HomeMy WebLinkAboutSoils Report 05.10.2017H-PKUMAR
Geotechnical Engineering Engineering Geology
Materials Testing l Environmental
5020 County Road 154
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Phone: (970) 945-7988
Fax: (970) 945-8454
Email: hpkglenwoad@kumanisa.com
Office Locations: Parker, Glenwood Springs, and Silverthorne, Colorado
SUBSURFACE STUDY
FOR FOUNDATION DESIGN
PROPOSED RANCH HOUSE
BIG MOUNTAIN RANCH
COUNTY ROAD 252, NORTH OF RIFLE
GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO
PROJECT NO. 17-7-263
MAY 10, 2017
PREPARED FOR:
EGGERS ARCHITECTURE, INC.
ATTN: DON EGGERS
P. O. BOX 798
KREMMLING, COLORADO 80459
domeggers@eggersarchitecture.com
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY - 1 -
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION - I -
SITE CONDITIONS - 2 -
FIELD EXPLORATION - 2 -
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS - 2 -
FOUNDATION BEARING CONDITIONS - 3 -
DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS - 4 -
FOUNDATIONS - 4 -
FLOOR SLABS - 5
UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM - 6 -
SURFACE DRAINAGE _ 7 -
LIMITATIONS - 7 -
FIGURE 1 - LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORING AND PITS
FIGURE 2 - LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORING AND PITS
FIGURE 3 - LEGEND AND NOTES
FIGURES 4 through 9- SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
TABLE 1- SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
H -P. KUMAR
Project No. 17-7-263
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY
This report presents the results of a subsurface study for the proposed ranch house residence to
be located at Big Mountain Ranch, near County Road 252, north of Rifle, Garfield County,
Colorado. The project site is shown on Figure I. The purpose of the study was to develop
recommendations for foundation design. The study was conducted in general accordance with
our agreement for geotechnical engineering services to Eggers Architecture, Inc., dated March
28, 2017.
A field exploration program consisting of an exploratory boring and pits was conducted to obtain
information on subsurface conditions. Samples of the subsoils and bedrock 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 foundation types, depths and allowable
pressures for the proposed building foundation. This report summarizes the data obtained during
this study and presents our conclusions, design recommendations and other geotechnical
engineering considerations based on the proposed construction and the subsurface conditions
encountered.
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION
The residence will be a single story, log structure located on the property as shown an Figure 1.
The building floor will be structurally supported over crawlspace in the living arca and slab -on -
grade in the attached garage.
We assume excavation for the building will have cut depths of
about 3 to 4 feet below the existing ground surface. For the purpose of our analysis, foundation
loadings for the structure were assumed to be relatively Tight and typical of the proposed type of
construction. The residence will have 3 bedrooms and have an on-site wastewater treatment
system (OWTS) located to the northwest.
If building loadings, location or grading plans are significantly different from those described
above, we should be notified to re-evaluate the recommendations contained in this report.
H-P%KUMAR
Project No. 17-7-263
-�-
SITE CONDITIONS
The proposed building site is vacant and the ground surface appears mostly natural. The
vegetation had been removed in the building area at the time of our field exploration and about
the upper 1 foot of ground was disturbed. The terrain is relatively flat and strongly sloping down
to the northwest at grades estimated at about 3 to 5%. Vegetation outside the cleared building
site consisted of moderately thick oak brush with an understory of grass and weeds. There were
scattered cobbles and boulders up to about 2 feet in diameter on the ground surface in areas.
FIELD EXPLORATION
The field exploration for the project was conducted on April 6 and 21, 2017. Initially two
backhoe pits (Pits 1 and 2) were excavated at the building site to evaluate the shallow subsoil
conditions. Due to expansive soil and weathered claystone encountered in the pits, an
exploratory boring (Boring 1) was subsequently drilled to better evaluate the subsurface
conditions. The pit and boring locations are shown an Figure 1. The pits were excavated with a
backhoe provided by the ranch. The boring was advanced with 4 inch diameter continuous flight
auger powered by a truck -mounted CME 45B drill rig. The pits and boring were logged by a
representative of H-P/Kumar.
