Third Lab Report: TARAB ARAB Padi Sawah

Lecturer: Madam Diana Demiyah binti Mohd Hamdan

Date of Submission: 10^th April 2018

Soil Analysis Test: Soil Permeability

NAME	MATRIC NUMBER
NG JING JIE	BS17160675
FICKRY JAJURI	BS17160677
NURUL IRINA AK DOUGLAS NYEGING	BS17110050
MARILYN LEANNE MONROE	BS17110366
EMILEY TOMPOK @ MOJINOK	BS17110145
SITI NURAZWANNI BT. WARISHAD	BS17160698

SOIL PERMEABILITY TEST 

INTRODUCTION

Soil Permeability is a property of the soil to transmit water and indicating the ease with which water will flow through the soil. The permeability of a soil is referred as the ability of water to move through it or permeate it. There are many factors which affects soil permeability of different soil textures. These physical and chemical properties that affect soil permeability are such as the particle size distribution, pore spaces, pore size and the continuity of the spaces.  A pond built in impermeable soil will lose little water through seepage. The more permeable the soil, the greater the seepage. Some soil is so permeable and seepage so great that it is not possible to build a pond without special construction techniques. Soils are generally made up of layers and soil quality often varies greatly from one layer to another.

The formal term for soil permeability would be hydraulic conductivity. Hydraulic conductivity refers to the ability of a soil to conduct water. Hydraulic conductivity, or K is measured in cm/hour- which is how far or deep the water would be able to penetrate through the soil in a given time. One reason why soils are permeable materials are due to the presences of interconnected voids which permit the flow of fluids from a location where the energy is high to low energy locations. Hydraulic conductivity has complex features of soils that varies in different location, soil types, soil depth, soil moisture content and direction of flow. For example, the horizontal conductivity is often greater compared to vertical conductivity on account of soil horizons. 

OBJECTIVES

1. To determine the percolation rate/ hydraulic conductivity of each different soil samples.

2. To determine the porosity and permeable of different soil samples.

3. To determine which soil would be more suitable for seed germination on account of soil permeability.

MATERIALS AND APPARATUS

1. Graduated Cylinders

2. Filter funnels

3. Test tubes/Glass beakers

4. Test tube rack

5. Filter papers

6. Soil samples

7. Timewatch

8. Watercolour paints

PROCEDURE

1. Test tubes were prepared on the test tube rack and filter funnels were put on top of test tube.

2. The filter papers were folded and inserted into the funnel as a soil separate. This was to prevent soil from falling into the test tube together with water.

3. The same amount of five air-dried soil samples for each setup were prepared. The soils were compacted gently.

4. The same amount of water (100ml) for each soil sample was prepared to be gently poured in each funnel at the same time.

5. The water was poured slowly into all the soil sample at the same time.

6. The balance water was added after water is not overflowing in the funnel to finish 100ml of water.

7. The water volume in the test tubes were measured after an hour and the flow rate of the water through the soils were recorded using stopwatch. 

RESULTS

Types of Soil	Flow Time (s)	Water Recovered (mL)	Permeability (mL/s)
Residential College E, Blk B1	3600	25	0.00694
Residential College E Compound	3600	50	0.01389
ODEC	3600	90	0.025
UMS Peak	3600	34	0.00944
Garden Soil	3600	26	0.00722

Table 1: Permeability results of 5 soil samples.

DISCUSSION

Soil permeability is affected by many factors as mentioned in the introduction, such as soil depth, soil porosity, pore sizes, particle size distribution, water holding capacity, etc. From the results obtained after conducting a few soil texture analysis such as the ribbon test and ball test. We were able to estimate the type of soil texture of the 5 soil samples. Based on the ribbon test, a comparison can be done to determine the possible permeability based on their texture.

Soil Sample	Soil Texture
Residential College E, BLK B1	Clay Loam
Residential College E, compound	Loamy Sand
ODEC	Sand
UMS Peak	Clay Loam
Garden Soil	Loam

Table 2: Results from the Ribbon Test

Soil	Texture	Permeability
Clayey soils	Fine	Slow to rapid movement (Order from the top until the bottom)
Loamy soils	Moderately fine
	Moderately coarse
Sandy soils	Coarse

Table 3: Permeability of different soil texture

Source: Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)

As shown in the table above, the water moves the most rapid in sandy soils and the slowest in clayey soils. Based on this table, we can already deduce that the soil sample from ODEC has the highest soil permeability as shown in table 1. The soil particles in sandy soil are coarse and they have large pores and less porosity. Hence, the soil of ODEC could not hold a high amount of water which causes it to lose water and water were able to infiltrate through the soil rapidly. Besides, coarse sandy soils have wide pore spacing which allows water to infiltrate but with less porosity to hold the water, the water infiltrates and passes through the soil layer allowing it to be more permeable. The water holding capacity of soil which is affected by soil texture and organic matter also affects the permeability of soils. The presence of organic matter holds water, in this case, sandy soil has the least organic matter. Besides, fine particles such as silt and clay has a larger surface area which helps to hold more water particles. On the contrary, larger soil particles have smaller surface area which results in a low affinity of water.

