SOIL MOISTURE PROFICIENCY SAMPLE PROGRAM SHA 730 X SHRP P 619

User Manual: SHA-730 X

Open the PDF directly: View PDF .
Page Count: 129

Download
Open PDF In Browser	View PDF

SHRP-P-619

Soil Moisture Proficiency
Sample Program
Garland W. Steel, P.E.
Steel Engineering, Inc.

Strategic Highway Research Program
National Research Council
Washington, DC 1993

PUBL.

NO. SHRP-P--619

Program Manager: Neil Hawks
Production Editor: Marsha Barrett
Program

Area Secretary:

February

1993

Cindy Baker

key words:
base course aggregates
cohesive soils

Strategic Highway Research Program
National Academy of Sciences
2101 Constitution Avenue N.W.
Washington,

DC

20418

(202) 334-3774

The publication of this report does not necessarily indicate approval or endorsement of the findings,
opinions, conclusions, or recommendations
either inferred or specifically expressed herein by the National
Academy of Sciences, the United States Government, or the American Association of State Highway and
Transportation
Officials or its member states.
© 1993 National Academy

350/NAP/293

of Sciences

Acknowledgments

The research described herein was supported by the Strategic Highway Research
Program (SHRP). SHRP is a unit of the National Research Council that was authorized
by section 128 of the Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of
1987.

°°°
m

Contents

Acknowledgments
Abstract

..................................................

iii

...........................................................

Summary of Research

vii

................................................

Appendix

I--Descriptive

Appendix

II--AMRL

Appendix

III---Correspondence

regarding transmitting

Appendix

IV--Correspondence

concerning

Appendix

V--Memorandum

Appendix

VI--Example

1

test results on materials used by AMRL for samples

report on SHRP Moisture Content

of report distributed

Appendix VII--AASHTO/ASTM

Proficiency Sample Program

AMRL report

............

analysis of data ...................

on variance component

.......

analysis ..................

to each participant

format precision statements

...............
.................

5
13
103
107
113
135
143

V

Abstract

This report describes the development of the Long-Term Pavement Performance (LTPP)
soil sample selection process based on the American Association of State Highway
Transportation
Officials (AASHTO) model. Lab results present the bias in determining
moisture content in cohesive soil and base course aggregate samples.

vii

SUMMARY OF RESEARCH

FINAL
SHRP

SOIL

MOISTURE

RESEARCH
REPORT
on the
PROFICIENCY
SAMPLE

PROGRAM

One element
of Quality
Assurance
(QA) for
laboratory
testing
that
was deemed
to be of key
importance
by SHI_P, as a result
of Expert
Task
Group
(ETG)
recommendations,
is the American
Association
of
State
Highway
and Transportation
Officials
(AASHTO)
accreditation
program
(AAP)
for
laboratories.
All
laboratories
providing
long
term
pavement
performance
(LTPP)
testing
services
were
required
to be
accredited
by
AAP.
Most
of the
laboratory
tests
on LTPP
field
samples
were
addressed
by the
AAP,
which
includes
on site
inspections
of
equipment
and
procedures,
and participation
in
applicable
proficiency
sample
series.
However,
a
few critical
tests
in
the SHRP
LTPP
studies
were
not fully
addressed.
After
extensive
consultation
and careful
study,
it
was determined
that
supplemental
programs
should
be designed
to provide
assurance
of
quality
test
data
in a manner
similar
to that
provided
by AAP for
other
tests.
The
Soil
Moisture
Proficiency
Sample
Program
supplemental
programs
approved
for
implementation.
was
designed
to
provide
precision
and
bias
standard
tests
for moisture
content
of
subgrade
course
aggregates.

was

one of the
The program
data
concerning
soils
and base

The
soil
moisture
program
was modeled
after
the familiar
AASHTO
Materials
Reference
Laboratory
(AMRL)
proficiency
sample
programs
at
the National
Institute
of
Standards
and Technology
(NIST).
The moisture
samples
were
prepared
and
distributed
to
participants,
the raw test
data
was
collected
and collated,
and a
report
documenting
the program
was issued
for SHRP
by the AMRL.
Two
different
cohesive
soils
were
supplied
for the program
by the
Maryland
Department
of
Transportation's
Materials
Laboratory.
These
soils
were
from
the same
sources
that
were
used
in the Type
II Soil
Proficiency
Sample
Program.
Soil
classification
data
is
contained
in appendix
I.
Two
different
base
course
aggregates
were
supplied
for the
program
by
the University
of Nevada-Reno.
The aggregates
were
from
the
same sources
that
were
used
in
the Type
I Proficiency
Sample
Program.
It
is
also
noted
that
these
materials
were
obtained
from
SHRP
reference
material
sources,
Watsonville
Granite
at
Monterey,
California
and
Kaiser
at
Pleasonton,
California.
Classification
data
for
the
materials
used
is
contained
in appendix
I.
AMRL
thoroughly
materials
into

blended,
then
two
approximately

split
each
of the
four
primary
equal
parts,
one
part
to
3

eventually
provide
material
for dry samples
and the other
part
to
eventually
provide
material
for
wet samples.
Each
of these
8
parts
was
then
split
again
into two approximately
equal
portions
designated
as split
A and split
B.
Each
of the 16 splits(8
A and
8 B)
was then
split
to yield
64 test
samples.
8 of the
sets
of
64 samples
were
finally
processed
for
distribution
in
an air
dried
condition
and
the
other
8
sets
were
processed
for
distribution
in a wet
condition.
Finally,
20
groups
of
3 test
samples
each
were
randomly
selected
from
each
of the 16 sets
of
64 test
samples
and identified
for shipment
to each
participating
laboratory.
Every
participant
received
a
total
of 48 test
samples
(16 groups
of 3 test
samples
each).
All
samples
were
selected
and
identified
in
accordance
with
statistically
acceptable
random
procedures.
The
entire
experiment
was designed
in
consultation
with
SHRP
statisticians
to
allow
a
complete
components
of
variance
analysis
to be
conducted
as resources
allowed.
Instructions
directions
procedure
to

to the participants
(appendix
concerning
test
sequencing,
follow
(AASHTO
T265).

II,
page
7) provided
identification
and

Raw
test
data
was
returned
to
AMRL
for
incorporation
into the AMRL
report
(appendix
If).
forwarded
to the
SHRP
Quality
Assurance
Engineer
had
been
received.
It
was
then
transmitted
Statistician
bias.

for

analysis

The
Statistician's
explanation
of the
derived
therefrom.
Precision
AASHTO\ASTM
they
deem

data

and

report
analysis

statements
(appendix
format
for use
by
appropriate.

The
appendices
to
supporting
documents
contents.

determination

of

4

participants

are

VII)
were
standards

drafted
writing

this
report
contain
for this
program
as

listed

in

test

and
was
data
SHRP

precision

and

(appendix
V)
provides
a
full
along
with
complete
information

Seventeen
(17)
laboratories
participated
Each
participant
has
made
a
substantial
successful
completion
of SHRP
research
in
The

collation
The report
when
all
to
the

Appendix

the
listed

in

the
standard
committees
as

complete
in
the

set
table

of
of

in
this
experiment.
contribution
to the
the LTPP
program.

II,

page

11.

APPENDIX I

\

SHA -73 0-32
REVISED 3-75

MATERIALSAND RESEARCH
LaboratoryWorksheet
COMBINED

HYDROMETER,

SIEVE

ANALYSIS

AND

TEST

DATA

SHEET

Z

o_
LOG NO.= /../(2. 728c'f
CONTRACT=/402(72 - ZO7"7"7f
FIELD CLASS:
.a,__ _ ,/?.f.
c,
(_7_ _ So
/5o ' /TT. I#
g'_/_ (
DEPTH:. O,& '7o
E_. LOCATION - STA.
EST. MOIST.:
/4
OPT. MOIST. DATE:
6-59o
CUT _
FILL rl
NC/NF []
OPERATOR
_.-7_
DATE G,-?o - 90
CHECKED BY
_, _
DATE
/;/7e/'_CLASSIFICATION
: MSMT
LIQUID LIMIT D
: 3"-PLASTICITY INDEX:
//.

/_.

MOISTURE DENSITY_ [_-180
RELATIONS
Jr'IT-99
GRADATION (PERCENT
2_'.
<_ 2"
r_ l Y_"
I"
34-

C

_'?

I]_24

)=
%,

Hr. Bath

[]

_
EST. C.B.R. VALUE
SHRINKAGE'} 95%T-180
r-I FACTOR j" 98% T- 99
pcf
pcf

OPT. MOIST. =
OPT. MOIST. =

%
%

PERCENT OF SOIL MORTAR

#40
,_60
=riO0
==200
#270

_
8_/

MOISTURE AT
(
I-I ORGANIC TEST=
[] COLOR
REMARKS; _- "f-_. ,,'_/_

¢_

MAX. DEN.=
MAX. DEN. =

PASSING by WEIGHT)

_z"
3/o"
_4
_ I0
#30

//00
9"?

