Technical Note 557

H. B. Nagaraj1* and A. Sridharan2

An improved ko-stress method of

determining liquid limit of soils

Abstract:  Liquid limit is used extensively by geotechnical engineers to determine the characteristics of cohesive soils and
also aid to have a preliminary assessment of their engineering properties related through plasticity index, consistency index,
liquidity index and shrinkage index. In view of the liquid limit being an important index property which is used in many of the
correlations to predict engineering property, and that the currently used methods having their own limitations, Sridharan et
al (2000) have proposed a new method to determine liquid limit from limiting equilibrium water content under ko-stress. This
paper presents the attempt made to verify the ko-stress to be adopted in determining the liquid limit and also to improve the
test procedure with respect to the dimensions of the rings and associated porous stones to be used This study corroborates
the previous findings that the limiting equilibrium water content for a ko-stress of 0.9 kPa is having a good correlation with the
liquid limit obtained from cone penetration method. It is hoped that the method would gain universal acceptance to determine
liquid limit of soils due to its several advantages as compared to the existing popular methods.

Keywords:  Foundations, geotechnical engineering, index property, compressibility, roads and highways.

Introduction
The index tests namely the Atterberg limits form the most
important inferential soil tests with very wide universal
acceptance. They are extensively used in geotechnical engi-
neering practice. These tests are relatively simple to perform
and have provided a basis for explaining most engineering
properties in geotechnical engineering. The use of simple soil
test procedures aid to have a preliminary assessment of engi-
neering properties of fine-grained soils. This has been made
possible by means of several correlations developed between
the Atterberg limits (or consistency limits) and engineering
properties. The Atterberg limits were originally devised to
help classify soils and as such, a high degree of accuracy was
not necessary. However, when these parameters are used
in conjunction with correlations, the degree of reliability of
such correlations increases only when the consistency limits
are determined fairly accurately through standardized proce-
dures having universal acceptance.
*Corresponding Author
Assistant Professor in Civil Engineering, Department of Civil Engineering,
1
BMS College of Engineering, Bangalore 560 019, India. email: hbnraj@
gmail.com, Fax: 0091 80 26614357, Phone: 0091 80 26622130-35
Extn. 4083, Mobile: 0091 98805 07537
Professor Emeritus, Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of
2
Among the consistency limits, the liquid limit has found
to be an important parameter used in many correlations with
the engineering properties. In the recent past various attempts
have been made to correlate the consistency limits, especially
the liquid limit with various soil properties or parameters
like surface area & cation exchange capacity (Farrar and
Coleman 1967, Ohtsubo et al. 1983), the mineralogy and
geological history (through “activity”) (Seed et al.1964a,
1964b), swelling behaviour (Seed et al. 1962, Ranganatham
and Satyanarayna 1965, Vijayavergiya and Ghazally 1973,
Srinivasa Murthy and Nagaraj 1987), the compression index
(Skempton 1944, Nishida 1956, Wroth and Wood 1978,
Koppula 1981, Nagaraj and Srinivasa Murthy 1983 and
1986, Nagaraj et al. 1995, and many others), the coefficient
of consolidation (Carrier 1985, Narasimha Raju et al. 1995),
shear strength (Wroth and Wood 1978), and to use these cor-
relations for the purposes of checking new data/or to predict
soil behavior for design work. Besides the consistency limits,
plasticity index, liquidity index, and consistency index have
also been used to correlate with the engineering properties.
These indices are different forms of the consistency limits.
Several attempts have been made in the past to use alter-
nate test methods to determine the liquid limit of soil like
the dye absorption method (Ramachandran et al, 1963); the
vane shear method (Darienzo and Vey 1955); soil moisture

