Sieve Analysis/Hydrometer Analysis/Liquid and Plastic Limit

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Geotechnical Lab

Dr. Lin Li

Prepared by: Nakarsha Bester

Date: Fall Semester

Location: Geotechnical Lab

Report Submitted on: 9/18/2013

2

3

3

4

5

6

6

7

8

10

10

11

12

12

12

12

13

14

18

Table of Contents

Table of Contents…………………………………………………….……………...

Sieve Analysis

Introduction…………………………………………………….….………….

Background……………………………………………………..…………….

Methods and Materials……………………………………….…….………...

Calculations………………………………………………….………………..

Hydrometer Analysis

Introduction………………………………………………….…….………….

Background………………………………………………….………………..

Methods and Materials…………………………………………...…………...

Calculations…………………………………………………….……………..

Liquid Limit

Introduction………………………………………………….…….………….

Background……………………………………………………….…………..

Methods and Materials…………………………………….………..………...

Calculations……………………………………………….…………………..

2

Plastic Limit

Introduction……………………………………………..…………………….

Background…………………………………………….……………………..

Methods and Materials………………………………………..……………...

Calculations…………………………………………………..……………….

Results and Calculations…………………………………………..………………...

Discussion and Conclusions……………………………………..…………………..

I. Sieve Analys….. is

I. Introduction

This report presents the analysis results of the sieve analysis from the soil sample taken from

Pearl, MS. For engineering purpose the grading or size distribution of the soil had to be

determined using several laboratory methods, beginning with the sieve analysis. The sieve

analysis was used to determine the grain size distribution of the soil sample. The results from the

experiment yielded an approximation of the distribution of the soil grain sizes of the soil. The

sieves, used in the experiment, are made of woven wires with square openings and numbers on

the outside of the sieves corresponding to the size of the openings in each sieve. Table 1 gives a

list of the U.S. standard sieve numbers with their corresponding size of openings used in the

experiment.

II. Background

The theory behind the sieve analysis is performed, per ASTM D421, to measure the dry mass of

the soil retained in each of the sieve. The process, in which the proportion of the soil sample of

each grain size present, in a given soil is determined. The grain size distribution of coarse-

grained soils is determined directly by sieve analysis, while that of fine-grained soils is

determined indirectly by hydrometer analysis. The grain size distribution of mixed soils is

determined by combined sieve and hydrometer analyses.

3

The total percentage passing through each sieve, by weight, is also calculated and plotted against

the grain size on a semi-log plot. The x-axis represents the logarithm of the grain size, and the y-

axis represents the percent by weight of the sample passing. A smooth curve is drawn to

represent the grains size distribution.

From the grain size distribution curve, grain sizes such as D10, D30 and D60 can be obtained.

The D refers to the size, or apparent diameter, of the soil particles and the subscript (10, 30, 60)

denotes the percent that is smaller.

An indication of the spread (or range) of particle sizes is given by the coefficient of uniformity

(Cu), which is defined as

Cu=D 60D 10

The coefficient of curvature (Cc) is a measure of the shape of the curve between the D60 and

D10 grain sizes, and is defined as

Cc= D302

D 60∗D 10

You will plot the grain size distribution curve and calculate Cu and Cc for combined analysis,

with the result of sieve and hydrometer analysis.

III. Methods and Materials

Sieve analysis testing, using ASTM D421, was used for testing a soil sample taken from Pearl,

MS on September 11, 2013 in the Geotechnical Lab in Jackson State University Engineering

Building. The mechanical sieve shaker was used to complete this project by Fatima Diop and

Nakarsha Bester. The purpose of this test was to determine the distribution of the grain of the

soil. No deviations from the standard testing procedure were performed.

3.1 Materials

4

Sieves (#4, 10,20,40,60,100,200), pan, and cover Mechanical sieve shaker Balance Oven Containers with labels

3.2 Methods

1. Weigh 500g of air-dried soil (W).

2. Determine the masses of the containers.

3. Assemble sieves, with sieve number 4 on the top and the pan with #200 on the bottom.

4. Add sample and place lid on top. Place on to sieving shaker.

5. Run the shaker for 10 minutes and then for an additional 1 minute.

6. Wash the soil. Ensure each layer is washed carefully removing all dirty from the rocks.

7. Pour each sieve contents into assigned container and place into the oven for at least 12

hours at 105ºC.

