HomeMy WebLinkAboutSubsoils Report for Foundation DesignGEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT
Proposed FreeUp Storage Silt Expansion
357 South 16th Street
Silt, Colorado
Yeh Project No.: 222-221
June 10, 2022
Prepared for:
Spartan Investment Group, LLC
1440 Brickyard Drive, Unit 4
Golden, Colorado 80403
Attn: Mr. Alex Dick
Prepared by:
Yeh and Associates, Inc.
588 North Commercial Drive
Grand Junction, CO 81505
Phone: 970-382-9590
1AYeh and Associates Inc.
Consulting Enginccrs & Scicn LISTS
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT
Proposed FreeUp Storage Silt Expansion
357 South 161h Street
Silt, Colorado
Yeh Project No.: 222-221
June 10, 2022
Prepared by:
�,pv arc
06/10/2022 7;
46179
4T+IAL
Martin L. Skyrman, P.E.
Senior Geotechnical Engineer
)A Yeh and Associates, Inc.
Consulting Engineers & Scientists
Reviewed by:
Roger K. Southworth, P.E.
Senior Project Manager
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY....................................................................................... 1
2.0 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION...........................................................................I.................. 1
3.0 SITE CONDITIONS.............................................................................................................. 2
4.0 GEOLOGIC SETTING............................................................................................................
3
5.0 SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION............................................................................................
4
5.1 FIELD EXPLORATION................................................................................................................................4
5.2 LABORATORY TESTING............................................................................................................................. 5
6.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS................................................................................................
6
7.0 DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS................................................................................................
6
8.0 RECOMMENDATIONS........................................................................................................7
8.1 HELICAL PIERS........ ......... .................................................................................. .............................
7
8.2 SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS.........................................................................................................................
7
8.3 FLOOR SLABS.........................................................................................................................................
8
8.4 SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS.......................................................................................................................
9
8.5 DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS.................................................................................................................9
8.6 CORROSIVITY.......................................................................................................................................10
8.7 PAVEMENT............................................................................................................._............................10
9.0 EARTHWORK RECOMMENDATIONS................................................................................
11
9.1 SITE GRUBBING AND STRIPPING..............................................................................................................
11
9.2 EXCAVATION AND TRENCH CONSTRUCTION................................................................................................
12
9.3 BUILDING PAD PREPARATION.................................................................................................................
13
9.4 PAVEMENT SUBGRADE PREPARATION......................................................................................................
13
9.5 FILL MATERIAL.....................................................................................................................................13
9.6 COMPACTION REQUIREMENTS.................................................................._.............................................
14
10.0 LIMITATIONS.................................................................................................................
14
11.0 REFERENCES..................................................................................................................
15
IN
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
List of Figures
FIGURE 1. PROJECT LOCATION MAP..................................................................................................................... 2
FIGURE 2. SITE PHOTOGRAPH — EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS..................................................................................... 3
FIGURE 3. SITE PHOTOGRAPH — FIELD INVESTIGATION......................................................................................................4
List of Tables
TABLE 1. RECOMMENDED PAVEMENTSECTIONS................................................................................................... 11
LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX A— BORING LOCATION PLAN
APPENDIX B — LOGS AND LEGEND
APPENDIX C — LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
/A
Proposed FreeUp Storage Silt Expansion
Yeh Project No. 222-221
1.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY
This report presents the results of our geotechnical investigation for the expansion of the existing FreeUp
Storage Silt facility that will be constructed in Silt, Colorado. This investigation was performed in general
accordance with our Proposal No. 222-221 dated April 29, 2022 and authorized by Mr. Alex Dick of Spartan
Investment Group, LLC on May 6, 2022. Our scope of services included public and private utility locates,
field exploration, laboratory testing, geotechnical engineering analyses, and preparation of this report.
The purposes of this investigation were to evaluate the subsurface conditions on the site and to develop
geotechnical recommendations to guide design and construction of the proposed expansion. Our scope
of services included the following:
• Notification of Colorado 811 for location of public utilities and use of a subcontractor to locate
private utilities.
■ Drilling 11 soil borings to evaluate the subsurface conditions in the proposed building and access
drives.
• Laboratory testing of the soils encountered during the field exploration to evaluate pertinent
engineering properties of the soil.
■ Foundation design recommendations, including allowable bearing pressure, approximate depth
to bearing stratum, and estimated movement.
■ Floor slab design considerations and floor slab subgrade preparation recommendations.
• Pavement subgrade preparation and recommended pavement sections.
■ Earthwork, including recommendations for fill placement and compaction, suitability of the site
soil for reuse as engineered fill, and subgrade preparation.
■ Discussion of geotechnical conditions that could impact construction, such as unstable subgrade
soils, shallow groundwater, dewatering, and drainage.
2.0 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION
The project will consist of expanding the existing FreeUp Storage Silt facility in Silt, Colorado. The
expansion will include four new structures; access drives with new pavements; and associated
infrastructure. The location of the project site is depicted on the following Figure 1, Project Location Map.
The new structures will consist of one 24,000 square foot one-story building (Building'L') and three 3,400
to 6,000 square foot one-story buildings (Buildings 'I', 'J', and W) in the existing gravel -surfaced RV/trailer
storage areas. It was assumed that the buildings will have maximum wall loads on the order of 2 to 3 kips
per linear foot and maximum column loads on the order of 50 to 75 kips.
1
Proposed FreeUp Storage Silt Expansion
Yeh Project No. 222-221
A site grading plan was not available when this report was prepared. It was assumed that grade changes
of less than 2 feet will be required to develop the final site grades. We should be contacted if this
information is incorrect so that we can determine if a revision of the recommendations contained herein
is necessary.
/-frghway 6
a FedEx Drop Box
V) L
3301
r
3.0 SITE CONDITIONS
Figure 1— Project Location Map
IJ , 119L—wa�fi
Holiday Inn Express
.4 Suites S .
Highway 6
Murr Welding & Design
330
The project site is generally level, surfaced with gravel and currently being used for RV storage/parking.
The existing structures at the site are single -story, metal -clad structures. The type of foundation system
for the existing structures is not known. Access drives between the existing structures are gravel surfaced.
The site slopes gently to the south with a relatively small drainage pond, approximately 3 feet deep,
located near the southern property boundary within the footprint of proposed Building V. A photograph
of the pond is shown in Figure 2. The site is bounded on the north by the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR)
K
Proposed FreeUp Storage Silt Expansion
Yeh Project No. 222-221
tracks, on the east by South 16t' Street and commercial developments, on the south by Interstate 70, and
on the west by vacant land with apparent spoil piles present. In addition, abundant cattails, which are
generally indicative of poor drainage and/or shallow groundwater, are present in a relatively large
undeveloped parcel immediately north of the UPRR tracks northwest of the site.
Figure 2 —Site Photograph, Looking South at Southern Property Boundary Near Existing Drainage Pond
4.0 GEOLOGIC SETTING
The project site is in the Colorado River valley, southwest of the Grand Hogback Monocline and on the
north limb nearthe axis of the shallow dipping Rifle Syncline approximately 800 feet north of the Colorado
River. The following geologic descriptions are based on the Geologic Map of the Silt quadrangle, Garfield
County, Colorado (Shroba and Scott, 2001). The site is located on surficial deposits mapped as flood -plain
and stream channel deposits of silt, sand, pebbly to cobbly gravel with boulders, overlying claystone,
mudstone, siltstone and sandstone of the Tertiary -age Wasatch Formation. The Wasatch Formation dips,
or tilts, from horizontal to approximately 10 degrees to the southwest where it is exposed in surrounding
areas approximately one mile from the project site. Additional surficial deposits may include artificial fill.
The geohazard noted in the flood -plain deposits included flooding. Based on Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA, 2022) flood mapping, the project site is in an area of minimal flooding. Based
on the Colorado EPA Map of Radon Zones, Garfield County is listed as a Radon Zone 1. Radon gas can be
found in nearly all rock and soil and can move into buildings or other enclosed spaces and create a health
hazard if radioactive particles are inhaled. Evaluation of the radon gas potential was not within our
authorized scope of service and should be addressed by others.
3
Proposed FreeUp Storage Silt Expansion
Yeh Project No. 222-221
5.0 SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION
5.1 Field Exploration
A total of eleven borings were drilled for this project to depths ranging from approximately 10 to 16 feet.
Ten borings, designated B-1 through B-10, were performed for structural design purposes, whereas boring
B-11 was performed for design of pavements. The location of the pavement boring was provided to us by
the project civil engineer. The borings generally were terminated due to auger refusal in dense gravels.
The approximate boring locations are indicated on Figure A.1- Boring Location Plan attached in Appendix
A. A photograph of the drilling operations is shown in Figure 3.
Figure 3 —Site Photograph, Drilling Operations at Boring B-7
Samples of the subsurface materials were obtained from the borings at select depths by driving either a
split -spoon or modified California barrel sampler. Bulk samples of the soil were recovered from auger
cuttings as the borings were advanced. The samples were transported to our laboratory where they were
examined by the project geotechnical engineer and a program of laboratory testing was prepared.
Penetration resistance measurements were made by driving the samplers into the subsurface materials
with a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches. The number of blows required to drive the sampler 12 inches,
after an initial penetration of 6 inches for the standard sampler, constitutes the N-value as shown on the
boring logs. The N-values can be correlated to the relative density of granular soil and the consistency of
cohesive soil.
4
Proposed FreeUp Storage Silt Expansion
Yeh Project No. 222-221
Water levels were recorded in each boring at completion of the drilling operations. The borings were
backfilled with the auger spoil after the water level readings were obtained. The water level readings are
presented on the boring logs.
The drilling operations were monitored by a Yeh and Associates project geotechnical engineer. The
engineer prepared field logs documenting the soil conditions encountered, groundwater levels, standard
penetration test blow counts (N-values), sampling intervals, and types of samples obtained. The field logs
were used by the project geotechnical engineer as an aid in preparing the final boring logs. Copies of the
boring logs are presented in Appendix B. Our scope of services did not include survey of the boring
locations.
5.2 Laboratory Testing
The recovered soil samples were classified by the project geotechnical engineer in accordance with the
Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). Laboratory tests were then performed on select samples to
evaluate the pertinent engineering properties of the soil. The laboratory testing was conducted in general
accordance with the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) test procedures. The following
laboratory tests were performed for this evaluation:
• Water Content
• Dry Unit Weight
• Liquid and Plastic Limits
■ Grain Size Analysis
• Percent Passing No. 200 Sieve
• One -Dimensional Swell/Collapse Potential
■ Unconfined Compressive Strength of Soils
• Water Soluble Sulfates
• Chlorides
• Resistivity
■ pH
The laboratory test results are presented on the boring logs and summarized in Appendix C. Following the
completion of the laboratory testing, the field descriptions were confirmed or modified as necessary and
boring logs were finalized.
