THIRD LAB REPORT : IMPATIENS BALSAMINA
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE (HS11)
SS11403 ENVIRONMENTAL SOIL SCIENCE
YEAR ONE SEMESTER 2 2017/2018
LECTERUR: MDM. DIANA DEMIYAH
GROUP NAME: DINIE TEAM 5
NAME
|
MATRIC NUMBER
|
CHAN CHU YIN
|
BS17110446
|
CHOW YIAN PENG
|
BS17110592
|
DARREN NETANIEL ERIC ROGERS
|
BS17110402
|
MIMORI SOGA
|
BS17270765
|
NUR AISYIKIN BINTI ABDULLAH
|
BS17160683
|
NUR DINIE DAYANA BINTI MOHAMAD
RAFI
|
BS17110064
|
SOIL PERMEABLELITY TEST
Introduction
The variety of soil types depends on where the environment they are. Some soils can grow very well if the environment have the characteristics that they required. In this experiment, we conducted an experiment to analyze soil permeability.
Soil permeability is the
ability of the soil to transmit water and air. Soil permeability is affected by
particle size, impurities in the water, absorbed water, the degree of
saturation, and void ratio. The permeability is related to soil texture. In this test, water is
forced by a known constant pressure through a soil specimen of known dimensions
and the rate of flow is determined. This test is used primarily to determine
the suitability of sands and gravels for drainage purposes and is made only on
remolded samples. The test is limited to materials which have a coefficient of
permeability of approximately 300 mm/day or greater. The “Constant Head” type
of test is used on samples that represent materials to be used as backfill for
abutments, as permeable material for underdrains, as sand drains, as sand
blanket for sand drain areas, and similar materials. Water flows
rapidly in sand soil, because soil particles are large and have pore spaces. In
sandy loam, the flow of water is moderate. Clay soil is less porous than sand
soil, thus clay can hold a lot of water. That’s why water flows very slowly in
clay soil.
Aim
To
investigate the relationship between the types of soils and the quantity of
water after flow through the soils.
Objectives
1. To determine the coefficient
of permeability of a soil.
2. To study the permeability
of different type of soils.
Apparatus and
Materials
·
Graduated Cylinders
·
Funnels
·
Test Tubes
·
Beaker
·
Test Tube Rack
·
Filter Papers
·
Soil Samples (black soil, FSSA’s lake, hill soil, ODEC’s
soil, mangrove)
·
Stopwatch
Procedures
1. The test tube
is stand on the test tube rack and funnel on top of test tube is prepared.
2. The filter paper is folded and inserted into
the funnel to separate the soil. This is to prevent soil from dropping into the
test tube together with water.
3. Same amount of
5 air-dried soil samples for each setup are prepared. The soil is compacted
gently.
4. Same amount of
water (100ml) is prepared and poured gently in each funnel at the same time.
5. The water is
poured slowly to all the soil samples at the same time.
6. Balance water
is added after the water is not overflowing in the funnel to finish 100ml
water.
7. After an hour,
the water volume in the test tube is measured.
8. Results are
collected.
Results
Type of Soil
|
Initial
volume of water (mL)
|
Final
volume of water (mL)
|
Black soil
|
100
|
61
|
FSSA’s lake
|
100
|
78
|
Hill (tanah bukit)
|
100
|
78
|
ODEC
|
100
|
79
|
Mangrove
|
100
|
75
|
Table 1.0 Volume of water reading after filtration
for an hour
Discussion
Soils are composed of three types of particles: sand, silt, and clay.
The size of the particles varies, with clay having the smallest size and sand
the largest. Smaller sized particles pack more closely together and slow the
flow of water through the soil. The composition of a soil can affect the
permeability of water to flow through the soil. In this experiment, the student
will test the permeability of soils to water.
Permeability is influenced by the size, shape, and
continuity of the pore spaces. Coarse textured soils such as sands usually have
high infiltration rates as sand particles are larger than other. The
infiltration rates of medium and fine textured soils such as black soil, hill
soil, soil at FSSA’s lake and mangrove soil are lower than those of coarse
textured soils and more dependent on the stability of the soil aggregates.