Samples of the subsoils and bedrock in the boring were taken with a 2 inch I.D. spoon sampler.
The sampler was driven into the subsoils and bedrock 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 and bedrock. Samples from the pits were obtained with
relatively undisturbed, hand driven 2 -inch diameter liners. Depths at which the samples were
taken and the penetration resistance values arc shown an the Logs of Exploratory Boring and
Pits, Figure 2. The samples were returned to our laboratory for review by the project engineer
and testing.
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Graphic logs of the subsurface conditions encountered at the site are shown on Figure 2. The
subsoils encountered, below 1% to 3 feet of organic topsoil, consisted of nil to 31/2 feet of stiff,
H-P%KUMAR
Project No. 17-7-263
-3 -
sandy clay underlain by nil to 2 feet of very stiff/medium dense, sandy clay and gravel with
scattered cobbles. Below depths of 5 to 7 feet, medium hard to hard weathered claystone was
encountered underlain in the boring at a depth of 131/2 feet by less weathered and very hard
claystone bedrock that extended down to the boring depth of 26 feet.
Laboratory testing performed on samples obtained during the field exploration included natural
moisture content and density, and swell -consolidation testing. The results of the swell -
consolidation testing, provided on Figures 4 through 9, indicate the clay and claystone materials
typically have low compressibility under relatively Tight surcharge loading and a low to
relatively high swell potential when wetted under a constant 1,000 psf surcharge. Swell
pressures up to about 5,000 to 7,000 psf were typically measured on the weathered claystone
samples and about 15,000 psf on a sample of the claystone bedrock. One sample (Boring 1 at 10
feet) of the weathered claystone showed a low hydro -compression potential and moderately high
compressibility when loaded after wetting. The sample was likely partly disturbed from the
sampling process. The laboratory testing is summarized in Table 1.
No free water was encountered in the boring or pits at the time of drilling or excavation and the
subsoils and bedrock were generally moist.
FOUNDATION BEARING CONDITIONS
The subsoils and bedrock encountered at the site are expansive. Shallow foundations placed on
the expansive materials similar to those encountered al this site can experience movement
causing structural distress if the clay/claystone is subjected to changes in moisture content. A
drilled pier foundation can be used to penetrate the expansive materials to place the bottom of the
piers in a zone of relatively stable moisture conditions and make it possible to load the piers
sufficiently to resist uplift movements, and is recommended for foundation support of the
residence. In addition to their ability to reduce differential movements caused by expansive
materials, straight -shaft piers have the advantage of providing relatively high supporting
capacity. The piers can be constructed relatively quickly and should experience a relatively
small amount of movement.
H-P€KUMAR
Project No. 17-7-263
A 4 -inch void form should be provided beneath grade beams
-4 -
DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
FOUNDATIONS
The design and construction criteria presented below should be observed for a straight -shaft
drilled pier foundation system:
I)
The piers should be designed for an allowable end bearing pressure of 25,000 psf
and an allowable skin friction value of 2,500 psf for that portion of the pier in
bedrock.
2) Piers should also be designed for a minimum dead load pressure of 10,000 psf
If the minimum dead load requirement cannot be
based on pier end area only.
achieved, the pier length should be extended beyond the minimum penetration to
make up the dead load deficit. This can be accomplished by assuming one-half
the allowable skin friction value given above acts in the direction to resist uplift.
3) Uplift on the piers from structural loading can be resisted by utilizing 75% of the
allowable skin friction value plus an allowance for the weight of the pier.
4) The piers should be at least 12 inches in diameter and should penetrate at least
three pier diameters into the bedrock.
A minimum penetration of 10 feet into the
bedrock and a minimum pier length of 20 feet arc also recommended. The 20 feet
minimum depth is measured from the ground surface near the top of pier or
adjacent excavation depth, whichever is greater.
5) Piers should be designed to resist lateral loads assuming a modulus of horizontal
subgrade reaction of 50 tcf in the clay soils and a modulus of horizontal subgrade
reaction of 200 tcf in the bedrock. The modulus values given arc fora Iong, 1 -
foot -wide pier and must be corrected for pier size.
