Scribd
Upload
50 views3 pages

Classification of Grain Size

The document summarizes a particle size distribution analysis of a 1000g soil sample. The sample was sieved using a series of sieves ranging from sizes 4 to 200. The amounts retained on each sieve were recorded, with 95.7% passing through sieve #4 and only 1.9% passing through sieve #100. No particles passed through the finest sieve #200. Based on the results, the soil was classified as a gravelly sand due to the large proportions of coarser particles.

Uploaded by

Mae Anne G
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
50 views3 pages

Classification of Grain Size

The document summarizes a particle size distribution analysis of a 1000g soil sample. The sample was sieved using a series of sieves ranging from sizes 4 to 200. The amounts retained on each sieve were recorded, with 95.7% passing through sieve #4 and only 1.9% passing through sieve #100. No particles passed through the finest sieve #200. Based on the results, the soil was classified as a gravelly sand due to the large proportions of coarser particles.

Uploaded by

Mae Anne G
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

APPARATUS

 Set of Sieves
 Weighing Balance
 Pan
 Spatula
 1000 grams of Soil

I. DATA

Wt. of Sieve Cumulative


Sieve Wt. of Retained Retained
+ Soil Retained Passed (%)
No. Sieve (g) (g) (%)
Retained (g) (g)
4.3%
4 479 522 43 43 4.3 95.7
GRAVEL
8 474 552 78 121 12.1 87.9
93.8%
50 355 1124 769 890 89 11
SAND
100 348 439 91 981 98.1 1.9
0% CLAY
200 294 314 20 1001 100.1 0
OR SILT
Pan 362 372 10 1011 101.1 0

II. COMPUTATION

Retained (g)

𝑆𝑖𝑒𝑣𝑒 𝑁𝑜. 4 = 522 − 479 = 43 𝑆𝑖𝑒𝑣𝑒 𝑁𝑜. 100 = 439 − 348 = 91

𝑆𝑖𝑒𝑣𝑒 𝑁𝑜. 8 = 552 − 474 = 78 𝑆𝑖𝑒𝑣𝑒 𝑁𝑜. 200 = 314 − 294 = 20

𝑆𝑖𝑒𝑣𝑒 𝑁𝑜. 50 = 1124 − 355 = 769 𝑃𝑎𝑛 = 372 − 362 = 10

Cumulative Retained (g)

𝑆𝑖𝑒𝑣𝑒 𝑁𝑜. 4 = 43 𝑆𝑖𝑒𝑣𝑒 𝑁𝑜. 100 = 890 + 91 = 981

𝑆𝑖𝑒𝑣𝑒 𝑁𝑜. 8 = 43 + 78 = 121 𝑆𝑖𝑒𝑣𝑒 𝑁𝑜. 200 = 981 + 20 = 1001

𝑆𝑖𝑒𝑣𝑒 𝑁𝑜. 50 = 121 + 769 = 890 𝑃𝑎𝑛 = 1001 + 10 = 1011


Retained (%)

43 981
𝑆𝑖𝑒𝑣𝑒 𝑁𝑜. 4 = × 100 = 4.3 𝑆𝑖𝑒𝑣𝑒 𝑁𝑜. 100 = × 100 = 98.1
1000 1000

121 1001
𝑆𝑖𝑒𝑣𝑒 𝑁𝑜. 8 = × 100 = 12.1 𝑆𝑖𝑒𝑣𝑒 𝑁𝑜. 200 = × 100 = 100.1
1000 1000

890 1011
𝑆𝑖𝑒𝑣𝑒 𝑁𝑜. 50 = × 100 = 89 𝑃𝑎𝑛 = × 100 = 101.1
1000 1000

Passed (%)

𝑆𝑖𝑒𝑣𝑒 𝑁𝑜. 4 = 100 − 4.3 = 95.7 𝑆𝑖𝑒𝑣𝑒 𝑁𝑜. 100 = 100 − 98.1 = 1.9

𝑆𝑖𝑒𝑣𝑒 𝑁𝑜. 8 = 100 − 12. 1 = 87.9 𝑆𝑖𝑒𝑣𝑒 𝑁𝑜. 200 = 100 − 1001 = 0

𝑆𝑖𝑒𝑣𝑒 𝑁𝑜. 50 = 100 − 89 = 11 𝑃𝑎𝑛 = 100 − 1011 = 0

4.3% Gravel
95.7 – 1.9 = 93.8% Sand
0% Clay or Silt
Soil Classification: GRAVELY SAND

III. OBSERVATION

The sand sample underwent sieving using a range of sieve sizes, including numbers 4,

8, 50, 100, and 200. The amounts of sand retained on each sieve were 43 grams (sieve

#4), 78 grams (sieve #8), 769 grams (sieve #50), 91 grams (sieve #100), and 20 grams

(sieve #200), respectively. Additionally, 10 grams of sand were retained on the pan,

indicating the finest particles that could pass through the smallest sieve. The percentage

of sand that passed through each sieve provides valuable insights into the distribution

of particle sizes within the sample. Notably, 95.7% of sand passed through sieve #4,
indicating that the majority of the particles were coarser than the mesh openings of this

sieve. Similarly, 87.9% of the sand passed through sieve #8, while only 11% passed

through sieve #50, demonstrating a significant decrease in particle size. Furthermore,

the data illustrates that a mere 1.9% of the sand managed to pass through sieve #100,

highlighting the dominance of finer particles within this range. Notably, no sand

particles were able to pass through sieve #200, signifying the presence of extremely

fine particles that were unable to traverse the sieve openings.

IV. CONCLUSION

The presented particle size distribution analysis offers a comprehensive understanding

of the sand sample's composition. The substantial proportion of sand passing through

sieve #4 and sieve #8 suggests a preponderance of coarser particles, whereas the

minimal percentage of sand passing through sieve #100 and the complete absence of

passage through sieve #200 underscore the presence of finer particles within the

sample. These findings hold significant implications for various fields, including

geotechnical engineering, construction, and soil classification. The data can aid in

designing appropriate engineering solutions, understanding soil behavior, and

predicting factors such as permeability, compaction, and shear strength. Nonetheless,

it is crucial to acknowledge that the accuracy of the analysis relies on proper sampling

techniques and sieving procedures, and further replication of the experiment could

provide a more robust assessment of the sand's particle size distribution.

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy