HomeMy WebLinkAboutSubsoils Study for GradingrcÄ iiti,ffi#fÉ:if 'YË;
;**'
An Employce Ownod Compony
5020 County Road 154
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
phone: (970)945-7988
fax: (970) 94s-84s4
email: kaglenwood@kumarusa.com
www.kumarusa.com
Ofüce Locations: Denver (lIQ), Parker, Colorado Springs, Fort Collins, Glenwood Springs, and Summit County, Colorado
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
LOTS 2 AND 3, LA'ÌIJ STREET MARI(ETPLACE
AI\D 301 W 16TH STREET
RTFLE, COLORADO
PROJECT NO.22-7- 126
APRrL 5,2022
PREPARED FOR:
ECODlVELLING
ATTN: FERNANDO ARGIRO
15400l\I\ry 15rH AVENUE, UNrr B
MrAMr, FLORTDÄ 33169
fernando@.ecodwellin g. us
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY ..
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.
SITE CONDITIONS
GEOLOGIC SETTING
FIELD EXPLORATION
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ...
GEOLOGIC ASSESSMENT...
PRELIMINARY DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
FOUNDATIONS
FLOOR SLABS
UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM ..........,
SITE GRADING..........
SURFACE DR4INAGE...............
PAVEMENT SECTION DESIGN
LIMITATIONS.
REFERENCES
FIGURE I - LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
FIGURES 2 and 3 - LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
FIGURES 4 through 7 - SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
FIGURE 8 - GRADATION TEST RESULTS
FIGURE 9 - IryEEM STABILOMETER TEST RESULTS
TABLE I- SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
I
1
I
-2-
-2-
-2-
3-
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
6-
-7 -
Kumar & Associates, lnc. @ Project No.22-7-126
PURPOSE AI\D SCOPE OF STT]DY
This report presents the results of a preliminary geotechnical study for the proposed residential
development to be located south of West l6th Street and north of l4th Street near Howard Avenue
in Rifle, Colorado. The project site is shown on Figure 1. The purpose of the study was to
evaluate the geologic and subsurface conditions and their impact on the project. The study was
conducted in general accordance with our proposal for geotechnical engineering services to
EcoDwelling, dated January 14, 2022, Proposal No. P7-22- I I 0.
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 summarizes the data obtained during this study and
presents our conclusions and recoÍrmendations based on the proposed development and
subsurface conditions encountered.
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
The proposed residential development will consist of an 86Jot subdivision as shown on Figure I
The construction will consist of single-family homes accessed by private streets and driveways.
We understand the residences will be single story steel framed structures. Ground floors will be
structural over crawlspace. The development will be serviced with municipal water and sewer.
If development plans change significantly from those described, we should be notified to re-
evaluate the recommendations presented in this report.
SITE CONDITIONS
The proposed residential development consists of about 11.27 acres located in the south half of
the NV/ quarter of Section 9, T65, R93W of the 6th principal meridian. The proposed residential
lots will be located approximately as shown on Figure l. The terrain is valley bottom with gentle
to moderate slopes generally down to the southeast. The area of Borings 6 and 1l is strongly
sloping terrain down to the northeast. The elevation ranges from about 5390 feet to about
5440 feet in the proposed building areas. Vegetation consists of native grass and weeds,
scattered brush, and scattered deciduous trees.
Kumar & Associates, lnc. o Project No.22-7-126
-2-
GEOLOGIC SETTING
The project site is underlain by the Tertiary-age Shire member of the'Wasatch Formation (Tws).
The Shire member of the'Wasatch Formation consists of interbedded sandstone and claystone.
Surficial deposits at the subject site consist of floodplain and stream channel deposits (Qfp),
older terrace alluvium (Qto), alluvial and colluvial deposits (Qac), and sheetwash deposits (Qsw)
(Shroba and Scott, 1997).
FIELD EXPLORATION
The field exploration for the project was conducted on January 29 and February I and 2,2022.
