Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 7

Feng, T. W. (2000). Geotechnique 50, No.

2, 181187

Fall-cone penetration and water content relationship of clays


TAO - W E I F E N G 
Les resultats des etudes precedentes sur l'utilisation du test
du cote de chute pour determiner la limite plastique des sols
indiquent de des travaux de recherche additionnels sont
necessaires. Les recherches actuelles sont consacrees a la
modication de la technique de preparation des specimens, a
l'examen des rapports entre profondeur de penetration du
cone et teneur en eau, et l'estimation de la limite plastique
en utilisant le rapport profondeur de penetration du cone/
teneur en eau. On a produit des bagues specimen que l'on a
utilisees pour remplacer le gobelet specimen, an de faciliter
la preparation des specimens. Des donnees sur vingt-six sols,
portant sur une large plage de limites liquides de 30% a
526%, indiquent que le rapport entre l'algorithme de la
profondeur de penetration du cone et celui de la teneur en
eau est lineaire. En consequence, on produit une equation
lineaire avex deux parametres fonction du sol pour l'estimation de la limite plastique. Pour un certain sol, on est en
mesure de determiner la valeur de parametres tributaires du
sol avec un nombre d'essais au cone pouvant etre inferieur a
quatre, que l'on peut substituer ensuite dans l'equation pour
evaluer la limite plastique. Les limites plastiques calculees
pour les sols analyses sont comprises entre 08 at 12, avec
une valeur moyenne de 1, multipliees par les limites plastiques mesurees. On a evalue les effets de la vitesse de
deformation et du rapport de resistance non draine sur
l'evaluation de la limite plastique et ils se sont averes
limites.

Results of previous studies on using the fall-cone test to


determine the plastic limit of soils show that further research is warranted. The present investigation devotes itself
to modication of the specimen preparation technique, examination of the relationship between depth of cone penetration and water content, and estimation of the plastic limit
using the penetration depth against water content relationship. Specimen rings are made and used to replace the
specimen cup so as to facilitate the preparation of specimens. Data of 26 soils, covering a wide range of liquid limits
from 30% to 526%, show that the logarithm of depth of
cone penetration against logarithm of water content relationship is linear. Therefore, a linear equation with two soildependent parameters is developed for estimation of the
plastic limit. For a soil, the value of the soil-dependent
parameters can be determined from as little as four fallcone tests and substituted into the equation to estimate the
plastic limit. The computed plastic limits of the soils analysed are within 0812, with an average value of 1, times
the measured plastic limits. The effects of strain rate and
undrained strength ratio on the estimation of the plastic
limit are evaluated and found to be limited.

KEYWORDS: clays; laboratory tests; plasticity; shear strength.

contents near the plastic limit, the relationship between logarithmic depth of fall-cone penetration and water content has been
used to estimate the value of the plastic limit. Based on the
critical state theory, Wood & Wroth (1978) and Belviso et al.
(1985) suggest that the logarithmic depth of penetration against
water content relationship is linear between the liquid limit and
the plastic limit, and the slope of this relationship is equal to
one half of the plasticity index. Then, the plastic limit can be
computed by subtracting the plasticity index from the liquid
limit. However, the relationship has been found to be highly
non-linear for a number of soils (e.g. Karlsson, 1961; Wood,
1985; Wasti & Bezirci, 1986; Harison, 1988).
The penetration depth corresponding to the liquid limit is
20 mm for the 308 British cone. Hansbo (1957) proposes the
following equation:

INTRODUCTION

The use of laboratory cone penetrometers to determine the


liquid limit of soils has been studied in detail (e.g. Terzaghi,
1927; Sowers et al., 1959; Karlsson, 1961; Sherwood & Riley,
1970; Littleton & Farmilo, 1977; Garneau & Le Bihan, 1977;
Wroth & Wood, 1978; Houlsby, 1982; Wood, 1982; Whyte,
1983; Wood, 1985; Wasti & Bezirci, 1986; Leroueil & Le
Bihan, 1996; Farrell et al., 1997). The British Standard (BS
1377:pt2: 1990), the Swedish Standard (SS 027120:1990) and
the Canadian Standard (CAN/BNQ 2501-092-M-86) have included the determination of the liquid limit by using fall-cones.
On the other hand, only a few studies (e.g. Wood & Wroth,
1978; Belviso et al., 1985; Harison, 1988) have focused on the
determination of the plastic limit by the fall-cone test.
It was generally recognized that fall-cone tests were difcult
to perform at water contents near the plastic limit, since soil
samples were stiff and difcult to mix (Wood & Wroth, 1978;
Whyte, 1983; Wasti & Bezirci, 1986; Harison, 1988; Stone &
Phan, 1996). Furthermore, in BS 1377 (1990), Test 2(A)
(British Standards Institution, 1990), the test procedure for
determination of liquid limit includes the following: `The remixed soil shall be pushed into the cup with a palette knife,
taking care not to trap air.' The process of placing the soil into
the specimen cup is inuenced by individual judgement and is
probably the most difcult step in the fall-cone test. In fact,
pushing soil into the cup may not be good practice, since the
soil is repeatedly loaded, although this effect is difcult to
evaluate. This problem becomes more serious as the water
content of the soil sample decreases.
Since it is difcult to carry out the fall-cone test at water

su k

W
d2

(1)

where su is undrained shear strength, k is a constant, W is the


weight of cone, and d is depth of penetration. It can be seen
from equation (1) that undrained shear strength is inversely
proportional to the square of the depth of penetration. The data
of Skempton & Northey (1953) show that the undrained shear
strength at the plastic limit is about 100 times the undrained
shear strength at the liquid limit. Thus, it can be computed from
equation (1) that the depth of cone penetration at the plastic
limit is about 2 mm for the 308 cone. Harison (1988) suggests a
bilinear model indicating that the relationship is linear for
depths of penetration either greater or smaller than 14 mm.
Therefore, the plastic limit can be estimated by extrapolating a
linear relationship obtained from two to three fall-cone tests
with depth of penetration smaller than 14 mm. However, with
the general lack of sufcient published information on the
logarithmic depth of cone penetration against water content
relationship in between depths of penetration of 14 cm and

Manuscript received 7 July 1999; revised manuscript accepted 4


October 1999.
Discussion on this paper closes 4 August 2000; for further details see p. ii.
 Chung Yuan Christian University.

181

182

FENG

2 mm, a question as to whether the bilinear model is appropriate still remains.


In summary, it appears that further studies are warranted in
the following areas:
(a) modication on the specimen preparation technique
(b) examination of the shape of the relationship between
logarithm depth of cone penetration and water content,
especially for depths of penetration less than 14 mm
(c) estimation of the plastic limit by using the depth of
penetration and water content relationship.
This paper presents the results of a study focused on the abovementioned areas.
TEST PROGRAMME

A set of fall-cone apparatus (made by Wykeham Farrance,


Inc.), with a 308 cone (weight 80 g) was used during this
investigation. As difculties in specimen preparation are primarily associated with placing soil samples into the specimen cup,
the cup was modied during this investigation by removing the
bottom of the cup, keeping the diameter and the height of the
cup unchanged. As a result, the specimen cup became a specimen ring. Furthermore, one end of the ring was sharpened, as
shown in Fig. 1(a), to facilitate penetration into soil samples. In
fact, a stainless steel ring 55 mm in diameter, 40 mm in height
and 2 mm in thickness was used for depths of cone penetration
in between 25 mm and 10 mm. For depths of cone penetration
less than 10 mm, a shallower stainless steel ring (20 mm in
height) was used so that smaller amounts of soil were needed
for the tests.
The specimen preparation procedure started with mixing the
soil sample thoroughly on a large square glass plate (30 3
30 cm) at water contents slightly higher than the liquid limit. A
single batch of the mixed soil sample was then transferred to a
small square glass plate (10 3 10 cm) to make a soil mound, as
shown in Fig. 1(b), with lateral and vertical dimensions greater
than the dimensions of the specimen ring used. Two spatulas
were used to mix the soil samples and to make the soil mound,
to reduce the possibility of trapping air within the specimen.
Furthermore, only small pressures are exerted on the soil, so
that their effect on the test result may be ignored. The specimen
ring was then placed on top of the soil mound with the