The water holding capacity also affects the
permeability of the soil. Water
holding capacity is the amount of water that a given soil can hold. Sand have the
lowest water holding capacity instead of having the high infiltration rate. Soil
with high percentage of silt and clay have high water holding capacity. As an example,
mangrove is a lock and can hold more water than the sandy soil.
Based on the experiment’s
result, ODEC’s soil have the highest permeability rate compared to the other
soil. Results obtained are differ to the actual results. It supposed the mangrove’s
soil can hold the most water in an hour compared to the others instead, the
black soil holds the most. This is also caused by the organic matter contained
in the black soil make it holds water the most. Improper handling method also
can affect the results obtained.
Conclusion
The soil from ODEC has the best drainage. Sandy soil
has large particles and pore space. Loosely space allows water to pass through
the soil and drain quickly. The soil from ODEC has the highest permeability. On
the other hand, water took the longest time to pass through mangrove soil.
Mangrove soil has the lowest permeability of the five soil types that we
employed in this experiment. Soils are porous and permeable. However, the
permeability is affected by many factors such as pore space of the soil.
Generally, sand has the highest permeability. Clay has the lowest permeability.
Analyzing permeability of the soil is important. It leads to understand what
type of soils is good to germinate seeds and grow plants.
Appendix
References
Alexandria Engineering Journal, Volume 55, Issue 3, September 2016, Pages 2631-2638
Alexandria Engineering Journal, Volume 55, Issue 3, September 2016, Pages 2631-2638
EGCE 324L (Soil Mechanics Laboratory) Spring 2008, Binod Tiwari, PhD
Hamdan, D. D. (2018, March 20). HS11 Sains Tanah Sekitaran 2018. Retrieved April 7, 2018, from https://hs11sainstanahsekitaran2018.blogspot.my/2018/03/soil-permeability-test_19.html
Soil Mechanics – Laboratory Manual,B.M. DAS (Chapter 10,11) Soil Properties, Testing, Measurement, and Evaluation, C.Liu, J.Evett
SIEVE ANALYSIS TEST
Introduction
The variety of soil types depends on where the environment they are. Some soils can grow very well if the environment have the characteristics that they required. In this experiment, we conducted a sieve analysis experiment.
Sieve analysis is a practice to determine the particle
size distribution of the soil, coarse and fine aggregates. The particle size
distribution is called gradation. The standard grain size analysis test
determines the relative proportions of different grain sizes as they are
distributed among certain size ranges. This grain size analysis is widely used
in classification of soil. Soil passes through a stack of sieves. Then, we can
collect different sized particles left behind at each of sieves and weight
them.
Aim
To investigate the relationship between the types of soils and the particle size distribution of the soils.
Objective
To
determine the particle size distribution of the coarse and fine aggregates.
Apparatus and Materials
·
Air-dried soils (mangrove, ODEC’s, FSSA’s lake, black
soil, hill’s (tanah bukit))
·
Stack of sieves including pan and cover
·
Weighing balance
·
Mechanical sieve shaker
·
Brush
·
Pestle and mortar
·
Tray
Procedures
1. Tree roots,
pieces of bark and rocks are removed from the soil sample.
2. Clumps of
air-dried soils are broken by hand before air-dried samples are sieve.
3. The total
weight of the sample soil is measured before sieve.
4. 5 size of mesh
sieve are selected (one of the sieve should be the 60µm mesh size).
5. Sieves are made
sure in clean condition. Brush is used
gently without injuring the mesh if many soil particles are stuck in the
openings.
6. A stack of
sieves on the mechanical sieve shaker is prepared. Sieves are made sure to have
larger opening sizes are placed above the one having smaller opening size. The
pan is set first in the stack, the cover on the top of the biggest mesh size
sieve.
7. The soil is
poured and the cover is placed.
8. The clamps are
fixed.
9. A tray below
the opening of the pan is placed to collect the finest particle.
10. The time is
adjusted to 15 minutes and get the shaker went on 40~50.
