Lab Report #1:

Plastic Particle Size Analysis of Soils

Abstract
This experiment examined the particle-size distribution of soil using Sieve Analysis
Method and Hydrometer Analysis Method. The experiment was to determine the percentage
passing in each sieve using Sieve Analysis and the percentage finer in suspension using
Hydrometer Analysis. Two hundred-fifty gram sample were obtained from a pile of air-dried
soil. The sample was sieved through a series of sieves with varying opening sizes and
measured the mass retained in each sieve. The soil particles that passed through the sieve
with smallest opening were in suspension in a Sodium Hexametaphosphate solution at a
given time and percentage finer is calculated. Results are plotted in a semilogarithmic graph
and showed that it is relatively well graded because its uniformity coefficient lied within the
set range.

Submitted by: Chrislene D. Calivo

Groupmates:
Romil Cahatol
Arlish Carpio
Ramil Diaz
Mark David Siervo
Niki Jon Tolentino
Date Performed: 22 November 2010
Date Submitted: 03 December 2010

I.

Objectives
To determine the particle size distribution of the soil sample by Sieve Analysis

and Hydrometer Analysis

To be able plot and analyze the gradation curve of the soil sample

Materials
Balance
Sieves (Nos. 4, 8, 16, 30, 40, 50, 100, 200)
Bottom pan
Lid
Oven
Stirring rod
Hydrometer (type 152H)
Graduated cylinder
Graduated beaker
Sodium Hexametaphosphate
Distilled water
Thermometer
Timer

II.

III.
Methodology
A. Sieve Analysis

B. Hydrometer Analysis

RMCC4eyitlxaitniund0reeedrawwsoaasisllstaeirmtiedpdolbewfoanrt,6thh0ree btiomtaeormwpatasn twiaratseodplaancdnedreiandtihnegws w er taaken susing the hydrom et r at 4, 15, 30,

MTRCDHdgiemiaxdeeirdnowgaoiygsaswisannegnradnitnadgsreteitiaranrdtleteianodkglaesfnnnwdeamettihr5e,trtdh1ay5ksd,e3nreso0fm,o6rewt0ttaoarnewdafs(aprlawctebdwien aeegrraadauatweskd cylienaderrfsil ed ww ith diset l edr e
HgDsP6tapfer0yiac,rgrodmo9rneud0oldasattsceanordgardpeodi1foync2sflco0gnsoiodlreeipslecaescoruotntidiodfcpnsledenfsaetsociostontrrwwataoasrs one ddfd i olrt loe sau todph ) e a t
gs1toe c ho n r0fd treiaa l0 d u0 u p ma p t eeL rd v m c o y el ul n i mni s d ce e u r s
w1co4amte0prumitneindaustpesin ing m otion
ccoalmcupluatteedd

IV.
Data and Results
A. Sieve Analysis
Mass of
Sieve No.
4
8
16
30
40
50
100
200
pan
Sum (kg)

Mass of

Sieve with

Soil

Sieve (kg)
0.499
0.475
0.432
0.405
0.383
0.367
0.337
0.334
0.368

Soil (kg)
0.523
0.503
0.462
0.442
0.41
0.391
0.376
0.361
0.381

(kg)
0.024
0.028
0.03
0.037
0.027
0.024
0.039
0.027
0.013
0.249

%
Retained
9.60%
11.20%
12.05%
14.80%
10.84%
9.60%
15.66%
10.80%
5.20%

Cumulative

Cumulative

Retained
9.60%
20.80%
32.85%
47.65%
58.49%
68.09%
83.75%
94.55%
99.75%

Passing
90.40%
79.20%
67.15%
52.35%
41.51%
31.91%
16.25%
5.45%
0.25%

Orig. Mass
(kg)
Difference
%
0.250
0.001
40.00%
Table 1. Mass Retained, Percentage Retained and Percentage Passing Using Sieve Analysis

Sieve Diameter (mm)

4.75
2.36
1.18
0.6
0.42
0.3
0.15
0.075

% Cumulative Passing
90.40%
79.20%
67.15%
52.35%
41.51%
31.91%
16.25%
5.45%
0.25%
Table 2. Sieve Diameter and % Cumulative Passing Using Sieve Analysis

Mass of Soil=Mass of Sieve wit h SoilMass of Sieve

Mass of Soil=0.523 kg0.499 kg=0.024 kg

Retained=

MassofSoil
100
Total Mass

Retained=

0.024
100 =9.64
0.249

Cumulative=94.78 +5.22 =100

Cumulative Passing=100 Cumulative

Cumulative Passing=100 9.64 =90.36

Orig . Mass

Orig . Mass

Error=

0.2500.249
100 =0.40
0.250

Error=

Particle Size Distribution Curve Using Sieve Analysis

100
80
60
40
20
0
10

0.1

0.01

Graph 1. Sieve Diameter vs. %Cumulative Passing Using Sieve Analysis

B. Hydrometer Analysis
Time elapsed, T (min)

Actual Hydrometer Reading

Trial 1 Trial 2 Average

0.067
50
40
45
0.25
48
52
50
0.50
47
50
48.5
1.00
47
50
48.5
1.50
46
50
48
2.00
46
50
48
Table 3. Hydrometer reading during the first two minutes
Actual