sharpened end facing downwards, as shown in Fig. 1(c). Initial


levelling of the ring can be done with a hand level and a small
glass plate placed at the top of the ring. After the initial
levelling, the ring was pushed downwards by hand until it
reached the glass plate, as shown in Fig. 1(d). A wire-saw and a
straight edge were then used to remove excess soil from the top
of the ring, so as to obtain a at surface, as shown in Fig. 1(e).
Lastly, the soil specimen together with the small glass plate was
transferred to the base stand below the fall-cone for the penetration test.
Samples of kaolin, bentonite and three natural soils were
prepared at water contents slightly higher than the liquid limits
and then stored overnight before testing. For each soil, the fallcone tests were carried out starting from water contents slightly
higher than the liquid limit to water contents as near the plastic
limit as possible. After each fall-cone test, the water content of
the soil specimen was measured. The remaining soil sample
was spread over the large glass plate for air-drying for the next
fall-cone test. The time required for proper air-drying of the
soil sample depends on a number of factors, such as the contact
areas between the soil and the air, the plasticity of the soil, etc.
In order to dene better the penetration depth against water
content relationship, the fall-cone tests were carried out at as
many water contents as possible.
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DEPTH OF CONE PENETRATION AND
WATER CONTENT

Relationships between logarithmic depth of cone penetration


and water content for the soils tested during the present investigation are shown in Figs 26. It can be seen from these
gures that these relationships are all non-linear in nature and
the minimum depths of penetration are as low as 31 mm.
Incidentially, these data can be used to check Harison's (1988)
bilinear model. In order to quantify the non-linearity of the
curves, secant slopes of the curves between 14 mm penetration
and 5 mm penetration for Sinjun clay, Taipei clay, Panama clay,
kaolin and bentonite are rst determined as 19%, 22%, 73%,
23% and 360%, respectively. In contrast, the tangent slopes of
the curves at 5 mm penetration for Sinjun clay, Taipei clay,
Panama clay, kaolin and bentonite are 12%, 9%, 55%, 13% and
225%, respectively. It is thus apparent from these data that the
use of the bilinear model to estimate the value of the plastic
limit will result in an underestimation.

Specimen ring

ESTIMATION OF THE PLASTIC LIMIT


H

In order to estimate the plastic limits, the non-linear regression curves shown in Figs 26 may be manually extended with

(a)

60

Sinjun clay
PL(conventional) = 19%

Soil

10 cm

Soil

Glass plate

(b)

(c)

Soil

Soil

(d)

(e)

Water content: %

50

40

30

20

Fig. 1. Side views of (a) the specimen ring, (b) the soil mound and
the glass plate, (c) the specimen ring placed on top of the soil
mound, (d) the specimen ring fully penetrating the soil mound, and
(e) excess soil removed from the top of the specimen ring

10
30

20

10
7
5
3
Penetration depth: mm

Fig. 2. Logarithm of penetration depth against water content relationship for Sinjun clay

FALL-CONE PENETRATION AND WATER CONTENT RELATIONSHIP OF CLAYS


500

60

Taipei clay
PL(conventional) = 24%

40

30

300

200

100

20

10
30

20

10
7
5
3
Penetration depth: mm

Panama clay
PL(conventional) = 59%

90

60

30
30

20

10
7
5
3
Penetration depth: mm

20

10
7
5
3
Penetration depth: mm

Fig. 6. Logarithm of penetration depth plotted against water content


rela-tionship for bentonite

the help of a French curve to the depth of cone penetration of


2 mm. Results of the estimations show that the plastic limits of
Sinjun clay, Taipei clay, Panama clay, kaolin and bentonite are
20%, 25%, 61%, 26% and 38%, respectively, which agree well
with the plastic limit values obtained from conventional tests,
given in Figs 26. It may be noted from Figs 26 that 814
data points are shown for each soil. The large number of data
points ensures that the curves are well dened. It is impractical
in engineering practice to carry out such a large amount of tests
for estimation of the plastic limit.
On the other hand, the data shown in Figs 26 can be replotted on loglog scales, as shown in Fig. 7. Similar plots can
be made using the data of Skempton & Northey (1953),
Karlsson (1961), Wood, (1985), Wasti & Bezirci (1986) and
Harison (1988), as shown in Figs 812, respectively. Based on
the data shown in Figs 712, a linear model is proposed for the
loglog relationship and is expressed by the following equation:

