Download - Laboratory Report #1c (1).docx
Sieve Analysis/Hydrometer Analysis/Liquid and Plastic Limit
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Geotechnical Lab
Dr. Lin Li
Prepared by: Nakarsha Bester
Date: Fall Semester
Location: Geotechnical Lab
Report Submitted on: 9/18/2013
2
3
3
4
5
6
6
7
8
10
10
11
12
12
12
12
13
14
18
Table of Contents
Table of Contents…………………………………………………….……………...
Sieve Analysis
Introduction…………………………………………………….….………….
Background……………………………………………………..…………….
Methods and Materials……………………………………….…….………...
Calculations………………………………………………….………………..
Hydrometer Analysis
Introduction………………………………………………….…….………….
Background………………………………………………….………………..
Methods and Materials…………………………………………...…………...
Calculations…………………………………………………….……………..
Liquid Limit
Introduction………………………………………………….…….………….
Background……………………………………………………….…………..
Methods and Materials…………………………………….………..………...
Calculations……………………………………………….…………………..
2
Plastic Limit
Introduction……………………………………………..…………………….
Background…………………………………………….……………………..
Methods and Materials………………………………………..……………...
Calculations…………………………………………………..……………….
Results and Calculations…………………………………………..………………...
Discussion and Conclusions……………………………………..…………………..
I. Sieve Analys….. is
I. Introduction
This report presents the analysis results of the sieve analysis from the soil sample taken from
Pearl, MS. For engineering purpose the grading or size distribution of the soil had to be
determined using several laboratory methods, beginning with the sieve analysis. The sieve
analysis was used to determine the grain size distribution of the soil sample. The results from the
experiment yielded an approximation of the distribution of the soil grain sizes of the soil. The
sieves, used in the experiment, are made of woven wires with square openings and numbers on
the outside of the sieves corresponding to the size of the openings in each sieve. Table 1 gives a
list of the U.S. standard sieve numbers with their corresponding size of openings used in the
experiment.
II. Background
The theory behind the sieve analysis is performed, per ASTM D421, to measure the dry mass of
the soil retained in each of the sieve. The process, in which the proportion of the soil sample of
each grain size present, in a given soil is determined. The grain size distribution of coarse-
grained soils is determined directly by sieve analysis, while that of fine-grained soils is
determined indirectly by hydrometer analysis. The grain size distribution of mixed soils is
determined by combined sieve and hydrometer analyses.
3
The total percentage passing through each sieve, by weight, is also calculated and plotted against
the grain size on a semi-log plot. The x-axis represents the logarithm of the grain size, and the y-
axis represents the percent by weight of the sample passing. A smooth curve is drawn to
represent the grains size distribution.
From the grain size distribution curve, grain sizes such as D10, D30 and D60 can be obtained.
The D refers to the size, or apparent diameter, of the soil particles and the subscript (10, 30, 60)
denotes the percent that is smaller.
An indication of the spread (or range) of particle sizes is given by the coefficient of uniformity
(Cu), which is defined as
Cu=D 60D 10
The coefficient of curvature (Cc) is a measure of the shape of the curve between the D60 and
D10 grain sizes, and is defined as
Cc= D302
D 60∗D 10
You will plot the grain size distribution curve and calculate Cu and Cc for combined analysis,
with the result of sieve and hydrometer analysis.
III. Methods and Materials
Sieve analysis testing, using ASTM D421, was used for testing a soil sample taken from Pearl,
MS on September 11, 2013 in the Geotechnical Lab in Jackson State University Engineering
Building. The mechanical sieve shaker was used to complete this project by Fatima Diop and
Nakarsha Bester. The purpose of this test was to determine the distribution of the grain of the
soil. No deviations from the standard testing procedure were performed.
