Hindawi

Advances in Civil Engineering

Volume 2022, Article ID 7438757, 6 pages
https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/7438757

Research Article
The Influence of Soil Saturation on the Geotechnical Test Results

1,2 1
Jianxiang Guo and Xiaobin Wei
1
Jiangsu Testing Center for Quality of Construction Engineering Co., Ltd, Nanjing, China
2
Key Laboratory of the Ministry of Education for Geomechanics and Embankment Engineering, Hohai University,
Nanjing, China

Correspondence should be addressed to Jianxiang Guo; gjx9669@163.com

Received 9 March 2022; Revised 19 April 2022; Accepted 21 April 2022; Published 4 May 2022

Academic Editor: Yi Zhang

Copyright © 2022 Jianxiang Guo and Xiaobin Wei. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons
Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is
properly cited.

The consistency limits are important properties of soil. The fall cone test method has a good repeatability, and the operator’s
judgement has little effect on the results. This paper presents a new sample preparation method, in which the sedimentation
method and consolidation test are combined, to prepare the saturated specimens for fall cone test for determining the consistency
limits, and the sample prepared by this new method can be considered completely saturated. For the specimens prepared by the
previous sample preparation method, the decrease in the water content leads to a decrease in the degree of saturation of soil. The
test results show that the specimens prepared by this new method can reach a low water content, and the minimum penetration
depths are as low as 2 mm, and the plastic limit could be obtained directly. In addition, the van shear test results show that the
unsaturated specimens have larger values of undrained shear strength than the saturated specimens at the same water content,
which could explain the difference of consistency limits obtained from different specimen preparation methods.

1. Introduction that the soil’s shear strength is related to the degree of

The consistency limits are important engineering parameters
of soils [1]. There are many methods used to measure the
consistency limits, including percussion cup method, fall
cone method, and thread rolling method [2–5]. Among
those methods, the fall cone method has a good repeatability,
and the operator’s judgement has little effect on the results
[6]. In many countries, the fall cone method has been used to
determine the liquid limit and plastic limit [4, 5, 7–9]. In fact,
the essential of the fall cone method is a strength-based
method [10], Wood and Wroth have proposed that the
undrained shear strength cu of soil at plastic limit is 100
times that at the liquid limit [11], and the relationship be-
tween undrained shear strength cu and the cone penetration
depth d has been derived by Hansbo [12]; this relationship is
obtained under the assumption that the soil samples are
completely saturated. However, the degree of saturation of
specimens is not strictly controlled by using spatulas to mix
the sample on the mixing plate, which is introduced in BS
EN ISO 17892–12 : 2018 [13]. Previous studies have shown
saturation [14, 15]. Furthermore, the differences of plastic
limit and liquid limit between the saturated specimens and
unsaturated specimens are not analyzed.
In summary, it appears that the following studies need to
be researched:
(1) The degree of saturation of the soil during the fall
cone test using BS EN ISO 17892–12 : 2018 specimen
preparation method.
(2) Modification on the specimen preparation method
to ensure the degree of saturation of the soil
specimens.
(3) The mechanism of liquid limit and plastic limit
influenced by saturated and unsaturated specimens.
2. Materials and Experimental Produce
The kaolin and bentonite were used in this study. The
specimen was prepared from high water content to low
water content as near the plastic limit as possible. The fall
2 Advances in Civil Engineering
cone test was carried out using BS cone (cone angle: 30°, cone
weight: 80 g).
In test 1, the specimens were prepared by the method
introduced in BS EN ISO 17892–12 : 2018 and the fall cone
tests were performed in the specimen cup. At the end of each
fall cone test, the saturation and water content of the
specimens were measured. The degree of saturation (Sr) was
calculated by the formula:
wds
Sr � , (1)
e the minimum depths are as low as 2 mm.
where w is the water content, e is the void ratio, and ds is the
specific gravity of soil particle.
The void ratio was calculated by the formula:
ds (1 + w)ρw
e� − 1, (2)
ρ
where ρw is the water density, and ρ is the density of
specimen.
The remaining soil was spread over a large plate for air
drying for the next fall cone test, during this process, lo-
calized drying shall be avoided by repeating the process of
remixing the soil.
Using the above specimen preparation method, it is
difficult to guarantee complete saturation of the specimens.
Furthermore, with the decrease of water content, placing the
soil into the specimen cup is difficult [6]. Ting et al. [16]
adopted sedimentation method to achieve fully saturated
specimens. The soil was mixed with distilled water to form a
dilute slurry, and then the slurry was pumped into a sedi-
mentation column. The sedimentation was carried out for a
period of 3 days, and the consolidation cell preplaced at the
base of the sedimentation column. The saturated specimens
can be used for the subsequent consolidation stage by re-
moval of the consolidation cell. In this research, the method
introduced above was used to prepare the specimens and the
sedimentation process was carried out in the consolidation
instrument. The heights of specimen rings were 20–40 mm
and a pipe was added on the upper part of the specimen ring
to increase the initial slurry capacity, as shown in Figure 1(a).
After sedimentation for a period of 3 days, a saturated
specimen form in the specimen ring, and the upper part is
clear liquid, as shown in Figure 1(b). Then, remove the pipe,
and carry out the consolidation tests, as shown in
Figures 1(c) and 1(d). The specimens with different water
content will be obtained by different consolidation pressure
and time. When the consolidation process is finished, the fall
cone tests will be carried out immediately after removal of
the surface water. The fall cone test using the above speci-
men’s preparation method was named test 2.
3. Results
Relationships between the values of penetration depth and
water content for the soils using test 1 and test 2 methods are
shown in Figures 2(a)–2(c). It can be seen from these figures
that the relationships are linear in the double logarithmic co-
ordinate system. In test 1, the soils were stiff and difficult to mix
at low water content, so the minimum depths of penetration are
close to 5 mm. In test 2, after a long period of consolidation with
high-pressure, the specimens can reach a low water content, and
In order to calculate the consistency limits, the fitting
lines are shown in Figures 2(a)–2(c). Linear relationships
between penetration depth and water content are established
in the double logarithmic coordinate system. In test 1, the
plastic limits at the depth of 2 mm penetration can be ob-
tained by extending the fitting lines. The plastic limits and
liquid limits are summarized in Table 1.
As shown in Figure 2 and Table 1, it can be seen that the
plastic limits and liquid limits are influenced by the different
specimen preparation methods. The values of LL and PL of
specimens prepared by test 1 are larger than that of test 2.
This is because the fall cone method is essentially reflecting
the relationship between the undrained shear strength and
the penetration depth of the soil under different water
content, and the degree of saturation has an influence on the
undrained shear strength.
The degree of saturation of the specimens prepared by
Test 1 is shown in Figure 3. As can be seen from Figure 3, the
decrease of the specimens prepared by Test 1 in water
content also leads to a decrease in the degree of saturation;
this phenomenon indicates that the air bubbles were pro-
duced during the mixing process. Therefore, even if the
water content of the sample is very high, the soil will also be
in an unsaturated state when the specimens are prepared by
test 1. As shown in Figure 4, the undrained shear strength of
the specimens prepared by test 1 and test 2 is measured by
van shear test. The specimens prepared by test 1 have larger
values of the undrained shear strength than that of test 2 at
the same water content. This is because the undrained shear
strength of saturated soil is mainly composed of friction and
cohesion, and the cohesion is affected by the bound water
between the soil particles. However, the undrained shear
strength of unsaturated soil is mainly composed of friction,
cohesion, and matric suction [17]. The matric suction in-
creases with the decrease of water content in unsaturated
soil, so the undrained shear strength of test 1 is larger than
that of Test 2. Therefore, the value of fall cone depth obtained
from unsaturated soil is smaller than that of saturated soil,
and the PL and LL obtained from test 1 are larger than that of
test 2. However, when the water content is higher than liquid
Advances in Civil Engineering 3