Eleven exploratory borings were drilled at the locations shown on Fig. I to evaluate the
subsurface conditions. The borings wero advanced with 4-inch diameter continuous flight auger
powered by a truck-mounted CME 458 drill rig (Borings l-10) and a track-mounted CME-45
drill rig (Boring I l). The borings were logged by a representative of Kumar & Associates, Inc.
Samples of the subsoils were taken with l%-inch and 2-inch LD. 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 and hardness of the bedrock. Depths at which the samples were taken and the
penetration resistance values are shown on the Logs of Exploratory Borings, 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 Figures 2 and3.
Beneath about one foot of topsoil or pavement materials, the subsoils generally consist of 3 to
l0 feet of sandy clay to clayey silty sand overlying relatively dense, silty sandy gravel containing
cobbles.
Laboratory testing performed on samples obtained from the borings included natural moisfure
content and density and gradation analyses. Results of swell-consolidation testing performed on
relatively undisturbed drive samples, presented on Figures 4 through 7, indicate low to moderate
compressibility under conditions of loading and wetting and, a low hydrocompresssion potential
when weffed under a constant 1,000 psf surcharge. The sample from Boring I at 2Yz îeet deep
exhibited a low expansion potential when wetted under a constant 1,000 psf surcharge. The
gradation and HVEEM 'R' value test results are presented on Figures 8 and 9. The laboratory
testing is summarized in Table l.
Kumar & Associates, Inc. o Project No.22-7-126
-3 -
No free water was encountered in the borings at the time of drilling and the subsoils were
slightly moist to moist.
GEOLOGIC ASSESSMENT
The project site geology should not present major constraints or unusually high risks to the
proposed development. There are, however, several conditions of a geologic nature that should
be considered. Geologic conditions that should be considered, their potential risks, and
mitigations to reduce the potential risks are discussed below. The site could experience
moderate levels of earthquake related ground shaking.
SLOPES GREATER THAN 30 PERCENT
Some of the slopes in the southwestern part (near Boring I l) of the development area exceed
30 percent. Based on our review of the current site conditions, the information provided, and our
experience in the area, the proposed building sites are feasible from a geotechnical viewpoint.
The steep slopes appear stable and should not be adversely affected by the proposed
development if the site grading recommendations provided below are followed.
SEISMICITY
Historic earthquakes within 150 miles of the project site have typically been moderately strong
with magnitudes less than 5.5 and maximum Modified Mercalli Intensities less than VI
(Widmann and Others, 1998). The largest historic earthquake in the project region occurred in
L882. It was located in the northern Front Range and had an estimated magnitude of about M6.4
+ 0.2 and a maximum intensity of VII. Historic ground shaking at the project site associated
with the 1882 earthquake and the other larger historic earthquakes in the region does not appear
to have exceeded Modified Mercalli Intensity VI (Kirkham and Rogers, 2000). Modified
Mercalli Intensity VI ground shaking should be expected during a reasonable exposure time for
the residences, but the probability of 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.
The seismic soil profile at the project site should be considered as Class D, stiffsoil, as described
in the 2018 International Building Code, unless site specific shear wave velocity studies show
otherwise. Based on our experience in the area and,the anticipated ground conditions,
liquefaction is not a design consideration. Using the USGS National Earthquake Hazard
Reduction Program online database, the following probabilistic ground motion values are
reported for the project site.
Kumar & Associates, lnc. @ Project No.22-7-126
-4-
Intensity Measure Type Intensity Measure Level
2percent in 50 Years
0.2 Sec. Spectral Acceleration S'0.326
1.0 Sec. Spectral Acceleration Sl 0.076
The USGS National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program online database also indicates a peak
ground acceleration @GA) of 0.1969 at the subject site. The PGA is the lower of either the
deterministic or probabilistic value with a 2o/o exceedance probability for a 5O-year exposure
time at the project site (statistical recurrence interval of 2,500 years).
PRELIMINARY DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
The conclusions and recoûrmendations 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 will vary depending on the specific location of the building on the property.
Based on the nature of the proposed construction, spread footings bearing on the natural subsoils
should be suitable at the building sites. 'We expect the footings can be sized for an allowable
bearing pressure in the range of 1,500 psf to 2,000 psf with relatively low risk of excessive post-
construction movement. Expansive clays encountered in building areas may need to be removed
or the footings designed to impose a minimum dead load pressure to limit potential heave.
