CHAPTER IV

RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

4.1 Introduction
To improve the current status of the sediments location at bottom of the reservoirs,
this chapter exhibits the results and analysis of physical and chemical properties of the
samples obtained from several reservoirs located at Cameron Highlands Hydro
Electric Scheme.
Several tests were performed on the sediments. The tests are SEM-EDX, XRD,
Sieve Analysis and Specific Gravity.

4.2 Scanning Electron Microscope and Energy Dispersive X-ray spectroscopy
Test (SEM-EDX)
The SEM-EDX test was carried out at Universiti Putra Malaysia in November 2011.
In this test, Jeol JSM-7600F SEM is connected to EDX, to analyse fourteen samples
of sediments obtained from Cameron Highlands Reservoir (Fig. 4.2.1).


58


Figure 4.2.1 Institute Bio-Science, Universiti Putra Malaysia (November/2011)

The samples analysed were fresh or dredged. The samples were dried at 50
in electric-oven before starting of the test. The SEM-EDX test took 5 hours.
The results which are illustrated in Figures 4.2.2_169, have showed that the
sediments consist of Si, Al, Fe, Mg, Na, Ti, K, O and C. However, the Toxic metals
such as As, Ba, Be, Cd, Cr, Hg, Pb, Se, Ag does not exist in the sediments tested.
Moreover, all the samples are found to be angular. The characteristic of these
sediments is beneficial to manufacture new constructional material such as brick.



59


FIGURE 4.2.2 The Result from SEM for Jor Dam (Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.3 The Result from SEM for Jor Dam (Dredged)

60



FIGURE 4.2.4 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 1 for Jor Dam (Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.5 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 1 for Jor Dam (Dredged)
61


FIGURE 4.2.6 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 2 for Jor Dam (Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.7 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 2 for Jor Dam (Dredged)

62


FIGURE 4.2.8 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 3 for Jor Dam (Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.9 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 3 for Jor Dam (Dredged)

63


FIGURE 4.2.10 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 4 for Jor Dam (Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.11 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 4 for Jor Dam (Dredged)

64


FIGURE 4.2.12 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 5 for Jor Dam (Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.13 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 5 for Jor Dam (Dredged)



65



FIGURE 4.2.14 The Result from SEM for Rabinson Falls (Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.15 The Result from SEM for Rabinson Falls (Dredged)
66



FIGURE 4.2.16 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 1 for Rabinson Falls (Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.17 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 1 for Rabinson Falls (Dredged)

67


FIGURE 4.2.18 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 2 for Rabinson Falls (Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.19 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 2 for Rabinson Falls (Dredged)

68


FIGURE 4.2.20 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 3 for Rabinson Falls (Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.21 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 3 for Rabinson Falls (Dredged)

69


FIGURE 4.2.22 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 4 for Rabinson Falls (Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.23 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 4 for Rabinson Falls (Dredged)

70


FIGURE 4.2.24 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 5 for Rabinson Falls (Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.25 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 5 for Rabinson Falls (Dredged)



71


FIGURE 4.2.26 The Result from SEM for Rabinson Falls Intake (Fresh)



FIGURE 4.2.27 The Result from SEM for Rabinson Falls Intake (Fresh)

72



FIGURE 4.2.28 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 1 for Rabinson Falls (Fresh)



FIGURE 4.2.29 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 1 for Rabinson Falls (Fresh)
73


FIGURE 4.2.30 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 2 for Rabinson Falls (Fresh)



FIGURE 4.2.31 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 2 for Rabinson Falls (Fresh)

74


FIGURE 4.2.32 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 3 for Rabinson Falls (Fresh)



FIGURE 4.2.33 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 3 for Rabinson Falls (Fresh)

75


FIGURE 4.2.34 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 4 for Rabinson Falls (Fresh)



FIGURE 4.2.35 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 4 for Rabinson Falls (Fresh)


76


FIGURE 4.2.36 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 5 for Rabinson Falls (Fresh)



FIGURE 4.2.37 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 5 for Rabinson Falls (Fresh)



77


FIGURE 4.2.38 The Result from SEM for Sungai Habu (Grade A, Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.39 The Result from SEM for Sungai Habu (Grade A, Dredged)

