PLASTIC LIMIT DETERMINATION USING A DROP-CONE

PENETROMETER
D. J. CAMPBELL
(Scottish Institute of Agricultural Engineering, Bush Estate,
Penicuik, Midlothian)

Summary
The drop-cone method, in which a 30° cone of mass 80 g is allowed to sink into a
soil sample at a selection of moisture contents, was used to determine the moisture
content/cone penetration curve in the region of the plastic limit for eighteen soils.
The moisture content corresponding to the minimum of the curve is shown to be
always numerically less than, but to correlate closely with, the plastic limit. It is
suggested that the plastic limit be redefined as the moisture content corresponding
to the minimum of the moisture content/cone penetration curve, with the advantages
that the test is more closely related to soil behaviour, less subjective, at least as repro-
ducible as the Casagrande test and may be carried out simultaneously with the liquid
limit test.
Introduction
AN earlier paper (Campbell, 1975) demonstrated that the dro cone
penetrometer method of liquid limit determination offers wort while
improvements over the Casagrande method both in terms of reproduci-
K-
bility and in ease of conduct of the test. Briefly the method involves
measuring the extent to which a standard cone sinks into the soil at
a series of moisture contents, that corresponding to a penetration of
20 mm being taken to be the liquid limit.
The drop-cone liquid limit method, which was originally proposed
for civil engineering soils in Great Britain by Sherwood and Ryley
(1970), has now been ado ted as the referred method for liquid limit
P i
determination of such soi s (British tandards Institution, 1975), and
there would clearly be an advantage in using the same apparatus for
plastic limit determination. Scherrer (1961) has proposed a method of
plastic limit determination which involves extrapolation of a linear rela-
tionshi between moisture content and penetration in the region of the
P
liquid imit, but concedes that the use of extrapolation implies possible
inaccuracy in the method. In fact Towner (197 ) has shown that
although the relation between moisture content and log penetration is
linear in the region of the liquid limit, it becomes non-linear at lower
moisture contents, tending to show a minimum penetration.
This paper shows that the moisture content corresponding to the
minimum of the moisture content/cone penetration curve is numerically
less than, but correlates closely with, the plastic limit. The use of this
minimum in the drop-cone method to represent the lower end of the
range of moisture contents over which a soil is plastic offers several
advantages over the method developed by Casagrande (19 2 ) which is
the basis of the current British Standard method (Britis Standards
Institution, 1975).
z
Journal of Soil Science, Vol. 27, 295300. 1976
296 D. J. CAMPBELL
Methods
Soils. Sixteen arable topsoils, one subsoil, and one clay mineral,
kaolin, were used in the tests. The classification of the soils and some
of their relevant physical properties are given in Table I .
TABLE I
Description of soils
Casagrande
Sand, Silt, Total
Liquid Plastic (2.00- (0.06- Clay, Field orgatc
Sample Soil limit, limit, 0.06 mm), 0'002 mm). (< 0'002 iexture mutter,
number series % wlw % wlw % % mm), % (U.S.D.A.) %
142 Cauldside 67 39 14'7 45'2 40.1 SjCL 6.40
Winton* 40 46 64.1 70'1 SiCL 070
3
335
Kaolin
Winton
59
37
20
42
26
0'0
48.5
26'5
33'0
53.2
18.4 c
SaCL
~ 0.70
5.46
337 Darvel 37 31 69.2 23'7 7.1 SaL 7 '40
339 Greenside 43 34 50'4 29'9 19'7 L 5'78
341 Yarrow 47 44 28.5 56.9 14'6 SaL 5.16
342 Frcatineb 50 38 36.5 42'9 20.6 L 5.64
343 Queensferry 45 38 54'4 32.1 13'5 SaL 3'12
-347
.-
id< Not surveved 42
Macmev-
38 37'9 16.8 -_
24.7
15.1
SaCL
SaL
-5.70.
7.10
46 32 52'9 31'9
349 Dreghorn 30 26 55'0 29'5 15'5 SaL 3.86
350 Brownrigg 27 22 57'4 30'1 12.5 SaL 3'03
352 Brownrigg 30 26 53.8 29'3 16.9 SaL 3'72
3% Kilmarnock 36 28 47'1 32'5 20'5 SaCL 3'25
3.57 Bie! 33 24 3743 45.6 16.6 SaCL . ..
4'70
359 Whltsome 41 31 50.6 41.0 8.4 L 4'79
360 Kedslie 38 26 34'0 52'9 13.1 CL 3 '40

* Subsoil, sample depth 30-45 cm.

