Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Soil Aggregate - 3 Topics: 1.4 Consistency of Cohesive Soil
Soil Aggregate - 3 Topics: 1.4 Consistency of Cohesive Soil
Module 1
Lecture 3
Soil Aggregate -3
Topics
1.4 CONSISTENCY OF COHESIVE SOIL
1.4.1 Atterberg Limits
1.4.2 Liquidity Index
1.4.3 Activity
The liquid limit is defined as the moisture content, in percent, at which the soil changes from illiquid state to
a plastic state. The liquid limit is now generally determined by the standard Casagrande device (Casagrande,
1932, 1948). The moisture contents (in percent) at which the soil changes from a plastic to a semisolid state
and from a semisolid to a solid state are defined, respectively, as the plastic limit and the shrinkage limit.
These limits are generally referred to as the Atterberg limits.
The Atterberg limits of cohesive soil depend on several factors, such as amount and type of clay mineral
sand type of absorbed cation.
The difference between the liquid limit and the plastic limit of a soil is defined as the plasticity index PI:
(1.44)
Where LL is the liquid limit and PL the plastic limit.
1.4.3 Activity
The oriented water (absorbed and double layer) gives rise to the plastic property of a clay soil. The thickness
of the oriented water around a clay particle is dependent on the type of clay mineral. Thus, it can be
expected that the plasticity of given clay will depend on (1) the nature of the clay mineral present and (2) the
amount of clay mineral present. Based on laboratory test results for several soils. Skempton (1953) made the
observation that, for a given soil, the plasticity index is directly proportional to the percent of clay size
fraction (i.e., percent by weight finer than 0.002 mm in size), as shown in Figure 1.20. With this
observation, Skempton defined parameter called activity .
Figure 1.20 Variation of plasticity index with the percent of clay size fraction
(1.46)
Where C is the percent of clay-size fraction, by weight. It should be noted that the activity of a given soil
will be a function of the type of clay mineral present in it.
The activities of several sand-clay mineral mixtures have been evaluated by Seed et al. (1964b). They
concluded that although PI bears a linear relation to clay-size fractions, the line of correlation may to pass
through the origin.
For practical purposes, it seems convenient to define activity as
(1.47)
Activity has been used as an index property to determine the swelling potential of expansive clays
system s widely used by various organizations, geotechnical engineers in private consulting business, and
building codes.
Initially, there are two major divisions in the system. A soil is classified as a coarse-grained soil (gravelly
and sandy) if more than 50% is retained on a No. 200 sieve and as a fine-grained soil (silty and clayey) if
more than 50% is passing through a No. 200 sieve. The soil is then further classified by a number of
subdivisions, as shown in Table 1.7. The following symbols are used:
Figure 1.21 The moisture content vs. unit weight relationship indicating the increased unit weight resulting
from the addition of water and that due to the compaction effort applied. (Redrawn after A. W. Johnson and
J. R. Sallberg, Factor Influencing Compaction Test Results. Highway Research Board, Bulletin 319, 1962)
Typical names
GW
Well-graded
gravels,
gravel-sand
mixtures (little or no fines)
GP
GM
Group symbols
(appreciable
GC
Clayey
mixtures
SW
Well-grraded sands,
(little or no fines)
SP
SM
SC
ML
CL
OL
Silts and clay (liquid limit greater
than 50)
MH
CH
Highly organic soils
Pt
gravels,
Criteria of classification *
gravel-sand-clay
gravelly
sands
classification
Less than 5
More than 12
5 to 12
Atterburg limits above A line and plasticity index between 4 and 7 are borderline cases. It needs dual
symbols.
The effect of compactive effort on the dry unit weight vs. moisture content relation is shown in Figure 1.24
With increasing compactive effort the optimum moisture content decreases, and the same time the maximum
dry unit weight of compaction increases.
Figure 1.22 Nature of the variation of dry unit weight of soil with moisture content in a compaction test
Figure 1.23 Moisture content vs. dry unit weight relationships for eight soils according to AASHTO method T-99.
(Note:
). (After A. W. Johnson and J. R. Sallberg, Factors Influencing Compaction Test
Results. Highway Research Board, Bulletin 319, 1962)
Figure 1.24 Effect of compactive effort on dry unit weight vs. moisture content relation
With the development of heavier compaction equipment, the standard Proctor test has been modified for
better representation of field conditions. In the modified Proctor test (ASTM designation D-1577 and
AASHTO designation T-180), the same mold as in the standard Proctor test is used. However, the soil is
compacted in five layers with a 101b (44.5-N) hammer giving 25 bows to each layer. The height of drop of
the hammer is 18in (457.2 mm). Hence the compactive effort in the modified Proctor test is equal to
Conducting Proctor tests in sandy and a gravelly soil in rather tedious because of lack of control over the
moisture content. The nature of the dry unit weight vs. moisture content plot for sand is shown in Figure
1.25. With increasing moisture content, the dry unit weight gradually decreases and then increases up to the
optimum moisture content. The decrease of dry unit weights obtained at lower moisture contents is a result
of the effect of capillary tension in the pore water. The capillary tension resists the movement of soil
particles and thus prevents the soil from becoming densely packed.
Figure 1.25 Proctor compation test results on a sand (AASHTO test designation T-99)
Figure 1.26 Maximum dry unit weight vs. organic content for all compaction tests. (Note:
). (Redrawn after A. F. Fraklin, L. F. Orozco, and R. Semrau, Compaction of
Slightly Organic Soils, J .Soil Mech. Found. Div., ASCE, vol. 99, no. SM7, 1973)
Two major conclusions can be drawn from Figures 1.26 and 1.27 (1) if the organic content in a given soil
is more than about 10%, the maximum dry unit weight of compaction decreases considerably. (2) the
optimum moisture content increases with the increase of organic contents of soil.
Figure 1.27 Effect of drying history and organic content on optimum moisture content. (after A. F.
Fraklin, L. F. Orozco, and R. Semrau, Compaction of Slightly Organic Soils, J .Soil Mech. Found.
Div., ASCE, vol. 99, no. SM7, 1973)
10