150

120

30

Fig. 3. Logarithm of penetration depth plotted against water content


rela-tionship for Taipei clay

Water content: %

Bentonite
PL(conventional) = 37%

400

Water content: %

Water content: %

50

Fig. 4. Logarithm of penetration depth plotted against water content


rela-tionship for Panama clay

log w log c m log d

(2)

where w is water content, c is water content at d 1 mm, m is


the slope of the linear relationship, and d is the depth of cone
penetration. Values of c and m obtained from linear regression
analyses of the data presented in Figs 712 are listed in Table 1.
1000

60

Kaolin
PL(conventional) = 25%

Bentonite
Water content: %

50

Water content: %

183

40

30

100
Panama clay
Kaolin

20

Sinjun clay

10

Taipei clay

10
30

20

10
7
5
3
Penetration depth: mm

Fig. 5. Logarithm of penetration depth plotted against water content


rela-tionship for kaolin

30

20

10
7
5
3
Penetration depth: mm

Fig. 7. Loglog plot of penetration depth plotted against water


content rela-tionships for the ve soils tested

184

FENG
It may be noted from Table 1 that the bentonite samples have
liquid limits of about 423% and 526%, the kaolin samples have
liquid limits of 50% and 59%, and the other 22 natural soils
show a wide range of liquid limits ranging from 30% to 125%.
Both of the bentonite specimens gave the same m value of 1,
which is much larger than the m values from 0216 to 0569 for
the natural soils. A large value of m indicates a higher rate of
decrease in water content with decreasing depth of penetration.
A large value of c implies a large value of the plastic limit. The
Panama clay specimen tested has an organic content of 12%,
which is probably responsible for its large c value of 47%. The c
values of the Bandung clays are rather high, that is 3039%;
probably these soils are organic to some degree, but information
on the composition of these soils is absent.
The existence of the linear relationship as expressed by
equation (2) is useful for estimation of the plastic limit. For a
soil, c and m can be determined from results of as few as four
fall-cone tests with depths of penetration evenly distributed
between 25 mm and 3 mm. Equation (3) can then be used to
compute the plastic limit:

Fig. 8. Loglog plot of penetration depth plotted against water


content rela-tionships according to the data of Skempton & Northey
(1953)

Fig. 9. Loglog plot of penetration depth plotted against water


content rela-tionships according to the data of Karlsson (1961)

Fig. 10. Loglog plot of penetration depth plotted against water


content relationships according to the data of Wood (1985)

PL c(2) m

(3)

For example, the c and m values as listed in Table 1 and


equation (3) are used to compute the plastic limit values of the
26 soils. The computed plastic limits are compared with the
plastic limits determined by the conventional method, as shown
in Fig. 13. The dashed lines in Fig. 13 show that the computed
plastic limits are within 0812 times the measured plastic
limits, with an average value of 10. The discrepancies between
the measured and the computed plastic limits may result from
several reasons, such as the undrained strength ratio of 100
adopted and problems associated with the conventional plastic
limit test.
The empirical ratio of undrained strength at the plastic limit
to undrained strength at the liquid limit is estimated from the
data of Skempton & Northey (1953) as 100. However, Whyte
(1982, 1983) suggests that the strength ratio derived from the
data of Skempton & Northey (1953) should be about 70.
Furthermore, the data of Karlsson (1961) indicate a range of the
strength ratio from 50 to 100 for some Swedish clay and a
strength ratio of about 200 for both a quick clay and a varved
clay. Now as equation (2) is developed, it is possible to examine
the effect of the strength ratio on the estimated plastic limit.
According to equation (1), strength ratios of 50, 100 and 200
correspond to depths of penetration of 28, 2 and 14 mm,
respectively. For the soils listed in Table 1, the corresponding
water contents are computed using both equation (2) and values
of c and m, and the results are also shown in Table 1. It may
be concluded from Table 1 that, except for the bentonite, the
estimated plastic limits are affected by the strength ratio
assumption around 1020%, which is consistent with the data
shown in Fig. 13. The bentonite probably has a strength ratio
slightly lower than 100, as the computed water content of 34%,
corresponding to depth of penetration of 2 mm, is slightly
smaller than the measured plastic limit of 37%.
The measured plastic limits shown in Fig. 13 were determined by the conventional plastic limit test, in which a soil
thread was rolled to 3 mm diameter before it crumbled on
rolling. The water content of the crumbled soil thread has been
dened as the plastic limit. However, the stress system applied
to the soil thread during rolling is highly complicated and is not
controlled. Whyte (1982) reported that the plastic limit of a clay
determined in different laboratories ranged from 19% to 39%,
with an average plastic limit of 23%. He further concluded that
the rolling thread test does not provide reliable and consistent
results for the plastic limit. Since the data shown in Fig. 13
come from at least four different groups of people and four
different laboratories, it is expected that some uncontrolled
factors during the conventional plastic limit test have played a
role in the discrepancies between the measured and the computed plastic limits.
The fall-cone test is much more reliable than the conventional plastic limit test. As can be seen in both Fig. 14 and

