Lab Glanulometria .docx

Baquero E. Castillo D. González C. Guacaneme J. Ortíz D.

CONCLUSIONS:

According to the table of USCS, it can conclude:

1. The soil is define like a depth grain because more of the 50% is hold prisoner in the siave N 200. The hold prisoner accumulate percentage is of 95,87%. [1] 2. Agree with the table 4.2 in the Braja’s M. Book, the soil sample is a clean sand, depending on the percentage that hold prisoner the sieve N 200 which was of 95,87% and the percentage that passing in the sieve N 4 which was of 75,08%. 3. In conformity with the table 3.5 of the William’s Lambe and Withman’s Robert book, it dismiss that the soil sample is classify like silty sand (SM) or clay sand (SC), because the percentage that pass for the sieve N 200 was of 4,12% (Smaller of 12%). [3] 4. In the table 3.5 of the William’s Lambe and Withman’s Robert book, the soil sample is a poor sand (SP), because for a well sand (SW) the curvature coefficient (Cc) must be among 1 and 3, the analyzed sample have a Cc= 0,23, but the uniformity coefficient (Cu) if accomplish is greater than of 6, the analyzed sample have Cu=21,44. [3] 5. The percentage that pass for the sieve N 200 was of 35% or minor of the sample (the percentage that pass was of 4,12%), regarding to general classification in a granular material.[4] Keeping in mind the AASHTO regulation classification of the soils, can conclude that: 6. Respect to group classification is (A-3) what indicate that include poor finer sands, with some depth sand and gravel. [5] 7. According to the AASHTO regulation have a 46,37% of gravels, 49,50% of sands and 4,13% of finer. Analyzing the results it can conclude than the sample in conformity to AASHTO

regulation is a sand with gravels. In this case would

calculated but the can not determined the liquid limit and the plastic limit. [6]

8. In conformity with the table 3.7 of the William’s Lambe and Withman’s Robert book, regarding to use of the material for a Civil Engineering construction is not appropriate, because is a material poor graded, and the soil sample is permeable.[9] 9. In conformity with with the table 2.3 in the Braja’s M. Book, keeping in mind the USCS regulation, can determined that the soil have clays and silt, because by means of Hydrometer Analysis determined particles lower that 0,075 mm, getting 2,21% of silt and 1,9% of clay. 10. To conclude according to our judgment like engineerings based on in the USCS regulation that the soil is a poor sand (S), because the result of Cu is the expected, but the Cc the result id minor that 1(P) like the percentage of finer is minor to 5% the nomenclature is SP.

REFERENCIAS. [1] BOWLES, JOSEPH E, (1982), PHYSICAL AND GEOTECHNICAL PROPERTIES OF SOILS, EEUU, Ed. McGRAW-HILL, 4-3 USCS (Page 83). [2]

BRAJA

M.

DAS,

(2011),

FUNDAMENTALS

OF

GEOTECHNICAL

ENGINEERING, CENGAGE LEARNING, TABLA 4.2 USCS. [3] LAMBE T. WILLIAM Y WITHMAN ROBERT V., (1996), SOIL MECHANICS, EEUU, ED. LIMUSA, TABLA 3.5 UCSC. [4] BOWLES, JOSEPH E, (1982), PHYSICAL AND GEOTECHNICAL PROPERTIES OF SOILS, EEUU, Ed. McGRAW-HILL, 4-5 CLASIFICACIÓN DEL SISTEMA AASHTO (Page 90). [5] BOWLES, JOSEPH E, (1982), PHYSICAL AND GEOTECHNICAL PROPERTIES OF SOILS, EEUU, Ed. McGRAW-HILL, 4-5 CLASIFICACIÓN DEL SISTEMA AASHTO (PAGE 92). [6] CLASIFICACIÓN DE SUELOS- S.U.C.S- ASTM- AASHTO, UNIVERSIDAD DEL CAUCA PÁGINA 14 [7] CLASIFICACIÓN DE SUELOS- S.U.C.S- ASTM- AASHTO, UNIVERSIDAD DEL CAUCA PÁGINA 2 [8]

BARDET

JEAN-PIERRE,

(1997),

EXPERIMENTAL

SOIL

MECHANICS,

PRENTICE HALL, TABLA 3.2 CLASIFICACIÓN DE SUELOS. [9] LAMBE T. WILLIAM Y WITHMAN ROBERT V., (1996), SOIL MECHANICS, EEUU, ED. LIMUSA, TABLA 3.7 PROPIEDADES Y APLICACIONES EN OBRAS CIVILES.

[10]

BRAJA

M.

DAS,

(2011),

FUNDAMENTALS

OF

GEOTECHNICAL

ENGINEERING, CENGAGE LEARNING, TABLA 4.2 LÍMITE DE SEPARACIÓN DE TAMAÑO DE PARTÍCULAS.