Composi

Hydrome

te

Hydrometer

Hydromet

ter

Correctio

Reading

er Length,

Reading

Correction

Temp (C)

L (cm)

0
0.067
0.25

45
50

0
0

45
50

27
27

0.50

48.5

48.5

1.00

48.5

1.50

48

2.00

*Effective
Diameter

K*

(mm)

finer

8.9
8.1

0.01258
0.01258

0.145352
0.071607

27

8.35

0.01258

0.051409

48.5

27

8.35

0.01258

0.036352

48

27

8.4

0.01258

0.02977

48

48

27

8.4

0.01258

0.025781

5.00

49

49

27

8.3

0.01258

0.016208

15.00

49

49

27

8.3

0.01258

0.009358

30.00

49

49

27

8.3

0.01258

0.006617

60.00
1440.

47

47

27

8.6

0.01258

0.004763

18
20
19.
4
19.
4
19.
2
19.
2
19.
6
19.
6
19.
6
18.
8

(min)

18.
8

00
47
0
47
27
8.6
0.01258 0.000972
Table 4. Diameter and percentage finer in suspension of soil particles less than 0.075 mm in
diameter

*L, K obtained from the table, specific gravity is assumed to be 2.65, since Hydrometers are
calibrated for soils that have a specific gravity of 2.65. (Fundamentals of Geotechnical
Engineering 3rd Ed. by Das, p.29)

Particle Size Distribution Using

Hydrometer Analysis
20.5
20.0
19.5
19.0
18.5
18.0
17.5
17.0
1.0000

0.1000

0.0100

0.0010

Graph 2. Particle Diameter (mm) vs. % Finer in suspension

20.5
20.0
19.5
19.0

Sieve Analysis
Hydrometer Analysis

18.5
18.0
17.5
17.0
1.000

0.100

0.010

0.001

Graph 3. Particle Distribution using Sieve Analysis, superimposed Particle Distribution

Using Hydrometer Analysis
D ( mm )=K

L
T

D ( mm )=K

L
T

D ( mm )=0.01258

P=

P=

V.

8.9
= 0.145352
0.067

Rh
x 100 %
W

8.91.0
x 100 = 3.56%
250

Analysis and Discussion

Table 1 is the result of the sieve analysis. As computed, the percent difference of the

initial mass from the mass after sieving was just 0.40%. It means that the results are
acceptable.
Table 3 is the hydrometer reading done in the two first two minutes of reading.
Table 4 is the summary of the results for the hydrometer analysis of soil. The mass of
the air-dried soil was 13 g, while the oven-dried was 11 g. The composite correction was
computed by subtracting one from the calibration reading. But we were not able to calibrate
the hydrometer therefore assuming that the composite correction is zero. For the diameter and
percent finer, G1 was set to be 1 and Gs was set to be 2.65.
Graph 3 was the combined gradation/particle size distribution curve using hydrometer
analysis and hydrometer analysis of soils.

VI. Conclusion
There are three basic parameters in analyzing the particle size distribution of soils,
namely: Effective size, Coefficient of uniformity and coefficient of gradation. Via Dplot, an
application, D10, D30 and D60 were obtained which are necessary in computing for the
values of the three parameters. D10, D30, and D60 were found to be 0.101 mm, 0.277 mm,
and 0.851 mm respectively.
Coeffi cient of uniformity ,C u=

D 60 0.851
=
=8.425
D 10 0.101

D302
0.2772
Coefficient of gradation , C c =
=
=0.893
D 60 D 10 0.851(0.101)

For soil particles to be classified as well graded, its coefficient of uniformity should
be greater than 4 for gravel and greater than 6 for sands, and its coefficient of gradation
should lie between 1 and 3. Otherwise, it is poorly graded. From above, it can be said that its
uniformity coefficient lies within the pre-set range. But its coefficient of gradation failed to
do so. Results showed that it is neither well graded nor poor graded. Its particle distribution
lies somewhere in between.
But graph 1, using Sieve Analysis showed that there was uniform distribution of size
particles over a wide range. While graph 2, using Hydrometer analysis showed a poorlygraded soil particles since majority of those particles were of the same size.
Using graph 3, it can be said that relatively, the sample was well-graded. It just
deviated a bit at the hydrometer analysis.
The errors might have come from the non-calibration of the hydrometer. We were not
able to correct our reading because of it. And also, we were not able to check if the
temperature of the mixture varied while doing the reading. We just assumed that temperature
was constant all throughout.

VII.

References
ASTM D422 Standard Test Method for Particle-Size Analysis of Soils
Biscontin, Giovanna. CVEN365 Introduction to Geotechnical Engineering
LABORATORY MANUAL. Particle Size Analysis of Soils. Texas A&M
University.
CE 162 Lecture Notes