Science, Bangalore 560 012, India. email: sridharanasuri@yahoo.com

International Journal of Geotechnical Engineering (2010) 4: (557-563) J. Ross Publishing, Inc. © 2010
DOI 10.3328/IJGE.2010.04.04.557-563
558  International Journal of Geotechnical Engineering
tension method (Russel and Mickle 1970) and equilibrium
sediment volume method (Prakash and Sridharan, 2002) to
name a few.
Currently two methods are popular in practice for the
determination of the liquid limit of a fine-grained soil. They
are:
(i) The percussion cup method and ii) The cone pen-
etration method.
Both these methods have limitations and practical dif-
ficulties which have been discussed extensively by various
researchers (Casagrande, 1958; Sherwood and Ryley, 1970;
Sridharan and Prakash, 2000; Prakash and Sridharan, 2006).
To over come the shortcomings of these two popular meth-
ods of determining liquid limit, recently Sridharan et al.,
(2000) have suggested a test procedure to determine liquid
limit of soils namely liquid limit by equilibrium water con-
tent under ko stress, which has least limitations with the test
procedures and devoid of personal errors. In this paper the
above method of determining liquid limit has been further
verified, improved and simplified to be convenient for rou-
tine testing of soils.
Basic principles of ko – stress method
It is widely accepted that the liquid limit test is essentially a
measure of the viscous resistance or shear strength of a soil
that is so soft, it approached the liquid state (Casagrande,
1932; Sowers et al. 1959). In the percussion cup method,
the impact of soil filled cup on the base induces a dynamic
stress in the soil, which results in shear and the soil flows in
the sloping walls of the groove. Thus, the force resisting the
deformation of the sides of the groove is the shearing resis-
tance of the soil, and hence, the number of blows required
to close the groove of the soil represents a relative indirect
measure of dynamic shearing resistance of the soil at that
moisture content. In a cone penetrometer test, the resistance
offered to a static load gives the shearing resistance of the soil
to plastic flow at that moisture content. In case undrained
frictional resistance exists, the result becomes erroneous.
In the conventional methods of liquid limit determina-
tion which are in popular use, the methods were devised
based on the small but measurable shear strength at liquid
state of consistency. In a similar way, one can also examine
the possibility of having a low ko stress at liquid limit. It is
well known that in a conventional oedometer test, a saturated
soil mass reaches an equilibrium water content following
any increment in pressure. The equilibrium water content
depends upon the level of the pressure and the initial water
content itself. Thus, it may be stated that if the equilibrium
water content happens to be the liquid limit water, then the
corresponding pressure and initial water content required
to reach this equilibrium condition can be determined and
compared for different soils. In other words, this gives the
water holding capacity of the soils under very low ko stress
condition. On this premise experiments were conducted
using the conventional oedometer rings to obtain the pres-
sure required for a saturated slurry sample to reach an equi-
librium water content equal to that of the liquid limit water
content.
It is also well recognized that in a consolidation test, the
void ratio-logarithm of pressure relationship depends on
the water content at which the consolidation test is started
(Leonards and Ramiah 1959). Similarly, the equilibrium
water content reached under any stress will also depend
on the initial water content. Sridharan and Prakash (1997)
observed a similar behavior in sedimentation tests. A straight
line extension of these equilibrium points are obtained by
plotting initial water content (wi) versus equilibrium water
content (we) under a given vertical effective stress to meet
the wi = we line (45° line), which gives a unique minimum
equilibrium water content, and that can be taken as the liq-
uid limit of the soil. In other words, at the liquid limit water
content of a saturated soil sample, it has a unique external
effective vertical stress under ko conditions. This concept is
used to develop a procedure to determine the liquid limit, as
explained in the following sections.
Scope for Improvement
It was felt that the 60 mm diameter rings proposed in the
test procedure suggested by Sridharan et al., (2000) requires
more laboratory working space and soil for routine testing
to determine liquid limit. Hence, an attempt is made in this
experimental study to improve the test procedure with a
reduced dimension of the rings and also verify the appropri-
ateness of the value of ko stress of 0.9 kPa suggested by them.
The same is presented in this technical note.
Material and methods
Five natural soils from various geological locations, cover-
ing a wide range of liquid limit (40.8 % < wL < 83 %) were
selected for the present study and have been tested for their
physical properties according to ASTM Standards and the
results summarized in Table 1.
The specific gravity of soils used was determined using
a pyconometer (stoppered bottle having a capacity of 50 ml)
as specified by ASTM Standard Test Method for Specific
Gravity of Soils (D 854-92, 1995). The specific gravity values
are an average of three tests; individual determinations dif-
fered from the mean by less than 0.01. The liquid limit of
the soils was determined by the cone penetration method
 An improved ko-stress method of determining liquid limit of soils   559