(t'.7
")('AASHO /_ .C
SHRINKAGE LIMIT:
/_
SHRINKAGE RATIO: /, "7_

"7/
(p3
--%-_
¢/'7

*COARSE SAND: (2.0- 0.42ram)
_FINE SAND: (0.42- O.075mm)
SILT= (0.075-0.005mm)
"CLAY = (0.005 - 0.001 ram)
COLLOIDS,(O.OOImm Minus)

/_
Z-_

%(
); MOISTURE AT
(
)=
%(
[] P.H.
, [] OTHER TESTS._-_t_
_ _.-(.rl C.B.R.
%, (
),r-i VOL. CHANGE
._olc
S'[,_/L
/ 7/7/o/_[
,_77-h'.
I._ k.'cC_:_ t¢

MSMT

El =_40 Wash

El _200 Wash

[]

l
J

_G

_ __/
J_
)
7
%

No Bath Required

MECHANICAL ANALYSIS DATA
o'(Wo)
23 . /2(We)- ?__i__
....
"" (W,)
2_,
xlOO+Ws =
SEDIMENTATION
TEMP
__ STA.T
J
w,N
OF C
<_

I
[

TEST SAMPLE
W=x I00 +(% HYGRO
= Ws
% HYGRO Wo=
3-,3_. /?
W=
=
_,.._
I
(R/Ws)XlO0
EST.
MAX. 'COARSE
_RA_
SAND
T
R
% CLAY" SlZEmm P_,
I0 - P_40 =
/_

.

.oo_

_'-I
H

m
/
FINE
WHERE,

Pp =

SIEVE

ANALYSIS

Wp
Ws X I00

Pp

I0=100

u)
_
t--

I
SIEVE

w,= ._j

_-50

w, -w_=

J
<_: -#'40
(J

.<_'

0.425

"7/ . _ (_ * 7Z

- _'_'

('_

o.2_o

_ ._,/
3_'. '/?-_.D_

(..1. D..{

:I: G_

. g7

55

0.150

2?._3

_<3_73 :_54

._7

=..7

o.o7_

w,= 37._-<"

-#'lO0

w, -w,=
w, --

,,=
--

¢
7/

w,

w,

s/'oo%A,_L(_ASS

._7

#60

#z_o

;:

MAX.
_AIN
WHERE :
S_ZE
mm

0.60

"
w_ -_ _./
w_'_= _.
7_
--

P_

% TOTAL

CFINE SAND
_
Pp40 - Pp200=
NOMENCLATURE

3"

-_

_'_

•

03

_: _7_

Wo =Air Dry (gin)
W, = Oven Dry (gm)
W,'= Water Wt. (gin)
H = Hydrometer Reading
C = Tamp. Correction Factor
R
Hydrom.onReading
PR =
= Corrected
% Setup.Retained
Sieve
Pp = % Sample Passing Sieve
W== Wt. Retained on Sieve (gin)
S ='% Total Sample Passing
# I0 Sieve
W_ = Wt Possing Sieve (gm)

0.053

7

LOG. NO. /JO • lze,-?

'_
:D
rr
O
..J

24

HOUR HYDROMETER ANALYSIS

Re
P = -_s X I00

d =d I=K,xKGx K.

WHERE ;

WHERE :

P =
R =
a =
Ws=
H =
C =
S =
S, =

% Soil in Suspension
Corrected Hydrometer Reading
Constant - Depending on Specific Gravity
Oven Dry Weight of Test Sample
Hydrometer Reading, Uncorrected.
Correction Factor for Temperature
% Total Sample Passing #10 Sieve
% Totol Somple Passing

o =

(_. _

Ws=

5_..E_

!
TEMPoF

( H

%Total

+

C

=

R )

<
..J

_L_ _/.._ _- ._ z
7.;- 3_'.o - 5._-

OBS.
TIME

IOOo

:D
(D
.J

z(,-.3

Corrected Grain Diameter
Max. Groin Die. UnderAssumedConditions
Correction for Elevation of Hydrometer (H)
Correction for Variation of Specific
Grovity
Correction for Variation of Viscosity of
Suspending Medium.

Sample Passing #10(S}

Ws
P x S/IO0=

/ _z3

zq._,

T
MIN.

1

=

Io

d =
d, =
KL=
KG=
K. =

_'?,...

37

27.5 -S.'_

, _.3

_2.¢ .

3_"

KL

x

KG

K.

.o811

30

q7.ct

7.. _7

=
i

yE z-

Sp. Gr.

d,

S,

i

-

_.

,80
I0_- ,'

I

190 _

I {

'
--

_ '00
_

e_

_r

0
GRAIN

COARSE
IMEOUM
t .,.E
% SOIL MORTAR=READINGFROM
-.,"

_

SIZE

o
IN

_

Q

v

o

o

o

MILLIMETERS

COARSE
I .,.E

CURvE+S/Io0

o

SILT

REMARKS: O.O0--C _-- 27. d

--

,q.,7 -._

I

31

,-r'Al._• =,_

SHA-730-32
REVISED 3-7_

MATERIALSAND RESEARCH
Loborotory Worksheef
COMBINED

HYDROMETER,

SIEVE

ANALYSIS

o_
u
E

LOG NO.:
LOCATION
EST.

__

OPERATOR

SHEET

#
//

FIELD

MOIST. DATE'

/..'r _

DATE

: MSMT

LIMIT

[]

PLASTICITY

3 -I _, -_0

"_

AASHO
LIMIT=

//"

SHRINKAGE

RATIO:

MOISTURE
DENSITY_Ig_-180
RELATIONS
JnT-g9__

_-

GRADATION

by WEIGHT)

(PERCENT

PASSING

MAX.
MAX.

_'8"
w4
,_ I 0
_z"

_/,"

/0

L_

#30

MOISTURE

AT__

r-I ORGANIC
[] COLOR

CHECKED

SHRINKAGE

INDEX:

I"
2_:

CUT []

: _'_/

1 Y="

_-

DATA

CLASS:
DEPTH:

OPT.

CLASSIFICATION

1

TEST

- STA.

MOIST.'

LIQUID

A A-)_r
r"/
J

CONTRACT'

AND

/,"
/.

(

_
73_

*FINE

=200
"40

(_ _

C.B.R. VALUE

OPT.
OPT.

OF SOIL

SAND= (0.42-

SILT

NC/NF

/

95%T-180

: (0.075

MOIST. =
MOIST. =

3/.

O.075mm)

- O.O05mm

); MOISTURE

AT__(

, I-I OTHER
%, (

%
%

7. _

t

)

=/5

"CLAY:
(0.005
- 0.001 mm)
*COARSE SAND ' (2.0-0.42mm)

I'1 PH.
rl C.B.R

g"

MORTAR

._

COLLOIDS_(O.OOImm
Minus)

)=__.%(

[]

,,_ -z/-?o

FACTOR J" 98% T- 99

pcf
pcf

PERCENT

_e60

%,

r-i

_7/._t

8100

EST.

SHRINKAGE_

/_ i_

_(

[]
DATE

-_

#270

TEST:

BY _._=_

_"

DEN.=
DEN. =

FILL

)=

_)_)

%(

TESTS
=_/o _p.
),E3 VOL. CHANGE

Z.

)
73
%

REMARKS:

2B_4

Hr. Bath

r-;

MSMT

El _40

Wash

r'l

+200

Wash

[]

No Bath

Required

MECHANICAL ANALYSIS DATA
9! '(W=)

_(=,.

_! CW,)-'"
= (W,)

_'_i"'_"_"
.'7#

3._ ....

TEST
xlOO

?

%

SAMPLE

WaX 100
Wo=
.._'.E._Z/

HYGRO

+ I00)= W,
W==

o.*'.
START

_[

llllN.

SEDIMENTATION

i

°F

H

[TEMP

-I

T

C

I

R

%

CLAY"

Pp IO

-

.oo5

P, 40

- P,200=
NOMENCLATURE

FINE SIEVE ANALYSIS
WHERE' P_= _

X I00

(n

SIEVE

*,"

<
.J
:3
o
..J

_30

w, -wp=

< #4o

;

*--'-

::

=

-/

MAX.

I0=100

PP

Pp 40

=_A,,
SIZE
s/Ioo .s_u.pt.=pAs_

""

WHERE :

0.60

Wo = Air Dry (cjm)
W, = Oven Dry (gin)
W, "= Water Wt. (gin)
H = Hydrometer Reading
C = Tamp• Correction
Factor

0425

R =
P_
: %
Corrected
S_mp. Retained
Hydrom. onReading
Sieve

¢

Lt,'tC,

i wp"

L(? - _

*._ -#_oo

,,

#200

._ --

-_270

w, --

'_"

Pp

SAND

S/ZmE

(R/Ws)XIO0 EST'"AX"

/

"COARSE

lHYGRO
_.3-_"

--

'_"

_

.3/

_

__0

_o " z_,
(. ?//

3_ .'_7

_

I - /_

:1: _

/

/.0

_/

•

P_ = %
W=
Wt. Sample
RetainedPassing
onSieveSieve
(gin)

"T_ " e)O :_ 7_
_.

f.o

_-_ , (.o7.- f.G

7S

o.,50

G_"

oo7s
0.053

S = % Total Sample Passing
_elO Sieve
Wp = Wt P_ssin9 Sieve (gin)

LOG. NO.

<1

_i
"1

i

/_rT._

.-F _

24

HOUR HYDROMETER ANALYSIS

Ro
P = _
XlO0

d = dlxKLxK_x

WHERE :

WHERE :

K.

P = % Soil in Suspension

d = Corrected Groin Diameter

R = Corrected Hydrometer Reading
a = Constant - DePending on Specific Gravity
W== Oven Dry Weight of Test Sample
H = Hydrometer Reading,Uncorrected.
C = Correction Factor for Temperature
S = % Total Sample Passing #10 Sieve
S, = % Total Sample Passing

d, =
KL=
Ks.-K. =

a =

O.

