Scribd
Upload
3 views9 pages

Soils Lab 2

lab 2 soil mechanics CEG4011

Uploaded by

meowlody329
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
3 views9 pages

Soils Lab 2

lab 2 soil mechanics CEG4011

Uploaded by

meowlody329
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 9

Melody Wood

Lab 2: Sieve Analysis


Friday 9/13/24
Lab 2: Sieve Analysis

Performed by Melody Wood

Collaborators

Aidan Zydiak

Valentina Cara

Artem Egorov

CEG4011 - Soil Mechanics

Date performed: 9/13/24

Date submitted: 9/20/24


Summary
The sieve analysis test aims to determine the distribution of grain
sizes in a specific sample of soil. This test measures the mass of soil (Ms)
retained on sieves of different mesh dimensions after vibration. These
masses are used to determine the soil makeup via the analysis of the
percent mass retained on each sieve. Particles with relatively large
diameters will be retained on the upper sieves while finer particles are
allowed to pass through the mesh. Determining the fraction of soil passing
through each sieve and comparing that to the corresponding grain size
diameters (D) determined by the mesh dimensions allows for the gradation
of the soil to be determined. From this, a grain size distribution curve can
be plotted for a visual representation of the soil’s gradation. This procedure
is very commonly used in soil analysis as the grain size and gradation
determine the suitability of a soil for a certain application. A soil intended for
use in a dam would have a much different grain size distribution curve than
a soil to be used for drainage, the suitability of a soil is determined by its
use case.

Soil Description
The soil tested visually appears coarse with a primarily gray color. It
seems to be poorly graded with most particles being sand of a visually
similar size. The particles are estimated to have an angularity of 0.3 and a
sphericity of 0.5.

Test Procedure
The test procedure followed for this lab is outlined in ASTM D 422 -
Standard Test Method for Particle-Size Analysis of Soils Using Sieve
Analysis.
Data Collected

Table 2.1 Sieve Analysis Data

Sieve Diameter Mass of Mass of Mass of Percent


Number (mm) sieve, Msv sieve + soil, Ms (g) finer (%)
(g) soil, Msv,s
(g)

506.88 100

½’’ 12.5 543.49 550.64 7.15 98.59

⅜” 9.5 549.40 556.97 7.57 97.10

4 4.75 504.06 542.64 38.58 89.48

10 2 509.55 544.88 35.33 82.51

20 0.85 463.66 627.37 163.71 50.22

50 0.30 457.76 689.11 231.35 4.58

100 0.15 352.99 372.07 19.08 0.81

200 0.075 337.68 341.21 3.53 0.11

pan 0.01 370.69 371.27 0.58 0

Table 2.2 Important Values for Soil Classification


D10 0.48 mm
D30 0.61 mm
D60 1.05 mm
Coefficient of uniformity, Cu 2.1875
Coefficient of curvature, Cc 0.7383
Figure 1 - The experimentally found grain size distribution curve for the sampled soil.
Results

The sieve analysis test shows that the soil sample is primarily
uniformly graded. This would make this a poorly graded soil as the curve
indicates that most of the soil particles are of similar sizes. This is not
preferred over a soil of various sizes as there are less smaller particles to
fill in gaps between the larger particles, resulting in less friction between
particles and more voids overall. With a coefficient of uniformity of 2.1875
and a coefficient of curvature of 0.7383, this soil does not meet the Unified
Soil Classification System standards for a well graded soil. It is possible
that there was an error in the massing of the original soil sample, but this
would not impact the results greatly as the ratios should be constant. It is
also possible that the sample was not vibrated for a sufficient amount of
time, leading to a buildup on a sieve which would result in a distribution
curve similar to a uniformly graded soil. As there are more voids due to this
uniform gradation, this soil would not be very suitable for foundation or
high-strength applications and is better suited for situations that do not
require high strength or high water retention, such as drainage.
Original Data Sheet
Sample Calculations

𝑀𝑠
%𝑅𝑒𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑑 = 𝑀𝑡
(100%) (Eqn. 2.1)

𝑀𝑠 = 7. 15 𝑔
𝑀𝑡 = 506. 88 𝑔
7.15
%𝑅𝑒𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑑 = 506.88
(100%) = 1. 41%

%𝐹𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑟 = 100% − 𝐶𝑢𝑚𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒%𝑅𝑒𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑑 (Eqn. 2.2)

𝐶𝑢𝑚𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒%𝑅𝑒𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑑 = 1. 41%
%𝐹𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑟 = 100% − 1. 41% = 98. 59%

𝐷60
𝐶𝑢 = 𝐷10
(Eqn. 2.3)

𝐷60 = 1. 05 𝑚𝑚
𝐷10 = 0. 48 𝑚𝑚
1.05
𝐶𝑢 = 0.48
= 2. 1875

𝐷30²
𝐶𝑐 = 𝐷60𝐷10
(Eqn. 2.4)

𝐷60 = 1. 05 𝑚𝑚
𝐷30 = 0. 61 𝑚𝑚
𝐷10 = 0. 48 𝑚𝑚
0.61²
𝐶𝑐 = 1.05(0.48)
= 0. 7383
Legend of Variables

𝑀𝑠 - mass of soil

𝑀𝑡 - total mass

𝐷10 - diameter at which 10% of particles pass

𝐷30 - diameter at which 30% of particles pass

𝐷60 - diameter at which 60% of particles pass

𝐶𝑢 - coefficient of uniformity

𝐶𝑐 - coefficient of curvature

You might also like