la/30
The Use of the Unified Soil Classification System by the Bureau
of Réclamation
L’emploi du Système Uniforme de Classification des Sols par le Bureau de Réclamation
by A. A . W a g n e r , A ssistan t C hief, E a rth L a b o ra to ry B ran ch , B u rea u o f R é clam a tio n , D en v er F é d é ra l C en tre,
Denver, C o lo ra d o , U .S .A .
Sununary
The Unified Soil Classification System was adopted jointly by the
Bureau of Réclamation and Corps of Engineers in 1952.
This paper présents a brief discussion of the development, the basic
principles and procédures for classifying soils by this system, and the
application and use by the Bureau of Réclamation.
Introduction
M odem soil mechanics considers soil as a m aterial o f con­
struction having engineering properties which can be used in
design. Soils are a heterogeneous accum ulation o f m inerai
grains and occasionally organic m aterial uncemented or
cemented together, and because o f the uncontrolled natural
conditions under which they are form ed, there is an infinité
variety of natural soils, each with slightly différent physical
properties. O ther materials such as concrete, Steel, or iron are
closely controlled during fabrication to provide a lim ited range
in the m agnitude o f their properties.
The engineer engaged in the design and construction o f
foundations and earthw orks has recognized this peculiarity of
soils. To reach a practical and econom ical solution to this
problem, it becam e apparent th a t some m ethod o f identifying
soils and grouping them into classes, w hich have sim ilar
physical properties and which exhibit sim ilar général behaviour
characteristics, was necessary. N um erous systems have been
developed for classifying soils for engineering purposes. Some
are based on modifications of existing systems such as those
used in agriculture, geology o r pedology, which were developed
to describe and catalogue soils according to a particular, non-
engineering property o f their m ode o f déposition and occur­
rence on the earth. New systems were set up for specialized
fields of engineering stressing a particular use which in some
cases applied only to certain limited fractions o f the soil. Some
systems used uncom m on, unrelated, locally-coined words and
phrases to describe soil properties.
In 1946 the Bureau o f R éclam ation adopted w ith some
modifications the Airfield Classification which was developed
by Professor A. Casagrande for the C orps o f Engineers and
published by them in 1942. Acting on a recom m endation by
Casagrande, the Bureau o f R éclam ation in 1952 initiated dis­
cussions with the Corps o f Engineers for the purpose o f adopting
a system satisfactory to both organizations. W ith A. C asa­
grande as consultant, they reached agreement on a modification
of the Airfield Classification which they nam ed the Unified Soil
Classification System (1953a, b).
The Unified Soil Classification System
The features of the Unified Soil Classification System which
make it desirable and advantageous for categorizing soils
according to their engineering properties are discussed below :
Sommaire
L’emploi du système uniforme de classification des sols a été adopté
conjointment p ar le Bureau de Réclamation et le Corps des Ingénieurs
de l’Armée en 1952.
Cette communication présente une briève discussion de la méthode,
des principes de base et des méthodes pour la classification des sols,
ainsi que son emploi par le Bureau de Réclamation.
(1) T he system is related to the physical properties inhérent
in the soil and n o t a particular use. Thus, it may be used for
ail varieties o f engineering problem s involving soils.
(2) The system is based on soil behaviour which in turn
reflects the physical properties.
(3) The system recognizes th a t soil behaviour is a function
o f the am ounts and the distribution o f the basic constituents
com m on to ail soils; these are:
(a) Soil components. This is a term given to the solid
m inerai grains which range in size from bulky equidim ensional
grains a t least 12 in. in diam eter to colloidal size fiake o r plate-
like particles. Because o f this b road size range, interm ediate
size ranges have been established using well-known, com m on
language term s to define each range; i.e. boulders, cobbles,
gravel, sand, silt and clay. These are called com ponents
(R eport o f Com m ittee V II on F o undation and Soil M echanics,
1947), see Table 2. The m axim um size, distribution o f the
interm ediate sizes, shape an d minerai com position (particularly
o f the fine-grained com ponent) affect the behaviour o f the soil.
(b) Moisture. This includes the am ount o f free w ater in the
voids and com bined m oisture present in the soil grains or other
substances.
(c) Other substances. This includes ail other substances,
such as organic material, gases, and minerais which coat the
grains or act as cementing agents.
(4) The system establishes 15 soil groups. These groups,
each o f which have distinct engineering properties, are typical
o f ail soils found in nature.
It is recognized th at m any soils have property characteristics
of two groups if they are close to the border line between the
groups. Therefore, for this substantial num ber o f soils,
boundary classifications between the typical soil groups are
provided.
This provides a broad scheme o f classification, in keeping
with this variable type o f m aterial, rather th an a précisé one
which attem pts to define the properties o f a soil by différences
o f one o r two percentage points as determ ined from a particular
test.
(5) The system provides two m ethods for determ ining the
am ount and type o f the basic com ponents in the soil: a simple
visual and m anual method or a laboratory method which uses
well-known, widely used tests (Book of ASTM Standards, 1955),
125
 U c <
;sc uu ;e 1 1s 1°
£ i 3 8.3
. VF' 3 *0
-
< a,Z^ ^t* -S
g i>»
' 5n - û ^ C {*■ U IA
>
O ~> _* î;3 <
qu*.22
£o>’>
> n ? »-i“
<

*e >
Osfl
Xi u
sa
ÙÛ
J2 *«
It Es 6*5
o - ï - $
O] o .s
q |q ffc u QlQ £?.§
Ht -3
ff.Sr.
JJr .S r c -O . |r c
I <u< Si U < .C
3 I* *
O <
sjoquUs |Bnp jo
s s n S u iJ in b d J s s s b o s u t p a p j o f f % zr o i % ç
D S 'W S *DD lW O % Z I UEM1
J S 4A i S *d D 'M O %£ SS3T
:SMO(jOj SB payiSSBp 3JB SJIOS p3UIEjS 3S-IBO:>(3ZIS9AaiS0O£
•D jV U E q j js u E u i s u o r p ç j j ) s a u y j ô 9 8 b ;u 3 o j3 c I u o S u ip u s d a Q
OAJnD
szis u;bj8 u io jj p u es p u e j9 aej3 j o sa8Bju30i 3d s u n u js p Q XdpUj À^pj^SBy
u o ij B o g u u a p t p j s i j J 3 p u n u s a i s s e s u o p o e j j a q j 8 u i X j i m 9 p i u t 3 A jn o s z is u i b j S s s f j