Results of the Atterberg limit tests and grain size analyses were used to classify the soils according to
AASHTO and the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) standards. Atterberg limits tests were
performed in general accordance with ASTM D4318 and the grain size analyses were performed in general
accordance with ASTM D421. Dry density and moisture content tests were performed in general
accordance with ASTM D7263 and ASTM D2216, respectively.
I
Proposed FreeUp Storage Silt Expansion
Yeh Project No. 222-221
Results of one-dimensional swell/collapse testing, performed in accordance with ASTM D4546, indicate
that a sample of lean clay with sand at a depth of 4 feet collapsed 1.3 percent when wetted under a
surcharge pressure of 500 psf. A sample of clayey sand at a depth of 4 feet collapsed 0.3 percent under a
surcharge pressure of 500 psf. The results indicate the soils have a low collapse potential.
Strength testing performed on six samples of sandy lean clay, lean clay with sand, or clayey sand at depths
between 4 and 10 feet exhibited unconfined compressive strengths ranging from 422 to 2,988 pounds per
square foot (psf). Four of the six samples tested had unconfined compressive strengths below 800 psf.
These results indicate the soils have poor strength and support characteristics.
6.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Approximately 4 to 6 inches of gravel with sand was encountered at the surface in the borings. Native
soils beneath the surficial gravel consisted of very soft to stiff sandy lean clay, very soft sandy silt, or very
loose to medium dense silty, clayey sand. A two -foot thick layer of fat clay was encountered in boring 13-
7 at depths between 12 and 14 feet. These deposits extended to depths of approximately 8 to 14 feet and
generally were underlain by medium dense to very dense gravel with silt and sand that extended to the
boring termination depths. An approximately 1-foot thick layer of cobbles was encountered on top of the
gravel stratum in boring B-3. The borings were terminated at depths of approximately 10 to 16 feet due
to auger refusal in the dense gravels.
Groundwater was encountered at depths between approximately 7 and 12 feet in the borings at the time
of drilling. Variations in the groundwater level may occur seasonally. The magnitude of the variation will
be largely dependent upon the amount of spring snowmelt, duration and intensity of precipitation, river
levels, irrigation practices, site grading changes, and the surface and subsurface drainage characteristics
of the surrounding area. Perched water tables may be present but were not encountered in the borings.
7.0 GEOTECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS
Due to weak and compressible soils encountered in the upper 8 to 14 feet of the exploratory borings, it is
recommended to support the planned single -story structures on helical pier foundations bearing in the
underlying dense gravels to mitigate low bearing capacity and differential settlement concerns.
Alternatively, spread or strip footings bearing on in -situ soils and that are designed to accommodate
differential settlement may be feasible for very lightly -loaded structures. Footings should be designed
utilizing a reduced allowable bearing pressure presented subsquently with sufficient reinforcing steel to
reduce differential foundation movements. Due to the shallow groundwater levels encountered at the
time of drilling and high moisture content of the soft foundation soils, overexcavation below the footing
bearing grades and replacement with structural fill to increase the allowable bearing pressure is not
recommended as there is a likelihood for unstable subgrade conditions to develop during construction. In
Proposed FreeUp Storage Silt Expansion
Yeh Project No. 222-221
addition, if shallow foundations are utilized for Building'K', they must be extended at or below the existing
bottom of drainage pond elevation so that building foundations bear uniformly on native soils.
The low -strength clays/sands will be subject to consolidation/compression upon application of additional
loads. Therefore, the site grades should not be raised by more than 2 feet in order to reduce the potential
for settlement induced by the weight of the newly placed fill. We should be contacted if the site is going
to be raised by more than 2 feet to determine the potential impact of the fill on the recommendations
presented herein.
The clay deposits exhibit generally low strength characteristics and may be unstable. Placement of a
geogrid, coarse aggregate, or other forms of subgrade stabilization could be necessary to develop a
suitable subgrade for floor slab and pavement support. The method of subgrade stabilization, if required,
should be determined by the project geotechnical engineer at the time of construction.
8.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
8.1 Helical Piers
Helical piers bearing in dense gravel are recommended to support the proposed structures. Typically,
these systems are designed and installed by a specialty contractor working under a performance
specification. The piers should penetrate the soft overburden soils and extend into the dense gravel
stratum present at depths of about 8 to 14 feet at the boring locations to achieve target pier design
capacities. Helical piers should be tested to verify design capacities. Depending on pier spacing, it is
anticipated that the target depths for helical piers will be on the order of 10 to 16 feet. These pier lengths
are estimates and the actual field depths may exceed these values.
The structural engineer should determine the helical pier locations and capacity requirements. This
information should be provided to a specialty design/build contractor to develop drawings for the helical
piers. Provided the site grades are not raised by more than 2 feet, the foundation design does not have
to account for downdrag loads. Uplift forces from swelling soils may also be neglected in the design. A
representative of the geotechnical engineer should observe helical pier installation.
8.2 Shallow Foundations
Alternatively, it may be feasible to support very lightly -loaded structures on spread or strip footings
bearing on native clay soils provided they are designed to accommodate some degree of differential
settlement. To limit potential foundation movement associated with the compressible subsoils, the
reduced bearing pressure presented below should be utilized in design.