6)
7)
Piers should be reinforced their full length with at least one #5 reinforcing rod for
each 14 inches of pier perimeter to resist tension created by the swelling
materials.
to prevent the
swelling soil and bedrock from exerting uplift forces on the grade beams and to
concentrate pier loadings. A void form should also be provided beneath pier caps.
H -P KUMAR
Project No. 17-7-263
-5-
8) Concrete utilized in the piers should be a fluid mix with sufficient slump so that
concrete will fill the void between the reinforcing steel and the pier hole. We
recommend a slump in the range of 6 to 8 inches.
9) Pier holes should be properly cleaned prior to the placement of concrete. The
drilling contractor should mobilize equipment of sufficient size to effectively drill
through cobbles and possible cemented bedrock zones. Concrete should be
placed the same day the pier hole drilling is completed.
10) Although free water was not encountered in the boring at the site, some seepage
in the pier holes may be encountered during drilling. If water cannot be removed
prior to placement of concrete, the tremie method should be used after the hole
has been cleaned of spoil. In no case should concrete free fall into more than 3
inches of water.
11) Care should be taken to prevent the forming of mushroom -shaped tops of the
piers which can increase uplift force on the piers from swelling soils.
12) A representative of the geotechnical engineer should observe pier drilling
operations on a full-time basis.
FLOOR SLABS
Floor slabs present a problem where expansive materials are present near floor slab elevation
because sufficient dead Toad cannot be imposed on them to resist the uplift pressure generated
when the materials arc wetted and expand. We recommend that structural floors with crawlspace
below be used for all floors in the building that will be sensitive to upward movement.
Slab -on -grade construction may be used (such as in the garage area) provided the risk of distress
is understood by the owner. We recommend placing at least 3 feet of imported road base as
structural fill below floor slabs in order to mitigate slab movement due to expansive soils.
To reduce the effects of some differential movement, nonstructural floor slabs should be
separated from all bearing walls, columns and partition walls with expansion joints which allow
unrestrained vertical movement. Interior non-bearing partition walls resting on the floor slab
should be provided with a slip joint at the bottom of the wall so that, if the slab moves, the
movement cannot be transmitted to the upper structure, This detail is also important for
H-PkKUMAR
Project No. 17-7-263
-6 -
wallboards, stairways and door frames. Slip joints which allow at least 2 inches of vertical
movement are recommended. Floor slab control joints should be used to reduce damage due to
shrinkage cracking. Joint spacing and slab reinforcement should be established by the designer
based on experience and the intended slab use.
Required fill placed beneath slabs should consist of a suitable imported granular material such as
CDOT Class 2, 5 or 6 road base. The fill should be spread in thin horizontal lifts, adjusted to at
or above optimum moisture content, and compacted to at least 95% of the maximum standard
Proctor density. Prior to the structural fill placement, all topsoil and loose disturbed soil should
be removed and the subgrade moistened to slightly above optimum and compacted.
The above recommendations will not prevent slab heave if the expansive soils underlying the
structural fill becomes wet, however, the recommendations will reduce the effects if slab heave
occurs. All plumbing lines should be pressure tested before backfilling to help reduce the
potential for welting.
UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM
Although groundwater was not encountered during our exploration, it has been our experience in
mountainous areas and where clay soils are present and bedrock is shallow, that local perched
groundwater can develop during times of heavy precipitation or seasonal runoff. Frozen ground
during spring runoff can also create a perched condition. Therefore, we recommend below -grade
construction, such as crawlspace and basement areas, be protected from wetting by an undcrdrain
system. The drain should also act to prevent buildup of hydrostatic pressures behind foundation
walls.
The undcrdrain system should consist of a drainpipe surrounded by free -draining granular
material placed at the bottom of the wall backfill. The drain lines should be placed at each level
of excavation and at least 1 foot below lowest adjacent finish grade, and sloped at a minimum
1% grade to a suitable gravity outlet. Free -draining granular material used in the drain system
should consist of minus 2 inch aggregate with Tess than 50% passing the No. 4 sieve and less
than 2% passing the No. 200 sieve. The drain gravel should be at lease 11 feet deep and covered
by filter fabric such as Mirafi 140N.