3.1 Materials
4
Sieves (#4, 10,20,40,60,100,200), pan, and cover Mechanical sieve shaker Balance Oven Containers with labels
3.2 Methods
1. Weigh 500g of air-dried soil (W).
2. Determine the masses of the containers.
3. Assemble sieves, with sieve number 4 on the top and the pan with #200 on the bottom.
4. Add sample and place lid on top. Place on to sieving shaker.
5. Run the shaker for 10 minutes and then for an additional 1 minute.
6. Wash the soil. Ensure each layer is washed carefully removing all dirty from the rocks.
7. Pour each sieve contents into assigned container and place into the oven for at least 12
hours at 105ºC.
8. Remove containers from the oven and weight. Record the mass and repeat this set until
each container has been weight and recorded.
9. Calculate percent passing for each sieve aperture. Record this data.
IV. Calculations
1. Calculated the percent of soil retained on the nth sieve (counting from the top )
Rn=W nW
x 100
2. Calculated the cumulative percent of soil retained on the nth sieve
n Rn
i=1
3. Calculated the cumulative percent passing through the nth sieve n
percent finer =100 – Rn i=1
5
II. Hydrometer Analysis
I. Introduction
This report presents the hydrometer analysis from the soil sample taken from Pearl, MS. For
engineering purpose the estimation of the distribution of soil particle sizes from the No. 200
(0.075 mm) sieve to around 0.01 mm. The data are presented on a semi-log plot graph of percent
finer vs. particle diameters and combined with the data from the mechanical sieve analysis of the
soil sample to get a complete grain size distribution curve.
II. Background
The hydrometer analysis is based on Stokes’ law, which gives the relationship among the
velocity of fall of spheres in a fluid, the diameter of a sphere, the specific weight of the sphere
and of the fluid, and the fluid viscosity. In equation form this relationship is:
v=
29∗(Gs−G f )η
∗(D2 )2
where,
v = velocity of fall of the spheres (cm/s)Gs = specific gravity of the sphereGf = specific gravity of fluid
6
η = absolute, or dynamic, viscosity of the fluid (g/(cm*s))D = diameter of the sphere (cm)
Solving the equation for D and using the specific gravity of water Gw, obtain
D=√ 18ηv
(Gs−Gw )
v=Lt
where,
L = effective depth (cm)t = time (min) The effective length can be found in Table 2 and variable A can be found in Table 3
A=√ 18ηv
(G s−Gw )
D=A √ LtCorrections to hydrometer readings
Zero Correction (Fz): If the reading in the hydrometer (in the control cylinder) is below
the water meniscus, it is (+), if above it is (-), if at the meniscus it is zero.
Meniscus Correction (Fm): Difference between upper level of meniscus and water level
of control cylinder.
Temperature correction (Ft): The temperature of the test should be 20°C but the actual
temperature may vary. The temperature correction is approximated as
Ft = -4.85 = 0.25 T (for T between 15°C to 28°C)
III. Methods and Materials
The hydrometer analysis testing used ASTM D422 procedures for testing a soil sample from
Pearl, MS on September 12, 2013 in the Geotechnical Lab location in the Jackson State
University Engineering Building. The ASTH 152-H hydrometer was used to complete this
7
project by Fatima Diop and Nakarsha Bester. The purpose of this test is to determine the
diameter of the soil particles D that are dispersed in the water. No deviations from the standard
procedure were performed.
III.1 Materials
Hydrometer Mixer Two 1000 mL graduated cylinders Thermometer Deflocculating agent
Spatula Beaker Plastic squeeze bottle Distilled water Balance
III.2 Methods
1. Calibrate the hydrometer.
2. Take 50g of oven-dry, well-pulverized soil in a beaker.
3. Determine the composite correction for the Hydrometer reading due to specific gravity
error by taking a 1000-mL graduate cylinder and adding 875 mL of distilled water plus
125 mL of the dispersing agent in it.
4. Put the hydrometer in the cylinder. Record the reading. This is the Fz (zero correction).
5. Take 125mL of the deflocculating solution and add it to the soil taken in step 2.
6. Add the mixture to the graduated cylinder and stir while washing all remaining residue
from the container.
7. Turn the cylinder upside down and right side up for 60 times in 1 minute.
8. Set on countertop.
9. Place hydrometer into the graduated cylinder and take reading. Continue to take reading
until the last reading of 2880 minutes.
