By the end of this chapter, you will be able to:
Mastering these skills helps you deliver reliable test results and keeps your tools ready for any job, making you a valuable part of the team.
Compiled by: Faith Achieng
Civil engineering projects in Kenya demand rigorous quality assurance to ensure safety, durability, and compliance with standards. Preparing samples for testing is a critical step in material evaluation, influencing project outcomes from foundations to superstructures. This chapter explores how to correctly prepare and collect samples for testing, emphasizing methods suited to the Kenyan civil engineering context, such as construction materials testing for aggregates, concrete, and soils.
Sample testing forms the backbone of quality control in civil engineering projects. It provides objective data on material properties, enabling engineers to make informed decisions on material suitability and project compliance. In Kenya, adherence to recognized testing standards ensures that infrastructure like roads, bridges, and buildings meet safety and durability requirements.
Testing has two halves, and both must be done correctly or the result is worthless. First the material is sampled, so that a small portion truly represents the whole delivery or source. Then that sample is tested, to measure the property the specification calls for. A perfect test on an unrepresentative sample gives a confident wrong answer.
Sampling methods in civil engineering are designed to obtain representative material portions that reflect the whole batch or source. Choosing the correct method affects the reliability of test results, impacting decisions on material acceptance or rejection.
Random sampling involves selecting samples without any bias towards any part of the material batch or source. This method ensures every unit has an equal chance of selection, reducing systematic errors.
Systematic sampling selects samples at fixed intervals from a material batch or production line. This method is simpler to implement than random sampling and can detect patterns of variability.
Stratified sampling divides the population into homogenous subgroups or strata, then samples are drawn from each stratum. This technique improves representativity when material batches are heterogeneous.
Composite sampling combines multiple individual samples into one aggregate sample for testing. It is cost-effective and useful when materials are uniform.
Whichever method is chosen, the physical act of taking the sample follows a set procedure.
From a stockpile:
From a lorry or wagon:
From a conveyor belt:
From bagged material such as cement:
From fresh concrete:
A field sample is far larger than any test needs. It must be reduced without changing its grading, since simply scooping off the top takes the fines and leaves the coarse.
Quartering method:
Riffle box (sample divider): The sample is poured evenly across a box of alternating chutes that discharge into two pans. Each pan receives half the sample. One half is kept and the other set aside, and the process is repeated until the right quantity remains. This is quicker and more accurate than quartering.
A sample without a label is not evidence. Each sample is sealed and labelled with:
Samples are protected from rain, sun, contamination and loss of moisture in transit. Soil samples for moisture content go into airtight containers and are weighed as soon as possible. Concrete cubes are kept damp and undisturbed for the first 24 hours before being taken to the laboratory. A duplicate sample is often kept sealed on site, so that a disputed result can be checked against it.
Aggregate makes up around three quarters of the volume of concrete, so its quality largely sets the quality of the concrete.
| Test | What it measures | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|
| Sieve analysis (grading) | The proportion of each particle size | Governs workability, strength and the cement needed |
| Silt and clay content | Fine dust coating the particles | Silt stops cement paste bonding to the stone |
| Aggregate crushing value (ACV) | Resistance to a slowly applied crushing load | Shows whether the stone can carry the load in a pavement |
| Aggregate impact value (AIV) | Resistance to sudden shock | Important under traffic and compaction plant |
| Los Angeles abrasion | Resistance to wear and tumbling | Predicts breakdown in road surfacing |
| Flakiness and elongation index | Shape of the particles | Flaky particles break easily and give poor packing |
| Water absorption and specific gravity | Porosity and density | Affects the water needed in the mix |
| Moisture content | Free water on the aggregate | Must be deducted from the mix water, or the concrete is too wet |
Sieve analysis procedure: A dried, weighed sample is passed through a nest of sieves arranged coarsest at the top. The sieves are shaken mechanically for a set period. The mass retained on each sieve is weighed, and the cumulative percentage passing each sieve is calculated and plotted as a grading curve against the specification limits.
Worked example. A 1000 g sample of fine aggregate is sieved and the mass retained on each sieve recorded.
| Sieve | Mass retained (g) | Cumulative retained (g) | Cumulative retained (%) | Passing (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4.75 mm | 20 | 20 | 2 | 98 |
| 2.36 mm | 80 | 100 | 10 | 90 |
| 1.18 mm | 150 | 250 | 25 | 75 |
| 600 µm | 250 | 500 | 50 | 50 |
| 300 µm | 300 | 800 | 80 | 20 |
| 150 µm | 150 | 950 | 95 | 5 |
| Pan | 50 | 1000 | 100 | 0 |
Percentage passing = 100 − cumulative percentage retained. Plotting these values gives the grading curve, which is compared with the envelope in the specification. This sand is well graded, with a spread of sizes and no single size dominating.