11. The mass of
each sieve and retained soil are measured after the shaker has stopped. The
finest particle on the pan is collected.
12. Brush is used
to poke the particles that stuck on the mesh and the particles are collected.
13. Step 1 to 12
are repeated for another 4 soil samples.
14. The soils are
labelled and kept for further analysis.
Results
Black soil
Total
mass of dry soil: 100g
Sieve
Number
|
Sieve
Opening Mesh Size
|
Mass
of Soil Retained on Each Size (g)
|
Percentage
of Mass Retained on Each Sieve (Rn)
|
Cumulative
Percent Retained
|
Percent
Finer
|
%
Retained = Wsieve /Wtotal x 100%
|
%
Cumulative Passing = 100% - % Cumulative Retained
|
100
- ΣRn
|
|||
18
|
1mm
|
49.6162
|
49.6162
|
50.3838
|
50.3838
|
30
|
600µm
|
20.1440
|
20.1440
|
79.8560
|
79.8560
|
70
|
212µm
|
27.5365
|
27.5365
|
72.4635
|
72.4635
|
120
|
125µm
|
13.4530
|
13.4530
|
86.5470
|
86.5470
|
230
|
63µm
|
7.1918
|
7.1918
|
92.8082
|
92.8082
|
Pan
|
6.8571
|
6.8571
|
93.1429
|
93.1429
|
Table 1.0 Sieve analysis result for black soil
ODEC
Total
mass of dry soil: 100g
Sieve
Number
|
Sieve
Opening Mesh Size
|
Mass
of Soil Retained on Each Size (g)
|
Percentage
of Mass Retained on Each Sieve (Rn)
|
Cumulative
Percent Retained
|
Percent
Finer
|
%
Retained = Wsieve/Wtotal x 100%
|
%
Cumulative Passing = 100% - % Cumulative Retained
|
100
- ΣRn
|
|||
18
|
1mm
|
14.6237
|
14.6237
|
85.3763
|
85.3763
|
30
|
600µm
|
16.5058
|
16.5058
|
83.4942
|
83.4942
|
70
|
212µm
|
24.5751
|
24.5751
|
75.4249
|
75.4249
|
120
|
125µm
|
43.8140
|
43.8140
|
56.1860
|
56.1860
|
230
|
63µm
|
20.2656
|
20.2656
|
79.7344
|
79.7344
|
Pan
|
7.5604
|
7.5604
|
92.4396
|
92.4396
|
Table 2.0 Sieve analysis result for ODEC
Chart 2.0 Sieve analysis for ODEC
FSSA’s Lake
Total
mass of dry soil: 100g
Sieve
Number
|
Sieve
Opening Mesh Size
|
Mass
of Soil Retained on Each Size (g)
|
Percentage
of Mass Retained on Each Sieve (Rn)
|
Cumulative
Percent Retained
|
Percent
Finer
|
%
Retained = Wsieve/Wtotal x 100%
|
%
Cumulative Passing = 100% - % Cumulative Retained
|
100
- ΣRn
|
|||
18
|
1mm
|
26.9246
|
26.9246
|
73.0754
|
73.0754
|
30
|
600µm
|
9.0722
|
9.0722
|
90.9278
|
90.9278
|
70
|
212µm
|
19.9532
|
19.9532
|
80.0468
|
80.0468
|
120
|
125µm
|
15.6134
|
15.6134
|
84.3866
|
84.3866
|
230
|
63µm
|
13.1421
|
13.1421
|
86.8579
|
86.8579
|
Pan
|
8.9816
|
8.9816
|
91.0184
|
91.0184
|
Table 3.0 Sieve analysis result for FSSA’s lake
Chart 3.0 Sieve analysis for FSSA’s lake
Hill’s soil (tanah bukit)
Total
mass of dry soil: 100g
Sieve
Number
|
Sieve
Opening Mesh Size
|
Mass
of Soil Retained on Each Size (g)
|
Percentage
of Mass Retained on Each Sieve (Rn)
|
Cumulative
Percent Retained
|
Percent
Finer
|
%
Retained = Wsieve /Wtotal x 100%
|
%
Cumulative Passing = 100% - % Cumulative Retained
|
100
- ΣRn
|
|||
18
|
1mm
|
41.7600
|
41.7600
|
58.2400
|
58.2400
|
30
|
600µm
|
15.0772
|
15.0772
|
84.9228
|
84.9228
|
70
|
212µm
|
25.5321
|
25.5321
|
74.4679
|
74.4679
|
120
|
125µm
|
17.0120
|
17.0120
|
82.9880
|
82.9880
|
230
|
63µm
|
15.3400
