HomeMy WebLinkAbout1.07 Geotechnical ReportGEOTECHNICAL REPORT
Gtech
Hepworth - Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc.
5020 Couiify Road 154
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
Phone: 970-945-7988
Fax: 970 - 945 -8454
hpgeo@hpgeotech.com
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL STUDY
PROPOSED T. O. RANCH SUBDIVISION
ROAD 100 AND HIGHWAY 82
GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO
JOB NO. 100 661
DECEMBER 19, 2000
PREPARED FOR:
MARY ANN HYDE
P.O. BOX 1557
ASPEN, COLORADO 81612
HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GEOTECHNNICAL, INC.
December 19, 2000
Mary Ann Hyde
P.O. Box 1557
Aspen, Colorado 81612 Job No. 100 661
Subject: Report Transmittal, Preliminary Geotechnical Study, Proposed T.O.
Ranch Subdivision, 100 Road and Highway 82, Garfield County,
Colorado
Dear Ms. Hyde:
As requested, we have conducted a geotechnical study for the proposed subdivision.
The property is suitable for the proposed development based on geologic and
geotechnical conditions. Potential storm water impacts from uphill drainage on the
property should be considered in the development.
Subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory borings drilled in the proposed
development area consist of about 2 to 15 feet of sandy clay and silty sand overlying
dense river gravel alluvium. Groundwater was not encountered in the borings to the
drilled depths of 6 to 18 feet. The upper soils were moist to very moist with depth.
Spread footings placed on the natural subsoils and designed for an allowable bearing
pressure in the range of 1,000 psf to 1,500 psf appear suitable for building support.
Footings that bear entirely on the underlying dense gravels can be designed for 3,000
psf. Infiltration septic disposal systems appear feasible. The system may need to extend
through the clay soils and into the underlying river gravel alluvium at Lot 1.
The report which follows describes our exploration, summarizes our findings, and
presents our recommendations suitable for planning and preliminary design. It is
important that we provide consultation during design and field services during
construction to review and monitor the implementation of the geotechnical
recommendations.
If you have any questions regarding this report, please contact us.
Sincerely,
HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
Steven L. Pawlak, P.E.
Rev. by: DEH
SLP/ksw
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY 1
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 1
SITE CONDITIONS 2
GEOLOGIC SETTING 2
FIELD EXPLORATION
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
GEOLOGIC SITE ASSESSMENT
STORM WATER AND DEBRIS MANAGEMENT 4
SINKHOLES 5
REGIONAL EVAPORITE DEFORMATIONS 5
MOISTURE SENSITIVE SOILS 6
CONSTRUCTION RELATED SLOPE INSTABILITY 6
EARTHQUAKE CONSIDERATIONS 6
PRELIMINARY DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS 7
FOUNDATIONS 7
FLOOR SLABS 7
UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM 8
SITE GRADING 8
SURFACE DRAINAGE 8
PERCOLATION TESTING 9
LINIITATIONS 9
REFERENCE 10
FIGURE 1 - GEOLOGY MAP
FIGURE 2 - EXPLORATORY BORING LOCATIONS
FIGURE 3 - LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
FIGURE 4 - LEGEND AND NOTES
FIGURES 5 & 6 - SWELL- CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
TABLE I - SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
TABLE II - PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY
This report 'presents the results of a preliminary geotechnical study for the
proposed T.O. Ranch Subdivision located at Road 100 and Highway 82, Garfield
County, Colorado. The project site is shown on Figs. 1 and 2. The purpose of the
study was to evaluate the geologic and subsurface conditions and their potential impacts
on the project. The study was conducted in accordance with our proposal for
geotechnical engineering services to Mary Ann Hyde, dated May 4, 2000.
A field exploration program consisting of a reconnaissance and exploratory
borings was conducted to obtain information on the site and subsurface conditions.
Samples of the subsoils obtained during the field exploration were tested in the
laboratory to determine their classification, compressibility or swell and other
engineering characteristics. The results of the field exploration and laboratory testing
were analyzed to develop recommendations for project planning and preliminary design.
This report su nmarizes the data obtained during this study and presents our conclusions
and recommendations based on the proposed development and subsurface conditions
encountered.
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
The 17 acre TO Ranch will be subdivided into three single- family residential
lots, see Figs. 1 and 2. The lots will be between 4 and 7 acres. Specific building types
and locations had not been determined at the time of this study. It is expected that the
residences will be relatively large, 2 to 3 story buildings. In addition to the residences,
outbuildings and other axillary structures may also be built on the lots. The residences
will have individual wells and sewage disposal facilities. Primary access to the lots
will be a common driveway located along the northern boundary of Lot 1.
