Soil Genesis and Classification 2011
DOI: 10.1002/9780470960622.ch21
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|
Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…According to the USCS (Unified Soil Classification System), the soil used in this study classified as MH, namely, silt with high plasticity with 35.20% sand fraction, 34.55% silt fraction, and 30.25% clay fraction. Meanwhile, according to AASHTO, this sample is included in sample type A-7-5 with an estimated poor to medium quality [16]. The untreated soil has a UCS value of 46 kN/m 2 which classified as soft soil due to UCS value less than 50 kN/m 2 [17].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…According to the USCS (Unified Soil Classification System), the soil used in this study classified as MH, namely, silt with high plasticity with 35.20% sand fraction, 34.55% silt fraction, and 30.25% clay fraction. Meanwhile, according to AASHTO, this sample is included in sample type A-7-5 with an estimated poor to medium quality [16]. The untreated soil has a UCS value of 46 kN/m 2 which classified as soft soil due to UCS value less than 50 kN/m 2 [17].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Based on the result of the tests, the aggregate was dominated by a gravel fraction of 82.48%. By referring to the Unified Soil Classification System, the gravel used in this study was classified as GW or Well Graded Gravelly Sand, due to 5.16 in CU value and 1.29 in CC value, with little/no fine-grained soil [18]. While the mechanical properties that could be determined were CBR considering the nature of the material was non-cohesive, granular, and loose.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While the mechanical properties that could be determined were CBR considering the nature of the material was non-cohesive, granular, and loose. The physical and mechanical characteristics of Asbuton showed that Asbuton was classified as SP/Poorly Graded Sand [18]. It has no gravel fraction, resembling coarse sand.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%