M E M O R A N D U M
To: Jakob Schallberger
From: John Smith
Subject: Sieve analysis test results
Date: 1/19/2018
Per your request, we have performed a sieve analysis test on the soil sample you provided to
determine its grain size distribution. Based on visual inspection, the soil sample appeared to be
mostly sand, olive gray in color. The sieve analysis test was performed in general accordance with
ASTM D-422 standard. Raw laboratory data are provided in Attachment-A and our
analysis/calculations are provided in Attachment-B.
Table 1 summarizes the grain size distribution of the soil sample. It should be noted that during
the test about 0.13% of the total mass was lost; this amount of lost mass is considered acceptable
and may be due to the sensitivity of the balance used for measurement. The data from Table 1 are
also presented graphically as a grain size distribution chart in Figure 1.
Table 2 summarizes the findings from the particle distribution curve. Coefficient of uniformity
Cu and coefficient of curvature Cc are the indicators of gradation distributions and are used to
determine if granular soils are well graded or uniformly (poorly) graded. Since the results show that
Cu > 6 and 1 < Cc < 3, the soil sample provided could be classified as well graded sand but further
analysis will be necessary to accurately report the soil classification. These additional tests include
hydrometer analysis, liquid limit test and plastic limit test.
If you have further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at [email protected]
Sincerely,
John Smith
1. Attachment-A: Lab observation table
2. Attachment-B: Analysis/Calculations
2
Table 1: Sieve analysis data.
Particle size
(mm)
Percent finer
(%)
4.75 100
2 85.5
0.85 52.1
0.42 27.8
0.18 17.2
0.125 8.1
0.075 2.4
Figure 1: Percent passing versus sieve opening.
Table 2: Gradation coefficients and other quantities.
Percent gravel 0 %
Percent sand 97.6 %
Percent fines 2.4 %
D10 (Particle diameter corresponding to 10% of the particles finer) 0.14 mm
D30 (Particle diameter corresponding to 30% of the particles finer) 0.45 mm
D60 (Particle diameter corresponding to 60% of the particles finer) 1.10 mm
Cu (Coefficient of uniformity) 7.8
Cc (Coefficient of curvature) 1.3
3
4
Memorandum Written Content
Font size: 12 pt.
Single space
Use Times New Roman, Arial, or Garamond for the font
There is not a length requirement for the memo, however the report needs to cover everything
listed below. Also, the report needs to be written in third person and past tense. Points will be
deducted if first person and present/future tense is used.
Please do not copy word for word from the example memo!! It is only there to provide some
guidance and sentence structuring. This lab needs to be signed and turned into me before the s ...
Basic Civil Engineering first year Notes- Chapter 4 Building.pptx
M E M O R A N D U M To Jakob Schallberger From J.docx
1. M E M O R A N D U M
To: Jakob Schallberger
From: John Smith
Subject: Sieve analysis test results
Date: 1/19/2018
Per your request, we have performed a sieve analysis test on the
soil sample you provided to
determine its grain size distribution. Based on visual inspection,
the soil sample appeared to be
mostly sand, olive gray in color. The sieve analysis test was
performed in general accordance with
ASTM D-422 standard. Raw laboratory data are provided in
Attachment-A and our
analysis/calculations are provided in Attachment-B.
Table 1 summarizes the grain size distribution of the soil
sample. It should be noted that during
the test about 0.13% of the total mass was lost; this amount of
lost mass is considered acceptable
and may be due to the sensitivity of the balance used for
measurement. The data from Table 1 are
also presented graphically as a grain size distribution chart in
Figure 1.
Table 2 summarizes the findings from the particle distribution
2. curve. Coefficient of uniformity
Cu and coefficient of curvature Cc are the indicators of
gradation distributions and are used to
determine if granular soils are well graded or uniformly
(poorly) graded. Since the results show that
Cu > 6 and 1 < Cc < 3, the soil sample provided could be
classified as well graded sand but further
analysis will be necessary to accurately report the soil
classification. These additional tests include
hydrometer analysis, liquid limit test and plastic limit test.
If you have further questions, please do not hesitate to contact
me at [email protected]
Sincerely,
John Smith
1. Attachment-A: Lab observation table
2. Attachment-B: Analysis/Calculations
2
Table 1: Sieve analysis data.
Particle size
(mm)
Percent finer
(%)
3. 4.75 100
2 85.5
0.85 52.1
0.42 27.8
0.18 17.2
0.125 8.1
0.075 2.4
Figure 1: Percent passing versus sieve opening.
Table 2: Gradation coefficients and other quantities.
4. Percent gravel 0 %
Percent sand 97.6 %
Percent fines 2.4 %
D10 (Particle diameter corresponding to 10% of the particles
finer) 0.14 mm
D30 (Particle diameter corresponding to 30% of the particles
finer) 0.45 mm
D60 (Particle diameter corresponding to 60% of the particles
finer) 1.10 mm
Cu (Coefficient of uniformity) 7.8
Cc (Coefficient of curvature) 1.3
3
4
5. Memorandum Written Content
Font size: 12 pt.