78


FIGURE 4.2.40 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 1 for Sungai Habu (Grade A,
Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.41 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 1 for Sungai Habu (Grade A,
Dredged)

79


FIGURE 4.2.42 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 2 for Sungai Habu (Grade A,
Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.43 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 2 for Sungai Habu (Grade A,
Dredged)

80


FIGURE 4.2.44 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 3 for Sungai Habu (Grade A,
Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.45 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 3 for Sungai Habu (Grade A,
Dredged)

81


FIGURE 4.2.46 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 4 for Sungai Habu (Grade A,
Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.47 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 4 for Sungai Habu (Grade A,
Dredged)

82



FIGURE 4.2.48 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 5 for Sungai Habu (Grade A,
Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.49 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 5 for Sungai Habu (Grade A,
Dredged)
83


FIGURE 4.2.50 The Result from SEM for Sungai Habu (Grade A, Fresh)



FIGURE 4.2.51 The Result from SEM for Sungai Habu (Grade A, Fresh)

84


FIGURE 4.2.52 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 1 for Sungai Habu (Grade A,
Fresh)



FIGURE 4.2.53 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 1 for Sungai Habu (Grade A,
Fresh)

85


FIGURE 4.2.54 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 2 for Sungai Habu (Grade A,
Fresh)



FIGURE 4.2.55 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 2 for Sungai Habu (Grade A,
Fresh)

86


FIGURE 4.2.56 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 3 for Sungai Habu (Grade A,
Fresh)



FIGURE 4.2.57 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 3 for Sungai Habu (Grade A,
Fresh)

87


FIGURE 4.2.58 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 4 for Sungai Habu (Grade A,
Fresh)



FIGURE 4.2.59 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 4 for Sungai Habu (Grade A,
Fresh)

88


FIGURE 4.2.60 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 5 for Sungai Habu (Grade A,
Fresh)



FIGURE 4.2.61 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 5 for Sungai Habu (Grade A,
Fresh)
89


FIGURE 4.2.62 The Result from SEM for Sungai Habu (Grade B, Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.63 The Result from SEM for Sungai Habu (Grade B, Dredged)

90


FIGURE 4.2.64 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 1 for Sungai Habu (Grade B,
Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.65 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 1 for Sungai Habu (Grade B,
Dredged)

91


FIGURE 4.2.66 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 2 for Sungai Habu (Grade B,
Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.67 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 2 for Sungai Habu (Grade B,
Dredged)

92


FIGURE 4.2.68 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 3 for Sungai Habu (Grade B,
Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.69 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 3 for Sungai Habu (Grade B,
Dredged)

93


FIGURE 4.2.70 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 4 for Sungai Habu (Grade B,
Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.71 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 4 for Sungai Habu (Grade B,
Dredged)

94


FIGURE 4.2.72 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 5 for Sungai Habu (Grade B,
Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.73 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 5 for Sungai Habu (Grade B,
Dredged)

95


FIGURE 4.2.74 The Result from SEM for Sungai Jasik (Grade 5, Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.75 The Result from SEM for Sungai Jasik (Grade 5, Dredged)

96



FIGURE 4.2.76 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 1 for Sungai Jasik (Grade 5,
Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.77 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 1 for Sungai Jasik (Grade 5,
Dredged)
97


FIGURE 4.2.78 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 2 for Sungai Jasik (Grade 5,
Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.79 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 2 for Sungai Jasik (Grade 5,
Dredged)
98


FIGURE 4.2.80 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 3 for Sungai Jasik (Grade 5,
Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.81 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 3 for Sungai Jasik (Grade 5,
Dredged)
99


FIGURE 4.2.82 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 4 for Sungai Jasik (Grade 5,
Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.83 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 4 for Sungai Jasik (Grade 5,
Dredged)
100


FIGURE 4.2.84 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 5 for Sungai Jasik (Grade 5,
Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.85 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 5 for Sungai Jasik (Grade 5,
Dredged)
101


FIGURE 4.2.86 The Result from SEM for Sungai Jasik (Grade 6A, Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.87 The Result from SEM for Sungai Jasik (Grade 6A, Dredged)

102


FIGURE 4.2.88 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 1 for Sungai Jasik (Grade 6A,
Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.89 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 1 for Sungai Jasik (Grade 6A,
Dredged)
103