TEMP.
°F

_

(H

W_=

+

'

[
-

/

i-

C

=

_3._

:_C"

R) x IOOo =

!I

W,

j

I

%Total Sample Passing #10(S)

pxS_IO0=S,

Ij
t

OBS.

Ir

T

d,

/dO

Sp. Gr.

x

KL x

I
i

I
t

MIN.

'
3o_. .osiI
, .027

TIME

i

I

Max. Grain Did. UnderAssumedConditions
Correction for Elevation of Hydrometer (H)
Correction for Variation of Specific Gravity
Correction for Variation of Viscosity of
Suspending Medium.

7.'7
;_.o-_,._-

K_

2..'/.-_

K.

=
)

,I
I

I

I

I
I

.o26
i._z_
t .o_7 !.o_-_

;[I -

''
.

I

,

! I

-_?.l_';.oI-".:,
'_';I ,,7._
!rr

o I
Go .oo74,._i._==? oo_.II

_o

zso .oo_6!.
15o

I

i-'

I

!Io.o

'

i/o.d
'

'lo

i

I

i

MECHANICAL

ANALYSIS
U.S

STANDARD

(AASHO
SIEVE

DESIGNATIONS

M.146

SIZE

.do33

I

_

i

I

'

AND

i

T.88]

1

HYDROMETER

I

l

I00

0

i!!ti!
ll!t!I iI I!
I; t ! I!
I:

_ _o

t

=

,_ lii
Iii ii
I_ 1!i
_1

_

;i;i i I

,

ii

!1!!! !! !

I _"----_!1111:1
+
_,

:
•

!!1i'

i

;

I i,

,

I

i

_li
i _', li
,,

COARSE

MEDIUM
GI_AVEL t

,%.

'_

FINE

COARSE

% SOIL MORTAR-READING
FROMCURVE+_o0

SIZE

_

J:
IN

_AN[)
1

"

',= ; =

;
1

GRAIN

-

_4o__

z.

i
[!IIIi___i I
_IIII
o _

-_

1

_I

;! :1

!tl

,,,_ _

!

I

,,__.1_

i ,_ I

I

,_

_

I I

I

..t! !1

'° li!!,
_
!iliI ii
i: .i

10

d

_

-_,oc=

o
o

MILLIMETERS

FINE

REMARKS: O.OID_

SILT

_

CLAY

I

/(_.8

_',

I.(_

_1,

I

t'7

SHRP PROFICIENCY
SAMPLES
FOR RESILIENT MODULUS TESTING
OF UNBOUNDED
MATERIAL
(Gradation)
__ii!ii
i iiiii:i_iiiii:iiii:iiii]iil
ilii!_i:i_!ii
iiii_i_:ii!
iiiii!iii!!iiii_
:ii i!iii!ii!iiii
il!!_ _:
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

AASHTO

1.5"

100

r'

82

3/4"

73

1/2"
3/8"

61
52

#4

39

#8

27

#16

21

#30

15

#50

10

#100

8

#200

6

Soil Classification

Unified Soil Classification

A-l-a

GW-GM
PLASTIC INDEX
np

Material Identification

Specific Gravity of
Material Passing #4

Specific Gravity of
Material Retained on #4

WatsonviUe

2.777

2.865

Pleasonton

2.713

2.748

11

APPENDIX II

13

SHRPMoisture Content
Proficiency Sample
Program

1S

S.H.1LP. Moisture

- Content

Proficiency

Sample

Program

CONTENTS
Correspondence
Document
The correspondance
document that was mailed to the 17 laboratories participating
in the S.H.R.P.
Moisture
Content Proficiency
Sample Program,
consists
of an
Instruction page, a copy of the Standard Test method, and a Data sheet to be used
for recording test results.
* Although only 17 complete samples were distributed
by AMRL, (17 laboratories
participated
in the Proficiency
Sample
Program)
20 complete
samples
were
prepared, leaving 3 complete samples to serve as replacements
in case of loss or
damage during shipment. As a result, the following report reflects the in-house
data recorded for 20 complete samples. (A complete sample is defined as 16 Sets
of 3 sub-samples
each, with one Set coming from each of the 16 Sample Types).

Section 1 - Master Identification Record
Laboratory
Identification
Sheet
This sheet
identifies
each laboratory
participating
laboratory
was assigned
a number which is used to
laboratories
data.

in the
identify

program.
Each
and trace the

Test
Sample
Splitting
Procedure
This document illustrates
the process used to split the material from the Split
A or Split B portion to yield 64 sub-samples. Each of the 4 Primary materials was
blended
and then split into 2 approximately
equal portions.
Each of these
portions was then split to yield 2 portions, one half being identified as Split
A, and the other half being identified as Split B. Each of the splits, (Split A
or Split B) was then split to yield 64 sub-samples. Each laboratory was shipped
3 randomly
selected
sub-samples
from
the 64 sub-samples.
(3 sub-samples
constitute
one Set for a particular material type.
Sample
TTpe
Identification
Sheet
This document describes the attributes of each of the 16 different sample types.
It also identifies the four primary materials that were used to in preparing the
samples. Each laboratory was shipped one set, (3 sub-samples)
from each of the
16 Sample Types.
Each Sample

Type

is described

by the following

criteria:

* Primary material type. (Aggregate 1 or Aggegate 2, Soil 1 or Soil 2)
* Which half of the split the sample originated from. (Split A or Split B)
* Moisture condition of the material. (Air dry, Plastic Limit or Saturated
Surface Dry.

17

To approximate
the plastic
limit or saturated
surface
dry
following moisture contents were added to the air dry samples:
*
*
*
*

Aggregate
1
Aggregate
2
Soil 1 -->
Soil 2 -->

Laborator7

-->
-->
15.00
25.00

2.00 !
3.00 _
± .04%
± .04%

Sub-Sample

condition,

the

.04% moisture.
.04% moisture.
moisture.
moisture.

Identification

Sheet

These sheets identify the 3 randomly selected sub-samples
that were assigned to
each
laboratory
for a particular
sample
type.
The sub-samples
that each
laboratory
received are identified by sample type number and the letter a, b or
c on the data sheets. The sheets also identify the proper set testing sequence
for that set of 3 sub-samples.
The numbers were assigned using the Lotus random
number generator function.
Example: For Sample Type No. I, Laboratory No. 1 was assigned sub-sample No.'s
12, 42 and 57. These 3 sub-samples
are identified
as Sample#'s la, ib and Ic
respectively.
These 3 sub-samples
were labeled Set #II, meaning that from the
total group of 16 sets received by the laboratory,
Sample Type
No. 1 would be
the eleventh set tested.
Laboratory
Set Testln K Sequence
Table
This table shows the Set Testing Sequence for all of the laboratories.
a column for each sample type and a row for each laboratory.

There

is

Section 2 - Master Data Record
Master
Data
Record
These are the data tables used to record the mass and the amount of moisture
added to the sub-samples prepared by AMRL. These data sheets may be compared with
the Returned
Data Sheets shown in Section 3.

Section 3 - Returned Data Sheets
Returned
These
AMRL.

data

Data

Sheets

sheets were

filled

out by participating

laboratories

and returned

to

Returned
Tare
Weights
* Note that Laboratory No. 's 3, 7, 9, 10, Ii, 13 and 19 did not comply with the
request
to record the tare weights of the bags on the back of the Data Sheet.
* When comparing the respective masses of the sub-samples
on the Master Data
Shee_s with the masses of the sub-samples
submitted from the laboratories
on
the Returned Data Sheets, it appears that some of the laboratories
may not have
used the entire sub-sample when testing for moisture content.

18

Errors in processing
Note i: Laboratory
No. 15 received
two sets identified
as Set _I.
The Set
containing Sub-Samples
9a, 9b and 9c was inadvertantly identified as Set #I when
it should have been Set #3. The situation was explained to the laboratory prior
to testing and is considered resolved.
Note 2: Laboratory
No. II, Set 8, Sample 9b had an excessive amount of moisture
added to the sample. This error is reflected in the laboratories
returned data
sheet.

Gregory V. Uherek,
October, 1990

AMRL Research

Associate

19

Correspondence Document

21

Date
Name of laboratory
manager
Laboratory
name and address

Subject:

SHRP Moisture

Dear

name):

(insert

Content

Proficiency

Test Samples

SHEP has engaged
the AASHTO Materials
Reference
Laboratory
to prepare
and distribute
proficiency
test samples for moisture content determination.
In connection with this effort,
we are sending two boxes containing
16 sets of material
to your laboratory.
Each set of
material is identified with a Set Number from 1 to 16 and contains three double-bagged
test
samples identified
with a Sample Number.
The two boxes you receive should contain fortyeight test samples (16 sets containing 3 samples each).
Please determine the moisture content of each sample in accordance with Section 5 of AASHTO
T265-86.
A copy of this standard
is attached
for your convenience.
Test each set
individually and in numerical order according to the Set Number (i.e. Begin testing with Set
Number 1 and end testing with Set Number 16.). Do not open the bags containing a test sample
until the test sample is ready to be tested. Opening the sample bags too soon may affect the
moisture content of the samples.
Please use the enclosed data sheet to record your test results. (Additional copies of this
letter, test method T265 and the data sheet have been included in each box of material being
sent to your laboratory.)
Set and Sample Numbers have been entered in the appropriate
columns on the data sheet and are exclusive to your laboratory.
Record all weights to the
nearest 0.I g and calculate and report the moisture content to the nearest 0.01%.
After
testing record the weight of the bag containing each sample and the applicable Set and Sample
Number on the back of the data sheet.
Please test all samples as soon as possible, but no later than thirty days after
return a completed
data sheet:
Gregory Uherek, AASHTO
Materials Reference
Building 226, Room A365, Gaithersburg,
Maryland 20899.
If you have any questions,
or if the
contact Greg Uherek at (301) 975-6704.

samples

received

are

damaged

receipt, and
Laboratory,

or incomplete,

please

Sincerely,

Peter A. Spellerberg,
Assistant Manager
AASHTO Materials Reference Laboratory
Enclosures

23

d
Z

_"

e-

z

_-

._o

_

tiff

fl

_

_
0

25

Section 1
Master Identification Record

27

S.H.R.P.

