CE 412

Geotechnical Engineering 1

Laboratory Report No. 7: Plastic and Liquid Limit of Soil

Lab Date: November 7, 2017

Report Date: November 21, 2017

T.A.: Engr. Cristina Amor M. Rosales

Lab Group: Group 5

Lab Partners: Agbing, Arielle Joyce

Barro, Nikko Adrian

Ebora, Joseph Kevin

Dimaano, John Michael

Paygane, Kimberly

Pineda, Raymond Lester

 ii

Abstract

This study investigates the liquid limit using Casagrande device, Vicat apparatus and the

Fall Cone apparatus. The plastic limit (rolling and thread method) was also tested.

To be able to determine the plasticity index of the soil sample, the group performed two

experiments, the liquid limit and the plastic limit. The values needed in computing the plasticity

index is obtained in the liquid limit and plastic limit. But in this experiment, the value of liquid

limit obtained from Casagrande device method will be used to determine the plasticity index.

The liquid limit of using Casagrande device was 37.951. The Vicat Apparatus liquid limit

test resulted to 25.00. Meanwhile, the Automated Fall Cone Apparatus has 73.33 of liquid limit.

The plastic limit was 22.764.

The plasticity index was 15.187 coming from the casagrande’s liquid limit and 22.764 of

plastic limit.
 iii

Table of Contents:

1. Abstract………………………………………………………………………………..…ii

2. Table of contents…………………………………………………………………….......iii

3. List of table(s)……………………………………………………………………….…...iv

4. List of figure(s)…………………………………………………………………….…….v

5. Objectives…………………………………………………………………………..……..1

6. Theoretical background……………………………………………………………........1

7. Materials and equipment ……………………………………………………………….3

8. Experimental Procedures…………………………………………………………....…..3

9. Analysis of data……………………………………………………………….……....…7

10. Discussion of results………………………………………………………………….....12

11. Summary.........................................................................................................................14

12. Conclusion………………………………………………………………………….…...16

13. Recommendations…………………………………………………………………..…..17

14. References………………………………………………………………………….........17

15. Appendix A……………………………………………………………………….…......18

16. Appendix B……………………………………………………………………………...24

 iv

List of table(s)

1. Table 7-1: ASTM designation D-4318…………………………………………….……1

2. Table 7-2: Approximate ranges for the liquid limit of some clay minerals……...........2

3. Table 7-3: Typical values of PI of several clay minerals……………………………......2

4. Table 7-4: Plasticity of various silt/clay soil ………………………………..…………..2

5. Table 7-5: Liquid Limit Test Result (Casagrande Device) ……………………….……7

6. Table 7-6: Liquid Limit Test Result (Vicat Apparatus) ……………….…………........8

7. Table 7-7: Liquid Limit Test Result (Fall Cone Apparatus) ………………….……….9

8. Table 7-8: Liquid Limit Test Result (Plastic Limit) ………………………….……….10

 v

List of figure(s)

1. Figure 7-1: Casagrande device ………………………………………………………. 4

2. Figure 7-2: Vicat Apparatus …………………………………………………………. 5

3. Figure 7-3: Fall Cone Apparatus ……………………………………………………. 6

4. Figure 7-4: Plastic Limit (rolling method) …………………………………………… 6

5. Figure 7-5: Plot of the Moisture Content (%) vs the Number of Blows for the Liquid

Limit Test Result………………………………………………………………………..10

6. Figure 7-6: Flow Curvefor the determination of the liquid limit (Vicat Apparatus)

…………………………..……………………………………………………………….11

7. Figure 7-7: Flow Curvefor the determination of the liquid limit (Fall Cone

Apparatus) ………..……………………………………………………………………11

8. Figure 7-8: Flow Curvefor the determination of the liquid limit (Fall Cone

Apparatus) vs (Vicat Apparatus) ………………..……………………………………12

 1

Objectives

This experiment aims to determine the plastic limit and liquid limit of soil samples for the

identification and classification of dried soil using Casagrande device, vicat and fall cone

apparatus.This activity is vital to predict the shear strength and sediment of soil.

