Classification of soils 222
Classification of soils 222
OF SOILS
INTRODUCTION
▪ Soil classification is the arrangement of different soils with
similar properties into groups and subgroups based on their
application.
▪ Soils may be classified in a general way as:
• Cohesive vs. cohesionless
• Fine- grained vs. coarse grained
• Residual vs. Transported
▪ However these terms are too general and cover too wide
range of physical and engineering properties.
▪ A more refined classification is necessary to determine the
suitability of a soil for specific engineering purposes.
Classification System
“Language”
Engineering Properties
Permeability, shear strength, compressibility,
swell-shrinkage etc.
Engineering Purpose
(Foundation, Dams, Highways, Airfields, etc.)
Why more than one Classification System are in use?
Limitations:
❑ Gives only border between groups (i.e. gravel, sand, silt,
clay) but does not give us a name for a given bulk of soil.
❑ In most cases, natural soils are mixtures of particles from
several size groups.
2. TEXTURALCLASSIFICATION
▪ In the textural classification system, the soils are
named after their principal components, such as
sandy clay, silty clay, and so forth.
Notes
We could have used the
point of intersection of:
• Silt-size+ Clay-size
• Sand-size + Clay-size
Example 2
Let it be desired to determine the textural classification of
a soil whose grading is as follows:
10% Gravel
18% Sand
27% Silt-size
45% Clay-size
Find the modified textural
composition:
18 X 100
Sand - size = = 20%
100 − 10
27 X 100
Silt - size = = 30%
100 − 10
The textural classification is CLAY.
45 X 100
Clay - size = = 50% Because of the large percentage of
100 − 10
gravel, it may be called GRAVELLY CLAY.
Limitations of Textural Classification Systems
▪ They are based entirely on particle-size distribution and
does not consider PLASTICITY which to great extent
influences the physical properties of soils.
▪ Because textural classification systems do not take plasticity
into account and are not totally indicative of many
important soil properties, they are inadequate for most
engineering purposes.
▪ The two elaborate systems used at present are AASHTO and
USCS. Both systems take into account the particle-size
distribution and plasticity.
▪ The AASHTO classification system is used mostly by highway
departments. Geotechnical engineers generally prefer the
Unified system.
3. CLASSIFICATION BY USE
A. AASHTO CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
The AASHTO soil classification system was originally
developed in the late 1920’s (1929) by the U.S. Bureau of
Public Roads (BPR) for the classification of soils for highway
subgrade use.
It was developed as a result of the work of Hogentogler in
the 1920’s.
Adopted by Bureau of Public Roads in 1931.
AASHTO : Acronym of American Association of State Highway
and Transportation Officials.
Originally, the system classified soil as being either a group A
or a Group B.
A Group A soil was able to maintain uniform pavement
support at all location whereas the Group B soils were not.
The B designation was subsequently deleted, leaving only A
soils in the classification system.
Consequently, the “A” still remains in an AASHTO
classification of a soil type, but it no longer has any real
significance.
The A soils were subdivided into eight subgrade soil groups.
A-1 through A-8.
It went through various revisions since 1929, and the
classification system received its last revision in 1974.
ASTM D-3282; AASHTO method M145.
Criteria:
Tests Required:
•Grain-size analysis
•Liquid Limit
•Plastic Limit
Sieve No. 10 Sieve No. 200
Remarks
o In addition to Sieve no. 10 & 200 also sieve no. 40 is involved in AASHTO
classification which separates between medium and fine sands.
o In the classification, differentiation between silt and clay soils is based on
plasticity.
(USCS) 4.75 mm 0.075 mm
2.0 mm 0.425 mm
Gravel Sand
18 (AASHTO)
Sieve No. involved in AASHTO Soil Classification System
3 Groups
6 Subgroups
4 Groups
2 Subgroups
No. 10
No. 40
No. 200
For classification starts apply the test data from left to right, top to
bottom. By process of elimination, the first group from the left into which
the test data fit is the correct classification.