MOISTURE

CONTENT

PROFICIENCY

Participating

Braun

Engineering

Minneapolis,

Federal
Denver,

Testing,

Minnesota

California
Sacramento,

PROGRAM

Inc.

55435

Department
California

Highway
Colorado

SAMPLE

Laboratories

of Transportation
95819

Administration
80225

Florida
Department
of Transportation
Gainesville,
Florida
32602
Iowa
Ames,

Department
of
Iowa 50010

Kansas
Topeka,
Law

Transportation

Department
of
Kansas
66611

Transportation

Engineering

Atlanta,

Georgia

Maryland

State

Brooklandville,
Minnesota
Maplewood,

30324
Highway

Administration

Maryland

Department
Minnesota

21022

of Transportation
55109

Nevada
Carson

Department
of Transportation
City,
Nevada
89712

Oregon

State

Highway

Salem,

Oregon

97310

Division

PSI
Pittsburgh,

Pennsylvania

Southwestern
Houston,
Texas

Laboratories

Texas

State

Public
Austin,

15220

77249

Department

of

Highways

and

Transportation
Texas
78731-6033

University
of Nevada-Reno
Reno,
Nevada
89557-0030
West Virginia
Department
Charleston,
West Virginia
Western
Phoenix,

of Transportation
25311

Technologies
Inc.
Arizona
85036

29

i-:,
r-i,
r--:,
/%

I.T.i

r,#,}

-- !{l,,

°-_

"

r--i,

Qlml

•i.i

_

_f.LI

i.l.I

r..T.l
,,_

,Y

r--i
_

_z

_r0
f..l.I

^ i_
I
!
I
I
t

30

S.H.R.P.

Moisture Content Proficiency Sample
Sample Type Identification Sheet

SAMPLE TYPE NO.

Program

SAMPLE DESCRIPTrlON

1...........................................
2...........................................
3...........................................
4...........................................

Aggregate
Aggregate
Aggregate
Aggregate

1,
1,
2,
2,

Split
Split
Split
Split

A,
B,
A,
B,

SSD
SSD
SSD
SSD

5...........................................
6...........................................
7...........................................
8...........................................

Aggregate
Aggregate
Aggregate
Aggregate

1,
1,
2,
2,

Split
Split
Split
Split

A,
B,
A,
B,

Air
Air
Air
Air

9...........................................
10..........................................
11..........................................
12..........................................

Soil
Soil
Soil
Soil

1, Split A,
1, Split B,
2, Split A,
2, Split B,

Plastic
Plastic
Plastic
Plastic

13..........................................
14..........................................
15..........................................
16..........................................

Soil
Soft
Soil
Soil

1,
1,
2,
2,

Air
Air
Air
Air

Split
Split
Split
Split

A,
B,
A,
B,

Condition
Condition
Condition
Condition

Dry
Dry
Dry
Dry

Condition
Condition
Condition
Condition

Limit Condition
Limit Condition
Limit Condition
Limit Condition

Dry
Dry
Dry
Dry

Condition
Condition
Condition
Condition

PRIMARY
MATERIALS USED
Aggregate 1 - Watsonville, Supplied by University of Reno, Nevada
Aggregate 2 - Pleasonton, Supplied by University of Reno, Nevada
Soil 1 - **, Supplied by the Department
Soil 2 - **, Supplied by the Department

of Highways, Maryland
of Highways, Maryland

31

S.H.R.P.

Moisture Content Proficiency Sample Program
Laboratory Sub-Sample Identification Sheet

SAMPLE

TYPE NO. 1

Aggregate No. 1, Split A, Saturated - Surface - Dry Condition

_EMAINDERS

32

: 23,

22,

40,

63

,..

,_ ,.

, '_._i_ _ ,,_'_ "_; ,

S.H.ILP. Moisture Content Proficiency Sample Program
LaboratorySub-SampleIdentificationSheet

SAMPLE

TYPE NO. 2

Aggregate No. 1, Split B, Saturated - Surface - Dry Condition

33

S.H.R.P.

Moisture Content Proficiency Sample Program
Laboratory Sub-Sample Identification Sheet

SAMPLE

TYPE NO. 3

Aggregate No. 2, Split A, Saturated - Surface - Dry Condition

34

S.H.R.P.

Moisture Content Proficiency Sample Program
LaboratorySub-SampleIdentificationSheet

sa_eze nee NO.4
Aggregate No. 2, Split B, Saturated - Surface - Dry Condition

i:!_i:i_:_i:i:_:_:i:i:_:i:i_i:i:i:!_!:i:_:i:i:i:i:_:!:!:!:i:i:_:_:i:_:_j:i:i:i:i:_:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:_:i:i:_:i:i:i:i:_:i:_:i:i:_:_:!:_:i:_:_:i:_:_i:_:!:_:_:i:_:_:_:i:_:i_:_:i_i_i_!_i:i_i_i_i_i:i_i:i:i_i:!_!_i_i_i_:!:i:_3_i:_:_!:_:!:!:_:_:i:_:_:_:_:_:i:_:i:_:i:i:i:i:!:i:i:i:i:!:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:i:!:!_!:i:!:i:j:i:_:_:i`._:_:_:_:i:i:i:i:_:i:i:i:_:!:i:i:i:i

_%EMAINDERS

: 31,

52,

5,

54

35

S.H.R.P. Moisture Content Proficiency Sample Program
Laboratory

Sub-Sample

Identification

Sheet

SAMPLE TYPE NO. 5
AggregateNo. 1, SplitA, Air - DryCondition

REMAINDERS

36

: 56,

53,

62,

50

S.H.R.P.

Moisture Content Proficiency Sample Program
Laboratory

Sub-Sample

SAMPLE

Identification

Sheet

TYPE NO. 6

Aggregate No. 1, Split B, Air - Dry Condition

REMAINDERS

: 57,

63,

42,

I0

37

S.H.R.P. Moisture Content Proficiency Sample Program
Laboratory Sub-Sample Identification Sheet

SAMPLE

TYPE NO.

7

Aggregate No. 2, Split A, Air - Dry Condition

iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii!iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii_i_iiiiiiiiiiiiii!iiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii_giiiiiiiii21i!i!!ii!iiiiiiii[iiiiiii
_ iii i_ i _
i iilii

REMAINDERS

38

: 13,

63,

14,

3

_ii

1

S.H.R.P.

Moisture Content Proficiency Sample Program
Laboratory Sub-Sample Identification Sheet

SAMPLE

TYPE NO. 8

Aggregate No. 2, Split B, Air - Dry Condition

i:_:i:i:i:_:_:i:!:!:::i:i:i:i:!:_8_:!:!:i:i:!:!:i:i:_:i:!:i:i:i:_:i:i:_:_:i:_:i:i:_:i:i:i:_:_:i:i:i:_:i:i:i:!:i:i:_:i:_:i:i:!:_:::::::::::::::::::::::::_:_:i:£!:i:_:!:_:_:!:i:_:i:i:_:_:_:_:_:_:_:3:i:_:_:!:_:_:_:_:_:i:i:i:i:i:_:i:_:i:i:_:!:_:_:_:!:!:!:_:_
REMAINDERS

:

54,

30,

63,

46

39

S.H.ILP. Moisture Content Proficiency Sample Program
Laboratory

Sub-Sample

SAMPLE

Identification

Sheet

TYPE NO. 9

Soil No. 1, Split A, Plastic - Limit Condition

i:i:i:_:i:i:_
:i:i:.:_:i:i
:::::::::::::::::::::
i::i:J:i:_:!:i:i:_:
i:i.i:i:i:_:!:i:!:
:i:i:i:i:i:
i:i:i:i:i:i:!:i:i:i:_:_:_:_:!:
i:i:i:::?:i:i:_
:i:_:i:i:i:i:i:i
:i:_::i:!.
i:i:ii.:i:i:i:i:i:i:
:_:i
:i:i:i:i:i:
i:_:i.i:_:i
:!:i:i:J:
i:!:i:i:_:i:i:i:_:_:i:_:_:
i:i.3:_:_:i:_
:i:_:i:_:_:i
:i:i:_:_:i:_',i:!:_:!:!:!_i:i:i:i:i:i:_:_:i:_:i:_:i:_:_:i:_:i:!:_:i:_:i:J:_:i:i
:i:i:i:!:_:i:i:i
:_:i:i
:i:i:i_:_:i:i:i:i:i
:i:J:i:_:i:J:_:!:_:i:_;_:_:i:_:_:_:_:i:i:i:
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:_:i:i
:_:i:
i:i:::i:
i:!:i:i
:i:i:i:i:i:_:_:!:i:
::!:ii:i:::::::::::::::::::::::::::
i:i:::

ZEMAINDERS

4O

: 21,

22,

36,

6

S.H.R.P. Moisture Content Proficiency Sample Program
Laboratory

Sub-Sample

SAMPLE

Identification

Sheet

TYPE NO. 10

Soil No. 1, Split B, Plastic - Limit Condition

_EMAINDERS

: 45,

64,

49,

15

41

S.H.R.P. Moisture Content Proficiency Sample Program
Laboratory

Sub-Sample

SAMPLE

Identification

TYPE NO. I1

Soil No. 2, Split A, Plastic - Limit Condition

42

Sheet

S.H.R.P.