FALL-CONE PENETRATION AND WATER CONTENT RELATIONSHIP OF CLAYS

Fig. 11. Loglog plot of penetration depth plotted against water


content relationships according to the data of Wasti & Bezirci
(1986)

185

Fig. 12. Loglog plot of penetration depth plotted against water


content relationships according to the data of Harison (1988)

Table 1. Values of c and m parameters of clays and water contents computed from strength ratios of 50, 100 and 200
Soil

LLCasagrande : %

c: %

w1:4 : %

w2 : %

w2:8 : %

w1:4 =w2 :

w2:8 =w2

36
43
125
50
423
97
73
30
80
83
70
63
54
35
59
65
526
110
52
100
86
78
72
65
63
59

14
17
47
20
17
26
21
13
28
26
25
22
21
12
21
23
16
20
21
39
31
30
30
32
30
31

0322
0322
0321
0301
1
0436
0410
0266
0352
0425
0360
0360
0308
0350
0343
0345
1
0569
0335
0312
0341
0318
0292
0237
0239
0216

16
19
52
22
24
30
24
14
32
30
28
25
23
14
24
26
22
24
24
43
35
33
33
35
33
33

18
21
59
25
34
35
28
16
36
35
32
28
26
15
27
29
32
30
26
48
39
37
37
38
35
36

20
24
66
27
48
41
32
17
40
40
36
32
29
17
30
33
45
36
30
54
44
42
41
41
38
39

089
090
088
088
071
086
086
088
089
086
088
089
088
093
089
090
069
080
092
090
090
089
089
092
094
092

111
114
112
108
141
117
114
106
111
114
113
114
112
113
111
114
141
120
115
113
113
114
111
108
109
108

Sinjun clay
Taipei clay
Panama clay
Kaolin
Bentonite
Shellhaven clay
London clay
Horten clay
Gosport clay
Swedish clay
Swedish clay
Swedish clay
Swedish clay
Drammen clay
Kaolin
Gault clay
Bentonite
Turkey soil
Turkey soil
Bandung clay
Bandung clay
Bandung clay
Bandung clay
Bandung clay
Bandung clay
Bandung clay

Table 2, both the logarithm of penetration depth against logarithm of water content relationships and the (c, m) data of
kaolin obtained by ve persons demonstrate excellent repeatability of the fall-cone test. It is worthy of note that four of the
ve persons had no previous experience with the fall-cone test
and were taught only once how to run the test. It is clear from
the present investigation that mixing the soil specimen thoroughly during preparation is one of the most important steps in
the fall-cone test.
STRAIN RATE EFFECT

It is generally known that the undrained shear strength of


saturated clays is a function of strain rate. Since the fall-cone
test is in fact a strength test, the effect of strain rate, if any, on
the test results must be evaluated.
In the absence of data on the time rate of cone penetration,
an average strain rate for 20 mm and 4 mm of penetration may