O .? « O
) ü a> C
j-r 8 c à g s -g C C v-i c ^3 5 ^ 0 c o ’S c •S 'es -3
fl§.üO -! E-ï” ® h
Unified soil classification (including identification and description)

O 1- 0 ‘ 3
a> E 53-n
— OS 3 a - ÜC-- 2 S.yg » g-° s g l»| 5S> ^
-t_ *d o o U-O
S g ■ = • § 2 -a -* 1 3
§8.8.■o^jz o.a 4>tS ■o c ’a 5?
s 0 11 „■M0*0U £C •-§ 3 0
■9 * ?*.Sg g| «= n 4>.. !~
- 0 _ ... g>
^ w2Î’~-o.2 C C O rt -
1 S i U “ -o «
'5M ® ^■ r Ë £ ®i « jû 2 >,3 ’« U l
■S°-S ! *
n 0Î3• M
§ !!
u u . 4> C _.
M u 'O o g ë 2-0 S “ Ê C_
»? vC SS w- .2 8 > 1- EJ32 U« m ?0
S
* eni sh I-S 0 S i 5 « « »- P -ü- u g .> cs Tu“3lV»s.Ü ! X) —; 3
3
_5 [/1* ■o 2 2:o.S9 «^2 2 Mp i>Si Ora Eü to3u *c13 2c
ra o t ) e o 5 30. n0.
m 3 F
Tableau de classification unifiée des sols

0 r» . «c g«.ç >"5.
m =L = *0 c O - o rj ■î: «
<355 s) SO” 1jsjs
; C2 c ? .,d o 5
i i ï . 8 ? s ‘s H gS.“ S g . Es u o B? 21-9 3 °u«£ o !5>o
s-s - |'|l m
e c t; al
e P *- M .Ü «î—
■s «o o u
t cS •g S o Ü 1 S § o |i ^ o c*o 5 c ï l l s l l
d .2 u » o S- & S ■'■ -■ a g s-S.1^3 8
t; O W g ta a tc c p,
O "O MT3
g J- C c c B ? |S
« M.S & 3 2^-'| S> u e E
s ü P
U T3 M C 1/5 t Ë ij H Ë’-Ô
t E o E ii 2^5

e ° £M o >.>.
Table 1

l£-
ci " "1^3 3 T3
mH U. u
60 C &I-S —
oS .
- ÙOt/> "c >? UOK)C”w
> ..2 *«C > , >1 S) o
^ >>42 ë •a
«5 «de-c
U ICI°< u-,
O >*
«3 “ O A nT3 ü rt ÿ
•o 3
4) w
T3 0
S u u a o 10
■O X
w—
•a t : «-B
-a «- “ ’s,« S ■a 8 a
ï gia o J2
|e : 'ë rt S• :* & *
■a «-&-S
oE "l ■c- gf Ô
w o
CÛT3 c
•&c ï &sci >,T3
v>>crt Sc ï j lu?leâ—â— i?.- >> ■s-S ’S-o
S»
= 5? o 9j n
■O& c
1/l o S"o O. O Cu O M .-
o-o o o.
O O
c/5

£g à O
to

5 &-S
O^
i«2««o, '1 536

Z <u SE .a= SI o'?

4> «J
11 <0 - ° «! II *a
'- 'O r oO
S.s 4> O
ce
O O
C C
!■»
Q w C
* 1s
Id °o
•-2 3 C4
tn )
«> «
<» 2«S Ss
<üij=/- ,
U O fc
M“ •-“ J ’i “ « g«
o 2 E 2 3E o j= Ex
p O - •§ * “ S-o Ê«*
E-o
5“ «- 3 » 3 _QÛ •3*0 3
§-■§ .2 1•8O O 3 tu C 1 5-ï so —
â ■O"S f lv 2 J3 *0J3 T3 2 x
■oj)o.Ü *oa a!>5
OÜM
« <u 0 .2» . -ï .£?«
■S 6 .a « ct C
o tO- ■S2« o.
s ■o.Ü'E c/ÜE 55 Ë « Æ rj s*«
c ?
.- 4> W5t b Z
l« |S
82«
« (ssuif (S d u if
S&.§ s a u if J o tunowD (S3U lf J o ju n o u jo
o u jo 3 /i//;) d jq D p d Jd d o ) ou jo 3/;;;/) aiqppBJddr?)
s js a o j ÿ UD912 sauÿ spuos UD9J3 s d u tf
IfilM SpaDI£) tflIM SpUOg OÇ
0^- WOJ/^ SS5/ UDlf/ J3JD3JS
( d zis 303ts p 'O tf sifj o f iU3\T>ainbd //M /i/ p tr tb if l i iu i j p in b i)
sd p3sn aq Kom bzis ‘ut f ai/; *uotwoifissop fonsta joj) s X b p p u b s iU S sAD p puD s i ff S
3ZIS 3(13}Sp ’OjV 3ZtS 9(131S p 'O tf
UDlfJ J d S JD f SI UOXIOVJj UDlfJ Jd/JDUJS SI UOlfJDJj
d s j v o o J o J jo t{ uD ifj a jo y ij 3SJD00 JO JjDl{ Ùoifl 3JOJAI
spaojQ SpUDS .bo
(3 A s p a ^ B U o ; s iq is iA s i o i j j B d }S 3| | b u is s q j j n o q B s i a z is o a s is 0 0 £ 'O M » 4 X ) 5
z 3 z j s d d d ts OOZ ' ° N UDH> J»8JB ï s i j d i j 3 jd u j J o J j o i f ut?i{t 3 j o j \[
3ZIS 3a31s
OOZ 'O jV UDli * s i j d j j s j d u j J o J j D if u o i f i d jo p y
SJ10S p d U tD jS 3 S J D 0 J
s /fo s p a u w jS 3 u i j

