Technical Report Submitted for KA21603 Geotechnical Engineering 1, Semester II, Session 2012/2013)

SOIL CLASSIFICATION USING SIEVE ANALYSIS AND ATTERBERG LIMITS FOR A LAND RECLAMATION PROJECT
MOHD HAZMI BIN HASAN1 ABSTRACT: In order to be able to describe, in general, a specific soil without listing values of its many soil parameters, it would be convenient to have some kind of generalized classification system. (Liu, 2005) This paper presents initial soil classification using sieve analysis and atterberg limits for a land reclamation project. By doing this project, it required several systems to classify the soils. There are Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials(AASHTO), Unified Soil Classification System(USCS), American Society for Testing and Materials(ASTM), United states Department of Agricultural(USDA), British Standard Classification System(BS). We did a laboratory test (sieve analysis and Atterberg limits) to get information for the classification. This technical report is to provide the essential information of the test and a suggestion on the most suitable soil for the project. Keywords: Soil classification, Sieve Analysis, Atterberg Limit Test.

1.0 INTRODUCTION In order to classification the land, studies must be conducted to understand what soil was like in its original state. This project is conducted to determine the suitability of the soils in the areas of Teluk Likas. This study involves soil taken from UMS-ODEC, Indah Permai and also in Kingfisher area. These three samples were carried for the laboratory test. Soil investigation at certain area is conducted to determine which soil is suitable for land reclamation at that area. Atterberg proposed the limits of consistency for agriculture purpose to get a clear concept of the range of water contents of a soil in plastic state (Nagaraj, Sridharan, Mallikarjuna 2012). The atterberg limit consist of plastic limit and liquid limit (Nagaraj, Sridharan, Mallikarjuna 2012). To develop the testing procedures to determine the plastic limit and liquid limit, researcher tried to defined liquid limit and plastic limit as strength based water content (Nagaraj, Sridharan, Mallikarjuna 2012). The objectives of the test are: a) To classify the soil sample using different standards systems. To know how to use the soil classification system such as Association of State Highway and Transportation System (AASHTO), Unified Soil Classification System (USCS), British Standard System (BS), American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) and United State Department of Agriculture (USDA). b) To compare the soil after the classification.
1

c)

To determine the suitability of the soil for land reclamation.

2.0 RESEARCH METHOD There are 3 samples that we have taken from three different places such as UMS-ODEC, Indah Permai, and Kingfisher. To classify and determine the soils using different systems, we need to know specific information about the soil such as specific gravity, liquid limit, plastic index, and so on. Different experiments need to be conducted to obtain different parameters. Sieving procedure First, samples with the largest particles being of the size NO 4 sieve opening (4.75mm). For soils with the largest particles of a size greater that 4.75mm, larger weight are needed. After that, break the soil samples into individual particles using mortar and a pestle. Next, determine the accurate mass of the sample and prepare and weight a stark of the sieve. A sieve with larger opening is places above a sieve with smaller opening. The sieve at the bottom should be NO 200. A bottom pan should be placed under the NO 200 sieve, as mentioned before, the sieve that are generally used are NO 4,10,20,40,60, 140, and 200 : however, more sieve can be placed in between. Pour the soil prepared in into stack of sieve from the top.

BK11160409, [email protected], Civil Engineering Program, UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH

Place the cover on the top of the stack of sieves. Run the stack of sieve thought a sieve shaker for about 10-15 minutes. Weigh the amount of soil retained on each sieve and in the bottom of the pan. Weigh the amount of soil retained on each sieve and in the bottom pan. If a considerable amount of soil with silk and clayed faction is retained on the NO 200 sieve, it has washed. Washing is done by taking the NO 200 sieve with the soil retained on it and pouring water through the sieve from a tap. When the water passing through the sieve is clear, stop the flow of water. Transfer the soil retained on the sieve at the end of washing to a porcelain evaporating dish by backwashing. Put it in the oven to a constant weight. Determine the mass of the dry soil. Determine the mass of soil that has washed through (Makinda, 2013). Atterberg Limits Soil sample with air dried is taken and sieve with sieve No. 40, soil that passing sieve No. 40 is used for the liquid limit test. Sample is first added with water to about surface saturated dry, then it is placed in a penetration cup using spatula and pressed slightly too removed air void. Lowered the penetration cone until the needle slightly touched the surface of the sample. The cone penetration is released for about 3 second and the penetration depth is taken. Average cone penetration is taken to reduce error. A small sample at the centre of cup penetration is taken, weight, and oven-dry for 24 hours. After oven-dry, the sample was weight again to determine the moisture content Remainder of the sample is then put in some pure water to increase its moisture content. The procedure is repeated and 5 set of test is recorded. (Makinda, 2013) Soil sample with air dried is taken and sieve with sieve No. 200, soil that passing sieve No. 200 is used for the plastic limit test. Water is added until sample is in wet condition. A small amount of soil sample is taken and row on the glass plate to form soil thread until it crumbles (or cracks) when its diameter about 3mm. Crumbles sample immediately taken to weighed and oven dry (24hours) in order to obtain the moisture content. The procedure is repeated for 4 set tests. (Makinda, 2013) On the left-hand side, show three types of soil samples after sieving. Whichever soil sample of percentage passing more than 5% for sieve No. 200 will carry another test which is Atterberg Limit test. The liquid limits, plastic limits, shrinkage limits and the plasticity index are useful parameters in classifying soils and making judgements as to their applications. (Liu & Event, 2005) It can be used to determine the interaction between the solid and the liquid phases in

the soils, and thus provide the possibility of classifying soils into groups with similar mechanical properties. (Bojana, 2012). The coefficient of uniformity (Cu) and the coefficient of curvature (Cv) can be found by the equation below: ..... (1) ..... (2)

3.0 RESULT

Figure 1: Soil sample gradation chart at Indah Permai, Teluk Likas and UMS-ODEC

Figure 2: Liquid limit test at Indah Permai.

3.2 CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL USING USCS General Classification Passing 4.75mm (No. 4) Passing 0.075mm (No. 200) Liquid Limit , LL Plastic Index, LI Figure 3: Liquid limit test at Kingfisher Coefficient of uniformity , Cu Curvature of Soil , Cv USCS Classification SC

IP 100 14

KF 100 7.56

UMSODEC 100 1.7

20.6 5.98 13

20.6 7.31 5.41

NP NP 1.95

1.49 SMSC

0.65 SP-

1.03 SP

Container no. Moisture Indah Content (%) Permai KingFisher

LL 20.6 20.6

Table 2: Classification of soil using USCS

Table 1: Moisture content at Jalan UMS-Sulaman and KingFisher. Plasticity Index (PI) =Liquid Limit Plastic Limit . 3.1 CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL USING AASHTO Sieve No. 10 40 200 Sieve Size/mm 2.00 0.425 0.075 IP 84 58 14 20.6 5.98 A-2-4 KF 83.02 56.61 7.56 20.6 7.31 A-2-4 UMSODEC 96.61 84.75 1.7 NP NP A-3

3.3 CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL USING ASTM General Classification Passing 4.75mm (No. 4) Passing 0.075mm (No. 200) Liquid Limit , LL Plastic Index, LI Coefficient of uniformity , Cu Curvature of Soil , Cv IP 100 KF 100 UMSODEC 100

14

7.56

1.7

20.6 5.98 13 1.49

20.6 7.31 5.41 0.65

NP NP 1.95 1.03

Liquid Limit , LL Plastic Index, LI Group Classification

Table 1: Classification of soil using ASSHTO

ASTM Classification

SC-SM

SP-SC

SP

% FineGrained Soils % Gravel % Sand % Silt % Clay LL PI PL AASHTO USCS SC ASTM BS USDA 0 86 12 2

