Tests for Determination of Plasticity Characteristics

Introduction:
Determination of the Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit and the Plastic Index are described here. In
recognition of their formulation by the Swedish soil scientist A. Atterberg, Liquid limit and
plastic limit (along with the Shrinkage limit) are often referred to as Atterberg Limits.
These limits are a basic measure of the nature of a fine grained soil. These limits distinguish the
boundaries of the several consistency states of a plastic soil and are performed on the soil which
passes the 0.425 mm (425 m) sieve.
Liquid limit can either be determined using a multi point test or a one point test. In here
Casagrande apparatus (multi point test) was used to determine the Liquid limit. Plasticity limit
test is performed on materials prepared for the Liquid limit test.
Plasticity characteristics are used as an integral part of several engineering classification systems
to characterize the fine grained fraction of the soil. The Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit and Plasticity
Index of soils are also used extensively, either individually or together with other soil properties
to correlate with engineering behaviors such as compressibility, permeability, compact ability,
shrink, swell and shear strength.
Objectives:

Objectives of this tests are to determine the Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit and the Plasticity
Index of soils.

Apparatus:
The following apparatus are required.
Apparatus for Liquid Limit

Figure 1 - Casagrande Liquid Limit apparatus and tools.

1. A mechanical device (the Casagrande's Apparatus) consisting of a brass cup suspended

from a carriage (Figure 1), which is designed to control its drop on to a hard rubber base.
The principle of its action is shown in Figure 2. The cup must fall freely, without too
much side-play. The height to which the cup is lifted must be exactly 10mm above the
base. This can be checked with the spacer gauge (a steel block 10 mm thick, or a block on
the handle of the grooving tool. The adjusting screw provides a simple means of
adjustment. The lock-nut must be tightened after adjustment, and the maximum height
rechecked with the gage. The hardness of the rubber base has a considerable effect on the
test results.
2. Grooving tool having dimensions as shown in Figure 3. The tool shall be made of plastic
or non corroding metal. The design of the tool may vary as long as essential dimensions
are maintained.

Figure 2 Principle of Casagrande apparatus.

Figure 3 Grooving tool

3. Small containers for moisture content determination.

4. A balance readable to at least 0.01 g.
5. A mixing bowl.
6. Spatulas A spatula having a blade about 2 cm wide by 10 cm long and another having a
blade 2.5 cm wide and 15 cm long.
7. Wash bottle containing distilled water.
8. Drying Oven A thermostatically controlled oven capable of continuously maintaining a
temperature of 105 110 C0, throughout the drying chamber.
Apparatus for Plastic Limit
1. The most important piece of apparatus for this test is the hand of the operator, which
should be clean and free from grease.
2. A ground glass plate at least 30 cm square by 1 cm thick.
3. A short length (say 100 mm) of 3 mm diameter metal rod (useful but not essential).
4. Wash bottle containing distilled water.
5. Small containers for moisture content determination.
6. A balance readable to at least 0.01 g.
7. Drying Oven A thermostatically controlled oven capable of continuously maintaining a
temperature of 105 110 C0, throughout the drying chamber.
Procedure:
Test Procedure for the Liquid Limit (Casagrande's Apparatus)
1. In order to perform the liquid limit test and the plastic limit test, about 250g of soil
portion passing No 40 sieve (425 m) was put into a mixing bowl.
2. The soil sample was thoroughly mixed with distilled water to make a readily workable
paste.
3. A portion of the prepared soil was placed in the cup of the liquid limit device and spread
in the cup to a depth of 10 mm at its deepest point, to from an approximately horizontal
surface. Care had been taken to eliminate air bubbles from the soil pat.
4. A groove was cut at the center of the soil pat by drawing the tool, beveled edge through
the soil on a line joining the highest point to the lowest point on the rim of the cup with
standard grooving tool.
5. When cutting the groove, grooving tool was held against the surface of the cup and
maintained perpendicular to the surface throughout its movement.