7
Proposed FreeUp Storage Silt Expansion
Yeh Project No. 222-221
Foundations bearing on the in -situ soils can be designed for a maximum net allowable bearing pressure
of 400 pounds per square foot (psf). The allowable bearing pressure applies to dead load plus design live
load conditions and incorporates a factor of safety of approximately 3.0. The design bearing pressure can
be increased by one-third or as allowed by local code, when considering transient loads, such as wind or
seismic.
Resistance to lateral loads will be provided by the passive earth pressure acting against the footings and
the frictional resistance acting along the base of the footings. An ultimate passive earth pressure
resistance of 300 pounds per square foot per foot (psf/ft) is recommended for design. A coefficient of
sliding resistance of 0.33 is recommended for design. The lateral load resistance should incorporate a
factor of safety of at least 1.5.
In accordance with Garfield County requirements, the foundations should bear a minimum of 36 inches
below the final site grade for frost considerations. Due to the existing drainage pond within the planned
footprint of Building `K', footings for this structure should bear at or below the existing bottom of pond
elevation to ensure all footings bear uniformly on native soils. Strip footings should have a minimum width
of 16 inches and isolated column pad foundations should have a minimum dimension of 24 inches.
We estimate that the total post -construction movement of foundations supported as recommended
herein will be on the order of 1 inch or less. We estimate that the differential movement between
comparably sized and loaded foundations could equal the total foundation movement. It is recommended
that the strip foundations be designed as rigid grade beams with reinforcing steel placed in the top and
bottom of footings to reduce the potential for distress due to abrupt differential movement. Additional
foundation movement can occur if water from any source infiltrates the foundation subgrade. Therefore,
proper drainage should be provided in the final design and during construction. It is recommended that
paving be placed adjacent to building foundations to limit moisture infiltration.
The soft clay soils at the footing bearing grades may become unstable during construction, especially
during periods of precipitation. We recommend placement of a thin layer of flowable fill at the bottom of
excavations to maintain the in -situ moisture content of the bearing soils, minimize soil disturbance, and
assist in potential excavation dewatering efforts prior to placement of reinforcing steel and concrete.
Foundation excavations should be observed by the project geotechnical engineer, or a representative of
the engineer, to document that the foundation bearing stratum is similar to the conditions encountered
in the borings. If the subsurface conditions encountered differfrom those presented herein, supplemental
recommendations may be required.
8.3 Floor Slabs
Slab -on -grade floors may be used for the proposed storage buildings and should be underlain by at least
6 inches of imported granular structural fill. The floor slab subgrade should be prepared in accordance
8
Proposed FreeUp Storage Silt Expansion
Yeh Project No. 222-221
with the recommendations presented in Section 9.3 of this report. For structural design of concrete slabs -
on -grade, a modulus of subgrade reaction of 125 pounds per cubic inch (pci) may be used for floors
supported on a minimum of 6 inches of granular structural fill.
Additional floor slab design and construction recommendations are as follows:
• Positive separations and/or isolation joints should be provided between slabs and all foundations,
columns, or utility lines to allow independent movement.
• Control joints should be provided in slabs to control the location and extent of cracking.
• Interior trench backfill placed beneath slabs should be compacted in accordance with
recommended specifications outlined herein.
■ If moisture -sensitive floor coverings are used on interior slabs, barriers to reduce the potential for
vapor rise through the slab are recommended.
• Floor slabs should not be constructed on frozen subgrade.
Other design and construction considerations, as outlined in Section 302.1 R of the "ACI Design
Manual", are recommended.
8.4 Seismic Considerations
Seismic structural design criteria are provided below:
■ Design Code Reference ASCE 7-16
■ Site Soil Classification: Site Class D*
• GPS Coordinates: 39.544714-107.647607
Ss = 0.354 g SMs = 0.537 g Sys = 0.358 g
51=0.079g Sml=0.189g Soi=0.126g
* The site class was based on the conditions encountered in our shallow exploratory soil borings and our
knowledge of the soil conditions in the site vicinity. The soil characteristics extending beyond the depth
of our borings were assumed for the purposes of providing this site classification.
8.5 Drainage Considerations
Properly functioning foundations and floor slabs require appropriately constructed and maintained site
drainage conditions. Therefore, it is extremely important that positive drainage be provided during
construction and maintained throughout the life of the structures. It is also important that proper
planning and control of landscape and irrigation be performed.
9
Proposed FreeUp Storage Silt Expansion
Yeh Project No. 222-221
The buildings should be provided with downspouts extensions to direct water away from the structures.
The downspouts should discharge into drainage swales or into the storm sewer system.
Infiltration of water into utility or foundation excavations must be prevented during construction. Backfill
against footings and in utility trenches should be well compacted and free of all construction debris to
reduce the possibility of moisture infiltration.
In areas where paved surfaces do not immediately adjoin the structures, the ground surface adjacent to
the structures should slope down at a grade of about five percent for a distance of at least 10 feet from
the perimeter walls. Planters, landscape areas or other surface features that could retain water adjacent
to the structures should be avoided. These recommendations will help reduce the potential for soil
movement and the resulting distress but will not eliminate this potential.