126
 . -rt _• c ^ ^ +£. —h; s T ï
0 2>>nc
« 0 8*0ü 3 -G W ) c “o u0^*5
“5
| â & | | g 1 â ^ -S^'S-S
.§*3 4,
O ° , 0 O.
o J3 j=
— c
£ o «
«ÇJ
^-5 uj 23
Q, _ ** Q. u
!& 2 > ° .ë -2 £ S E-S-gïg
S3 «‘“ c i *- -§£-•<=
B..s |^>2 . ! * £ , g | ° o |
S i c fi 3 2 Ü » .S " ! » S *
«oSa-üSE'SO ■"‘“ -7 3
>£ o-: 0,g C'5 o3J S5y *3o ?E 7“
« “ «So-B C ïîoaÿ • u
. ««*
“ 2 & E |n Ec ï ï | | | _ i . a . | &

à 3 o .S » « Ë-0 § r t o - « o O.
Z O ^ « „ 1 S û 3 u ü .ïïü'=j:t3 «
*" c y wT3-t C W _ o 2 F ^ e _
j 35ÎSw5 -
>= o*“S «"S- ü^.S ïÿ, ”
E 2 ‘35H‘ox>e ^ c w« ■£ <3e tT”^ 0 v
—£ - rtÿ —0 üpjj=4j -.' û.S û S j> ?
.a u--^ I 05 g-Q~ft'g « oJB- S -
w ft-o^s-o o o.« 5 « §js a 5 c -
Jû «8?a‘
o 2*«i>S§-!-c-5l«~:s.S
s- = « - ^ ^ S t < - =

O
Ü
v1 0
* b, c
ü,
u
5 CA«_ ^^*0
.3.2
W c £2->3*£-Cîe -«f0r0-‘Q
r-*“0 Ü
û1-
— S ic 3 8 . c S S ^ C C O c rt
o- P •=o v u u ^ i- £■Si Si « 2
S, s *■§ |g .s s & a o ë - i -13
If 3 O " .C Ï * T J > > fc, ^ " S
0, " J3 8 S'-^üg-o - ^ 5 “ “
§ g 8 8 ’“ 5'3 <->„s|.s
.2 ■> ï ï f l L a ï h a
S . Sc, .H*°-S 2 •Sa’B o -
S> J2 i: ^ m c E o - 2 « a ni
fe. ° g, S 2 -|3 5-Ss °> .Ê a"
£ Ë »§ ■'2tO u
o & £■= 2 a. ÿ ^ c S - § ^ * 1
't, a ï s z ï « > oç i.-twu'f

s f 'o - B i S s I ^ s S - s - I

2 5 O ,£ v’5) u _e*£.2’w2*-r=pv5'T3
| -=fc “ 3 g & f!h s 8 ’S!s.S-§S =
g 3. £ s OT3 e Sj* J3.2 ^ g>« §
&Æ2fiS!r.s!a- g ; |a «

rt£ *£<±S pSJË*2

uU ^S
&si •=g*2
-E sü
ÎS-S-SIbSa>g««ïrt 2.c

t 3 5 | î § ,S ^ 8 ? S a .
• s » ë |s ||£ a ^ *-9
g £s «-5
> 8.2 ^8 *<§5:2
1 -S “ --?;
D-ë3 . - e5: 5
o s S s s s is g s ^ s li*
't-■■5
5 |-
“ °C ’c
■ t. S
fc- “j 5'cSî’.s
r^-rt O ü8'"c rt
=” '3CT

mCO
âD
c|_ I J UW’ ^ C m ^h V <^H . T1 w M îï
» » > p s o “ ü h g „ t!£ c E-
<ij0 .S
j> *3— <« « S-S M«û.5?‘5'S —1„Mrt
Oc ■• » £ «u .“■«'S 2 fcD.d'—f
w.S2*n c ï-5 ylî1
^2^ s>

9« e u !
s- t “ « lï-p o ù d i!!^ ®°—«ô55o
VI •- M « ^ C O ïl
S?mo o d .52si—1bo2 O.Æm«^ S — ü*S M
c eS

- ’S

127
 Table 2
Soil components and fractions
Composantes et fractions du sol

j
Soil Grain size range and description | Significant properties
Soil component Symbol |
\
Boulder None Rounded to angular, bulky, hard, rock Boulders and cobbles are very stable components, used for fills,
particle, average diameter more than ballast, and to stabilize slopes (riprap). Because of size and
12 in. weight, their occurrence in natural deposits tends to improve the
stability of foundations. Angularity of particles increases stability
Cobble None Rounded to angular, bulky, hard, rock
particle, average diameter smaller
£ than 12 in. but larger than 6 in.
s:
Û Gravel G Rounded to angular bulky, hard, rock Gravel and sand have essentially same engineering properties differ-
particle, passing 3-in. sieve (76-2 mm) ing mainly in degree. The No. 4 sieve is arbitrary division, and
o retained on N o. 4 sieve, (4-76 mm) does not correspond to significant change in properties. They
are easy to compact, little affected by moisture, not subject to
•5 Coarse 3- to J-in. frost action. Gravels are generally more perviously stable,
c résistant to érosion and piping than are sands. The well-graded
Fine ^-in. to N o. 4 sands and gravels are generally less pervious and more stable than
& those which are poorly graded and uniform gradation. Ir-
Sand S Rounded to angular, bulky, hard, rock regularity o f particles increases the stability slightly. Finer,
a particle, passing No. 4 sieve (4-76 uniform sand approaches the characteristics of silt; i.e., decrease
mm) retained on N o. 200 sieve (0-74 in permeability and réduction in stability with increase in moisture
mm)
Coarse No. 4 to 10 sieves
Medium No. 10 to 40 sieves
Fine N o. 40 to 200 sieves
Silt M Particles smaller than N o. 200 sieve Silt is inherently unstable, particularly when moisture is increased,
(0-74 mm) identified by behaviour; with a tendency to become quick when saturated. It is rela-
that is, slightly or non-plastic regard- tively impervious, difficult to compact, highly susceptible to frost
less of moisture and exhibits little or heave, easily erodible and subject to piping and boiling. Bulky
no strength when air dried grains reduce compressibility ; flaky grains, i.e., mica, diatoms,
increase compressibility, produce an ‘elastic’ silt