The drop-cone method. The preparation of the soil corresponded

exactly with the preparation for the plastic limit test as described in
B.S. 1377 (British Standards Institution, 1975), i.e. the soil was air dried
and passed through a 420 pm sieve. For the drop-cone method it was
then wetted to give about ten samples at a selection of moisture contents
around the plastic limit, this being in contrast to the Casagrande method
in which the soil is gradually dried until the lastic limit is reached.
Each sample in turn was packed into a rigiJmeta1 cup 55 mm in
diameter and 45 mm deep. The penetration of the sample by a free-
falling 30' cone of mass 80 g was determined when the cone was
released for 5 s from an initial position in which its tip was just in
contact with the soil surface, the technique corresponding in detail to
that used to determine the liquid limit by drop-cone (Campbell, 1975).
When the procedure had been repeated for all ten samples, the mois-
ture content/cone penetration curve was plotted. The drop-cone plastic
limit was determined from the moisture content, recorded to the nearest
integer, corresponding to the minimum of this curve. This moisture
content correlated closely with, but is not the equivalent of, the Casa-
grande plastic limit (see Results).
- Expeiimentalprocedure. The dro -cone method was applied to each
B
of the soils described in Table I an their plastic limits were also deter-
mined in accordance with B.S. 1377 (British Standards Institution,
1975). In the latter method the plastic limit is considered to be the
moisture content such that a thread of the soil 3 mm in diameter just
 PLASTIC LIMIT DETERMINATION 297
crumbles when rolled between the palm of the operator's hand and a flat
glass plate. The measurements were made by an operator with exten-
sive experience in the conduct of both the drop-cone and British Stan-
dard tests. In addition the drop-cone measurements only were repeated
by a second operator with no previous experience of the drop-cone
apparatus. The same soils were used with the exception of sample num-
bers 257, 288, and 345 which were unavailable.

Sandy loam 347 f Loam 342 > silty clay loam 142
25 I

E 20
E
C
.-
5* 15
c
:lo
C

0
5

C
1'0 20 30 40 50 10 20 30 40 5(
Moisture content Moisture content loisture content per cent w, N
per cent w l w per cent w/w

FIG.I . Moisture content/cone penetration relations for three soils obtained by both
operators.
x = operator I, 0 = operator 11, P.L. = plastic limit, L.L. = liquid limit.

Results
Typical moisture content/cone penetration curves obtained by both
operators for a sandy loam, a loam, and a silty clay loam are shown in
Fig. I . A similar pair of smooth curves, each showing a distinct mini-
mum, was obtained for all the soils. The regression of the moisture
content corresponding to the minimum of the curve on the Casagrande
plastic limit is shown in Fig. 2 for the values obtained by both operators.

Discussion
Although the moisture content corresponding to the minimum of the
moisture content/cone penetration curve correlates closely with the
Casagrande limit it is not numerically equal to it, the latter always
corresponding to a moisture content which is on the wet side of the
minimum. Towner (1973) has suggested, with reservations, that a
enetration of 2 mm may correspond to the Casagrande plastic limit,
gut the results for the eighteen soils examined here give a mean pene-
tration corresponding to the Casagrande plastic limit of -6 mm with
a coefficient of variation of 73 per cent. The range of va!lues obtained
was from 1.0to 10.0mm if the extreme value of 18.0mm found for the
kaolin was excluded.
298 D. J. CAMPBELL

40 -
-I Operator II
2 y=0*67~+1.98
n=15
C
Q)
0 r=0.87
.& 30-
0.

$
.-EC 20-
/y
0
5
-
c.
m
Ax/x
X
t
a
l
E
s 10-
-.-E
3
In

r" 01
0
I
10
I
20
I
30
I
40 0

FIG.2. Regression of the moisture content corresponding to the minimum

of the moisture content/cone penetration curve on Casagrande plastic limit,
for each of two operators.

