University College of Engineering

Narasaraopet, JNTUK
Department of Civil Engineering

Co-Relationship between California

Bearing Ratio and Index Properties of
Subgrade Soil

Project Supervisor: Project Associates:

L. Vishnu Vardhan Reddy, M. Tech. S. Jhansi Lakshmi (18031A0140)
Department of Civil Engineering A. Bhanu Prakash (18031A0101)
UCEN – JNTUK, Narasaraopet. K. Hemanth Kumar (18031A0123)
B. Raghuram Naidu (18031A0108)
B. Madhu Kumar (18031A0103)
 Table of contents
• Introduction
• Problem definition
• Objectives
• Methodologies
• Sample Locations
• Experiments/Resources
• Conclusion
• References
 Introduction
• Generally, pavement is constructed over the
natural soil in order to support the wheel and
traffic loads as well as to provide a hard,
durable and abrasion resistant surface.
• It is necessary to evaluate the strength of
subgrade soil.
• CBR is one of the most widely used methods
to determine the strength of the soil.
• CBR test is laborious ,costly as it involves
high level technical supervision and quality
control assessment.
• So, for quick assessment of CBR value, it is
required to correlate the CBR value with the
quickly assessable properties of soils.
 Definition of the Problem
• Conducting CBR test to evaluate the
strength of the soil is time consuming and
requires money, which directly or
indirectly affects the duration of any
project.
 Objectives
• To predict Unsoaked CBR values using Single Linear Regression
Analysis by
• Plastic Limit
• Liquid Limit
• Percentage fines
• Optimum Moisture Content
• Maximum Dry Density
• To predict Unsoaked CBR values using Multiple Linear Regression
Analysis by
• Plastic Limit
• Liquid Limit
• Percentage fines
• Optimum Moisture Content
• Maximum Dry Density
 Methodologies
• Artificial Neural Networks
• It is an advanced algorithm to obtain relation between dependent and
independent variables.
• Complex relationships can be obtained with minimum error.
• Requires additional process and duration of network is unknown .
• Mathematical method
• Manual method used to obtain the relation between dependent and
independent variables.
• Involves simple calculations for solving.
• Process becomes complex with increasing of independent variables.
• Regression Analysis
• Single linear regression analysis
• Multiple linear regression analysis
 Methodologies
• Regression Analysis
• Involves identifying relationship between a dependent variable and one
or more independent variables.
• Single linear regression analysis

y = mx + c

y = dependent variable
x = independent variable
m = slope or coefficient
c = intercept
 Methodologies
• Multiple linear regression analysis

y = a0 + a1x1 + a2x2 + a3x3 + ……. + anxn

y = dependent variable
x1 , x2 , x3, ….. , xn = independent variable
a0 = intercept
a1 , a2, a3, …. , an = coefficients
 Experiments
• Grain size analysis
• Plasticity index
• Plastic limit
• Liquid limit
• Light/Heavy Compaction Test
• Maximum Dry Density (MDD)
• Optimum Moisture Content (OMC)
• California bearing ratio Test
• Unsoaked
 Grain Size Analysis
• To determine the percentage of each size of grain that is contained within
a soil sample.
• Used to produce grain size distribution curve.
• Types:
• Sieve Analysis (>75 microns)
• Hydrometer Analysis (<75 microns)
120

96.8 100
100
87.2

80
68.4
[Y VALUE]
56.4
% Finer

60

40 [Y VALUE] 31.8

20 14.6
[Y VALUE]
2.40000000000001
0
0.0015 0.015 0.122
0.15 0.284 0.720 1.5 15
Grain size
 Grain Size Analysis
• To assess the particle size
distribution of a granular material
by allowing the material to pass
through a series of sieves of
progressively smaller mesh size.
• Followed through IS 2720(part
4): 1985 code book.
• Range = 10mm to 0.075mm

% Finer = 100 - (cumulative

% retained)
 Sample 1 (NGO colony)
Sieve No. Mass Retained (g) Cumulative Retained (g) % Cumulative Retained % Finer
10 0 0 0 100
4.75 16 16 3.2 96.8
2 48 64 12.8 87.2
1 94 158 31.6 68.4
0.6 60 218 43.6 56.4
0.3 123 341 68.2 31.8
0.15 86 427 85.4 14.6
0.075 61 488 97.6 2.4
Pan 12 500 100 0

Sample 1
120

Cu = 5.915 100
96.8
Cc = 0.922
100
87.2

80
68.4
[Y VALUE]
% Finer

60 56.4

40
[Y VALUE] 31.8

20 [Y VALUE] 14.6

2.40000000000001
0
0.0015 0.015 0.122
0.15 0.284 0.720
1.5 15

Grain size
 Sample 2 (Islam pet)
Sieve No. Mass Retained (g) Cumulative Retained (g) % Cumulative Retained % Finer
10 0 0 0 100
4.75 31 31 6.2 93.8
2 77 108 21.6 78.4
1 116 224 44.8 55.2
0.6 63 287 57.4 42.6
0.3 94 381 76.2 23.8
0.15 63 444 88.8 11.2
0.075 52 496 99.2 0.8
Pan 4 500 100 0

Sample 2
120

100
Cu = 8.153 100
93.8
Cc = 0.858
78.4
80

[Y VALUE]
% Finer

60 55.2

42.6
40
[Y VALUE]
23.8
20
[Y VALUE] 11.2

0.799999999999997
0
0.0015 0.015 0.15 1.152
1.5 15
0.141 0.374
Grain size
 Sample 3 (ZPHS)
Sieve No. Mass Retained (g) Cumulative Retained (g) % Cumulative Retained % Finer
10 0 0 0 100
4.75 35 35 7 93
2 48 83 16.6 83.4
1 83 166 33.2 66.8
0.6 46 212 42.4 57.6
0.3 118 330 66 34
0.15 96 426 85.2 14.8
0.075 64 490 98 2
Pan 10 500 100 0

Sample 3
120

100
Cu = 5.779 100
93
Cc = 0.841 83.4
80
66.8
[Y VALUE] 57.6
% Finer

60

40 34
[Y VALUE]