1 Clay C Particles smaller than N o. 200 sieve The distinguishing characteristic o f clay is cohésion o r cohesive
o (0-74 mm) identified by behaviour; strength, which increases with decrease in moisture. The per­
that is, it can be made to exhibit meability of clay is very low, it is difficult to compact when wet
"S
plastic properties within a certain and impossible to drain by ordinary means, when compacted is
5 range of moisture and exhibits con­ résistant to érosion and piping, is not susceptible to frost heave,
sidérable strength when air dried is subject to expansion and shrinkage with changes in moisture.
5 The properties are influenced not only by the size and shape, fiat,
£ plate-like particles, but also by their minerai composition; i.e.,
1 the type of clay-mineral, and chemical environment or base
exchange capacity. In général, the montmorillonite clay minerai
has greatest illite and kaolinite the least adverse effect on the
properties
Organic O Organic m atter in various sizes and Organic m atter present even in moderate amounts increases the
m atter stages o f décomposition compressibility and reduces the stability of the fine-grained com­
ponents. It may decay causing voids or by chemical altération
change the properties of a soil, hence organic soils are not
desirable for engineering uses

N o te .— N am es a n d définitions o f soil com p o n en ts h ave been suggested by o th e rs (1953a). T h e n am es w ith th e exception o f clay, w hich is called clay soil, a n d the size range
given in th e ta b le a re being considered jo in tly by th e A m erican Society fo r T estin g M ate rials a n d th e A m erican Society o f C ivil H ngineers
T h e sym bols a n d fractio n s w ere developed for th e U nified C lassification System . F o r field id en tificatio n , i in . is assu red éq u iv alen t to th e N o . 4, a n d th e N o . 200 is
defined as, ‘a b o u t th e sm allest particle visible to th e u n aid ed e y e \ T h e san d fractio n s are n o t eq u a l divisions o n a logarith m ic p lo t; th e N o . 10 w asselected because
o f th e significance a ttach e d to th a t size by som e investigators. T h e N o . 40 was chosen b ecause th e 'A tte rb e rg lim its’ tests a re perfo rm ed o n th e fractio n o f soil finer than
th e N o . 40

see (‘Field Identification P rocédures’ and ‘L aboratory Classifi­
cation C riteria’) Classification Chart, Table 1. The maximum
size, am ount, distribution, and shape o f the particles in the
coarse-grained soil com ponents and the am ount o f the fine-
grained soil com ponents are estim ated by visual exam ination
or accurately determined by a gradation test (Book o f ASTM
Standards, 1955); and the type o f fine-grained com ponent is
determined by estimating the plasticity by the ‘Field Identifi­
cation Procédures for Fine-grained Soils o r F ractions’ (see
D ilatancy, D ry Strength and Toughness Tests), Table 1, or by
perform ing Soil Consistency Tests, Book o f A STM Standards,
1955.
128
Both m ethods are based on gradation and plasticity. They
vary only in degree o f accuracy. Thus, the objective o f field
classification is prim arily to assign to a soil one of the 15 soil
group names and, in addition, to distinguish th at soil from
others in the same group by descriptive words and phrases.
This is well within the accuracy o f the m ethod, and a high
degree of proficiency can be attained in placing a soil in the
p roper group and describing it by the visual and manual
m ethods. The laboratory m ethod places the soil in the proper
group and distinguishes the soil from others in the same group
by test data.
(6) The system uses nam es and symbols to distinguish
 Table 3
Description o f soils
Description des sols

Borrow Foundation
Items o f descriptive data Coarse-grained Fine-grained Coarse-grained Fine-grained
soils soils soils soils

Typical name (examples are shown in classifi­

cation (chart) XX XX XX XX
Approximate percentages of gravel and sand X X
Maximum size of particles (including cobbles
and boulders) XX X
Shape of the coarse grains—angularity X X
Surface condition o f the coarse grains—
coatings X

Hardness o f the coarse grains—possible-

breakdown into smaller sizes X X
Colour (in moist condition for fine-grained
soils) X X X X
Moisture and drainage conditions (dry, moist,
wet, saturated) XX XX XX XX

Organic content X X X X
Plasticity (of fine fraction in coarse-grained
soils; degree and character for fine-grained
soils) X XX X XX

Amount and maximum size o f coarse grains X X

Structure (stratification, etc., give dip and

strike; honey comb, flocculent, ro o t holes) XX XX

Cementation—type XX XX

Degree of compactness—loose or dense (ex-

cepting clays) XX XX

Consistency in undisturbed and remoulded

states (clays only) XX

Local or géologie name X X X X

Group symbol XX XX XX XX

between the typical and boundary soil groups. These symbols Locally coined words, geological, o r pedological terms and
are simple and derived from the ternis descriptive o f the soil phrases are often helpful in localized areas and may be given
components, gradation, and liquid limit. These are as follows : in addition to b u t n o t as a substitute for the required description.
(8) The system provides for the classification and description
Components
o f soils both for construction and for use in-place as a
Boulders—none Silt—M
Cobbles—none Clay— C foundation.
Gravel—G Organic —O (9) T he system is n o t restrictive. It is recom m ended and
Sand —S Peat—P t advisable to use ail available inform ation, géologie, pedological
o r other, to establish the aerial extent, occurrence, and in-place
Gradation Liquid limit
conditions of the différent types or strata of soil in a foundation
Well graded — W High liquid limit—H
Poorly graded—P Low liquid limit—L or proposed m aterial source. However, classification by this
system is necessary to define the potential engineering properties.
These are com bined to form the group symbols which corre­ T he addition o f detailed descriptive inform ation o r précisé test
spond to the nam es o f typical soils, Table 1. The same symbols d ata to define the properties o f a particular soil in greater détail
are used in com bination to indicate boundary soils. will n o t adversely affect the classification, b ut will add to it and
(7) A dequate description o f a soil is o f extreme im portance. m ake it more précisé.
In addition to assigning to a soil one o f the group nam es and Field classification (visual classification)—This procédure does
Symbol o f the typical soils, the soil should be distinguished from n o t require spécial equipm ent; however, a rubber syringe or
other soils in the same group by the use o f descriptive words small oil can, a supply o f clear water, a small bottle o f dilute
and phrases. This description should be accurate and précisé hydrochloric acid, a classification chart, and familiarity with
but expressed in simple engineering and technical terms. the descriptive inform ation required, Table 3, will facilitate the
129
 Table 4
D ata forms of field classification by visual and manual methods
» Tableau ou fiche de classification par méthodes visuelles et manuelles
(a) Sack samples