FIGURE 4.2.90 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 2 for Sungai Jasik (Grade 6A,
Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.91 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 2 for Sungai Jasik (Grade 6A,
Dredged)
104


FIGURE 4.2.92 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 3 for Sungai Jasik (Grade 6A,
Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.93 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 3 for Sungai Jasik (Grade 6A,
Dredged)
105


FIGURE 4.2.94 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 4 for Sungai Jasik (Grade 6A,
Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.95 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 4 for Sungai Jasik (Grade 6A,
Dredged)
106


FIGURE 4.2.96 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 5 for Sungai Jasik (Grade 6A,
Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.97 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 5 for Sungai Jasik (Grade 6A,
Dredged)
107


FIGURE 4.2.98 The Result from SEM for Sungai Jasik (Grade 6B, Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.99 The Result from SEM for Sungai Jasik (Grade 6B, Dredged)

108


FIGURE 4.2.100 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 1 for Sungai Jasik (Grade 6B,
Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.101 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 1 for Sungai Jasik (Grade 6B,
Dredged)

109


FIGURE 4.2.102 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 2 for Sungai Jasik (Grade 6B,
Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.103 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 2 for Sungai Jasik (Grade 6B,
Dredged)

110


FIGURE 4.2.104 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 3 for Sungai Jasik (Grade 6B,
Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.105 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 3 for Sungai Jasik (Grade 6B,
Dredged)

111


FIGURE 4.2.106 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 4 for Sungai Jasik (Grade 6B,
Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.107 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 4 for Sungai Jasik (Grade 6B,
Dredged)

112


FIGURE 4.2.108 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 5 for Sungai Jasik (Grade 6B,
Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.109 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 5 for Sungai Jasik (Grade 6B,
Dredged)

113


FIGURE 4.2.110 The Result from SEM for Sungai Jasik (Grade 7, Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.111 The Result from SEM for Sungai Jasik (Grade 7, Dredged)

114


FIGURE 4.2.112 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 1 for Sungai Jasik (Grade 7,
Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.113 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 1 for Sungai Jasik (Grade 7,
Dredged)
115


FIGURE 4.2.114 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 2 for Sungai Jasik (Grade 7,
Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.115 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 2 for Sungai Jasik (Grade 7,
Dredged)

116


FIGURE 4.2.116 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 3 for Sungai Jasik (Grade 7,
Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.117 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 3 for Sungai Jasik (Grade 7,
Dredged)

117


FIGURE 4.2.118 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 4 for Sungai Jasik (Grade 7,
Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.119 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 4 for Sungai Jasik (Grade 7,
Dredged)

118


FIGURE 4.2.120 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 5 for Sungai Jasik (Grade 7,
Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.121 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 5 for Sungai Jasik (Grade 7,
Dredged)

119


FIGURE 4.2.122 The Result from SEM for Sungai Ringlet (Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.123 The Result from SEM for Sungai Ringlet (Dredged)

120


FIGURE 4.2.124 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 1 for Sungai Ringlet (Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.125 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 1 for Sungai Ringlet (Dredged)
121


FIGURE 4.2.126 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 2 for Sungai Ringlet (Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.127 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 2 for Sungai Ringlet (Dredged)
122


FIGURE 4.2.128 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 3 for Sungai Ringlet (Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.129 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 3 for Sungai Ringlet (Dredged)
123


FIGURE 4.2.130 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 4 for Sungai Ringlet (Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.131 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 4 for Sungai Ringlet (Dredged)
124


FIGURE 4.2.132 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 5 for Sungai Ringlet (Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.133 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 5 for Sungai Ringlet (Dredged)
125


FIGURE 4.2.134 The Result from SEM for Sungai Ringlet (Fresh)



FIGURE 4.2.135 The Result from SEM for Sungai Ringlet (Fresh)

126



FIGURE 4.2.136 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 1 for Sungai Ringlet (Fresh)



FIGURE 4.2.137 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 1 for Sungai Ringlet (Fresh)

127


FIGURE 4.2.138 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 2 for Sungai Ringlet (Fresh)



FIGURE 4.2.139 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 2 for Sungai Ringlet (Fresh)

128


FIGURE 4.2.140 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 3 for Sungai Ringlet (Fresh)