Foundation walls should be designed to span local anomalies and to resist lateral earth loadings
when acting as retaining structures. Below grade areas greater than 3 feet and retaining walls
should be protected from wetting and hydrostatic loading 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. There could be
some post-construction slab movement at sites with collapsible matrix or expansive clays. 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 cracking. A minimum 4 inchthick layer of free-draining gravel
should underlie basement level slabs (if any) to facilitate drainage.
Kumar & Associates, lnc. o Project No.22-7-126
5
UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM
Although free water was generally not encountered in the exploratory borings at an elevation
well lower than proposed finished floors, it has been our experience in the areas 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, crawlspace deeper than 3 feet and basement areas from wetting and hydrostatic pressure
buildup. The drains should consist of slotted PVC drainpipe surrounded above the invert level
with free-draining granular material. The drain should be placed at each level of excavation and
at least I foot below lowest adjacent finish grade and sloped at a minimumYzo/o to a suitable
gravity outlet or sump and pump.
SITE GRADING
The risk of construction-induced slope instability at the site appears low provided the buildings
are located in the less steep, lower part of the property typically as planned and cut and fill
depths are limited. Cut depths for the building pads and driveway accoss should not exceed
about l0 feet. Fills should be limited to about 10 feet deep, and likely less in theptéep hillside
along the southwest part of the development. Structural fills should be compacted to at least
95o/o 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 the portions of the hillside exceeding 20o/o grade The on-site
soils excluding oversized rock and topsoil should be suitable for use in embankment fills.
Permanent unretained cut and fill slopes should be graded at2honzontal to I vertical or flatter
and protected against erosion by revegetation, rock riprap or other means. This office should
review site grading plans for the project prior to construction.
SURFACE DRAINAGE
The grading plan for the subdivision should consider runoff from steep uphill slopes through the
project and at individual sites. V[ater 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 slope away from the building for a
distance of at least 5 feet. Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits
of all backfrll and landscape irrigation should be restricted.
PAVEMENT SECTION DESIGN
We understand asphalt pavement is proposed for the streets. Traffic loadings for the streets were
not provided to us. The subgrade soils encountered at the site are generally low plasticity sand,
Kumar & Associates, lnc. @ Project No.22-7-126
-6-
silt and clay which are considered a relatively poor support for pavement sections. Imported fill
could be needed for the roadway construction. The import soil should be a granular soil with a
minimum Hveem stabilometer 'R' value of 25. Based on our experience and test results, an
Hveem stabilometer 'R' value of l0 for the native soil encountered at the site, an l8 kip EDLA
of 15, a Regional Factor of 1.75 anda serviceability index of 2.0 (for low volume traffic), we
recoûrmend the minimum pavement section thickness consist of 3 inches of asphalt on 6 inches
ofbase course on 8 inches ofgranular subbase or 4 inches ofasphalt on I inches ofbase course.
The asphalt should be a batched hot mix, approved by the engineer and placed and compacted to
the project specifications. The base course and subbase should meet CDOT Class 6 and Class 2
specifications, respectively. All base course, subbase and required subgrade fill should be
compacted to at least 95Yo of the maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture content within
2o/o of optimum.
Required fill to establish design subgrade level can consist of the on-site soils or suitable
imported granular soils and evaluated for suitability by the geotechnical engineer. Prior to fill
placement the subgrade should be stripped of vegetation and topsoil, scarified to a depth of
8 inches, adjusted to near optimum moisture and compacted to at least 95o/o of standard Proctor
density. In soft or wet areas, the subgrade may require drying or stabilization prior to fill
placement. A geog¡id and/or subexcavation and replacement with aggregate base soils may be
needed for the stabilization. The subgrade should be proofrolled. Areas that deflect excessively
should be corrected before placing pavement materials. The subgrade improvements and
placement and compaction of base and asphalt materials should be monitored on a regular basis
by a representative of the geotechnical engineer. Once traffic loadings are better known, we
should review our pavement section recommendations.