The above explanations apply to the other soil samples based on their respective soil textures. As shown in table 1, the soil permeability decreases in an order from ODEC, College E, UMS Peak, Garden Soil and BLK B1. Soils from BLK B1 has the least permeability due to a high content of organic matter, presence of more fine soil particles, high porosity as compared to ODEC soils and other soil samples which has high percentage of sandy or coarse soil particles. Fine soil particles with smaller particles but higher porosity allows the soil to store more water making it hard for water to penetrate through the soil easily.

CONCLUSION

The permeability of soil describes how water and air are able to move through the soil. Water moves very easily through highly permeable soils and very slowly through soils with low permeability. The permeability of soil can be determined by calculating its infiltration rate.

Soils with sandy textures have large spaces that allow water or liquid to drain very quickly through the soil. Sandy soils are known to have high permeability, which results in high infiltration rates and good drainage. Clay textured soils have small pore spaces that cause water to drain slowly through the soil. Clay soils are known to have low permeability, which results in low filtration rates and poor drainage.

As more water fills the spaces of pore, more air is pushed out. When all pore spaces in the soils are filled with water, the soil becomes saturated. The root of many types of plants are not possible to survive in saturated soils. Saturated soils on level  ground results in standing water which can cause flooding. Saturated soils on sloping ground results in runoff, and may lead to an increased volume of water entering a body of water. This condition can result in erosion and flooding, as well as an increased level of pollutants entering the body of water.

REFERENCES

1. Soil Permeability ( July 23, 2014) http://www.fao.org/fishery/static/FAO_Training/FAO_Training/General/x6706e/x6706e09.htm

2. Amr F.Elhakim. 2016. Alexandria Engineering Journal. Estimation of soil permeability. Volume 55, Issue 3, September 2016, p. 2631-2638. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aej.2016.07.034

3. Soil Permeability And How To Measure It. SESL Australia, Environment and Soil Science. http://sesl.com.au/blog/soil-permeability-and-how-to-measure-it/

4. ASTM D2434, Standard Test Method for Permeability of Granular Soils (Constant Head), 2006

5. K. Robertson. 1990. Soil classification using the cone penetration test. Can. Geotech. J., 27 (1) pp. 151-158.

SIEVE ANALYSIS TEST

INTRODUCTION

A sieve analysis or gradation test is a practice or procedure used commonly in civil engineering to assess the particle size distribution of a granular material. The size distribution is often of critical importance to the way the material performs in use. A sieve analysis can be performed on any type of non-organic or organic granular materials including sands, crushed rock, clays, granite, feldspars, coal, soil, a wide range of manufactured powders, grain and seeds, down to a minimum size depending on the exact method. Being such a simple technique of particle sizing, it is probably the most common. A known weight of material, the amount being determined by the largest size of aggregate, is placed upon the top of a group nested sieves. The top sieve has the largest screen openings and the screen opening size decreases with each sieve down to the bottom sieve which has the smallest opening size screen for the type of material specified. The sieves then being shaken by mechanical means for a period of time. After shaking the material through the nested sieves, the material retained on each of the sieves is weighed. (Donald Mcglinchey. Characterisation of bulk solids. CRC Press, 2005.)