H-PkKUMAR
Project No. 17.7-263
-7 -
Void forth below the foundation can act as a conduit for water flow. An impervious liner such as
20 or 30 mil PVC should be placed below the drain gravel in a trough shape and attached to the
foundation wall above the void form with mastic to keep drain water from flowing beneath the
wall and to other areas of the building.
SURFACE DRAINAGE
Positive surface drainage is a very important aspect of the project to prevent wetting of the
bearing materials below the residence. The following drainage precautions should be observed
during construction and maintained at all times after the residence has been completed:
1) Excessive wetting or drying of the foundation excavations and underslab areas
should be avoided during construction. Drying could increase the expansion
potential of the clay and claystone materials.
2) Exterior backfill should be adjusted to near optimum moisture and compacted to
at least 95% of the maximum standard Proctor density in pavement areas and to at
least 90% of the maximum standard Proctor density in landscape areas.
3) The ground surface surrounding the exterior of the building should be sloped to
drain away from the foundation in all directions. We recommend a minimum
slope of 12 inches in the first 10 feet in unpaved areas and a minimum slope of 3
inches in the first 10 feet in paved areas.
4) Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all
backfill.
5) Landscaping which requires regular heavy irrigation, such as lawn, and sprinkler
heads should be located at least 10 feet from foundation walls.
LIMITATIONS
This study has been conducted in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering
principles and practices in this arca at this time. We make no warranty either express or implied.
The conclusions and recommendations submitted in this report arc based upon the data obtained
from the exploratory boring drilled and exploratory pits excavated at the locations indicated on
Figure 1, the proposed type of construction and our experience in the area. Our services do not
include determining the presence, prevention or possibility of mold or other biological
H -P KUMAR
Project No. 17-7-265
-8 -
contaminants (MOBC) developing in the futureIf the client is concerned about MOBC, then a
professional in this special field of practice should be consulted. Our findings include
interpolation and extrapolation of the subsurface conditions identified at the exploratory boring
and pits and variations in the subsurface conditions may not become evident until excavation is
performed. If conditions encountered during construction appear to be different from those
described in this report, we should be notified at once so re•evaluation of the recommendations
may be made.
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use by our client for design purposes. We are not
responsible for technical interpretations by others of our information. As the project evolves, we
should provide continued consultation and field services during construction to review and
monitor the implementation of our recommendations, and to verify that the recommendations
have been appropriately interpreted. Significant design changes may require additional analysis
or modifications of the recommendations presented herein. We recommend on-site observation
of excavations and foundation bearing strata, observation of pier drilling, and testing of structural
fill by a representative of the geotechnical engineer.
Sincerely,
H -P k• KU
David A. Young, P.E.
Reviewed by:
Steven L. Pawlak, P.E.
DAY/kac
cc Giard Homes — Roger Giard (roaer.giard@giardhomes.com)
KRM Consultants — Tim Hennum (tim@krmconsultants.com)
H-PkKUMAR
Project No. 17-7.263
EXISTING
- STORAGE
BUILDING
100 0 100 200
APPROXIMATE SCALE -FEET
17-7-263
H-P4----KUMAR
RANCH HOUSE SITE
BIG MOUNTAIN RANCH
LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORING
AND PITS
Fig. 1
— 0
— 5
— 10
— 20
1-
— 25
— 30
BORING 1
14/12
WC=12.7
DO=108
27/12
50/5
WC=12.5
00=117
50/5
WC=17.9
D0=95
50/4
WC=10.5
DD=124
49/12
WC=10.0
00=127
50/3
PIT 1
PIT 2
00=112
WC=19.3
00=105
/
/WC=19.1
00=105
0 ----
5
10-
15-
20
5-
20 --
25-
30
5-
30 --
17-7-263
H-PtiKUMAR
LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORING AND PITS
Fig. 2
LEGEND
—7
1
L
7-0
• •••••
—7
TOPSOIL; HIGHLY ORGANIC SILTY CLAY WITH SCATTERED COBBLES, FIRM. MOIST, DARK BROWN.
CLAY (CL); SANDY, STIFF, MOIST. REDDISH BROWN, MEDIUM PLASTICITY.