Moisture
Laboratory

Content
Sub-Sample

Proficiency

Sample

Identification

Program

Sheet

SAMPLE TYPE NO. 12
Soil No. 2, Split B, Plastic - Limit Condition

REMAINDERS

: 26,

2,

47,

37

43

S.H.R.P.

Moisture Content Proficiency Sample Program
Laboratory Sub-Sample Identification Sheet

SAMPLE

TYPE NO. 13

Soil No. 1, Split A, Air - Dry Condition

44

S.H.R.P.

Moisture
Content Proficiency
Sample Program
Laboratory Sub-Sample Identification Sheet

SAMPLE

TYPE NO. 14

Soil No. 1, Split B, Air - Dry Condition

REMAINDERS

:

55,

17, 33,

ii

45

S.H.R.P. Moisture Content Proficiency Sample Program
Laboratory

Sub-Sample

Identification

SAMPLE TYPE NO. 15
Soil No. 2,

46

Split A, Air - Dry Condition

Sheet

S.H.R.P.

Moisture Content Proficiency Sample Program
Laboratory Sub-Sample Identification Sheet

SAMPLE

TYPE NO. 16

Soil No. 2, Split B, Air - Dry Condition

REMAINDERS

: 50,

64,

33,

46

47

48

Section 2
Master Data Record

f-4

O0
rJ ,_ !

_4
g

_

_

q

_

_

9

q ll

q

:

a

q

o.^
._ _.._.:.:_.:._:_._._.:._:...
_:_ • ._.._..
_....._.._.. _ _._.

._._...<.._

._

.

51

._ ._ ._

o _ ._1._ ._ oo _ o ._ ._ ._ _ _ _. _1_

_ ._ ._ ._

o
t_

e_

e-I

_-4

e-4

e,.-I

_

,..-4

e-4

_0

_

_

r_

,,0

al

_

$2

_

. .

_

_

_

..1'

_

,-1"

.

_

r..

_._ ._ _ _ o
°
0

_ _, _ _ _

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

O0

A

M

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ o__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _11

all

...................._........ -.:.:_
,..:.:_.:.:,_:._._.._.
_:_

•

•

_

_

Ca

ql

_

Ca

_

°

....

C_

¢_

•

c_

C_'

_0

"

_

_

....

O_

¢'_

_1

53

Z

G

•

"

O_

c_

cO

0

r_

o°. _
_o_.__o_

m
_J

54

_

o_;
_i_

•

•

_o_o _ _ _

°

°

_ _ _ _

0
Z_

r_

0 0
_0

Z

_

_,4

_

,i-I

_1
0

_O_

_1
0

_

o_

0

u_
0

u_
0

..

55

u_
0

0
Z

_n

n

-

II

i -o

•

.

III

r_

ii
:11

_i_:_:.".;:_.'.':_!:_:!:_:_:_:_
_,_

_

_ _.::::::::_.::_:::_::;:::_:_:::'.::;_::_:_
;:;;_:_
_:::::_:,
_:;_:_:;_E_?_ _._

__'_::_

• . ._

=

"-

@_7_,#_

._

::::>_:_::_::::::_:_:_:_:::::_::::_:_:::::::::_::::_:_::_:;_:_:_:_:_:_:_:

• . .

. -_

•l

l

__

..........
ii

.=

56

II

0

z

_._
G
_l_Oj

"

0

rc0

_,_

,,__,

_r; _

_

0

_q"

_D

_

_

" " _

_r_

04

_ _r/

_

'

0

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
-.............
• .........

_

......

_

_ o __
_

_

_.

_,__,_0
o_
_-_,f_i
_......
...............................
..................................
'_i"_%:"_:
'_ '_ __*_*:_i_:_!_":_l_i_i_!i!!
.i/_ili_.:
'I!!_i:l_l
!fi!_;_i_!_i_i_iiii_i_::ii#_i_...,...:_
_!_/_ _!_
_,_!_,::_,_
_,_._

_I

::_:_::::::===========================

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
!_:_]_]_:

..

_
.

. _. "

_

•

*

: .....

°

°

_____

• • .

.

®

.

o

. o _

_

.

. _, _

_

. o " _ ,-:. .

_=

. -"

57

0
Z

o

_,_

_

,_

r_

_

._

_

_

,1_

r_

_

'_

_1
_

_

.0

_

_

_3

r_

_

,_0

_

_

,_

o_

0

r_

r_

0

0

0

I

m

r_

Z

58

_

°°__
0
Z

II

j,%

I!
•

Q

_0

_

_

r_

u_

O_

_0

m

0

W

_

_i_:_.

_ ___.-:_
_!_:_.
__!_ _:..'._.._
:_ _ _%_!;.":!_;:_
_. _ _:_...*:_]!._,_2,_
_:_::_!

_.:
_:_i!_!_._:_::::_:_i_:.;...:_:
,_.,:_:
:__:!:!:_:!:!:!:_:_:_:::

1.4
el

_0

_ OC_
-'_

"

-I

_

_

_

_

_

c_

c_

c_

e_

c_

c_

_

_

_

0

0

0

0

C_

C3

c_

c_

c_

_

_

c_

59

0

_ oo.

!._

_

___

_'_

......

__o_o

_

_

r,n

":'_:_':':':_:':':%:"

}i _.__ _ ..........

6O

_

_

=========================================

.

II

_s

_

H

• _4 _4 _

_

_,

_ _

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

" _;

" _

_

_

" _

.

,_

I

_s

"

I

a_

61

X

I!

_

II

,o

H

.7

o

_

?_._:,..."
.....

_

1"4

_

_

1"4

_

H

H

:._.i__:.:_:_

U

•

l
i

||

..

62

H

0

-

i

I

-- _o
oo

Z

oo

o

o

o

c_

-_o
o
o

if'3

o

r_

63

"

I

¢/]
:-:,::_::::..:::::::.:_:,..:.:.:..
_:_

............

II

64

o..
0

_II
_,,.41

O0

.,li

--

•

_

U

II
III •

"

°

U
•

°

•

°

....

°

.....

"_-

_

all

||

_.:i:_:i:_::_:

._ _I___

__i

_._.,:_::_._'.x_..-_:_.,,,_.,.'.,::..'._..
........
.;.,
...
_..
_..:_-;-_...:_,,,...:._:.:.;.:.:.
;:
........
::_:_:;._;;_!_:_i:_:_::_:_:_i:!_i_:_:::::::_::::!:_.......:

_

__o___

.

I

N

"

U

-• _ __
[]

_1

•

n
II

65

Q

• N................

|

n

_0

4)

III
_A

66

]

I

-

II
000

o

_*_
II.I_

_.

_'

o

_

a0 _

_

_ _ov

_

_

_

.,-r _" _

_

"

_

r_

_

ch _

_

II

c_ u_

_° _

_

I1

II

i

:_:_'_'_:_:_:_:_i_!_

:_..'..:._:_
:_._:_::_:_._
_:._.._._

.'-_:_:._:_.."_-_:_!

_:::_:_._:._::::
,.:_..:.:
_ ..................................................................

:_:.,.:_:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
I_::i_:_:_i'iii_i_i_i_i.".._!_i_::_::_i_i_::':

_0
1_ r_
oo_,_

_

•

oil
._

ell
ell
",4
._

ell
._

ell
._

ell
._

cl
._

"'

°

?

0

al
._

oil
.._

cl
c_ c_ e_ ._

cl
._

cl
._

cl
oil
.._
-_

._

_

0

i

i

i

•

II

67

m_O
O0

....

t

_

.

.

! ii

p.u

.......

.

"

_g_

. . ._

. .

,,_,

_

u_

_

_'_

,_

,-_.

,._

_-i

f.4

,-4

_

. . .

_

O_

_

.d"

_

_t'

m

68

,-0

_

v'_

,__

,-0

f._

°

_

°

w

II

II

_ _ __ _ _ _i_:___ ___

__:__*__
__#__

__:_
__

_.....
H

_]
_

_,_,_,_...
_

°

°

!

•

,

o

_

_

°

o

_

°

_._._,--"

_

=

_

......

-

_

o

•
;

II
in

_
_

.,

69

0

_.v

®

o,i,-- °

0, = ,.-

._ ._ ._
g

r_

II

_

_0

o_

......

0

,,o o_
_r..,,o

0

0

0

C_

_ _

_,,0'

"

li

ql

II

,_

7O

I|

Section 3
Returned Data Sheets

Ii,jd

_

.

73

_

-

i

74

i/l
°f,.)

,,..,_

J= =

._

.

_

_--I

|J

I

I
i

"rn

=kkl
1 i=i

1=ri
=='=' =m=II=I
?II=III

,.,l,i
'°=.,:,
°I!,r
l°J
+.=!!!l -ffl i!!