Water

Pipe
Mud water
Specimen ring interface
Slurry
Water

Clamp ring Soil

Porous stone

(a) (b)

Loading pad

Porous stone

Soil

(c) (d)

Figure 1: Consolidation method for specimen preparation. (a) Slurry before sedimentation. (b) Sedimentation for 3 days. (c) Details for
consolidation test. (d) Consolidation process.
4 Advances in Civil Engineering

200 200

100 100 log w = 1.621 + 0.278 log d

R2 = 0.998
Water content (%)

Water content (%)

log w = 1.291 + 0.432 log d
1:5
R2 = 0.993
1:5

log w = 1.605 + 0.286 log d

log w = 1.287 + 0.419 log d R2 = 0.992
R2 = 0.994
10 10
1 10 30 1 10 30
Penetration depth (mm) Penetration depth (mm)
Test 1 Test 1
Test 2 Test 2
Fitting line Fitting line
(a) (b)
200

100 log w = 1.588 + 0.268 log d

R2 = 0.996
Water content (%)

1:5

log w = 1.579 + 0.269 log d

R2 = 0.992

10
1 10 30
Penetration depth (mm)
Test 1
Test 2
Fitting line
(c)

Figure 2: Relationship between penetration depth and water content. (a) Kaolin. (b) Bentonite. (c) 50% kaolin and 50% bentonite.