FIGURE 4.2.141 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 3 for Sungai Ringlet (Fresh)

129


FIGURE 4.2.142 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 4 for Sungai Ringlet (Fresh)



FIGURE 4.2.143 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 4 for Sungai Ringlet (Fresh)

130


FIGURE 4.2.144 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 5 for Sungai Ringlet (Fresh)



FIGURE 4.2.145 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 5 for Sungai Ringlet (Fresh)

131


FIGURE 4.2.146 The Result from SEM for Telon Intake (Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.147 The Result from SEM for Telon Intake (Dredged)

132


FIGURE 4.2.148 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 1 for Telon Intake (Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.149 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 1 for Telon Intake (Dredged)
133


FIGURE 4.2.150 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 2 for Telon Intake (Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.151 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 2 for Telon Intake (Dredged)
134


FIGURE 4.2.152 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 3 for Telon Intake (Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.153 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 3 for Telon Intake (Dredged)
135


FIGURE 4.2.154 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 4 for Telon Intake (Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.155 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 4 for Telon Intake (Dredged)
136


FIGURE 4.2.156 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 5 for Telon Intake (Dredged)



FIGURE 4.2.157 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 5 for Telon Intake (Dredged)
137


FIGURE 4.2.158 The Result from SEM for Telon Intake (Fresh)



FIGURE 4.2.159 The Result from SEM for Telon Intake (Fresh)

138


FIGURE 4.2.160 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 1 for Telon Intake (Fresh)



FIGURE 4.2.161 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 1 for Telon Intake (Fresh)
139


FIGURE 4.2.162 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 2 for Telon Intake (Fresh)



FIGURE 4.2.163 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 2 for Telon Intake (Fresh)
140


FIGURE 4.2.164 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 3 for Telon Intake (Fresh)



FIGURE 4.2.165 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 3 for Telon Intake (Fresh)
141


FIGURE 4.2.166 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 4 for Telon Intake (Fresh)



FIGURE 4.2.167 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 4 for Telon Intake (Fresh)
142


FIGURE 4.2.168 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 5 for Telon Intake (Fresh)



FIGURE 4.2.169 The Result from EDX in Spectrum 5 for Telon Intake (Fresh)



143

4.3 X-Ray Diffraction Test (XRD)
At Physical Characterisation Laboratory, Centre for Research & Instrumentation
Management (CRIM), Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia the XRD experiment was
performed for fourteen samples from Cameron Highlands reservoirs sediments. The
apparatus used was Bruker AXS D8 Advance X-ray diffractometer (Fig. 4.3.1).


FIGURE 4.3.1 Physical Characterisation Laboratory, Centre for Research &
Instrumentation Management (CRIM), Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia
(December/2011)

The results of XRD (Figures 4.3.2_6) have illustrated that the samples from
different Grades of Sungai Jasik have the same mineralogy. The samples from Sungai
Habu (Dredged and Fresh), Sungai Ringlet (Fresh), Telon Intake (Dredged and Fresh)
and Robinson Fall (Fresh) are found to have similar mineralogy. Dissimilar cases are
found for the rest of the samples from Jor Dam Dredged, Robinson Fall Dredged and
Sungai Ringlet Dredged.
The analysis of the results (Figures 4.3.7_14) have illustrated that the
mineralogical composition of the dredged sediment is similar to that of the brick soil.
144

The major crystalline phases found in the sediment included quartz, Kaolanite,
Berlinite, Erythrosiderite, Mg-Calcite, Chlorite-serpentine, Vivianite and Akermanite.
The XRD analyses have showed the existence of small amounts of feldspar (sample
Intake Telon Dredged, Sungai Habu Grade A). The very small bump around 12 2- in
some samples suggested that small amounts of clay existed. Quartz is found to be the
dominant mineral. One diffractogram is found to contain a small amount of calcite.
Heavy metal, such as Arsenic, is not found in any sample from the Reservoirs.