Gradation Description and soil classification

Identification {estimated)
1

J
y0 No. 4 to No. 200)

(% minus No. 200)

(wet state)
Field sample No.
Excavation No.
sample No.
Laboratory

size

(% plus No. 4)

Colour

Group symbol
Depth in feet

Silt and clay

J. Descriptive classification

Gravel
2. Particle size, shape and gradation (uniformly,

Sand
Maximum
well, poorly graded, etc.)
3. Consistency, elasticity, etc.
4. Reaction to shaking test, dry strength, etc.

16Y-

1 3 0-3-5 i in. 5 70 25 Brown Sand, very fine, silty; non-plastic; contains a few SM
angular gravel particles

2 3 35-6-5 50 0 40 60 Tan Clay, lean, sandy; sand particles coarse, CL

rounded ; moderately tough at plastic limit

3 5 0-6-5 l i in. 15 80 5 Tan Sand, coarse to fine, well graded, clean; sand is SfV
sub-rounded, gravel is angular

4 5 6-5-10 1 in. 10 50 40 Grey Sand, clayey; medium to fine sand; contains sc

gravel-size shale fragments; clay portion
moderately plastic

5 14 0-9-5 100 0 5 95 Tan Silt, non-plastic; contains slight am ount of very ML

fine sand
6 14 9-5-14-5 100 0 15 85 Tan Clay, lean, silty; slightly sandy; slight to CL
moderate plasticity when wet (Loess)
7 14 14-5-19-0 8 in. 30 60 10 Tan Sand, well graded; silty fines SfV
(Approximately 10 per cent oversize 3 to 8 in.
estimâtes made in field)

(b) Undisturbed 12-in. cube samples

Identification Gradation Description— undisturbed Soil classification

(iestimated) state
yQNo. 4 to No. 200)

1. Consistency— very soft, 1. Descriptive classi­

'“/ minus No. 200)

(wet state)
Field sample No.
sample No.
Laboratory

Excavation No.

soft, firm , hard, very hard, fication

size

(% plus No. 4)

Group symbol
Colour
Silt and clay
Depth in feet

sticky, brittle, friable, 2. Particle size

Gravel

spongy shape, gradation

Sand
Maximum

2. Structure — stratified, (uniformly, well,

varved, single grain, etc. poorly graded,
3. Cementation and moisture etc.)
4. General géologie descrip­ 3. Consistency, elas­
tion ticity, etc.
16Y-

8 207 1 35-7-36-7 No. 50 0 30 70 Blue and T o p ô i n . : soft very moist; Top 6 in.: sand, SP
tan bluish-grey sand with slightly clayey,
m inor fat clay stringers; fine poorly
porous structure; odorous graded
Bottom 6 in.; firm, moist; Bottom 6 in.: silt, ML
tan non-plastic
9 207 2 44-3-45-3 No. 200 0 0 100 Brown Soft, very moist, homogene- Clay, fat ; very CH
ous ; butterlike consist­ tough at plastic
ency l i mi t ; s t i c k y
when wet
,0 207 3 46-1-47-0 2 in. 30 60 10 Brown Firm, dense, fairly well Sand, fairly well sw
cemented ; appears per- graded, rounded;
vious; calcareous; (Ogal- gravelly
lalla)

130
work. D ata sheets, Table 4, are recommended for training
and may be used as a guide.
A person can be taught to classify soils by following the
simple rules and procédures w ithout a technical background of
soils. However, a knowledge of the factors and conditions
which influence soil behaviour and experience in perform ing
the consistency and gradation tests com bined with practical
training, including com parisons of visual estimâtes with
laboratory test results, are desirable pre-requisites to accurate,
adequate field classification.
A représentative disturbed or undisturbed sample (to describe
in-place conditions for foundations) is required.
The size o f the largest particle is estim ated. Then the
boulders and cobbles, particles larger than 3 in., are removed
and the am ount, percentage by weight, in the total sample is
estimated. (See Sample N o. 7, Table 4a and 5b.) The am ount
of oversized m aterial may be of im portance in the selection of
sources for em bankm ent m aterial. The occurrence and estimate
of the percentage o f boulders and cobbles in a foundation
should be noted so th at their effect on the physical properties
and possible construction problem s can be evaluated.
The rest of the procédure is, in effect, a process o f simple
élimination, beginning a t the left side of the Classification Chart,
Table 2, and working to the right until the proper group nam e is
obtained. While perform ing these steps, pertinent descriptive
inform ation should be noted. Table 3 shows items which
should always be reported (XX) and those which may be
reported depending upon use (X); see examples, Tables 1, 3, 4
and 5.
(1) Spread the sample on a fiat surface or in the palm o f the
h and to aid in observing the various com ponents. Classify
the soil as coarse-grained o r fine-grained by criteria in left-
hand colum n on chart.
(2) If fine-grained, see (6) below. If coarse-grained, classify
as gravel or sand by the criteria shown on the chart.
(3) If gravel or sand, classify as ‘clean’ or ‘with appréciable
fines’. Fines are defined as the fraction smaller th an the 200
mesh sieve size.