• The plot below is for the range of the liquid limit and the
plasticity index for soils that fall into groups A-2, A-4, A-5, A-
6, and A-7.
• If the soil is A-1 or A-3 we cannot use this chart
(mainly non plastic soils).
Note:
Differentiation
between A-2’s
and other
group is based
on %passing
Sieve No. 200
REMARKS
According to this system, soil is classified into eight
major groups, A-1 through A-8.
Soil group A-8 is peat (very organic) or muck (thin
very watery, and with considerable organic material).
A soil is classified according to the table by
proceeding from left to right, top to bottom, column
by column on the table to find the first group in
which the soil test data will fit.
The first group from the left into which the test data
will fit is the correct classification.
The classification process stops at this point
regardless if another column farther to the right can
also qualify.
GROUP INDEX
▪ Soils containing fine-grained material are further
identified by a number called GROUP INDEX (GI). This
was to establish the relative RANKING of a soil within
a subgroup or a group. This help in evaluating the
quality of a soil as a highway subgrade material.
▪ It is dependent on:
1. Percentage of the soil passing the No. 200 (0.075
mm) sieve.
2. Liquid limit, LL
3. Plasticity Index, PI
▪ The index is given by the following empirical formula:
GI = ( F200 − 35)[0.2 + 0.005( LL − 40)]
+ 0.01( F200 − 15)( PI − 10)
F200= % passing No. 200 sieve.
Rules for Determining Group Index
1. If GI is negative value take it as zero.
2. GI is rounded off to the nearest whole number.
3. There is no upper limit for GI.
4. The group index belonging to groups A-1-a, A-1-b, A-2-4, A-2-5
and A-3 will always be zero. Why?
5. When calculating the group index for soils belonging to groups
A-2-6 and A-2-7, the partial group index for PI should be used,
or
GI = 0.01( F200 − 15)( PI − 10)
6. The group index value is written in parenthesis next to the
AASHTO symbol. Ex. A-2-6(3), A- 4(5) etc.
7. In general the higher the GI, the less desirable is the soil for use
as a subgrade. A GI of 0 indicates a “good’ subgrade , and a GI>
or equal 20 indicates a “very poor” subgrade material.
Partial
GI = 0 Group Full Group Index
Index
No. 10
No. 40
No. 200
Example 1
The sieve analysis and plasticity data for two soils are
given in the table below. Classify soils according to the
AASHTO soil classification system.
35 100 NO. 4
20 100 NO. 10
No. 10
No. 40
10 99 NO. 40
No. 200 5 90 NO. 100
2 75 NO. 200
- 110 LL
- 50 PL
110
#200 86%
GI = ( F200 − 35)[0.2 + 0.005( LL − 40)] LL 70%
+ 0.01( F200 − 15)( PI − 10) PI 32%
Example 3
The grain size distribution curve, natural water content, liquid limit,
and liquidity index are give below. Classify the soil according to the
AASHTO Classification System.
Solution
Given
wn − PL 25 − PL
Li = = PL =21.25%
4 10 20
Seive No.
40 60 100 200 PI 21 − PL
40
100
%finer Sieve
Plastic Limit, LL = 40%
Natural Water Content, wn=25% No.
PI = 18.75%
80 Liquidity Index, Li = 0.2
98 NO. 4
Percent Finer
60 86 NO. 10
28 NO. 40
40
10 NO. 200
40 LL
20
19 PI
0
5.00 3.00 2.00 0.50 0.30 0.20 0.05 0.03 0.02
10.00 1.00 0.10 0.01
Particle Diameter (mm)
%finer Sieve
No.
98 NO. 4
No. 10 86 NO. 10
No. 40
No. 200 28 NO. 40
10 NO. 200
40 LL
19 PI
From the AASHTO Table the soil is classified as: A-2-6 (0)
Because %Passing #200 < 35%
The soil is classified as A-2-6
and not A-6.
%finer Sieve
No.
