## Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

Abstract This experiment examined the particle-size distribution of soil using Sieve Analysis Method and Hydrometer Analysis Method. The experiment was to determine the percentage passing in each sieve using Sieve Analysis and the percentage finer in suspension using Hydrometer Analysis. Two hundred-fifty gram sample were obtained from a pile of air-dried soil. The sample was sieved through a series of sieves with varying opening sizes and measured the mass retained in each sieve. The soil particles that passed through the sieve with smallest opening were in suspension in a Sodium Hexametaphosphate solution at a given time and percentage finer is calculated. Results are plotted in a semilogarithmic graph and showed that it is relatively well graded because its uniformity coefficient lied within the set range.

Submitted by: Chrislene D. Calivo Groupmates: Romil Cahatol Arlish Carpio Ramil Diaz Mark David Siervo Niki Jon Tolentino Date Performed: 22 November 2010 Date Submitted: 03 December 2010

4.I. 16. 40. • • Objectives To determine the particle size distribution of the soil sample by Sieve Analysis and Hydrometer Analysis To be able plot and analyze the gradation curve of the soil sample I. 100. 50. Methodology . 30. • • • • • • • • • • • • • Materials Balance Sieves (Nos. 8. 200) Bottom pan Lid Oven Stirring rod Hydrometer (type 152H) Graduated cylinder Graduated beaker Sodium Hexametaphosphate Distilled water Thermometer Timer I.

Data and Results A. Mass (kg) Sieve with Soil (kg) 0.381 Differenc e % Soil (kg) 0.91% 16.499 0.027 0.41 0.20% % Cumulative Retained 9. Sieve Analysis Mass of Mass of Sieve No.60% 20.20% 67.51% 31.40% 79.09% 83.013 0. Sieve Analysis B.25% 5.024 0.05% 14.49% 68.462 0.391 0. Hydrometer Analysis I.334 0.024 0.405 0.65% 58.432 0.80% 5.249 % Retained 9.35% 41.55% 99.03 0.25% .85% 47.75% 94.442 0.80% 32.80% 10.383 0.361 0.503 0.45% 0. 4 8 16 30 40 50 100 200 pan Sum (kg) Sieve (kg) 0.367 0.75% % Cumulative Passing 90.A.66% 10.84% 9.037 0.60% 11.15% 52.039 0.027 0.337 0.523 0.475 0.20% 12.368 Orig.60% 15.376 0.028 0.

51% 31.0240.75 2. Sieve Diameter and % Cumulative Passing Using Sieve Analysis Sieve Diameter (mm) 4.250 0.40% 79. Sieve Diameter vs.36 1.0.249*100%=9.40% Graph 1.075 Mass of Soil=Mass of Sieve with Soil-Mass of Sieve Mass of Soil=0.250*100%=0.6 0.20% 67.15% 52. %Cumulative Passing Using Sieve Analysis . Percentage Retained and Percentage Passing Using Sieve Analysis % Cumulative Passing 90.22%=100% % Cumulative Passing=100%-%Cumulative % Cumulative Passing=100%-9.024 kg % Retained=Mass ofSoilTotal Mass*100% % Retained=0.35% 41.78%+5.250-0.42 0.36% Error=Orig.64%=90.45% 0.Mass*100% Error= 0.15 0.91% 16.Mass-SumOrig.3 0.001 40.00% Table 1.2490. Mass Retained.499 kg=0.18 0.523 kg-0.25% Table 2.25% 5.64% % Cumulative=94.

025781 19. 6 30.3 0. 4 0.067 0.004763 1440.01258 0.5 27 8.051409 19.5 1.1 0.01258 0. Hydrometer Analysis Time elapsed.071607 diameter . T (min) Actual Hydrometer Reading Trial 1 Trial 2 Average 0.35 0. Diameter and percentage finer in suspension of soil particles less than 0.016208 19.5 27 8. 4 1.00 49 0 49 27 8.01258 0.00 49 0 49 27 8.5 1.009358 19. 8 60.01258 0.01258 0.50 48. 2 1.00 46 50 48 Table 3. 2 2. L (cm) K* Diameter (mm) % finer 0 0.01258 0.00 49 0 49 27 8.01258 0.9 8.067 50 40 45 0.01258 0.036352 19.B.35 0.075 mm in 45 50 0 0 45 50 27 27 8.145352 0. 8 00 47 0 47 27 8.4 0.50 46 50 48 2. 6 5.000972 Table 4.01258 0.00 48. Hydrometer reading during the first two minutes Actual Hydrome T (min) ter Reading Composi te Correctio n Hydrometer Reading Correction Temp (°C) *Effective Hydromet er Length.01258 0.4 0.00 47 0 47 27 8.02977 19. 6 15.50 48 0 48 27 8.6 0.00 47 50 48.50 47 50 48.25 18 20 19.3 0.01258 0.5 0 48.006617 18.00 48 0 48 27 8. 18.5 0 48.6 0.25 48 52 50 0.3 0.