Theoretical Background

Plasticity index is also denoted by PI. This is the range of the water content within which

soil achieves its plastic state. This is a measure of plasticity of soil of our interest.The plasticity

index is the size of the range of water contents where the soil exhibits plastic properties. The PI

is the difference between the liquid limit and the plastic limit (PI = LL-PL). Soils with a high PI

tend to be clay, those with a lower PI tend to be silt, and those with a PI of 0 (non-plastic) tend to

have little or no silt or clay.

ASTM also recommends this equation for determining the liquid limit of soils (ASTM

designation D-4318). However, the value of WN should correspond to an N value between 20 and

30. Following are the values of (N/25)0.121 for various values of N.

Table 7-1: ASTM designation D-4318

N N

20 0.973 26 1.005
21 0.979 27 1.009
22 0.985 28 1.014
23 0.990 29 1.018
24 0.995 30 1.022
25 1.000
 2

The presence of clay contributes to the plasticity of soil. The liquid limit of a soil will

change depending on the amount and type of clay minerals present in it. Following are

theapproximate ranges for the liquid limit of some clay minerals.

Table 7-2: Approximate ranges for the liquid limit of some clay minerals

Clay Mineral LL

Kaolinite 35-100

Illlite 55-100

Montmorillonite 100-800

Following are typical values of PI of several clay minerals.

Table 7-3: Typical values of PI of several clay minerals

Clay Mineral PL

Kaolinite 20-40

Illlite 35-50

Montmorillonite 50-100

Table 7-4: Plasticity of various silt/clay soils

Category Soil PI Degree of plasticity

(percentage)
I Sand or silt 0-1 Non-plastic
1-5 Slight plasticity
 traces of 5-10 Low plasticity
clay
 3

 little clay

II Clay loam 10-20 Medium plasticity

III Silty clay 20-35 High plasticity

Clay >35 Very high plasticity

Materials and Equipment

For the liquid limit test, the materials to be used are Casagrande liquid limit device, Vicat

apparatus, Fall Cone apparatus, Grooving tool, Moisture cans, Porcelain evaporating dish, Oven,

Balance, Plastic squeeze bottle, Paper towels. For the plastic limit test, Porcelain evaporating

dish, Spatula, Plastic squeeze bottle with water, Moisture can, Ground glass plate, Balance

sensitive up to 0.01 g.

Experimental Procedures

The following methods are used to determine the liquid limit of soil using different test

apparatus

A. Using Casagrande Device

In order to start determine the plasticity index, there are procedures done both for the

liquid limit and the plastic limit test. For the liquid limit test, the materials and equipment must

be prepared. First step is to shake an ample amount of soil in sieve no. 40. The soil particles that

passed will be used in performing the experiment. A few drops of water will be added to the soil

depending on how much volume is needed until it becomes clayey. Place it in the

casagrandeliquid limit device and flatten it for grooving. Using the grooving tool, divide it in the

middle and rotate its handle eventually. Be sure to count the number of blows while performing
 4

the liquid limit test. When the soils already stick together, remove the part that stick and get its

weight. Insert it into the oven and wait until its mass become constant. When it is completely

dry, record the dry weight needed for the computation.

Figure 7.1 – Casagrande Device

B. Using Vicat Apparatus

Samples of various soil types were obtained primarily from Utah Valley, with the exception

of one soil sample obtained from the Cedar City area. The samples used were selected in an

attempt to represent a variety of soil types, ranging from highly plastic organic clays to slightly

plastic silts and clayey silts. The soils were oven dried and then broken down to obtain a

sufficient amount of Sieve no. 40 material. Each sample was then tested for liquid limit generally

following ASTM procedures. Immediately following the measurement of the number of blows in

the conventional liquid limit device for each point, the sample was transferred to a small cup in

three lifts, gently tamping each lift 25 times with the blunt end of the grooving tool. The excess

sample was then trimmed off, leaving a flat surface across the top of the cup. The cup was placed

on the table of the Vicat Apparatus and the “needle” brought down until it was just in contact

with the trim surface. The movable indicator was set to 0, and then the rod was released. The rod
 5

was allowed to penetrate for a period of ten seconds. The penetration value for this period was

then recorded for each point of each specimen.

