1

Lab 4
Atterberg Limits
Introduction
Atterberg was a scientist who proposed his limits. In these limits of soil, he recommended Liquid
Limit and Plastic Limit. He submitted his theory by performing experiments separately.
So, here we will explain both experiments performed in the lab.
Liquid Limit Experiment
Definition
It may be described because the water content at which the soil is positioned in the brass cup,
and then it's far reduced with the usual groove, and in the end, the soil is dropped from a height
of one cm which can go through a slot closer about 13 mm while it's far dropped 25 times.
Apparatus
Apparatus used for this test is as follows
 Casagrande apparatus
 Soil sample
 Balance
 Oven
 Containers for water content
 Sieve #40
 Lid and Pan
 Spatula
 Grooving Tools
All the apparatus is shown in the figure.
 2

Procedure
 Change the stature of fall of the liquid constraint contraption it will use for a fall 1. Use 1
cm arrangement discourages for rolling out the improvement.
 Take around 250 g of air-dried soil passing #40 strainer and district it in a porcelain
mixing dish, move a little measure of water and carefully mix the earth by techniques for
the utilization of spatula to shape a uniform paste.
 Recognize a bit of the paste inside the metal cup of liquid impediment contraption and
degree it off to a most extreme power of around 1 cm, by then the outside of the dough
must be smoothed off degree and relating to the base.
 Draw the scoring instrument from again to front through the model along with the even
center point of the cup with an indirect advancement holding the contraption healthy to
the cup surface.
 Turn the wrench oversee at a pace of 2 reps, so the metal cup is lifted and dropped.
Record the amount of blows N required last the downturn along with a division of
thirteen mm.
 Clear a proportion of soil (around 10-15 g) from the bits of the model that have as of late
spilled together that is used for comprehending the water content material.
 Move the earth extraordinary inside the cup to the mixing dish, and move a little amount
of water to the porcelain dish of soil and cautiously blend the surface by technique for
using a spatula to shape a uniform tint and consistency.
 Repeat arrange three to 7 for three additional models with different water content.
 It is suggested that the water content be changed as per get two models between (15-25)
blows and others between (25-35) blows.
Observations and Calculations
M 2−M 3
Moisture iContent i(ꞷ) i(Trial i1) =
M 3 −¿ M x 100 ¿
1

83.10−78.25
= x 100 = 33.21 %
78.25−63.65
Similarly, we can Calculate by using same formula
Moisture iContent i(ꞷ) for trial 2 = 40.32 %
Moisture iContent i(ꞷ) for trial 3 = 47.42 %
From the graph we have the value of Liquid Limit = 38.98 %
Results
Item No.1 No.2 No.3
Mass of Can M 1 (g) 63.65 61.79 62.5
Mass of can + moist soil M 2 (g) 83.1 99.55 103.41
Mass of can + dry soil M 3 (g) 78.25 88.7 90.25
Moisture Content 33.21 40.32 47.42
 3

M 2−M 3
ꞷ(%) =
M 3 −¿ M x 100 ¿ 1

Number of Blows 31 23 17

Graph

Flow Curve
50
Moisture Content %

48
46 f(x) = − 1.01 x + 64.16
44
42
40
38
36
34
32
30
1 10 100

Number of Blows, N

Plastic Limit Experiment

Definition
It is the check performed along the edge of the fluid limit. It very well may be portrayed because
the water content at which the dirt beginnings off advanced to self-destruct when it tends to be
folded directly into a string of around 3 mm in breadth.
Apparatus
 Balance
 Oven
 Container for water content
 Glass having a smooth surface
 4

Procedure
 Take about 20g of plastic soil (put aside ahead of time during the training for fluid
limitation).
 The dirt is worked into a few littler examples, formed into (1-2) cm distance across the
ball. The material should be plastic enough no longer to adhere to the palms while
pressing.
 Roll the dirt between hands on a pitcher plate to frame a uniform string of 3 mm width.
 If the width of the string transforms into significantly less than three mm without splits, it
demonstrates that the water content is more noteworthy than as far as possible.
Manipulate the dirt to decrease the water content material, and move it again to a string.
 Rehash the procedure of trade rolling and plying till the string disintegrates, and the dirt
can not be folded into the series.
 Gather the segments of the disintegrated soil string in a dampness content material
compartment, and decide its water content material.
 Rehash the strategy as a base multiple times extra with clean examples of plastic soil at
whatever point.
Observations and Calculations
M 2−M 3 58.5−57.34
Plastic Limit PL Trial 1 = = x 100 = 18.38%
M 3 −¿ M x 100 ¿ 57.34−51.03
1

Similarly, we can calculate all the values for each trial

PL for Trial 2 = 17.68 %
18.38+17.68
Average value of PL = = 18.03%
2
 5

Plasticity Index (PI) = LL – PLaverage = 38.98 – 18.03 = 20.95%

Plastic Index and Liquid Index
Plastic Index (PI) = 20.95%
Liquid Index = LI=(W-PL)/(LL-PL) (W is the natural water content and W = 20)
= (20-18.03)/ (38.98-18.03) = .094%
Results
Item 1 2
Mass of Can M 1 (g) 51.03 50.91
Mass of can + moist soil M 2 (g) 58.5 59.16
Mass of can + dry soil M 3 (g) 57.34 57.92
Plastic Limit (PL) = 18.38 17.68
M 2−M 3
M 3 −¿ M x 100 ¿
1

Estimation of LL
Given equation is
N .121
LL = ꞷN (%) x ( ¿
25
Where
ꞷN = Moisture content at number of blows
N = Number of blows
Calculations of Estimated LL
N ꞷN N .121
LL = ꞷN (%) x ( ¿
25

31 33.219 34.09499
23 40.319 39.91426
17 47.42 45.25798

Comparison of Estimated LL and LL from Graph

LL from Graph = 38.9765
While the estimated liquid limit has different values at the different number of blows.
 6

Discussion
We have performed two experiments in the lab. One was the plastic limit test, and the other was
a liquid limit test, and the other was a plastic limit test. We performed in the lab and got the
values to calculate the results. After experimenting, we used the formulas and calculated the
required amount and then plotted the graph for liquid limit and reached the value of liquid limit
form that figure and then calculated the plastic limit in the same way. Then we calculated the
synthetic index and liquid index from the values and then compared the estimated values of the
liquid limit with the values from the graph.
Conclusion
From the experiment we calculated the required values for liquid limit and plastic limit test, and
the costs of liquid limit came out to be in the range. Also, the importance of plastic limit was in
the excellent range. These test strategies are utilized as a necessary piece of a few building order
frameworks to portray the fine-grained divisions of soils and to determine the fine-grained part
of development materials. As far as possible, plastic cutoff and versatility record of soils are
likewise utilized widely, either independently or together, with other soil properties to relate with
building conduct, for example, compressibility, pressure-driven conductivity (porousness),
similarity, shrivel swell, and sheer quality.

References
 https://www.astm.org/Standards/D4318
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atterberg_limits