LIMITATIONS
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 express or implied.
The conclusions and recoÍtmendations 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 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 contaminants (MOBC) developing in the future. If 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
borings and variations in the subsurface conditions may not become evident until excavation is
Kumar & Associates, lnc. o Project No.22-7-126
-7 -
performed. If conditions encountered during construction appear different 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
recofirmendations presented herein. We recommend on-site observation of excavations and
foundation bearing strata and testing of structural fill by a representative of the geotechnical
engrneer.
Respectfully Submitted,
Kur¡rar *& ,Associat*s, I
Robert L. Duran, P
Reviewed by:
Steven L. Pawlak, P.E.
RLD/kac
cc: Kuersten Construction - John Kuersten fieþûilkuerstcnsoq$trr¡ction.cplrÐ
SGM - Jeff Simonson (þlf-$fãSggyi¡q.ccrgr)
REFERENCES
Kirkham, R. M. and Rogers, W. P., 1985, Colorødo Earthquake Data and Interpretations 1867
to 1985: Colorado Geological Survey Bulletin 46.
Shroba,R.R. and Scott, R.8., 1997, Revised Preliminary Geologic Map of the Rifle.Quadrangle,
Garfield County, Colorado, U.S. Geological Survey, Open-File Report OF-97-852
\Midmann B. L. and Others, 1998, Preliminary Quaternary Fault and Fold Map and Data Base
of Colorado: Colorado Geological Survey Open-File Report 98-8.
Kumar å Associates, lnc.0 Project No.22-7-126
i
ì
1
!
#
*,'
.SCALE_FEET
¡-
t¡J
l¡Ju.FØ
It-t
t.
t.
s
{Þ
*
#
ROXIMATE
.ì
rir.
Qb
ìtb
lÈÊ
3
I
Ir'
I
I
I
40
APP
3vh
5$È
"#{
.iì
qlb
tr-ã
t
,t.
4(
,
;4--
t
L
'':
f
è
7:
t
ì
u
1
t,
i
'Ë
{,I
;'*'
i*,
*r{
*þ&
¡j
1t
li
;
¡t
.1 |
\\
i
T'u,þi
t
i
T
f.f
1,
I-'1
I
¡
:.'lt
ììq
òè3
- ;i;
ıàB
.eb
\sfi
'tI
Þ"ài
HOWARD
AVE.
F
I.JJ
t¡Ju.t--v)
-t-(o
f
Ã
rE
+"v
t
t
I
1,4
l
lI
:
il
¡th v
hà8
á{h
!È$
I
ednr
!
I
I
I
I
I-'-1
I
N
{ti
iL
22-7 -126 Kumar & Associates LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS Fig. 1
22-7-126BORING 1BORING 2BORING 3BORING ,1BORING 5BORING 6BORING 7BORING ABORING 9BORING 1OÍlT-t,,",,, ""'W-trr,r=F,Æi3:i;1 W'-o,ã12'o,WWr,,il'-y::., ra'"!:i."V.il oo=ttt llÁ oo=ttsrÀ -200=4e r4I;:A V.Iffin¡tz (;,f¡,,¡,,wrf,YÀ Iåffi,,,' W,,u,,,mffilíf 0,,,,46/12WC=5.5DD=98-200=6SLL=25Pl=11g,ft1!i:í'tl$:rt::,l4l oo=t ral./:1 -zoo=47W*,,,Wffiw""'t4wh,¡,,o123s/12wC=5.07/12WC= 15.3DD=1 1 1-2OO=541o/12WC=4.812=2.417/12WC=3.EDD=1 0200DD= 1 05-2OO=7 1DD=1 01-2OO=1 417-200=56511/1222/12WC=4.0DD=1 0918/1220/12WC=5.011/1232/12WC=8.516/12DD= 1 05DD=l19-2OO=79LL=33Fl=1E1012/12WC=14.8DD=1 0s-200=8711/121071 /12ss/12so/1252/1271 /12tsIIFÀ1513/12sE/1226/6, so/s'15tsIItsùo37 /1233/122/1222/122038/1257/1216/1223/1220257o/12253030Kumar & AssociatesPROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTLOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGSFig. 2
