CE 6L: Geotechnical Engineering

Experiment No. 1: Particle-Size Assortment of Soil through Single Set

Sieving
KENNETH A. CABACUNGAN
12 8228
ALTHEA R. DELOS SANTOS
12 8199
ERSON M. DEL ROSARIO
12 7931
JOCERO RAY G. REPUYAN
12 8583
JOYMEE V. RODELA
12 7899
July 19, 2015
Submitted to: Engr. John Lemar M. Tirao, Instructor
Abstract
Soil particle-size gradation is one of the most important aspects when classifying whether
a soil is geotechnically good for a specific purpose such as theoretical/scientific purposes
and purposes of practical importance as in the case of agriculture. This experiment aids
the said classification and was done in accordance to Test Method D 6913 04. The soil
sample had undergone different processes such as incineration drying, fine crushing,
quartering, and manual sieving before having the data analyzed and interpreted. A brief
discussion of the results was conducted and had provided sufficient information for
conclusions. At the end of the study, evaluations were also done to assess whether the
objectives stated were met by the experiment or not. Also, recommendations about the
inadequacies of the experiment were stated for further improvement and repetition of the
work in the future.

Location:

Civil Engineering Laboratory

Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Valenzuela, Malinta, Valenzuela City
Date of Experiment: July 5, 2015

Objectives

To explicitly determine specific and relevant properties of the soil sample according to the

data obtained from the laboratory experiment.

To produce comprehensive information about the soil particle-size distribution of the soil

sample.
To generalize about the fineness or coarseness of the soil particles.

Significance
This test is performed to determine the distribution or composition of a soil based on different
grain sizes contained within as it gives information about certain properties of the soil such as
particle diameter, gradation, etc., which can be deduced through further analysis. Aside from
that, analysis of soil particle-size provides specific data for soil classification and it is of utmost
importance to classify a soil whether it is geotechnically good before utilizing for specific
purposes such as theoretical/scientific purposes and practical purposes (e.g. Agriculture). Since
sieve analysis is widely applied and practiced in selection of fill materials and to classify the
compatibility of the soil for compliance with design and production standards, it is essential for
practitioners of geotechnical engineering to conduct such an experiment.

Experiment Procedure
A. Materials and Equipment
Soil, US standard test sieves (nos. 4, 10, 20, 50, 60, 80, 100, 120, 140, and 200), Mixing tray,
Rubber hammer, Laboratory oven, Denatured Alcohol (for immediate drying), Weighing scale,
Trowel, Pan.
B. Methodology
The test started by obtaining a working soil sample in accordance to Test Method D 6913 04
(Standard Test Methods for Particle-Size Distribution (Gradation) of Soils Using Sieve
Analysis 9). A minimum mass of 2000 g of undisturbed soil sample must be and was obtained
as specified by the authority. Although instructed, because of several factors such as the
researchers' mode of transportation, weather during the procurement, source location, and other

causes, the actual mass of the sample, which was obtained from a relatively saturated land in
Meycauayan City, Bulacan, was limited to 1455 g. The working sample, as much as possible,
must also be free from any voids, which includes, but not limited to, foreign and unnecessary
materials such as plant parts, animal secretions, rubbishes, etc. Aside from that, the sample must
undergo thorough drying to remove excess water and air, which may cause significant
discrepancies in the final outcome of the experiment or prolong the time lapse of the test. The
method and duration of drying may depend on certain conditions or may be specified by
respective authorities. Such may include moist drying, air drying, oven drying, or any
combination of the methods, in which the differences may be evident. In the case of this
experiment, where the soil sample obtained was too saturated for oven drying, an alternative
method for drying was specified by the authority. This method, which we refer to in this report as
incineration drying, used flammable liquid (denatured alcohol) to incinerate the sample and
immediately remove excess water. First, the sample was placed and evenly spread in an
aluminum mixing tray. Then, two cups of denatured alcohol (1 cup = 250 mL) was evenly
poured to the soil sample. The sample was ignited afterwards and while burning, constant stirring
was done until the fire is out to ensure that all of the sample was being burned. After the
incineration process, using a rubber hammer, the sample was pounded in every portion to crush
unstable chunks into finer solid particles. It was then randomly stirred, sub-divided into quarters,
and mixed again in four cycles to even out the dispersion of soil particles of different gradations.
This random stirring and mixing process is also known as quartering method. Next process was
preliminary clean-up and weighing. The test sieves must be and were thoroughly cleaned using a
generic toothbrush and were weighed on a weighing scale to measure its empty mass. The soil
sample was weighed afterwards on a weighing scale to measure its total mass of 1455 g. After
that, the sieving process was initiated, piling up the sieves into a vertical set with the one having
the largest diameter (no. 4/4.75 mm) at the topmost and the smallest (no. 200/0.075 mm) at
second to the last, which was the pan. Take note that the size range of the sieves was specified by
the authority and was not arbitrarily chosen by the researchers. Then, the whole soil sample was
poured into the first sieve of the set before covering. The researchers started shaking the sieve
set by hand in a horizontal, circular fashion (never shake the sieve set in any vertical direction to
prevent the contents from spilling) since there was no available mechanical shakers at the
moment. The manual shaking process must be and was performed for about an accumulated time
4

