1.1 本试验方法包括使用模制圆柱体作为试样测定水泥土的抗压强度。 1.2 提供以下两种替代程序: 1.2.1 方法A- 本程序使用在符合试验方法的模具中制备的试样 D698 直径（4.0英寸（101.6毫米）和4.6英寸。（116.8毫米），有时称为普氏模具，导致高度与直径之比为1.15。本试验方法仅适用于具有30 % 保留在19.0毫米( 3. / 4. -英寸。）滤器看见 注释2 . 1.2.2 方法B- 本程序使用根据实践在圆柱形模具中制备的高径比为2.0的试样 D1632 直径（2.8英寸（71.1毫米）和9.0英寸。（229 mm）。本试验方法适用于通过4级试验的材料。 75 mm（4号）筛。 1.3 单位- 除非下文另有说明，否则以英寸-磅为单位的数值应视为标准值。括号中给出的值是国际单位制的数学转换，仅供参考，不被视为标准值。筛网尺寸由规范中的标准名称确定 E11 . 括号中给出的替代筛孔尺寸名称仅供参考，并不代表不同的标准筛孔尺寸。 1.3.1 在处理英寸磅单位时，使用英寸磅单位的重力系统。在这个系统中，磅（lbf）表示力（重量）的单位，而质量的单位是段塞。 1.3.2 在商业实践中几乎从未使用段塞质量单位，即密度、天平等。因此，本标准中的质量标准单位为千克（kg）或克（g），或两者兼有。 此外，括号中未给出/显示等效英寸-磅单位（slug）。 1.3.3 工程/建筑行业的常见做法是同时使用磅来表示质量单位（lbm）和力（lbf）。这隐含地结合了两个独立的单元系统；也就是说，绝对系统和引力系统。在一个标准中结合使用两套独立的英寸-磅单位在科学上是不可取的。如前所述，本标准包括英寸-磅单位的重力系统，不使用/呈现质量的段塞单位。然而，使用天平或天平，记录质量磅（lbm）或记录密度（lbm/ft） 3. 不应视为不符合本标准。 1.4 所有观察值和计算值应符合实践中确定的有效数字和舍入准则 D6026 除非被本试验方法取代。 1.4.1 用于规定如何在标准中收集/记录和计算数据的程序被视为行业标准。此外，它们代表了通常应保留的有效数字。使用的程序不考虑材料变化、获取数据的目的、特殊目的研究或用户目标的任何考虑因素；通常的做法是增加或减少报告数据的有效位数，以与这些考虑因素相称。考虑工程数据分析方法中使用的有效数字超出了这些测试方法的范围。 1.5 本标准并非旨在解决与其使用相关的所有安全问题（如有）。本标准的用户有责任在使用前制定适当的安全、健康和环境实践，并确定监管限制的适用性。 1.6 本国际标准是根据世界贸易组织技术性贸易壁垒（TBT）委员会发布的《关于制定国际标准、指南和建议的原则的决定》中确立的国际公认标准化原则制定的。 ====意义和用途====== 4.1 方法A使用土壤实验室中常见的压实设备和模具，并用于其他土壤水泥试验。人们认为，方法A给出了强度的相对测量，而不是抗压强度的严格测定。由于圆柱体的高径比（1.15）较小，用方法A测定的抗压强度通常比用方法B测定的抗压强度大。 4.2 方法B，因为更大的高径比（2。 00），从技术角度提供了更好的抗压强度测量，因为它减少了方法a试样剪切过程中可能出现的复杂应力条件。 4.3 在实践中，方法A比方法B更常用。因此，通常评估或指定由方法A确定的抗压强度值。第节给出了基于高径比转换抗压强度值的系数 8. . 3. 注1: 本标准产生的结果的质量取决于执行该标准的人员的能力以及所用设备和设施的适用性。符合实践标准的机构 D3740 通常认为能够胜任和客观的测试/采样/检查等。本标准的用户应注意遵守惯例 D3740 本身不能确保可靠的结果。可靠的结果取决于许多因素；实践 D3740 提供了一种评估其中一些因素的方法。

1.1 This test method covers the determination of the compressive strength of soil-cement using molded cylinders as test specimens. 1.2 Two alternative procedures are provided as follows: 1.2.1 Method A— This procedure uses a test specimen prepared in a mold complying with Test Methods D698 (4.0 in. (101.6 mm) in diameter and 4.6 in. (116.8 mm) in height), sometimes referred to as a proctor mold, resulting in a height over diameter ratio of 1.15. This test method may be used only on materials with 30 % or less retained on the 19.0-mm ( 3 / 4 -in.) sieve. See Note 2 . 1.2.2 Method B— This procedure uses a test specimen with a height over diameter ratio of 2.0 prepared in a cylindrical mold in accordance with Practice D1632 (2.8 in. (71.1 mm) in diameter and 9.0 in. (229 mm) in height). This test method is applicable to those materials that pass the 4.75-mm (No. 4) sieve. 1.3 Units— The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as standard, except as noted in below. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to SI units, and are provided for information only and are not considered standard. Sieve sizes are identified by the standard designations in Specification E11 . The alternative sieve size designation given in parentheses is for information only and does not represent a different standard sieve size. 1.3.1 The gravitational system of inch-pound units is used when dealing with inch-pound units. In this system, the pound (lbf) represents a unit of force (weight), while the unit for mass is slugs. 1.3.2 The slug unit of mass is almost never used in commercial practice, that is, density, balances, etc. Therefore, the standard unit for mass in this standard is either kilogram (kg) or gram (g), or both. Also, the equivalent inch-pound unit (slug) is not given/presented in parentheses. 