Discussion on Hydrometer analysis

1. BS (British Standard) and ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials)

BS uses sieve analysis at first place followed by the hydrometer. ASTM vice versa.
Usage of the dispersing agent (sodium hexametaphosphate) at the initial stage of the
practical is beneficiary. Dispersing agent separate the particles in the coagulation
form which will increase the accuracy of sieve analysis followed by the hydrometer.
Therefore, the accuracy in the ASTM is higher than the BS.

2. Temperature correction

Temperature correction used in the practical calculations

Temperature (C) Correction

28.5 4.8
28.0 5.1
27.5 5.3
27.0 5.5
26.5 6.7
26.0 6.0

Approximated temperature correction equation 1

FT = - 4.85 + 0.25 T (for T between 15C and 28C)

Where FT = temperature correction to the observed reading

T = temperature of test in C

According to the equation temperature correction table is as follow

Temperature (°C) Correction

28.5 Not Available
28 2.15
27.5 2.025
27 1.9
26.5 1.775
26 1.65

It is recommended to reconsider the temperature correction used in the hydrometer

analysis in the laboratory.
 3. Failures in the visual identification of the samples

Approximate of 115g sandy soil and 65g of silt and clay soils are taken for
hydrometer analysis according to clause 5.1.2. Risk in visual identification leads to
the wrong pick in the size of sample finally produce a low sedimentation rate which
affect the accuracy of the results. So, it is advisable to take 100g on both sandy and
fine particle cases unless the experiment is done by an experienced technician.

Discussion on Sieve analysis

1. Manual washing of sample through No 200 sieve after Hydrometer test

Sample is passed through the No 200 sieve to eliminate the finer particles while
transferring the sample from the hydrometer test to sieves analysis. In the process of
washing the sieve there are two possible ways of losing the soil particles just above 75
microns.

a. Turbulent nature of water from the tap introduce force on the particles and
made them pass through the improper sieve
b. Usage of brass brush expands the sieve mesh sizes

2. Effect of shape of the soil particles

Soil grains are never exactly spherical in shape. They are commonly flake in shape.
Size of soil grain is determined by the highest of its three dimensions. During the
mechanical vibration, particles passes through the sieves with the aid of the lesser
dimensions which creates error in the calculation of retained weight in sieves.

Discussion on Atterberg limits

1. Multi point Liquid limit and one-point liquid limit

Multi point liquid limit is more precise than the one-point liquid limit test. For the
beginners it is advisable to use multi point liquid limit test in order to increase the
preciseness of the results obtained. Multi point limit test is also increases the
accuracy of the results obtained. considering a highly heterogenous sample results
produced by one-point liquid limit test is not reliable. But an average of liquid limit
obtained in the multi point liquid limit test is reliable.

2. Engineering Application
 The validity of the test is high only if significant amount of soil is passing through the
No 40 sieve. Errors occurred while obtaining the representative sample will highly
influence in the validity of the test in application phase. Limit tests are essential in
the classification of the soil, but when considering the application on the field, many
other parameters wants to be considered.

3. Usage of water in the practical

Water used in this practical is from the tap. According to the ASTM standards it is
advised to use either distilled water or demineralized water. 2 In the case of using tap
water it needs contain no more than 100 mg/L of dissolved solids. Cations of the
salts in the water will react with the cation ions naturally presence in the soil which
leads to the alter in the results.

4. Grooving tool used

ASTM and AASHTO (American Association of State Highway and Transportation

Officials) standard grooving tools make different shapes. A groove made with the
ASTM standard grooving tool has faces which form an angle of approximately 45
while the other one makes almost 60. ASTM grooving tool also shapes the top of
the soil surface. This angle difference plays a significance role on the number of
blows. With the increase of the angle of repose at the wedge number of blows
needed will decrease. This practical uses AASHTO grooving tool instead of the ASTM.

5. Identifying the 13mm contact at the bottom of the Casagrande cup

Visual identification of the 13 mm contact at the bottom of the Casagrande cup can
cause error in results. Nearly 13 mm contact is observed in the phases of 22 nd ,23rd
and 24th blows during the practical. As we are plotting a graph with 3 to 5 points, it is
necessary to obtain more accurate data in order to increase the accuracy of the
results.
Fig 1: Contact in the bottom of the Casagrande apparatus 3

6. Suspension of the water while tapping

In the process of tapping, there is always a possibility of water suspension in the

sample which increases the water content at the lower phase finally leads to an early
contact of the two portions.

7. Sample position on the Casagrande apparatus before grooving

It’s is advised on 11.1 of the ASTM standards to form almost a horizontal surface. But
in the practical it’s very hard to maintain the soil pat. Most of the time the level goes
down creating errors in the results.

Fig 2: Horizontal Pat Surface Fig 3: Pat Surface obtained in Practical

 8. Using spatula for initial grooving

It is advised in clause 11.2 2 to cut the groove slightly less than required dimension
using a spatula to obtain a perfect groove. This will create an initial separation of the
soil pat allowing grooving tool to bring exact final dimensions.

9. Dimension of the fragile thread in Plastic limit test

This practical was done using hand rolling method. According to the standards it is
3.2 mm where the fragility is needed to observe. But at the practical, it can’t be
identified visually. So, it is advisable to use a 3.2 mm (1/8 in) cylindrical rod to ensure
the dimensions which increases the accuracy of the results.

Reference:

1. Das, B., 2002. Soil Mechanics - Laboratory Manual. 6th ed. Oxford Press, p.27.

2. 2010. 2010 Annual Book Of ASTM Standards. Philadelphia, PA: ASTM.

3. Das, B., 2002. Soil Mechanics - Laboratory Manual. 6th ed. Oxford Press, p.37.