8. Remove containers from the oven and weight. Record the mass and repeat this set until

each container has been weight and recorded.

9. Calculate percent passing for each sieve aperture. Record this data.

IV. Calculations

1. Calculated the percent of soil retained on the nth sieve (counting from the top )

Rn=W nW

x 100

2. Calculated the cumulative percent of soil retained on the nth sieve

n Rn

i=1

3. Calculated the cumulative percent passing through the nth sieve n

percent finer =100 – Rn i=1

5

II. Hydrometer Analysis

I. Introduction

This report presents the hydrometer analysis from the soil sample taken from Pearl, MS. For

engineering purpose the estimation of the distribution of soil particle sizes from the No. 200

(0.075 mm) sieve to around 0.01 mm. The data are presented on a semi-log plot graph of percent

finer vs. particle diameters and combined with the data from the mechanical sieve analysis of the

soil sample to get a complete grain size distribution curve.

II. Background

The hydrometer analysis is based on Stokes’ law, which gives the relationship among the

velocity of fall of spheres in a fluid, the diameter of a sphere, the specific weight of the sphere

and of the fluid, and the fluid viscosity. In equation form this relationship is:

v=

29∗(Gs−G f )η

∗(D2 )2

where,

v = velocity of fall of the spheres (cm/s)Gs = specific gravity of the sphereGf = specific gravity of fluid

6

η = absolute, or dynamic, viscosity of the fluid (g/(cm*s))D = diameter of the sphere (cm)

Solving the equation for D and using the specific gravity of water Gw, obtain

D=√ 18ηv

(Gs−Gw )

v=Lt

where,

L = effective depth (cm)t = time (min) The effective length can be found in Table 2 and variable A can be found in Table 3

A=√ 18ηv

(G s−Gw )

D=A √ LtCorrections to hydrometer readings

Zero Correction (Fz): If the reading in the hydrometer (in the control cylinder) is below

the water meniscus, it is (+), if above it is (-), if at the meniscus it is zero.

Meniscus Correction (Fm): Difference between upper level of meniscus and water level

of control cylinder.

Temperature correction (Ft): The temperature of the test should be 20°C but the actual

temperature may vary. The temperature correction is approximated as

Ft = -4.85 = 0.25 T (for T between 15°C to 28°C)

III. Methods and Materials

The hydrometer analysis testing used ASTM D422 procedures for testing a soil sample from

Pearl, MS on September 12, 2013 in the Geotechnical Lab location in the Jackson State

University Engineering Building. The ASTH 152-H hydrometer was used to complete this

7

project by Fatima Diop and Nakarsha Bester. The purpose of this test is to determine the

diameter of the soil particles D that are dispersed in the water. No deviations from the standard

procedure were performed.

III.1 Materials

Hydrometer Mixer Two 1000 mL graduated cylinders Thermometer Deflocculating agent

Spatula Beaker Plastic squeeze bottle Distilled water Balance

III.2 Methods

1. Calibrate the hydrometer.

2. Take 50g of oven-dry, well-pulverized soil in a beaker.

3. Determine the composite correction for the Hydrometer reading due to specific gravity

error by taking a 1000-mL graduate cylinder and adding 875 mL of distilled water plus

125 mL of the dispersing agent in it.

4. Put the hydrometer in the cylinder. Record the reading. This is the Fz (zero correction).

5. Take 125mL of the deflocculating solution and add it to the soil taken in step 2.

6. Add the mixture to the graduated cylinder and stir while washing all remaining residue

from the container.

7. Turn the cylinder upside down and right side up for 60 times in 1 minute.

8. Set on countertop.

9. Place hydrometer into the graduated cylinder and take reading. Continue to take reading

until the last reading of 2880 minutes.