Fig. 3 shows, for the fifteen soils tested by both o erators, the relation
P
between the values obtained by the two operators or the moisture con-
tent correspondin to the minimum of the moisture contentlcone pene-
tration curves. ?he maximum difference in values obtained is 7 per
cent w/w and is less than half this value for eleven of the fifteen soils.
The value of 7 per cent w/w corresponds closely with the maximum
difference of 7-1 per cent w/w found among ten operators by Ballard
and Weeks (1963) when they examined the reproducibility of the Casa-
grande plastic limit test for a single soil. They also found that when
 PLASTIC L I M I T DETERMINATION 299
each operator performed the test five times the maximum difference
in mean between operators was 6.0 per cent w/w. The repeatability by
any one operator produced variations ranging from 0.0 to 2.4 per
cent w/w.
Although the reproducibility of the determination of the minimum
of the moisture content/cone penetration curve is similar to the repro-
ducibility of the Casagrande method, there is, in the case of the drop-cone
method, the additional error introduced by the use of the regression

0 10 20 30 3
Moisture content at the minimum,
(operator II), per cent w/w
FIG.3. Relation between the values obtained by two operators for
the moisture content corresponding to the minimum of the mois-
ture content/cone penetration curve for fifteen soils.

line in predicting the Casagrande plastic limit from the minimum. The
maximum value of this error of prediction is about f8 per cent w/w
irrespective of whether the regression of operator I or that of o erator I1
P
is used, the curves obtained by both operators being remarkab y similar.
Such an estimate, however, assumes that the values of the Casagrande
plastic limits used in the regression analyses are exact, whereas they
are in fact liable to a repeatability error of up to 2-4per cent w/w as
indicated above. Clearly the drop-cone method is at a disadvantage in
relation to the Casagrande method in determining the Casagrande
plastic limit.
The presence of a minimum on the moisture contentlcone penetration
curve suggests that a change in the hysical state of the soil occurs at
P
this point and it is therefore arguab e that this is a better estimate of
the moisture content at which the soil changes from semi-solid to plastic
than the Casa rande plastic limit which is more empirical in origin.
P
Redefinition o the plastic limit to correspond to the moisture content
JSS. 3 X
300 D. J. CAMPBELL
at the minimum of the curve would offer the additional advantages that
the test would no longer be subjective and that the reproducibility would
be at least as good even when carried out by operators totally inex-
perienced in the drop-cone method. In addition, since the penetrations
corresponding to the minima of the moisture content/cone enetration
curves for the eighteen soils examined here gave a mean o 1-36 mm, F
a range of 0.4 to 1.8 and a coefficient of variation of only 30 per cent,
the method has the attraction that different soils have similar strengths
at their plastic limits. Despite this, it would not be feasible to define
the plastic limit in terms of the moisture content corresponding to a
penetration of 1.36 mm as such a penetration may be attainable at two
distinct moisture contents or not at all.
As it is usually the plasticity index rather than the plastic limit per se
that is of interest for both soil classification and the prediction of soil
behaviour (Soane et al., 1972; Cam bell, 1976), there is also the ad-
vantage of measuring both the liquicf and plastic limits simultaneously
simply by carrying out the dro cone test over a suitable range of
K-
moisture contents. Using this tec nique the time required to determine
the plasticity index is half that required by the Casagrande methods,
the princi a1 gain being in the liquid limit determination.
P
It wou d clearly be unwise to introduce a redefined plastic limit
without also introducing a new name for it. The term cone penetro-
meter plastic limit is suggested as this corresponds with the name given
to the liquid limit when the latter is determined by the drop-cone
method (British Standards Institution, 1975).
REFERENCES
BALLARD, G. E. H., and WEEKS, W. F. 1963. The human factor in determining the
plastic limit of cohesive soils. Mater. Res. Stand. 3 (9),726-9.
British Standards Institution, 1975. Methods of test for soils for civil engineering
purposes. British Standard 1377: 1975 British Standards Institution, London.
CAMPBELL, D. J. 1975. Liquid limit determination of arable topsoils using a drop-
cone penetrometer. J. Soil Sci. 26, 234-40.
-1976. The occurrence and prediction of clods in potato ridges in relation to
soil physical properties. Ibid. 27, 13.
CASAGRANDE, A. 1932. Research on the Atterberg limits of soils. Public Roads, 13,
121-30.
H. U. 1961. Determination of liquid limit by the static cone penetration
SCHERRER,
test. Proc. 5th int. Conf. Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering. Paris,
1, 319-22.
SHERWOOD, P. T., and RYLEY,M. D. 1970. An investigation of a cone-penetrometer
method for the determination of the liquid limit. GCotechnique, 20, 203-8.
SOANE, B. D.,CAMPBELL, D. J., and HERKES,S. M. 1972. The characterization of
some Scottish arable topsoils by agricultural and engineering methods. J. Soil
Sci. 23,93-104.
TOWNER, G. D. 1973. An examination of the fall-cone method for the determination
of some strength properties of remoulded agricultural soils. Ibid. 24, 470-9.

(Received 19 November 1975)