14 0

7.56 0

1.7

Table 3: Classification of soil using ASTM 3.4 CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL USING BS General Classification Passing 0.063mm Passing 2.00mm Liquid Limit , LL Plastic LI Index, IP 12.7 84 20.6 5.98 13 1.49 S-F SC-SM S-F Sand KF 6.5 83.02 20.6 7.31 5.41 0.65 SPM SP-SC SPM Sand UMSODEC 0 96.61 NP NP 1.95 1.03 SPg SP SPg Sand

92.44 6.56 1 20.6 7.31 NP A-2-4 SP-SC SP-SC SPM Sand

98.3 1.7 0 NP NP NP A-3 SP SP SPg Sand

20.6 5.98 NP A-2-4 SMSC-SM S-F Sand

Coefficient of uniformity , Cu Curvature Soil , Cv BS Classification ASTM BS USDA of

Table 6: Compared Classification of soil a) For all sample, all the five experiments classifies the sample in the sand group, thus we can be sure that all soil sample is sand.

Table 4: Classification of soil using BS

b) The only different in the soil sample is the secondary letter c) This may be due to problems which occur during the course of conducting our experiment, specifically plastic limit test. Source of error during plastic limit test may be due to the heat from our hand and low of our experience. For soil sample C, it is a non-plastic (NP) soil, therefore it is not necessary to conduct Atterberg limits test for sample C as it does not possess any plasticity behaviour. To make sure, we try doing the plastic limit test first on soil sample C. Since it cannot be determined, it confirmed our assumptions that it is a nonplastic soil. For all sample, all the five experiments classifies the sample in the sand group, thus we can be sure that all soil sample is sand.

3.5 CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL USING USDA General Classification Sand Silt Clay USDA Classification IP 86 12 2 Sand KF 92.44 6.56 1 Sand UMSODEC 98.3 1.7 0 Sand d)

e)

Table 5: Classification of soil using USDA 4.0 DISSCUSSION Properties Soils Sample IP KF 86 92.44 f)

% CoarseGrained Soils

UMSODEC 98.3

g) The only different in the soil sample is the secondary letter h) This may be due to problems which occur during the course of conducting our experiment, specifically plastic limit test.

i)

Source of error during plastic limit test may be due to the heat from our hand and low of our experience. For soil sample C, it is a non-plastic (NP) soil, therefore it is not necessary to conduct Atterberg limits test for sample C as it does not possess any plasticity behaviour. To make sure, we try doing the plastic limit test first on soil sample C. Since it cannot be determined, it confirmed our assumptions that it is a nonplastic soil.

7.0 REFERENCE Makinda, J., (2013), KA21603: Geotechnical Engineering 1, students lab manual, SKTM, University Malaysia Sabah. Liu, Cheng and Event, Jack B., (2005), SOILS AND FOUNDATION: SI EDITION, Singapore: Prentice Hall. Makinda, J, (2013), KA21603: Geotechnical Engineering 1, Lecture Notes, SKTM, University Malaysia Sabah. Somayaji, Shan (2001), Civil Engineering Materials, 2nd ed., Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Nagaraj, H. B, Sridharan, A and Mallikarjuna, H. M, (2012), Re-examination of Undrained Strength at Attterberg Limits Water Content

j)

General Classificatio n ASSHTO USCS ASTM BS USDA

IP

KF

UMSODEC 1 1 1 1 1

2 3 3 2 1

2 2 2 3 1

Table 7: Comparison for the best soil by the system classification 5.0 CONCLUSION In conclusion, all three sample soils almost have same group of classification. However, the soil classification gave roughly the same group name. When it comes to the used, they will have to refer to the standard charts. From Table 7, we can see that soil in UMS-ODEC is the best choose to be the reclamation land for the project. This is because the soil in UMS-ODEC show that the soil in that area have a better strength then other. This is making me support that UMS-ODEC is very suitable for the reclamation land project. 6.0 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Im with honour that I acknowledge the support and help from my lecturer, Sir Jodin Makinda, my friends, especially my group members, and lab assistant in completing this PBL project.