Laboratory Work No.

TITLE: MECHANICAL ANALYSIS OF SOIL

OBJECTIVE:

LIST OF EQUIPMENTS AND APPARATUS:

1. Stack of sieves 5. sieve shaker

2. Drying oven 6. soil pan
3. Mortar 7. spatula
4. Balance 8. hand shovel

PROCEDURE:

1. Obtain a representative of a given dry soil approximately 400-500 grams. The

sample must be well pulverized using the mortar impresser or mechanical soil
pulverizer. Place the sample in the stack if sieves with the arrangement
shown.

Place the stack of sieves in a mechanical sieve shaker. Shake for 5 to 10

minutes, depending on the probable difficulty involved as observed by visual
inspection.
2. Remove the stack of sieves from the shaker and obtain the weight of the
material.
3. Sum up the cuts and compare the weight obtained (400 – 500). Get
percentage of loss.
4. Compute the percentage retained in each sieve by the original sample weight.
Compute the percentage of passing or percent finer by starting with 100%and
subtracting the percentage retained from each sieve by a cumulative
procedure.
5. Put the plot of the graph of percentage passing as natural scale versus sieve
size as a logarithmic scale.
GENERAL DATA:

Original weight of Soil Sample _____1197.45 g_______________________

Weight of Sample ________________1197.45 g_______________________
Weight of Pan with Soil ____________3402.07 g_______________________
GENERAL DISCUSSIONS

A soil material maybe divided into fractions according to the size of its consistent
particles. Such division is a mechanical analysis of soil. A good mechanical analysis is
not equally valuable in different branches of engineering. The size of soil grain is of
importance only in such cases as embankments where earth is used as a material that
should satisfy definite specifications in foundations of structures. Data from mechanical
analysis generally are only illustrative; other soil properties such as compression or
shearing resistance are of importance.

The physical and chemical processes which result in graduation of sizes of

granular sizes from immense builders down to tiny particles composed of clay minerals
also suggest that this should be a convenient method in classifying the material, and
most system of classification which have been devised are, in fact, based upon the
grain size. In practice important mechanical property distinctions and differences
develop as soil grain sizes approximate those at which the chemical and physical
properties are also separated. Certain material behaviors maybe associated with the
coarser grain sizes and qualitatively different behaviors with soils composed of finer
grain sizes.

Consequently, it is of interest to determine in any given soil sample the

proportions of relatively finer materials present. This is achieved by considering that
soul larger in size than the openings of the #200 sieve shall be determined as coarse,
and the smaller grain size soil will be termed as fine. The classifications of soil size
distribution are accomplished by setting up a stack of sieves in which sieve is a set
above a second one whose opening is commonly half the size of opening of the first.
Frequently, seven or eight sieves are used. The range of size varies perhaps by ¾ size
openings. However, the selection of sieve usually depends on how the observer sizes up
this range in the soil most accurately. With a known weight of sieves, the nest is shaken
vigorously for 10 to 15 minutes. And then, the weight of the soil retained din each sieve
is measured. The soil in any sieve is the size resisting upon it. A pan catches the grain
passing through the sieve.

In the case of the finer particles, they are separated by the method of wet
analysis, which is principally based on the speed of sedimentation. The method of wet
analysis generally used is the “hydrometer method”. Other methods are the pipette
and elutriation method, which will not be discussed here.
GENERAL DATA:

