Laserfiche WebLink
<br />M94105MT <br />3/17/95 <br />Paqe Two <br />sample obtained and tested for the moisture content-dry density <br />relationship test was a representative sample of the material. <br />The moisture content-dry density relationship test was <br />conducted in accordance with ASTM Test Method D698. ASTM Test <br />Method D69B is virtually the identical as AASHTO Test Method T99- <br />74, as specified differing only in the publication in which it is <br />presented. <br />The Division of Minerals and Geology letter discusses one (1) <br />density test result indicating a density about 21 percent higher <br />than the maximum dry density as defined by the moisture content-dry <br />density relationship test. <br />It should be understood that the moisture content-dry density <br />relationship test method as outlined in the specifications is a low <br />energy compaction test with the compaction energy input about <br />12,000 foot-pounds per cubic foot. A modified moisture content-dry <br />density relationship test has a compaction energy input of about <br />55,000 foot pounds per cubic foot with a resulting higher maximum <br />dry density and lower optimum moisture content than the low energy <br />moisture content-dry density relationship test. This comparison <br />alone is a good indication that greater inputs of compaction energy <br />than the energy used for the moisture content-dry density <br />~Lambcrt ana ~~s,~ociates <br />CONSUL i1NG GEOiELH NICAL ENGINEERS •NG <br />MATERIAL TESTING <br />