All Issue

2017 Vol.33, Issue 3
Liquid and Plastic Limits of Cohesive Soil by Static and Dynamic Test Methods and Testers

정적 및 동적시험법과 실험자에 따른 점토의 액･소성한계

Chan-Kee Kim1
,
Jin-Soo Yeo2
,
Young-Seog Moon3
,
Hyung-Yeol Park3
,
Tae-Hyung Kim4*
김 찬기1
,
여 진수2
,
문 영석3
,
박 형렬3
,
김 태형4*
1Prof., Dept. of Civil Engrg., Daejin Univ.
2Graduate Student, Dept. of Civil Engrg., Daejin Univ
3Graduate Student, Dept. of Civil Engrg., Daejin Univ.
4Prof., Dept. of Civil Engrg., Korea Maritime and Ocean Univ.
1대진대학교 건설시스템공학과 교수
2대진대학교 토목공학과 공학석사
3대진대학교 토목환경공학과 박사과정
4국해양대학교 건설공학과 교수
*교신저자. *Corresponding Author. 
31 March 2017. pp. 5-15
PDF XML Citation
Abstract

In this study, the liquid and plastic limit tests were conducted on Paju clay with Casagarande method (dynamic) and the fall cone test method (static) to find out the effects of test methods and testers on their values. Six testers, who already have the experience of test, participated. As a results of liquid limit tests, the fall cone test method showed 4% smaller liquid limit compared to the value determined by Casagrande method. As the number of tests increased, the fall cone test method showed less variation between testers and the variation range of level of proficiency was also more stable. In the case of one point method, the liquid limit determined by the fall cone test method varied with smaller range compared to the Casagrande. Consequently, the fall cone test provided more stable liquid limit value than that of Casagrande method. For the results of plastic limit tests, there were no difference between Casagrande method and the fall cone test unlike liquid limit test results. In other words, both methods showed that plastic limit reached the average value as the number of tests increased, and the tendency level of proficiency also showed to get better.

Keywords
Fall cone test
Casagrande method
Liquid limit
Plastic limit
Tester
Proficiency

연구는 파주점토에 대해 Casagrande법(동적)과 원추관입시험법(정적)으로 액성한계와 소성한계시험을 실시하여 실험방법과 실험자에 따른 액･소성한계 결정에 미치는 영향을 검토하였다. 총 6명의 실험경험을 가진 학생이 참여하였다. 액성한계시험결과, 원추관입시험법으로 구한 액성한계는 Casagrande법으로 구한 액성한계보다 약 4% 정도 작게 나타났다. 원추관입시험법에서 실험횟수의 증가함에 따라 비례적으로 실험자별 실험값의 차이가 작아지고, 숙련도의 변화 폭도 양호해지는 경향을 보였다. 1점법에서 원추콘관입시험법에 의해 결정된 액성한계 값의 변화는 작고 Casagrande법보다 좀 더 양호한 값을 얻을 수 있었다. 소성한계시험결과, 액성한계와는 다르게 두 시험법의 결과 차이는 없는 것으로 나타났다. 즉, 두 시험방법 모두 실험자별 소성한계는 실험횟수가 증가함에 따라 평균 소성한계 값에 근접해 가는 경향을 보이고 있으며 숙련도의 변화도 실험횟수가 증가 할수록 좋아 지는 경향을 보였다.

References
1
British Standards Institute (1975), Methods of Test for Soils for Engineering Purposes, London.
2
CAN/BNQ (1986), Soils-Determination of Liquid Limit by the Swedish fall Cone Test Penetrometer Method and Determination of the Plastic Limit, Canadian Standards Association and Bureau de Normalization de Quebec, CAN/BNQ 2501-092-M-86.
3
Feng, T.W. (2000), “Fall-Cone Penetration and Water Content Relationship of Clay”, Geotechnique, Vol.50, No.2, pp.181-187.
4
Hansbo, S. (1957), “A New Approach to the Determination of Clay by the Fall Cone Test, in Proceeding”, National Swedish Geotechnical Institute, No.14, pp.5-47.it
5
Ishihara, K. and Koseki, J. (1989), “Cyclic Shear Strength of Fines- containing Sands”, Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering, Proceedings of the Discussion Session on Influence of Local Conditions on Seismic Response, 12th ICSMFE, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil, pp.101-106.
6
Jang, J.-W., Park, C.-S., Ha, J.-H., and Chung, Y.-I. (2005), “A Comparative Study on Liquid Limit Value by Liquid Limit Tests”, Journal of Korean Society of Coastal and Ocean Engineers, Vol. 17, No.2, pp.80-85.
7
Kim, M.A. (2005), A Study on Liquid Limit and Plastic Limit of Cohesive Soil in Western Gyengnam by Fall Cone Test, Master Thesis, Gyeongsang National University, pp.1-11.
8
Kim, S.-C., You, N.-J., and Lee, S.-D. (2000), “Relation between the Liquid Limit by Casagrande’s Method and Fall Cone Test”, Conference Proceeding of Korean Society of Civil Engineers (II), pp.233-236.
9
Leroueil, S. and Le Bihan J.P. (1996), “Liquid Limits and Fall Cones”, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Vol.33(5), pp.793-798.
10
Lim, H.-M. (2014), “A Study on Consolidation Characteristics of Remolded Clay due to the Liquid Lim”, Journal of the Korean Geoenvironmental Society, Vol.15, No.5, pp.67-74.
11
Nagaraj, T.S. and Jayadev, M.S. (1981), “Re-Examination of On- Point Method of Liquid Limit Determination”, Geotechnique, Vol.31, No.3, pp.413-425.
12
Sherwood, P.T. and Riley, M.D. (1970), “An Investigation of Cone- Penetrometer Method for Liquid Limit”, Geotechnique, Vol.20, pp.203-208.
13
Sowers, G. F., Vesic, A., and Grandolfi, M. (1960), “Penetration Tests for Liquid Limit”, ASTM Special Technical Publication No. 254, pp.216-224.
14
Vasilev, A.M. (1949), Basic Principles of the Methods and Techniques of Laboratory Determination of Physical Soil Properties, Refered by somers et al. (1959).
15
Wood, D.M. and Wroth, C.P. (1978), “The Use of the Cone Penetrometer to Determine the Plastic Limit of Soils”, Ground Engng, Vol.11, No.3, pp.37.
16
You, J.-S., Lee, K.-I., Lee, J.-H., and Chun, W.-J. (2003), “A Study on Liquid Limit Results by Dynamic and Static Liquid Limit Tests”, Conference Proceeding of The Korean Society of Agricultural Engineers, pp.207-210.
Information
  • Publisher :The Korean Geotechnical Society
  • Publisher(Ko) :한국지반공학회
  • Journal Title :Journal of the Korean Geotechnical Society
  • Journal Title(Ko) :한국지반공학회 논문집
  • Volume : 33
  • No :3
  • Pages :5-15
  • Received Date : 2016-02-12
  • Accepted Date : 2017-02-07
  • DOI :https://doi.org/10.7843/kgs.2017.33.3.5
Journal Informaiton Journal of the Korean Geotechnical Society Journal of the Korean Geotechnical Society
Archives
: Vol.23~28 (2007~2012)
  • NRF
  • KOFST
  • KISTI Current Status
  • KISTI Cited-by
  • crosscheck
  • orcid
  • open access
  • ccl
Journal Informaiton Journal Informaiton - close