22-7-126LEGENDLEGEND (CONTINUED)BORING 1 1(2):E!(1)mH$NnnnnnmffiwmASPHALT, THICKNESS IN INCHES SHOWN IN PARENTHESES TO LEFT OF THE LOG.FIt_,DRIVE SAMPLE, 2-INCI] I.D. CALIFORNIA LINER SAMPLE.0BASE COURSE, ÍHICKNESS IN INCHÊS SHOWN IN PARENIHESES TO LEFT OF lHE LOG.DRIVE SAMPLE, 1 3/8_INCH I.D. SPLIT SPooN STANDARD PENETRATIoN lEsI16/12TOPSOIL; SILTY SAND, FIRM, MOIST, GRAY TO TAN, ORGANIC.DISTURBED BULK SAMPLE.17/12WC= | 0.9DD=122-200=61FILU GRAVEL, SANDY, SILTY, WITH COBBLES, DENSE, MOIST, TAN.27¡12 DRIYE SAMPLE BLOW COUNI, INDICATES THAT 28 BLOWS OF A 140-POUND HAMMER--,'- FALLING 30 INCHES WERE REQUIRED TO DRIVE IHE SAMPLER 12 INCHES.I otprg ro wATER LEvEL ENcouNTERED AT THE lrME oF DRrLLrNc, (BoRrNG ro oNLy).tsIItsùo31 /12WC=11.sDD= 1 23LL=35Pl=15CLAY AND SILT (CL-ML); SANDY To VERY SANDY, STIFF lo VERY SflFF, MotST, TAN.10CLAY (CL); SANDY, STIFF, SLIGHILY Molsl, TAN, LOW PLAsTtctTY60/12SANO AND CLAY (SC-CL); WITH GRAVEL, MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST, MIXED TAN, SLIGHTLYNOÏES1. THE EXPLORATORY BORINGS WERE ORILLED ON JANUARY 29 AND FEBRUARY 1 AND 2, 2022IVITH A 4-INCH-DIAMETER CONTINUOUS-FLIGHT POWER AUGER.CALCAREOUS.15SAND AND SlLl (SM-ML); INTERLAYERED, MEDIUM DENSE/STIFF lo VERY sTlFF, MOIST, TAN,2. THÊ LOCATIONS OF TI]E ÊXPLORATORY BORINGS WERE MEASURED APPROXIMATELY 8Y PACINGFROM FEATURES SHOWN ON THE SIÎE PLAN PROVIDED.SAND (SM); SILTY TO VERY SILTY, LoOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE, MolST, TAN.SAND AND GRAVEL (cM-sM); SILTY, COBBLES, DENSE, MolST, BROWN, SUB-ANGULAR roSUB-ROUNDED ROCK.WEAÎIIERED SILTSTONE/CLAYSIONE, HARD, MOIST, MIXED PURPLE, GRAY, TAN.3. THE ELEVATIONS OF IHE EXPLORATORY BORINGS WERE NOT MEASURED AND TI1E LOGS OF THEEXPLORATORY BORINGS ARE PLOTIED TO DEPTH.20so/34. THE ÊXPLORATORY BORING LOCAÌIONS AND ELEVATIONS SHOULD BE CONSIDERED ACCURATEONLY TO THE DEGREE IMPLIED BY THE METHOD USED.5. .TIIE LINES BETWEEN MATERIALS SHOWN ON THE EXPLORAIORY BORING LOGS REPRESENÍ THEAPPROXIMATE BOUNDARIES BETWEEN MATERIAL TYPES ANO THE TRANSITIONS MAY BÊ GRADUAL.6. GROUNDWATER LEVELS SHOWN ON IHE LOGS WERE MEASURED AT THE TIME AND UNDERCONDITIONS INDICATED. FLUCTUATIONS IN THE WATER LEVEL MAY OCCUR WITH TIME.7. LAEORATORY TEST RESULTS:WC = WATER CONTENT (Z) (ASTM 02215);DD = DRY DENSITY (PCf) (ASTM D22I6)i-2oo= PERCENTAGE PASSING No. 200 SIEVE (ASIM Dll4o);LL = LIQUID LIMIÍ (ASTM D4318);PI = PLASTICITY INDEX (ASIM 04518).srLtstoNE/sANDsToNE,FORMATION.HARD TO VERY HARD, MOIST, MIXED PURPLÊ, GRAY, TAN, WASÀTCHKumar & AssociatesPROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTLOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGSFig. 5