Table 1.  Physical properties of soil used in the present study

Grain Size distribution
Soil No Soil type Location Gs wL (%) wP (%) IP (%)
Gravel (%) Sand (%) Silt (%) Clay (%)
1 Black cotton soil-1 Davanagere 2.7 40.8 24.6 16.2 0 20 75 5
2 Kaolinite Cannanore 2.65 50.0 36.8 13.5 0 41 40 19
3 Ball clay Cannanore 2.68 69.5 33.5 36.0 0 17 29 54
4 Black cotton soil-2 Mugur 2.71 78.0 57.8 20.2 0 7.1 74.9 18
5 Black cotton soil-3 Gulbarga 2.72 83.0 62.6 20.4 0 7.7 72.3 20

Figure 1.  Diagrammatic sketch of the apparatus used to determine the Liquid Limit of soils by ko - stress method.

as specified by BS: 1377 – part 2, 1990. The liquid limit tests
were carried out to obtain a minimum of six points for plot-
ting the flow curve. The consistency of soil specimen was
adjusted such that the cone penetration ranged between
15mm and 25mm. The plastic limit of soil specimens were
determined by 3mm rolling thread method as outlined in the
ASTM Standard Test Method for Liquid Limit, Plastic limit,
and Plasticity Index of Soils (D 4318 – 93, 1995). The plastic
limit values are an average of 3 trials.
Grain size analysis was done according to ASTM Test
Method for Particle Size Analysis of Soils (D 422-63, 1995) by
wet sieving of 300 g of dry soil using a 75µm sieve. The por-
tion retained on the 75µm sieve was oven dried and sieved
using sieves of 4.75 mm, 2.36 mm, 1.18 mm, 600 µm, 425
µm, 300 µm, 212 µm, 150 µm and 75 µm sizes. The soil pass-
ing 75µm was collected carefully and air-dried, and the grain
size distribution analysis was performed by the hydrometer
method. The results are presented in Table 1.
Improved ko - Stress method of liquid limit
determination
In order to standardize the test procedure with respect to the
reduced dimensions of the ring, so, as to optimize the labora-
tory working space and soil required and thus convenient for
routine determination of liquid limit, smaller size rings of 38
mm internal diameter and height of 20 mm were selected.
The diagrammatic sketch of the test set up used is shown
in Fig. 1. The internal diameter of the rings is 38 mm, with
the size of the bottom and top porous stones as 50 mm and
36 mm in diameter respectively. Due to the reduced diam-
eter of the rings, it was felt necessary to check whether the
ko-stress of 0.9 kPa suggested by Sridharan et al., (2000) was
still valid to arrive at the liquid limit of the soil. So, ko-stress
values around 0.9 kPa, namely 0.7 kPa and 1.1 kPa, in addi-
tion to 0.9 kPa were selected in the present study.
560  International Journal of Geotechnical Engineering

Figure 2.  Relationship between initial water content and equilibrium Figure 3.  Relationship between initial water content and equilibrium
water content under varying consolidation pressures of 0.7, 0.9, 1.1 kPa water content under varying consolidation pressures of 0.7, 0.9, 1.1
for soil 1. kPa for soil 2.

