Determination of Particle Size Sieve (mm)

Distribution - Sieve Analysis

9.5 3/8 in
4.75 No.4
2.36 No.8
1.18 No.16
0.6 No.30
0.3 No.50
0.5 No.100

Grading Chart

100

90

80

70
Percentage Passing (%)

60

50

40

30

20

10

Sieve Size (mm)

Sieve (mm)

3.35
2.36
1.18
0.85
0.6
0.212
0.075

Grading Chart
100

90

80
 Grading Chart
100

90

80

70

Percentage Passing (%)

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
0.05 0.5

Sieve Size (mm)

Silt Content
Coral/Shell Content
Fineness Modulus
Relative Density
12 Metallic Elements Analysis Test Items

As
Ba
Cd
Co
Cr
Cu
Pb
Hg
Mo
Ni
Se
Zn
Percentage passing by mass ASTM JCT EU IS (Indian
Standard)

100 PASS
96 PASS
86 PASS
85 PASS
25 PASS
25 PASS
5 PASS

Grading Chart

Sieve Size (mm)

Percentage passing by mass ASTM JCT EU IS (Indian

Standard)
82 FAIL
96 PASS
86 FAIL
85 FAIL
25 PASS
25 FAIL
5 PASS

Grading Chart
 Grading Chart

Value

5 0.5 5

Sieve Size (mm)

Percentage by mass ASTM JCT EU IS (Indian

Standard)
9% FAIL PASS FAIL FAIL
10% PASS PASS PASS PASS

Upper Limit Conc. In Sediment (ppm) ASTM JCT EU IS (Indian

Standard)
30 PASS
200 PASS
2 PASS
20 PASS
0 PASS
35 PASS
100 PASS
0.5 PASS
10 PASS
35 PASS
20 PASS
200 PASS
TEST CODE VALUE

Determination of Particle Size ASTM C 33/AASHTO M 6 Sieve (mm)

Distribution - Sieve Analysis
9.5
4.75
2.36
1.18
0.6
0.3
0.15

IS Sieve
(Indian
Standard)
(mm)

10
4.75
2.36
1.18
0.6
0.3
0.15

BS 812-103-1:1985 Sieve (mm)

3.35
2.36
1.18
0.85
0.6
0.212
0.075

Silt Content
BS 812-103.1: 1985 1
BS EN 12620 15% by weight in crushed sand
3% by weight in natural or crushed grave
1% by weight in coarse aggregate.
Coral/Shell Content SANS 5840:2008 1
BS EN 12620 1
Fineness Modulus Limits for FM
Fine aggregate:
Coarse aggregate:
Combined aggregate:

Sieve size
(mm)

Fineness Modulus = Cum.% retained / 100 =

Relative Density BS 1377-4:1990: CLAUSE 4.6

12 Metallic Elements Analysis EPA 3051 DIGESTION & ICP ANALYSIS

Test Items

As
Ba
Cd
Co
Cr
Cu
Pb
Hg
Mo
Ni
Se
Zn
 Sieve (mm) Percentage passing by mass

3/8 in 100
No.4 95-100
No.8 80-100
No.16 50-85
No.30 25-60
No.50 5.00-30 AASHTO 10-30
No.100 0-10 AASHTO 2-10

Percentage passing for

Grading Zone I Grading Zone II Grading Zone III Grading Zone IV

100 100 100 100
90 – 100 90 – 100 90 – 100 90 – 100
60 – 95 75 – 100 85 – 100 95 – 100
30 – 70 55 – 90 75 – 100 90 – 100
15 – 34 35 – 59 60 – 79 80 – 100
5 – 20 8 – 30 12 – 40 15 – 50
0 – 10 0 – 10 0 – 10 0 – 15

JTC Requirement (Overall Limits)

85-100
60-100
30-85
15-75
10.00-50
0-15
0-10

8%
10%
5% by weight in crushed sand
% by weight in natural or crushed gravel
% by weight in coarse aggregate.
10%
10%
 Fine aggregate: 2.3-3.0
Coarse aggregate: 5.5-8.0
Combined aggregate: 4.0-7.0

