361-ll2

ENCE 3610
Soil Mechanics
Soil Classification
Methods of Classifying Soils
 USDA Method  AASHTO System
 Developed primarily for  Originally developed in the
agricultural and surface soil 1920’s as the Bureau of
purposes Public Roads system
 Not used often in soil  Primarily aimed at
mechanics classification for pavement
 Unified Classification System purposes
 Developed by Arthur  All methods similar, but
Casagrande during World differences are significant
War II for the U.S. Army enough that they should be
Corps of Engineers understood
 Most widely used
classification system
USDA System
Unified Classification System
 Primary Characteristics  Secondary
 G: gravels Characteristics
 S: sands
 C: clays
 W: well graded
 M: silts
SM
 O: organic soils
 Pt: peat


P: poorly graded
M: silty (as opposed to
a predominant silt in
the left column)
 C: clayey (as opposed
to a predominant clay
in the left column)
 L: lean (LL < 50)
 H: fat (LL > 50)
First Decision for Unified System:
Coarse or Fine Grained?
Unified Method of Soil Classification
Plasticity Chart
Gradation
Example of
Gradation
Unified Classification Example
 Given  Result of Atterberg Limit

Tests (for portion passing
 Results of Sieve Test #40 sieve)
 Uniformity Coefficient  Liquid Limit LL = 63
Cu = 8.1  Plastic Limit PL = 42
 Curvature Coefficient  Plasticity Index = LL-
Cc = 0.9 PL=21
 Percentage Passing  Find
#200 Sieve = 10%  Unified Soil Classification
 Percentage Passing
#4 sieve = 89%
(Soil A)
 Question 1:  Question 2:
 What is the percentage of the  What is the percentage of
material passing the #200 the coarse fraction which is
(0.074 mm opening) sieve? gravel?
 Answer:  Answer:
 10%. Since this is < 50%, the  11% of this sample is
soil is a cohesionless (coarse retained on the #4 sieve
grained) soil  This represents 11/(100-10)
 Remaining: “G” or “S” = 12.2% of coarse fraction
classification soils  Since this is < 50%, this
eliminates all of the “G”
classification soils
 Remaining: “S” classification
soils
 Question 3:  Question 4:
 How “clean” are the sands?  How is the soil graded?
 Answer:
 “Clean” sands or gravels have
 Answer:
less than 5% of the material  Uniformity Coefficient
passing the #200 sieve Cu = 8.1, Curvature
 Sands (or gravels) “with fines” Coefficient Cc = 0.9.
have more than 12% of
material passing the #200  For SW, Cu > 6 and 1 <
sieve Cc < 3, so this is
 Since 5% < 10% < 12%, no eliminated
classifications are elimiated
 Remaining: “S” classification
 Remaining: SP, SM and
soils SC
 Question 5:  Final Classification
 What are the Atterberg
Limits?
 Atterberg Limit is below
the “A” line, so SM is
 Answer:
possible
 Liquid Limit LL = 63, Plastic
Limit PL = 42, Plasticity Index  Cu and Cc do not meet
= LL-PL=21 the classification for
 A-Line Analysis: PI = 0.73(LL SW, so SP is possible
-20) = 31.39 > 21, so below
the “A” Line
 Soil in question is
 “A” Line analysis eliminates
subject to a dual
SC classification classification, or SM-
 Remaining: SP and SM SP
AASHTO System
Notes on
AASHTO System
AASHTO System
AASHTO
System
(ODOT)
AASHTO Classification Example

Given (same soil as 
Result of Atterberg Limit
before) Tests (for portion

Results of Sieve Test passing #40 sieve)
 Uniformity Coefficient Cu =

Liquid Limit LL = 63
8.1 
Plastic Limit PL = 42
 Curvature Coefficient Cc = 
Plasticity Index = LL-
0.9 PL=21

Percentage Passing #10 
Find
Sieve: 82% 
AASHTO Soil

Percentage Passing #40
Sieve: 51%
Classification

Percentage Passing #200
Sieve = 10%
AASHTO Classification Example
 Examine Sieve Passing  Examine Liquid Limit and
Points Plasticity Index
 #10: is greater than 50%, so  LL > 40, so eliminate A-2-4
move past A-1-a and A-2-6
 #40: is greater than 50%, so  PI > 10, so eliminate A-2-5
eliminate A-1, but A-2  This leaves A-2-7, which
possible meets all three criteria
 #200: is equal to 10%, so A- (#200 sieve, LL and PI)
3 is possible (but take a  Because this is an A-2-7, we
look at the curve more must use partial group index
carefully, result may be
more precise than accurate)
 PGI = PGI = 0.01(F200 – 15)
(PI – 10) = (0.01(10-15)(21-
 #200: is less than 35%, so
10) < 0, so PGI = 0
A-2 is possible
 Classification is A-2-7(0)
Unified and AASHTO Example
Differences between
Unified and AASHTO
Classification Systems
Questions?

361-ll2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

361-ll2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

361-ll2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ENCE 3610

 Given  Result of Atterberg Limit

You might also like

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