6. Extreme care was exercised to prevent any sliding of the soil relative to the surface of the
cup.
7. Then, the cup was lifted and dropped by turning the crank at a rate of 2 drops per second
until the two halves of the soil pat come in contact at the bottom of the groove along a
distance of 12.7mm.
8. The number of drops, N, required to closed the groove was recorded and a slice of the soil
was removed for the determination of moisture content. This sample was taken using a
spatula from edge to edge of the cup to include the portion of the groove in which the soil
flowed together.
9. The soil remaining in the cup was returned to the mixing bowl, and the cup and grooving
tool was thoroughly cleaned.
10. Cup was then reattached to the carriage in preparation for the next trial.
11. The entire soil specimen on the mixing bowl was remixed adding more water to increase
the moisture content so that the number of blows required for the closure of the groove
would be less.
12. In the trials number of blows required was between 15 and 50. Four trials were carried
out.
13. A semi logarithmic plot of number of blows (N) and moisture content was plotted as
shown in Annex 1.
14. The moisture content, in percent, required to close the groove along the bottom of the
groove after 25 blows was defined as the Liquid limit (LL).
Test Procedure for the Plastic Limit
1. About a 20 g portion of soil from the material prepared for the Liquid Limit test was
used for this test.
2. By spreading and continuously mixing on the glass plate or by rolling between the palms
of hands the water content of the soil was reduced to a consistency at which it could be
rolled without sticking.
3. From the specimen about 2 g was taken and formed it to an ellipsoidal mass.
4. This mass was rolled between the palms of hands and the ground glass plate.
5. Mass was rolled with just sufficient pressure to make it in to a thread of uniform
diameter of about 3.2 mm.
6. Any crumbling of the thread was observed.
7. This was done over and over again; thereby reducing the water content till the thread
crumbles when rolled to a diameter of 3.2 mm.
8. The portions of the crumbled thread were gathered and placed on a container to

determine the moisture content.

9. The procedure was repeated for another 2 g portion of the soil from the original
specimen. This was continued until the container had at least about 9 g of soil.
10. The process was repeated to obtain another container of at least 9 g of soil.
11. The moisture content from the two containers was computed separately to determine
the Plastic Limit of the soil.
Observation:

Observations are given in Annex 1.

Calculations and result:

Liquid Limit Test

The relationship between the water content and the number of blows were plotted in a
semi log paper (Annex 1). Number of blows were plotted on the X axis on the logarithmic
scale and water content was on the Y axis on the arithmetic scale. The water content
corresponding to 25 blows were taken as the Liquid Limit of the test.

Plastic Limit Test

The average moisture contents of the crumbled threads were reported as the Plastic Limit
of the soil.

Specimen Calculation:
Liquid Limit
Taking data from Trial number 1
Mass of moisture
Mass of dry soil
Moisture content

Taking data from Trial number 2

Mass of moisture
Mass of dry soil
Moisture content

Taking data from Trial number 3

Mass of moisture
Mass of dry soil
Moisture content

= 26.66 23.61 = 3.05 g

= 23.61 17.88 = 5.73 g
= (Mass of water/ Mass of dry soil) x 100
= (3.05 / 5.73) x 100
= 53.23 %
= 30.81 25.88 = 4.93 g
= 25.88 17.75 = 8.13 g
= (Mass of water/ Mass of dry soil) x 100
= (4.93 / 8.13) x 100
= 60.64 %
= 28.35 24.29 = 4.06 g
= 24.29 17.91 = 6.38 g
= (Mass of water/ Mass of dry soil) x 100
= (4.06 / 6.38) x 100
= 63.64 %

Taking data from Trial number 4

Mass of moisture
Mass of dry soil
Moisture content

= 26.43 23.13 = 3.30 g

= 23.13 18.07 = 5.06 g
= (Mass of water/ Mass of dry soil) x 100
= (3.30 / 5.06) x 100
= 65.22 %