20 14.8
[Y VALUE]
2
0
0.0015 0.015 0.15
0.122 0.269 1.5 15
0.704
Grain size
 Sample 4 (Palapadu Road)
Sieve No. Mass Retained (g) Cumulative Retained (g) % Cumulative Retained % Finer
10 0 0 0 100
4.75 27 27 5.4 94.6
2 64 91 18.2 81.8
1 121 212 42.4 57.6
0.6 72 284 56.8 43.2
0.3 127 411 82.2 17.8
0.15 50 461 92.2 7.8
0.075 36 497 99.4 0.6
Pan 3 500 100 0

Sample 4
120

Cu = 5.829
100 94.6
100

Cc = 1.010
81.8
80

[Y VALUE] 57.6
% Finer

60

43.2
40
[Y VALUE]

17.8
20
[Y VALUE] 7.8
0.599999999999994
0 1.067
0.0015 0.015 0.183
0.15 1.5 15
0.444
Grain size
 Sample 5 (VR Ground)
Sieve No. Mass Retained (g) Cumulative Retained (g) % Cumulative Retained % Finer
10 0 0 0 100
4.75 32 32 6.4 93.6
2 82 114 22.8 77.2
1 133 247 49.4 50.6
0.6 58 305 61 39
0.3 94 399 79.8 20.2
0.15 56 455 91 9
0.075 39 494 98.8 1.2
Pan 6 500 100 0

Sample 5
120

Cu = 8.283
100
100
93.6
Cc = 0.942
77.2
80
% Finer

60
50.6

39
40

20.2
20
9
1.2
0
0.0015 0.015 0.15
0.163 0.456 1.5 15
1.353
Grain size
 Sample 6 (Near check post)
Sieve No. Mass Retained (g) Cumulative Retained (g) % Cumulative Retained % Finer
10 0 0 0 100
4.75 113 113 22.6 77.4
2 117 230 46 54
1 129 359 71.8 28.2
0.6 44 403 80.6 19.4
0.3 54 457 91.4 8.6
0.15 26 483 96.6 3.4
0.075 15 498 99.6 0.4
Pan 2 500 100 0

Sample 6
120

Cu = 7.982
100
100

Cc = 1.248
77.4
80
% Finer

60 54

40
28.2
19.4
20
8.59999999999999
3.40000000000001
0.400000000000006
0
0.0015 0.015 0.15 0.339 1.070
1.5 2.705 15

Grain size
 Sample 7 (Near Pedda cheruvu)
Sieve No. Mass Retained (g) Cumulative Retained (g) % Cumulative Retained % Finer
10 0 0 0 100
4.75 35 35 7 93
2 64 99 19.8 80.2
1 113 212 42.4 57.6
0.6 72 284 56.8 43.2
0.3 141 425 85 15
0.15 51 476 95.2 4.8
0.075 22 498 99.6 0.4
Pan 2 500 100 0

Sample 7
120

Cu = 4.710
100
100
93
Cc = 0.874
80.2
80

57.6
% Finer

60

43.2
40

20 15

4.80000000000001
0.400000000000006 1.067
0
0.0015 0.015 0.15 1.5 15
0.226 0.460
Grain size
 Plastic Limit
• Take a sample which is passing through 420 micron IS sieve.
• Add some water and thoroughly mix and make the sample as 3mm
thread.
• If the thread cracks before attaining 3 mm diameter, and add little more
water and repeat the process until it doesn’t crumble.
• The water content at which the 3mm dia. thread begins to crumble is
known as Plastic Limit. It is being done followed through IS2720(part
2): 1973
 Sample 1 (NGO colony)

Plastic Limit
Container Empty Wt. Wet wt. + Container wt. Dry wt. + Container wt. Water Content
S. No. (Avg. of WC)
No. (g) (g) (g) (%)
(%)

1 B1 PL 17.72 20.93 20.15 32.099

2 G2 4 15 17.61 20.7 20.07 25.610

29.588

3 66 17.53 22.5 21.22 34.688

4 22 B 23 18.12 21.42 20.74 25.954

 Sample 2 (Islam pet)

Plastic Limit
Wet wt. + Container Dry wt. + Container
S. No. Container No. Empty Wt. (g) Water Content (%) (Avg. of WC)
wt. (g) wt. (g)
(%)

1 11/C 17.4 20.6 19.9 28.000

2 A9 17.6 21.8 20.85 29.231

30.549

3 B1 18 16.61 22.27 20.89 32.243

4 19 17.95 23.75 22.32 32.723

 Sample 3 (ZPHS)

Plastic Limit
Wet wt. + Container wt. Dry wt. + Container wt. Water Content
S. No. Container No. Empty Wt. (g) (Avg. of WC)
(g) (g) (%)
(%)

1 14 17.28 20.59 20.02 20.803

2 4L 16.46 19.93 19.3 22.183

21.958

3 A4 17.02 20.7 20.01 23.077

4 19 17.96 23.05 22.14 21.770

 Sample 4 (Palapadu Road)

Plastic Limit
S. No. Container No. Empty Wt. (g) Wet wt. + Container wt. Dry wt. + Container wt. Water Content (Avg. of WC)
(g) (g) (%)
(%)

1 B1 PL 17.72 20.93 20.15 32.099

2 G2 4 15 17.61 20.7 20.07 25.610

29.588

3 66 17.53 22.5 21.22 34.688

4 22 B 23 18.12 21.42 20.74 25.954

 Sample 5 (VR Ground)

Plastic Limit
Empty Wt. Wet wt. + Container Dry wt. + Container wt. Water Content
S. No. Container No. (Avg. of WC)
(g) wt. (g) (g) (%)
(%)

1 B1 37 7 16.75 18.54 18.09 33.582

2 5 16.65 18.37 17.96 31.298

29.078

3 14 2 16.93 19 18.62 22.485

4 DO 4 16.96 18.92 18.48 28.947

 Sample 6 (Near check post)

Plastic Limit
Wet wt. + Container Dry wt. + Container Water Content
S. No. Container No. Empty Wt. (g) (Avg. of WC)
wt. (g) wt. (g) (%)
(%)