Reference
Present investigation
Present investigation
Present investigation
Present investigation
Present investigation
Skempton & Northey (1953)
Skempton & Northey (1953)
Skempton & Northey (1953)
Skempton & Northey (1953)
Karlsson (1961)
Karlsson (1961)
Karlsson (1961)
Karlsson (1961)
Wood (1985)
Wood (1985)
Wood (1985)
Wasti & Bezirci (1986)
Wasti & Bezirci (1986)
Wasti & Bezirci (1986)
Harison (1988)
Harison (1988)
Harison (1988)
Harison (1988)
Harison (1988)
Harison (1988)
Harison (1988)

be evaluated as follows. The volume of the portion of the 308


cone penetrating into the specimen can be computed using
equation (4):
V 0:075h3

(4)

where h is depth of penetration. A zone of inuence of the


cone penetration must be dened so that induced volumetric
strain can be determined. The inuence zone may be assumed
to have a conical shape having a height equal to the depth of
penetration and a diameter of three times the cone diameter
(Houlsby, 1982). Then the volumetric strain induced by cone
penetration is 11% and is independent of the depth of penetration. On the other hand, experience obtained during the present
investigation showed that a penetration of 20 mm takes about
ve times as long as a penetration of 4 mm. Therefore, a ratio
of average strain rates between 20 mm and 4 mm of penetrations can be computed using equation (5):

186

FENG
on undrained shear strength is computed using equation (6) to
be 7% between 20 mm and 4 mm penetrations.

CONCLUSIONS

The following conclusions are based on data and analyses


presented in the previous paragraphs:

Fig. 13. Computed plastic limits plotted against measured plastic


limits
100

Water content: %

Kaolin

10
30

20

10
7
5
3
Penetration depth: mm

Fig. 14. Loglog plot of penetration depth versus water content


relationships determined by ve persons for the repeatability study.
One person determines one relationship as represented by a
regression line passing through points of the same symbol.
Table 2. Values of c and m for kaolin determined for the
repeatability study
Test
no.

PL (measured):
%

c: %

PL (computed): %

1
2
3
4
5

25
25
25
25
25

20
19
19
20
21

0301
0295
0316
0281
0281

25
23
24
24
26

t20
_ 4

5
_ 20
t4

(5)

The effect of strain rate on undrained shear strength can then


be computed by using equation (6):
su(4) su(20)

su(20)

_ 4
_ 20

 C =Cc

(6)

where su is undrained shear strength, _ is strain rate, c is the


secondary compression index, and cc is the compression index
(Terzaghi et al., 1996). For example, the value of C =Cc can be
taken as 004 for inorganic clays, and the effect of strain rate

(a) The specimen preparation technique has been improved by


using specimen rings to hold the specimens. The process of
specimen preparation with the specimen ring is faster and
easier than that with a specimen cup, and it reduces the
chances of trapping air in the specimen. Furthermore, the
specimen ring is pushed into the soil, instead of pushing
soil into the specimen cup. For liquid limit determinations,
the specimen ring retained the dimensions of the specimen
cup. For depths of penetration less than 10 mm, a specimen
ring of 20 mm in height can be used so that less soil is
needed for the fall-cone test.
(b) The relationship between logarithmic depth of penetration
and water content in the range from the liquid limit to the
plastic limit is generally non-linear. The minimum depth of
penetration attainable with the specimen ring is about
3 mm. For the ve soils tested during the present investigation, an attempt to extend the non-linear regression
curves from around 3 mm to 2 mm penetration gives a close
estimate of the plastic limits, though these non-linear curves
are dened by 814 data points. On the other hand, the
relationship between logarithmic depth of penetration and
logarithmic water content is linear. This relationship can be
dened by as few as four data points with depths of
penetration evenly distributed between 25 mm and 3 mm.
This makes the fall-cone test easier to perform to determine
the plastic limit.
(c) Based on the linear model of the relationship between
logarithmic depth of penetration and logarithmic water
content and an undrained strength ratio of 100, an equation
is derived for estimation of the plastic limit. This equation
includes two soil-dependent parameters which can be
determined from at least four fall-cone tests and substituted
into the equation to estimate the plastic limit. For the 26
soils analysed, the computed plastic limits are within 08
12, with an average value of 10, times the measured plastic
limits. Factors such as the assumption of strength ratio of
100 and problems associated with the conventional plastic
limit test could have contributed to the discrepancies
between the computed and the measured plastic limits.
The plastic limits computed using the undrained strength
ratios of 50 and 200 are affected by 1020% of the plastic
limits estimated using the undrained strength ratio of 100
for most of the soils analysed. The strain rate effect in the
fall-cone test is small. For a variation in depth of
penetration from 20 mm to 4 mm, the strain rate effect on
undrained strength is estimated as 7% for inorganic clays.