FIGURE 4.3.2 XRD pattern of Sediments from Jor Dam (Dredged)

145


FIGURE 4.3.3 XRD pattern of Sediments from Robinson Fall (Dredged)


146


FIGURE 4.3.4 XRD pattern of Sediments from Sungai Ringlet (Dredged)
147


FIGURE 4.3.5 XRD pattern of Sediments from Sungai Jasik (Dredged) in different
grades
148


FIGURE 4.3.6 XRD pattern of Sediments from Sungai Habu (Dredged and Fresh) in
different grades, Sungai Ringlet (Fresh), Telon Intake (Dredged and Fresh), Robinson
Fall (Fresh) and the Fertilizer taken from these Sediments
149


FIGURE 4.3.7 ICDD card of Aluminium Phosphate (Berlinite)

150


FIGURE 4.3.8 ICDD card of Aluminium Silicate Hydroxide (Kaolanite)
151


FIGURE 4.3.9 ICDD card of Calcium Magnesium Silicate (Akermanite)

152


FIGURE 4.3.10 ICDD card of Iron Phosphate Hydrate (Vivianite)


153



FIGURE 4.3.11 ICDD card of Magnesium Aluminium Silicate Hydroxide (Chlorite-
Serpentine)

154


FIGURE 4.3.12 ICDD card of Magnesium Calcium Carbonate (Mg-Calcite)
155


FIGURE 4.3.13 ICDD card of Potassium Iron Chloride Hydrate (Erythrosiderite)

156


FIGURE 4.3.14 ICDD card of Silicon Oxide (Quartz)


4.4 Sieve Analysis
8 samples of Cameron Highlands Reservoir Sediments have been prepared and tested
for sieve analysis. The test was done in accordance to the requirements of ASTM C33.
Tabulated graphical results are shown in Table (4.4.1_16) and Figure (4.4.1_8).





157

TABLE 4.4.1 Sieve Analysis for Sediments of Jor Dam
Sieve
Size
Mass Retained
(gr)
Cumulative
amount
Retained (gr)
Cumulative
percentage
Retained (%)
Cumulative
percentage
Passing (%)
9.5 mm 0 0 0 100
4.75 mm 15.2 15.2 5.07 94.93
2.36 mm 26.3 41.5 13.83 86.17
1.18 mm 58.4 99.9 33.30 66.70
600 m 124.4 224.3 74.77 25.23
300 m 10.8 235.1 78.37 21.63
150 m 39.7 274.8 91.60 8.40
75 m 11.2 286.0 95.33 4.67
Pan 14.0 300.0 100.00 0.00
Total 300.0



FIGURE 4.4.1 The resulting graph of grain size distribution for Sediments of Jor Dam




0
20
40
60
80
100
120
9.5
mm
4.75
mm
2.36
mm
1.18
mm
600
m
300
m
150
m
75 m
C
u
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e

P
e
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e

P
a
s
s
i
n
g

(
%
)

Sieve Size
Jor Dam
158

TABLE 4.4.2 The fineness modulus for Sediments of Jor Dam
Maximum aggregate size Nominal Maximum aggregate size Fineness Modulus
4.75 mm 4.75 mm 2.97


From the sieve analysis performed on sediments obtained from Jor Dam, it is
found that the maximum aggregate size is 4.75mm, nominal maximum aggregate size
is 4.75 mm and fineness modulus is 2.97.

TABLE 4.4.3 Sieve Analysis for Sediments of Sungai Ringlet
Sieve
Size
Mass Retained
(gr)
Cumulative
amount
Retained (gr)
Cumulative
percentage
Retained (%)
Cumulative
percentage
Passing (%)
9.5 mm 0 0 0 100
4.75 mm 16 16.0 5.33 94.67
2.36 mm 15.2 31.2 10.40 89.60
1.18 mm 33.5 64.7 21.57 88.43
600 m 135.8 200.5 66.83 33.17
300 m 13.2 213.7 71.23 28.77
150 m 37.1 250.8 83.60 16.40
75 m 29.0 279.8 93.27 17.73
Pan 20.2 300.0 100.00 0.00
Total 300.0


159


FIGURE 4.4.2 The resulting graph of grain size distribution for Sediments of Sungai
Ringlet


TABLE 4.4.4 The fineness modulus for Sediments of Sungai Ringlet
Maximum aggregate size Nominal Maximum aggregate size Fineness Modulus
4.75 mm 4.75 mm 2.59


From the sieve analysis performed on sediments obtained from Sungai Ringlet,
it is found that the maximum aggregate size is 4.75mm, nominal maximum aggregate
size is 4.75 mm and fineness modulus is 2.59.