f
SAMPLE OF: Sondy Cloy ond Silt
FROM:Boringl@2.5'
WC = 5.2 %, DD = 117 pcf
EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT
PRESSURE UPON WETTING
JJ
LJ
=tn
I
z.otr
o
Jovlz.o()
ñ
JJ
UJ
=an
I
z.o
F
ô
=otnz.o
C)
1
-1
2
-5
1
0
-1
2
1
t.0 t0
10
t00
APPLIED PRESSURE - KSF
SAMPLE 0F: Sondy Cloy ond Silt
FROM:Boring2@2.5'
tNC = 7.4 %, DD = 112 pcf
ADDITIONAL COMPRESSION
UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE
DUE TO WETTING
-3
t.0 100
22-7-126 Kumar & Associates SWELL_CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 4
t
I
.g
å
ï
¡¡
I
SAMPLE OF: Silty Sond
FROM¡BoringS@5'
WC = 4.0 %, DD = 115 pcf
ADDITIONAL COMPRESSION
UNDER CONSTANÏ PRESSURE
DUE TO WETTING
\o
JJ
UJ
=U1
I
zo
F-
ô
Jotnz.o(J
1
0
-1
2
-3
-4
t.0 APPLIED PRESSURE - KSF 10 t00
àq
JJ
t¡J
=UI
I
z.otr
o
Jo
anz.o
C)
1
0
-1
2
-5
1.0 APPLIED 10 100
SAMPLE OF: Silty Sond
FROM:Boring4@5'
WC = 4.0 %, DD = 109 pcf
*ithout lh. rrlttrn oppÞvol d
ond
^ßoclot6,
lnc, Süôll
in
ADDITIONAL COMPRESSION
UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE
DUE TO WETTING
22-7-126 Kumar & Associates SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 5
a
¡
:r
:
nì
I
{t
SAMPLE OF: Silt ond Sond
FROM:Boring6@2.5'
WC = 5.9 %, DD = 107 pcf
ADDITIONAL COMPRESSION
UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE
DUE TO WETTING
N
JJ
l¡J
=tt1
I
zo
F
ô
Jotnz.o(-)
1
0
-1
2
-3
-4
t.0 APPLIED PRESSURE - KSF t00
àq
JJ
LJ
=an
I
z.otr
o
Jo
anz.o()
1
0
-1
2
-5
1 t.0 APPLIED PRESSURE - KSF 10 r00
SAMPLE OF: Very Sondy Sill
FROM:Boring7@5'
WC = 5.0 %, DD = 105 pcf
full rithout thc rrltt n opprcvol of
ond
^sociotð,
lnc. Sr.ll
ln
ADDITIONAL COMPRESSION
UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE
DUE TO WETTING
22-7-126 Kumar & Associates SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 6
f
SAMPLE OF: Sondy Cloy
FROMrBoringg@2.5'
WC = 3.8 %, DD = 102 pcf
nd bc
rihod
ft.
roprcduc€d,
th.
ADDITIONAL COMPRESSION
UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE
DUE TO WETTING
1
N
-J)
l¡J
=tn
I
z.otr
o
=ov,zo(J
0
-1
2
3
-4
-5
1 t.0 APPLIED PRESSURE - KSF 10
22-7-126 Kumar & Associates SWELL_CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 7
Ë
¡
¡i
ç
3ñ
I{YDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS
TIHE READI¡CS tJ.S. SIA¡IDARO SERIES CLEAR SQUARÊ OPENINGS
¡l
t'
t.
i
;.
i
I
I
I
I
i
l
Ì
i
.l
t.I i
I
:
a
I
t.
l
I
,
ì
ì
I
l
!!