The moisture content against the number of blows was plotted (Annex 1).
Liquid Limit (LL)
to 25 blows)

= 58.8% (Liquid Limit is the moisture content corresponding

Plastic Limit
Taking data from Trial number 1
Mass of moisture
Mass of dry soil
Moisture content

Taking data from Trial number 2

Mass of moisture
Mass of dry soil
Moisture content

Plastic Limit (PL)

= 30.18 27.16 = 3.02 g

= 27.16 17.85 = 9.31 g
= (Mass of water/ Mass of dry soil) x 100
= (3.02 / 9.31) x 100
= 32.44 %
= 28.01 25.49 = 2.52 g
= 25.49 18.04 = 7.45 g
= (Mass of water/ Mass of dry soil) x 100
= (2.52 / 7.45) x 100
= 33.82 %
= (32.44 + 33.82) / 2
= 33.13 %

Plastic Index
Plastic Index (PI)

= LL PL
= 58.8 33.13
= 25.67 %

Discussion:
1) What are the importances of Atterberg limits?
Atterberg limits describe the consistence of fine grained soils with varying moisture
contents. This cohesive nature is caused by the adsorbed water surrounding the clay
particles. At very low moisture content, soil behaves more like a solid. When the moisture
content is very high, the soil and water may flow like a liquid. Hence, on an arbitrary
basis, depending on the moisture content, the behavior of the soil can be divided in to four
basic states: solid, semisolid, plastic, and liquid. Similarly, the volume of the soil varies
with the increase in moisture content as shown in the following diagram.

Volume verses moisture content

Shrinkage Limit (SL) The moisture content below which no further soil volume
reduction (shrinkage) takes place.
Plastic Limit (PL) The moisture content below which the soil shows non-plastic
behavior.
Liquid Limit (LL) The moisture content below which the soil behaves as a plastic
material. At this moisture content, the soil is on the verge of becoming a viscous fluid.
Plasticity Index (PI) The Plasticity Index is simply the numerical difference between the
Liquid Limit and the Plastic Limit for a particular material and indicates the magnitude of
the range of moisture content over which the soil remains plastic. It is a measure of the
cohesive quantities of the binder resulting from the clay content. Also, it gives some
indication of the amount of swelling and shrinkage that will result in the wetting and
drying of that soil.
The objectives of the Atterberg limits test is to obtain basic index information about the
soil used to estimate strength and settlement characteristics. It is the primary form of
classification for cohesive soils. These standardized tests produce comparable numbers
used for soil identification, classification and correlations to strength.

The liquid limit, plastic limit and plasticity index of soils are also used extensively, either
individually or together, with other soil properties to correlate with engineering behavior
such as compressibility, permeability, compactibility, shrink-swell and shear strength.

2) Discuss the usage of Atterberg limit values in AASHTO soil classification system?
Engineering behavior of soil to large extent depends on the amount and type of clay minerals
present in fine grained soils. The The classification systems, which do not take into account the
soil plasticity, are not capable of predicting the engineering behavior of fine grained soils.
One of the widely used soil classification that is used for engineering purposes, is AASHTO
classification system. AASHTO classification system is preferred by highway engineers for the
use of soil in highway construction. This classification is mainly used to select material for the
highway subgrade.
In AASHTO soil classification system, Atterberg limit values such as liquid limit and plasticity
index are used to obtain the characteristics of soil needed to place it in a group. Therefore,
knowing the liquid limit and plasticity index or plastic limit of a soil, Group classification can
also be done using the AASHTO classification charts.
To evaluate the quality of the material as a highway subgrade material, a number called the group
index (GI) is also incorporated with the groups and subgroups of the soil. Liquid limit and plastic
limit are used to estimate the group index, which can be used to identify the material, to select the
material and accordingly to plan the construction methodology, as well as identify the difficulties
may come across at the highway subgrade construction.