0
20
40
60
80
100
120
9.5
mm
4.75
mm
2.36
mm
1.18
mm
600
m
300
m
150
m
75
m
C
u
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e

P
e
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e

P
a
s
s
i
n
g

(
%
)

Sieve Size
Sungai Ringlet
160

TABLE 4.4.5 Sieve Analysis for Sediments of Sungai Habu
Sieve
Size
Mass Retained
(gr)
Cumulative
amount
Retained (gr)
Cumulative
percentage
Retained (%)
Cumulative
percentage
Passing (%)
9.5 mm 0 0 0 100
4.75 mm 41.0 41.0 13.70 86.30
2.36 mm 34.3 75.3 25.10 74.90
1.18 mm 78.8 154.1 51.37 48.63
600 m 80.3 234.4 78.13 21.87
300 m 41.3 275.7 91.90 8.10
150 m 7.2 282.9 94.30 5.70
75 m 5.1 288.0 96.00 4.00
Pan 12.0 300.0 100.00 0.00
Total 300.0



FIGURE 4.4.3 The resulting graph of grain size distribution for Sediments of Sungai
Habu



0
20
40
60
80
100
120
9.5
mm
4.75
mm
2.36
mm
1.18
mm
600
m
300
m
150
m
75 m
C
u
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e

P
e
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e

P
a
s
s
i
n
g

(
%
)

Sieve Size
Sungai Habu
161

TABLE 4.4.6 The fineness modulus for Sediments of Sungai Habu
Maximum aggregate size Nominal Maximum aggregate size Fineness Modulus
4.75 mm 4.75 mm 3.55

From the sieve analysis performed on sediments obtained from Sungai Habu, it
is found that the maximum aggregate size is 4.75mm, nominal maximum aggregate
size is 4.75 mm and fineness modulus is 3.55.

TABLE 4.4.7 Sieve Analysis for Sediments of Sungai Jasik (Grade 5A)
Sieve
Size
Mass Retained
(gr)
Cumulative
amount
Retained (gr)
Cumulative
percentage
Retained (%)
Cumulative
percentage
Passing (%)
9.5 mm 0 0 0 100
4.75 mm 112.2 112.2 37.40 42.60
2.36 mm 36.4 148.6 49.53 50.47
1.18 mm 19.2 167.8 55.93 44.07
600 m 20.4 188.2 62.73 37.27
300 m 21.2 209.4 69.80 30.20
150 m 26.9 236.3 78.77 21.33
75 m 26.3 262.6 87.53 12.47
Pan 37.4 300.0 100.00 0.00
Total 300.0


162


FIGURE 4.4.4 The resulting graph of grain size distribution for Sediments of Sungai
Jasik (Grade 5A)

TABLE 4.4.8 The fineness modulus for Sediments of Sungai Jasik (Grade 5A)
Maximum aggregate size Nominal Maximum aggregate size Fineness Modulus
4.75 mm 4.75 mm 3.54

From the sieve analysis performed on sediments obtained from Sungai Jasik
(Grade 5A), it is found that the maximum aggregate size is 4.75mm, nominal
maximum aggregate size is 4.75 mm and fineness modulus is 3.54.








0
20
40
60
80
100
120
9.5
mm
4.75
mm
2.36
mm
1.18
mm
600
m
300
m
150
m
75
m
C
u
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e

P
e
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e

P
a
s
s
i
n
g

Sieve Size
Sungai Jasik (Grade 5A)
163

TABLE 4.4.9 Sieve Analysis for Sediments of Sungai Jasik (Grade 6A)
Sieve
Size
Mass Retained
(gr)
Cumulative
amount
Retained (gr)
Cumulative
percentage
Retained (%)
Cumulative
percentage
Passing (%)
9.5 mm 0 0 0 100
4.75 mm 25.0 25.0 8.33 91.67
2.36 mm 33.2 58.2 19.40 80.6
1.18 mm 48.9 107.1 35.70 64.3
600 m 50.1 157.2 52.40 47.6
300 m 54.8 212.0 70.67 29.33
150 m 31.8 243.8 81.27 18.73
75 m 18.9 262.7 87.57 12.43
Pan 37.3 300.0 100.00 0
Total 300.0