8.6 Corrosivity
The concentrations of water-soluble sulfates measured in two samples obtained from the exploratory
borings at depths of 1 to 12 feet ranged from 0.012 to 0.014 percent. Based on laboratory test results, we
anticipate a Class 0 exposure based on a range of less than 0.10 percent as presented in the American
Concrete Institute (ACI) Guide to Durable Concrete. We recommend that a cement type to resist attack,
as required by the ACI, be used at the site for concrete placed directly on native soils, or a layer of
structural fill or aggregate base course be used as a separator between concrete and native material.
In addition, pH, water soluble chloride, and soil resistivity tests were performed on the same samples to
evaluate the potential attack on concrete and buried metal at the site. Test results measured pH values
of 6.9 to 7.6. The resistivity measurements were 979 to 1820 ohm -centimeters, and the concentration of
water-soluble chlorides were 0.0065 to 0.0078 percent. A qualified corrosion engineer should review this
data to determine the appropriate level of corrosion protection.
8.7 Pavement
The project will include the construction of access drives that will surround the storage buildings. Design
traffic volumes were not provided for our analysis. It was assumed that the drives will be subject to
automobile and light truck traffic, as well as moderately loaded delivery/moving vehicle traffic. A
pavement design life of 20 years was assumed for the analysis.
Recommended pavement sections for an estimated traffic loading of 75,000 18-kip equivalent single axle
loads (ESALs) are presented in Table 1. A revision of the recommended pavement sections may be
necessary if the design traffic loading conditions are different than assumed. An evaluation of the type
and volume of traffic that each portion of the paved area will experience should be conducted to
determine if the pavement sections presented herein are appropriate. A thinner pavement section may
10
Proposed FreeUp Storage Silt Expansion
Yeh Project No. 222-221
result in increased maintenance and/or shorter design life. The pavement subgrade should be prepared
in accordance with the recommendations presented in Section 9.4 of this report.
Table 1: Recommended Pavement Section
Traffic Area
Asphalt Pavement
I Aggregate Base Couse
Structural Number
Access Drives
4 inches
9 inches
2.84
The "design life" of a pavement is defined as the expected life at the end of which reconstruction of the
pavement will need to occur. Normal maintenance, including crack sealing, slurry sealing, and/or chip
sealing, should be performed during the life of the pavement.
A rigid pavement section is recommended in loading and unloading areas and at dumpster locations due
to the high static loads imposed by parking trucks in these areas. A minimum six-inch thick Portland
cement concrete pavement bearing on compacted subgrade is recommended.
Bituminous pavement should be constructed of dense -graded, central plant -mix, asphalt concrete. Base
course, Portland cement, and asphalt concrete should conform to Garfield County or CDOT standard
specifications. Material and compaction requirements should conform to recommendations presented in
Sections 9.4 and 9.5 of this report.
The pavement service life may be reduced due to water infiltration into the subgrade soils. This will result
in a softening and loss of strength of the subgrade soils. A regular maintenance program to seal pavement
cracks will help prolong the life of the pavement.
9.0 EARTHWORK RECOMMENDATIONS
Site preparation and earthwork operations should be performed in accordance with applicable codes,
safety regulations, and other local, state, or federal guidelines. Earthwork on the project should be
observed and evaluated by Yeh and Associates (Yeh). The evaluation of earthwork should include
observation and testing of engineered fills, subgrade preparation, foundation bearing soils, and other
geotechnical conditions exposed during the construction of the project.
9.1 Site Grubbing and Stripping
Existing gravel, vegetation, tree root balls, and other deleterious materials should be removed from the
proposed building and pavement areas. All exposed surfaces should be free of mounds and depressions,
which could prevent uniform compaction.
11
Proposed FreeUp Storage Silt Expansion
Yeh Project No. 222-221
9.2 Excavation and Trench Construction
Excavations within the on -site geologic materials will encounter a variety of soil types. We anticipate these
materials will be excavatable with conventional heavy-duty earth moving equipment. The excavation
contractor is responsible for determining the means and method necessary to accomplish earthwork
operations.
All excavations must comply with the applicable local, State, and Federal safety regulations, and with the
excavation standards of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). Construction site
safety, including excavation safety, is the sole responsibility of the Contractor as part of its overall
responsibility for the means, methods, and sequencing of construction operations. Yeh's
recommendations for excavation support is provided for the Client's sole use in planning the project, and
in no way do they relieve the Contractor of its responsibility to construct, support, and maintain safe
slopes. Under no circumstances should the following information be interpreted to mean that Yeh is
assuming responsibility for either construction site safety or the Contractor's activities.
We believe the overburden soil encountered on this site will classify as a Type C material, using OSHA
criteria due to the possibility of saturated soil and high groundwater table. OSHA requires that
unsupported cuts be no steeper than 1.5H:1V for Type C material for unbraced excavations up to 20 feet
in height. Flattened slopes may be required if hazardous ground movement is observed or the slopes will
be exposed for an extended period of time. Please note that the Contractor's OSHA -qualified "competent
person" must make the actual determination of soil type and allowable sloping in the field.
Trench excavations are not anticipated to extend into the groundwater table, which was encountered at
depths between 7 and 12 feet in the borings at the time of drilling. If deeper excavations are planned for
the project or if the groundwater table is higher at the time of construction, dewatering efforts may be
needed. Utilizing appropriate construction dewatering equipment/systems such as well points, sumps,
and trenches, will be the responsibility of the contractor. In addition, trenching into unstable, saturated
overburden soils will require temporary shoring, where construction of safe slopes is not feasible. OSHA
requirements for excavation in unstable materials should be followed.
