Unconfined compressive strength represents an important parameter for soil investigation report test results because the values of cohesion and allowable bearing capacity can directly obtained from the relevant test especially if the clayey soil layers are found at sufficient enough depth above water table level.This paper deals with simple comparison (based on (31) soil samples) between unconfined compressive strength (q u ) obtained by using the pocket soil penetrometer tool and the unconfined compressive strength using the conventional test for the same sample penetrated by the pocket penetrometer with different soil moisture contents. Two triaxial specimens, sample type-1-with dimensions 38 X 79mm and type-2-with dimensions 33 X 79mm(diam. X height)) prepared in the libratory.It was found that the results refers that soil pocket penetrometer readings are closed enough to the results that obtained from the unconfined compression test result with certain conditions.The average percentage of difference between penetrometer readings and unconfined compression test result values was (1.103%) for sample type-1-and (1.53%) for sample type -2-.The maximum moisture content for all tests samples was (27.3%) and the minimum was (14.7%) while the average moisture content was(20.9%).

The processing of optimum moisture  content for specific soils as indicated by ASTM D698 specifications detail relies upon developing the fitting third or second degree bend connection between dampness content versus soil dry unit weight on a fitting bend, the registered optimum moisture  substance may contrast for a similar soil as for fitting bend figure and its position. The main objective of this study is to evaluate the optimum moisture content value based on computing average moisture content adapted from standard or modified Proctor compaction test trials and compared it with respect to the computing optimum moisture content using standard method. The research deals with a (52) compaction tests results with a wide range of optimum moisture content and dry unit weight to explore the relationships between them. The study also explores the maximum dry density values which versus standard optimum moisture content and average adopted moisture content. Statistical part depends on evaluating many statistical function values for standard and research method starts by evaluating significance of normality using Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. The average differences between standard optimum moisture content and an average value (this study depends) for moisture content was about (-0.20) and an average of differences for dry unit weight values was (0.261).

Background: The skirt foundation is one of the powerful types of foundations to resist the lateral loads produced from natural forces, such as earthquakes and wind action, or from the type of structures, such as oil platforms and offshore wind turbines. Objective and Methodology: This research experimentally investigated the response of skirted footing resting on sandy soil of different states to lateral applications of loads on a small-scale physical model manufactured for this purpose. The parameters studied are the distance between the footing and the skirt and its depth. Results and Conclusion: The results show that the presence of the skirt behind the footing loads to an increase in bearing load and a reduction in the lateral movement whereas the skirt near or adjacent to the footing edge causes maximum increases in bearing load and reduction in lateral movement, for skirted footing. The ratio between the wall distance and the width of the footing has no effect when it is greater than one. On the other hand, the state of the soil influences the bearing load and lateral movement with different ratio of wall distance and wall depth to the width of the footing, especially when the wall distance to the footing width is less than one and the state of the soil has no effect on the bearing load and lateral movement when the ratio is more than one.

The main aim of this research can be represented as a trail to computerize the most soil engineering properties to compute them automatically using many simple Microsoft Excel functions based on raw soil test experimental data. This work will be shortening the time and effort of the geotechnical engineers calculating different soil parameters with acceptable accurate values. Nine different Microsoft Excel formulas, some of the techniques by certain Excel expressions and normal designed algebraic equations were used to present the final spreadsheet. The main computed soil parameters were (ω, LL, PL, PI, ρd,max, ωopt, k) soil classification AASHTO, (qu and cu) for unconfined compression test, (ø and c') for the direct shear test finally (Cc and Cs) for consolidation tests. To get a better understanding on how most of the programmed tools and to Microsoft Excel sheets work, the user should have knowledge about basic concepts of the certain soil parameter test and experimental steps and also the guidelines of the theory that depends to compute the parameter. Also, the user should have enough background about engineering soil properties laboratory experiments computation.

No abstract