EV216 CIVIL LAB 2

LAB REPORT

Group :4
No. of Experiment : Experiment 5
Title of Experiment : SOIL SAMPLING PROPERTIES TEST
5.1 Determination of Grain Size Distribution
5.2 Determination of Moisture Content
5.3 Determination of Density (Unit weight) of Soil Sample
Date of Experiment : 09 FEB 2022
Lecturer : Ts. Dr. Ng Jing Lin
Group member :

No. Nama No. Student ID

1 Aaryan Amin Premji 1001957060
2 Jason Hwong Jung Xien 1001953796
3 Lee Hong Shen 1002058441
4 Mohamed Ibrahim Mohamud 1002059478
5 Wan Jia Jun 1002164989
6 Jalal Hassan Jalal Fuqhaa 1001955505
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Table of Contents
5.1 Determination of Grain Size Distribution ................................................... 3
Introduction .................................................................................................................... 3
Objective ........................................................................................................................ 3
Experiment Outcomes .................................................................................................... 4
Equipment / Apparatus .................................................................................................. 4
Materials ........................................................................................................................ 4
Methodology / Procedures ............................................................................................. 4
Result and Analysis........................................................................................................ 4
Discussion and Observation ........................................................................................... 8
Conclusion ..................................................................................................................... 9
5.2 Determination of Moisture Content ............................................................ 9
Introduction .................................................................................................................... 9
Objective ...................................................................................................................... 10
Experiment Outcomes .................................................................................................. 10
Equipment / Apparatus ................................................................................................ 10
Materials ...................................................................................................................... 11
Methodology / Procedures ........................................................................................... 11
Result and Analysis...................................................................................................... 11
Discussion and Observation ......................................................................................... 12
Conclusion ................................................................................................................... 13
5.3 Determination of Density (Unit weight) of Soil Sample ........................... 13
Introduction .................................................................................................................. 13
Objective ...................................................................................................................... 14
Experiment Outcomes .................................................................................................. 14
Equipment / Apparatus ................................................................................................ 14
Materials ...................................................................................................................... 14
Methodology / Procedures ........................................................................................... 14
Result and Analysis...................................................................................................... 15
Discussion and Observation ......................................................................................... 16
Conclusion ................................................................................................................... 17
Reference ..................................................................................................................... 18
Rubric........................................................................................................................... 19
5.1 Determination of Grain Size Distribution

Introduction
Aggregate is a fundamental component of concrete. Its quality is critical since
aggregates account for around one-quarter of the volume of concrete. The grading of
aggregate is one of the physical features of aggregate that influences the property of
concrete. The proportions of aggregate particles of different sizes in the aggregate are
defined by aggregate grading. The sieve analysis, often known as the graduation test,
is a fundamental requirement for all aggregate technologists.

The sieve analysis determines the graduation (the distribution of aggregate

particles by size within a given sample) in order to assess compliance with the design,
production control requirements, and verification specification. A sieve analysis can
be done on any sort of non-organic or organic granular material, such as sands,
crushed rock, clays, granite, feldspars, coal, and soil, as well as a variety of produced
powders, grain, and seeds, down to a minimum size depending on the particular
method. Because it is such a simple method of particle size, it is most likely the most
often used.

Grading of aggregates refers to the particle size distribution of an aggregate as

measured by sieve analysis. If all of the particles in an aggregate are the same size, the
compacted mass will have more voids, whereas an aggregate with a variety of particle
sizes would have fewer vacancies. A mass of aggregate should have a particle size
distribution in which the smaller particles fill the spaces between the bigger particles.
The right grading of an aggregate results in dense concrete that requires less fine
aggregate and cement waste. The dry sieving method most used for coarse grain soil.
Coarse grain soil can be classed as gravel or sand.