The soils encountered in the proposed excavations may vary significantly across the site. The preliminary
classifications presented above are based solely on the materials encountered in widely spaced
exploratory test borings. The contractor should verify that similar conditions exist throughout the
proposed area of excavation.
As a safety measure, it is recommended that all vehicles and soil piles be kept to a lateral distance equal
to at least the depth of the excavation from the crest of the slope. The exposed slope face should be
protected against the elements and monitored by the contractor on at least a daily basis.
12
Proposed FreeUp Storage Silt Expansion
Yeh Project No. 222-221
9.3 Building Pad Preparation
The stripped subgrade within the footprints of Buildings 'I', 'J', and 'L' should be scarified to a minimum
depth of 8 inches, moisture conditioned to within 2 percentage points of the optimum moisture content,
and recompacted to at least 95 percent of the standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698). The
site can then be raised to the design finish grade with engineered fill. Floor slabs should be underlain by
a minimum of 6 inches of imported granular material meeting the requirements of Section 9.5 of this
report. The ground surface should be sloped away from the buildings to promote drainage away from the
structure.
Due to the presence of the existing drainage pond within the footprint of Building'K', we recommend that
the upper 2 feet of in -situ soils within the entire footprint be removed and recompacted to limit
differential fill thickness and to mitigate associated settlement concerns. In addition, we recommend that
the pond side -slopes be laid back at an inclination 6h:1v, or flatter, prior to the overexcavation to avoid
abrupt changes in fill thickness and to provide uniform floor slab support.
9.4 Pavement Subgrade Preparation
The stripped pavement subgrade should be proof rolled underthe observation of the project geotechnical
engineer, or a representative of the engineer, to verify stability immediately prior to placing the aggregate
base course or engineered fill to raise grade, if necessary. Proof rolling should be accomplished with a
fully loaded water truck or similar heavy rubber -tired equipment weighing a minimum of 10 tons and
should include multiple equipment passes in two directions. Any soft, loose, or otherwise unsuitable
material detected during proof rolling operations should be removed and replaced with engineered fill or
otherwise stabilized. The subgrade can then be raised to the design finish grade with engineered fill. We
recommend a separator fabric, such as Mirafi 500x or equivalent, be used between the clay subgrade and
aggregate base course (ABC) layer to prevent the fines from contaminating the ABC and reducing the
strength of this layer.
9.5 Fill Material
The on -site soils may be reused as fill to raise grade in the planned building and pavement areas provided
it does not contain any deleterious material and provided any material greater than 4 inches in diameter
is removed. Imported granular structural fill should meet the criteria of CDOT Class 1 Structure Backfill.
Aggregate base course should meet the requirements of CDOT Class 6 ABC. Samples of any imported
material proposed for use on the project should be submitted to our office for approval and testing at
least three (3) days prior to stockpiling at the site.
13
Proposed FreeUp Storage Silt Expansion
Yeh Project No. 222-221
9.6 Compaction Requirements
Fill should be placed in horizontal lift thicknesses that are suitable for the compaction equipment being
used but in no case should exceed 8 inches by loose measure. Within the building and pavement areas,
scarified and recompacted subgrades in addition to engineered fill consisting of on -site soils should be
moisture conditioned to a water content within 2 percentage points of the optimum moisture content,
and recompacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the standard Proctor maximum dry density. Imported
granular fill or Class 6 ABC should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the modified Proctor (ASTM
D1557) maximum dry density at a moisture content within 2 percentage points of the optimum water
content. Trench backfill outside of structural and paved areas may be compacted to a minimum of 90
percent of the standard Proctor maximum dry density.
We recommend that a qualified representative of Yeh and Associates visit the site during excavation and
during placement of the structural fill to verify the soils exposed in the excavations are consistent with
those encountered during our subsurface exploration and that proper foundation subgrade preparation
is performed.
10.0 LIMITATIONS
The recommendations in this report are based on our field observations, laboratory testing, and our
present understanding of the proposed construction. It is possible that subsurface conditions can vary
beyond the limits explored. If the conditions found during construction differ from those described in this
report, please notify us immediately so that we can review our report considering those conditions and
provide supplemental recommendations as necessary. We should also review this report if the scope of
the proposed construction, including the proposed loads or structure locations, changes from that
described in this report.
The scope of services for this project did not include, specifically or by implication, any environmental or
biological (e.g. mold, fungi, and bacteria) assessment of the site or identification or prevention of
pollutants, or conditions or biological conditions. If the owner is concerned about the potential for such
contamination, conditions or pollution, other studies should be undertaken and a professional in that field
should be consulted.
Yeh and Associates has prepared this report for the exclusive use of Spartan Investment Group, LLC. This
report was prepared in substantial accordance with the generally accepted standards of practice for
geotechnical engineering as they exist in the site area at the time of our investigation. No warranty is
expressed or implied. The recommendations in this report are based on the assumption that Yeh and
14
Proposed FreeUp Storage Silt Expansion
Yeh Project No. 222-221
Associates will conduct an adequate program of construction testing and observation to evaluate
compliance with our recommendations.
11.0 REFERENCES
American Concrete Institute (ACI) 201.211-08, 2008, Guide to Durable Concrete,
Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT), 2021, Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge
Construction.