Figure 7.2 – Vicat Apparatus for Soil

C. Using Fall Cone Apparatus

About 150 gm. of air dried soil from thoroughly mixed portion of material passing 425

micron IS sieve is obtained.Distilled water is mixed to the soil thus obtained in a mixing disc to

form a uniform paste.Then the wet soil paste is transferred to the cylindrical cup of cone

penetrometer apparatus, ensuring that no air is trapped in this process.Finally the wet soil is

leveled up to the top of the cup and placed on the base of the cone penetrometer apparatus.The

penetrometer is so adjusted that the cone point just touches the surface of the soil paste in the cup

and the initial ready is to be taken.The vertical clamp is then released allowing the cone to

penetrate into soil paste under its own weight for 5 seconds. After 5 seconds the penetration of

the cone is noted to the nearest millimeter.The test is repeated at least to have four sets of values

of penetration in the range of 14 to 28 mm.The exact moisture content of each trial is

determined.
 6

Figure 7.3 – Fall Cone Apparatus

On the other hand, for the plastic limit test, put approximately 20 grams of a representative,

air-dry soil sample, passed through No. 40 sieve (5 minutes of shaking), into an evaporating dish.

Add water from the plastic squeeze bottle to the soil and mix thoroughly. Determine the mass of

moisture can in grams and record it on the data sheet. From the moist soil prepared, prepare

several ellipsoidal-shaped soil masses by squeezing the soil with your fingers.Take one of the

ellipsoidal-shaped soil massesand roll it on a ground glass. When the thread is being rolled in

reaches 3.18 mm in diameter break it up into several small pieces and squeeze it with your

fingers to form an ellipsoidal mass again.Collect the small crumbled pieces in the moisture can.

Remove the cap from the top of the can and place the can in the oven put the cover on the

can.Determine the mass of the moisture can plus the wet soil in grams. After about 2 hours,

remove the can from the oven and determine the mass of the can plus the dry soil. When all the

data needed for the plasticity index are gathered, the computations can be determined already

Figure 7.4 – Plastic Limit test by rolling method

 7

Analysis of Data

The results obtained in liquid limit and plastic limit tests are listed and tabulated below.

Table 7-5: Liquid Limit Test Result (CASAGRANDE DEVICE)

Test No.
Item
1 2 3

Can no. 1 2 3

Mass of can, W1 (g) 20.1 20.7 20.5

Mass of can + moist soil, W2 (g) 47.4 43.7 38.2

Mass of can + dry soil, W3 (g) 37.6 37.5 32.5

Moisture content,

w% = 44.57 36.90 30.83

Number of blows, N 35 27 21

Average Liquid Limit = 37.951

 8

Table 7-6: Liquid Limit Test Result (VICAT APPARATUS)

Test No.
Item
1 2 3

Can no. 1 2 3

Penetration (mm) 18 22 25

Weight of wet soil, W1 (g) 9 13.5 13.9

Weight of oven-dry soil, W2 (g) 7.2 5.9 7.1

Weight of water (W1 – W2) 1.8 7.6 6.8

Moisture content,
25.00 52.54 95.77
w% =

Average Liquid Limit = 25.00

 9

Table 7-7: Liquid Limit Test Result (FALL CONE APPARATUS)

Test No.
Item
1 2 3 4

Can no. 1 2 3 4

Penetration (mm) 15.7 16.3 17.7 20.2

Weight of wet soil, W1 (g) 2.6 4.9 2.5 5.4

Weight of oven-dry soil, W2 (g) 1.5 2.8 1.4 2.8

Weight of water (W1 – W2) 1.1 2.1 1.1 2.6

Moisture content,
73.33 75.00 78.57 92.86
w% =

Average Liquid Limit = 73.33

 10

Table 7-8: Plastic Limit Test Result

Can No. ----

Mass of can, (g) 20

Mass of can + moist of soil, ( ) (g) 35.1

Mass of can + dry soil, ( ) (g) 32.3

PL = 22.76

Plastic Limit: 22.764

Plasticity Index = Liquid Limit – Plastic Limit

Plasticity Index = 37.951 - 22.764

Plasticity Index = 15.187

Flow Curve
50
Moisture Content (%)

