Introduction

This report will inform you about the sieve analysis test about the soil sample given to us from Sonoma ranch to analyze. This experiment was conducted in the New Mexico State university laboratory in the date of September 4th. The soil was very dry like sand and the color was light brown. We got a sample of 500 grams soil and with this sample its enough to run a grain size distribution test. The sieve analysis is a method used to determine the grains size distribution of a soil sample. Civil Engineers must have a good knowledge of what kind of soil is on a site. Knowing what kind of soil is on the site they could say its a good place to do construction or its a very bad site to build some structure. The sieve analysis doesnt provide information about the shape of the particles. With the sieve analysis we can tell if the ground is good or bad, this experiment consists in metal sieves that have woven screens that filter the grains of soil through it, it separates the soil with respect to the size. The sieves are positioned from big to small big rocks end up caught on top and fine rocks like clay and silt get caught on the bottom. When are done with this data we can graph it and we get a line graph. The purpose of this is to get the D 10 and D 60, which are percent finer number which we use to calculate uniformity coefficient and curvature coefficient. These coefficients are helpful to determining if a soil is well graded, poorly graded or gap graded. Well graded is a soil that is very good soil with almost the same quantity of air, water and rocks. It doesnt contain that much voids. Poorly graded soil has some irregularities in the soil either too much air or too much water. Gap graded is a soil that has to many voids which means too many air in the soil its not steady it could sag or move with time.

Objective
The objective of this laboratory is to determine the grain size distribution of a soil sample and to classify the soil sample as well graded, poorly graded, and gap graded. Also with the data acquired we can calculate the uniformity and curvature coefficient and this will help us to classify the soil with much more accuracy.

Methods
The equipment used in the experiment 500 grams of soil Scale Sieves # 4,10, 20, 40, 60, 140, 200 (pan and lid) Mechanical sieve shaker/mixer

Steps in the experiment 1. We cleaned the sieves before staring and then weighed them and calculated there weight. 2. 500 grams of soil was collected, with no error we obtained 500 grams exactly. 3. The sieves were stacked from biggest to smallest with pan on the bottom. They were stacked as fallows, 4, 10,20,40,60,140,200. 4. The soil was poured through the top and lid was placed on the top. 5. The sieves well stacked were placed in the mechanical shaker for 10 minutes. 6. After the 10 minutes the sieves were separately carefully and were weighed once more with the dirt in them.

7. After we got the data we calculated mass lost, it was calculated by original mass minus mass retained divided by mass retained and multiplied by 100. Our group got a .08 % loss. 8. After that we poured the dirt in a container to be recycled and then we started cleaning the sieves to be placed in their original spot.

Results
When graphing our data we can come up with our values for the percent finer and can our D10, D30, and D60 to calculate the coefficient of graduation and the curvature coefficients. The results of the experiment are the ones that fallow. Table 1: Coefficients of graduation and curvature
Cu 4.33 Cc 1.02

The next table represents the size distribution of the soil that was used in the experiment Table 2: Size distribution
size distribution gravel coarsed grained medium grained fine grained silts and clays percent % 2.5 7.7 52.6 31.1 6.2

Discussion
After reviewing the results the soil is a poorly graded soil. Because the uniformity coefficient is low it should be a bigger than six but its less. Also by taking a look at the graph the lines tells us the soil is poorly graded and this site its not very good material to construct something really big. Theres is too much silt and clay in the soil and when water get in contact with this material it behaves very unnatural. In this sample there are a lot of fine grained and medium grained grains so it doesnt have variety. We want a very good variety so the soil wont have so many voids. Again this is a poorly graded soil and not very good soil.

References
Soil Mechanics Laboratory Manual. Braja M. Das. seventh edition. Oxford University Press 2009.

Appendix Table 3: Raw Data

Sieve No. # Particle Equipment Full Mass size weight weight retained (mm) (gr) (gr) (gr) 4 4.750 604.4 616.7 12.3 10 2.000 477.9 489 11.1 20 0.850 430.2 457.8 27.6 40 0.425 373.8 485.1 111.3 60 0.250 357.6 508.9 151.3 140 0.106 410.8 515.5 104.7 200 0.075 357.3 407.6 50.3 Pan 0.000 334.9 365.9 31 Total 499.6

Table 4: Calulation
Sieve No. # Particle Equipment Full Mass percent cumulative percent size weight weight retained retained percent finer (mm) (gr) (gr) (gr) (%) (%) (%) 4 4.750 604.4 616.7 12.3 2.5 2.5 97.5 10 2.000 477.9 489 11.1 2.2 4.7 95.3 20 0.850 430.2 457.8 27.6 5.5 10.2 89.8 40 0.425 373.8 485.1 111.3 22.3 32.5 67.5 60 0.250 357.6 508.9 151.3 30.3 62.8 37.2 140 0.106 410.8 515.5 104.7 21.0 83.8 16.3 200 0.075 357.3 407.6 50.3 10.1 93.8 6.2 Pan 0.000 334.9 365.9 31 6.2 100.0 0.0 Total 499.6 100.0

Figure 1: Graph percent finer vs. grain size

100.0 90.0 80.0 Percent Passing (%) 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 0.0 10 1 Particle size (mm) 0.1 0.01 Series1

Formulas
Uniformity coefficient

Coefficient of gradation

Mass retained ( Percent retained ( ) )

Uniformity coefficient

Coefficient of gradation