1 A 12 18 17.17 19.64 19.08 29.319

2 A4 1 17.01 19.58 18.99 29.798

30.828

3 G3 3 16.96 19.45 18.84 32.447

4 B1 18 A6 15.27 17.76 17.16 31.746

 Sample 7 (Near Pedda cheruvu)

Plastic Limit
Container Wet wt. + Container Dry wt. + Container Water Content
S. No. Empty Wt. (g) (Avg. of WC)
No. wt. (g) wt. (g) (%)
(%)

1 2 18.31 19.21 19.02 26.761

2 A7 10 17.92 18.56 18.43 25.490

23.137

3 A9 17.61 18 17.93 21.875

4 G5 18.5 18.95 18.88 18.421

 Liquid Limit
• The water content where the soil
starts to behave as a liquid .
• Liquid Limit is defined as the
water content corresponding to
25 blows.
• IS Sieve 425microns (120gm)
• 2 rev/sec.
• It is being done followed through
IS2720(part 5): 1985
Casagrande Apparatus
 Sample 1 (NGO colony)
S. No. Container No. Empty Wt. (g) No. of blows Wet wt. + Container wt. (g) Dry wt. + Container wt. (g) Water Content (%)

1 A2 18.08 55 48.48 39.13 44.418

2 B1 (37) 16.86 43 38.38 31.49 47.095

3 26 18.25 38 41.25 33.8 47.910

4 5 16.63 18 45.3 35.9 48.780

Liquid Limit = 48.208

50.000

49.000 48.780
f(x) = − 3.2560835743561 ln(x) + 58.6885220969041
R² = 0.690226368281512
[Y VALUE] [Y VALUE]
47.910
48.000
Water Content (%)

47.095
47.000

46.000

45.000
44.418

44.000
1 10 100
25
No. of blows
 Sample 2 (Islam pet)
S. No. Container No. Empty Wt. (g) No. of blows Wet wt. + Container wt. (g) Dry wt. + Container wt. (g) Water Content (%)

1 3 (10) 18.58 48 36.18 30.06 53.310

2 6 (A6) 15.89 38 33.11 26.86 56.974

3 4 (45) 17.04 30 32.54 26.8 58.811

4 2 16.95 21 38.25 30.3 59.551

Liquid Limit = 59.118

60.000 59.551
[Y VALUE] f(x) = − 7.24828843927481 ln(x) + 82.4479994237316
59.118
R² = 0.84206164559164
58.811
59.000

58.000

56.974
Water Content (%)

57.000

56.000

55.000

54.000
53.310

53.000

52.000
1 10 100
25
No. of blows
 Sample 3 (ZPHS)
S. No. Container No. Empty Wt. (g) No. of blows Wet wt. + Container wt. (g) Dry wt. + Container wt. (g) Water Content (%)

1 UCEN SRH (8) 18.1 59 36.54 33.07 23.180

2 B1 (18) 16.58 34 40.8 35.25 29.727

3 4 16.94 27 38 32.86 32.286

4 12 17.16 12 34.34 29.83 35.596

Liquid Limit = 31.166

38.000

35.596
f(x) = − 7.60248432851995 ln(x) + 55.6363455794156
36.000
R² = 0.913644312917008
34.000
32.286
[Y
32.000 VALUE]
Water Content (%)

29.727
30.000

28.000

26.000

24.000 23.180

22.000

20.000
1 10 100
25
No. of blows
 Sample 4 (Palapadu Road)
S. No. Container No. Empty Wt. (g) No. of blows Wet wt. + Container wt. (g) Dry wt. + Container wt. (g) Water Content (%)

1 B1 4 17.99 47 44.57 36.48 43.753

2 2 18.33 27 41.21 33.8 47.899

3 B1 44 10 16.32 21 41.15 32.96 49.219

4 A7 15.07 10 42.16 33.14 49.917

Liquid Limit = 47.329

51.000
f(x) = − 3.85617683823056 ln(x) + 59.7409628392384
49.917
R² = 0.806015032023478
50.000
49.219
49.000

47.899
Water Content (%)

48.000
[Y VALUE]
47.000

46.000

45.000

44.000 43.753

43.000
1 10 100
25
No. of blows
 Sample 5 (VR Ground)
S. No. Container No. Empty Wt. (g) No. of blows Wet wt. + Container wt. (g) Dry wt. + Container wt. (g) Water Content (%)

1 26 28 18.26 53 31.19 28.3 28.785

2 UCEN SRH 8 18.11 49 32.79 29.14 33.092

3 14 17.25 29 33.78 28.21 50.821

4 4 L 12% 16.44 13 33.72 27.51 56.098

Liquid Limit = 46.595

60.000
56.098
f(x) = − 19.1210793948071 ln(x) + 108.139540223754
R² = 0.865831178370644
55.000
50.821

[Y
50.000 VALUE]
Water Content (%)

45.000

40.000

35.000 33.092

30.000 28.785

25.000

20.000
1 10 25 100

No. of blows
 Sample 6 (Near check post)
S. No. Container No. Empty Wt. (g) No. of blows Wet wt. + Container wt. (g) Dry wt. + Container wt. (g) Water Content (%)

1 B1 23 18.11 47 31.73 27.5 45.048

2 B1 PL 17.71 39 35.7 29.46 53.106

3 B1 44 16.31 28 31.06 25.68 57.417

4 G2 17.58 17 38.56 30.68 60.153

Liquid Limit = 56.614

65.000

60.153
f(x) = − 13.3787375299701 ln(x) + 99.6834296039401
60.000 R² = 0.818272441318484
57.417
[Y VALUE]
Water Content(%)

55.000
53.106

50.000

45.048
45.000

40.000
1 10 100
25
No. of blows
 Sample 7 (Near Pedda cheruvu)
S. No. Container No. Empty Wt. (g) No. of blows Wet wt. + Container wt. (g) Dry wt. + Container wt. (g) Water Content (%)