40

30

20
Flow Curve
10

0
0 10 20 30 40
Number of Blows (N)

Figure 7-5: Plot of the Moisture Content(%) vs the Number of Blows for the Liquid Limit

Test Result (Casagrande Device)

 11

120

Moisture Content (%)

100

80

60
Flow Curve
40
Liquid Limit
20

0
0 10 20 30
Penetration (mm)

Figure 7-6: Flow Curve for the liquid limit determination (Vicat Apparatus)

100
90
Moisture Content (%)

80
70
60
50
40 Flow Curve
30 Liquid Limit
20
10
0
0 10 20 30
Penetration (mm)

Figure 7-7: Flow Curve for the liquid limit determination (Fall Cone Apparatus)
 12

120

Moisture Content (%)

100

80

60 Flow Curve (Vicat)

40
Flow Curve (Fall
20 Cone)

0
0 10 20 30
Penetration (mm)

Figure 7-8: Flow Curve for the liquid limit determination (Fall Cone Apparatus) vs Flow

Curve for the liquid limit determination (Vicat Apparatus)

Discussion of Results

The common procedure for the liquid limit test is given in ASTM Test Designation D –

4318 which is using Casagrande device. However, two other methods of determining liquid limit

were also performed to check the validity of the test results. These are using Vicat apparatus and

Fall Cone apparatus according to BS – 1377.

The value of the liquid limit using Casagrande Device was 37.245, 46.422 and 30.187 for

Trial 1, Trial 2 and Trial 3, respectively. This was computed using the formula

using 44.57, 36.90, 30.83 of moisture for trial 1, 2 and 3, respectively and the

number of blows 35, 27 and 21.

 13

Meanwhile, the Vicat’s penetration was 18 mm, 22 mm, and 25 mm for Trial 1, 2 and 3,

respectively. The moisture content was computed and the result was 25.00 for trial 1, 52.54 for

trial 2 and 95.77 for trial 3. Based from the graph, the liquid limit was 25.00.

On the other hand, using automated fall cone apparatus, the penetration was 15.7 mm,

16.3 mm, 17.7 mm and 20.2 mm for trial 1, 2,3 and 4, respectively. The moisture content was

73.33 for trial 1, 75 for trial 2, 78.57 for trial 3 and 92.86 for trial 4. Based from the graph, the

liquid limit was 73.33.

The plastic limit is the moisture content at the point of transition from semi solid to

plastic state. It is the lower limit of the plastic stage of soil. The group conducts this experiment

to know the limit to predict the shear strength and sediment of soil. It is very important to

determine the shear strength of soil for building a foundation. The mass of can is equal to 20

grams. The mass of can and moist soil is 35.1 grams. The mass of can plus dry soil is 32.3

grams. The plastic limit is equal to 22.764.As a result, when the moisture content is high, the soil

and water may flow like a liquid and when the moisture content is low, soil changes its flexibility

and becomes brittle. In order to reach the plastic limit, they put some water to dry soil and they

check if it is like a semisolid then they add again some water until it turns to plastic state. The

soil crumbles when rolled into threads of 3.2 mm in diameter. The diameter of soil and its

moisture content has a big factor to plastic limit test.

The plasticity index was calculated by subtracting the plastic limit from liquid limit.

Using Casagrande’s liquid limit test result and the plastic limit, the plasticity index was 15. 187.
 14

Summary

The experiment of determining the plasticity index of soil is performed by the group last

November 7, 2017. In getting the plasticity index, there should be data from the liquid limit and

plastic limit so the group has to perform two experiments, the liquid limit and the plastic limit.

However, the values from the Casagrande device test method for liquid limit will only be used

for the determination of plasticity index.

To get the liquid limit, there must be prepared materials to be used in the experiment. The

soil needed should pass the no. 40 sieve size so the sieving of soil is performed in order to get the

samples needed. The soil sample obtained in the sieve is used in performing three trials. The dry

soil is mixed with water depending on how much volume is needed until it becomes clayey. The

wet soil mixture is then poured in the casagrande liquid limit device and grooved immediately.