10. Calculate percent passing, and plot it.

11. Determine uniformity coefficient Cu = D60/D10) and coefficient of gradation Cc =

D230/D60/D10 of the soil.

IV. Calculation

1. Calculated corrected hydrometer reading for percent finer, RCP = R + Ft + Fz

2. Calculated percent finer = (A * RCP * 100) / Ws

8

where,

Ws = dry weight of soil used for hydrometer analysis A = correction for specific gravity (as hydrometer is calibrated for Gs = 2.65 )

therefore,

A = 1.65 * Gs / ((Gs – 1 ) * 2.65 )

3. Calculated corrected hydrometer reading for determination of effective length, RCL = R + Fm

4. Determined L (effective length) corresponding to RCL given in Table 1.

5. Determined A from Table 2

6. Determined D (mm )=A √ L(cm.)t (min .)

Table 2. Variation of L with Hydrometer Reading

Hydrometer Reading

L(cm)

Hydrometer Reading

L(cm)

Hydrometer Reading

L(cm)

Hydrometer Reading

L(cm)

0123456789

101112

16.316.116.015.815.615.515.315.215

14.814.714.514.3

13141516171819202122232425

14.214

13.813.713.513.613.213

12.912.712.512.412.2

26272829303132333435363738

1211.911.711.511.411.211.110.910.710.610.410.210.1

39404142434445464748495051

9.99.79.69.49.29.18.98.88.68.48.38.17.9

Table 3. Variation of A with Gs

Temperature (C)Gs 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

2.5 2.55 2.6 2.65 2.7 2.75 2.8

0.01490.01460.01440.01420.01400.01380.0136

0.01470.01440.01420.01400.01380.01360.0134

0.01450.01430.01400.01380.01360.01360.0134

0.01430.01410.01390.01370.01340.01330.0131

0.01410.01390.01370.01350.01330.01310.0129

0.01400.01370.01350.01330.01310.01290.0128

0.01380.01360.01340.01320.01300.01280.0126

Temperature (C)

9

Gs 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 2.5 2.55 2.6 2.65 2.7 2.75 2.8

0.01370.01340.01320.01300.01280.01260.0125

0.01350.01330.01310.01290.01270.01250.0123

0.01330.01310.01290.01270.01250.01240.0122

0.01320.01300.01280.01260.01240.01220.0120

0.01300.01280.01260.01240.01230.01210.0119

0.01290.01270.01250.01230.01210.01200.0118

0.01280.01260.01240.01220.01200.01180.0117

III. Liquid Limit

I . Introduction

This report presents the analysis results of the liquid limit from the soil sample taken from

Pearl, MS. For engineering purpose, the liquid limit testing was performed to determine the

moisture content in a soil in order to make its behavior change into a liquid material and

begins to flow. When a cohesive soil is mixed with an excessive amount of water, it will be

in a liquid state and flow like a viscous liquid. When the viscous liquid dries gradually due

to loss of moisture, it will pass into a plastic state. With further loss of moisture, the soil will

pass into a plastic state. With even further reduction of moisture, the soil will pass into a

semi-solid and then into a solid state.

The moisture content, w, (%) at which the cohesive soil will pass from a liquid state to a

plastic state is called the liquid limit of the soil. Similarly, plastic limit and shrinkage limit

can be explained. These limits are called Atterberg limits.

Atterberg Limits

Moisture content increasing

Solid Semisolid Plastic Liquid

Shrinkage Limit (SL) Plastic Limit (PL) Liquid Limit (LL)

II. Background

10

The liquid limit testing is based on ASTM D4318-10 Standard Test Methods for Liquid

Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of Soils. The liquid limit testing on a soil sample is

used to determine the moisture content at the boundary between the liquid and plastic states

of consistency. The boundary at the moisture content is arbitrarily defined as the water

content at which two halves of a soil cake will flow together, for a distance of ½ iin. along

the bottom of a groove of standard dimensions separating the two halves, when the cup of a

standard liquid limit apparatus is dropped 25 times from a height of 0.3937 in. at the rate of

two drops per second.