Soil texture such as loam, sandy loam or clay refers to the proportion of sand, silt and clay sized particles that make up the mineral fraction of the soil. For example, light soil refers to a soil high in sand relative to clay, while heavy soils are made up largely of clay. Texture is important because it influences the amount of water the soil can hold, the rate of water movement through the soil and how workable and fertile the soil is. For example, sand is well aerated but does not hold much water and is low in nutrients. Clay soils generally hold more water and are better at supplying nutrients. Texture often changes with depth so roots have to cope with different conditions as they penetrate the soil. A soil can be classified according to the way the texture changes with depth. The particles that made up soil are categorized into three groups by size which are sand, silt and clay. Sand particles are the largest while clay particles are the smallest. Most soils are combination of three. The relative percentages of sand, silt and clay are what give soils its texture. A clay loam texture soil, for example, has nearly equal parts of sand, slit and clay. These textural separates result from the weathering process. (M.S. Mamlouk and J.P. Zaniewski, Materials for Civil and Construction Engineers, Addison-Wesley, Menlo Park CA, 1999)

OBJECTIVES

• To determine the particle size distribution of the coarse and fine aggregates

• To determine the exact relative proportions of different grain sizes as they are distributed among certain size ranges

MATERIAL AND APPARATUS

• Air-dried soils

• Stack of sieves including pan and cover

• Analytical balance

• Mechanical sieve shaker

• Brush

• Pestle and mortar

• Tray

PROCEDURE

1. Tree roots, pieces of bark and rocks were removed from the soil samples.

2. Clumps of air-dried soils were broken by hand before the air-dried samples were sieved.

3. The total weight of the sample soils was measured before sieve.

4. 5 size of mesh sieve were selected (one of the sieve should be the 63µm mesh size).

5. Sieves were made sure to be clean. Soil particles that were stuck in the openings were poked out gently using brush without injuring the mesh. 

6. A stack of sieves were prepared on the mechanical sieve shaker. Sieves with large opening sizes were placed above the one with smaller opening sizes. The pan was set first in the stack, the cover on the top of the biggest mesh sieve size.

7. The soil was poured and the cover was placed.

8. The clamps were fixed.

9. A tray was placed below the opening of the pan to collect the finest particle.

10. The time was adjusted to 15 minutes and the shaker was going on 40-50 intensity.

11. After the shaker stopped, the mass of each sieve and retained soil were measured. The finest particle on the pan was collected.

12. Brush was used to poke out particles that were stuck in the mesh and the particles were collected.

RESULTS

1)    Residential College E, BLK B1

Total mass = 198.245 g

Sieve No.	Sieve opening mesh size	Mass of soil retained on each sieve(g)	Percent of mass retained on each sieve (Rn) (%)	Cumulative percent retained (%Cumulative Passing =100% - %Cumulative Retained) (%)	Percent Finer (100-∑Rn)
	1mm	11.8700	6.1073	6.1073	93.8927
	600µm	7.9479	4.0893	10.1966	89.8034
	500µm	3.6488	1.8774	12.0740	87.9260
	212 µm	48.3411	22.8722	34.9462	65.0538
	125µm	47.1832	24.2764	59.2226	40.7774
	63µm	27.9397	14.3754	73.5980	26.4020
Pan		51.3144	26.4020	100	0

1)   Residential College E, Compound

 Total mass = 194.358 g

Sieve No.	Sieve opening mesh size	Mass of soil retained on each sieve(g)	Percent of mass retained on each sieve (Rn) (%)	Cumulative percent retained (%Cumulative Passing =100% - %Cumulative Retained) (%)	Percent Finer (100-∑Rn)
	1mm	26.2495	13.5057	13.5057	86.4943
	600µm	14.2597	7.3369	20.8426	79.1574
	500µm	4.3707	2.2488	23.0914	76.9086
	212 µm	47.4321	24.4045	47.4959	52.5041
	125µm	35.6183	18.3261	65.8220	34.1780
s	63µm	24.1000	12.3998	78.2218	21.7782
Pan		42.3276	21.7782	100	0

1)    ODEC

Total mass = 194.358 g

Sieve No.	Sieve opening mesh size	Mass of soil retained on each sieve(g)	Percent of mass retained on each sieve (Rn) (%)	Cumulative percent retained (%Cumulative Passing =100% - %Cumulative Retained) (%)	Percent Finer (100-∑Rn)
	1mm	0.0680	0.0350	0.0350	99.9650
	600µm	0.4390	0.2259	0.2609	99.7391
	500µm	6.7343	3.4649	3.7258	96.2742
	212 µm	15.5897	8.0211	11.7469	88.2531
	125µm	134.342	69.1209	80.8678	19.1322
s	63µm	33.6835	17.3306	98.1984	1.8016
Pan		3.5016	1.8016	100	0

