English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

The Casagrande percussion method and the fall cone method are being followed to determine the liquid limit of fine-grained soils worldwide. The liquid limits obtained by these two methods have been observed by many to be not the same. In this article, an attempt is made to show that the values of liquid limit obtained by the Casagrande percussion method and the fall cone method are two different soil properties, which cannot be used synonym to each other. The experimental data documented in the geotechnical engineering literature and also from the authors’ files are analysed critically from the clay mineralogical composition point of view. The analysis has revealed the following:The liquid limit obtained by the Casagrande percussion method is a soil rheological property.The liquid limit obtained by the fall cone method is basically a mechanical property of the soil. The liquid limit obtained by the Casagrande percussion method is a soil rheological property. The liquid limit obtained by the fall cone method is basically a mechanical property of the soil.

Critical appraisal of the Casagrande percussion and fall cone liquid limits of fine-grained soils