Silt content (field test): Place 50 mm of sand in a clear jar, fill with water, shake and leave to stand for one hour. The silt settles as a distinct layer above the sand. Silt content is the depth of the silt layer as a percentage of the sand layer. More than about 6 to 8 per cent means the sand must be washed.
| Test | What it measures |
|---|---|
| Fineness | How finely the cement is ground, by sieving or air permeability |
| Standard consistency | The water needed to make a paste of standard stiffness |
| Initial and final setting time | How long the paste remains workable, and when it hardens |
| Soundness | Whether the cement expands after setting, using the Le Chatelier apparatus |
| Compressive strength | Strength of standard mortar cubes at 3, 7 and 28 days |
On site, cement is also judged by colour, by the absence of hard lumps, by the bag feeling cool rather than warm, and by the manufacture date printed on the bag.
These are carried out at the point of placing, before the concrete stiffens.
Cube test procedure:
Compressive strength = failure load ÷ cross-sectional area
Worked example. A 150 mm cube fails at a load of 675 kN.
Area = 150 × 150 = 22 500 mm²
Load = 675 kN = 675 000 N
Strength = 675 000 ÷ 22 500 = 30 N/mm²
This satisfies a specified grade of C25 concrete, whose characteristic strength is 25 N/mm², since individual results are expected to exceed the characteristic value by a margin.
| Test | What it measures | Used for |
|---|---|---|
| Moisture content | Water present as a percentage of dry mass | Every other soil test depends on it |
| Particle size distribution | Proportions of gravel, sand, silt and clay | Classification and drainage behaviour |
| Atterberg limits | Liquid limit, plastic limit and plasticity index | How the soil behaves as water content changes |
| Compaction (Proctor) test | Maximum dry density and optimum moisture content | Sets the target for field compaction |
| California Bearing Ratio (CBR) | Strength of subgrade and sub-base | Pavement thickness design |
| Shear strength | Cohesion and angle of friction | Foundation and slope stability |
| Field density (sand replacement) | Density actually achieved on site | Checks whether compaction met the target |
Moisture content = (mass of water ÷ mass of dry soil) × 100
Worked example. A soil sample weighs 250 g wet and 220 g after oven drying at 105 degrees Celsius.
Mass of water = 250 − 220 = 30 g
Moisture content = (30 ÷ 220) × 100 = 13.6 per cent
Note that the divisor is the dry mass, not the wet mass. Dividing by the wet mass is the commonest error in this calculation and gives 12 per cent, which is wrong.
Plasticity index = liquid limit − plastic limit. A high plasticity index means the soil swells and shrinks greatly with moisture, which makes it unsuitable as a subgrade without treatment.
A test result that cannot be traced back to a specific lot of material is of no use in a dispute. Every report records:
Where a result fails, the material is not simply rejected on one test. The specification normally allows a retest on a fresh sample from the same lot, and only a second failure condemns it.
Create a free account to open more of this chapter.
Free: practical guides, quick cards, workplace scenarios and more.
Create a free accountThis chapter explored the fundamental aspects of preparing samples for testing, beginning with an examination of various sample tests and the methods of sampling that ensure representative and reliable results. It then detailed the role of standard manuals and procedures, providing an overview of the sampling process and emphasizing the critical steps of preparation before collection alongside techniques for effective sample collection. The discussion advanced to the tools and apparatus used in sample testing, highlighting the different types and their specific applications in achieving accurate analysis. Further, the chapter underscored the importance of standard manuals in guiding sample collection, clarifying their purpose in maintaining consistency and reliability. It also outlined the different types of standard manuals available to practitioners and identified key organizations responsible for publishing these standards. Together, these topics provide a comprehensive framework for understanding the preparation of samples that meet both technical and regulatory requirements in testing environments.
Type: Individual
| Tools & Equipment | Materials |
|---|---|
| PPEs | Clean Soil Sample (oven dried) |
| Weighing Balance | Aggregate Sample (clean, dry) |
| Set of Sieves (20mm to 75um) | |
| Scoop | |
| Sieve Brush | |
| Mechanical Sieve Shaker (optional) |
| S/N | Item | Quantity |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | PPEs (gloves, facemask, overall, safety shoes, helmet) | 1 set per Candidate |
| 2 | Weighing Balance | 1 per Candidate |
| 3 | Set of Sieves (20mm, 10mm, 4.75mm, 2.36mm, 1.18mm, 600um, 300um, 150um, 75um, pan) | 1 set per Candidate |
| 4 | Sieve Brush | 1 per 5 Candidates |
| 5 | Mechanical Sieve Shaker (optional) | 1 per 10 Candidates |
| 6 | Scoop | 1 per 5 Candidates |