Objective
The main objective of this experiment was:
• To obtain the particle size distribution of a given soil sample
Experiment Outcomes
The experiment outcomes of this experiment were:
• To determine the percentage of soil retained on each sieve
• To draw a graph between the log of the grain size of the soil and percentage fineness
• The data obtained is used in the design of filters for earth dams

Equipment / Apparatus
1. B.S Sieves
2. Mechanical sieve shaker
3. Weighing Balance
4. Cleaning brush

Materials
1. Dry soil sample

Methodology / Procedures
1. The weight of each sieve was written down as well as the bottom pan to be used in
the analysis.
2. The weight of the given dry soil sample was recorded.
3. All the sieves were cleaned and assembled in the ascending order of sieve numbers
(#4 sieve at top and #200 sieve at bottom). The pan was placed below #200 sieve.
The soil sample was poured carefully into the top sieve and place the cap over it.
4. The sieve stack was placed in the mechanical shaker and shake for 10 minutes.
5. The stack was removed from the shaker and the weight of each sieve were weighted
and recorded carefully with its retained soil. In addition, the weight of the bottom
pan was also weighed and recorded with its retained fine soil.

Result and Analysis

Grain Size Analysis

Date Tested : 02 MAR 2022
Tested by : Group 4
Project Name : Determination of Grain Size Distribution
Sample Number :1
Visual Classification of Soil : Dry soil
Weight of Container : 8603 gm
Wt. Container + Dry Soil : 12587.5 gm
Wt. of Dry Sample : 4006 gm

Sieve Diameter Mass of Mass of Sieve Soil Percent Percent

Number (mm) Empty Sieve + Soil Retained Retained (g) Retained Passing
(g) (g)
6 3.35 mm 1035.0 2263.0 1228.0 30.8 69.2
10 2.00 mm 1019.5 1486.0 466.5 11.7 57.5
16 1.18 mm 917.0 1532.5 615.5 15.5 42.0
30 600 m 882.0 1490.5 608.5 15.3 26.7
40 425 m 853.5 1061.5 208.0 5.2 21.5
50 300 m 786.5 1012.5 226.0 5.7 15.8
70 212 m 744.5 957.5 213.0 5.3 10.5
100 150 m 725.0 940.5 215.5 5.4 5.1
230 63 m 752.0 927.5 175.5 4.4 0.7
Pan - 888.0 916.0 28.0 0.7 0.0
Total Weight = 3984.5
*Percent passing=100-cumulative percent retain

Calculation:

1. Sieve No.6
Soil retained = 2263.0 – 1035.0 = 1228.0g
Percent retained = 1228 / 3984.5 x 100% = 30.8%
Percent passing = 100% - 30.8% = 69.2%

2. Sieve No.10
Soil retained = 1486.0 – 1019.5 = 466.5g
Percent retained = 466.5 / 3984.5 x 100% = 11.7%
Percent passing = 69.2% - 11.7% = 57.5%
3. Sieve No.16
Soil retained = 1532.5 – 917.0 = 615.5g
Percent retained = 615.5 / 3984.5 x 100% = 15.5%
Percent passing = 57.5% - 15.55% = 42.0%

4. Sieve No.30
Soil retained = 1490.5 – 882.0 = 608.5g
Percent retained = 608.5 / 3984.5 x 100% = 15.3%
Percent passing = 42.0% - 15.3% = 26.7%

5. Sieve No.40
Soil retained = 1061.5 – 853.5 = 208.0g
Percent retained = 208.0 / 3984.5 x 100% = 5.2%
Percent passing = 26.7% - 5.2% = 21.5%

6. Sieve No.50
Soil retained = 1012.5 – 786.5 = 226.0g
Percent retained = 226.0 / 3984.5 x 100% = 21.5%
Percent passing = 21.5% - 5.7% = 15.8%

7. Sieve No.70
Soil retained = 957.5 – 744.5 = 213.0g
Percent retained = 213.0 / 3984.5 x 100% = 5.3%
Percent passing = 15.8% - 5.3% = 10.5%

8. Sieve No.100
Soil retained = 940.5 – 725.0 = 215.5g
Percent retained = 215.5 / 3984.5 x 100% = 5.4%
Percent passing = 10.5% - 5.4% = 5.1%

9. Sieve No.230
Soil retained = 927.5 – 752.0 = 175.5g
Percent retained = 175.5 / 3984.5 x 100% = 4.4%
Percent passing = 5.1% - 4.4% = 0.7%