REFERENCES
Belviso, R., Ciampoli, S., Cotecchia, V. & Federico, A. (1985). Use of
the cone penetrometer to determine consistency limits. Ground
Engng 18, No. 5, 2122.
British Standards Institution (1990). Methods of test for soils for civil
engineering purposes. British Standards Institution BS 1377. London.
Canadian Standards Association and Bureau de normalisation du Quebec
(1986). Soils-Determination of liquid limit by the Swedish fall cone
penetrometer method and determination of plastic limit. CAN=BNQ
2501-092-M-86.
Farrell, E., Schuppener, B. & Wassing, B. (1997). ETC 5 fall-cone
study. Ground Engng 30, No. 1, 3336.
Garneau, R. & Le Bihan, J. P. (1977). Estimation of some properties of
Champlain clays with the Swedish fall-cone. Can. Geotech. J. 14,
No. 3, 571581.
Hansbo, S. (1957). A new approach to the determination of the shear
strength of clay by the fall-cone test. R. Swedish Geotech. Inst.
Proc. No. 14, 747.

FALL-CONE PENETRATION AND WATER CONTENT RELATIONSHIP OF CLAYS


Harison, J. A. (1988). Using the BS cone penetrometer for the determination of the plastic limits of soils. Geotechnique 38, No. 3,
433438.
Houlsby, G. T. (1982). Theoretical analysis of the fall-cone test. Geotechnique 32, No. 2, 111118.
Karlsson, R. (1961). Suggested improvements in the liquid limit test,
with reference to ow properties of remoulded clays. Proc. 5th
ICSMFE 1, 171184.
Leroueil, S. & Le Bihan, J. P. (1996). Liquid limits and fall cones. Can.
Geotech. J. 33, No. 5, 793798.
Littleton, I. & Farmilo, M. (1977). Some observations on liquid limit
values. Ground Engng 10, No. 4, 3940.
Sherwood, P. T. & Riley, M. D. (1970). An investigation of a conepenetrometer method for the determination of the liquid limit.
Geotechnique 20, No. 2, 203208.
Skempton, A. W. & Northey, R. D. (1953). The sensitivity of clays.
Geotechnique 3, No. 1, 3053.
Sowers, G. F., Vesic, A. & Grandol, M. (1959). Penetration tests for
liquid limit. Philadelphia ASTM, STP No. 254, 216224.
Stone, K. J. L. & Phan, K. D. (1996). Cone penetration tests near the
plastic limit. Geotechnique 45, No. 1, 155158.

187

Swedish Standards Commission (1990). Geotechnical tests cone liquid


limit. Swedish Standards Commission, Stockholm, SS 027120.
Terzaghi, K. (1927). Determination of consistency of soils by means of
penetration tests. Public Roads 7, No. 12, 240247.
Terzaghi, K., Peck, R. B. & Mesri, G. (1996). Soil mechanics in
engineering practice, 3rd edn. New York: Wiley.
Wasti, Y. & Bezirci, M. H. (1986). Determination of the consistency limits
of soils by the fall-cone test. Can. Geotech. J. 23, No. 2, 241246.
Whyte, I. L. (1982). Soil plasticity and strengtha new approach using
extrusion. Ground Engng 15, No. 1, 1624.
Whyte, I. L. (1983). Cone penetrometer and liquid limit. Geotechnique
33, No. 1, 7677.
Wood, D. M. (1982). Cone penetrometer and liquid limit. Geotechnique
32, No. 2, 152157.
Wood, D. M. (1985). Some fall-cone tests. Geotechnique 35, No. 1,
6468.
Wood, D. M. & Wroth, C. P. (1978). The use of the cone penetrometer
to determine the plastic limit of soils. Ground Engng 11, No. 3, 37.
Wroth, C. P. & Wood, D. M. (1978). The correlation of index properties
with some basic engineering properties of soils. Can. Geotech. J. 15,
No. 2, 137145.