TO:
Laboratory #1 Water Content
Rabie Farrag
FROM:
Nada Elshehawy
PARTNERS:
Andrew Nakamura, Jennifer Lopez, Johnathan Chan, and Nam Ngo
DATE:
Tuesday 10/17/2023
Objective:
The objective in this experiment to figure out how to calculate the moisture content of the soil by
using the ASTM D 2216 procedure
Equipment:
1. 5 laboratory dishes
2. Balance scale
3. Oven
4. 5 samples of approximately 50 grams of wet soil
5. Galves
Procedure
1. Begin by weighing the 5 laboratory dishes and label them as "W1"
2. Add approximately 50 grams of wet soil to each laboratory dish, then re-weigh them, and
label the measurements as "W2"
3. Place the 5 soil samples in an oven set at 110 degree Celsius for a duration of 24 hours to
facilitate thorough drying.
4. Following the 24-hour drying period, re-weigh the 5 samples and denote these new
measurements as "W3"
Data:
Sample 01
Sample 02
Descriptio
n
Unit
Mass of
empty dish
W1
31.1
22.7
Mass of
dish + wet
W2
62.1
66.2
Sample 03
Sample 04
Sample 05
11.8
11.9
11.8
40.7
42.7
29.4
(Grams)
1
soil
Mass of
dish + dry
soil
W3
58.6
61.5
37.5
39.4
27.7
Mass of
the
moisture
Mw = W2
- W3
3.5
4.7
3.2
3.3
1.7
Mass of
dry soil
Ms = W3 W1
27.5
38.8
25.7
27.5
15.9
Total unit
Weight
γ
182.8
193.9
118.9
124.8
86.5
Moisture
Content
W% =
[(W2
–W3)/
(W3-W1)
]x100
12.727272
73%
12.113402
06%
12.451361
87%
12%
10.691823
9%
Average
Moisture
Content
Wavg =
Sum all
Moisture
Content of
the
samples /
Number of
the
Samples
11.99677211%
Results:
For the water content lab, this was straight forward:
The average Moisture Content = 11.99677211%
Sample Calculations:
2
Conclusions:
In conclusion, the experiment aimed to determine the moisture content of soil using the ASTM D
2216 procedure. Through careful utilization of laboratory dishes, a balance scale, an oven, and
wet soil samples, the process was meticulously carried out. The initial measurements (W1) of the
laboratory dishes, followed by the addition of wet soil and subsequent measurements (W2),
allowed for the calculation of the initial moisture content. The subsequent 24-hour drying
process at 110 degrees Celsius ensured complete evaporation of moisture, leading to the final
measurements (W3). By analyzing the differences between W2 and W3, the average moisture
content of the soil was successfully determined, which is 11.99677211%
3
Laboratory #2 Specific Gravity
TO:
Rabie Farrag
FROM:
Nam Ngo
PARTNERS:
Jennifer, Nada, Johnathan, and Andrew
DATE:
Tuesday 10/17/2013
Objective:
Find specific gravity through an experiment using a pycnometer, distilled water, soil, and a
vacuum pump known as the ASTM D 854-14 test procedure for soil solids.
Equipment:
- Pycnometer
- Vacuum Pump
- Funnel
- Spoon
- Squeeze Bottle
- Thermometer
- Weighing scale
Procedure:
1. Fill pycnometer with distilled water to line and weigh
2. Weigh out 50-60g of soil
3. Empty half of the water from pycnometer and add soil
4. Clean sides of pycnometer
5. Connect pycnometer to vacuum and apply partial vacuum for 15 min
6. Fill pycnometer with distilled water to line
7. Weigh pycnometer
8. Empty pycnometer and clean up
Data:
*All measurements taken in grams (g)
w(p)=weight of empty pycnometer
w(s)=weight of dry soil
125.5
55.5
w(p,w)=weight of pycnometer filled w water
377.8
w(p,w,s)=weight of pycnometer filled with
412.4
4
water & soil
specific gravity Gs
2.655502392
Results:
Specific Gravity Gs = 2.655502392
Sample Calculations:
Conclusions:
Overall, the specific gravity lab was straightforward when it came to the objective, procedure,
and calculations. After taking all needed measurements, we found that the specific gravity is Gs
= 2.655502392 by using a pycnometer, distilled water, soil, and a vacuum.