10. Pan
Soil retained = 916.0 – 888.0 = 28.0g
Percent retained = 28.0 / 3984.5 x 100% = 0.7%
Percent passing = 0.7% - 0.7% = 0.0%

Semilogarithmic Graph:

Grain size distribution curve

80

70

60
Percent Passing %

50

40

30

20

10

0
0.01 0.1 0.29 1 1.36 3.49 10
Particle size, D (mm)

Graph 1.0 Grain Size Distribution Curve

From Grain Size Distribution Curve:

% Gravel (size limit – greater than 3.350mm) = 30.8%

% Sand (size limit – 3.350mm – 0.063mm) = 100% - 30.8% - 0.7% = 68.5%
% Fines (size limit – less than 0.063mm) = 0.7%
D10 = 0.29 mm
D30 = 1.36 mm
D60 = 3.49 mm
𝐷60 3.49
Cu = 𝐷10 = 0.29 = 12.034
𝐷302 1.362
Cc = 𝐷60∗𝐷10 = 3.49∗0.29 = 1.827

Unified Classification of Soil: Well-graded soil and coarse-grained soil

Discussion and Observation
This experiment involved sieve analysis of a soil sample. Through previous
experience, we had an idea of how sieve analysis is conducted when we did sieve
analysis for aggregates. We took approximately 4kg of dry soil sample and poured it
into the sieve shaker. We let it run for 10 minutes and then we measured the amount of
soil retained in each sieve. The upper most sieve had the largest opening, while the
lowest sieve had the smallest openings which was then followed by the pan which had
no openings. It was placed to collect the soil that manages to pass through all the sieves.

After measuring the amount of soil retained on each sieve, we calculated the
total weight of the soil. And found the total percentage retained on each sieve. However,
the total retained weight that we calculated was slightly short of 4kg. This would mean
that some of the soil sample was lost/not accounted for during the process. The
following could be the reasons for the difference in soil weight before and after sieve
analysis:

Wind
- The experiment was conducted in the lab, but the window railings were open. This
might have led to some of the soil sample flying away and causing a lower reading on
the scale
- Also, due to the wind, the apparatus we used to hold the soil while measuring the soil
before sieve analysis was shaking and causing the weighing balance to give erratic
readings. This may have led to a higher reading of soil sample than the real reading.

However, the difference between the weight of the soil sample before and after
sieve analysis was within the given range in the procedures. The procedures stated that
the difference should not be more than 2%. Our soil sample had 4kg before and after
sieve analysis we had 21.5g difference which is just a 0.5% difference which is well
within the allowable limit and thus the results of our sieve analysis were valid.
After completing sieve analysis and measuring the weights retained on each sieve, we
tabulated the data and calculated the percentage retained and percentage passing which
helped us draw the grain size distribution curve. From the curve we could make out that
the majority (99.3%) of our soil sample comprised of coarse aggregate while only 0.7%
was fine aggregate.

Since our sample primarily composed of coarse aggregate, we further calculated

the values of D10, D30 and D60 which would assist us to find the values of Cu and Cc
which give us the gradation of our soil whether it is poorly graded or well graded. A
value of 12.034 (>6 for sand) was obtained for Cu which when combined with the value
of Cc (1.827, between 1-3 for sand) implied that our soil sample is well graded. This
can be further evidenced by the shape of the graph which shows a variety in particle
size diameters from 0.1mm up to 3.5mm.

Conclusion
To summarize, our experiment objectives were met due to our performance in
the lab and by following the directions given, since errors in collecting measurements
and setting the cement were avoided due to precision in following the instructions. After
completing our experiment, we were able to determine and comprehend the particle
size distribution and grading of aggregates, as well as the impacts of the aggregates on
the workability and strength of the concrete after hardening.

5.2 Determination of Moisture Content

Introduction
The moisture content of soil, often known as water content, is a measure of how
much water is contained in the soil. The quantity of water contained in the pore spaces
of soil to the solid mass of particles in that material, given as a percentage, is known as
moisture content.