The moisture content is determined by:

MoistureContent= Weight of WaterWeight of oven−dried soil

x100

III. Methods and Materials

The liquid Limit testing used ASTM D4318 for the test on September 12, 2013 in the

Geotechnical Lab location in the Jackson State University Engineering Building. The liquid

limit device was used to complete this project by Fatima Diop and Nakarsha Bester. The

purpose of this test was to determine the moisture content of the soil. No deviations from the

standard procedures were performed.

Equipment:

Casagrande liquid limit device Grooving tool Moisture can Porcelain evaporating dish

o Spatulao Oveno Balanceo Plastic squeeze bottle

Procedure:

1. Determine the mass of three moisture cans (W1).

2. Place 250g of air-dry soil in the No. 40 sieve and shake allowing the soil to pass through

3. Take the soil, which has passed through the No. 40 sieve, and place it into an evaporating

dish. Add 20 percent of distilled water and mix with soil to form a uniform paste.

4. Place a small sample in the cup of the Casagrande liquid limit apparatus.

11

5. Cut a groove into the soil.

6. Run the device while watching the groove. Stop the apparatus when the line closes.

7. Take 15g of the wet soil sample and place it into a moisture can, determine the mass of

the sample plus the can and place it into the oven

8. Run the test three more times.

IV. Calculation

1. Calculated mass of can, W1 (g)

2. Calculated mass of can + moist soil, W2 (g)

3. Calculated mass of can + dry soil, W3 (g)

4. Determined the moisture content for each of the three trials as

(W2 - W3) x 100w (%) =

(W3 - W1)

IV. Plastic Limit

I. Introduction

Plastic limit is defined as the moisture content, in percent, at which a cohesive soil will

change from a plastic state to a semisolid state. In the lab. the plastic limit is defined as the

moisture content (%) at which a thread of soil will just crumble when rolled to a diameter of

1/8 in. (3.18 mm).

II. Background

12

The plastic limit test uses ASTM D4318 standard. The test is used to determine the moisture

content, expressed as a percentage of the weight of the oven-dry soil, at the boundary

between the plastic and semisolid states of consistency. It is the moisture content at which a

soil will just begin to crumble when rolled in to a thread 1/8 in. in diameter using a ground

glass plate.

III. Methods and Materials

The plastic limit testing used ASTM D4318 for the test on September 12, 2013 in the

Geotechnical Lab location in the Jackson State University Engineering Building. The rolling

of the hand was used to complete this project by Fatima Diop and Nakarsha Bester. The

purpose of this test is to determine the lower limit of the soil sample by the rolling of the

sample to the point of crumble.

III.1 Materials

Porcelain evaporating dishSpatulaGround glass plateMoisture can

OvenBalancePlastic squeeze bottle

III.2 Methods

1. Place 20g of air-dry soil in the No. 40 sieve and shake allowing the soil to pass

through

2. Take the soil, which has passed through the No. 40 sieve, and place it into an

evaporating dish. Add 20 percent of distilled water and mix with soil to from a

uniform paste.

3. Determine the mass of a moisture can (W1)

4. Form several balls from the soil sample and begin rolling each ball until a thread

reaches 1/8 in and then continue until it crumbles.

5. Determine the moisture content of 6g of the crumbled soil sample.

IV. Calculations

1. Calculated mass of can , W1 (g)

13

2. Calculated mass of can + moist soil, W2 (g)

3. Calculated mass of can + dry soil, W3 (g)

4. Calculated plastic limit

(W2 - W3) x 100 PL =

W3 - W1

5. Calculated plasticity index, PI = LL – PL.

V. Results and Calculations

I. Results

These are the results for the soil sample from Pearl, MS.