5
Laboratory #3 Sieve Analysis
TO:
Rabie Farrag
FROM:
Johnathan Chan
PARTNERS:
Jennifer, Nada Elshehawy, Nam, and Andrew
DATE:
Tuesday 10/17/2013
Objective:
Thir report will summarize the results received from the sieve analysis experiment. There are
procedures and equipment used to conduct this experiment listed below in the report. The main
objective of this lab was to find the coefficient Cc and Cu. Therefore the grain size distribution
curve that was provided helped calculate the coefficients. The calculations can be found in the
report under sample calculations and data.
Equipment:
- Sieve of No. 4, 20, 80, 100,140, 200
- Cleaning brush
- Mechanical Sieve shaker
- Electronic Balance
Procedure:
1. Clean Sieve
2. Weigh each Sieve
3. Weigh around 500g of dry soil, record exact mass M
4. Put the sieves in the correct order and carefully pour the soil into the top sieve
5. Mount the sieve in the shaker, let it shake for about 5 minutes
6. Remove the sieve from the shaker and weight the soil+sieve that was retained in each
sieve
Data:
Mass of Mass of sieve
Soil
Sieve Diameter empty
with retained soil retained
#
(mm)
sieve (g) (g)
(d) [d-c]
Cumulative
soil retained
(g)
Cumulative
Percent retained Percent passing
(%)
(%) = % Finer
4
4.75
493.8
495.5
1.7
1.7
0.285474391
99.71452561
20
0.84
630.6
823.4
192.8
194.5
32.66162888
67.33837112
6
80
0.18
424.7
812.4
387.7
582.2
97.7665827
2.233417296
100
0.147
420.7
428.4
7.7
589.9
99.05961377
0.94038623
140
0.106
300.8
305.2
4.4
594.3
99.79848866
0.201511335
200
0.075
305.7
306.6
0.9
595.2
99.94962217
0.050377834
283.7
284
0.3
595.5
100
0
3455.5
595.5
Pan
total
Results:
For this report the coefficient of Cu was calculated to be 3.07 and the coefficient of Cc was
calculated to be 2.27 for this report.
Sample Calculations:
7
8
Conclusions:
This report summarizes the results obtained from the sieve analysis and the results are
summarized in the grain size distribution curve. Using the grain size distribution curve in
particular diameters D60, D30, D10 to find the coefficients of Cu and Cc . The Cu was calculated to
be 3.09 and the Cc was found to be 2.27 in this report.
9
Laboratory #4 Hydrometer Testing
TO:
FROM:
Rabie Farrag
Andrew Nakamura
PARTNERS: Jennifer, Johnathan, Nada Elshehawy, and Nam
DATE:
Tuesday 10/17/2013
Objective:
In this lab we are effectively utilizing a hydrometer to establish the distribution of particle
size in a soil sample between 0.001mm and 0.075mm. We will take a sample of dry soil, mix it,
suspend it into a solution, float a hydrometer, and take readings at various times in order to
determine the various fractions of material in the sample.
Equipment:
-Hydrometer
-Mixer
-Two graduated cylinders
-Scale
-Plastic Squeeze bottle
-Water
-No. 12 Rubber Stopper
-Oven Dried Soil Sample
Procedure:
1. 50g of dried, pulverized soil, pulverized into a beaker
2. We proceed to take a deflocculating agent that had been allowed to soak between 8-12
hours prior to the experiment and prepare 125 ml into the mixer.
3. Transfer the soil into the mixer, and add additional water to two thirds full.
4. Mix thoroughly.
5. Transfer the mixture into the graduated cylinder, use the squirt bottle to ensure all solids
are transferred.