After grooving, it is rotated depending on when the parted soil will stick together again. When it

is already stick, the number of blows is recorded and the parts that stick together is extracted and

weighed to get the mass of the wet soil sample. It is dried in the soil oven until its mass remains

constant and weighed again to get its dry weight afterwards.

Meanwhile for the Vicat Apparatus, the soil used passed sieve no. 40. The group created

soil paste by adding water to the soil in a metal can. Then, they compact the soil and placed it in

the rubber mold. After adjusting the movable rod, they released the Vicat’s needle. A member

read the penetration in the indicator. They add little amount of water to the mixture every after a

trial. Enough wet soil was dried in the oven until its mass remains constant and weighed again to

get its dry weight afterwards. Three trials were done in this experiment to arrive to better results.
 15

For the Fall Cone Apparatus, the group used the automated one. They again created soil

paste using soil which passed sieve No. 40 and distilled water. They mixed it and placed enough

amount of mixture in a metal can. To determine the penetration, they adjusted the cone until it

reached the top surface of the soil. Then, they release the cone. They add little amount of water

to the mixture every after a trial. Meanwhile to determine the moisture content, enough wet soil

was dried in the oven until its mass remains constant and weighed again to get its dry weight

afterwards. Group performed three trials to attain the validity of the results.

For the plastic limit, it is defined as the moisture content at which soil begins to behave as

a plastic material. A plastic material can be molded into a shape and the material will retain that

shape. If the moisture content is below the plastic limit, it is considered to behave as a solid, or a

non-plastic material. The assigned members for doing the plastic limit test sieved a certain

amount of disturbed soil in a No. 40 sieve, and reached approximately 20 grams of fine grained

soil, and then they add sufficient water to the soil and mix it thoroughly. After mixing the soil,

they determine the mass of moisture can by weighing it in a weighing scale. After weighing,

from the moist soil, the assigned members prepared several ellipsoidal-shaped soils by squeezing

the soil with their fingers on a ground glass. They rolled it until it reaches 3.18mm in diameter,

then they break it up into several small pieces, and again squeezed it with their fingers to form an

ellipsoidal mass again. After rolling the ellipsoidal masses, they collected the small crumbled

pieces in the moisture can and put the cover on the can. After that, they weighed the moisture can

with the wet soil and then remove the cap from the top of the can and place the can in the oven

for 2 hours. After removing the can, they determine the mass of the can plus the dry soil.

After computing for the values of both liquid and plastic limits, the plasticity index can

be calculated already since the values needed for its computation is obtained. The effect of the
 16

moisture content affects the result of the graph. The interval of number of blows is relatively

small that is also considered when plotting the graph.

Conclusion

If the soil accumulates enough water, it starts to behave similar to water. Determining the

liquid limit of the soil is important since it gives us information regarding the state of consistency

of the soil.

When the moisture content is increasing, the nature of soil behavior changed. The plastic

limit is the result of either cavitation or air entry, resulting in the water phase ceasing to act as a

continuum within the soil thread. Soil type, especially the presence of a significant silt fraction,

will determine which of these mechanisms governs. The moisture content at the point of

transition from semisolid to plastic state is the plastic limit, and from plastic to liquid state is

liquid limit.

The value of liquid limit using Casagrande device was 37.951. For the Vicat Apparatus,

the test resulted to 25.00 liquid limit. Meanwhile, using the automated fall cone apparatus the

value was 73.33. On the other hand, the plastic limit was 22.764.

The following experiments come up with high percentage of errors. This is because the

amount of water used was not observed properly. The soil paste was not able to dry immediately.

The use of apparatus was also a challenge for the group.

The plasticity index of soil depends on what will be the value of the liquid limit and

plastic limit. From the results obtained in the experiment, the soil used is claysince its plasticity
 17

index resulted to 15.187 which are in the range of 10-20. Soil’s plasticity index that is between

that ranges is said to be considered to have medium plasticity.