Sieve Size Weight Cumulative % Cumulative % Passing

# Opening Retained weight Retained % retained
(mm) retained
4 4.75 0.27 g 0.27 g 0.02 % 0.02 % 99.98 %

8 2.36 1.99 g 2.26g 0.17 % 0.19 % 99.81 %

16 1.18 23.16 g 25.42 g 1.93 % 2.17 % 97.88 %

40 0.425 365.89 g 391.41 g 30.56 % 32.68 % 67.32 %

80 0.18 385.83 g 777.14 g 32.22 % 64.9 % 35.1 %

100 0.15 282.34 g 1059.48 g 23.58 % 88.48 % 11.52 %

200 0.075 103.07 g 1162.55 g 8.61 % 97.09 % 2.91 %

pan _ 34.90 g 1197.45 g 2.91 % 100 % 0%

Total Sample =1197.45g

COMPUTATIONS:
Formulas
1. Wr = Ws - W
Wr = Weight of soil retained in the sieve
W = Weight of sieve without soil
Ws = Weight of sieve with soil
2. Cumulative Wr = sum of Wr
3. % Retained = (Wr/Total sample) x 100
4. Cumulative % retained = sum of % retained
5. % Passing = 100% - Cumulative % retained
SIEVE # 4:
1. Wr = 596.63 - 596.36 = 0.27g
2. Cumulative Wr = 0.27g
3. % Retained = (0.27/1197.45) x 100 = 0.02 %
4. Cum. % Ret’d = 0.02 %
5. % Passing = 100% - 0.02 % = 99.98 %
SIEVE # 8:
1. Wr = 477.99 – 476 = 1.99 g
2. Cumulative Wr = 0.27 + 1.99 = 2.26g
3. % Retained = (1.99/1197.45) x 100 = 0.17 %
4. Cum. % Ret’d = 0.02% + 0.17% = 0.19 %
5. % Passing = 100% - 0.19 % = 99.81 %
SIEVE # 16:
1. Wr = 464.77 – 441. 61 = 23.16 g
2. Cumulative Wr = 2.26+ 23.16 = 25.42 g
3. % Retained = (23.16/1197.45) x 100 = 1.93 %
4. Cum. % Ret’d = 0.19% + 1.93% = 2.12 %
5. % Passing = 100% - 2.12 % = 97.88 %
SIEVE # 40:
1. Wr =747.77 – 381.88 = 365.89 g
2. Cumulative Wr = 25.42 + 365.89 = 391.41 g
3. % Retained = (365.89/1197.45) x 100 = 30.56 %
4. Cum. % Ret’d = 2.12% + 30.56% = 32.68 %
5. % Passing = 100% - 32.68 % = 67.32 %
SIEVE # 80:
1. Wr =735.73 -349.9 = 385.83 g
2. Cumulative Wr = 391.41 + 385.83 = 777.14 g
3. % Retained = (385.83/1197.45) x 100 = 32.22 %
4. Cum. % Ret’d = 32.68% + 32.22% = 64.9 %
5. % Passing = 100% - 64.9 % = 35.1 %
SIEVE # 100:
1. Wr = 631.42 – 349.08 = 282.34 g
2. Cumulative Wr = 777.14 + 282.34 = 1059.48 g
3. % Retained = (282.34/1197.45) x 100 = 23.58 %
4. Cum. % Ret’d = 64.9% + 23.58% = 88.48 %
5. % Passing = 100% - 23.58 % = 11.52 %
SIEVE # 200:
1. Wr = 438.17 – 335.10 = 103.07 g
2. Cumulative Wr = 1059.48 + 103.07 = 1162.55 g
3. % Retained = (103.07/1197.45) x 100 = 8.61 %
4. Cum. % Ret’d = 88.48% + 8.61% = 97.09 %
5. % Passing = 100% - 97.09% = 2.91 %
PAN:
1. Wr = 410.35 – 375.45 = 34.90 g
2. Cumulative Wr = 1162.55 + 34.9 = 1197.45 g
3. % Retained = (34.9/1197.45) x 100 = 2.91 %
4. Cum. % Ret’d = 97.09% + 2.91% = 100 %
5. % Passing = 100% - 100% = 0 %
REMARKS AND CONCLUSION:

In this particular laboratory work, we were able to determine the particle size
distribution of our soil sample. Our total soil sample is 1197.45 grams and from the
experiment, it is found out that about 2.17% is in the particle size of 1.18mm to 4.75
mm and about 86.31% is in the particle size of 0.1mm to 0.425mm. And only 2.91% of
the sample penetrated the Sieve# 200 or is smaller than 0.075mm. Therefore, only
little amount of the sample is considered as fine, only about 2.91% (34.9g) and the rest
of the sample, 97.09% (1162.55g) is to be considered as coarse. And from the value of
the uniformity coefficient which is 1.79, the soil sample is considered to be poorly
graded or uniformly graded.

APPARATUS: (DOCUMENTATION)

Empty Sieve

Sieve with Soil

PLOT:

Uniformity Coefficient (Cu):

Cu = D60/D10
*D60 = 0.25
*D10 = 0.14
Cu = 0.25 / 0.14
Cu = 1. 79
■ Cu < 5, therefore the soil sample is poorly graded or uniformly
graded.

Coefficient of gradation (Cc):

Cc = (D30)² / (D60)(D10)
*D30 = 0.17
Cc = (0.17) ² / (0.25)(0.14)
Cc = 0.83