Cumulative Cumulative
Mass retained Percentage percentage percentage
(Grams) retained retained passing

Upper Limit
Conc. In
Sediment (ppm)

30
200
2
20
100
35
100
0.5
10
35
20
200
REMARKS

Fine-Aggregate Grading Limits

generally satisfactory for most concretes

Indian Standard
JTC Requirement

Clay, Silt and Crusher dust

JTC Requirement
European Standard
Geotechnical parameters of reclaimed sandfill

cone penetration test

Source http://www.nrcresearchpress.com/doi/abs/10.1139/t04-064#.XFEwOFwzaHs
https://www.encyclopedia.com/construction/trade-magazines/design-process-land-reclamation-and-
ocess-land-reclamation-and-soil-improvement#A
source https://www.indiamart.com/proddetail/p-sand-18007944048.html

Product SpecificationDetails

150 microns Block masonry and plastering purposes

2.38 mm
40 mm Coarse Aggregate
20 mm
12 mm
8 mm
to chips

The absorption quality requirement applies only to

coarse aggregates, but this data is necessary on fine
aggregate for other purposes, such as mix design and
water/cementitious ratios.

test method AASHTO T 85

defines absorption as the increase in the weight of

aggregate because of water in the pores of the
material, but not including water adhering to the
outside surface of the particles. Absorption is
expressed as a percentage of the dry weight.
 Beach Reclamation

What is beach reclamation?

Beach reclamation is the act of reclaiming a beach from erosion. In other words sand is
added to the area that was lost to erosion "reclaiming" the shoreline that once was.
Reclamation does not just occur on ocean beaches but any beach or shoreline that is subject
to severe erosion.

How is it done?
Beach reclamation is often done through a process called dredging. Dredging is the process
of scooping from the bottom of a water source a material. You may have heard of dredging
when a person has drowned. Police dredge or take a device along the bottom of the body of
water in an effort to locate the body of the victim. However, in beach reclamation the
material retrieved is sand. The use of a vacuum-like device is often used in areas like lakes
and rivers to obtain the sand.

Once the sand is obtained, it is deposited at the site. Sand is either directly applied or the
sand that has been gathered is cleaned through a heat process and then deposited. The sand
extends the shoreline to its orginal borders or extends the beach farther into the body of
water it is adjacent to.
Below is an example of dredging from the Dredge and Dock Company Site. They contract
under the Army Corps of Engineers for beach replenishment.
Sand siphoned up from the ocean floor, being deposited in one of the hoppers of the
Dredge Long Island

With all the hoppers full, the Dredge Long Island heads towards the beach bringing sand
from distant borrow areas. This dredge has a capacity of over 16,000 cubic yards of sand
and can pump sand ashore from a buoy located off the beach.

In the background the Hopper Dredge Long Island, hooked up to a buoy, pumps a slurry
mixture of sand and water ashore through a half mile of 27" diameter pipe.

Prior to beach replenishment the shoreline encroaches very near the boardwalk putting it in
danger from coastal storms.
After beach renourishment, the shoreline is located further away from existing structures,
protecting them from damage caused by coastal storms as well as providing a clean
recreation area on the beach.

Why is it done?

The purpose of beach reclamation is to protect development properties from storm damage,
extend beaches for public use, and to re-establish sand bars (also protection from storms).
Without an adequate barrier between large bodies of water like oceans, beachfront
properties are at risk from storms and erosion. The owners of these properties have a lot
invested in their buildings and businesses and do not want to have them destroyed by high
tides, hurricanes, or pounding waves caused by sea storms. Some sand bars that protected
areas like the Barrier Islands of South Carolina as well as the islands themselves are
subject to severe erosion and are the "speed breakers" of storms coming inland. When
these are destroyed by erosion there is nothing to protect the properties inland.
Reclamation becomes a source of replacing the "speed breakers" and dredging is the most
common means to replace them.

What Problems Are Involved in Dredging?