Table 5
Examples of field classification by visual and manual methods
Exemples de classification par méthodes visuelles et manuelles

LOG O F TEST PIT O R A U G ER HOLE

for borrow and foundation investigations

Feature: Cachuma D am Project: Cachuma Hole No.: TP-101

Area Désignation: Spillway Coordinates: N17, 210, E2, 600 Cround Elévation: 779-4 Depth To Ground
Method o f Approximate Dimensions Dates o f Water Level *: N ot reached
Excavation: Hand-dug pit o f Hole: 4 x 5 ft. Excavation: 5-2 to 6-17-49 Hole Logged by: L. E. G arst

Percentage o f cobbles and bouldersf

Size and Classification and description o f material
symbol Depth type o f (See chart—unified soil classification Volume o f Weight o f Percentage Weight o f Percentage
ft. sample give géologie and in-place description hole 3 to 5-in. by volume plus 5-in. by volume
taken for foundation investigations) sampled sampled o f 3 to sampled o f plus
Letter Graphie (eu. ft.) (lb.) 5-in.{ (lb.) 5-in.î

SM 150-lb. Silty Sand: gravelly; about 25 per cent

3~ sack gravel and cobbles to 12-in. maximum,
— 3 in. coarse grains are medium hard to
friable, rounded sandstone; about
.5 20 per cent non-plastic fines; dry;
alluvial fan material 3-1 8 1-6 73 150
1
GW-GC 300-lb. Gravel with sand-clay binders: well-grated ;
sack about 50 per cent gravel; 30-in. maxi-
.g — 3 in. mum-size boulder; sub-rounded sand­
£ stone gravel, cobbles and boulders,
Q somewhat weathered; about 10 per
c cent o f plastic fines; dry; alluvial fan
material 15-2 246 10 3 256 10-8

1
'5
o-
JU
20—
5
ï;
300-lb. Well-graded gravel: clean; about 30 per
GW sack cent sand; maximum size 30 in .; hard
— 3 in. sub-rounded gravel, cobbles and
25— boulders; dry; alluvial fan material 6-2 82 8-4 137 14-1

Reraarks :
Average specific gravity of cobbles and boulders 2-51 by displacement.
Samples obtained from sampling trench.
Notes:— R ec o rd w ate r te st a n d density lest d a ta , if applicable, u n d e r rem ark s. . ________________ (L b . o f ro ck sam pled) 100____________________
* R ecord a fte r w ate r h as reached its n a tu ra l level; give d ate o f reading ad jacen t to grap h ie sym bol o r (B u lk specific gravity o f ro ck ) 62-4 (C u b ic feet o f hole sam pled)
in rem arks.
t A pplicable only to b o rro w p its a n d to fo u n d atio n s w hich a re p o te n tia l sources o f c o n stru c tio n R ec o rd b u lk specific g ravity in rem ark s, statin g how o b ta in ed ,
m aterials. m easured o r estim ated)

(a) Log of Test pit—Materials Investigation.

131
 T a b le 5— c o n tin u e d
LOG O F TEST PIT O R A U G ER HOLE
for borrow and foundation investigations
Feature: Pumping Plant Project: Example Hole No.: TP-2
Area Désignation: P. E. 4 Coordinates: Sta. 39 + 45 Ground Elévation: 911 Depth To Ground
M ethod o f Excavation: Hand Approximate Dimensions Dates o f Water Level * : None
o f Hole: 4 x 4 ft. Excavation: 10-1 to 15-54 Hole Logged by: M. N.

i Percentage o f cobbles and bouldersf

Classification Classification and description o f material
symbol j Depth type o f (see chart—‘ unified soil classification ’ Volume o f Weight o f Percentage Weight o f Percentage
! (ft.) sample give géologie and in-place description hole 3 to 5 in. by volume plus J-in. by volume
taken for foundation investigations) sampled sampled o f 3 to sampled o f plus
Letter jGraphie (eu. ft.) (lb.) 5 -in.t (lb.) 5-in.î
Y - ✓ '-V Clay lean: D ark brown, very moist,
' ' y, greater than (PL) medium plasticity,
’/ ' ' maximum size N o. 40, 50% fines and ;
CL '
50% smaller than N o. 200
C layey G ravel: 40% gravel, s u b -ro u n d e d an d Hat
5— h a rd particles, m axim um size 6 in ., 30% sand,
4 « * 30% clayey fines, m o d e ra te p lasticity , w et, c o m ­
<a ô p ac t. P ro b a b ly flood p la in d ep o sit derived
<4 « fro m w eath erin g o f c retace o u s co n g lo m erale,
GC O in crease in m o istu re a t 10’0 ft.
0 0
« 0
^ o 10 —
'////' Clay lean: D ark reddish brown with
' / // / ' - yellow brown streaks and concrétions,
■■/ , y/ .
CL concentration o f calcite a t 13-0 ft., cal-
■ l'Und'd. cite diflused throughout soil mass
S s /s // ,5J • cube below, moist, equal to (PL), medium
'/ s " " . plasticity, 40% medium and fine sand,
// V/ ///" , 60% smaller than N o. 200, slightly
'///s* cemented, compact
'/ //'/
20 — Proposed Base o f Plant 14 ft.; El. 897±
Bottom o f Test Pit at 25 ft., El. 886
W/ / / /yï 4 in. Auger hole to 33 ft. ; El. 878. Clay
/ / / / /, lean, same as above. 1, lb. dist. sample
/ / /> / 1l'Und’d.
25 J cube from 33 ft.