_I

illlI; IIIIII"=III
tl !
=..=
' tttIIIIII"-=III
-ftlIII!
i, ,_,_.,Iiii,

" {i'lll.!!!
!1!!
IiiiiI,£1
!!i
77

7 F

....................................................................

Model
MST
MATL
LAB
Error
Corrected

Variance

18
i
I
16
385
403

Total

659.049
614.220
43.343
1.486
29.966
689.015

36.6138
614.2196
43.3428
0.0929
0.07783

470.41
7891.49
556.87
1.19

0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.2699

Components
OaLAB = 0.0006345

02

= 0.07783

Student-Newman-Keuls
Means

with

test for variable:

the same underline

SNK Grouping

I

Mean

MSTLAB

are not significantly

different.

LAB

1 5937
1 5583
1 5562
1 5467
1 5467
1 5438
1.5246
1.5221
1.5208
1.5154
1.5096
1.4974
1.4909
1.4871
1.4817
1.4379

09
07
01
04
12
15
16
05
02
06
08
14
13
03
i0
Ii

1.1677

17

119

Table

3.

Variance

Degrees of
Freedom

Source

component

Sum of
Squares

analysis

for soil samples.

Mean
Square

F Value

Pr > F

292.19
3533.67
1705.33
1.28

0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.2059

.....................................................................

Model
MST
MATL
LAB
Error
Corrected

Variance

18
I
I
16
388
406

Total

66999.245
45014.471
21723.755
261.019
4942.622
71941.867

3722.180
45014.471
21723.755
16.314
12.739

Components
CY2LA
B -- O. 1493

a2

= 12. 739

Student-Newman-Keuls
Means

with

the same underline

SNK Grouping

120

test for variable:

Mean
17.628
17.621
17.583
17.554
17.390
17.354
17.301
17.252
17.154
17.017
16.780
16.598
16.255
15.932
15.904
15.388
14.958

N
24
23
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
24

are not
LAB
ii
13
09
Ol
14
07
02
04
08
03
16
15
06
17
12
i0
05

MSTLAB
significantly

different.

examination
reason

of the

raw data

for this laboratory

is required

to determine

a

for this difference.

PRECISION

STATEMENTS

The within
the two material

laboratory

given.

variance

precision

deviation

limits

These values

selected

CONTENT

components

types are given in Tables

within-laboratory
standard

FOR MOISTURE

at random

statements
for

for the moisture

2 and 3.

This section provides

for moisture

the difference

content

between

imply that within one laboratory,
will differ

contents

by more than 2 4/-_

testing.

two

of
the

The two

observations

are

a pair of measurements
in only

5% of all cases.

Aggregates

Precision

- The within-laboratory
aggregates

is

Therefore,

results

same operator
not differ

These numbers
in ASTMPractice
Construction

single

determined
of two

operator

to

_

- J

properly

respectively,

C670, for Preparing

deviation

0.07783

conducted

in the same laboratory

by more than 2 4_

represent,

be

standard

B

0.2790.

tests by

on this aggregate

- 0.7891

for

the

should

from each other.

the IS and D2S limits as described

Precision

Statements

for Test Methods

for

Materials.

Soils

Precision

- The within-laboratory
aggregates

has

Therefore,

results

same operator
not differ

These numbers
in ASTMPractice
Construction

represent,

single

been

operator

found
of two

to be
properly

in the same laboratory

_

standard
-

J

conducted

C670, for Preparing

_

for

3.5692.

tests by

on this aggregate

by more than 2 J 2 _ = 10.0951

respectively,

deviation

12.739

the

should

from each other.

the IS and D2S limits as described

Precision

Statements

for Test Methods

for

Materials.

121

BETWEEN

The

LABORTORIES

PRECISION

between-laboratory

the two material

types,

variance

are given

between-laboratory

precision

modulus

The

between

testing.

two observations

imply that the difference
of two laboratories

STATEMENTS

two

components

in Tables

statements
standard

will differ

SAMPLES

for

the moisture

2 and 3.

based

This

limits

laboratories

one measurement

for

of

provides

for resilient
the

are given.

selected

content

section

on these results

deviations

from different
between

FOR MOISTURE

difference

These values

at random

from each

from each other by more than 2 _2(_LA

B +02)

in only 5% of all cases.

A_EreEates

Precision

- The between

laboratory

single operator

standard

deviation

for

moisture content has been found to be JOaLA B + O 2 = 0.28012.
Therefore, the results of properly conducted tests from two
laboratories
than 2 J2

These numbers
in ASTM Practice
Construction

represent,

on the same aggregate
(O2LAB + 02 ) -- 0.7923

respectively,

C670, for Preparing

should not differ

by more

from each other.

the IS and D2S limits as described

Precision

Statements

for Test Methods

for

Materials.

Soils

Precision

- The between

deviation for
3.5900.
moisture content has been found to be J_LA 8 + 02
Therefore, the results of properly conducted tests from two
laboratories

laboratory

single operator standard

on the same soil should

2 J 2 (_2LA8 + 02) = 10.1541

These numbers
in ASTM Practice
Construction

122

represent,

respectively,

C670, for Preparing

Materials.

not differ

by more than

from each other.

the IS and D2S limits

Precision

Statements

as described

for Test Methods

for

ESTIMATION

The

OF BIAS

precision

moisture
of

the

of

the

standard

content of aggregates
two previous

agreement
accuracy

result,

both

the

These

measurements

of a test procedure

It covers

value.

or

than

smaller

accuracy

its

In order

value

not

available

been

acceptable

and bias

of the

test

error, involves

value.

Further

statement

is required.

Because

estimate

reference value

obtained

showed

the

statements

a valid

no

was the primary

takes the precision

degree

from these test

of

method.

of mutual

The

bias

of a

deviations

from

results

ever

content

may be used

of

be larger

precision

and

of a test procedure,

data to support

for moisture

The

(Ref 3).

on the bias

bias has

topic

one step further.

consistent

E177

of

laboratories.

explanations

in the ASTM publication

to have

reference

results

determination

is, the mean of the test will consistently

true

can be found

the

and across

precision

That

for

both within

often called the systematic

a reference

method

and soils in a laboratory

sections.

of individual

test

this

been

requirement

determined.

can be derived,
in estimating

a

have
If an

then the data

the bias

of the

and shipped

to the

test procedure.

The material
participating
content

samples,

processed

laboratories.

for long periods
temperature

conditions

were not satisfied,

to

samples

moisture

They should

the possible

moisture

so that they do not remain

away from direct

constructed

in a known quantity

the

other

half.

determined

is the best
dried

and kept

for estimating

also have

sunlight.

impact

been stored

at

If any of these

on the bias calculations

unknown.

Moisture
added

as soon as possible
of time.

the proper

remains

bagged

An important requirement

is to test the samples

in the bags

by AMRL, were

by AMRL were developed

to one-half

Since

no

water

by the test results

estimate

possible

of the samples
was

added

to

and no water was
the

in the laboratories

of the amount

which

such that water was

occurs

"dry"

samples,

added
the

for these samples
naturally

in air-

material.

123

The following
test

method

subsamples
The

only

for

content.

added

The

of material

5.

content

samples

i and

content

laboratory

sent

was

3

for a total of 24 subsamples.

sample

exists

for

across

sample

5 materials

between

of variance

indicate

that

is

sample

the

added

pairs

(2,6),

only

did not

to

Table

indicate

laboratory

find.

ii having

that material

positive

-

and negative

depends

The
through

as much

the

source

and

material

results

on the source

same

procedure

12 had

specific

are given by sample

WA

laboratory

was also

"wet"

in the sample

found

number

of 0.1200.

Another

produced

source

a

PL

- 0.0007).

samples.

indicates

the

as one would

have

in the right

produced

hand

positive

column
bias

interesting

large

The

The results

for the aggregate

water

positive

generally

with
result

results

produced

Thus, the magnitude

of

both
of the

used.

followed

amounts of moisture
numbers

for

was

from the 17 laboratories

positive

from

of material

of the

8.

exists

generally

(average

moisture

was used

This

means

bias

sample

in the study are shown in Table 4.

laboratories

the largest

from

0.0615)

0.03113.

of

respective

samples

of bias

individual

most

6 through

for

content

on these data is given in Table 5.

estimate
The

moisture

same procedure

The

This average was

of the average

The average
the

i.

laboratory

term.

a small amount

laboratories

each

estimate

for the aggregate

is

by

by

a bias

performed

average

was found for the three

determined

levels of factors

overall

(average

I as

means

analysis

content

found

the best

4 and "dry" samples

the different

expected

moisture

content

represents

to determine

2 through

4

the average

in the "wet" samples.

The resulting

pairs

of material

sample

moisture

total

contained

subsamples

bias

Each

in the moisture

produced by AMRL for sample number

average

This

subtracted

is

followed.

same association

laboratory

to the

number

124

between

the bias

and (4,8).

subsamples

The

was

for each of the 8 samples

For each

3

for estimating

aggregates

difference

moisture
(3,7),

procedure

13 through

for

the

soils.

added by AMRL.

Sample

numbers

The corresponding

16 left in the air-dry

condition.

9

Table

4. _ Bias estimates

for aggregate

samples

1 through

8 (SSD condition).

H
S

A
e

L

T

L
A

............................................

L
I

B

WA

PL

......................................................

T

A

B

C

D

Mean

01

0.14000

0.18000

0.08333

-0 10333

0.0750

02

0.17667

0.03667

0.16333

-0 06667

0.0775

03

0.16333

0.02667

0.04667

-0 06667

0.0425

.........................................................