EPA, Colorado Radon Map accessed on June 2, 2022 at htt s: www.e a. ov sites default files 209.4-
08/documents/colorado. pdf
FEMA Flood Map Service Center, accessed on June 2, 2022 at
htt s: msc. fema.gov/porta Isearch?AddressQuer =Silt%2C%20Colorado#search results anchor
International Code Council. International Building Code. Falls Church, Va.:International Code Council,
2015.
PaveXpress, 2022, using AASHTO 1993/1998, accessed on February 17, 2022 at
http://projects.pavexpressdesign.com/
Shroba, R. and Scott, R., 2001, Geologic map of the Silt quadrangle, Garfield County, Colorado: U.S.
Geological Survey, Miscellaneous Field Studies Map MF-2331, scale 1:24,000.
U.S. Geological Survey, Seismic Design Web Service Documentation, accessed on June 9, 2022.
15
Appendix A
BORING LOCATION PLAN
'� Kam•-';iti [•`i•.• .
�__t!'_1-? * f��lll l]1 ' �j�•r
'
.� / I �f
�
�j
o
LL
43
WIT
its. pir
r� pi�'� � rf, kr•r. ,Irk-.—. �
r r m
III
I a
ii" --,"- " " "y -
ca �
y
so
? a
I
0
J,
.r cr
r
�
IpC �
•C
cu
o e
CD o)
- o
6m
ci r
CS
c
a
m
,
m
� ,
NIA
lit 1i
Z
g
Z
0
u
0
Z
cc
m
Z
O
Z
Qa
x
W
J_
N
W
O
H
a
W
W
cc
LL
Appendix 6
BORING LOGS AND LEGEND
�A Yeh and Associates, Inc. Project. FreeUp Storage Silt Expansion
Geotechnical • Geological • Construction Services
Project Number: 222-221
Legend for Symbols Used on Borehole Logs
Sample Types
Modified California Standard Penetration
Bulk Sample of a Sampler Z Test
auger/odex cuttings (2.5 inch OD, 2.0 inch(ASTM D1586)
ID)
Drilling Methods
SOLID -STEM
F1 AUGER (4" OD)
Lithology Symbols (see Boring Logs for complete descriptions)
M 0 Clayey Sand (SC) Cobbles and gravel H
Fat Clay (CH) ® Fill with Gravel as
major soil
® Lean Clay (CL) IN
Sandy Lean Clay (CL) IN
Silt (ML) Silty Clay (CL-ML)
Silty, Clayey Sand Well -Graded Gravel Well -Graded Gravel
(SC-SM) IM Silty Sand (SM) (GW) with Sand (GW)
Well -Graded Sand
with Gravel (SW)
Lab Test Standards Other Lab Test Abbreviations
Moisture Content ASTM D2216 ppH Soil pH (AASHTO T289-91
Dry Density ASTM D7263 5 Water -Soluble Suffate Can ent (AASHTO T290-91,
Sand/Fines Content ASTM D421, ASTM C136, ASTM D4327)
ASTM D1140 Chl Water -Soluble Chloride Content (AASHTO T291-91,
Atterberg Limits ASTM D4318 ASTM D4327)
AASHTO Class. AASHTO M145, S/C Sweli1Collapse (ASTM D4546)
ASTM D3282 UCCS Unconfined Compressive Strength
USCS Class. ASTM D2487 Soil - ASTM D2166, Rock - ASTM D7012)
(Fines = 3. Passing #200 Sieve R-Value Resistance R-Value (ASTM D2844)
Sand = 'i Passing #4 Sieve, but not passing DS (C) Direct Shear cohesion (ASTM D3460)
4200 sICVG] DS ((phi) Direct Shear friction angle ASTM 03080)
Re Electrical Resistivity (AASHTO T288-91)
Notes PtL Point Load Strength Index (ASTM 05731)
1. Visual classifications are in general accordance with ASTM D2488, "Standard Practice for Description and Identification of Soils (Visual -Manual
Procedures)".
2. "Penetration Resistance" on the Boring Logs refers to the uncorrected N value for SPT samples only, as per ASTM D1586. For samples obtained with a
Modified California (MC) sampler, drive depth is 12 inches, and "Penetration Resistance" refers to the sum of all blows. Where blow counts were > 50 for
the 3rd increment (SPT) or 2nd increment (MC), "Penetration Resistance" combines the last and 2nd-to-last blows and lengths; for other increments with >
50 blows, the blows for the last increment are reported.
3. The Modified California sampler used to obtain samples is a 2.5-inch OD, 2.0-inch ID (1.95-inch ID with liners), split -barrel sampler with internal liners, as
per ASTM D3550. Sampler is driven with a 140-pound hammer, dropped 30 inches per blow.
4. "ER" for the hammer is the Reported Calibrated Energy Transfer Ratio for that specific hammer, as provided by the drilling company.
Project FreeUP Storage, a Silt Expansion PAGE
Yeh and Associates, Inc. Name: ' P 1 of 1
Geolechnical •Geological •Construction Services
Project Number: 222-221 Boring No.: B-1
Boring Began: 5/13/2022 Total Depth: 15.0 ft Weather Notes: Sunny
Boring Completed: 5/13/2022 Ground Elevation: Inclination from Horiz.: Vertical
Drilling Method(s): Solid -Stem Auger (4" OD) Coordinates:
Location: Building L Night Work: ❑
Driller: HRL Compliance Solutions
Drill Rig:
Diedrich D-90
Hammer: Automatic (hydraulic), ER:
%
L Soil Samples
n
0
a) o
u iu
a am T 2 Blows
°
a'�
m 0 '0 ~ z er
a� p�
`�°
o
t
.r
N w
E a 6 in
W
J
a
m
11�
m
r?