Testing Program
The selected soils were mixed to water contents to a con-
sistency that soils were nearly flowing. The saturated soil
samples were remoulded in the three rings (inner diameter
38 mm) simultaneously. The rings with sample inside were
placed on saturated porous stones of 50-mm diameter. On
the top of each ring after filling with soil, a filter paper was
placed, over which the selected ko stress of 0.7 kPa, 0.9 kPa
and 1.1 kPa in the form of aluminum loading cap of 34 mm
diameter with porous stone of 36mm diameter was placed.
The mass of the aluminum loading caps was approximately
50 g. On the top of the porous stone and the loading cap a
suitable additional mass was placed in the form of lead shots
to obtain the desired ko-stress of 0.7 kPa (79.4 g), 0.9 kPa
(102.1 g) and 1.1 kPa (124.7 g) respectively. It is to be noted
that the porous stones on saturation absorbed around 2 g of
Figure 4.  Relationship between initial water content and equilibrium
moisture. Hence this was taken into consideration while tak-
water content under varying consolidation pressures of 0.7, 0.9, 1.1
ing the mass of the lead shots. The initial moisture content kPa for soil 3.
of the soil sample was determined separately. The prepared
soils specimens in the rings were kept in a container, with Results and Discussion
sufficient water poured to maintain the saturation of the
sample through the bottom porous stone (Fig.1). The entire Fig. 2 shows a typical plot of the equilibrium water content
assembly was kept in a desiccator containing water at the versus initial water content of soil No.1. It can be observed
bottom to maintain controlled environment conditions. that the equilibrium water content reached for any initial
After 24 hours of equilibration under the ko stress, the equi- water is a function of the vertical consolidation stress (ko
librium water content was determined. Similar testing pro- stress) used. More is the ko stress, more is the water squeezed
cedure was adopted at various initial moisture contents. The out, and hence, lower is the equilibrium water content
samples were tested at four initial moisture contents. reached. The experiment was repeated for different initial
The results of these tests conducted on five soils selected water contents. The points were connected by best-fit line
and used in the present study are presented. and extended backwards to cut the equality line. This is
the water content where in the equilibrium water content
 An improved ko-stress method of determining liquid limit of soils   561

Table 2.  Results of equilibrium water content from ko –

stress method under various ko – stresses
wLc wL0.7 wL0.9 wL1.1
Soil No.
(cone method) (0.7 kPa) (0.9 kPa) (1.1 kPa)
1. 40.80 41.4 40.0 38.8
2. 50.00 52.2 50.8 49.2
3. 69.50 72 69.7 68.5
4. 78.00 79.5 77.5 75.5
5. 83.00 84.1 82.8 81.2

Figure 5.  Relationship between initial water content and equilibrium

water content under varying consolidation pressures of 0.7, 0.9, 1.1
kPa for soil 4.

Figure 7.  Relationship between liquid limit by cone penetration method

and ko - Stress method for various values of ko–Stress.