04

0.04000

0.01000

0.03333

-0 13333

-0.0125

05

0.00000

0.01667

0.02667

-0 02333

0.005

-0.00333

-0 04667

-0.0017

0.05667

-0 06667

0.0208

0.06333

-0 03667

0.0133

.........................................................

06

0.02333

0.02000

.........................................................

07

-0.00333

0.09667

.........................................................

08

0.01667

09

0.06667

..............

I0

0.01000
0.02667
, ..........

0.02000

0.13333
° ..........

0.01000

-0 09667
, ..........

0.0325
, .........

-0.01333

-0 09000

-0.0183

0.14000

0 05000

0.1200

.........................................................

ii

0.13333

0.15667

.........................................................

12

0.10333

I ..............

0.02667
° ..........

0.ii000
, ..........

0 01333
, ..........

0.0633
, .........

I 13

0.07333

0.10500

0.05333

-0 07333

0.0396

I 14

0.08000

0.00000

0.00667

-0 06167

0.00625

-0.01667

-0 12000

I .........................................................

I 15

0.03333

0.01333

-0.0225

I .........................................................

I 16

0.11333

I ..............

I 17

0.03667
° ..........

0.11333

0.08333
, ..........

0.02667

-0 02667
, ..........

0.01333

-0 00667

0.0576

-0 0562

0.05170
, .........

0.03667

...........................................................

Averages

0.0761

0.0470

.....................

, .....................

0.0615

0.0007

...........................................

0.03113
.............................................

125

Table

5.

Analysis

Degrees
Freedom

Source

of Variance

of

for bias estimates

Sum of
Squares

Mean
Square

in aggregate

F Value

Pr > F

2.23
1.43
15.14

0.0143
0.1675
0.0003

.................................................................

Mode]
LAB
MATL

17
16
i

0.1576
0.0948
0.0628

0.00927
0.00592
0.06281

Error

50

0.2075

0.00415

67

0.3650

Corrected

Total

Student-Newman-Keuls
Means

with

SNK Grouping

126

test for variable:

the same underline

BIAS

are not significantly

Mean

N

LAB

0.1200
0.0775
0.0750
0.0633
0.0517
0.0425
0.0396
0.0367
0.0325
0.0208
0.0133
0.0063
0.0050
-0.0017
-0.0125
-0.0183
-0.0225

4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4

II
02
01
12
16
03
13
17
09
07
08
14
05
06
04
I0
15

different.

samples.

The resulting
the levels
variance
that

performed

a larger

of

Table

6

However,

to find.
indicate

interesting

value

of

most

of

result

produced

large negative

water

bias

for soils

on the source

in the sample
soils
bias

of the material

one would

hand

column

negative

bias.

bias

term of 1.614.
produced

M2

generally

the magnitude

of

from these results.

have

expected

did

to find.

overestimated

to find.

Also,

not

Bias is

estimate

as

The negative

the amount

of water

for both aggregates

the size and the magnitude

and

of the

term.

PRECISION

STATEMENTS

The

average
and

basis

statements

for

estimate.
desired

The

intervals

soils

bias

are given

Table

Given

the

components

in Tables

concerning

appropriate

inference.

squares.

FOR BIAS

laboratory

aggregates

mean

emerges

influenced

sample

used.

the laboratories

would

the

indicates

a

Thus,

now

number

from source

- -2.4418).

the laboratories

one would have expected

the source

overall

and material

contrast

except

in the right

produced

of

indicate

from source MI generally

of material

as one

in the

found

large positive

and therefore

indicates

of water

means

(average

The results

This negative

laboratories

- 0.4749)

results

in the sample

samples,

amount

the

In sl,mmary, an interesting

much

the

is that material

(average

for aggregates

7.

soil

across

The analysis

in Table

-0.9834.

the

05 has a very

results

positive

for

The individual

positive

the bias depends

is given

exists

overestimated

laboratory

Another

of bias

is the negative

expected

from the 17 laboratories

in the study are shown in Table 6.

on these data

amount

laboratories

have

for the soil samples

of the factors

difference
the

means

the

standard
8 summarizes
data

the

4 and 6.

precision
deviation

moisture

These
of

to

the
apply

the calculations

provided

for the true bias estimates

for

for

this

means

contents
provide

moisture
depends
of

of
the

content
upon

the

the appropriate

experiment,

confidence

will be provided.

127

Table

6.

Bias estimates

for soil samples

9 through

16 (PLM condition).

M
S

A
P

L

T

.............................................

L

L

B

T

MI

M2

A

01

B

1.07667

..............

C

-0.ii000
, ..........

D

-2.70667
, ..........

-3.10333
, ..........

Mean
-i 2108
] .........

02

1.66333

-0.39000

-3.52000

-2.65667

-i 2258

03

0.80333

0.21333

-5.23333

-3.47000

-I 9217

04

0.69667

-0.22333

-2.84667

-2.62667

-I 2500

05

0.92000

..............

-0.07333
J ..........

5.56667
, ..........

0.04333
, ..........

I 6142
, .........

06

0.80667

0.12000

-0.19667

-0.76333

-0 0083

07

1.13333

-0.04333

-3.30667

-2.95000

-i 2917

08

1.05333

-0.13333

-2.99667

-3.10000

-i 2942

09

1.52333

0.09000

-3.24000

-2.99333

-i 1550

I0

1.23333

-0.39333

-3.79000

-0.73333

-0 9208

ii

0.70000

0.19667

-3.94333

-2.97000

-i 5042

12

0.89333

0.36000

-0.26333

-0.96333

0 0067

........................................................

13

0.81000

-0.19000

-2.88667

-2.78667

-i 2633

14

I.I0000

0.67333

-2.94667

-3.29667

-i 1175

15

0.36333

-0.05000

-2.24000

-2.33667

-i 0658

16

1.75667

-4.23333

-3.87333

-i 5033

..............

17
.....

Averages

0.33667
] ..........

-0.38667
, ..........

i ..............................

-0.38333
. ..........

0.9498

-4.02000
. ..........

0.0000

.....................

-2.5178

-2.3657

. .....................

0.4749

-2.4418

...........................................

-0.9834
.............................................

128

-1.63667
. ..........

-I 6067
, .........

Table

7.

Analysis

Degrees
Freedom

Source

of Variance

of

for bias estimates

Sum of
Squares

Mean
Square

in aggregate

F Value

Pr > F

6.56
1.62
85.46

0.0001
0.0966
0.0001

samples.

.................................................................

Model
LAB
MATL

17
16
I

188.612
43.993
144.618

11.0948
2.7496
144.6181

Error

50

84.6079

1.6922

67

273.2194

Corrected

Total

Student-Newman-Keuls
Means

with

SNK Grouping

test for variable:

the same underline
Mean
1.614
0.007
-0.008
-0.921
-1.066
-1.117
-i.155
-1.211
-1.226
-1.250
-1.263
-1.292
-1.294
-1.503
-1.504
-1.607
-1.922

are not
N

BIAS
significantly

different.

LAB
4
05
4
12
4
06
4
i0
4
15
4
14
4 09
40l
4
02
4
04
4
13
4
07
4
08
4
16
4
ii
4
17
4
03

129

Table

8.

Mean

square

calculations

for the bias

of aggregates

and soils.

_GGREGATES

Source

DF

Sum of
Squares

Mean
Square

..............................................

Error
Corrected
Total

67
67
68

Total

Source

DF

0.3650
0.3650
0.4309

0.005448

Sum of

Mean

Squares

Square

F Value

Pr > F

13.72

0.0004

....................................................................

AGGR
Error
Corrected
Total

i
66
67
68

0.0628
0.3022
0.3650
0.4309

0.06281
0.004578

DF

Sum of
Squares

Mean
Square

67
67
68

273.2194
273.2194
338.9847

4.0779

DF

Sum of
Squares

Mean
Square

Total

SOILS

Source

.............................................

Error
Corrected
Total

Total

Source
........

SOIL
Error
Corrected
Total

130

F Value

Pr > F

.............................................................

Total

I
66
67
68

144.6180
128.6013
273.2194
338.9847

144.6180
1.9485

74.22

0.0001

Precision

Statements

Aggregates.

Table

of

8 shows

deviation

one

within-laboratory

aggregates

operator

value

compared

of

for

material

the

the

same

laboratory

a

lie

than

the

on

an

experimental

moisture

0.005448

conducted

test

95%
on

±

from

results

the

0.0311

test

aggregate

2 o - 0.1476

value,

between

standard

_ = J

a properly

by more

of
to

operator

to be

of

reference

bias

found

determined

When

known

single

bias

differ

bias.

a

was

the

not

with

is
the

in

should

limits

Aggregates

Therefore,

material
true

for

the

for

- 0.0738.
by

Bias

were

confidence

an

2 a

the

aggregate

or

(-0.116,

0.179).

Aggregates
from

Source

WA.

The

within-laboratory

aggregates

from

- 0.06766.
by

one

this

source
true

bias

of

source

WA

Therefore,

operator

the

single

should

value
the

is 0.0615

in

of

is determined

the

bias

the

same

not

differ

bias.

moisture

± 2 _ or

operator

by
95%

content

of

(-0.074,

more

deviation

for

to be a = J 0.004578

of a properly

laboratory

A

standard

on
than

an

conducted

test

aggregate

from

2 _

- 0.1353

confidence

interval

aggregates

from

from

for

this

the

source

0.197).

Aggregates
from

Source

PL.