period of fifteen minutes. After that, using a rubber hammer, the sides of the sieve set were
pounded to precisely sieve the particles that were unsettled and clinging on the wire mesh of the
sieves. Next was the post-sieve weighing process, where the sieves and pan, without removing
the soil mass retained, were individually weighed. The sieve-soil mass data for each sieve was
then measured and recorded for analysis and interpretation.
C. Equations
Using the computer software Microsoft Excel 2010 and Casio fx-991ES Plus scientific calculator
to immediately produce relevant information, the data gathered from the experiment were
calculated from the following equations:
Mass Retained=( SieveS oil Mass )(Soil Mass)

Mass Retained=

mass retained on current sieve

100
mass

Cumulative Mass Retained=(Current Mass Retaine d )

Eq. 1

Eq. 2

Eq. 3

+( Previous Cumulative Mass Retained)

Percent Finer =100 Cumulative mass retained

Eq. 4

Particle-Size Parameters (Using Interpolation):

Effective D10

Eq. 5

Coefficient ofCurvature ( C c )=

D30 2
D 60 D10

Coefficient of Uniformity ( C u )=

Sorting Coefficient ( S o )=

D 25
D 75

D60
D10

Eq. 6

Eq. 7

Eq. 8

Results and Discussion

These are the results of the sieve analysis:
Sieve
No.

Sieve

[mm]

Sieve
Mass
[g]

Sieve &
Soil
Mass
[g]

Mass
Retaine
d [g]

Percent
Mass
Retained
(%)

Cumulativ
e Mass
Retained
(g)

4
10
25
50
60
80
100
120
140
200
Pan
Total

4.75
2
0.71
0.355
0.25
0.18
0.15
0.125
0.106
0.075
-

493
457
393
348
335
331
323
308
321
308
364
3991

549
751
799
632
396
413
367
364
344
362
469
5446

56
294
406
284
61
82
44
46
23
54
105
1455

4
20
28
20
4
6
3
3
2
4
7
100

56
350
756
1040
1101
1183
1227
1273
1296
1350
1455

Cumulativ
e Percent
Mass
Retained
(%)
4
24
52
71
76
81
84
87
89
93
100

Percen
t Finer
(%)
96
76
48
29
24
19
16
13
11
7
0

Table 1
A. Result Computations
Particle-Size Parameters:

Effective Size
117 0.0750.053
=
107
D100.053

Coefficient of Uniformity ( Cu )
7648 2.000.71
=
6048 D 6 00.71

D10 = 0.0695 mm

=> D60 = 1.2629 mm

Cu = 18.17

Coefficient of Curvature (Cc)

4829 0.710.355
=
3029 D300.355

=> D30 = 0.3737 mm Cc = 1.591

Sorting Coefficient (So)

2924 0.3550.25
=
2524
D25 0.25
7648 2.000.71
=
7548 D750.71

=> D25 = 0.271 mm

So = 1.954

=> D75 = calcu

100
90
80
70
60
Percent Finer

50
40
30
20
10
0
10

0.1

0.01

Particle Size (mm)

Fig. 1: Particle-Size Distribution Curve

B. Discussion
To further understand the qualitative properties of a soil, data must be first expressed and
computed in quantitative terms and for this experiment, the main focus are the measurements

that correspond to the particle-size gradation of the soil. These measurements include the
following:

Effective Size It represents the particle diameter corresponding to 10% cumulative