The amount of water contained in a substance, such as soil, is known as its water
content (called soil moisture). This is a ratio that can vary from 0 (totally dry) to the
value of the materials porosity during saturation. It is utilised in a wide range of
scientific and technological fields. The "soil moisture content" refers to the quantity of
water present in a certain soil. In most cases, air and/or water fill this pore space. The
soil is fully dry when all of its pores are filled with air. The soil is considered to be
saturated when all of the pores are filled with water. Soil moisture is an important factor
in regulating the flow of water and heat energy between the land surface and the
atmosphere via evaporation and plant transpiration.

We followed the proper process for determining the moisture content (water
content) of soil samples in this lab. The water content varies from sample to sample
based on the sample type, such as clay, sand, gravel, or silt, and technically depends on
the soil texture and humus levels. The water content of various soils might be a critical
method to estimate the interaction between how a soil behaves and its qualities. The
consistency of fine-grained soil is mostly determined by its water content. The water
content of a specific volume of soil is also used to illustrate the phase relationships of
air, water, and solids.

Even though the experiment to estimate the moisture content of soil is

straightforward to carry out, there are various causes of mistake that might arise. The
temperature of the oven is the most crucial. Many soil-forming minerals are hydrous,
which means that water is present in their crystal formations. Normally, a soil's water
content is determined by drying it in an oven at 110 degrees Celsius. This temperature
is chosen because it is high enough to evaporate all the water in the soil's pore spaces
while not being so high as to force water out of most minerals' structures.

Objective
The main objective of this experiment was to:
• To determine the natural moisture content of the given soil sample.

Experiment Outcomes
The experiment outcomes of this experiment were:
• To determine the moisture content, which is needed for all the soil tests.
• To obtain information about the state of soil in the field.

Equipment / Apparatus
1. Moisture Cans
2. Electric oven
3. Desiccator
4. Weighing Balance
5. Gloves
6. Spatula

Materials
1. Dry soil sample
2. Water

Methodology / Procedures
1. The moisture can and lid number was recorded. The mass of an empty, clean, and
dry moisture can with its lid (MC) was determined and recorded.
2. The moist soil was placed in the moisture can and the lid was secured. The mass of
the moisture can was determined and recorded (now containing the moist soil) with
the lid (MCMS).
3. The lid was removed, and the moisture can was placed (containing the moist soil)
in the drying oven that is set at 105oC. The can was leaved in the oven overnight.
4. The moisture can was removed. The lid on the moisture can was replaced carefully
but securely by using gloves, and it was allowed to cool to room temperature. The
mass of the moisture can and lid was determined and recorded (containing the dry
soil) (MCDS).
5. The moisture can was emptied, and the can and lid were cleaned.

Result and Analysis

MOISTURE CONTENT DETERMINATION DATA SHEET

Sample number: 1 Date Tested: 02 MAR 2022

Soil description: Dry soil sample
Moisture content determination:
Specimen number 1 2 3
Moisture can and lid number 1 2 3
MC = Mass of empty, clean can + lid (grams) 54 54 55
MCMS = Mass of can, lid, and moist soil (grams) 91 113 175
MCDS = Mass of can, lid, and dry soil (grams) 89 107 152
MS = Mass of soil solids (grams) 35 53 97
MW = Mass of pore water (grams) 2 6 23
w = Water content, w% 5.7% 11.3% 23.7%

Calculations:
1. Mass of soil solids: MS = MCDS – MC
Sample no.1: Sample no.2: Sample no.3:
MS = 89–54 MS = 107-54 MS = 152-55
MS = 35g MS = 53g MS = 97g

2. Mass of pore water: MW = MCMS - MCDS

Sample no.1: Sample no.2: Sample no.3:
Mw = 91-89 Mw = 113-107 Mw = 175-152
Mw = 2g Mw = 6g Mw = 23g

𝑀𝑤
3. Moisture content of the given soil sample: w = × 100%
𝑀𝑠

Sample no.1: Sample no.2: Sample no.3:

2 6 23
w = 35 × 100% w = 53 × 100% w = 97 × 100%

w = 5.7% w = 11.3% w = 23.7%

Discussion and Observation

In this experiment, the three-difference soil sample were added difference
amount of water to determine the moisture content of difference soil sample. The moist
soil was put in a moisture can and placed in the oven over night to get the dry soil
sample. The soil moisture content indicates the amount of water present in the soil. It
is generally stated as the quantity of water contained in one metre of soil (in mm of
water depth). In this experiment, the objective is to determine the natural moisture
content of the given soil sample. The consistency and behaviour of a soil is different
and consequently in each state to shows its engineering properties.

From the result, we know that the first soil with 37gram moist soil has 5.7% of
moisture content which is also contain 2gram of pore water. Besides that, the second
soil with 59gram moist soil has 11.3% of moisture content and the third soil with
120gram of moist soil has 23.7% of moisture content. To get the result of moisture
content, we had calculated the mass of soil solids, MS with the formula (MCDS – MC)
and mass of pore water, MW with (MCMS – MCDS). By using the MS and MW, we had
found out the moisture content of each of the soil sample. In contrast, due to the
evaporation of water content in the soil sample, we know that the mass of dry soil
should be lesser then the moist soil after placing it in the oven. Lastly, the reason that
we repeat the experiment in three time is because we need to ensure the accuracy of the
experiment and compare the moisture content of each of the soil sample.

Conclusion
In this experiment, we learnt about the soil and its structure at the conclusion
of the experiment, and we completed the objectives of estimating the water content of
the soil sample. According to the findings of the experiment, the soil sample does not
have the same moisture content because some parts are partially dry while the other
parts have more moisture present.

5.3 Determination of Density (Unit weight) of Soil Sample

Introduction
In this experiment, the density of soil sample is determined by a compacted soil.
The length and diameter of soil is determined by the soil compacted in a cylinder. The
density or unit weight of soil can be defined as the relation between the mass and
volume of a soil sample. Besides that, the density of soil sample can also be illustrated
in particle density and bulk density and normally bulk density of soil sample should be
smaller than the particle density.
 Generally, the bulk density also separates into wet bulk density (total density)
and dry bulk density. The wet bulk density can be calculated directly by dividing the
volume of soil sample to the mass of the sample and. For the dry bulk density, we need
to calculate it with the mass of oven dried soil sample divided the volume of sample.
Thus, through this experiment we can determined the density (unit weight) of given soil
sample by compressing it in a cylinder and we should also know that the unit weight of
soils sample that is used for compacted soils for structural fills.

Objective
The main objective of this experiment was to:
• To determine the Unit weight of the given soil sample.

Experiment Outcomes
The experiment outcomes of this experiment were:
• To determine the Unit Weight of disturbed soil sample.
• To understand the Unit Weight of soils that is used for compacted soils for structural
fills.

Equipment / Apparatus
1. Moisture cans
2. Electric oven
3. Vernier caliper
4. Weighing balance
5. Straight edge

Materials
1. Dry soil sample
2. Water

Methodology / Procedures
1. The soil sample was extruded from the cylinder using the extruder.
2. A representative soil specimen was cut from the extruded sample.
3. The length (L), diameter (D) and mass (Mt) of the soil specimen was determined
 and recorded.
4. The moisture content of the soil (w) was determined and recorded. (See Experiment
1) (Note: If the soil is sandy or loose, weigh the cylinder and soil sample together.
Measure dimensions of the soil sample within the cylinder. Extrude and weigh the
soil sample and determine moisture content.)

Result and Analysis

DENSITY (UNIT WEIGHT) DETERMINATION DATA SHEET

Sample number :1 Date Tested : 02 MAR 2022

Soil description : Dry soil sample

Mass of the soil sample (Mt) : 299g

Length of the soil sample (L) : 10cm
Diameter of the soil sample (D) : 5cm

Moisture content determination:

Specimen number 1
Moisture can and lid number 1
MC = Mass of empty, clean can + lid (grams) 55
MCMS = Mass of can, lid, and moist soil (grams) 183
MCDS = Mass of can, lid, and dry soil (grams) 165
MS = Mass of soil solids (grams) 110
MW = Mass of pore water (grams) 18
w = Water content, w% 16.4%

