Faculty:

Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering

Department :
Department of Geotechnical and Transportation Engineering
Title:
CALIFORNIA BERING RATIO TEST

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The California Bearing Ratio (CBR) was developed by California division of highways as a
method of classifying and evaluating soil-sub-grade and base course materials for flexible
pavements. The CBR test is currently used in pavement design for both roads and airfield
pavement. In some methods CBR is used directly and in some others it is converted to
Resilient Modulus MR using the following relationships.

MR = 1500 x CBR (ibs/in2)

MR = 10340 x CBR (Kpa)

The laboratory CBR test measures the shearing resistance of a crushed aggregate/soil
under controlled moisture and density conditions. The test yields bearing ratio number that
is applicable for the state of crushed aggregate/soil as tested.
The CBR is obtained as the ratio of the unit stress required of effect a certain depth of
penetration of the piston (1935 mm) into a compacted specimen of crushed aggregate/soil
at some water content and density to the standard unit stress required to obtain the same
depth of penetration on a standard sample of crushed stone. Thus,

Test unit stress

CBR 
Standard unit stress

The CBR is usually base on the load ratio for the penetration of 2-5mm. If the CBR value at
the penetration of 5.0 mm is larger, the test should be repeated. If a second test yields a
larger value of CBR at 5.0 mm penetration then this larger value should be adopted.

The CBR test is usually made on test specimens at optimum moisture content (OMC) for
the crushed aggregate/soil as determined from modified compaction test.
 Faculty:
Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering
Department :
Department of Geotechnical and Transportation Engineering
Title:
CALIFORNIA BERING RATIO TEST
CBR is used to rate the performances of soils used as bases and sub grade. The following
table gives typical rating :

CBR General Rating Uses

0.3 Very poor Sub-grade
3–7 Poor to fair Sub-grade
7 – 20 Fair Sub-grade
20 – 50 Good Base of sub-base
>50 Excellent Base

2.0 OBJECTIVE

To determine the CBR value of the given crushed aggregate/soil sample.

3.0 APPARATUS

1. CBR equipment consisting of 152.4 mm diameter and 178 mm height, An extension

collar of a diameter 51 mm, spacer disk of 150.8mm diameter and 61.4 mm height.
2. Mechanical compaction rammer 50.8 mm die, 2.49 kg and capable of free fall of 305
mm.
3. Surcharge weight to simulate the effect of overlaying pavement weight.
4. CBR machine: A compression machine, which can operate at a constant rate of
1.3mm/min. A metal piston of 1935mm2 is attached to it.
 Faculty:
Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering
Department :
Department of Geotechnical and Transportation Engineering
Title:
CALIFORNIA BERING RATIO TEST

4.0 PROCEDURE

1. CBR equipment consisting of 152.4 mm diameter and 178 mm height, An extension collar
of diameter 51 mm, spacer disk of 150.8 mm diameter and 61.4 mm height.
2. Mechanical compaction rammer 50.8 mm die, 2.49 kg and capable of free fall of 305 mm.
3. Surcharge weight to simulate the effect of overlying pavement weight.
4. CBR machine: A compression machine, which can operate at a constant rate of 1.3
mm/min. A metal piston of 1935mm2 is attached to it.
5. The representative crushed aggregate/soil sample is sieved through 20 mm sieve. About 5
kg of crushed aggregate/soil is taken and mixed with optimum moisture content (OMC).
6. The mould is clamped to the base plate, the extension collar is attached and weighted. The
spacer disk is inserted into the mold and a coarse filter paper is placed on the top of the
disk.
7. The aggregate /soil water mixture is compacted into the world in 3 equal layers to give a
height of 127 mm compact each layer in the 10 blows , 30 blows and 65 blows for each
sample.
8. The water content of the crushed aggregate /soil mixture is determined.
9. The extension collar is removed, and using on straight edge, the compacted crushed
aggregate/soil even with the top of the mold surface is trimmed. The spacer disks is
removed and the mold with sample is weighted.
10. The mold with crushed aggregate/soil is placed on the CBR machine and the surcharge is
placed weight .seat the penetration piston, the dial gauges is set for load and penetration.
11. The loads is applied to the penetration piston at the rate of 1.27mm/min and the load is
recorded at 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, 4.0, 5.0, 7.5, and 10.0mm penetration respectively.
 Faculty:
Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering
Department :
Department of Geotechnical and Transportation Engineering
Title:
CALIFORNIA BERING RATIO TEST

5.0 CALCULATION

CBR : Plot the load deformation curve for each specimen. In some cases the initial
penetration takes place without a proportional increase in the resistance to penetration and
the curve may be concave upward. To obtain the true stress-strain relationships, correct the
curve having concave upward shape near the origin by adjusting the location of the origin by
extending the straight the portion of the stress strain curve down ward until it intersects with
x-axis.