|
15.3400
|
84.6600
|
84.6600
|
Pan
|
12.5355
|
12.5355
|
87.4645
|
87.4645
|
Table 4.0 Sieve analysis result for hill soil
(tanah bukit)
Mangrove
Total
mass of dry soil: 100g
Sieve
Number
|
Sieve
Opening Mesh Size
|
Mass
of Soil Retained on Each Size (g)
|
Percentage
of Mass Retained on Each Sieve (Rn)
|
Cumulative
Percent Retained
|
Percent
Finer
|
%
Retained = Wsieve /Wtotal x 100%
|
%
Cumulative Passing = 100% - % Cumulative Retained
|
100
- ΣRn
|
|||
18
|
1mm
|
22.1155
|
22.1155
|
77.8845
|
77.8845
|
30
|
600µm
|
8.0099
|
8.0099
|
91.9901
|
91.9901
|
70
|
212µm
|
23.9828
|
23.9828
|
76.0172
|
76.0172
|
120
|
125µm
|
22.9710
|
22.9710
|
77.0290
|
77.0290
|
230
|
63µm
|
10.8171
|
10.8171
|
89.1829
|
89.1829
|
Pan
|
5.5415
|
5.5415
|
94.4585
|
94.4585
|
Table 5.0 Sieve analysis result for mangrove
Chart 5.0 Sieve analysis for mangrove
Discussion
From this experiment, there are five different soil that have been observed which are black soil, mangrove soil, hill soil, sand and soil at FSSA’s lake. The method used was sieving method, where we able to determine the particle size distribution. As a stack of sieves were prepared, the sieve that has larger opening size are placed above the ones that having smaller opening sizes. This means, the sieve that have diameter of aperture of 1mm will be placed at the above followed by 600µm, 212µm, 125µm, and 63µm. This experiment also cannot be considered accurate as the weight of black soil, mangrove soil, hill soil, sand and soil at FSSA’s lake not totally correct since there is still amount of soil left in the sieves after the process was carried out. Besides that, some of soil are spilled out from the container since the machine is not closed correctly. This also affects to the result obtained.
So, before conducting this experiment, make sure the sieves are clean by using brush, because if many soil particles are stuck in the openings, this will affect the result of the experiments. The machine also must be set up correctly so that there is no problem occur during carrying out the process.
Conclusion
Sieves separated fine and coarse aggregates into different particle sized. We weighted and recorded each size of particles. We calculated the percentage of retained aggregates. Sieve analysis is a simple way to determine the particle size distribution of the soil.
Appendix
Figure 1.0 Number of sieves used for sieve analysis
Figure 2.0 Mechanical sieve shaker
References
Alexandria Engineering Journal, Volume 55, Issue 3, September 2016, Pages 2631-2638
Alexandria Engineering Journal, Volume 55, Issue 3, September 2016, Pages 2631-2638
EGCE 324L (Soil Mechanics Laboratory) Spring 2008, Binod Tiwari, PhD
Hamdan, D. D. (2018, March 20). HS11 Sains Tanah Sekitaran 2018. Retrieved April 7, 2018, from https://hs11sainstanahsekitaran2018.blogspot.my/2018/03/sieve-analysis-test.html
Soil Mechanics – Laboratory Manual,B.M. DAS (Chapter 10,11) Soil Properties, Testing, Measurement, and Evaluation, C.Liu, J.Evett
Comments
Post a Comment