Laboratory Experiment No.

03
ATTERBERG LIMITS (LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMIT)
AND LINEAR SHRINKAGE TEST
Submitted by:
Ina Therese R. Ardan
11811250
Justine Eliza N. Rocha
11814985

I. OBJECTIVES
The following are the main objectives of this experiment:
• To accurately calculate the moisture content, liquid limit, plastic limit, plasticity index and
linear shrinkage of a given soil sample
• To verify the calculated liquid limit and plastic limit values with a table of typical values
and to hypothesize the type of mineral predominantly present in the soil sample
• To be familiar with the proper procedures and correct equations involved in computing the
moisture content, liquid limit, plastic limit, plasticity index and linear shrinkage of a given
soil sample
II. DATA PRESENTATION
Table 1. Summary of Experimental Data and Results Liquid Limit Determination
using Method A (Multipoint Liquid Limit) and Method B (One-Point Liquid Limit)
Liquid Limit Data
Trials 1 2 3
Number of Drops 29 20 10
Mass of can + moist soil, Mcws (g) 31.93 25.3 25.14
Mass of can + dry soil, Mcs (g) 29.32 22.97 22.74
Mass of can, Mc (g) 24.06 18.5 18.52
Mass of water, Mw (g) 2.61 2.33 2.4
Mass of dry soil, Ms (g) 5.26 4.47 4.22
Moisture content, w (%) 49.62 52.13 56.87
Liquid Limit (Method A) (%) 50.621
Liquid Limit (Method B) (%) 50.729
 Page 2 of 7

Table 2. Summary of Experimental Data and Results for Plastic Limit Determination
using ASTM D 4318 and Plasticity Index Calculation
Plastic Limit Data
Trials 1 2 3
Mass of container + moist soil, Mcws (g) 19.07 17.3 19.98
Mass of container + dry soil, Mcs (g) 17.98 15.91 18.67
Mass of container, Mc (g) 13.03 9.72 12.96
Mass of water, Mw (g) 1.09 1.39 1.31
Mass of dry soil, Ms (g) 4.95 6.19 5.71
Water content, w (%) 22.02 22.46 22.94
Plastic Limit (%) 22.473
Plasticity Index (Method A) (%) 28.148
Plasticity Index (Method B) (%) 28.256

Table 3. Summary of Experimental Data and Results for Linear Shrinkage Determination
using British Standard (BS) 1377-2:1990 Part 6.5
Linear Shrinkage Data
Trials L R
Original length (mm) 140 140
Oven-dried length (mm) 133.56 133.76
Percentage of Linear Shrinkage of Soil (%) 4.60 4.46
Linear Shrinkage of Soil (%) 5

Table 1 with Table 2 show the summary of the experimental data for the liquid limit, plastic
limit and plasticity index determination. To measure and solve for the liquid limit of the sample,
two methods were used; they are the multipoint liquid limit (Method A) and the one-point liquid
limit (Method B). On the other hand, the plastic limit of the sample was measured according to the
procedures stated in the ASTM D 4318. Lastly, Table 3 is the summary of the experimental data
for the linear shrinkage of the soil sample, which were measured according to the British Standard
1377-9:1900 Part 6.5. The moisture content for determining the liquid and plastic limits were
measured using the conventional oven method or ASTM D 2216.
 Page 3 of 7

III. COMPUTATION AND GRAPHS

Computing for the moisture content
The following equation shows the sample computation for the moisture content of the soil
sample.
𝑀𝑤 2.61
𝑤= = × 100% = 49.62%
𝑀𝑠 5.26 Eq. 1
where:
𝑀𝑤 = 𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟 (𝑔)
𝑀𝑠 = 𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑑𝑟𝑦 𝑠𝑜𝑖𝑙 (𝑔)
Calculating for the liquid limit using multipoint liquid limit (Method A)
The following equation is the derived linear equation from the plot of the moisture content
against the number of drops (see Figure 1). The liquid limit is the moisture content at 25 drops.
𝐿𝐿 = −0.6816𝑙𝑛(25) + 72.561 = 50.621% Eq. 2
where:
𝐿𝐿 = 𝑙𝑖𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑑 𝑙𝑖𝑚𝑖𝑡

Flow Curve
58
57
Moisture Content, w (%)

56
55
54
y = -6.816ln(x) + 72.561
53
52
51 Liquid Limit = 50.621
50
49
5 25
Number of Drops, N (log scale)

Figure 1. Flow Curve, Method A (Multipoint Liquid Limit)

Calculating for the liquid limit using one-point liquid limit (Method B)
The next equations demonstrate the computation for the liquid limit using the one-point
liquid limit method.
𝐿𝐿1 = 𝑘1 𝑤1 = (1.018)(49.62%) = 50.513% Eq. 3
𝐿𝐿2 = 𝑘2 𝑤2 = (0.974)(52.13%) = 50.775%
 Page 4 of 7