14

0.0010.010.11100

20

40

60

80

100Particle Size Distribution Curve

Grain Size, D (mm)

Pe

rce

nt

Fin

er

(%)

Figure 1 Pearl, MS soil sample Particle Size Distribution Curve

15

Figure 2 Particle size distribution of three soils

Table 4. Atterberg Limit of three soilsSoil Liquid limit (%) Plastic limit (%)

Madison soil 36 22Pearl soil 29 5.3

Campus soil 27 16

16

II. Calculations

Sieve Analysis

Sieve No.Sieve

opening (mm)

Mass of soil retained on each

sieve, Wn

(g)

Percent of mass retained on each sieve,

Rn

Cumulative percent retained

Percent finer

4 4.75 2.5 0.50 0.50 99.50

10 2 0.9 0.18 0.68 99.32

20 0.85 2.6 0.52 1.20 98.80

40 0.425 35.6 7.12 8.32 91.68

60 0.25 116.2 23.24 31.56 68.44

100 0.15 24.5 4.90 36.46 63.54

200 0.075 76.8 15.36 51.82 48.18

Pan - 239 47.80 99.62 0.38

∑498.1 = W1

Mass loss during sieve analysis = (W-W1)/W x100 = 0.38% (OK if less than 2%)

Hydrometer Analysis

Test Standard:ASTM: D-

422Dry weight of soil, Ws

(g):50

Gs = 2.65 Hydrometer Type: ASTM 152-HTemperature of test, T

(oC)24

Meniscus correction Fm 1 Zero correction Fz 7

Temperature correction, FT

1.4 Variable A 0.013

Time(min)

Hydrometer reading

RRcp RCL L

D (mm)

17

100xW

Ra

s

cp

Percent Finer0.25 27 21.4 42.8 28 11.7 0.0889340.5 27 21.4 42.8 28 11.7 0.0628861 25 19.4 38.8 26 12.0 0.0450332 24 18.4 36.8 25 12.2 0.0321084 22.5 16.9 33.8 23.5 12.4 0.0228898 20 14.4 28.8 21 12.9 0.016508

15 18.7 13.1 26.2 19.7 13.0 0.01210230 17 11.4 22.8 18 13.3 0.00865660 16 10.4 20.8 17 13.5 0.006166

120 15 9.4 18.8 16 13.7 0.004393240 14 8.4 16.8 15 13.8 0.003117480 14 8.4 16.8 15 13.8 0.0022041440 13 7.4 14.8 14 14.0 0.0012822880 12 6.4 12.8 13 14.2 0.000913

Size(mm)

finer(%)

4.75 99.502 99.32

0.85 98.800.425 91.68

0.25 68.440.15 63.54

0.075 48.18

Liquid Limit TestTest Standard: ASTM: D-4318Test No. 1 2 3Can No. TD1 Friday 2 Friday 1

Mass of can, W1 (g) 11 14.7 14.4

Mass of can + moist soil, W2 (g) 44.8 37.6 44.5

Mass of can + dry soil, W3 (g) 37.3 31.8 38

Moisture content, 28.5 33.9 27.5

Number of blows, N 30 14 42

Liquid Limit = (at 25 blows)

18

100(%)13

32 xWW

WWw

Plastic Limit TestTest No. 1Can No. JY5

Mass of can, W1 (g) 11.2

Mass of can + moist soil, W2 (g) 17.2

Mass of can + dry soil, W3 (g) 16.9

5.3

Plasticity index PI = LL-PL = -5.3

VI. Discussion and Conclusions

I. Discussion

The most common aggregates are gravel and crushed stone, although cinders, blast-furnace slag,

burned shale, crushed brick, or other materials may be used because of availability, or to alter

such characteristics of the concrete such as workability, density, appearance, or conductivity of

heat or sound. Usually aggregate which passes a sieve with 0.187-inch openings (No. 4 sieve) is

called fine aggregate, but that retained by a No. 4 sieve is coarse aggregate, although the division

is purely arbitrary. If all the particles of aggregate are of the same size, or if too many fine

particles are present, an excessive amount of cement paste will be required to produce a

workable mixture; a range of sizes aids in the production of an economical mixture.

II. Conclusion

The aggregate we studied consists of coarse aggregate mainly; I noted that from the fineness

modulus. From the Grading graph we note that the aggregate we have tested are not good for

using in mixes, as the graph doesn’t lie between the upper limit and the lower limit.

19

10013

32 xWW

WWPL

Figure 1-1. A stack of sieves with a pan at the bottom.

20