10. Calculate percent passing, and plot it.
11. Determine uniformity coefficient Cu = D60/D10) and coefficient of gradation Cc =
D230/D60/D10 of the soil.
IV. Calculation
1. Calculated corrected hydrometer reading for percent finer, RCP = R + Ft + Fz
2. Calculated percent finer = (A * RCP * 100) / Ws
8
where,
Ws = dry weight of soil used for hydrometer analysis A = correction for specific gravity (as hydrometer is calibrated for Gs = 2.65 )
therefore,
A = 1.65 * Gs / ((Gs – 1 ) * 2.65 )
3. Calculated corrected hydrometer reading for determination of effective length, RCL = R + Fm
4. Determined L (effective length) corresponding to RCL given in Table 1.
5. Determined A from Table 2
6. Determined D (mm )=A √ L(cm.)t (min .)
Table 2. Variation of L with Hydrometer Reading
Hydrometer Reading
L(cm)
Hydrometer Reading
L(cm)
Hydrometer Reading
L(cm)
Hydrometer Reading
L(cm)
0123456789
101112
16.316.116.015.815.615.515.315.215
14.814.714.514.3
13141516171819202122232425
14.214
13.813.713.513.613.213
12.912.712.512.412.2
26272829303132333435363738
1211.911.711.511.411.211.110.910.710.610.410.210.1
39404142434445464748495051
9.99.79.69.49.29.18.98.88.68.48.38.17.9
Table 3. Variation of A with Gs
Temperature (C)Gs 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
2.5 2.55 2.6 2.65 2.7 2.75 2.8
0.01490.01460.01440.01420.01400.01380.0136
0.01470.01440.01420.01400.01380.01360.0134
0.01450.01430.01400.01380.01360.01360.0134
0.01430.01410.01390.01370.01340.01330.0131
0.01410.01390.01370.01350.01330.01310.0129
0.01400.01370.01350.01330.01310.01290.0128
0.01380.01360.01340.01320.01300.01280.0126
Temperature (C)
9
Gs 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 2.5 2.55 2.6 2.65 2.7 2.75 2.8
0.01370.01340.01320.01300.01280.01260.0125
0.01350.01330.01310.01290.01270.01250.0123
0.01330.01310.01290.01270.01250.01240.0122
0.01320.01300.01280.01260.01240.01220.0120
0.01300.01280.01260.01240.01230.01210.0119
0.01290.01270.01250.01230.01210.01200.0118
0.01280.01260.01240.01220.01200.01180.0117
III. Liquid Limit
I . Introduction
This report presents the analysis results of the liquid limit from the soil sample taken from
Pearl, MS. For engineering purpose, the liquid limit testing was performed to determine the
moisture content in a soil in order to make its behavior change into a liquid material and
begins to flow. When a cohesive soil is mixed with an excessive amount of water, it will be
in a liquid state and flow like a viscous liquid. When the viscous liquid dries gradually due
to loss of moisture, it will pass into a plastic state. With further loss of moisture, the soil will
pass into a plastic state. With even further reduction of moisture, the soil will pass into a
semi-solid and then into a solid state.
The moisture content, w, (%) at which the cohesive soil will pass from a liquid state to a
plastic state is called the liquid limit of the soil. Similarly, plastic limit and shrinkage limit
can be explained. These limits are called Atterberg limits.
Atterberg Limits
Moisture content increasing
Solid Semisolid Plastic Liquid
Shrinkage Limit (SL) Plastic Limit (PL) Liquid Limit (LL)
II. Background
10
The liquid limit testing is based on ASTM D4318-10 Standard Test Methods for Liquid
Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of Soils. The liquid limit testing on a soil sample is
used to determine the moisture content at the boundary between the liquid and plastic states
of consistency. The boundary at the moisture content is arbitrarily defined as the water
content at which two halves of a soil cake will flow together, for a distance of ½ iin. along
the bottom of a groove of standard dimensions separating the two halves, when the cup of a
standard liquid limit apparatus is dropped 25 times from a height of 0.3937 in. at the rate of
two drops per second.