CLAY AND GRAVEL (CL—GC); SANDY, SCATTERED COBBLES, VERY STIFF/MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST,
MIXED BROWN, LOW TO MEDIUM PLASTIC TY.
WEATHERED CLAYSTONE; MEDIUM HARD TO HARD, MOIST, LIGHT BROWN, MEDIUM PLASTICITY.
ICLAYSTONE BEDROCK; VERY HARD, MOIST, LIGHT BROWN, MEDIUM PLASTICITY.
hRELATIVELY UNDISTURBED DRIVE SAMPLE; 2—INCH I.D. CALIFORNIA LINER SAMPLE.
1 HAND DRIVEN LINER SAMPLE.
14/12
NOTES
DRIVE SAMPLE BLOW COUNT. INDICATES THAT 14 BLOWS OF A 140—POUND HAMMER
FALLING 3D INCHES WERE REQUIRED TO DRIVE THE CAL+FORNIA SAMPLER 12 INCHES.
1. THE EXPLORATORY PITS WERE EXCAVATED ON APRIL 6, 2017 WITH A BACKHOE. THE
EXPLORATORY BORINGS WERE DRILLED ON APRIL 21, 2017 WITH A 4—INCH DIAMETER
CONTINUOUS FLIGHT POWER AUGER.
2. THE LOCATIONS OF THE EXPLORATORY BORING AND PITS WERE MEASURED APPROXIMATELY BY
PACING FROM FEATURES ON THE SITE PLAN.
3. THE ELEVATIONS OF THE EXPLORATORY BORING AND PITS WERE NOT MEASURED AND THE LOGS
OF THE EXPLORATORY BORINGS AND PITS ARE PLOTTED TO DEPTH.
4. THE EXPLORATORY BORING AND PIT LOCATIONS SHOULD BE CONSIDERED ACCURATE ONLY TO
THE DEGREE IMPLIED BY THE METHOD USED.
5. THE LINES BETWEEN MATERIALS SHOWN ON THE EXPLORATORY BORING AND PIT LOGS
REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARIES BETWEEN MATERIAL TYPES AND THE TRANSITIONS
MAY BE GRADUAL.
6. GROUNDWATER WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED IN THE BORING OR PITS AT THE TIME OF DRILLING OR
EXCAVATION, FLUCTUATIONS IN THE WATER LEVEL MAY OCCUR WITH TIME.
7. LABORATORY TEST RESULTS:
WC = WATER CONTENT (X) (ASTM D 2216);
DD = DRY DENSITY (pef) (ASTM D 2216).
17-7-263
H-P-WUMAR
LEGEND AND NOTES
Fig. 3
CONSOLIDATION - SWELL
O
— 2
—3
— 4
—5
— 6
—7
-8
SAMPLE OF: Woolhered Claysione
FROM: Boring 1 0 10'
WC = 17.9 %, DD = 95 pci
MN Mr ~Ai 1Ny N14 Y V.
wen** 1M1/1. 11. INY.I n'wt
4144 nM M fteryluneL ..sM i.
Manor ol/ M -111M, moi. 7w1
N
menrimmia rill 0-044
ADDITIONAL COMPRESSION
UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE
DUE TO WETTING
t.o APPLIED PRESSURE - KSr
10
100
17-7-263
H-P%KUMAR
SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Fig. 4
CONSOLIDATION - SWELL
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
—1
—2
SAMPLE OF: Cloyslane
FROM: Boring 1 0 15'
WC = 10.5%, OD = 124 pcf
EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT
PRESSURE UPON WETTING
1,1.1. MN mots •P. r .► M V*
.Mph. M.1.1. h. MTI'1 nport
dad NIA 111. rwsn4~1, IMMO 01
ML ..44 IN ..1M..A.�.1 K
111.01.1r 4114 Y.p1., ML 7.1
rewprrp M1 AnY 0.d.�1
1.0 APPLIED PRESSURE KSr
10
100
17-7-263
H-PtiKUMAR
SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Fig. 5
8
7
6
5
4
CONSOLIDATION
3
2
1
0
—1
—2
3
SAMPLE OF: Claysfoncs
FROM: Oaring 1 0 201
WC = 10.0 X. DD = 127 pci
EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT
PRESSURE UPON WETTING
inn Int r.. * q/. 1 Qn
=mole, s._. A y.lty i
*Id .M N rwwlewM. �...� ti
A4..M.ut w .wt.. wow' r
kw. awl Af.wl..n. Y.u. 1.1
muni spe WYE ...I M
..rrr...ti A!Th w
1.0 APPLIED PRESSURE - KSr 10
100
17-7-263
H -P KUMAR
SWELL --CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Fig. 6
a
-a
f
SAMPLE OF: Sandy Clay
FROM: PH 1 0 3.5'
WC = 17.9 %, DD = 107 pct
-1
J
W
1
CONSOLIDATION
-3
2
1
0
-1
-2
3
— EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT
PRESSURE UPON WETTING
1.0 APPLIED PRESSURE - 4451• f0
100
SAMPLE OF: Pit 1 0 6'
FROM: Weathered ClaysIone
WC = 15.6 %, D0 = 108 pcf
4P... Wit .will. .�/� ..y I. r.