The

within-laboratory

aggregates

from

= 0.06766.
by

one

this
the
bias
is

These
in ASTM

numbers

Practice

Construction

source

of

the

of

moisture

± 2 o or

represent,
for

in

should

value

0.0007

C670,

PL

Therefore,

operator

true

single

source

the

bias

the

same

not

differ

bias.

A

content
(-0.135,

respectively,

Preparing

operator

is determined

Precision

by

of

more

deviation

to be

of a properly

laboratory

95%

standard

on
than

an

for

a =_0.004578
conducted

test

aggregate

from

2 _ - 0.1353

confidence

interval

aggregates

from

from

for

this

the

source

0.136).

the

IS and

Statements

2S limits
for Test

as

described

Methods

for

Materials.

131

Precision

Statements

Soils.

of Bias

Table 8 shows the within-laboratory
deviation

for

2.0194.

is

by more

When the experimental

reference

operator

be

_

value,

standard

- J

4.0779

conducted

-

test by

on a soil material should

than 2 _ - 4.0388

of a moisture

between

to

the bias of a properly

in the same laboratory

the bias.
a known

single

determined

not differ

bias

Source

soils

Therefore,

one operator

Soils

for Soils

from

results

the true value of
were

the 95% confidence

test on a soil material

compared with
limits

was

for the

found to lie

-0.983 ± 2 _ or (-5.022, 3.056).

from
MI.

The within-laboratory
soils

from

1.3959.
one

source

single operator
MI

Therefore,

operator

in

is determined

standard

deviation

to

= J

be

the bias of a properly

the

same

laboratory

on

o

conducted
a

soil

for

1.9485

=

test by

from this

source should not differ by more than 2 a = 2.7918 from the
true value of bias.
A 95% confidence interval for the bias
of the moisture
± 2 a or

content

(-2.317,

of soils from

this

source

is 0.475

3.267).

Soils from
Source

M2.

The within-laboratory
soils
1.3959.
one

from

source

Therefore,

operator

in

in ASTM Practice
Construction

132

is determined

standard

deviation

to

= J

be

the bias of a properly

the same

laboratory

on

_

conducted
a

soil

for

1.9485

=

test by

from this

source should not differ by more than
true value of bias.
A 95% confidence

2 a = 2.7918 from the
interval for the bias

of the moisture

this source

content

± 2 O or (-5.234,

These numbers

single operator
M2

represent,

is -2.442

0.350).

respectively,

C670, for Preparing

Materials.

of soils from

the IS and 2S limits

Precision

Statements

as described

for Test Methods

for

REFERENCES

I. High,

R., "Materials

95, TRDF,

2. Anderson,

Sampling

AU-108,

G.,

October,

4. American
Precision
Material",

Designs",

Technical

Memorandum

AU-

1989.

V., "Analysis of Material

Memorandum

3. Uherek,

December,

Testing

TRDF, January,

"SHRP Moisture

Testing

Sampling

Designs",

Technical

1990.

Content

Proficiency

the

Testing

of

as

Applied

Sample

Program",

AMRL,

1990.

Society
and

.for

Accuracy

Materials,

to Measurement

"Use
of

of

the

a Property

Terms
of

a

E177, 1980.

133

APPENDIX Vl

November

!8_

1991

Fred
Martinez
South
Western
Laboratories
222 Cavalcade
Street
PO Box
8768
Houston.
TX 77249
Dear

Fred:

Subject:

SHRP

Enclosed
diagrams

Soil

The vertical
of
the
A
conditions
The test
letter
H.

and
and
noted
data

very

by

Program

is a copy
of following
four
tests
on the subject
Program.

horizontal
B
samples
above.

derived

lines
on
each
respectively

your

laboratory

scatter

condition

diagram
are the means
for
each
of the four

is

identified

by

the

truly

Steelej
Steele

enclosure:

4 pages

Neii
Paul
Dave
Bill
Robin

Sample

Type
!)-air
dry condition
Type
I)-saturated
surface
dry
II)-air
dry
condition
II)-piastic
limit
condition

Garland
W.
President,

co:

Proficiency

for your
information
showing
results
of

°Aggregate(SHRP
°Aggregate(SHRP
°Soii(SHRP
Type
°Soii(SHRP
Type

Yours

Moisture

P.E.
Engineering

Hawks(letter
Teng(letter
Esch(ietter
Hadley(letter
High(letter

Box

173 • Tornado,

inc.

only)
only)
only)
only)
only)

West

Virginia

25202

• Tele

(304)

727-8719

13 7

_ rO
0

_

m

-

d
[
_1

-o
L_

[3)

-._

-r

,L g

-_

Lcl °

-

ma"

0

n

_

0

o

d

1

I

T

[

T

T

_
d

o

r_
d

d

"7.
o

o

117dS--8
138

-o
o
d

_0

Z
--

0

Y

lit

v

N

1118

_o

-

_

_

<

0

I

I

I

I

N

_

N

N

±l-loiS--8
139

i

Z

I

7-

0
<.O

n

-I--

0 _

-_

°--

._

-

i

_

r--

,_

=i

_

©

J.17dS--8
140

_

Lḑ

_i

_

-

ffl

_

_12

4-

0

0
cO
<

T

__
0

¢-

o

"_

I_

,,

_

©8

El.

h.I
I"4
I

I

I

I

I

I

I

117dS--8
141

APPENDIX Vii

Moisture

Content-Aqgregates

Precision
The
within-laboratory
single
operator
standard
deviation
for
moisture
content
of aggregates
has been
found
to be _ = A0.2790%.
Therefore,
results
of two
properly
conducted
tests
by the same
operator
in
the same
laboratory
on
the same
type
of aggregate
sample
should
not differ
by more
than
2_2 a = 80.7891%
from
each
other.
The between-laboratory
single
operator
standard
deviation
moisture
content
of aggregates
has been
found
to be _(a21_b+a
A0.28012%.
Therefore,
results
of properly
conducted
tests
two
laboratories
on the
same
aggregate
should
not differ
by
than
2_(2(_21ab+a2))
= 80.7923%
from each
other.
These
numbers
as
described
Statements
for

represent,
respectively,
the
in
ASTM
Practice
C670,
Test
Methods
for Construction

AIS
and
Preparing
Materials.

for
2) =
from
more

_D2S
limits
Precision

Bias
When
experimental
results
are
accurately
compounded
specimens:

compared

with

The bias
of moisture
tests
on
one aggregate
found
to have
a mean
of
+0.0615%.
The bias
values
from
the same
aggregate
material
has
confidence
to lie between
-0.074%
and +0.197%.

known

values

from

material
has been
of individual
test
been
found
with
95%

The bias
of moisture
tests
on
a second
aggregate
material
has
been
found
to have
a mean
of +0.0007%.
The bias
of individual
test
values
from the
same
aggregate
material
has
been
found
with
95% confidence
to lie between
-0.135%
and
+0.136%.
The bias
of moisture
tests
overall
on both
aggregate
materials
has been
found
to
have
a
mean
of
+0.0311%.
The
bias
of
individual
test
values
overall
from both
aggregate
materials
has
been
found
with
95%
confidence
to
lie
between
-0.116%
and
+0.179%.

145

Moisture

Content-Soil

Precision
The
within-laboratory
single
operator
standard
deviation
for
soils has been found to be a =
A3.5692%.
Therefore,
results of
two properly
conducted
tests
by the
same operator
in the same
laboratory
on the same type soil should not
differ
by
more than
2_2 _ = _i0.0951%
from each other.
The
between-laboratory
single
operator
standard
deviation
for
moisture
content
of soils has
been
found
to
he
_(a21ab+_2)
=
A3.5900%.
Therefore,
results
of properly
conducted
tests from
two laboratories
on the same soil should not differ By
more than
2_(2(a_l_h+a2))
= Bi0.1541%
from each other.
These numbers
as
described
Statements
for

represent,
respectively,
the _IS
and _D2S limits
in
ASTM
Practice
C670,
Preparing
Precision
Test Methods
for Construction
Materials.

Bias
When
experimental
results
are
accurately
compounded
specimens:

compared

with

known

values

from

The bias of moisture
tests on one soil material
has been found to
have a
mean of +0.475%.
The bias of individual
test values
from
the same soil material
has been found with 95% confidence
to lie
between
-2.317%
and +3.267%.
The bias
of moisture
tests on
a second
soil material
has been
found to have a
mean of
-2.442%.
The bias
of individual
test
values
from
the
same
soil
material
has
been found with 95%
confidence
to lie between -5.234%
and +0.350%.
The bias
of moisture
tests overall
on both
soil materials
has
been found
to have
a mean
of -0.983%.
The bias of individual
test values overall
from both soil materials
has
been found with
95% confidence
to lie between
-5.022%
and +3.056%.

146



File Type                       : PDF
File Type Extension             : pdf
MIME Type                       : application/pdf
PDF Version                     : 1.4
Linearized                      : Yes
Create Date                     : 0000:01:01 00:00:00Z
Modify Date                     : 2002:06:05 08:11:13-04:00
Page Count                      : 129
Page Layout                     : OneColumn
Page Mode                       : UseOutlines
Producer                        : Pdf-It version 5.09
Creation Date                   : 0-01-01T00:00:00Z
Mod Date                        : 2002:06:05 08:11:13-04:00
Metadata Date                   : 2002:06:05 08:11:13-04:00
Title                           : SOIL MOISTURE PROFICIENCY SAMPLE PROGRAM