If development plans change significantly from those described above, we should
re- evaluate the recommendations presented in this report.
H -P GEOTECH
L�
SITE CONDITIONS
The TO Ranch is located near Catherine's Store in the Roaring Fork valley
about 3 miles upstream of Carbondale. The property covers parts of the northern half
of Section 31, T. 7 S., R. 87 W. Highway 82 borders the property on the south and
County Road. 100 borders the property to the east. The Roaring Fork River is located
about 3,000 feet south of the highway. The topography on the property is shown on
Figs. 1 and 2. Slopes on the property are nearly level to gently sloping, in the range of
1% to 5%. The property is on two alluvial fans that developed at the mouths of two
tributary drainages with basins on the northern valley side, see Fig. 1. The drainage
basin upslope of the western fan is large and covers more than 2,500 acres. The
drainage basin upslope of the eastern fan is considerably smaller and covers about 30
acres. The streams that drain these two basins are ephemeral and only have flow
following intense precipitation. At the time of our field work, the property was an
irrigated pasture and hay field. Residences, commercial facilities and ranches are
located on the adjacent properties.
GEOLOGIC SETTING
The general geologic features at the TO Ranch and vicinity are shown on Fig. 1. The
property is on the fourth river terrace level (Qt4) above the Roaring Fork River. In this
part of the valley the fourth terrace lies about 20 feet above the river and the higher fifth
terrace (Qt5) is about 100 feet above the river. A steep escarpment separates the fourth
and fifth terrace levels. Alluvial fans (Qaf) have developed at the mouths of the
tributary drainages along the base of the escarpment. Alluvial aprons (Qaa) are present
at the base of the escarpment between the alluvial fans.
The fourth terrace level (Qt4) is underlain by glacial outwash that correlates with
the late Pleistocene Pinedale glacial period (Kirkham and Widmann, 1997). The
exploratory borings show that the alluvial fan deposits near the borings are between 2 to
15 feet thick and overlie glacial outwash. The fan deposits are a low to medium
plasticity silty sand and sandy clay with scattered angular rock fragments. The
H -P GEOTECH
-3
underlying outwash consists of rounded gravel, cobbles and boulders in a silty to clean
sand matrix. The fans are geologically young and are largely the product of sediment
deposited by infrequent flash foods and associated debris flows and debris floods.
Regional geology mapping shows that formation rock in the project area is the
Pennsylvanian age Eagle Valley Evaporite (Kirkham and Widmann, 1997). The
evaporite crops out on the valley sides to the north and south of the project area, but is
covered by surficial soils at the project site. The Eagle Valley Evaporite is a gray to tan
gypsum, anhydrite and halite with interbedded siltstone, claystone, shale and dolomite.
Bedding in the rock is usually complexly folded because of flow of the plastic evaporite.
The gypsum, anhydrite and halite are soluble in fresh water. Subsurface voids and
related sinkholes are sometimes present in areas where the Eagle Valley Evaporite is
near the ground surface. Regional geologic mapping shows that sinkholes are present
on the older alluvial fans about 1000 feet to the north of the property.
FIELD EXPLORATION
The field exploration for the project was conducted on November 22 and
December 15, 2000. Three exploratory borings were drilled at the locations shown on
Fig. 1.to evaluate the subsurface conditions. The borings were advanced with 4 inch
diameter continuous flight auger powered by a truck- mounted Longyear BK -51HD drill
rig. The borings were logged by a representative of Hepworth - Pawlak Geotechnical,
Inc.
Samples of the subsoils were taken with 1% inch and 2 inch I.D. spoon
samplers. The samplers were driven into the subsoils at various depths with blows
from a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches. This test is similar to the standard
penetration test described by ASTM Method D -1586. The penetration resistance values
are an indication of the relative density or consistency of the subsoils. Depths at which
the samples were taken and the penetration resistance values are shown on the Logs of
Exploratory Borings, Fig. 3. The samples were returned to our laboratory for review
by the project engineer and testing.
H -P GEOTECH
r.
4
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Graphic logs of the subsurface conditions encountered at the site are shown on
Fig. 3. Below about 1 foot of topsoil, the subsoils consist of medium to stiff sandy clay
and loose to medium dense silty sand overlying dense, slightly silty sandy gravel,
cobbles and boulders. Drilling in the dense gravel alluvium with auger equipment was
difficult due to the cobbles and boulders and drilling refusal was encountered in the
deposit at depths of 6 feet to 18 feet.
Laboratory testing performed on samples obtained from the borings included
natural moisture content and density, finer than sand size gradation analyses and liquid
and plastic limits. Results of swell- consolidation testing performed on relatively
undisturbed drive samples of the upper clays and silty sands, presented on Figs. 5 and
6, indicate moderate compressibility under conditions of loading and wetting. The clay
soils are low to medium plasticity and medium to stiff consistency. The laboratory
testing is summarized in Table L
No free water was encountered in the borings at the time of drilling or when
checked 3 days later. The upper soils were moist to very moist with depth.
1 GEOLOGIC SITE ASSESSMENT
There are several conditions of a geologic nature that should be considered in
project planning and design. These conditions and their expected influence on the
proposed development are discussed below.
STORM WATER AND DEBRIS MANAGEMENT
The alluvial fans in the project area are geologically young and are potential
sites of debris flows and debris floods associated with thunderstorms. The existing
drainage channels on the fans are shallow and usually poorly defined. A hydrologist
should evaluate if the existing fan channel system has the capacity to convey the
appropriate design flash floods and associated debris flows and debris floods. If the
appropriate design flash flood cannot be contained in the existing channel system then
H -P GEOTECH
5
channel improvements should be considered. If it is not possible to route the design
flash floods through the project in the existing or improved channels, then other
mitigation options could be deflection berms and building flood proofmg. The
appropriate mitigation method will largely depend on the building locations, the size of
the design flash flood and risks acceptable to the developer and home owners.
SINKHOLES
Evidence of sinkholes were not observed on the property, however sinkholes are
known to be present in the region. The sinkhole risk on the property is viewed to be
low and no greater than that present in other parts of northwestern Colorado where the
evaporite is near the surface. The potential for shallow subsurface voids that could
develop into sinkholes should be considered when planning site specific geotechnical
studies at the building sites. If conditions indicative of sinkhole related problems are
encountered, the building site should be abandoned or the feasibility of mitigation
evaluated. Mitigation measures could include:
• Stabilization by Grouting
• Stabilization by Excavation and Backfitlling
• Deep Foundation Systems
• Structural Bridging
• Mat Foundations
• Set -back from the Sinkhole
Water features such as landscape ponds are not recommended near building sites
unless evaluated on a site specific basis. Home owners should be advised of the
sinkhole potential, since early detection of foundation distress and timely remedial
actions are important in reducing the cost of remediation, should a sinkhole start to
develop after construction.
REGIONAL EVAPORITE DEFORMATIONS
The project site is in an area where broad regional ground deformations have
been associated with evaporite solution and flow. An evaporite related subsidence
trough has been identified on the outwash terrace about one mile to the east of the
H -P GEOTECH
LJ
L.
L
6
project area (Kirkham and Others, 1998). The trough is about 4,500 feet long and 1000
feet wide. It is uncertain if geologic processes that produced this subsidence trough and
others in the region are still active or if deformation has stopped. If regional ground
deformations are still occurring their rates are low and differential movements over short
distances are unlikely. Because of this, the risk of regional deformation problems to
residential buildings in the project area is considered to be low. We are unaware of
problems associated with possible broad evaporite deformations in the region.
MOISTURE SENSITIVE SOILS
It has been our experience that the alluvial fans in the Roaring Fork River valley
can be moisture sensitive and have the potential for relatively large differential
compression if the deposits are relatively deep and wetted after construction.
Preliminary recommendations for foundations on the alluvial fans are presented in the
Preliminary Design Recommendations section of this report. The potential for moisture
sensitive soils should be evaluated on a site specific basis during development on the
lots.
CONSTRUCTION RELATED SLOPE INSTABILITY
We do not expect major problems with construction related slope instability if
grading is engineered and extensive grading is not needed for the residences.
Preliminary recommendations for site grading are presented in the Preliminary Design
Recommendations section of this report.
EARTHQUAKE CONSIDERATIONS
The project area could experience moderately strong earthquake related ground
shaking. Modified Mercalli Intensity VI ground shaking should be expected during a
reasonable service life for the residences, but the probability for stronger ground shaking
is low. Intensity VI ground shaking is felt by most people and causes general alarm, but
results in negligible damage to structures of good design and construction. Occupied
structures should be designed to withstand moderately strong ground shaking with little
or no damage and not to collapse under stronger ground shaking. The region is in the
H -P GEOTECH
7
Uniform Building Code, Seismic Risk Zone 1. Based on our current understanding of
the earthquake hazard in this part of Colorado, we see no reason to increase the
commonly accepted seismic risk zone for the area.
PRELIMINARY DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
The conclusions and recommendations presented below are based on the
proposed development, subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory borings,
and our experience in the area. The recommendations are suitable for planning and
preliminary design but site specific studies should be conducted for individual lot
development.
FOUNDATIONS
Bearing conditions could vary depending on the specific building location and
excavation depth on the property. Based on the nature of the proposed construction,
spread footings placed on the natural subsoils should be suitable for building support.
We expect the footings can be sized for an allowable bearing pressure in the range of
1,000 psf to 1,500 psf. Footings that bear entirely on the underlying dense gravel
alluvium can be designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 3,000 psf. There could
be locally soft wet soils that need to be removed or stabilized in footing areas.
Foundation walls should be designed to span local anomalies and to resist lateral earth
loadings when acting as retaining structures. Below grade areas and retaining walls
should be protected from wetting and hydrostatic Ioadnng by use of an underdrain
system. The footings should have a minimum depth of 36 inches for frost protection.
FLOOR SLABS
Slab -on -grade construction should be feasible for bearing on the natural soils
below the topsoil. There could be some post construction slab movement at sites with
hydrocompressive soils. To reduce the effects of some differential movement, floor
slabs should be separated from all bearing walls and columns with expansion joints.
Floor slab control joints should be used to reduce damage due to shrinkage craclanng. A
H -P GEOTECH
-8
minimum 4 inch thick layer of free - draining gravel should underlie basement level slabs
to facilitate drainage.
UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM
Although free water was not encountered in the exploratory borings, it has been
our experience in the area that local perched groundwater can develop during times of
heavy precipitation or seasonal runoff. An underdrain system should be provided to
protect below -grade construction, such as retaining walls and basement areas from
wetting and hydrostatic pressure buildup. The drains should consist of drainpipe
surrounded above the invert level with free - draining granular material. The drain
should be placed at each level of excavation and at least 1 foot below lowest adjacent
finish grade and sloped at a minimum 1% to a suitable gravity outlet.
SITE GRADING
The risk of construction - induced slope instability at the site appears low provided
cut and fill depths are limited to about 10 feet. More extensive grading may be feasible
and should be studied on a site specific basis. Structural fills should be compacted to at
least 95 % of the maximum standard Proctor density near optimum moisture content.
Prior to fill placement, the subgrade should be carefully prepared by removing all
vegetation and topsoil. The fill should be benched into slopes that exceed 20 % grade.
The on -site soils excluding oversized rock and topsoil should be suitable for use in
embankment fills. Some of the clays are very moist and could require drying before use
as structural fill. Permanent unretained cut and fill slopes should be graded at
2 horizontal to 1 vertical or flatter and protected against erosion by revegetation, rock
riprap or other means.
SURFACE DRAINAGE
The grading plan for the subdivision should consider runoff from steep uphill
slopes through the project and at individual sites. Water should not be allowed to pond
which could impact slope stability and foundations. To limit infiltration into the bearing
soils next to buildings, exterior backfill should be well compacted and have a positive
H -P GEOTECH
-9
slope away from the building for a distance of 10 feet. Roof downspouts and drains
should discharge well beyond the limits of all backfill and landscape irrigation should be
restricted.
PERCOLATION TESTING
Percolation tests were conducted on November 28 and December 18, 2000 to
evaluate the feasibility of infiltration septic disposal systems at the site. One percolation
hole was drilled next to each of the three exploratory borings at locations as shown on
Fig. 1. The test holes were drilled with 6 inch diameter auger and were soaked with
water one day prior to testing. The soils encountered in the percolation holes are similar
to those encountered in the exploratory borings shown on Fig. 2 and consist of stiff
sandy clay and silty sand. The percolation test results are presented in Table II and
indicate variable percolation rates. Based on the subsurface conditions encountered and
the percolation test results, the tested areas appear suitable for conventional infiltration
septic disposal systems. Due to possible slow percolation rates in the clay soils
encountered at Lot 1, the disposal system may need to be extended down into the
underlying gravel alluvium. A civil engineer should design the infiltration septic
disposal system for each lot.
LINIITATIONS
This study has been conducted according to generally accepted geotechnical
engineering principles and practices in this area at this time. We make no warranty
either expressed or implied. The conclusions and recommendations submitted in this
report are based upon the data obtained from the field reconnaissance, review of
published geologic reports, the exploratory borings located as shown on Figs. 1 and 2,
the proposed type of construction and our experience in the area. Our findings include
interpolation and extrapolation of the subsurface conditions identified at the exploratory
borings and variations in the subsurface conditions may not become evident until
excavation is performed. If conditions encountered during construction appear different
H -P GEOTECH
- 10 -
from those described in this report, we should be notified so that re- evaluation of the
recommendations may be made.
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use by our client for planning and
preliminary design purposes. We are not responsible for technical interpretations by
others of our information. As the project evolves, we should provide continued
consultation, conduct additional evaluations and review and monitor the implementation
of our recommendations. Significant design changes may require additional analysis or
modifications to the recommendations presented herein. We recommend on -site
observation of excavations and foundation bearing strata and testing of structural fill by
a representative of the geotechnical engineer.
Respectfully Submitted,
HEPWORTH - PAWLAK ; = "` :..� CAL, INC.
Steven L. Pawlak, P.
Reviewed by:
Daniel E. Hardin,
SLP/ksw
cc: Land Design Partners - Attn: Ron Liston
REFERENCE
Kirkham, R.M. and Widmann, B.L., 1997, Geology Map of the Carbondale
Quadrangle, Garfield County, Colorado: Colorado Geological Survey Open File
97 -3.
Kirkham, R.M. and Others, 1998, Geology Map of the Leon Quadrangle, Eagle and
Garfield Counties, Colorado: Colorado Geological Survey Open File 98 -3.
H -P GEOTECH
Qafo
Qt5
Qaa too
I f 1 1 �--
1 l 1
I 1 l 1 � �3
1 j <�Qafo
I ` Qafo fo
/ '~ -.... __'� '% Qt5
.. Qt5 _ ▪ �� 1 •
i r-- ,� �,
Qaa
Qaf
7
I•
Lot 3 •
B4
Ale P-2
32 dot 2
Qt4
Catherine's
Store
EXPLANATION;
Qaf - Alluvial Fan
Qafo Old Alluvial Fan
Qaa - Alluvial Apron
Qt4 - Fourth Terrace Level
Qt5 - Fifth Terrace Level
— — — Contact (approx.)
• Baring (approx.)
0 Perciolalion Test
(approx.)
0 300 ft
Scale 1 In. = 30011
Contours 1 ft.
• 1
0
001] HEPWORTH- PAWLAK
100
GEOTECHNICAL, Inc
TO Ranch - Exploratory Boring Locations
10
15
20
BORING 1
ELEV. =6286'
RI
1B /12
WC =16.8
DD =110
-200=86
LL =28
PI =12
BORING 2 BORING 3
ELEV. =6289' ELEV. =6291'
13/12
WC =8.0
DD =103
- 200 =61
7/12
WC =11.2
DD =110
7/12
5/2,15/0
26/12
9/12
WC =11.7
DD =110
.- 200 =50
6/12
WC =15.5
DD =111
16/5,10/0
Note: Explanation of symbols is shown on Fig. 4.
10
15
20
100 661
HEPWORTH- -PAWLAK 1 LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
Fig. 3
LEGEND:
ElTOPSOIL; organic sandy silty and clay, slightly moist, dark brown.
1
L
CLAY (CL); sandy, silty, medium to stiff, moist to very moist, brown, low to
medium plasticity.
SAND (SM); silty to very silty, gravelly layers, scattered cobbles, loose to
medium dense, moist to very moist, brown.
GRAVEL, COBBLES, AND BOULDERS (GM-GP); slightly silty sandy, dense to very
dense, slightly moist, brown, rounded rock.
Relatively undisturbed drive sample; 2-inch I.D. California liner sample.
Drive sample; standard penetration test (SPT), 1 3/8 inch I.D. split spoon
sample, ASTM D - 1586.
Drive sample blow count; indicates that 18 blows of a 140 pound hammer
18/12
falling 30 inches were required to drive the California or SPT sampler 12
inches.
Practical drilling refusal.
NOTES:
1. Exploratory borings were drilled on November 22 and December 15, 2000 with
a 4 -inch diameter continuous flight power auger.
2. Locations of exploratory borings were measured approximately by pacing from
features shown on the site plan provided.
3. Elevations of exploratory borings were obtained by interpolation between
contours on the site plan provided, Logs are drawn to depth.
4. The exploratory boring locations and elevations should be considered accurate
only to the degree implied by the method used.
5. The lines between materials shown on the exploratory boring logs represent the
approximate boundaries between material types and transitions may be gradual.
6. No free water was encountered in the borings at the time of drilling or when
when checked 3 days later. Fluctuation in water level may occur with time.
7. Laboratory Testing Results:
WC = Water Content,( % )
DD = Dry Density ( pcf )
-200 = Percent passing No. 200 sieve.
UC = Unconfined Compressive Strength ( psf )
LL = Liquid Limit ( % )
PI = Plasticity Index ( % )
100 661
HEPWORTH- PAWLAK
GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
LEGEND AND NOTES
Fig. 4
aQ
0
1
0
2
co
a)
O 3
U
4
0
as
0
CI) 2
• 3
U
4
5
0.1 1.0 10
APPLIED PRESSURE - ksf
100
Moisture Content = 11.2 percent
Dry Density = 110 percent
Sample of :Very Silty Sand
From:Boring 2 at 5 Feet
Compression
upon
wetting
0.1 1.0 10
APPLIED PRESSURE -- ksf
100
100 661 HEPWORTH —PAWLA
GEOTECHNICAL, INC. . SWELL CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 5
Moisture Content = 16.8 percent
Dry Density = 110 percent
Sample of:Sandy Clay
From: Boring 1 at 1 Foot
No movement
upon
wetting
•
M
0.1 1.0 10
APPLIED PRESSURE - ksf
100
Moisture Content = 11.2 percent
Dry Density = 110 percent
Sample of :Very Silty Sand
From:Boring 2 at 5 Feet
Compression
upon
wetting
0.1 1.0 10
APPLIED PRESSURE -- ksf
100
100 661 HEPWORTH —PAWLA
GEOTECHNICAL, INC. . SWELL CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 5
1
2
3
0.1 1.0 10
APPLIED PRESSURE - ksf
100
100 661
HEPWORTH- PAWLAR
GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
SWELL CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS j Fi.g.6
Moisture Content = 15.6 percent
Dry Density = 111 percent
Sample of: Very Silty Sand
From: Boring 3 at 10 Feet
No movement
upon
wetting
0.1 1.0 10
APPLIED PRESSURE - ksf
100
100 661
HEPWORTH- PAWLAR
GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
SWELL CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS j Fi.g.6
HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GEOTECHNMCAL, INC.
TABLE I
SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
JOB NO. 100 661+
SAMPLE LOCATION
NATURAL
MOISTURE
CONTENT
( %}
NATURAL
DRY
DENSITY
(pcf}
GRADATION
PERCENT
PASSING
NO. 200
SIEVE
ATTERBERG LIMITS
UNCONFINED
COMPRESSIVE
STRENGTH
(PS9
SOIL OR
BEDROCK TYPE
BORING
DEPTH
{feet)
GRAVEL
1 %}
-
SAN»
{961
LIQUID
LIMIT
( %)
PLASTIC
INDEX
1 961
1
1
16.8
110
86
28
12
Sandy Clay
•
2
2 Y2
8.0
103
61
Sandy Clayey Silt
5
11.2
110
Very Silty Sand
3
5
11.7
110
50
Very Silty Sand
10
15.6
111
Very Silty Sand
•
HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
TABLE II
PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS
JOB'NO.100 661
HOLE NO.
HOLE DEPTH
{INCHES}
LENGTH OF
INTERVAL
(MIN}
WATER DEPTH
AT START OF
INTERVAL
(INCHES)
WATER DEPTH
AT END OF
INTERVAL
(INCHES}
DROP IN
WATER
LEVEL
(INCHES}
AVERAGE i
PERCOLATION
RATE
(MIN. /INCH)
P -1
32
15
9
7 '/4
1 1/4
30
73/4
7
%
7
6 '/4
a/4
6 1/4
5 %
'/S
5'/4
5'/4
14
5 1/4
4 3/4
'A
P -2
35
15
12
10 %
1 314
20
10 1/4
8 '/4
2
8 '44
7
1 3/4
7
5 'A
1 Yz
5 '/z
4 '/4
3/4
4'/4
4
. %
P -3
32
15
refill
8
N.- 6 A
1 3/4
20
51/4
5
1'/4
5
4''A
%
6 3/4
5
1 1/4
5
4 1/4
3/4
L 4 '/4
3 '/3
'/4
Note: Percolation test numbers correspond to adjacent exploratory boring number (see Fig. 1).
The percolation tests were performed in 6 -inch diameter auger holes on December 19,
2000. The percolation rate is the average of the last 2 readings of each test.