FIGURE 4.4.5 The resulting graph of grain size distribution for Sediments of Sungai
Jasik (Grade 6A)



0
20
40
60
80
100
120
9.5
mm
4.75
mm
2.36
mm
1.18
mm
600
m
300
m
150
m
75
m
C
u
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e

P
e
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e

P
a
s
s
i
n
g

(
%
)

Sieve Size
Sungai Jasik (Grade 6A)
164

TABLE 4.4.10 The fineness modulus for Sediments of Sungai Jasik (Grade 6A)
Maximum aggregate size Nominal Maximum aggregate size Fineness Modulus
4.75 mm 4.75 mm 2.68

From the sieve analysis performed on sediments obtained from Sungai Jasik
(Grade 6A), it is found that the maximum aggregate size is 4.75mm, nominal
maximum aggregate size is 4.75 mm and fineness modulus is 2.68.

TABLE 4.4.11 Sieve Analysis for Sediments of Sungai Jasik (Grade 7)
Sieve
Size
Mass Retained
(gr)
Cumulative
amount
Retained (gr)
Cumulative
percentage
Retained (%)
Cumulative
percentage
Passing (%)
9.5 mm 0 0 0 100
4.75 mm 44.3 44.3 14.77 85.23
2.36 mm 40.4 84.7 28.23 71.77
1.18 mm 40.9 125.6 41.87 58.13
600 m 41.2 166.8 55.60 44.40
300 m 51.6 218.4 72.80 27.20
150 m 33.9 252.3 84.10 15.90
75 m 25.0 277.3 92.43 7.57
Pan 22.7 300.0 100.00 0.00
Total 300.0


165


FIGURE 4.4.6 The resulting graph of grain size distribution for Sediments of Sungai
Jasik (Grade 7)

TABLE 4.4.12 The fineness modulus for Sediments of Sungai Jasik (Grade 7)
Maximum aggregate size Nominal Maximum aggregate size Fineness Modulus
4.75 mm 4.75 mm 2.97

From the sieve analysis performed on sediments obtained from Sungai Jasik
(Grade 7), it is found that the maximum aggregate size is 4.75mm, nominal maximum
aggregate size is 4.75 mm and fineness modulus is 2.97.








0
20
40
60
80
100
120
9.5
mm
4.75
mm
2.36
mm
1.18
mm
600
m
300
m
150
m
75
m
C
u
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e

P
e
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e

P
a
s
s
i
n
g

(
%
)

Sieve Size
Sungai Jasik (Grade 7)
166

TABLE 4.4.13 Sieve Analysis for Sediments of Robinson Falls Intake
Sieve
Size
Mass Retained
(gr)
Cumulative
amount
Retained (gr)
Cumulative
percentage
Retained (%)
Cumulative
percentage
Passing (%)
9.5 mm 0 0 0 100
4.75 mm 6.9 6.9 2.30 97.70
2.36 mm 33.3 40.2 13.40 86.60
1.18 mm 76.8 117.0 39.00 61.00
600 m 83.4 200.4 66.80 33.20
300 m 76.7 277.1 92.37 7.63
150 m 10.4 287.5 95.83 4.17
75 m 5.4 292.9 97.63 2.37
Pan 7.1 300.0 100.00 0.00
Total 300.0



FIGURE 4.4.7 The resulting graphs for grain size distribution of Sediments of
Robinson Falls Intake



0
20
40
60
80
100
120
9.5
mm
4.75
mm
2.36
mm
1.18
mm
600
m
300
m
150
m
75
m
C
u
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e

P
e
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e

P
a
s
s
i
n
g

(
%
)

Sieve Size
Rabinson Falls Intake
167

TABLE 4.4.14 The fineness modulus for Sediments of Robinson Falls Intake
Maximum aggregate size Nominal Maximum aggregate size Fineness Modulus
4.75 mm 4.75 mm 3.1

From the sieve analysis performed on sediments obtained from Robinson Falls
Intake, it is found that the maximum aggregate size is 4.75mm, nominal maximum
aggregate size is 4.75 mm and fineness modulus is 3.1.