¡
=2
a
Ë
o
't0
20
t0
10
50
8o
70
EO
9o
too
a
E
E
p
78,2 127 200l5z
DIAMETER OF PARTICLES IN M
CLAY TO SILÍ COBBLES
GRAVEL 17 % SANO 30 %
LIQUIO LIMIT 23 PLASTICITY INDEX 9
SAMPLE OF: Sondy Leon Cloy wîlh Grovel
SILT AND CLAY 53 %
FROM: Boring 81-83 ot 1/2 lo 3'
Thr!! full r€lulls opply only lo lho
rqmplos whlch woro lo¡led, lhe
tcsllng rsporl rholl nol bc roprcducod,
excopl in full, wllhoul lho wrltlonqpprgyql ol Kumor t A!3oclol€s, lnc.
Slove onolysh l.rllng h prrfom.d lnqccordqncs wlth ASTM D69'15, ASIM D7928,
ASTM Cl56 ond/or ASTM 011¡lO.
SAND GRAVEL
FINE MEDIUM COARSE FINE COARSE
22-7 -126 Kumar & Associates GRADATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 8
€
3
TEST SPECIMEN 1 2 3 4 R _VALUE
(300 psi)
MOTSTURE CONTENT (%)14.4 12.7 11.1
DENSITY (pcf)1 18.8 126.0 150.6
EXPANSION PRESSURE (psi)0.000 0.000 0.002
EXUDATION PRESSURE (psi)185 413 640
R VALUE 7 15 21 t0
-a
---
J
l¡.¡JJ
I
É.
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
50
20
10
0 1 0 0 800
EXUDATION PRESSURE (psi)
SOIL TYPE: Sondy Leon Cloy wilh Grovel
LOCATION
DATE SAMPLED : 1 -?7-)O??DATE RECEIVED:1 -?7 -?Or?DATE TESTED:? -7 -2nr2
GRAVEL: 17 % SAND: 50 % SILT AND CLAY: s3 %
LIQUID LIMIT: ?3 PLASTICITY INDEX:
Thors lc¡l rslull! opply only lo lhe somplos
whlch w€rr l€!l!d, Thô 16lll¡9 r.porl lholl nol
be rcproduced,.xcôpl ln full, vlthout lhcyrltlcn qpprcyol of Kumqr & Alsoclqlot, lnc.
R-voluo p€rfom€d ln qccorddnqo wlth ASTM
028,1,1. Atl€rùorg llmli! portorm€d ln qccordonco
vllh ASTM D{118. Slavc qnolyscs perfom€d lnqqcordonc€ wlth ASTI¡ D122, D111O.
22-7-126 Kumar & Associates HVEEM STABILOMETER TEST RESULTS Fig. I
lGrIfuslli#*ffiniiiå**TABLE 1SUMMARY oF LABoRAToRYTEST RESULTSNo.22-7-12611I0987654J2I942%52y,2%52Yz52Yz2Yz52%5zYz52%102v,NATURALI,lOISTURECONTENTBORrr'rGDEPT}I.51110.94.88.53.815.35.05.06.23.92.44.05.54.04.55.27.414.85.2r23122I0I119t0211110510s11810710010998113r02111tt2105I17locfìNATURALDRYDENSITY6II479547I475669474987PERCENTPASSING NO,200 stEvE(hlGRAVEL$tSAND35JJ25(%lLIQUID LIMITI61811(%lPLASTICINDEXATTERBERG LIMITSl¡sfìUNCONFINEDCOMPRESSIVESTRENGTHWeathered ClaystoneVery Sandy ClaySiþ SandSandy ClaySandy ClayVery Sandy SiltVery Sandy SiltVery Sandy SiltVery Siþ SandSilt and SandVery Sandy SiltSiþ SandSandy ClaySiþ SandVery Silty SandVery Clayey Sand and GravelSandy Clay and SiltSandy Clay and Siltand SiltSOIL TYPE