See fo o ln o ie s on preuious page

Remarks:
Two undisturbed cubes and disturbed sample sent to the Denver Laboratory.
(b) Log o f Test pit—Foundation Investigation
(4) If the gravel or sand is clean, décidé if it is well graded
( W ) or poorly graded (P) and assign an appropriate group nam e
and symbol GW , GP, S fV o r SP.
(5) I f the gravel o r sand contains appréciable fines, it is
classified as GM , GC, S M o r S C depending upon the type o f
fines—silty (M ) o r clayey (C)—which are identified by the p ro ­
cédure for fine-grained soils; see (6) below.
(6) F o r fine-grained soils or the fine-grained fraction o f a
coarse-grained soil the ‘dilatancy’, ‘dry strength’, and ‘tough-
n ess’ tests are perform ed in accordance w ith the instructions
given a t the bottom o f the chart. The group nam e and
symbol are arrived a t by selection o f th a t group the character-
istics o f which m ost nearly com pare to th a t o f the sample.
D epending upon the organic content, the fine-grained soil or
the fine-grained fraction o f the coarse-grained soil is classified
as low to m edium plasticity silt (M L), clay (CL), o r organic silt
o r clay (OL); i.e. the liquid lim it is estim ated to be less than
50 per cent; o r elastic sût (M H ) plastic clay (CH ), o r organic
silt o r clay (OH ), i.e. liquid limit is estim ated to be m ore th an
50 per cent.
(7) Highly organic soils are classified as peat (Pt). These
are identified by colour, odour, spongy feel and fibrous mixture.
(8) Soils which have characteristics o f two groups, either
because o f percentage o f the coarse-grained com ponents o r
plasticity characteristics, are given boundary classification using
a nam e m ost nearly describing the soil, and the two group
symbols connected by a hyphen, such as G W -G C . Boundary
132
classifications which are com m on are: F o r the coarse-grained
gravelly soils— G W -G C, G W -G M , G W -G P, G M -G C—
similarly for sands; for fine-grained soils—M L -M H , CL-CH,
O L-O H , C L -M L , M L -O L , CL-O L, M H -C H , M H -O H and
C H -O H soils ; and for boundary classifications between coarse-
and fine-grained soils—S M -M L and S C -C L .
(9) Miscellaneous tests and criteria may be developed to
identify the occurrence o f other substances and constituents,
such as A cid test, réaction when dilute hydrochloric acid is
applied indicates presence o f calcium carbonate, an d Shine test,
shiny surface when dry o r m oist soil eut with a knife indicates
plastic clay. H eating sometimes intensifies organic odours.
Laboratory classification—T he same descriptive information
as required for field classification is also necessary. Instead of
estim ating gradation and plasticity, laboratory tests, gradation,
liquid limit and plastic lim it (1955) are perform ed. The criteria
for classifying coarse-grained soils is given in the right-hand
colum n o f the chart, ‘L aboratory Classification C riteria’. The
plasticity chart is used to classify the fine-grained soils or the
fine-grained fraction o f coarse-grained soils. Différentiation
between coarse- and fine-grained soils and between gravels and
sands is as given for the visual m ethod; i.e. the 50 per cent
criterion.
Application and use—The value o f this system lies in the basic
purpose for which it was devised, namely to classify soils
according to their potential physical o r engineering properties.
I t is n o t intended to delineate precisely a soil for a spécifié
 .5 en | ^

6\
“*<33 ?g Srg
3 t? en On «o (S Tf o vo r~- <n m 00 tj-
<5 £ .§ s
o.
*
■v* -s
«O
^ e n ^ - v n vo o o r- o as — ri
i ii§
s §,

S
<p^ ' Ç cj
C3
l Ct S > —< m tj- vo»or- oooso <N m rj-
5r
tj c *5 o;>
00 Ci,
-§
3 §p C
*s S.è?
$ 3
CO «4,

C -2 o ai •
è 'S ’S S? § « .2 S eg>s
in .2 o VO co \S en f-* co *a
Ssu
S*s OX
2 ‘S
O O <U'g°
2
So > O O

vo
cd cd
« 60 É)

îîa «d c>d
Propriétés des sols à l’usage des ingénieurs

tsi
â fc)

Ô
Engineering Use Chart

é, 3-g**
I § 1 §
>S § | 5
Table 6

i 5 i.§ ^ S *o *a 73 TJ
t . 5 88 §? Ss o o o M O XJ-= o o O
o oh o 8 O 0 (2 o o O
bo bo X
bû obÛ Cu Qi p<
« Il
D
_D S £ .o £
3 . §S
f e g j 5-a 2 ’5û ’Sb *9
’5û [3) .P
*â •a
§ '^ 2 *§ O ^ *5 ’B
&
<u ’âb
*w § > u
S- P O c
^o-e
•SU S! > « *
fc & * S “<3 P
1:1?
f) O
•O
*-*
TJ *T3 T3.S O
O
T3
O
O
o
T3 ~ l
O *o ■•
2 -o o
o
o
o
0 l | t o ' O O
bü bO Ot2 bo o OJ a a
o bo o
bQ
,« &
1 "U CO CO 1/5
P 3 P 3 P p p 3 P P P
292
'>*>*>
O O 3
O
o o 3
O
O O O O
§^ g E-. I_l t-l r, t z t P; S £ t
<U 1) 4) (U 4> t-H È u u O a>
a a a a O. Cu P h u a a a
fc-5 * •- F CU •- £ a •- F Q, o.
ûi &
a) ct §_
> u o fi* c
U O
y e -5
<L> o
b Ë
O O
d --
O o
E e
CO 4-t CO -4-> CO 4-) co ■*->