98 NO. 4
86 NO. 10
28 NO. 40
GI = ( F200 − 35)[0.2 + 0.005( LL − 40)] 10 NO. 200
Note: If the location comes along the border line, we need to consult the table
and the grain size will tell the classification of the given soil.
Remarks About AASHTO System
Boulders (retained on 75 mm (3 inch) sieve] should be excluded
from the portion of the sample to which the classification is
applied, but the percentage of such material, if any, in the
sample should be recorded.
Gravels
Sands
To determine if well graded (W) or poorly graded (P),
calculate Cu and Cc
Coefficient of uniformity
Coefficient of gradation
B-Line
CH
or
OH
CL
CL-ML or
OH OL or OH based
MH on the value of a
ML or
or
OH
OH
Organic Soils
• Organic clay or silt (group symbol OL or OH):
Liquid Limit (oven dried)
=
Liquid Limit (never - been - dried)
B-Line
% Gravel (G) = 100 - % Passing # 4
Soil 1: SC
Soil 2: MH
Example 2
SC
CH
SM
47
Example 2 (Cont.)
SC
CH
SM
Example 2 (Cont.)
49
Example 3
50
Soil A is then classified as SP-SM
(Poorly graded sand with silt and gravel)
51
Example 4
100
80
% Finer
60
40
20
0
0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Particle size (mm) From Atterberg Tests
LL = 32, PL = 26
#4 = 95%
#200 = 11%
Coarse fraction =100-11 = 89%,
Gravel = 100 -95 = 5% (5/89 = 5.6% < 50%) -→ Sand
Example 4 (cont.)
100
80
% Finer
60
40
20
0
0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Particle size (mm)
amounts of all intermediate particle sand mixtures, little or no proximate percentages of sand D 10
fines)
sizes fines 2
and gravel: maximum size: (D30 )
More than half of coarse
C c = ---------------------
fraction is larger than
missing fines grains: local or geological name Not meeting all gradation requirements for GW
2.36mm
Gravels
Use grain size curve in identifying the fractions as given under field identification
Non-plastic fines (for identification GM Silty gravels, poorly information and symbol in
(apreciable
procedures see ML below) graded gravel-sand-silt mixtures parentheses. Atterberg limits below Above "A" line with
fines
The .075mm sieve size is about the smallest particle visible to the naked eye
Coarse grained soils
Plastic fines (for identification pro- GC Clayey gravels, poorly graded For undisturbed soils add infor- are borderline cases
Atterberg limits above "A" requiring use of dual
(D 30 )2
fraction is smaller than
Example:
Predominantely one size or a range of SP Poorly graded sands, gravelly C c = --------------------- Between 1 and 3
Silty sand, gravelly; about 20% D 10 x D60
sizes with some intermediate sizes missing sands, little or no fines hard angular gravel particles
2.36mm
Sands
12.5mm maximum size; rounded Not meeting all gradation requirements for SW
Non-plastic fines (for identification pro- SM Silty sands, poorly graded and subangular sand grains
(appreciable
Less than 5%
Sands with
cedures, see ML below) sand-silt mixtures coarse to fine, about 15% non- Atterberg limits below Above "A" line with
5% to 12%
fines
plastic lines with low dry "A" line or PI less than 4 PI between 4 and 7
Plastic fines (for identification pro- SC Clayey sands, poorly graded strength; well compacted and are borderline cases
cedures, see CL below) sand-clay mixtures moist in places; alluvial sand; Atterberg limits above "A" requiring use of dual
(SM) line with PI greater than 7 symbols
Identification procedure on fraction smaller than .425mm
sieve size
Dry strength Dilatency Toughness
More than half of material is smaller than
crushing (consistency
less than 50
(reaction
liquid limit
Plasticity index
Slight to Slow Slight Organic silts and organic silt- inent descriptive information, and
medium OL clays of low plasticity symbol in parentheses CH
30 CI
inorganic silts, micaceous or
Silts and clays