Determine the corrected load values at 2.5mm and 5.0 mm and determine the CBR by the
following relationship.

Test unit stress

CBR   100
Standard unit stress

Standard load at 2.5mm is taken 13.2kN and at 5.0mm it is on 20kN

Dry Density:
Weight of the empty mold = A gm
Weight of the mold + soil = B gm
Volume of soil sample = V

 BA
Weight density 
V
Water Content w

Dry Density  d 
1 w

Plot the CBR vs Dry density and determine the CBR at 95% of maximum dry density and
repeat this value of CBR.
 Faculty:
Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering
Department :
Department of Geotechnical and Transportation Engineering
Title:
CALIFORNIA BERING RATIO TEST

Summary of Test Results

Sample No. of  d (gm/cm3) CBR (%)

No. Blows

1 10 1.848 56.00

2 30 1.892 127.50

3 65 1.968 178.75

CBR at 0.95  d max : 100%

The graph Dry Density (g/cm3) versus CBR (%) has been plotted as shown in appendix.

REFERANCES
1. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officals. AASHTO T-193-
1990.
2. ASTM D1556-1982
3. The Asphalt Institute. The Asphalt Handbook
4. E.J.Yoder “Principles of – pavement design” John-Wiley & Sons, New York.
 Faculty:
Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering
Department :
Department of Geotechnical and Transportation
Engineering
Title:
CALIFORNIA BERING RATIO TEST

CBR TEST – PENETRATION DATA

Load
Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3
Penetration
Div. Corrected Div. Corrected Div. Corrected
(mm)
0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.5 0.91 0.58 1.32
1.0 2.04 1.99 3.10
1.5 3.35 4.36 5.19
2.0 4.78 7.85 8.25
2.5 6.08 11.60 12.40
3.0 7.25 14.96 16.53
3.5 8.58 17.82 21.47
4.0 10.07 20.52 26.72
4.5 11.53 23.49 30.78
5.0 12.71 25.98 34.00
5.5 13.94 28.66 36.67
6.0 15.15 30.88 39.43
6.5 16.59 33.09 41.18
7.0 18.01 34.94 43.34

Graph Load (kN) versus Penetration (mm) has been plotted in appendix.
 Faculty:
Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering
Department :
Department of Geotechnical and Transportation
Engineering
Title:
CALIFORNIA BERING RATIO TEST
DATA SHEET (CBR TEST)

Type of the Test : Soaked/Unsoaked

OMC Date : 05/02/2009 OMC : 11.3%  d max : 1.86 gm/cm3

Sample 1 2 3
No. of Blows 10 30 65
Empty wt. of mould, W1 (kg) 16.700 16.800 16.650
Wt of mould + wet sample, W2 (kg) 21.150 21.350 21.260
Volume of sample, V (cm 3) 2104.920 2104.920 2104.920
Wet density  = ( W2 - W1) / V (g/cm3) 2.114 2.162 2.190
Can no. 10 30 65
Wt.of empty can, A (g) 29.000 39.000 57.000
Wt. of can + wet sample, B (g) 49.600 59.800 77.700
Wt. of can + dry sample, C (g) 47.000 57.200 75.600
Water content, W% = [ (B - C) / (C - A)] * 100 14.400 14.300 11.300
Dry Density,  d =  / ( 1 + W ) (g/cm3) 1.848 1.892 1.968

Graph Dry Density (g/cm3) versus Moisture Content (%) has been plotted in appendix.
 Faculty:
Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering
Department :
Department of Geotechnical and Transportation
Engineering
Title:
CALIFORNIA BERING RATIO TEST

DATA ANALYSIS

Sample 1 (10 blows)

1
Weight of Mould, W = 16700 g

2
Weight of Mould + wet sample, W = 21150 g
3

Volume, V = 2104.92 cm

Wet density, γ

W2  W1 

V

 21150  16700
2104.92
 2.114 g / cm 3
Weight of can, A = 29.0 g
Weight of can + wet sample, B = 49.6 g
Weight of can + dry sample, C = 47.0 g
Water content, W