1 A11 3 17.72 59 32.32 28.11 40.520

2 A7 A9 16.16 38 34.95 27.94 59.508

3 B1 4 17.99 25 34.94 28.4 62.824

4 6B 17.53 15 36.28 28.86 65.490

Liquid Limit = 60.348

70.000
65.490
f(x) = − 17.0487000688711 ln(x) + 115.230160121607
[Y VALUE]
65.000 R² = 0.777392663370442
62.824
59.508
60.000

55.000
Water Content(%)

50.000

45.000
40.520
40.000

35.000

30.000

25.000

20.000
1 10 100
25
No. of blows
 Compaction / Proctor test
• It is used to determine the
Optimum Moisture Content at
which given soil becomes most
dense and achieve its Maximum
Dry Density.
• It is being done followed through
IS2720(part 7): 1985
• Types:
• Light compaction test
• Heavy compaction test
 Light Compaction Test
• Weight of hammer: 2.5kg
• Height of free fall: 305mm
• No. of layers: 3
• No. of blows: 25 per layer
• Mould:
• Internal Dia: 100mm
• Height: 127.3mm + 60mm
• Volume:1000cc
 Heavy Compaction Test
• Weight of hammer: 4.5kg
• Height of free fall: 457mm
• No. of layers: 5
• No. of blows: 25 per layer
• Mould:
• Internal Dia: 150mm
• Height: 127.3mm + 60mm
• Volume: 2250cc
 Sample 1 (NGO colony)
Mass of soil + mould Moist unit weight
SI. No. Water Content (%) Mass of soil (kg) Dry unit weight (kNm-3)
(kg) (kNm-3)

1 6.307 6.081 1.639 16.079 15.125

2 10.255 6.268 1.826 17.913 16.247

3 14.824 6.421 1.979 19.414 16.908

4 18.829 6.456 2.014 19.757 16.627

5 22.619 6.407 1.965 19.277 15.721

6 27.108 6.345 1.903 18.668 14.687

Sample 1
17.500
MDD = 16.925 kN/m3
17.000[Y VALUE] 16.908 OMC = 15.55 %
16.627
Dry unit weight (kNm-3)

16.500
16.247

16.000
15.721

15.500
15.125

15.000
14.687
15.55
14.500
0.000 5.000 10.000 15.000 20.000 25.000 30.000

Water Content (%)

 Sample 2 (Islam pet)
Moist unit weight
SI. No. Water Content (%) Mass of soil + mould (kg) Mass of soil (kg) Dry unit weight (kNm-3)
(kNm-3)

1 5.540 11.071 3.944 17.196 16.293

2 8.375 11.494 4.367 19.040 17.569

3 11.256 11.86 4.733 20.636 18.548

4 16.168 11.854 4.727 20.610 17.741

5 16.846 11.69 4.563 19.895 17.026

Sample 2
19.000
MDD = 18.55 kNm-3
[Y VALUE] 18.548 OMC = 11.26 %
18.500
Dry unit weight (kNm-3)

18.000
17.741
17.569
17.500

17.026
17.000

16.500 16.293

11.26
16.000
0.000 2.000 4.000 6.000 8.000 10.000 12.000 14.000 16.000 18.000

Water Content (%)

 Sample 3 (ZPHS)
Mass of soil + mould Moist unit weight
SI. No. Water Content (%) Mass of soil (kg) Dry unit weight (kNm-3)
(kg) (kNm-3)
1 8.888 6.230 1.788 17.540 16.108

2 10.354 6.403 1.961 19.237 17.432

3 12.528 6.548 2.106 20.660 18.360

4 16.199 6.520 2.078 20.385 17.543

5 21.122 6.432 1.990 19.522 16.117

Sample 3
19.000 MDD = 18.36 kNm-3
OMC = 12.528 %
[Y
18.500 VALUE] 18.360

18.000
Dry unit weight (kNm-3)

17.543
17.432
17.500

17.000

16.500
16.108 16.117
16.000

15.500
0.000 5.000 10.000 12.528 15.000 20.000 25.000

Water Content (%)

 Sample 4 (Palapadu Road)
Water Content Moist unit weight
SI. No. Mass of soil + mould (kg) Mass of soil (kg) Dry unit weight (kNm-3)
(%) (kNm-3)
1 6.582 6.225 1.783 17.491 16.411

2 11.102 6.374 1.932 18.953 17.059

3 14.744 6.539 2.097 20.572 17.928

4 17.031 6.464 2.022 19.836 16.949

5 19.460 6.385 1.943 19.061 15.956

Sample 4
18.500 MDD = 17.928 kNm-3
OMC = 14.744 %
[Y VALUE]
18.000
17.928
Dry unit weight (kNm-3)

17.500

17.059
16.949
17.000

16.500 16.411

15.956
16.000

15.500
14.744
0.000 5.000 10.000 15.000 20.000 25.000

Water Content (%)

 Sample 5 (VR Ground)
SI. No. Water Content Mass of soil + mould Mass of soil (kg) Moist unit weight (kNm-3) Dry unit weight (kNm-3)
(%) (kg)
1 8.675 6.010 1.568 15.382 14.154

2 12.945 6.142 1.700 16.677 14.766

3 18.222 6.289 1.847 18.119 15.326

4 21.507 6.339 1.897 18.610 15.316

5 24.882 6.344 1.902 18.659 14.941

6 25.864 6.309 1.867 18.315 14.552

7 31.465 6.254 1.812 17.776 13.521

Sample 5
16.000
MDD = 15.38 kNm-3
OMC = 19.7 %
[Y VALUE]
15.500 15.326 15.316

14.941
Dry unit weight (kNm-3)

15.000
14.766
14.552
14.500
14.154

14.000

13.521
13.500

19.7
13.000
0.000 5.000 10.000 15.000 20.000 25.000 30.000 35.000
Water Content (%)
 Sample 6 (Near check post)
SI. No. Water Content (%) Mass of soil + mould (kg) Mass of soil (kg) Moist unit weight Dry unit weight (kNm-3)
(kNm-3)
1 7.235 6.052 1.61 15.794 14.729

2 12.638 6.223 1.781 17.472 15.511

3 15.093 6.301 1.859 18.237 15.845

4 19.668 6.44 1.998 19.600 16.379

5 26.720 6.42 1.978 19.404 15.313

6 28.222 6.342 1.9 18.639 14.537

Sample 6
17.000
MDD = 16.385 kNm-3
OMC = 19.15 %
16.500[Y VALUE] 16.379
Dry unit weight (kNm-3)

16.000 15.845

15.511
15.500 15.313

15.000
14.729
14.537
14.500

19.15
14.000
0.000 5.000 10.000 15.000 20.000 25.000 30.000

Water Content (%)

 Sample 7 (Near Pedda cheruvu)
Moist unit weight
SI. No. Water Content (%) Mass of soil + mould (kg) Mass of soil (kg) Dry unit weight (kNm-3)
(kNm-3)
1 7.915 6.069 1.627 15.961 14.790

2 13.404 6.246 1.804 17.697 15.605

3 17.288 6.389 1.947 19.100 16.285

4 21.632 6.43 1.988 19.502 16.034

5 26.939 6.332 1.89 18.541 14.606

6 30.953 6.289 1.847 18.119 13.836

Sample 7
16.500
MDD = 16.3 kNm-3
[Y VALUE] 16.285
16.300 OMC = 18 %
16.100 16.034

15.900
Dry unit weight (kNm-3)

15.700 15.605

15.500

15.300

15.100

14.900 14.790

14.700 14.606
18
14.500
0.000 5.000 10.000 15.000 20.000 25.000 30.000 35.000

Water Content (%)

 CBR Test
• The CBR is the ratio of the bearing load that penetrates a material to a
specific depth compared with the load giving the same penetration into
crushed stone.
• Measure of strength of the subgrade.
• Followed code book IS 2720(part 16): 1979
• CBR = p/ps. 100%
• p =measured pressure for site soils
• ps =pressure to achieve equal penetration on standard crushed stone
• Types of CBR Tests:
• Unsoaked CBR test.
• Soaked CBR test.
Unsoaked CBR Test:
• CBR test apparatus with min. capacity of 5000kg with a penetration rate
of 1.25mm/minute.
• Surcharge weight: 5kg
• Weight of hammer: 4.5kg
• Height of free fall: 457mm
• No. of layers: 3
• No. of blows: 25 per layer
• Diameter of the plunger: 50mm
• Diameter of the spacer disc: 148.5mm
• Mould dimensions:
• Internal Dia: 150mm
• Height: 127.3mm + 60mm
• Volume: 2250cc
Unsoaked CBR Test:

• Soil sample passing through 20mm sieve.

• Water content is taken as the optimum moisture content of the taken
sample.
SAMPLE NO.1
TRAIL 1
SI. No. Penetration(mm) Total load(kg)
1 0 0
2 0.5 88.2
3 1 105.84
4 1.5 111.72
5 2 123.48
6 2.5 129.36
7 3 135.24
8 3.5 141.12
9 4 147
10 4.5 152.88
11 5 158.76
12 5.5 164.64
13 6 170.52
14 6.5 170.52
15 7 176.4
 200.000

176.400
180.000
170.520 170.520
164.640
158.760
160.000 152.880
147.000
141.120
140.000 135.240
[Y VALUE] 129.360
123.480
120.000 111.720
105.840

100.000
Load

88.200

80.000

60.000

40.000

20.000

0.000
0.000
0 1 2 2.5 3 4 5 6 7 8

Penetration

CBR @ 2.5 mm = (129.36/1370)*100 = 9.442

CBR @ 5 mm = (158.76/2055)*100 = 7.726
SAMPLE NO.1
TRAIL 2

SI. No. Penetration(mm) Total load(kg)

1 0 0
2 0.5 76.44
3 1 94.08
4 1.5 99.96
5 2 111.72
6 2.5 117.6
7 3 123.48
8 3.5 129.36
9 4 135.24
10 4.5 141.12
11 5 147
12 5.5 152.88
13 6 158.76
14 6.5 158.76
15 7 164.64
 200.000

176.400
180.000 170.520 170.520
164.640
158.760
160.000 152.880
147.000
141.120
135.240
140.000 [Y VALUE] 129.360
123.480
120.000 111.720
105.840

100.000
Load

88.200

80.000

60.000

40.000

20.000

0.000
0.000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
2.5
Penetration

CBR @ 2.5 mm = (117.6/1370)*100 = 8.584

CBR @ 5 mm = (147/2055)*100 = 7.153

Average CBR = (9.442+8.584)/2 = 9.013

SAMPLE NO.2
TRAIL 1

SI. No. Penetration(mm) Total load (kg)

1 0 0
2 0.5 35.28
3 1 41.16
4 1.5 47.04
5 2 52.92
6 2.5 52.92
7 3 64.68
8 3.5 64.68
9 4 70.56
10 4.5 70.56
11 5 76.44
12 5.5 76.44
13 6 84.672
14 6.5 88.895
15 7 93.118
 100.000
93.118
88.895
90.000
84.672

80.000 76.440 76.440

70.560 70.560
70.000
64.680 64.680

60.000 [Y VALUE]
52.920 52.920
50.000 47.040
Load

41.160
40.000 35.280

30.000

20.000

10.000
0.000
0.000
0 1 2 2.5 3 4 5 6 7 8

Penetration

CBR @ 2.5 mm = (52.92/1370)*100 = 3.863

CBR @ 5 mm = (76.44/2055)*100 = 3.720
SAMPLE NO.2
TRAIL 2

SI. No. Penetration(mm) Total load (kg)

1 0 0
2 0.5 47.04
3 1 52.92
4 1.5 58.8
5 2 64.68
6 2.5 64.68
7 3 76.44
8 3.5 76.44
9 4 82.32
10 4.5 82.32
11 5 88.2
12 5.5 88.2
13 6 96.432
14 6.5 100.655
15 7 104.878
 120.000

104.878
100.655
100.000 96.432
88.200 88.200
82.320 82.320
80.000 76.440 76.440
[Y VALUE]
64.680 64.680
58.800
60.000
Load