Table 1: Plastic limits and liquid limits obtained from fall cone tests.
Test 1 Test 2
Soil
PL % LL % PI PL % LL % PI
Kaolin 26 71 45 26 68 42
Bentonite 51 96 45 49 95 46
50% K + 50% B 47 86 40 46 85 39
K: kaolin; B: bentonite; PL: plastic limit; LL: liquid limit; PI: plastic index.
Advances in Civil Engineering 5

105 of pushing soil into the specimen cup. Under the

consolidation pressure, the specimens can reach a
low water content and the minimum depths are as
100 low as 2 mm, and the plastic limits could be obtained
Degree of saturation (%)

directly.
(2) The decrease of the specimens prepared by the
95 traditional sample preparation method in water
content also leads to a decrease in the degree of
saturation, and this phenomenon indicates that the
90 air bubbles were produced during the mixing
process.
(3) The results by van shear tests show that the un-
85 drained shear strength of the unsaturated soil is
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
larger than that of saturated soil and leads to lower
Water content (%)
values of penetration depth.
Kaolin
Bentonite
Data Availability
50% Bentonite and 50% Kaolin
Figure 3: The degree of soil saturation during the test 1. The data that support the findings of this study are available
from the corresponding author.

100 Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

10 Acknowledgments
Cu (kPa)

This work was supported by the National Natural Science

Foundation of China (Project no. 51578213).
1
References
[1] B. C. O. Kelly, “Atterberg Limits and Remolded Shear
Strength--Water Content Relationships,” ASTM Interna-
0.1 tional, vol. 36, pp. 939–947, 2013.
20 40 60 80 100 120
Water content (%)
[2] A. Sridharan and K. Prakash, “Percussion and cone methods
of determining the liquid limit of soils: controlling mecha-
Test 1 Test 2 Soil nisms,” Geotechnical Testing Journal, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 236–
Kaolin 244, 2000.
Bentonite [3] A. Casagrande, “Notes on the design of the liquid limit de-
50 % K + 50% B vice,” Géotechnique, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 84–91, 1958.
Fitting line [4] J. I. S. A1205, Test Method for Liquid Limit and Plastic Limit of
Soils, Japanese Standards Association, Tokyo, Japan, 1999.
Figure 4: Undrained shear strength. [5] ASTM, Standard Test Methods for Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit,
and Plasticity index of Soils, American Society for Testing
Materials, West Conshohocken, Pa, 2010.
limit, the specimens prepared by test 1 and test 2 are both [6] J. A. Harison, “Using the BS cone penetrometer for the de-
saturated, so the values of the undrained shear strength termination of the plastic limit of soils,” Géotechnique, vol. 38,
derived from the two tests are similar. no. 3, pp. 433–438, 1988.
[7] D. M. Wood, “Cone penetrometer and liquid limit,”
Géotechnique, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 152–157, 1982.
4. Conclusions [8] T. W. Feng, “Fall-cone penetration and water content rela-
tionship of clays,” Géotechnique, vol. 50, no. 2, pp. 181–187,
This paper has focused on the influence of specimen 2000.
preparation methods on the measurement of the plastic limit [9] R. Ismael, M. Fattah, and M. Aswad, “Consistency charac-
and liquid limit; the conclusions are as follows: teristics of dispersive clays,” Engineering and Technology
Journal, vol. 39, no. 12, pp. 1753–1759, 2021.
(1) The sedimentation method combined with consol- [10] B. Sharma and P. K. Bora, “Plastic limit, liquid limit and
idation test can obtain saturated specimens of dif- undrained shear strength of soil-reappraisal,” Journal of
ferent water content. The fall cone test could be Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, vol. 129,
carried out immediately after consolidation instead no. 8, pp. 774–777, 2003.
6 Advances in Civil Engineering

[11] D. M. Wood and C. P. Wroth, “The use of the cone pene-

trometer to determine the plastic limit of soils,” Ground
Engineering, vol. 11, no. 3, p. 37, 1978.
[12] S. Hansbo, A new approach to the determination of the shear
strength of clay by the fall-cone test, vol. 14, pp. 5–47, Swedish
Geotechnical Institute, Stockholm, 1957.
[13] EN ISO 17892-12:2018, Geotechnical Investigation and Test-
ing-Laboratory Testing of Soil-Part 12: Determination of Liquid
and Plastic Limits, European Committee for Standardization,
CEN-CENELEC Management Centre, Brussels, Belgium,
2018.
[14] B. M. Das and B. M. Das, Advanced Soil Mechanics, Taylor &
Francis, New York, 2008.
[15] M. Y. Fattah, Q. G. Majeed, and H. H. Joni, “Comparison
between methods of soil saturation on determination of the
soil water characteristic curve of cohesive soils,” Arabian
Journal of Geosciences, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 101–111, 2021.
[16] C. M. R. Ting, G. C. Sills, and D. C. Wijeyesekara, “Devel-
opment of KO in soft soils,” Géotechnique, vol. 44, no. 1,
pp. 101–109, 1994.
[17] A. Al-Gharbawi, M. Fattah, and M. Mahmood, “New trend to
measure the saturation point and suction in granular soil,”
Engineering and Technology Journal, vol. 38, no. 11,
pp. 1570–1579, 2020.