The moisture content is determined by:
MoistureContent= Weight of WaterWeight of oven−dried soil
x100
III. Methods and Materials
The liquid Limit testing used ASTM D4318 for the test on September 12, 2013 in the
Geotechnical Lab location in the Jackson State University Engineering Building. The liquid
limit device was used to complete this project by Fatima Diop and Nakarsha Bester. The
purpose of this test was to determine the moisture content of the soil. No deviations from the
standard procedures were performed.
Equipment:
Casagrande liquid limit device Grooving tool Moisture can Porcelain evaporating dish
o Spatulao Oveno Balanceo Plastic squeeze bottle
Procedure:
1. Determine the mass of three moisture cans (W1).
2. Place 250g of air-dry soil in the No. 40 sieve and shake allowing the soil to pass through
3. Take the soil, which has passed through the No. 40 sieve, and place it into an evaporating
dish. Add 20 percent of distilled water and mix with soil to form a uniform paste.
4. Place a small sample in the cup of the Casagrande liquid limit apparatus.
11
5. Cut a groove into the soil.
6. Run the device while watching the groove. Stop the apparatus when the line closes.
7. Take 15g of the wet soil sample and place it into a moisture can, determine the mass of
the sample plus the can and place it into the oven
8. Run the test three more times.
IV. Calculation
1. Calculated mass of can, W1 (g)
2. Calculated mass of can + moist soil, W2 (g)
3. Calculated mass of can + dry soil, W3 (g)
4. Determined the moisture content for each of the three trials as
(W2 - W3) x 100w (%) =
(W3 - W1)
IV. Plastic Limit
I. Introduction
Plastic limit is defined as the moisture content, in percent, at which a cohesive soil will
change from a plastic state to a semisolid state. In the lab. the plastic limit is defined as the
moisture content (%) at which a thread of soil will just crumble when rolled to a diameter of
1/8 in. (3.18 mm).
II. Background
12
The plastic limit test uses ASTM D4318 standard. The test is used to determine the moisture
content, expressed as a percentage of the weight of the oven-dry soil, at the boundary
between the plastic and semisolid states of consistency. It is the moisture content at which a
soil will just begin to crumble when rolled in to a thread 1/8 in. in diameter using a ground
glass plate.
III. Methods and Materials
The plastic limit testing used ASTM D4318 for the test on September 12, 2013 in the
Geotechnical Lab location in the Jackson State University Engineering Building. The rolling
of the hand was used to complete this project by Fatima Diop and Nakarsha Bester. The
purpose of this test is to determine the lower limit of the soil sample by the rolling of the
sample to the point of crumble.
III.1 Materials
Porcelain evaporating dishSpatulaGround glass plateMoisture can
OvenBalancePlastic squeeze bottle
III.2 Methods
1. Place 20g of air-dry soil in the No. 40 sieve and shake allowing the soil to pass
through
2. Take the soil, which has passed through the No. 40 sieve, and place it into an
evaporating dish. Add 20 percent of distilled water and mix with soil to from a
uniform paste.
3. Determine the mass of a moisture can (W1)
4. Form several balls from the soil sample and begin rolling each ball until a thread
reaches 1/8 in and then continue until it crumbles.
5. Determine the moisture content of 6g of the crumbled soil sample.
IV. Calculations
1. Calculated mass of can , W1 (g)
13
2. Calculated mass of can + moist soil, W2 (g)
3. Calculated mass of can + dry soil, W3 (g)
4. Calculated plastic limit
(W2 - W3) x 100 PL =
W3 - W1
5. Calculated plasticity index, PI = LL – PL.
V. Results and Calculations
I. Results
These are the results for the soil sample from Pearl, MS.