6. Fill the cylinder to 1000 cm^3.
7. Secure the cylinder with the rubber stopper, and mix by inverting the container
repeatedly.
8. In our original procedure, there is an optional temperature control, we are opting not to
use it.
10
9. We are going to remove the cap from the cylinder, and immediately insert the
hydrometer, marking that as time zero, taking our readings every few minutes. Those
times would be 2, 5, 8, 12, 15, 30, and 45 minutes, with an additional reading at 24 hours.
Data:
a) Clock
time
b) Time t
(min)
c) Actual Hydrometer
Reading R
d) L (cm)
f) % Passing for the
e) Particle Diameter specific diameter P
D (mm)
[uncorrected]
2.1
2
16
13.692
0.036
2.66%
5.08
5
15
13.855
0.023
2.32%
8.2
8
15
13.855
0.018
1.99%
12.13
12
15
13.855
0.015
1.65%
15.36
15
15
13.855
0.013
1.31%
30.35
30
15
13.855
0.009
0.97%
45.51
45
15
13.855
0.008
0.63%
1440
14
14.018
0.001
0%
Results:
11
Sample Calculations:
𝑣 = (γ𝑠 − γ𝑤)/18η * 𝐷
2
The velocity of particles as given by stokes law, where v is the velocity in cm/s, γ𝑠 is the specific
weight of soil solids given in g/cm^3, γ𝑤 is the unit weight of water given in g/cm^3 , η is the
dynamic viscosity of water given in g*s/cm^2, and D is the diameter of the soil particle.
We can use the effective depth in centimeters and time to begin calculating the diameter of the
particles.
𝐿(𝑐𝑚)/(𝑡(𝑚𝑖𝑛)𝑥60) = (γ𝑠 − γ𝑤)/18η * [𝐷/10]
2
Solving for D gives us the following equation,
𝐷(𝑚𝑚) = (10/ 60) *
18η
(γ𝑠−γ𝑤)
*
𝐿
𝑡
=𝐴
𝐿(𝑐𝑚)
𝑡(𝑚𝑖𝑛)
A solves to
𝐴=
30η
(γ𝑠−γ𝑤)
For our temperature, we take 20 degrees C, which gives us at SG of 2.65. This gives our η result
as 0.0137 throughout our calculations.
Finally, for our percent passing =(C2-$C$9)*2.63/((C2-1)*'Specific Gravity'!$B$2)
C2 references our Actual Hydrometer Reading, $C$9 refers to our final Hydrometer Reading.
SG!$B$2 calls back to our specific gravity for this soil.
Conclusions: Unfortunately our results did not offer conclusive data, as our readings were
effectively unchanged throughout. Without re-doing this test with a similar sample from the same
material, and receiving similar results, we cannot reasonably state with any accuracy that our
results reflect the sample. We expected our hydrometer reading to change as time progressed,
and as there were no variations beyond the initial reading at 2 minutes, we assert there was some
amount of error that caused our results to be skewed. A retest would be critical for determining
accuracy, with a new flocculant and with a hydrometer that could be verified to be calibrated
within a reasonable timeframe.
12
Laboratory #5 Liquid Limit Test (Atterberg’s Limit)
TO:
Rabie Farrag
FROM:
Jennifer Lopez
PARTNERS:
Andrew Nakamura, Jonathan Chan, Nada Elshehawy, Nam Ngo
DATE:
Tuesday 10/17/2013
Objective:
The objective of this lab is to utilize the ASTM D 4318 test procedure in order to accurately
determine the plastic limit.
Equipment:
- Liquid Limit device
- Grooving tool
- Moisture cans
- Weighing scale
- Spatula
- Water bottle
- Oven
Procedure:
1. Obtain 150-200g of soil sieved through a #40 sieve and mix it with water to create a
smooth paste.