Recommendations

For the liquid limit, the group observed that the revolution of the Casagrande’s handle

matters so it should always be monitored. The soil should be properly grooved according to its

type. In performing the experiment using Vicat and Fall Cone Apparatus, the water that should

be applied when making the paste should not be plenty to avoid saturated soil.

On the other hand, for the plastic limit the group recommends to use a proper rolling

material instead of bare hands. In addition, it is much better to also perform Fall Cone method to

obtain plastic limit.

References:

 http://www.ijetae.com/files/Volume4Issue2/IJETAE_0214_98.pdf
 http://site.iugaza.edu.ps/dsafi/files/2015/02/Soil-Laboratory-Manual-Das.pdf
 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274763806_Relationship_between_the_atterber

g_limits_and_clay_content

 http://www-civ.eng.cam.ac.uk/geotech_new/people/bolton/mdb_pub/222.pdf

 ftp://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot-info/cst/TMS/100-E_series/pdfs/soi105.pdf

 http://cemmlab.webhost.uic.edu/Experiment%207-Atterberg%20Limits.pdf

 Soil Mechanics Laboratory Manual (6th Edition)

Author: Braja M. Das

 Fundamentals of Geotechnical Engineering, Soil Mechanics (Philippine Edition)

Author: Braja M. Das

 18

Appendix A

(Documentation using Casagrande Device)

Sieving of soil needed for the specimen

The sample was placed in the Casagrande and ready for grooving
 19

The sample were being grooved

The samples were placed in the soil oven for drying

Data that were obtained through the experiment were computed afterwards
 20

Appendix A

(Documentation using Vicat Apparatus)

The soil to be used must passed sieve No. 40

The soil must be compacted.

The movable rod must be adjusted.

 21

Release the needle of the Vicat. Read the penetration in the indicator.

Scoop an amount of wet soil and weigh it.

Place the metal can with wet soil in the oven. Wait for minutes, then weigh again the dried soil.
 22

Appendix A

(Documentation of Plastic Limit)

Prepare the soil sample which passed Sieve No. 40

Weigh the mass of the soil sample and make sure it is enough to do the plastic limit.
 23

Roll by hands the soil mass in an ellipsoidal size on a flat surface repeatedly.

The collected ellipsoidal size of soil mass was placed on a drying oven to achieve its constant

weight.

The samples were placed in the soil oven for drying

 24

Appendix B

(Computations)

 (Casagrande Device)

Liquid Limit, LL Moisture content:

Liquid Limit Formula: w% =

Where,

WN (%) = moisture content, in percent, for 92 in. (12.7 mm) groove closure in the liquid

limit device at N number of blows

Trial 1

w% = = 44.57% = 46.422

Trial 2

w% = = 36.90 % = 37.245

Trial 3

w% = = 30.83% = 30.186

Average liquid limit: 37.951

 25

Plastic Limit = 22.764

Plasticity Index = Liquid Limit – Plastic Limit

Plasticity Index = 37.951 – 22.764

Plasticity Index = 15.187

 (Vicat Apparatus)

Weight of Water = (W1 – W2)

Moisture Content = w% =

Trial 1

Weight of water = 9 – 7.2 = 1.8

Moisture Content = w% = = 25.00

Trial 2

Weight of water = 13.5 – 5.9 = 7.6

Moisture Content = w% = = 52.54

Trial 3

Weight of water = 13.9 – 7.1 = 6.8

Moisture Content = w% = = 95.77

Average Liquid Limit = 25.00

 26

 (Fall Cone Apparatus)

Weight of Water = (W1 – W2)

Moisture Content = w% =

Trial 1

Weight of water = 2.6 – 1.5 = 1.1

Moisture Content = w% = = 73.33

Trial 2

Weight of water = 4.9 – 2.8 = 2.1

Moisture Content = w% = = 75.00

Trial 3

Weight of water = 2.5 – 1.4 = 1.1

Moisture Content = w% = = 78.57

Trial 4

Weight of water = 5.4 – 2.8 = 2.6

Moisture Content = w% = = 92.86

Average Liquid Limit = 73.33

27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47