1.3.3 It is common practice in the engineering/construction profession to concurrently use pounds to represent both a unit of mass (lbm) and of force (lbf). This implicitly combines two separate systems of units; that is, the absolute system and the gravitational system. It is scientifically undesirable to combine the use of two separate sets of inch-pound units within a single standard. As stated, this standard includes the gravitational system of inch-pound units and does not use/present the slug unit for mass. However, the use of balances or scales, recording pounds of mass (lbm) or recording density in lbm/ft 3 shall not be regarded as nonconformance with this standard. 1.4 All observed and calculated values shall conform to the guidelines for significant digits and rounding established in Practice D6026 unless superseded by this test method. 1.4.1 The procedures used to specify how data are collected/recorded and calculated in the standard are regarded as the industry standard. In addition, they are representative of the significant digits that generally should be retained. The procedures used do not consider material variation, purpose for obtaining the data, special purpose studies, or any considerations for the user's objectives; and it is common practice to increase or reduce significant digits of reported data to be commensurate with these considerations. It is beyond the scope of these test methods to consider significant digits used in analysis methods for engineering data. 1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. 1.6 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee. ====== Significance And Use ====== 4.1 Method A makes use of the same compaction equipment and molds commonly available in soil laboratories and used for other soil-cement tests. It is considered that Method A gives a relative measure of strength rather than a rigorous determination of compressive strength. Because of the lesser height to diameter ratio (1.15) of the cylinders, the compressive strength determined by Method A will normally be greater than that for Method B. 4.2 Method B, because of the greater height to diameter ratio (2.00), gives a better measure of compressive strength from a technical viewpoint since it reduces complex stress conditions that may occur during the shearing of Method A specimens. 4.3 In practice, Method A has been more commonly used than Method B. As a result, it has been customary to evaluate or specify compressive strength values as determined by Method A. A factor for converting compressive strength values based on height to diameter ratio is given in Section 8 . 3 Note 1: The quality of the result produced by this standard is dependent on the competence of the personnel performing it and the suitability of the equipment and facilities used. Agencies that meet the criteria of Practice D3740 are generally considered capable of competent and objective testing/sampling/inspection/etc. Users of this standard are cautioned that compliance with Practice D3740 does not in itself ensure reliable results. Reliable results depend on many factors; Practice D3740 provides a means of evaluating some of those factors.