One problem with dredging is the cost. The cost is on-going just as the erosion is on-
going. Dredging does not stop erosion. It just adds more sand to erode. In some cases,
dredging has cost communities up to 90 million dollars in total costs! The cost often
exceeds the possible benefits of the beach nourishment.

Another problem is habitat destruction. When sand is added, it is not often done with
consideration of the plants and animals that exist on the beach. It is like putting a sandbox
in a yard. The plants and animals can often be smothered by the sand. The other aspect of
habitat destruction is dredging takes animals and plant life from the bottom of the body of
water being used to retrieve sand. The act itself is destructive to coral and other animals
that may use the area for feeding, breeding, or living purposes.

Dredging also changes the face of the area sand is gathered from. The change in the
geography could very well cause erosion in other areas because it shifts the way the land
lies. Extending beaches into a body of water may also cause harm in that as more land
becomes available people extend with it. The land extensions are often not stable. The land
has a tendency to shift, flood, or sink without notice as pockets fill in or nature tries its own
form of reclamation.
Are There Other Methods?

According to Holmberg Technologies, their method is the best. It promotes natural beach
nourishment or reclamation. Their method is best described in the article from their site:

"Undercurrent Stabilizer Technology neutralizes the impacts dredged channels have on

sandy beaches. This has proven to routinely reverse unnatural erosion. The technology
consists of modular, hydrodynamically shaped forms which are cast in place on the
nearshore seabed, generally at right angles to the shoreline. Problems normally associated
with erosion control structures are avoided through tapered, low-relief shaping, special
landward tie-backs and patented filter fabric foundations.

The low-profile, flow-through array (sometimes simply called "speed bumps")

progressively baffles unnatural nearshore turbulence, allowing sand to fall out of
suspension in quieted waters within and adjacent to the treated area. Local shoaling
progressively decreases remaining nearshore turbulence (beyond decreases induced by the
system itself). As the nearshore progressively shallows out in response to the accretion
template, less and less wave and current energy is supported to drive arriving sand from the
treated area.

Upon treatment, unnatural erosion ceases and resedimentation begins, often with surprising
speed. The accretion template itself is generally buried by rising sand levels as the
nearshore beach profile becomes inherently accretional. Adjacent shorelines benefit
because an unbounded feeder beach is established. A long-term university study of
numerous installations concludes: 'Consistent profile volume gain measured in the vicinity
of the Undercurrent Stabilizer system (relative to a regional trend of profile volume loss)
plus significant foreshore/backshore beach accretion with no apparent negative impact
down drift must be viewed as success in almost any context'" (Holmberg Technologies
1999).

Graphics from the same site show how their product works in reestablishing beaches.

They say their product is longer lasting at a lower cost than dredging. Some communities
in Texas and Florida have opted for this type of beach reclamation.
Problems associated with type of reclamation are erosion of downdrift beaches and
creation of rip currents that are hazardous to swimmers. There does not seem to be much
documentation to support any other problems. Yet, one still has to wonder about habitat
destruction with the implementation of this technology into the water.

With beach reclamation, there seems to be no easy answers. Maybe you can come up with
an environmentally friendly way to save the beaches and protect the developments as well.
 9.5 3/8 in 100 9.5 100 100
4.75 No.4 95-100 4.75 95 100
2.36 No.8 80-100 2.36 80 100
1.18 No.16 50-85 1.18 50 85
0.6 No.30 25-60 0.6 25 60
0.3 No.50 5.00-30 AASHTO 10 0.3 5 30
0.5 No.100 0-10 AASHTO 2- 0.15 0 10

Grading Chart
100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

3.35 85 100 82
2.36 60 100 96
1.18 30 85 86
0.85 15 75 85
0.6 10 50 25
 0.212 0 15 25
0.075 0 10 5

Grading Chart
100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
0.05 0.5 5
100 0.5 0 10
96 0.3 5 30
86 0.6 25 60
85 1.18 50 85
25 2.36 80 100
25 4.75 95 100
5 9.5 100 100