52.920
47.040

40.000

20.000

0.000
0.000
0 1 2 2.5 3 4 5 6 7 8

Penetration

CBR @ 2.5 mm = (64.68/1370)*100 = 4.721

CBR @ 5 mm = (88.2/2055)*100 = 4.292

Average CBR = (3.862+4.721)/2 = 4.292

SAMPLE NO.3
TRAIL 1

SI. No. Penetration(mm) Total load(kg)

1 0 0
2 0.5 70.56
3 1 76.44
4 1.5 88.2
5 2 94.08
6 2.5 105.84
7 3 111.72
8 3.5 117.6
9 4 123.48
10 4.5 129.36
11 5 135.24
12 5.5 152.88
13 6 170.52
14 6.5 182.28
15 7 188.16
 200.000
188.160
182.280
180.000 170.520

160.000 152.880

140.000 135.240
129.360
123.480
117.600
120.000 [Y VALUE] 111.720
105.840
100.000 94.080
Load

88.200

80.000 76.440
70.560

60.000

40.000

20.000
0.000
0.000
0 1 2 2.5 3 4 5 6 7 8

Penetration

CBR @ 2.5 mm = (105.84/1370)*100 = 7.726

CBR @ 5 mm = (135.24/2055)*100 = 6.581
SAMPLE NO.3
TRAIL 2

SI. No. Penetration(mm) Total load(kg)

1 0 0
2 0.5 70.56
3 1 76.44
4 1.5 88.2
5 2 94.08
6 2.5 105.84
7 3 111.72
8 3.5 117.6
9 4 123.48
10 4.5 129.36
11 5 135.24
12 5.5 152.88
13 6 170.52
14 6.5 182.28
15 7 188.16
 250.000

199.920
200.000 194.040
182.280
164.640
147.000
150.000 141.120
135.240
129.360
[Y VALUE] 123.480
117.600
Load

105.840
99.960
100.000 88.200
82.320

50.000

0.000
0.000
0 1 2 2.5 3 4 5 6 7 8

Penetration

CBR @ 2.5 mm = (105.84/1370)*100 = 8.584

CBR @ 5 mm = (135.24/2055)*100 = 7.153

Average CBR = (7.726+8.584)/2 = 8.155

SAMPLE NO.4
TRAIL 1
SI. No. Penetration(mm) Total load(kg)

1 0 0

2 0.5 41.16

3 1 52.92

4 1.5 70.56

5 2 76.44

6 2.5 78.38

7 3 82.32

8 3.5 82.32

9 4 82.32

10 4.5 88.2

11 5 88.2

12 5.5 94.08

13 6 94.08

14 6.5 94.08

15 7 99.96
 120.000

99.960
100.000
94.080 94.080 94.080
88.200 88.200
82.320 82.320 82.320
[Y VALUE]
80.000 76.440 78.380
70.560

60.000
Load

52.920

41.160
40.000

20.000

0.000
0.000
0 1 2 2.5 3 4 5 6 7 8

Penetration

CBR @ 2.5 mm = (78.38/1370)*100 = 5.721

CBR @ 5 mm = (88.2/2055)*100 = 4.292
SAMPLE NO.4
TRAIL 2
SI. No. Penetration(mm) Total load (kg)

1 0 0.00

2 0.5 29.40

3 1 41.16

4 1.5 58.80

5 2 64.68

6 2.5 66.62

7 3 70.56

8 3.5 70.56

9 4 70.56

10 4.5 76.44

11 5 76.44

12 5.5 82.32

13 6 82.32

14 6.5 82.32

15 7 88.20
 100.000

90.000 88.200
82.320 82.320 82.320
80.000 76.440 76.440
70.560 70.560 70.560
70.000 [Y VALUE] 66.620
64.680
58.800
60.000

50.000
Load

41.160
40.000
29.400
30.000

20.000

10.000
0.000
0.000
0 1 2 2.5 3 4 5 6 7 8

Penetration

CBR @ 2.5 mm = (66.62/1370)*100 = 4.863

CBR @ 5 mm = (76.44/2055)*100 = 3.720

Average CBR = (5.721+4.863)/2 = 5.292

SAMPLE NO.5
TRAIL 1
SI. No. Penetration(mm) Total load(kg)

1 0 0

2 0.5 14.700

3 1 26.460

4 1.5 38.220

5 2 44.100

6 2.5 46.040

7 3 46.452

8 3.5 47.040

9 4 47.040

10 4.5 49.980

11 5 49.980

12 5.5 49.980

13 6 49.980

14 6.5 49.980

15 7 55.860
 60.000
55.860

49.980 49.980 49.980 49.980 49.980

50.000 [Y VALUE]
46.040 46.452 47.040 47.040
44.100

40.000 38.220

30.000
Load

26.460

20.000
14.700

10.000

0.000
0.000
0 1 2 2.5 3 4 5 6 7 8

Penetration

CBR @ 2.5 mm = (46.04/1370)*100 = 3.361

CBR @ 5 mm = (49.98/2055)*100 = 2.432
SAMPLE NO.5
TRAIL 2

SI. No. Penetration(mm) Total load(kg)

1 0 0

2 0.5 32.340

3 1 44.100
4 1.5 55.860

5 2 61.740

6 2.5 63.680
7 3 64.092
8 3.5 64.680

9 4 64.680

10 4.5 67.620
11 5 67.620
12 5.5 67.620
13 6 67.620

14 6.5 67.620

15 7 73.500
 80.000
73.500

70.000 67.620 67.620 67.620 67.620 67.620

[Y VALUE] 63.680 64.092 64.680 64.680
61.740
60.000 55.860

50.000
44.100

40.000
Load

32.340
30.000

20.000

10.000

0.000
0.000
0 1 2 2.5 3 4 5 6 7 8

Penetration

CBR @ 2.5 mm = (63.68/1370)*100 = 4.648

CBR @ 5 mm = (67.62/2055)*100= 3.291

Average CBR = (3.361+4.648)/2 = 4.004

SAMPLE NO.6
TRAIL 1
SI. No. Penetration(mm) Total load(kg)