It means that the results are acceptable. Graph 3 was the combined gradation/particle size distribution curve using hydrometer analysis and hydrometer analysis of soils. Particle Diameter (mm) vs. K obtained from the table. .01258*8.40%. (Fundamentals of Geotechnical Engineering 3rd Ed. since Hydrometers are calibrated for soils that have a specific gravity of 2. by Das.56% I. Table 4 is the summary of the results for the hydrometer analysis of soil. G1 was set to be 1 and Gs was set to be 2. The composite correction was computed by subtracting one from the calibration reading. the percent difference of the initial mass from the mass after sieving was just 0.145352 P=RhαW x 100% P=8. p.*L. Particle Distribution using Sieve Analysis. Table 3 is the hydrometer reading done in the two first two minutes of reading. For the diameter and percent finer. But we were not able to calibrate the hydrometer therefore assuming that the composite correction is zero. As computed. while the oven-dried was 11 g. % Finer in suspension Graph 3. specific gravity is assumed to be 2. Analysis and Discussion Table 1 is the result of the sieve analysis.9*1.0250 x 100%= 3.067= 0.29) Graph 2.65. The mass of the air-dried soil was 13 g. superimposed Particle Distribution Using Hydrometer Analysis Dmm=KLT Dmm=KLT D mm=0.65.65.90.

namely: Effective size. References ASTM D422 Standard Test Method for Particle-Size Analysis of Soils Biscontin. But its coefficient of gradation failed to do so.” Texas A&M University. an application.101 mm. We were not able to correct our reading because of it. it can be said that relatively. From above.8510. Coefficient of uniformity. III. D10. . And also. Conclusion There are three basic parameters in analyzing the particle size distribution of soils. and its coefficient of gradation should lie between 1 and 3.893 For soil particles to be classified as well graded. using Sieve Analysis showed that there was uniform distribution of size particles over a wide range. D30. We just assumed that temperature was constant all throughout. and 0. But graph 1. it can be said that its uniformity coefficient lies within the pre-set range. using Hydrometer analysis showed a poorlygraded soil particles since majority of those particles were of the same size. While graph 2. D10. Otherwise. Via Dplot.277 mm. Using graph 3. It just deviated a bit at the hydrometer analysis. and D60 were found to be 0.II. 0. Cc= D302D60D10=0. we were not able to check if the temperature of the mixture varied while doing the reading.101)=0. the sample was well-graded.101=8. CVEN365 Introduction to Geotechnical Engineering LABORATORY MANUAL.27720. Coefficient of uniformity and coefficient of gradation. D30 and D60 were obtained which are necessary in computing for the values of the three parameters. Results showed that it is neither well graded nor poor graded.851(0. The errors might have come from the non-calibration of the hydrometer. Its particle distribution lies somewhere in between. its coefficient of uniformity should be greater than 4 for gravel and greater than 6 for sands.851 mm respectively. “Particle Size Analysis of Soils. it is poorly graded.425 Coefficient of gradation. Giovanna. Cu=D60D10= 0.

CE 162 Lecture Notes .

- 03 Hydrometer Analysis (1)
- 4) Hydrometer Analysis Test
- Sand Sieve Analysis Lab Report
- Atterburg Limits Lab Report (Lab Report 1)
- Dry Sieve Report
- Sieve-Analysis-Lab-Report.docx
- Conclusion
- Sieve Analysis
- Atterberg Limit-liquid and Plastic Limits Test
- Sieve analysis
- Sieve Analysis
- Lab5 Grain Size Distribution
- Lab Report 1
- Soil Lab Expt 3 a and b
- Sieve analysis
- Lab#1 Specific Gravity
- Plastic Limit Test
- shear box test
- FULL REPORT consolidation.docx
- Conclusion
- 06 Hydrometer Test
- Determination of Specific Gravity by Pcynometer Test
- Soil Comp Action Test report by yasas89
- Report Full Direct Shear Test Edit (Repaired)
- sieve analysis
- Experiment 4 ( Plastic Limit Test)
- Liquid Limit Test
- Geotechnics Moisture Content Lab Report
- Experiment Compaction Test (Standard Proctor)
- Determination of Moisture Content

Sign up to vote on this title

UsefulNot usefulRead Free for 30 Days

Cancel anytime.

Close Dialog## Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

Loading