equilibrium water content under ko-stress versus liquid limit

Figure 6.  Relationship between initial water content and equilibrium
water content under varying consolidation pressures of 0.7, 0.9, 1.1
kPa for soil 5.
is equal to the initial water content. This water content is
defined as the limiting equilibrium water content. This
represents the water holding capacity of the soil under that
particular ko-stress. Hence, comparison of this water content
could be made with the liquid limit by the cone method.
Similar results were obtained for other soils as shown in
Figs. 3 to 6. The limiting equilibrium water content which is
equal to that of initial water content under any ko-stress for
all the soils as obtained from Figs. 2 to 6 is tabulated in Table
2 along with the liquid limit obtained from cone penetration
method. The same results are plotted in Fig. 7 as limiting
by cone penetration method. Further, observation of Fig.
7 shows that the results are quite consistent for all the five
soils under all the three ko-stresses adopted in this study.
Fig. 8 is a plot of liquid limit by cone penetration method
and ko - Stress method under a ko-stress of 0.9 kPa from the
results of present study and the literature (Sridharan et al.,
2000). It can be observed from Fig.8 that, for all the soils the
equilibrium water content under ko-stress of 0.9 kPa is found
to be close to the liquid limit obtained from cone method. It
can be mentioned here that though there is a reduction in the
dimension in the rings used, a ko-stress of 0.9 kPa is found
to be a suitable vertical consolidation pressure to determine
liquid limit from equilibrium water content under ko-stress
as suggested earlier by Sridharan et al., (2000).
Recommendations
From the results of the above carefully conducted experi-
mental program on five soils selected from various geological
562  International Journal of Geotechnical Engineering
Figure 8.  Relationship between liquid limit by cone penetration method
and ko–Stress method for a ko–Stress of 0.9 kPa from the present and
the literature
locations, the following dimensions of the rings and the value
of ko-stress to be adopted are suggested to determine the
liquid limit from equilibrium water content under ko-stress:
(i) A ring of 38 mm internal diameter and 20 mm
height, with bottom and top porous stones of
50 mm and 36 mm diameter respectively to be
adopted.
(ii) A vertical consolidation pressure (ko-stress) of 0.9
kPa to be used in the form of saturated porous
stone of 36 mm in diameter at the top and an alu-
minum loading cap.
Limitations
The proposed test procedure of determining liquid limit has
the following limitation:
(i) The test requires an additional time of 24 hours
as compared to the conventional method of deter-
mining liquid limit.
(ii) The liquid limit of chemically contaminated and
thixotropic soils determined by this method may
possibly give results that differ to that determined
by the conventional test procedures because of the
time period of 24 hours needed to reach equilib-
rium condition.
Conclusions
In view of the liquid limit being an important index prop-
erty which is used in many of the correlations to predict
engineering property, and that the currently used methods
having their own limitations, Sridharan et al., (2000) have
proposed a new method to determine liquid limit from equi-
librium water content under ko-stress. In this present work
an attempt has been made to improve the test procedure
with respect to the dimensions of the rings and associated
porous stones to be used and also to verify the ko-stress to be
adopted with the improved ko-stress method to determine
the liquid limit.
From the present study of determining the liquid limit
form equilibrium water content on five soils from various
geological locations, using 38 mm diameter and 20 mm
height rings, with 36 mm of top porous stone and 50 mm
of bottom porous stone, it has been found that the limiting
equilibrium water content for a ko-stress of 0.9 kPa is having
a good correlation with the liquid limit obtained from cone
penetration method.
The proposed method has the following advantages:
(i) The apparatus is extremely simple and easy to use.
(ii) It is free from operator errors, and
(iii) Offers good reproducibility.
(iv) Possibility of determining the water holding capac-
ity of relatively less plastic soils including fly ash.
It is hoped that the method would gain universal accep-
tance, and adopted as the standard method of determining
liquid limit of soils due to its several advantages as compared
to the existing popular methods.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to appreciate Hafeez and Vibha for-
mer undergraduate students of B M S college of Engineering
for their active involvement in this experimental program.
References
BSI. (1990). “Methods of test for soils for civil engineering
purposes: classification tests (1377-2).” British standard
Institution (BSI), London, UK.
Carrier, III, W.D. (1985). “Consolidation parameters derived