1 0 0

2 0.5 32.34

3 1 38.22

4 1.5 49.98

5 2 49.98

6 2.5 61.74

7 3 67.62

8 3.5 67.62

9 4 73.5

10 4.5 79.38

11 5 85.26

12 5.5 85.26

13 6 91.14

14 6.5 91.14

15 7 97.02
 120.000

100.000 97.020
91.140 91.140
85.260 85.260
79.380
80.000
73.500
[Y VALUE] 67.620 67.620
61.740
60.000
Load

49.980 49.980

38.220
40.000
32.340

20.000

0.000
0.000
0 1 2 2.5 3 4 5 6 7 8

Penetration

CBR @ 2.5 mm = (61.74/1370)*100 = 4.508

CBR @ 5 mm = (85.26/2055)*100 = 4.149
SAMPLE NO.6
TRAIL 2
SI. No. Penetration(mm) Total load(kg)

1 0 0

2 0.5 49.98

3 1 55.86

4 1.5 67.62

5 2 67.62

6 2.5 79.38

7 3 85.26

8 3.5 85.26

9 4 91.14

10 4.5 97.02

11 5 102.9

12 5.5 102.9

13 6 108.78

14 6.5 108.78

15 7 114.66
 140.000

120.000 114.660
108.780108.780
102.900102.900
100.000 97.020
91.140
85.260 85.260
[Y VALUE] 79.380
80.000
67.620 67.620
Load

60.000 55.860
49.980

40.000

20.000

0.000
0.000
0 1 2 2.5 3 4 5 6 7 8

Penetration

CBR @ 2.5 mm = (79.38/1370)*100 = 5.794

CBR @ 5 mm = (102.9/2055)*100 = 5.007
 
Average CBR = (4.508+5.794)/2 = 5.150
SAMPLE NO. 7
TRAIL 1

SI. No. Penetration(mm) Total load(kg)

1 0 0

2 0.5 108.78

3 1 120.54

4 1.5 132.3

5 2 144.06

6 2.5 149.94

7 3 155.82

8 3.5 167.58

9 4 167.58

10 4.5 173.46

11 5 179.34

12 5.5 185.22

13 6 191.1

14 6.5 191.1

15 7 196.98
 250.000

196.980
200.000 191.100191.100
185.220
179.340
173.460
167.580167.580
[Y VALUE] 155.820
149.940
150.000 144.060
132.300
120.540
Load

108.780
100.000

50.000

0.000
0.000
0 1 2 2.5 3 4 5 6 7 8

Penetration

CBR @ 2.5 mm = (149.94/1370)*100 = 10.495

CBR @ 5 mm = (179.34/2055)*100 = 8.727
SAMPLE NO.7
TRAIL 2
SI. No. Penetration(mm) Total load(kg)

1 0 0

2 0.5 126.42

3 1 138.18

4 1.5 149.94

5 2 161.7

6 2.5 167.58

7 3 173.46

8 3.5 185.22

9 4 185.22

10 4.5 191.1

11 5 196.98

12 5.5 202.86

13 6 208.74

14 6.5 208.74

15 7 214.62
 250.000

214.620
208.740208.740
202.860
196.980
200.000 191.100
185.220185.220
[Y VALUE] 173.460
167.580
161.700
149.940
150.000 138.180
126.420
Load

100.000

50.000

0.000
0.000
0 1 2 2.5 3 4 5 6 7 8

Penetration

CBR @ 2.5 mm = (167.58/1370)*100 = 12.232

CBR @ 5 mm = (196.98/2055)*100 = 9.585

Average CBR = (10.495+12.232)/2 = 11.588

 Results
Sample No. Cu Cc Plastic Limit (%) Liquid Limit (%) MDD (KNm-3) OMC (%) CBR(%)

1 5.915 0.922 29.588 48.208 16.925 15.55 9.013

2 8.153 0.858 30.549 59.118 18.55 11.26 4.292

3 5.779 0.841 21.958 31.166 18.36 12.528 8.155

4 5.829 1.01 29.588 47.329 17.928 14.744 5.292

5 8.283 0.942 29.078 46.595 15.38 19.7 4.004

6 7.982 1.248 30.828 56.614 16.385 19.15 5.150

7 4.71 0.874 23.137 60.348 16.3 18 11.588

SIMPLE LINEAR REGRESSION
• For CBR and %finer
• For CBR and plastic limit
• For CBR and plasticity index
• For CBR and maximum dry density
• For CBR and optimum moisture content
CBR with %finer
CBR=18.248-1.72(%F) R2 = 0.7545
14.000

12.000

10.000

8.000
CBR (%)

6.000

4.000

2.000

0.000
4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5
% Finer
CBR with plastic limit
CBR=22.12-0.5513(PL) R2 = 0.5024
14.000

12.000

10.000

8.000
CBR (%)

6.000

4.000

2.000

0.000
20 22 24 26 28 30 32
Plastic Limit (%)
CBR with plasticity index
CBR=4.8372+0.0882(PI) R2 = 0.08
14.000

12.000

10.000

8.000
CBR (%)

6.000

4.000

2.000

0.000
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
PI
CBR with MDD
CBR=9.6095-0.165(MDD) R2 =0.0048
14.000

12.000

10.000

8.000
CBR (%)

6.000

4.000

2.000

0.000
15 15.5 16 16.5 17 17.5 18 18.5 19
MDD (kNm-3)
CBR with OMC
CBR=6.2632+0.0329(OMC) R2=0.0014
14.000

12.000

10.000

8.000
CBR (%)

6.000

4.000

2.000

0.000
10 12 14 16 18 20 22
OMC (%)
Equations from Multiple Linear Regression
Analysis
MODEL NO. Correlation/Model R2
1 CBR = 20.994-1.426(%F)- 0.780
0.169(PL)
2 CBR = 16.25-1.786(%F) 0.783
+0.049(LL)
3 CBR = 16.473-1.692(%F) 0.808
+0.072(PI)
4 CBR = 27.587-1.79(%F)- 0.800
0.518(MDD)
5 CBR = 16.397-1.759(%F) 0.777
+0.133(OMC)
6 CBR = 20.323-0.673(PL) 0.613
+0.104(LL)
7 CBR = 20.323-0.569(PL) 0.613
+0.104(PI)
8 CBR = 28.512-0.564(PL)- 0.524
0.353(MDD)
9 CBR = 20.673-0.564(PL) 0.519
+0.114(OMC)
10 CBR = 20.323-0.569(LL) 0.613
+0.673(PI)
11 CBR = 5.292+0.091(PI)-0.033(OMC) 0.081