| 7 | Clean Soil Sample (oven dried) | 3 kg per Candidate |
| 8 | Aggregate Sample (clean, dry) | 3 kg per Candidate |
| 9 | Notebook and pen | 1 set per Candidate |
| 10 | Calculator | 1 per Candidate |
| Items to be Evaluated | Marks Available | Marks Obtained | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|
| TASK 1: Safety and Sample Preparation | |||
| Wore PPEs (Overall, Safety boots, Gloves, Facemask, Helmet) (Award 3 marks or zero) | 3 | ||
| Weighed 3kg soil sample accurately using the weighing balance (Award 3 marks or zero) | 3 | ||
| Cleaned all sieves and pan with sieve brush before use (Award 4 marks or zero) | 4 | ||
| Sub-Total | 10 | ||
| TASK 2: Sieve Analysis Procedure | |||
| Arranged sieves in correct order with 20mm at top down to pan at bottom (Award 3 marks or zero) | 3 | ||
| Placed soil sample in top sieve (20mm) properly (Award 2 marks or zero) | 2 | ||
| Shook sieves mechanically or manually for 10 minutes (Award 3 marks or zero) | 3 | ||
| Weighed soil retained on each sieve and pan and recorded weights (Award 1 mark for each of 10 sieves/pan correctly weighed and recorded) | 10 | ||
| Calculated percentage retained for each sieve and recorded (Award 1 mark for each of 10 correct calculations) | 10 | ||
| Calculated cumulative percentage retained correctly (Award 3 marks or zero) | 3 | ||
| Calculated percentage passing each sieve and recorded (Award 1.5 marks for each of 6 correct calculations) | 9 | ||
| Plotted smooth grading curve from results (Award 10 marks for correct, smooth curve plotted) | 10 | ||
| Sub-Total | 50 | ||
| TASK 3: Aggregate Sample Sieve Test | |||
| Weighed 3kg aggregate sample accurately (Award 2 marks or zero) | 2 | ||
| Sieved aggregate sample through 20mm sieve (Award 3 marks or zero) | 3 | ||
| Weighed material retained on 20mm sieve and recorded (Award 3 marks or zero) | 3 | ||
| Calculated percentage retained and passing for aggregate sample (Award 4 marks or zero) | 4 | ||
| Cleaned tools and working area after test completion (Award 3 marks or zero) | 3 | ||
| Sub-Total | 15 | ||
| PRODUCT CHECKLIST | |||
| Accurate weight measurements of samples and sieved materials (Award 5 marks or zero) | 5 | ||
| Correct calculations of percentage retained, cumulative retained, and passing (Award 10 marks or zero) | 10 | ||
| Properly plotted smooth grading curve with correct axes and scale (Award 10 marks or zero) | 10 | ||
| Sub-Total | 25 | ||
| GRAND TOTAL | 100 | ||
Type: Individual
| Tools & Equipment | Materials |
|---|---|
| Sampling scoops | Aggregate stockpile (coarse and fine aggregates) |
| Weighing balance | Clean sample bags |
| Permanent marker pen | |
| Notebook and pen |
| S/N | Item | Quantity |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | PPEs (Overall, Safety boots, Gloves, Helmet) | 1 set per Candidate |
| 2 | Sampling scoops | 1 Pc per 5 Candidates |
| 3 | Clean sample bags (2 kg capacity) | 3 Pcs per Candidate |
| 4 | Weighing balance (0.1 g accuracy) | 1 Pc per Candidate |
| 5 | Aggregate stockpile (coarse and fine aggregates) | Sufficient quantity per Candidate |
| 6 | Permanent marker pen | 1 Pc per Candidate |
| 7 | Notebook and pen | 1 set per Candidate |
| Items to be Evaluated | Marks Available | Marks Obtained | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|
| TASK 1: Preparation and Safety | |||
| Wore appropriate PPE (Overall, Safety boots, Gloves, Helmet) (Award 4 marks or zero) | 4 | ||
| Ensured safe access to aggregate stockpiles and work area (Award 2 marks or zero) | 2 | ||
| Sub-Total | 6 | ||
| TASK 2: Sampling Process | |||
| Selected correct sampling points randomly across the stockpile as per sampling procedure (Award 5 marks or zero) | 5 | ||
| Used sampling scoop correctly to collect material from surface and different depths (Award 5 marks or zero) | 5 | ||
| Collected sufficient quantity (2 kg) for each of the three samples (Award 2 marks per sample, 3 samples total) | 6 | ||
| Placed samples in clean labeled sample bags and sealed properly (Award 4 marks or zero) | 4 | ||
| Recorded sampling details accurately in notebook (date, sample ID, location) (Award 4 marks or zero) | 4 | ||
| Sub-Total | 24 | ||
| TASK 3: Post-Sampling Procedures | |||
| Weighed each sample accurately using the weighing balance (Award 2 marks per sample, 3 samples total) | 6 | ||
| Cleaned tools and work area after sampling (Award 3 marks or zero) | 3 | ||
| Ensured samples are ready for dispatch to the laboratory (Award 3 marks or zero) | 3 | ||
| Sub-Total | 12 | ||
| PRODUCT CHECKLIST | |||
| Each sample weighs 2.0 kg ± 0.05 kg (Award 2 marks per sample, 3 samples total) | 6 | ||
| Samples are representative of stockpile (varied sampling points) (Award 4 marks or zero) | 4 | ||
| Samples are clean, properly labeled with date and sample ID (Award 4 marks or zero) | 4 | ||
| Sub-Total | 14 | ||
| GRAND TOTAL | 56 | ||
At the start of this chapter we promised you would be able to:
Tick each one you can genuinely do.
So, are you there yet?
You're competent when you can confidently do 50% or more of what this chapter promised.
Sign in to record how you're doing.