TABLE 4.4.15 Sieve Analysis for Sediments of Telon Intake
Sieve
Size
Mass Retained
(gr)
Cumulative
amount
Retained (gr)
Cumulative
percentage
Retained (%)
Cumulative
percentage
Passing (%)
9.5 mm 0 0 0 100
4.75 mm 4.1 4.1 1.37 98.63
2.36 mm 20.3 24.4 8.13 91.87
1.18 mm 51.5 75.9 25.3 74.70
600 m 73.5 149.4 49.8 50.20
300 m 110.2 259.6 86.53 13.47
150 m 25.2 284.8 94.93 5.07
75 m 7.2 292.0 97.33 2.67
Pan 8.0 300.0 100 0.00
Total 300.0


168


FIGURE 4.4.8 The resulting graph of grain size distribution for Sediments of Telon
Intake


TABLE 4.4.16 The fineness modulus for Sediments of Telon Intake
Maximum aggregate size Nominal Maximum aggregate size Fineness Modulus
4.75 mm 2.36 mm 2.66

From the sieve analysis performed on sediments obtained from Telon Intake, it
is found that the maximum aggregate size is 4.75mm, nominal maximum aggregate
size is 2.36 mm and fineness modulus is 2.66.

4.5 Specific Gravity
The results obtained from 5 samples of Cameron Highland reservoir sediments were
analyzed using Standard Test for Specific Gravity and Absorption of Fine Aggregate
as tabulated in Table 4.5.1. The results obtained from 3samples were analyzed using
Standard Test for Specific Gravity of Soil Solids as tabulated in Table 4.5.2.
Sample of Calculation of sediments from Jor Dam:
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
9.5
mm
4.75
mm
2.36
mm
1.18
mm
600
m
300
m
150
m
75 m
C
u
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e

P
e
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e

P
a
s
s
i
n
g

(
%
)

Sieve Size
Telon Intake
169

Bulk Specific Gravity =

= 2.375
Bulk Specific Gravity (SSD) =

= 2.431
Apparent Specific Gravity =

= 2.516
Absorption, (%) =

= 2.354 %

TABLE 4.5.1 The Results of Specific Gravity for 5 Sediments Samples considered as
Fine Aggregate
Location A
(gr)
B (gr) C (gr) Bulk
Specific
Gravity

Bulk
Specific
Gravity
(SSD)

Apparent
Specific
Gravity

Absorption,
(%)
Jor Dam 488.5 1609.8 1904.2 2.375 2.431 2.516 2.354
Sungai
Ringlet
490 1609.6 1908 2.428 2.477 2.554 2.040
Sungai
Habu
492 1609.8 1909 2.450 2.490 2.551 1.626
Rabinson
Fall Intake
490.2 1609.8 1901.5 2.353 2.400 2.469 1.999
Telon
Intake
490 1609.8 1903.2 2.371 2.420 2.492 2.040
Average 2.395 2.444 2.516 2.012


The Apparent Specific Gravity of fine aggregate, such as Sand, must be
between 2.3 to 2.6 with small percentage of Absorption. The above result is found to
approximately follow the standard of ASTM C 128.

170

Sample of Calculation of sediments from Sungai Jasik (5):
G
s
=

= 2.304

TABLE 4.5.2 The Results of Specific Gravity for 3 Sediments Samples which have
been considered as Soil
Location M
1
(gr) M
2
(gr) M
3
(gr) M
4
(gr) G
s
Sungai Jasik
(5)
27.16 37.16 83.16 77.50 2.304
Sungai Jasik
(6A)
28.66 38.66 84.66 78.83 2.398
Sungai Jasik
(7)
27.66 37.66 83.50 77.50 2.500
Average 2.400

The Specific Gravity for soil, such as Clay, must be between 1.90 to 2.67.
Thus, the above result is found to closely follow the standard of ASTM D 854.

4.6 Discussion
From the tests performed on the sediments obtained from various locations at
Cameron Highlands Reservoirs, it is found that the sediments does not contain any
harmful toxic metals, the shapes of the sediments are well graded and results of
specific gravity tests follow closely to the values recommended by standard ASTM
C128 and ASTM D854.