14
0.0010.010.11100
20
40
60
80
100Particle Size Distribution Curve
Grain Size, D (mm)
Pe
rce
nt
Fin
er
(%)
Figure 1 Pearl, MS soil sample Particle Size Distribution Curve
15
Figure 2 Particle size distribution of three soils
Table 4. Atterberg Limit of three soilsSoil Liquid limit (%) Plastic limit (%)
Madison soil 36 22Pearl soil 29 5.3
Campus soil 27 16
16
II. Calculations
Sieve Analysis
Sieve No.Sieve
opening (mm)
Mass of soil retained on each
sieve, Wn
(g)
Percent of mass retained on each sieve,
Rn
Cumulative percent retained
Percent finer
4 4.75 2.5 0.50 0.50 99.50
10 2 0.9 0.18 0.68 99.32
20 0.85 2.6 0.52 1.20 98.80
40 0.425 35.6 7.12 8.32 91.68
60 0.25 116.2 23.24 31.56 68.44
100 0.15 24.5 4.90 36.46 63.54
200 0.075 76.8 15.36 51.82 48.18
Pan - 239 47.80 99.62 0.38
∑498.1 = W1
Mass loss during sieve analysis = (W-W1)/W x100 = 0.38% (OK if less than 2%)
Hydrometer Analysis
Test Standard:ASTM: D-
422Dry weight of soil, Ws
(g):50
Gs = 2.65 Hydrometer Type: ASTM 152-HTemperature of test, T
(oC)24
Meniscus correction Fm 1 Zero correction Fz 7
Temperature correction, FT
1.4 Variable A 0.013
Time(min)
Hydrometer reading
RRcp RCL L
D (mm)
17
100xW
Ra
s
cp
Percent Finer0.25 27 21.4 42.8 28 11.7 0.0889340.5 27 21.4 42.8 28 11.7 0.0628861 25 19.4 38.8 26 12.0 0.0450332 24 18.4 36.8 25 12.2 0.0321084 22.5 16.9 33.8 23.5 12.4 0.0228898 20 14.4 28.8 21 12.9 0.016508
15 18.7 13.1 26.2 19.7 13.0 0.01210230 17 11.4 22.8 18 13.3 0.00865660 16 10.4 20.8 17 13.5 0.006166
120 15 9.4 18.8 16 13.7 0.004393240 14 8.4 16.8 15 13.8 0.003117480 14 8.4 16.8 15 13.8 0.0022041440 13 7.4 14.8 14 14.0 0.0012822880 12 6.4 12.8 13 14.2 0.000913
Size(mm)
finer(%)
4.75 99.502 99.32
0.85 98.800.425 91.68
0.25 68.440.15 63.54
0.075 48.18
Liquid Limit TestTest Standard: ASTM: D-4318Test No. 1 2 3Can No. TD1 Friday 2 Friday 1
Mass of can, W1 (g) 11 14.7 14.4
Mass of can + moist soil, W2 (g) 44.8 37.6 44.5
Mass of can + dry soil, W3 (g) 37.3 31.8 38
Moisture content, 28.5 33.9 27.5
Number of blows, N 30 14 42
Liquid Limit = (at 25 blows)
18
100(%)13
32 xWW
WWw
Plastic Limit TestTest No. 1Can No. JY5
Mass of can, W1 (g) 11.2
Mass of can + moist soil, W2 (g) 17.2
Mass of can + dry soil, W3 (g) 16.9
5.3
Plasticity index PI = LL-PL = -5.3
VI. Discussion and Conclusions
I. Discussion
The most common aggregates are gravel and crushed stone, although cinders, blast-furnace slag,
burned shale, crushed brick, or other materials may be used because of availability, or to alter
such characteristics of the concrete such as workability, density, appearance, or conductivity of
heat or sound. Usually aggregate which passes a sieve with 0.187-inch openings (No. 4 sieve) is
called fine aggregate, but that retained by a No. 4 sieve is coarse aggregate, although the division
is purely arbitrary. If all the particles of aggregate are of the same size, or if too many fine
particles are present, an excessive amount of cement paste will be required to produce a
workable mixture; a range of sizes aids in the production of an economical mixture.
II. Conclusion
The aggregate we studied consists of coarse aggregate mainly; I noted that from the fineness
modulus. From the Grading graph we note that the aggregate we have tested are not good for
using in mixes, as the graph doesn’t lie between the upper limit and the lower limit.
19
10013
32 xWW
WWPL