Calculations:
𝑀𝑤
1. Moisture content of the given soil sample: w = × 100%
𝑀𝑠

MS = MCDS – MC MW = MCMS - MCDS

MS = 165-55 MW = 183-165
MS = 110g MW = 18g
18
w = 110 × 100%
 w = 16.4%

𝜋𝐷 2 𝐿
2. Volume of the soil sample: 𝑉 = 𝑐𝑚3
4

𝜋(5)2 (10) 3
𝑉= 𝑐𝑚
4
𝑉 = 196.35𝑐𝑚3

𝑀𝑡 𝑔
3. Bulk density (𝜌𝑡 ) of soil: 𝜌𝑡 = 𝑉 𝑐𝑚3
299 𝑔
𝜌𝑡 =
196.35 𝑐𝑚3
𝑔
𝜌𝑡 = 1.523 3
𝑐𝑚
𝜌𝑡 𝑔
4. Dry density (𝜌𝑑 ) of soil: 𝜌𝑑 =
1+𝑤 𝑐𝑚3

1.523 𝑔
𝜌𝑑 =
1 + 0.164 𝑐𝑚3
1.523 𝑔
𝜌𝑑 =
1.164 𝑐𝑚3
𝑔
𝜌𝑑 = 1.308 3
𝑐𝑚

Discussion and Observation

In experiment 5.3 : determination of density of soil sample, 299 grams of soil
sample was used to extrude from the cylinder by the extruder. When the cylinder
mould was removed, the soil sample was able to stand and no collapse or any shear.
Then a few of soil sample was put into the moisture can and oven dry overnight to
take the result of mass of soil solids and mass of pore water to calculate the water
content of soil sample.

The objective of this experiment is determining the unit weight of the given
soil sample. First, the volume of soil sample is 196.35 𝑐𝑚3 as the length of soil
sample is 10 cm while the diameter of the soil sample is 5 cm.

The bulk density of a soil is defined as the total mass per total volume. This
means the soil sample which was weighed before oven dry process divided by the
total volume of soil sample giving the bulk density. The determination of bulk density
of a soil is important as it can calculate the total dry material in soil sample when
relate the bulk density to the water content of the soil sample. The determination of
water content of a soil is also important as it is useful in the practical problems design
such as drainage lines or irrigation planning.

The value of bulk density from the result of this experiment is 1.523 g/cm3 or
bulk unit weight is 14.94 N/m3 . The value of dry density of soil sample is 1.308
g/cm3 or dry unit weight is 12.83 N/m3 .

Fine grained soils have more total pore space between soil particles than
coarse grained soils. Thus. the fine-grained soils also generally have lower bulk
density and dry density. Bulk density values of fine-grained soils commonly range
from 1.0 to 1.3 g/cm3 , while coarse grained soils commonly range from 1.3 to 1.7
g/cm3 . Based on the result of this experiment, the soil sample that used in the
experiment is coarse grained soil.

Soil compaction is the process to decrease soil pore space and then lead to the
increase of bulk density. The fine-grained soil like clay soils can be compressed and
molded easily. The compressibility and the low bulk density of fine-grained soils
allow for substantial increases in bulk density when fine grained soils are compacted
due to their total pore space between soil particles decrease.

In contrast, course grained soil cannot be molded together with cylinder shape.
Thus, the coarse-grained soil sample that used in this experiment has added a little
water to increase its porosity. The compaction of course grained soils do not lead to as
great of increase in bulk density as occurs when fine grained soils are compacted due
to relatively small porosity of coarse-grained soils. For a small conclusion, although
fine grained soils generally have lower bulk densities than coarse grained soils while
the opposite can be happened in compacted soils.

Conclusion
In conclusion, the bulk density and dry density of soil sample can be determined
by the compressed soil and water content is found after the soil is dried. As shown as
discussion above, the bulk density of soil sample is 1.523 g/cm3 and the dry density of
soil sample is 1.308 g/cm3 which also means that the soil sample we used is the coarse-
grained soil. In this experiment, we known that the soil compaction is important because
good compaction may increase the bulk density of soil sample. The water in soil can
also be retained by reducing the void ratio to make the water flow through the soil more
difficult and prevent the buildup of large water pressures that cause soil to liquefy
during earthquakes.