1)    Garden Soil

Total mass = 194.358 g

Sieve No.	Sieve opening mesh size	Mass of soil retained on each sieve(g)	Percent of mass retained on each sieve (Rn) (%)	Cumulative percent retained (%Cumulative Passing =100% - %Cumulative Retained) (%)	Percent Finer (100-∑Rn)
	1mm	11.1361	5.7297	5.7297	94.2703
	600µm	13.4930	6.9423	12.6720	87.3280
	500µm	4.6518	2.3934	15.0654	84.9346
	212 µm	48.5111	24.9597	40.0251	59.9749
	125µm	39.8355	20.4959	60.5210	39.4790
s	63µm	28.8406	14.8389	75.3599	24.6401
Pan		47.8900	24.6401	100	0

1)    UMS Peak

     Total mass = 194.358 g

Sieve No.	Sieve opening mesh size	Mass of soil retained on each sieve(g)	Percent of mass retained on each sieve (Rn) (%)	Cumulative percent retained (%Cumulative Passing =100% - %Cumulative Retained) (%)	Percent Finer (100-∑Rn)
	1mm	22.5751	11.6152	11.6152	88.3848
	600µm	26.4178	13.5923	25.2075	74.7925
	500µm	8.4646	4.3552	29.5627	70.4373
	212 µm	55.8577	28.7396	58.3023	41.6977
	125µm	28.5281	14.6781	72.9804	27.0196
s	63µm	18.1446	9.3357	82.3161	17.6839
Pan		34.3700	17.6839	100	0

DISCUSSION

The main purpose of sieve analysis of aggregates is to determine the particle size distribution of the coarse and fine aggregates. Sieve analysis is used to divide the particulate material into size fractions and then to determine the weight of these fractions. In this way a relatively broad particle size spectrum can be analysed quickly and reliably. The different sieves describe what size aggregate fall through to the next.

A sieve analysis can be performed on any type of non-organic or organic granular materials including sands, crushed rock, clays, granite, feldspars, coal, soil, a wide range of manufactured powders, grain and seeds, down to a minimum size depending on the exact method. A suitable sieve size for the aggregate underneath the nest of sieves to collect the aggregate that passes through the smallest. The entire nest is then agitated, and the material whose diameter is smaller than the mesh opening pass through the sieves. After the aggregate reaches the pan, the amount of material retained in each sieve is then weighed.

In this case, it can be seen that the soil with the highest percentage finer would be soil samples from Residential College E, BLK B1 as the percentage of finer soils that passed through the 63 microns sieve mesh was the highest with 26.4020% and followed by garden soil at 24.6401% and then soil samples from the compounds of Kg. E at 21.7782%. Soil samples that passes through the 63 microns mesh sieve for UMS Peak was the second lowest at 17.6839%. The percentage of soil that passed through the 63 microns sieve mesh for ODEC soil was the lowest at only 1.8016%. This shows that the soil particles when compared to other soil samples has the largest and most coarse particles. As the sizes of the mesh sieves decreases down the process, only finer particles such as clay and silt would be able to pass through the sieves. From the graphs plotted, we are able to deduce that the highest content of silt and clay would be soil samples from KG. E

Based on the graph plotted for ODEC soils, it can be seen that the line drops drastically from the 212 microns sieve mesh size to the 125 microns sieve mesh size. This movement allows us to deduce that as soil particles passes through the sieves, most of the soil particles due to their coarse sizes are being retained in the 212 microns sieve mesh. By comparing the graphs of ODEC soils to other soil samples, the graph of ODEC soil sample is much more unique as other graphs showed a gradual decrease in the percentage passes of the soil particles. Hence, from the graphs plotted, we are able to identify that soil samples of ODEC are mostly or compared to other soil samples is the most sandy and contains the largest soil particles.

CONCLUSIONS

Sieve analysis test is the most accurate way to determine the sizes of the soil particles of each soil sample. As the sizes of the sieve mesh becomes smaller, much of the large particles are retained at each sieve. The weight or amount retained allows us to estimate and deduce the fineness of the soil particles and also deduce the proportion of the different sizes of solid particles in the sample.

REFERENCES

• M.S. Mamlouk and J.P. Zaniewski. 1999. Materials for Civil and Construction Engineers, Addison-Wesley, Menlo Park CA. 

• "Characterisation of bulk solids" by Donald Mcglinchey, CRC Press, 2005.

• Coduto and P. Donald. 2000. Foundation Design Principles and Practices (2nd Edition). Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.

• L. Karla. 2006. Sieving in Particle Size Analysis John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. USA

• Blaud, M. Menon, B. van der Zaan, G.J. Lair, S.A.Banwart . Effects of Dry and Wet Sieving of Soil on Identification and Interpretation of Microbial Community Composition Advances in Agronomy, Volume 142, 2017, pp. 119-142.