12 CBR = 19.669-1.322(%F)-0.292(PL)+0.081(LL) 0.846

13 CBR = 19.669-1.322(%F)-0.211(LL)+0.292(PI) 0.846

14 CBR = 23.954-1.751(%F)+0.058(PI)-0.396(MDD) 0.832

15 CBR = 66.679-1.831(%F)-2.198(MDD)-0.635(OMC) 0.839

16 CBR = 19.669-1.322(%F)-0.211(PL)+0.081(PI) 0.846

17 CBR = 30.29-1.498(%F)-0.168(PL)-0.517(MDD) 0.825

18 CBR = 19.181-1.451(%F)-0.178(PL)+0.141(OMC) 0.805

19 CBR = 24.777-1.828(%F)+0.036(LL)-0.444(MDD) 0.815

20 CBR = 15.199-1.804(%F)+0.04(LL)+0.101(OMC) 0.795

21 CBR = 15.492-1.72(%F)+0.064(PI)+0.085(OMC) 0.816

22 CBR = 23.366-0.574(PL)+0.099(PI)-0.163(MDD) 0.617

23 CBR = 36.748-0.561(PL)-0.712(MDD)-0.137(OMC) 0.526

24 CBR = 23.366-0.673(PL)+0.099(LL)-0.163(MDD) 0.617

25 CBR = 19.842-0.674(PL)+0.1(LL)+0.043(OMC) 0.615

26 CBR = 19.842-0.573(PL)+0.1(PI)+0.043(OMC) 0.615

27 CBR = 23.366-0.574(LL)+0.673(PI)-0.163(MDD) 0.617

28 CBR = 19.842-0.573(LL)+0.674(PI)+0.043(OMC) 0.615

29 CBR = 33.917-0.57(LL)+0.67(PI)-0.623(MDD)-0.176(OMC) 0.620

30 CBR = 18.68-1.348(%F)-0.286(PL)+0.073(LL)+0.088(OMC) 0.855

31 CBR = 26.612-1.391(%F)-0.272(PL)+0.068(LL)-0.374(MDD) 0.868

32 CBR = 63.635-1.602(%F)-0.129(PL)-1.977(MDD)-0.552(OMC) 0.853

33 CBR = 65.889-1.878(%F)+0.041(LL)-2.217(MDD)-0.675(OMC) 0.859

34 CBR = 26.612-1.391(%F)-0.204(LL)+0.272(PI)-0.374(MDD) 0.868

35 CBR = 18.68-1.348(%F)-0.213(LL)+0.286(PI)+0.088(OMC) 0.855

36 CBR = 59.898-1.494(%F)-0.233(PL)+0.068(LL)-1.831(MDD)- 0.896

0.551(OMC)
Comparison of actual CBR values with predicted CBR
values

Sample No. Actual CBR Predicted Difference % Error

CBR
1 9.013 7.887 1.126 12.489

2 4.292 4.450 0.158 3.686

3 8.155 7.747 0.408 5.001

4 5.292 6.564 1.272 24.031

5 4.004 4.901 0.897 22.403

6 5.150 4.087 1.063 20.638

7 11.588 11.811 0.223 1.922

Graphs showing the comparison

14.000

Sample 7
12.000

10.000

Sample 1
Predicted CBR

8.000
Sample 4 Sample 3
6.000
Sample 5

4.000
Sample 6
Sample 2
2.000

0.000
3.000 4.000 5.000 6.000 7.000 8.000 9.000 10.000 11.000 12.000 13.000
Actual CBR
Graphs showing the comparison

14.000

12.000

10.000

8.000
CBR

Actual CBR
6.000
Predicted CBR

4.000

2.000

0.000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Sample No.
 CONCLUSIONS

• The correlation of CBR with %Finer by utilizing SLRA approach gives a good
relationship with R2=0.7545, CBR=18.248-1.72(%F).

• CBR value provides a relationship with MDD and OMC through SLRA with
coefficient of determination R2values 0.0048 and 0.0014 respectively, which are
not suitable.

• The correlation of CBR with PL, LL, MDD and OMC by utilizing MLRA
approach gives a good relationship with R2 = 0.896,

CBR=59.898-1.494(%F)-0.233(PL)+0.068(LL)-1.831(MDD)-0.551(OMC).

• The values are largely dependent on % Finer, OMC, Plastic Limit.

 References
• Faisal Iqbal, Aneel Kumar, Ali Murtaza., “Co-Relationship between California
Bearing Ratio and Index Properties of Jamshoro soil” , Mehran University Research
Journal of Engineering and Technology, Mehran University of Engineering and
Technology, Jamshoro, Pakistan, 2018.
• Okon Bassey Bassey, Imoh Christopher Attah, Edidiong Eseme Ambrose, Roland
Kufre Etim., “Correlation between CBR Values and Index Properties of Soils: A
Case Study of Ibiono, Oron and Onna in Akwa Ibom State” , Department of Civil
Engineering, Akwa Ibom State University, Ikot Akpaden, Nigeria, 2017.
• Ravichandra, Shivakumar, Vinaykumar, Md. Khalid, Basavaraj., “PREDICTION OF
CBR VALUE BY USING INDEX PROPERTIES OF SOIL” , Civil Department
BITM Ballari, Karnataka, 2019.
• Z. U. Rehman, U. Khalid, K. Farooq, H. Mujtaba., “Prediction of CBR Value from
Index Properties of different Soils” , Civil Engineering Department, University
College of Engineering & Technology, University of Sargodha, Pakistan, 2017.
• Yimam Mohammed, A.Paulmakesh, BereketAdamasu, Salihashukri., “Relationship
between California Bearing Ratio and Other Geotechnical Properties of subgrade
Soils” , Department of Civil Engineering, WolaitaSodo University, Sodo, Ethiopia,
2021.
THANK YOU