To make sure our safety and health, we should always wear appropriate personal
protective clothing throughout the whole experiment. Besides that, we should keep
tools clean and check before and after use. Lastly, when we take out the moisture can
form the oven, we should wear the glove to prevent scald.

Reference
1. Online Courses Civil Engineering. (13 February 2020). unit weight of soil, bulk
unit weight, dry unit weight, unit weight of solids.
https://civilengineering.blog/2020/02/13/unit-weight-soil-mass/
2. Write Work. (November 2006). Determination of Bulk Density and Water Content
of a Cohesive Soil. https://www.writework.com/essay/determination-bulk-density-
and-water-content-cohesive-soil
3. Rubens Alves de Oliveira. (2015). Soil density. Soil Density - an overview |
ScienceDirect Topics. Retrieved March 3, 2022, from
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/agricultural-and-biological-sciences/soil-
density
4. Buckman, Harry O.; Brady, Nyle C. (1960). The Nature and Property of Soils - A
College Text of Edaphology (6th ed.). New York City: Macmillan. p. 50.
5. Grain Size Distribution. (n.d.). Geoengineer. Retrieved March 4, 2022, from
https://www.geoengineer.org/education/laboratory-testing/step-by-step-guide-for-
grain-size-analysis
 Rubric
Lab Report Assessment Rubric
Items Unacceptable Satisfactory Moderate Good Excellent
Score 0 1 2 3 4
Introduction Not introduction Background is Background Background Background
is presented. vague or brief, information is information is information is
hypothesis is vague or brief. researched and researched and
vague, or relevant Hypothesis is cited. cited.
explanation is stated but not Hypothesis is Hypothesis is
missing. clear. stated but not in stated in citation
clear explanation format and
explained
Objective No objective is Objectives are Objective Objective are Objective fully
stated irrelevant or are missing at least listed, at least addressed and
not appropriate to one important one important covered relevant
the experiment consideration environmental environmental
concern is and sustainability
covered concern.
Methodology/ No materials and Materials and Materials and Materials and Materials and
Procedures procedures are procedures are not procedures are procedures are procedures are
listed accurately list the listed, but seem listed, important listed in clear
steps of the missing some experimental steps, shown
experiment information, details are figures, each step
some steps are covered, shown is numbered in a
not numbered figures, some complete
and/or are in minor details sentence
incomplete missing
sentences.
 Result and No calculation, Figures, graphs, Figures, graphs, All figures, All figures,
Analysis figures, tables, tables contain tables, graphs, graphs, tables are
graphs are errors or are poorly calculation are calculation, correctly drawn,
provided constructed, have included, some tables are numbered and
missing titles, still missing correctly drawn, following
captions or some important but some have format,
numbers, units or required minor problems calculation are
missing or features or could still be clearly shown.
incorrect. improved
Discussion and Incomplete or Very incomplete or Some of the Almost all the All-important
Observation incorrect incorrect results have been results have been trends and data
interpretation of interpretation of correctly correctly comparisons
trends and trends and interpreted and interpreted and have been
comparison of comparison of data discussed; partial discussed, only interpreted
data. indicating a lack of but incomplete minor correctly and
understanding of understanding of improvements discussed, good
results results is still are needed understanding of
evident results is
conveyed
Conclusion, Incomplete or Conclusions or Conclusions, All-important All-important
safety, and incorrect safety and health safety, and health conclusions, conclusions,
health conclusion, no missing, or missing regarding major safety and health safety and health
safety and health the important points are drawn, have been drawn, have been clearly
were mentioned points but many are could be better made; student
misstated, stated shows good
indicating a lack understanding
of understanding
Reference and No reference was Sections out of Sections in order, Lab report is Lab report is
Formatting mentioned, order, formatting is mostly typed/written in
appearance and report/sentence rough, typed/written well-formatted,
formatting structure/reference sentence using appropriate very readable,
totally is not typed/written generally format, all sentences are
inappropriate using the readable with sections in order, very well written
 appropriate format. some rough spots formatting
in writing style generally good
but could still be
improved,
sentences
mature,
readable style
Timeliness Report handed Report handed in Up to one day Up to one hour Report handed in
in more than more than two late late time
three days late days late