𝑁3 10
𝐿𝐿3 = 𝑤3 ( )0.121 = (56.87%)( )0.121 = 50.902%
25 25 Eq. 4
50.513% + 50.775% + 50.902%
𝐿𝐿𝑎𝑣𝑒 = = 50.729%
3 Eq. 5
where:
𝐿𝐿1 = 𝑙𝑖𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑑 𝑙𝑖𝑚𝑖𝑡 𝑑𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑣𝑒𝑑 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑓𝑖𝑟𝑠𝑡 𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙
𝑘1 = 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑙𝑖𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑑 𝑙𝑖𝑚𝑖𝑡, 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑓𝑖𝑟𝑠𝑡 𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙
𝑤1 = 𝑚𝑜𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑖𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑓𝑖𝑟𝑠𝑡 𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙
𝐿𝐿2 = 𝑙𝑖𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑑 𝑙𝑖𝑚𝑖𝑡 𝑑𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑣𝑒𝑑 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑠𝑒𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑑 𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙
𝑘2 = 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑙𝑖𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑑 𝑙𝑖𝑚𝑖𝑡, 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑠𝑒𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑑 𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙
𝑤2 = 𝑚𝑜𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑖𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑠𝑒𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑑 𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙
𝐿𝐿3 = 𝑙𝑖𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑑 𝑙𝑖𝑚𝑖𝑡 𝑑𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑣𝑒𝑑 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑖𝑟𝑑 𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙
𝑤3 = 𝑚𝑜𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑖𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑖𝑟𝑑 𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙
𝑁3 = 𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑝𝑠 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑖𝑟𝑑 𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙
𝐿𝐿𝑎𝑣𝑒 = 𝑎𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑙𝑖𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑑 𝑙𝑖𝑚𝑖𝑡 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑟𝑒𝑒 𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙𝑠
Calculating for the plastic limit by getting the average of the moisture content
The plastic limit is calculated by getting the average moisture content from the three trials.
22.02% + 22.46% + 22.94%
𝑃𝐿 = 𝑤𝑎𝑣𝑒 = = 22. .473%
3 Eq. 6
where:
𝑃𝐿 = 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑐 𝑙𝑖𝑚𝑖𝑡
𝑤𝑎𝑣𝑒 = 𝑎𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑙𝑖𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑑 𝑙𝑖𝑚𝑖𝑡 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑟𝑒𝑒 𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙𝑠
Computing for the plasticity index using the liquid limits obtained from Methods A and B
The plasticity index is simply the difference between the liquid limit and the plastic limit.
𝑃𝐼𝐴 = 𝐿𝐿𝐴 − 𝑃𝐿 = 50.621% − 22.473% = 28.148% Eq. 7
𝑃𝐼𝐵 = 𝐿𝐿𝐵 − 𝑃𝐿 = 50.729% − 22.473% = 28.256% Eq. 8
where:
𝑃𝐼𝐴 = 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑖𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑥 𝑜𝑏𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑑 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑢𝑠𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑙𝑖𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑑 𝑙𝑖𝑚𝑖𝑡 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑀𝑒𝑡ℎ𝑜𝑑 𝐴
𝐿𝐿𝐴 = 𝑙𝑖𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑑 𝑙𝑖𝑚𝑖𝑡 𝑜𝑏𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑑 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑀𝑒𝑡ℎ𝑜𝑑 𝐴
𝑃𝐿 = 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑐 𝑙𝑖𝑚𝑖𝑡
𝑃𝐼𝐵 = 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑖𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑥 𝑜𝑏𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑑 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑢𝑠𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑙𝑖𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑑 𝑙𝑖𝑚𝑖𝑡 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑀𝑒𝑡ℎ𝑜𝑑 𝐵
𝐿𝐿𝐵 = 𝑙𝑖𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑑 𝑙𝑖𝑚𝑖𝑡 𝑜𝑏𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑑 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑀𝑒𝑡ℎ𝑜𝑑 𝐵
 Page 5 of 7

