EN ISO 14688-1 against USCS: two different size ladders
Updated: September 30, 2026 · ISKRIT
The same sieve data, run through EN ISO 14688-1 and through ASTM D2487, produces different fraction percentages and can produce a different soil name. The reason is not interpretation, it is that the two systems cut the size axis in different places.
Where the cuts fall
| Boundary | EN ISO 14688-1 | USCS, ASTM D2487 |
|---|---|---|
| fines / sand | 0.063 mm | 0.075 mm |
| sand / gravel | 2 mm | 4.75 mm |
| gravel / cobbles | 63 mm | 75 mm |
| silt / clay | 0.002 mm, by size | by plasticity, no size boundary |
The consequence for a real sample
The 2 mm against 4.75 mm cut is the one that moves numbers. Material between those sizes is coarse sand to a European report and gravel to an American one. In a fluvial deposit that band can hold 10 to 20 % of the mass, which is enough to swing the gravel-versus-sand comparison and change the USCS prefix from S to G while the EN description stays “sand”.
The 0.063 against 0.075 cut moves less mass but matters more at the thresholds: a soil at 11.5 % passing 0.075 mm may read 12.4 % passing 0.063 mm, crossing the 12 % line that separates a dual symbol from a single one.
Silt and clay are not the same concept
This is the deeper difference. EN ISO 14688-1 separates silt from clay at 0.002 mm, a particle size. USCS separates them on the plasticity chart, a behaviour. A rock flour with 40 % of its mass finer than 0.002 mm but no plasticity is clay by the European size definition and silt, ML, by USCS. Both answers are correct within their own system, and quoting one soil name in a report written to the other standard is a genuine error, not a translation choice.
Practical handling
Run the sieve set the target standard expects rather than converting afterwards. EN ISO 14688 work uses the 63, 20, 6.3, 2, 0.63, 0.2, 0.063 mm progression; USCS work uses 75, 37.5, 19, 9.5, 4.75, 2, 0.425, 0.075 mm. Both sets are preloaded in the calculator, so a sample entered once can be described under either system and the two descriptions compared directly.
Questions
Why do EN ISO 14688-1 and USCS give different fractions for the same sieve data? They cut the size axis in different places: sand and gravel at 2 mm against 4.75 mm, and fines at 0.063 mm against 0.075 mm.
Are silt and clay separated the same way in both systems? No. EN ISO 14688-1 separates them by particle size at 0.002 mm, USCS by plasticity on the plasticity chart. A non-plastic rock flour can be clay by the European definition and silt, ML, by USCS.
Which sieve set should be run? The one the target standard expects, rather than converting afterwards: 63, 20, 6.3, 2, 0.63, 0.2 and 0.063 mm for EN ISO 14688, and 75, 37.5, 19, 9.5, 4.75, 2, 0.425 and 0.075 mm for USCS.
Switch the standard selector on the grain size tool to see both descriptions of the same curve.
Measurement uncertainty calculator: GUM budget with Type A, Type B and expanded U
Area from coordinates calculator: shoelace formula for survey plots
Bearing and distance from coordinates: survey inverse calculator
Rotating shift patterns: covering the posts and balancing the hours
Calibration intervals: setting them, shortening them, defending them
Turning an estimate into a bill of quantities that foots
Progress billing: percent complete, carry-forward and retention
Checking claimed quantities: the design schedule and the survey
Pile capacity from CPT: how the LCPC method reads a cone trace
Driven and bored piles: why the same soil gives different capacity
What belongs on a borehole log, and what quietly gets left off
Drawing a cross section: correlating layers between boreholes
From an AGS4 file to a laboratory summary: what the groups carry
Characteristic values: turning a set of test results into one number
Void ratio, porosity and saturation from one density test
When one soil layer is really two: splitting geotechnical units
ASTM D4254 minimum index density: procedure and Dr calculator
Relative density Dr and density index Id are not the same number
USCS classification step by step: ASTM D2487
Cu and Cc: what the two gradation coefficients actually tell you
Dual symbols in USCS: the 5 to 12 percent fines band
AGS4 file validation: what the rules actually check
AGS4 syntax: the five rules that break a delivery
ASTM D2435 oedometer test: from the curve to Cc, mv and Eoed
Converting oedometer modulus to Young’s modulus
EN ISO 17892-5 and ASTM D2435: where the two diverge
ASTM D1196 plate load test: modulus and subgrade reaction
DIN 18134: Ev1, Ev2 and the compaction ratio
Ménard pressuremeter modulus: ASTM D4719 and EN ISO 22476-4
Hydraulic conductivity from a pumping test: Dupuit calculator and formulas
Shewhart control chart constants: A2, A3, B3, B4, D3, D4, d2, c4
The eight out of control tests on a Shewhart chart
Repeatability and reproducibility limits: where 2.77 comes from
How rebar cutting plans are optimised: the cutting stock problem
Cutting waste in rebar fabrication: what percentage is normal
Rebound hammer calibration: why the factory curve is not enough
Kerf and offcut: what a linear cutting plan has to account for
Earthwork volume from survey points: grid, TIN and cross sections
Fire load density: the formula, the calorific values and the traps
Explosive atmosphere zones 0, 1, 2 and 20, 21, 22 explained
Pollution charges per tonne: how the over-limit multiplier works
The Russian environmental fee: who pays, when, and how the advances work