 B  C 
   100
  C  A 
  49.6  47.0  
   100
  47.0  29.0  
 14.4%
Dry Density, γd


1  W 
2.114 g / cm 3

1  0.144 
 1.848 g / cm 3
 Faculty:
Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering
Department :
Department of Geotechnical and Transportation
Engineering
Title:
CALIFORNIA BERING RATIO TEST

Sample 2 (30 blows)

1
Weight of Mould, W = 16800 g

2
Weight of Mould + wet sample, W = 21350 g
3

Volume, V = 2104.92 cm

Wet density, γ

W1  W2 

V

 21350  16800
2104.92
 2.162 g / cm 3
Weight of can, A = 39.0 g
Weight of can + wet sample, B = 59.8 g
Weight of can + dry sample, C = 57.2 g
Water content, W

 B  C 
   100
  C  A 
  59.8  57.2  
   100
  57.2  39.0  
 14.3%
Dry Density, γd


1  W 
2.162 g / cm 3

1  0.143
 1.892 g / cm 3
 Faculty:
Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering
Department :
Department of Geotechnical and Transportation
Engineering
Title:
CALIFORNIA BERING RATIO TEST

Sample 3 (65 blows)

1
Weight of Mould, W = 16650 g

2
Weight of Mould + wet sample, W = 21260 g
3

Volume, V = 2104.92 cm

Wet density, γ

W2  W1 

V

 21150  16700
2104.92
 2.190 g / cm 3
Weight of can, A = 57.0 g
Weight of can + wet sample, B = 77.7 g
Weight of can + dry sample, C = 75.6 g
Water content, W

 B  C 
   100
  C  A 
  77.7  75.6  
   100
  75.6  57.0  
 11 .3%
Dry Density, γd


1  W 
2.190 g / cm 3

1  0.113 
 1.968 g / cm 3
 Faculty:
Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering
Department :
Department of Geotechnical and Transportation
Engineering
Title:
CALIFORNIA BERING RATIO TEST

DISCUSSION

The California Bearing Ratio is carried out to determine the CBR value of the
given crushed aggregate or soil sample. The value of the experiment is compared with the
standard value of CBR.

In the CBR test, the sample is separated into 3 types which consist of 10 blows, 30 blows
and 65 blows. Every sample is compacted to 5 layers for each blow.
The compacted soil will be tested with the depth of penetration of the metal piston. The value of
penetration is recorded into the table. The compaction that is carried out causes the soil to
become more compact.

From the graph load (kN) versus penetration (mm) that is been plotted, the value of the
corrected load at 2.5mm and 5.0mm is obtained. The CBR value for sample 1 is
56.0%, sample 2 is 127.5% and sample 3 is 178.75% According to the result, sample 3 is soil with
good compaction that gives a higher value of CBR.

The graph of CBR versus Dry density has been plotted as appendices and we have
determine the value of CBR at 0.95 dry density maximum is 100%. This shows that the sample is
suitable (excellent) to be used as the base layer because the value is more than 50%.
 Faculty:
Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering
Department :
Department of Geotechnical and Transportation
Engineering
Title:
CALIFORNIA BERING RATIO TEST

CONCLUSION

The objective of this experiment is to determine the California Bearing Ratio (CBR) value
of the given crushed aggregate or soil sample.

From this experiment, the value of CBR is used for road pavement design. It includes the
thickness of the pavement layer.

There are 4 graphs plotted. Pavement layer functions to support and separate load from
vehicles. So, CBR is important in design to make sure the record is able to support.

We can conclude that our experiment is successful. It is because the aggregate value of
CBR is more than 50%, which is excellent in general rating. It can be use as base layer. By using
this aggregate for road construction, it is safe for vehicles because has a good strength.

REFERENCES

1. Traffic engineering and safety, BFC 2082 , Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia
2. Nicholars J. Garber; Lester A.Hoel; Traffic & Highway Engineering (3 rd Edition),
University of Virginia, 1995.
3. Paul H.wright & Radnor J.Paquette; Higway Engineering (5 th Edition), Georgia
Institute of Technology, 1979.
4. Bent Tagesen; Highway Engineering & Traffic (1st Edition), Technical University of
Denmark.
5. www.wikipedia.com
Faculty:
Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering
Department :
Department of Geotechnical and Transportation
Engineering
Title:
CALIFORNIA BERING RATIO TEST