Calculating for the linear shrinkage

The following equations demonstrate the calculations for the linear shrinkage of the soil
sample, rounded up to the nearest whole number.
𝐿𝐷𝐿 133.56
𝐿𝑆𝐿 = (1 − ) × 100% = (1 − ) × 100% = 4.60%
𝐿𝑂 140.00 Eq. 9
𝐿𝐷𝑅 133.76
𝐿𝑆𝑅 = (1 − ) × 100% = (1 − ) × 100% = 4.46%
𝐿𝑂 140.00 Eq. 10
4.60% + 4.46%
𝐿𝑆𝑎𝑣𝑒 = ≈ 5%
2 Eq. 11
where:
𝐿𝑆𝐿 = 𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑠ℎ𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑘𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑙𝑒𝑓𝑡 𝑠𝑖𝑑𝑒 𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙
𝐿𝐷𝐿 = 𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ 𝑜𝑓 𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑛 − 𝑑𝑟𝑖𝑒𝑑 𝑠𝑝𝑒𝑐𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑛 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑙𝑒𝑓𝑡 𝑠𝑖𝑑𝑒 𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙
𝐿𝑂 = 𝑜𝑟𝑖𝑔𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑠𝑝𝑒𝑐𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑛
𝐿𝑆𝑅 = 𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑠ℎ𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑘𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑟𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑠𝑖𝑑𝑒 𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙
𝐿𝐷𝑅 = 𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ 𝑜𝑓 𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑛 − 𝑑𝑟𝑖𝑒𝑑 𝑠𝑝𝑒𝑐𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑛 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑟𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑠𝑖𝑑𝑒 𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙
𝐿𝑆𝑎𝑣𝑒 = 𝑎𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑠ℎ𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑘𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑡𝑤𝑜 𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙𝑠
IV. DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
Atterberg limits and linear shrinkage are used to define the difference between the four
states of fine-grained soils, which are liquid, plastic, semisolid and solid (Budhu, 2007).
Determining these values can help in predicting the strength and deformation of a soil sample. More
often, a soil sample will contain a mixture of various materials and minerals. It is the predominant
mineral in the soil that will likely determine the Atterberg limits of the sample. According to Budhu,
these are the typical liquid limit and plastic limit values of the following soil types:
Table 5. Typical Values of Atterberg Limit for Different Soil Types

The liquid limit of the soil sample in this experiment was estimated to be around 50 percent,
which falls under the category of clay. On the other hand, the plastic limit of the sample was
 Page 6 of 7

calculated to have an average of 22.473 percent, which falls under the category of silt, and the
plasticity index was around 28 percent, which falls under the category of clay. Using Table 5, it
can be interpreted that the soil sample was likely to be composed of largely clay particles. To further
classify the clay sample, the following table is another set of typical values for the Atterberg limits
of various clay minerals.
Table 6. Typical Values of Atterberg Limit for Different Clay Minerals
(Das & Khaled, 2014)

According to the Atterberg limit values found in Table 6, the soil sample in the experiment
falls under the category of kaolinite, with a liquid limit ranging from 35 to 100, and a plastic limit
ranging from 20 to 40. Within the liquid limit and the plastic limit, the soil sample was observed to
have a plastic behavior, which means it was able to be molded into different shapes and sizes
without any cracking. As the soil sample shifted from the liquid limit to the plastic limit, the amount
of water in the soil sample decreased, and at the plastic limit, the sample cracked. Furthermore,
Adams explained that only clay soils can exhibit plasticity (2019). It is a consequence of the particle
size and electrochemical behavior of the clay minerals. Therefore, the plasticity of a soil sample
will depend on the amount of clay and the type of clay minerals in it.
The shrinkage limit or linear shrinkage of the soil is another important property of a soil
sample. It is the water content below which the volume of the sample will no longer decrease
(Mustaq, n.d.). It is also the minimum moisture content at which the soil can be described as
saturated. Consequently, increasing the amount of water above the shrinkage limit will cause the
soil to swell.
V. CONCLUSIONS
The given soil sample was measured to have a liquid limit of 50.729 percent, the plastic
limit was 22.473 percent, and the plasticity index was around 28 percent. These were all measured
according to ASTM standard test methods and the conventional oven method. Finally, the linear
shrinkage of the sample was measured to have an average of five percent. This was measured using
 Page 7 of 7

the British Standard. Matching these values with the typical Atterberg limits of various soil types,
the sample was classified to be predominantly made of clay. Furthermore, it was inferred that the
soil sample was composed mainly of kaolinite.
VI. RECOMMENDATIONS
To ensure the accuracy of the data, which mainly focuses on the moisture of content of the
soil at varying states, it is important to work with the soil swiftly, especially in moving it from the
open air to the container, and to the oven. Excessive loss in the moisture content during these
transitions may cause errors in the measured water content. It is also recommended to store the first
portion of the sample in an air-tight container while the rest of the sample is still being obtained.
As much as the excessive loss of moisture can cause errors in the experiment, adding some moisture
can also cause errors in the data, which is usually due to performing the experiment with sweaty
hands.
VII. REFERENCE
Adams, T. (2019, July 11). Importance of Atterberg Limits - Global Road Technology. Retrieved
November 11, 2020, from https://globalroadtechnology.com/atterberg-limits/66/
Budhu, M. (2007). Soil mechanics and foundations: 2. ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Das, B. M., & Khaled, S. (2014). Principles of Geotechnical Engineering (8th ed.). Global
Engineering.
Mustaq, M. (n.d.). Atterberg Limits - Liquid, Plastic & Shrinkage Limit. Retrieved November 13,
2020, from https://civiltoday.com/geotechnical-engineering/site-investigation/296-
atterberg-limits-soil