2. Fill the paste into a liquid limit device ensuring it does not exceed 8mm in thickness.
3. Use a grooving tool to create a groove in the middle of the soil paste.
4. Ensure the liquid limit device has a 1 cm drop height.
5. Turn the crank at a rate of 2 revolutions per second and count the blows needed to close a
gap in the groove over a 0.5-inch (13mm) length.
6. Record the number of blows and take a sample of the wet paste in a small container
(moisture can). Record the weights of the container and wet soil.
7. Dry the container in an oven for 24 hours, measure the weight of the oven-dried soil, and
calculate the water content.
8. Repeat the test around 5 times, adjusting moisture as needed to achieve between 12 and
35 blows.
9. Ensure each group member performs the test at least once.
13
10. Create a plot with blow counts (x-axis, log scale) versus water content (y-axis) and fit a
straight line to the data. Read the liquid limit at N=25, referring to lecture notes for
guidance.
11. Summarize your findings in a lab report, combining the liquid limit (LL) and plastic
limit (PL) tests. Clearly state your soil's liquid limit, plastic limit, and plasticity index.
Data:
Table 1. Liquid Limit Data Table
Sample #
1
2
3
4
Number of blows (N)
35
34
28
23
MC= Mass of Moisture Can + Lid (empty) (g)
11.5
11.3
11.1
10.7
MCMS= Mass of Can, Lid+Moist Soil (g)
17.7
16.4
17.1
16
MCDS= Mass of Can, Lid + Dry Soils (g)
17
15.7
16.2
15.2
MS= Resulting Mass of Soil Solids (g)
0.7
0.7
0.9
0.8
MW= Resulting Mass of Water (g)
5.5
4.4
5.1
4.5
12.7272727
15.9090909
w= water content (%)
17.6470588 17.7777778
14
Sample #
1
2
3
MC= Mass of Moisture Can + Lid (empty) (g)
11.3
11.3
11.2
MCMS= Mass of Can, Lid+Moist Soil (g)
12.1
11.7
11.8
MCDS= Mass of Can, Lid + Dry Soils (g)
12
11.6
11.7
MS= Resulting Mass of Soil Solids (g)
0.7
0.3
0.5
MW= Resulting Mass of Water (g)
0.1
0.1
0.1
14.2857143
33.3333333
20
w= water content (%)
Average Plastic Limit
22.53968254
Table 2. Plastic Limit Data Table
Results:
Using the graph generated from our experiment data, we were able to calculate the Liquid Limit
(LL) for N=25 blows to be 17.6%. The average plastic limit calculated was 22.54.
Sample Calculations:
MC, MCMS, MCDS, were weighed using scale.
MS= Resulting Mass of Soil Solids:
𝑀𝑆 = 𝑀𝐶𝐷𝑆 − 𝑀𝐶
(Calculation for sample #1)
𝑀𝑆 = 17 − 11. 3 = 0. 7𝑔
MW= Resulting Mass of Water:
𝑀𝑊 = 𝑀𝐶𝑀𝑆 − 𝑀𝐶𝐷𝑆
(Calculation for sample #1)
𝑀𝑊 = 12. 1 − 12 = 0. 1𝑔
w = water content (%):
𝑀𝐶𝑀𝑆−𝑀𝐶𝐷𝑆
𝑤(%) =
(Calculation for sample #1)
𝑤(%) =
𝑀𝐶𝐷𝑆−𝑀𝐶
17.7−17
17−11.5
× 100
× 100 = 12. 72727 %
Plastic Limit:
𝑃𝐿 =
𝑃𝐿 =
𝑀𝐶𝑀𝑆−𝑀𝐶𝐷𝑆
𝑀𝐶𝐷𝑆−𝑀𝐶
12.1−12
12−11.3
× 100 = %
× 100 = 22. 54%
15
Conclusions: This report provides a summary of the outcomes from the Atterberg Limit test
performed in class, including the testing method employed. The measured liquid limit stands at
17.6%, while the plastic limit, determined by averaging the plastic limits, is 22.54%. Given that
the plastic limit is higher than the liquid limit. We must conclude that there must have been an
error during the experiment.
16