r.u... �.a.t. L. 1.M:...
.V M.4__ pv...k
M ...1/10.4...1/10.4.
M with, N/fd at
■__ — 4.WMr, 4Y. 1..11
mewls.* rM A$IY 0-4344
EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT
PRESSURE UPON WETTING
1.0 APPLIED PRESSURE - KSr
10
100
17-7-263
H-P-t4KUMAR
SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Fig. 7
1
1
1
1
.>Z
x
•
CONSOLIDATION - SWELL
CONSOLIDATION - SWELL
2
1
0
— 1
—2
— 3
1
— 1
— 2
—3
— 4
SAMPLE OF: Weathered Clayslone
FROM: P11 1 0 8'
WC = 13.2 X, DO = 312 pcf
EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT
PRESSURE UPON WETTING
1.0 APPLIED PRESSURE - NSF
10
107
SAMPLE OF: Sandy Clay with Gravel
j FROM: Pil 2 0 4'
j WC = 19.3 '/., DO = 105 pcf
them VIIYOLIM4y le
One ,.t . w mkore..,r.p M
nn .w mol
.rwr W M..eYl.. I. 1.4
e. w1.i , !rlr' d M
w..lbt. i, ISYY o-454611..
NO MOVEMENT UPON
WETTING
1.0 APPLIED PRESSURE - KM" 10 100
17-7-263
H-P�KUMAR
SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Fig. 8
3
.. 2
CONSOLIDATION - SWELL
1
0
SAMPLE OF: Weathered Cloystone
FROM: Pit 2 0 9'
WC = 19.1 X. DO = 105 pcf
I.S. I..t n.Ps ways, la To
...re. M..(. I14 u.I.y twirl
MIM Y. nw..r•...mpl In
I L .OFt h ..0.. SOWN* /
.I.n.1 wt ti1dsn. R SWI
Cslrp0n I in
- +ILII D-Ii1&
EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT
PRESSURE UPON WETTING
i.0 APPLIED PRESSURE — KSf 10
I00
17-7-263
H -P KUMAR
SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Fig. 9
Project No. 17-7- 263
w
a
J
N
cs
U
>,
'a
VI
IWeathered Claystone 11
IWeathered Claystone 11
C.1
=_
0
;,
0
CJ
0
>,
0
Sandy Clay
Weathered Claystone
Weathered Claystone 11
Sandy Clay with Gravel
Weathered Claystone
UNCONFINED
COMPRESSIVE
STRENGTH
(PSF)
r ATTERBERG LIMITS
PLASTIC
INDEX
(Y�)
/may 5
V 4
.7.1 -t
PERCENT
PASSING
NO. 200
SIEVE
GRADATION ._.
a
z
GRAVEL
(%)
NATURAL
DRY
DENSITY
tpc, I
C
n
'n
nl
—
N
—
O
co
.--
.—
O
O
NATURAL
MOISTURE
CONTENT
J%)
r-,
f i
4n
N
c,
r•
in
O
o
O
t•
t0
V'i
c.1
r•j
rn
c4
c4
LOCATION
DEPTH
(R)
C
in
O
�n
SAMPLE
BORING
—
el