from index tests.” Géotechnique, 35 (2): 211 - 213.
Casagrande, A. (1958). “Notes on the design of the liquid
limit device.” Géotechnique, 8 (2): 84 - 91.
 An improved ko-stress method of determining liquid limit of soils   563
Casagrande, A. (1932). “Research on the Atterberg limits of
soils.” Public Roads, 13 (3): 121 - 130, 136.
Darienzo M. and Vey E. (1955). “Consistency Limits of
clays by the vane method.” Proc. of the H.R.B. Annual
Meeting, 34: 559 - 566.
Farrar, D.M. and Coleman J.D. (1967). “The correlation of
surface area with other properties of nineteen British
clay soils.” Journal of Soil Science, 18 (1): 118 - 124.
Koppula, S.D. (1981). “Statistical estimation of compression
index.” Geotechnical Testing Journal, 4 (2): 68 - 73.
Leonards, G.A., and Ramiah, B.K. (1959). “Time effects in the
consolidation of clays.” Symposium on time rates of load-
ing in soil testing, ASTM, Special Technical Publication
STP No. 254, pp. 116 - 130.
Nagaraj, T.S. & Srinivasa Murthy, B.R. (1983).
“Rationalization of Skempton’s compressibility equa-
tion.” Géotechnique,33 (4): 433 - 443.
Nagaraj, T.S. and Srinivasa Murthy, B.R. (1986). “A criti-
cal reappraisal of compression index equations.”
Géotechnique, 36 (1): 27 - 32.
Nagaraj, T.S., Pandian N.S., Narasimha Raju P.S.R. and
Vishnu Bhushan T. (1995). “Stress - state - time - perme-
ability relationships for saturated soils.” Proc. of the Int.
Symp. on Compression and consolidation of clayey soils,
Japan, pp. 537-542.
Narasimha, Raju P.S.R., Pandian N.S. and Nagaraj T.S.
(1995). “Analysis and estimation of coefficient of consol-
idation.” Geotechical Testing Journal, 18 (2): 252 - 258.
Nishida, Y. (1956). “A brief note on compression index
of soil.” Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundation
Divisions, Proceedings of ASCE., 82 (SM 3): 1 - 14.
Ohtsubo M., Takayama M. & Egashira K. (1983).
“Relationships of consistency limits and Activity to
some physical and chemical properties of Ariake marine
clays.” Soils and Foundations. 23 (1): 38 - 46.
Prakash, K and Sridharan, A. (2002). “Determination of liquid
limit from equilibrium sediment volume.” Géotechnique,
52 (9): 693-696.
Prakash, K and Sridharan, A. (2006). “Critical appraisal of
the cone penetration method of determining soil plastic-
ity.” Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 43 (8): 884-888.
Ramachandran, V.S., Kacker, K.P. and Rao. H.A.B. (1963).
“Determination of liquid limit of soils by dye adsorp-
tion.” Soil Science. 95: 414.
Ranganatham, B.V. & Satyanarayana, B. (1965). “A rational
method of predicting swelling potential for compacted
expansive clays.” Proc. of the 6th Int. Conf. on SMFE,
Montreal, Vol. 1, pp. 92 - 96.
Russel, E.R. and Mickle J.L. (1970). “Liquid limit values by
soil moisture tension.” Journal of the Soil Mechanics
and Foundation Divisions, Proceedings of ASCE., 96 :
967 - 989.
Seed, H.B., Woodward.R.J. and Lundgren, R. (1962).
“Prediction of swelling potential for compacted clays.”
Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division,
Proceedings of ASCE. 88 (3): 53 - 87.
Seed, H.B., Woodward R.J. and Lundgren R. (1964a). “Clay
mineralogical aspects of the Atterberg limits.” Journal
of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, Proceedings of
ASCE. 90 (1) 107 - 131
Seed, H.B., Woodward R.J. & Lundgren R. (1964b).
“Fundamental aspects of the Atterberg limits.” Journal
of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, Proceedings of
ASCE. 90 (1): 220 - 224
Sherwood, P.T. and Ryley, M.D. (1970). “An investigation of
a cone-penetrometer method for the determination of
the liquid limit.” Géotechnique, 20 (2): 203 - 208.
Skempton, A.W. (1944). “Notes on compressibility of clays.”
Quarterly Journal of geological Society, London, England.
100 (2): 119 - 135.
Sowers, G.F., Vesic, A. and Grandolfi, M. (1959). “Penetration
tests for liquid limit. Proceedings Symposium on
Atterberg Limits.” ASTM Special Technical Publication,
STP No. 254, pp. 216 - 224.
Sridharan, A. and Prakash K. (1997). “Characteristic
water contents of a fine-grained soil-water system.”
Géotechnique, 48 (3): 1 - 10.
Sridharan, A. and Prakash K. (2000). “Percussion and cone
methods of determining liquid limit of soils: Controlling
mechanisms.” Geotechnical Testing Journal, 23 (2): 236-
244.
Sridharan, A. Nagaraj, H.B. and Prasad, P.S. (2000). “Liquid
limit of soils from equilibrium water content in one-
dimensional normal compression.” Proc. Instn. Civ.
Engrs. Geotech. Engng., 143, 164-169.
Srinivasa, Murthy B.R. and Nagaraj T.S. (1987). “Prediction
of heave in swelling soils.” Proc. of 6th Int. Conf. on
Expansive soils, New Delhi, pp. 201 - 206.
Vijayvergiya, V.N. and Ghazzaly, O.I. (1973). “Prediction
of swelling potential for natural clays.” Proc. of the 3rd
Int. Conf. on Expansive soils, Haifa, Israel, Vol. 1, pp.
227-236.
Wroth, C.P. and Wood, D.M. (1978). “The correlation of
index properties with some basic engineering properties
of soils.” Can Geotech. J., 15 (2): 137 - 145.