o
è l
ü
à
CO 53 SI b o I 5

•a *o
u Ë ►
> .2
c *o = c ’O-S 'c
cd cd
cd >>*w '•3 § £ cd O bO
u.
cG c/T'ô
“^ .9 o g O
G Ç 2 û,
G *G « c 2 Si
W>») o2 *o
>» Xî >.
-a« jü 2 bo
as; 5*•* *o O fl o i o 3in -g 5O »» o > •-
g a rt G O Û v
P, p cdç- T3
*2 3
.ü *o G C lï ^ ° i l ^ S Æ
*T3 u ..a ° § « *ts
O uo
Q> O û g ’O G^3 o D
-a ^
•OS
^ .ti co 3J2 cd
S w co O G
‘"'«H
- a >< c o i s y & o
.ts °&•— 3
o CO
iilll ° co
à* üo -3 »d
co 9 H ^ G w Ü'H G w .i5
o °co- sa |ed' 3, t •9
5^2 -2 a
S-a* ^*S s c >,73 cdT3 g, « f l tfl >v «d o ’c <o ^ J2
ü c ùDG m,£2 È?^2 w bû^ cd ^-»
g § *; m g>>«di O mCdrS ü ’f t o a o S7S o S S fe.cd
Ow* tfo -g g
'o
o w G A a G
PL, W U M O Ph
133
purpose. This is the function o f the soils engineer who
evaluates a particular soil for a particular purpose in term s of
its past history, the present conditions, and anticipated future
conditions imposed by the construction and opération o f an
engineering structure.
The laboratory m ethod as such is seldom if ever used to
classify soils. If subséquent laboratory testing o f a soil, which
has been previously classified by the visual and m anual method,
includes gradation and consistency tests, the classification may
be checked and adjustm ents m ade if it appears to be in error.
The laboratory m ethod is used to check and help ‘calibrate’
students while training to classify soils by the visual and m anual
method.
Table 6, called an Engineering Use C hart, shows four im­
p o rtan t properties o f the soil groups. Based on these properties
and experience, the relative desirability o f the typical soils for
use in rolled-earth dams, canal sections, foundations, and
roadw ays is also shown. The numerical ratings, N o. 1 is best,
are intended as a guide in com paring soils for various purposes.
The chart as presented serves as a guide for those who are n ot
specialists but who need to know the potential properties of
soils to form opinions during prelim inary investigations for
feasibility estimâtes, and to convey to the soils engineer pre­
lim inary soils inform ation. F o r those who are technically
qualified, the chart is quite flexible; th a t is, it can be extended
to specialized uses and can be expanded by the use of boundary
classifications.
The relative desirability o f m aterials for rolled-earth dams,
b oth the hom ogenous em bankm ent and for core, would be a
boundary soil, well-graded gravel with clay fines, G W -G C , to
incorporate the shear strength o f the gravel with sufficient clayey
fines to m ake the soil impervious. The relative desirability of
m aterials for homogenous em bankm ent construction would be
G W -G C , GC, G M -G C, GM, S W -S C , S C — etc.
F o r com pacted earth canal lining, perm eability is the first
considération, with stability and érosion résistance also im­
p o rtan t; therefore, the relative desirability o f materials would
be G W -G C , GC, S W -S C , SC , SC -C L , CL, GM . O ther less
desirable materials, such as sandy silts, S M , could be satis-
factory for lining if covered to prevent érosion. Obviously, the
requirem ent o f slope stability and w orkability applies for ail
types o f lining materials.
The relative desirability of soils for use as backfill around
structures depends upon backfill requirem ents. Résistance to
consolidation is usually the prim ary considération. F o r im­
pervious backfill, perm eability would also be considered ; thus,
in addition to the impervious gravelly soiJs, finer soils are also
satisfactory, such as S W -S C , SC , CL, SC -C L , S M -S C , S C -
M L —etc. If pîfeVious backfill is required, the materials are
lim ited to the coarser grained soils, such as GP, GW , S P and
S W soils.
W here high shear strength and résistance to consolidation are
required, pervious materials, densified by wetting and vibration,
are excellent for backfilling, particularly when in restricted or
in places otherwise difficult to com pact; for example, backfill
to form bedding and backfill for a pipe. Small percentages of
fines, particularly if the m aterial is well graded, reduces the
permeability and adversely affects densification by this method.
It is obvious th a t the coarse-grained soils G W , GP, S W and SP
(less th an 5 per cent fines, see classification chart) are suitable.
O ther soils such as borderline gravelly soils G W -G M , G W -G C,
G P -G M and G P-G C are suitable providing they contain less
134
th an 8 per cent fines. The sandy soils S M and S W - S C require
spécial considération, and their suitability depends on the
gradation of the sand and the plasticity o f the fines. Some S M
soils with fines as high as 16 per cent have been found to be
suitable. O ther sandy soils S W -S M , S P -S M and S P -S C (5
to 12 per cent fines, see classification chart) are suitable.
The adoption of this system has eliminated misunderstand-
ings between the field and office, which has resulted in savings
of tim e and costs o f design and construction. The soils in­
form ation on logs o f exploration holes in which the soils have
been properly classified are usually adequate for final designs
of m inor structures and for preliminary designs and estimâtes
o f m ajor structures. F o r m ajor structures field classification
m ust be supplemented by laboratory tests to determine the
spécifié properties of the soil under the conditions imposed by
the construction and opération of the structure.
Accurate logging and adequate soil classification reduce in­
vestigation costs. The results o f detailed laboratory tests or
field tests can be applied to the same m aterial in other parts of
a borrow or foundation area, o r testing can be limited to the
m ost critical, représentative, o r com petent soil strata as
required.
A knowledge o f the typical soils and their properties is par­
ticularly helpful during the initial or reconnaissance stage of
investigation when prospecting for earth m aterials for a par­
ticular use or selecting possible sites for structures.
Ail samples subm itted to the laboratory are classified by the
visual field m ethod before testing. This provides descriptive
inform ation n ot obtained from laboratory tests, and in those
cases when test results do n o t agree with the classification
further investigations are m ade to determ ine if the soil contains
unusual constituents, o r if the testing procédures have produced
certain irréversible effects, o r finally if the soil was incorrectly
classified. Visual classification helps to catalogue soils for
discussions with geologists an d designers when developing
detailed laboratory testing program m es. It also aids in select­
ing specimens which are m ost représentative o f the samples
subm itted for laboratory testing. Classification serves as a
guide for initial estimâtes o f quantifies o f materials to be
com bined to form a blended m aterial for a canal lining o r depth
to be excavated in a borrow area to produce a desired material.
The adoption o f this system has simplified the préparation of
spécification drawings. The simplicity o f the system and the
use o f com m on language term s to define the soil components
and the basic 15 typical soil groups m ake it easily understood
by those engaged in the design and construction o f earthworks
and foundations.
Référencés
Book of ASTM Standards, P art 3: (1955).
Grain Sized Analysis o f Soil, ASTM Désignation: D 422-54T,
pp. 1756
Liquid Lim it o f Soils, ASTM Désignation: D 423-54T, pp. 1769
Plastic Lim it and Plasticity Index o f Soils, ASTM Désignation:
D 424-54T, pp. 1774
R eport of Committee VII on Foundation and Soil Mechanics (1947).
Civil Engineering Bulletin, Vol. 12, N o. 2
Unified Soil Classification System (1953a). Technical Mémorandum
No. 3-357, Office Chief o f Engineers, Waterways Experiment
Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi, Vol 1; Appendix A, Vol. 2; and
Appendix B, Vol. 3
Unified Soil Classification System (1953b). A supplemental to the
Earth Manual, U.S. D epartm ent of the Interior, Bureau of Ré­
clamation, Denver, Colorado