Single space
Use Times New Roman, Arial, or Garamond for the font
There is not a length requirement for the memo, however the
report needs to cover everything
listed below. Also, the report needs to be written in third person
and past tense. Points will be
deducted if first person and present/future tense is used.
Please do not copy word for word from the example memo!! It
is only there to provide some
guidance and sentence structuring. This lab needs to be signed
and turned into me before the start
of class. Labs turned in after 6:30 will have a 10% deduction
automatically. The online
submission needs to be completed before the start of class as
well. I realized now that some of
you may not be able to figure out what D10 is because the
percent retained in the pan may be
above 10 %. In this case this information does not need to be
reported and can be reported on the
6. next lab.
Paragraph 1
Include information such as:
- Date the lab took place
- ASTM Standard/name of lab
- always give a visual classification of what the soil appeared to
be for every lab (ie. type of soil
and color, I will later discuss other ways to classify a soil
further)
- discuss the objective of the lab
Paragraph 2
Discuss how the lab procedure was performed (past tense)
Paragraph 3
Discuss the attachments, figures, and tables in the report.
Paragraph 4
Discuss your findings from the lab and answer the questions on
the last page of the handout.
Lastly, provide a way for me to contact you if I have any
question. Then sign the paper and put
your name at the bottom as in the example memo. Also put a
7. message at the very bottom of the
page or in the footnote that showcases what is in the
attachments (same as in the example
memo).
Tables
Tables need to be aligned to the left. Above the table, there
needs to be text that displays the
table number along with a brief description about what is in the
table. This text should also be
aligned to the left and the line spacing between the table and
text need to be zero. The units must
be shown in the table (see example below).
Table 1: Sieve opening and percent finer results.
Sieve opening (mm) Percent finer (%)
4.75 100
2.36 92
1.18 81
0.6 70
0.3 59
8. 0.15 47
0.075 25
Figures
Figures need to be in the center of the page. Below the figure,
there needs to be text that displays
the table number along with a brief description about what is in
the figure (ie. Perent finer versus
sieve opening). This text should be centered under the figure
and the line spacing between the
figure and text need to be zero. Include axis titles and for this
lab make the x-axis into
logarithmic scale and values in reverse order. The units need to
be displayed in the figure (see
example below). Your figures should be similar to the example
for this lab.
Figure 1: Percent finer versus sieve opening.
Attachments
Place the attachments in the same format as shown in the
example memo.
0
10
10. (%
)
Sieve opening (mm)
CUSTOMIZATION NOTECUSTOMIZATION NOTE*** DO
NOT MODIFY OR REMOVE ***If you would like to customize
this Excel template you may do so. The default template path
can be changed in any of the test modules software
options.NOTE* DO NOT DELETE THE DEFAULT ORIGINAL
TEMPLATE, MAKE A COPY OF THE ORIGINAL AND
MODIFY COPY.* DO NOT CHANGE THE NAME OF THE
DEFAULT ORIGINAL TEMPLATE.* DO NOT CHANGE ANY
OF THE ORIGINAL TAB NAMES/CAPTIONS* DO NOT
MODIFY ANY OF THE DEFAULT SHEETS; THE TEST
DATA WILL BE INSERTED INTO THESE SHEETS
SPECIMEN 0 - CONSOL - SUMMARYSPECIMEN 0 -
SEQUENCE SUMMARY*** DO NOT MODIFY OR REMOVE
***[UNITS][UNITS][UNITS][UNITS]%%[UNITS][UNITS][UN
ITS][UNITS]LOADCUMM.
CHNGSPECIMENVOIDSVERTICALVOIDT90 FITT50
FITT90T50SEQUENCESEQUENCEIN
HEIGHTHEIGHTHEIGHTSTRAINRATIOTIMETIMECVCV
SPECIMEN 0 - CONSOL - SEQ #SPECIMEN 0 -
CONSOLIDATION - SEQUENCE #*** DO NOT MODIFY OR
REMOVE
***MINUTESHH:MM:SS[UNITS][UNITS][UNITS]%ELAPSED
ELAPSED
AXIALVOIDREADINGTIMETIMELOADDISPSETTLEMENTS
TRAINRATIO
&"-,Bold"&K01+048HMTS Next Basic Export&"-
,Regular"&K01+000
&"-,Bold"&20&KFF0000User Defined Test
&P of &N
![curve. Coefficient of uniformity
Cu and coefficient of curvature Cc are the indicators of
gradation distributions and are used to
determine if granular soils are well graded or uniformly
(poorly) graded. Since the results show that
Cu > 6 and 1 < Cc < 3, the soil sample provided could be
classified as well graded sand but further
analysis will be necessary to accurately report the soil
classification. These additional tests include
hydrometer analysis, liquid limit test and plastic limit test.
If you have further questions, please do not hesitate to contact
me at [email protected]
Sincerely,
John Smith
1. Attachment-A: Lab observation table
2. Attachment-B: Analysis/Calculations
2
Table 1: Sieve analysis data.
Particle size
(mm)
Percent finer
(%)]()