(from 0 to 100%) undersize particle size distribution (What is Particle Size Distribution
D10, D10 Particle Size.)
Coefficient of Curvature It is the ratio (D 30)2/(D10 D60), where D60, D30, and D10 are the
particle diameters corresponding to 60, 30 and 10% finer on the cumulative particle-size
distribution curve, respectively (Defined Term - A dictionary of defined terms for the
legal profession).
Coefficient of Uniformity It is a coefficient related to the size distribution of a granular
material, obtained by dividing the size of the sieve of which 60% of the sample weight
passes by the size of the sieve of which 10% of the sample weight passes (Construction
Dictionary by DictionaryOfConstruction.com).
Sorting Coefficient It is a sorting index equal to the square root of the ratio of the larger
quartile (the diameter having 25% of the cumulative size-frequency distribution larger
than itself) to the smaller quartile (the diameter having 75% of the cumulative sizefrequency distribution larger than itself) (The Free Dictionary: Dictionary, Encyclopedia
and Thesaurus).

Results from Table 1 are computed using the formula in Sec. C of Experiment Procedure. Values
in Fig. 1 are plotted in a X-Y scatter graph with the Percent Finer values at Y-axis and the
Particle-Size Diameter at the logarithmic X-axis. All of which are produced using Microsoft
Excel 2010 spreadsheet software.
Particle-size parameters are manually computed via interpolation using a Casio fx-991ES Plus
scientific calculator.

Summary and Conclusion

Soil particle-size gradation was defined as the following:
Gradation describes the distribution of different size groups within a soil sample.
A well-graded soil is a soil sample that has all sizes of material present from
the no. 4 sieve to the no. 200 sieve. Poorly graded soil may be uniformed-graded
or gap-graded. If a soil is uniformed-graded, most of its particles are about
the same size. An example of this is a sieve analysis in which sand size No. 20 is
the only size present. If a soil is gap-graded, at least one particle size is missing.
An example of gap-graded soil is one in which a sieve analysis reveals
that sand sizes No. 10 and No. 40 are missing. All other sizes are present (Soil
Gradation).
9

With the computed results as solid evidence (as shown in Table 1 and in Fig. 1), it can be
concluded that the soil sample tested is a well-graded soil. Consequently, the sample is not gapgraded nor uniformed-graded since the particle-sizes are distributed in all sieves.
Soils that pass the no. 4 sieve but are retained on the no. 200 sieve are classified as sands. Sands
are further broken down as coarse sand or fine sands. Coarse sand passes the no. 4 sieve and
is retained on the no. 40 sieve. Fine sand passes the no. 40 sieve and is retained on the No. 200
sieve. Any soil passing the no. 200 sieve is classified as fine-grained (Soil Gradation). Since
there is no no. 40 sieve used in the experiment and only 7% of the sample had passed the no. 200
sieve, most of the soil sample can be generally classified as sand with some fine-grained
materials.
In conclusion, the overall experiment had been successful by providing specific information
from the data obtained. The relevant properties of the soil sample had been defined and the
sample itself had been judged with objection.

Recommendations
Despite the success, there are still few inadequacies that shall be addressed before repeating the
experiment. One is the sample itself, which was too saturated for oven drying. It is highly
recommended to obtain a soil sample which is dry enough for oven drying alone. This compels
the procedure to follow the standard method of drying as per Test Method D 6913 04.
Another one is the inadequate laboratory equipments. It is highly recommended that all observers
to wear proper clothes in conducting such an experiment and that had not been the case. For the
actual lab equipments, it is recommended that the facility provides a mechanical sieve shaker.

10

Works Cited
Defined Term - A Dictionary of Defined Terms for the Legal Profession. The Rulebase
Foundation,

n.d. Web. 17 July 2015.

Construction Dictionary by DictionaryOfConstruction.com. WebFinance Inc., n.d. 17 July 2015.

De Bakker, H. Purposes of Soil Classification. Geoderma 4.3 (1970): 195208. Print.
Soil

Gradation. Integrated Publishing - Your Source for Military Specifications and

Educational Publications. Integrated Publishing, Inc., n.d. Web. 17 July 2015.

Standard Test Methods for Particle-Size Distribution (Gradation) of Soils Using Sieve Analysis.
West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania: ASTM International, 2009. Print.
The Free Dictionary: Dictionary, Encyclopedia and Thesaurus. Farlex, Inc., n.d. Web. 17 July
2015.
What is Particle Size Distribution D10, D10 Particle Size. Laser Particle Size
Analyzer,Surface Area Analyzer,Bulk Density Tester,Milling & Sieving - AimSizer
Scientific. AimSizer Scientific Ltd., n.d. Web. 17 July 2015.

11