . .. .. .. ...-***
SAMPLE No. 2 3 4 5 6
ESTIMATED
MOISTURE 72 441
52 a 8% 97 0
CONTENT

2 MOISTURE CONTENT DETERMINATION (after MCV testing)

CONTAINER No. 400 404 402 do3 404 c/OS 3

CONTAINER MASS
SOY 498 Sd 502 soli 499
Mass of wet soil?
container
o zo$z 2088 2&f 2w 2130 Z&3
Massof dry soil +
container
(0) Ooi
4908 11994 aw 4993 199s
l MOISTURE
CONTENT

3 MOISTURE CONDITION VALUES & MOISTURE CONTENTS

I
MCV c?l.J 64.3 42.0 m-0 a2 6-B 3.6

iTlzxF.:.3, G-4 % 6-G 70% 8.0% 928

- Ad.Z$

4 CALIBRATION LINE

0 -- 1 2 3 4 S 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
MOISTURE CONDITION VALUE (MCV)

5 CHARACTERISTICS OF CALlBdATlON LINE

INTERCEPT (extrapolation to M% axis) 43-o
-0nabmwsLOCf
SLOPE (tan < between line and MCV axis) - 0 53 Y!izll
0 4- 89 uNvr%YoismJrr cOmcm
SENSITIVITY (l/slope)
#f o* 993
6 COMMENTS ~hcv o~ spm+ 6 ~~~~~~Yu~, w+ryothtion + srra lime.
 APPENDIX 3

EXAMPLE 3

CaIibration test on Sandy TiU under relatively dry conditions

E0201209.118 SDD AppHcations Guide. No 1 (Revised 1989)

I

MOISTURE CONDITION TEST Form MCA2

Site : A9 NIEIM-SLOWD
, . CALIBRATION LINE Bulk Location : C&73+0
Soil Type: Sad,, 71~~
a Fines Content: &
I SAMPLE DETAILS b ATE .~!:.b:..% . .. . .. ..-.
SAMPLE No. q 2 3 5 6
ESTIMATED
MOISTURE I .
CONTENT 5% I% -7 0 87 0 sss

2 MOISTURE CONTENT DETERMINATION (after MCV testing)

A4 AS
SO4 St
==I
2% 1 2449 2439
Mass of dry soil + 1 I
container -
(D) 4998
MO 4994 4996 4989 2004 /
MOISTURE
IONTENT
M co 62 73. 8.2 87f . I
92
J MOISTURE CONDITION VALUES & MOISTURE CONTENTS

4 CALIBRATION LINE

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 10 15 16 17 18
MOISTURE CONDITION VALUE (MCV)

5 CHARAtiERlSTlCS OF CALIBRATION LINE

INTERCEPT (extrapolation to M% axis) 40.8 -
tar-*cm, m- on l h* WIG SLOPE
SLOPE (tan < between line and MCV axis) -0*24_.s.unc
. ENSITIVITY (l/slope) 4-2 Ycvl l uontvn cmmm

+f \
6 COMMENTS A&: \&f&r/ yaia; ~kt;ar k::
 APPENDIX 3

EXAMPLE 4
MCV tests for the assessment of acceptability

E0201209.118 SDD Applications Guide No 1 (Revised 1989)

1

: *

rl IVkV. TESTING
3 ,- 1. PENETRATION MEASUREMENTS WTE --5:4:7$
-- .- wm
.- *- .
a

;I CHANGE IN PENETRATION PLOTS

3. EVALUATION

a
I
64 I
 APPENDIX 3

EXAMPLE 5
MCV test on gmnuhr Till at saturation

E0201209.118 SDD Appbations Guide No 1 (Retieed 1989)

i

M.C.V.TESTING SITE -wTB+sl Form MC

* * 1. PENETRATION MEASUREMENTS ~~&2~,8,?,, .

2. FHANGE 2 8 4 I 8PLOTSl2 Y llwu24OFIMS

IN PENETRATION
a a) 48Y

3. EVALUATION
 M.C.V.TESTING SITE A9 &vi@Wa Form MCA
? ,. -1 l PENETRATION MEASUREMENTS
I 1
rmE.4bA-.,.,
I
44.79e. .
or I I

6 93.0 I I I I
8 9b.3 43.0 1 I I I
32 emA AA.4

--- I I I I I 1 I I I

256 1 I I I I I I I 1 I I I
l CHANGE IN PENETRATION PLOTS

3. EVALUATION
 SCOTTISH DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
CHIEF ROAD ENGINEER

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM SH7/83

SPECIFICATION FOR ROAD AND BRIDGE WORKS: SOIL SUITABILITY

FOR EARTHWORKING - USE OF THE MOISTURE CONDITION APPARATUS

AMENDMENT NO 1

INTRODUCTION
Technical Memorandum SH7/83 introduced the SDD Applications Guide No 1
which set out the procedures for the use and application of the moisture
condition apparatus in testing soil suitability for earthworking. The
Applications Guide No 1 has been revised and replaces the original issued
tith Technical Memorandum SH7 / 83.

AMENDMENTS

1. The new SDD Applications Guide No 1 (Revised 1989) is now

available and shall be used for all trunk road earthworking and sire
investigation contracts from the date of this Amendment.

2. The SDD Applications Guide (Revised 1989) will also be appropriate

for future earthworking and site investigation contracts let under the
Specification for Highway Works 6th Edition.

3. There is one minor text alteration to the attached revised

Applications Guide and the following addendum should be entered:-

Addendum No 1

At 2. PRINCIPLES OF COMPACTION on page 1, hne 6, after soil, add

where in this case optimum moisture content corresponds to bulk density
and not dry density
ENQUIRIES
1. Copies of the SDD Applications Guide No 1 (Revised 1989) cost 22.85
and may be obtained from the Scottish Office Library, Official Publications
Section (Sales), Room 1 i44, New St Andrews House, Edinburgh EHl 3SZ.
2. Technical enquiries should be in writing and addressed to the Chief
Road Engineer, Scottish Development Department, Room 3/62, New St
Andrews House, St James Centre, Edinburgh EHl 3SZI

J INNES
Deputy Chief Engineer
a4 February 1989

GO301909.029

Printed in the UK foi HMSO Demand 296655 C2 6/95