5
10
l7
z
Of
0
m
w
c�
0
0
0)
a
Z)
w
w
LL
N
N
N
N
J
1 1-1-2 1 3 1
2-6-4 1 10
Logged By: M. Skyrman
Final By: R. Southworth
Material Description
0.0 - 0.5 ft. FILL, GRAVEL wl sand.
0.5 - 8.5 ft. Sandy LEAN CLAY, bri
plasticity, moist to wet, soft.
8.5 -12.0 ft. Sandy SILT, brown, no plasticity, wet,
very soft.
=' 12.0 -15.0 ft. GRAVEL w/ sand, brown, no
plasticity, wet, loose to medium dense.
Bottom of Hole at
Symboll
Depth
Date
12.0 ft
-
-
Atterberg
=
Limits
y
AASHTO
Field Notes
N =
o
-Classifi-
0 oT27F10:11
& uscs
and
Other Lab
v
o
aNi
cations
Tests
LL
17.81 167.31 28 1 12
(Poor Recovery)
Auger Refusal
YA Yeh and Associates, Inc. Name t FreeUp Storage, Silt Expansion PAGE
1of1
Geotechnical - Geological - Construction Services
Project Number: 222-221 Boring No.: B-2
Boring Began: 5/13/2022 Total Depth: 15.0 ft Weather Notes: Sunny
Boring Completed: 511312022 Ground Elevation: Inclination from Horiz.: Vertical
Drilling Method(s): Solid -Stem Auger (4" OD) Coordinates:
Location: Building L Night Work: ❑
Driller: HRL Compliance Solutions
Drill Rig: Diedrich D-90
Hammer: Automatic (hydraulic), ER: %
Soil Samples
c
aL
°
p
�
w
r
o m
a m
Blows
O U
CM
°
a>i
°� '�
o�
~
=
per
coy
w
�
0
6in
C 0
M
0-W
Cn
Logged By: M. Skyrman
Final By: R. Southworth
Material Description
0.0 - 0.3 ft. FILL, GRAVEL wl sand,
,gray and brown.
0.3 - 5.0 ft. Silty, Clayey SAND, brown,
tow plasticity. mast very loose.
5.0 - 14.0 ft. Sandy LEAN CLAY, br
low plasticity, moist to wet, very soft.
-15.0 ft. Silty SAND w/ gravel,
n and gray, very dense.
Bottom of Hole at 15.0 ft.
[groundwater Levels:
Symbol
Depth
8.0 ft -
Date
- -
-
Atterberg
w
y
c
°
Limits
AASHTO
Field Notes
�
o
° -
U '
o --
0 -
--
& USCS
and
o °3
co
o a
y`
C
Classifi-
Other Lab
v
z
o
o
J
cations
Tests
fD
(n
UL
a
27.61 1 1 164.41 27 1 9
Recovery)
Refusal
VAGeotechnical
Yeh and Associates, Inc.
- Geological - Construction Services
Boring Began: 5/1312022
Boring Completed: 5/13/2022
Drilling Method(s): Solid -Stem Auger (4" OD)
Driller: HRL Compliance Solutions
Drill Rig: Diedrich D-90
Hammer: Automatic (hydraulic), ER: %
=
Soil Samples
O
a
>,
m N
a a)a
Blows
O c
per
� cts
= v
o
w
E
0
6 in
0
M
EL 0Y
10-1./ i tl 9-26-50/4"
Project FreeUp Storage, Silt Expansion PAGE
Name: 1 of 1
Project Number: 222-221 Boring No.: B-3
Total Depth: 10.5 ft Weather Notes: Sunny
Ground Elevation: Inclination from Horiz.: Vertical
Coordinates:
Location: Building L Night Work: ❑
Logged By: M. Skyrman
Final By: R. Southworth
Material Description
0.0 - 0.3 ft. FILL, GRAVEL wl sand,
ray and brown.
0.3 - 8.0 ft. Sandy LEAN CLAY, brown,
low plasticity, moist, medium stiff to stiff.
8.0 - 9.0 ft. COBBLES AND GRAVEL,
brown, wet.
9.0 -10.5 ft. GRAVEL w/ sand, brown,
wet, very dense.
Bottom of Hale at 10.5 ft.
Symbol
Depth
Date
8.0 ft
-
-
Atterberg
J
c
Limits
w
c
c
AASHTO
Field Notes
N
o a
�o�oX
�, -
�-
-
&uscs
Classifi-
and
Other Lab
o
v
o
'm
`a
�,
S
.s xD
�.:� m e
cations
Tests
C7
Cn
U_
a
17.8 108.4 0.1 38.7 60.8 26 10 A-4 (3) Pocket
CL Penetrometer
=.75 tsf
UCCS=2385 psf
Refusal
Project FreeUp Storage, Silt Expansion
VAYeh and Associates, Inc. Name:
Geotechnmal - Geological - Construction Services
Project Number: 222-221 Boring No.: B-4
Boring Began: 5/13/2022
Boring Completed: 5/13/2022
Drilling Method(s): Solid -Stem Auger (4" OD)
Driller: HRL Compliance Solutions
Drill Rig: Diedrich D-90
Hammer: Automatic (hydraulic), ER: %
-E
I
Soil Samples
m
or
C
O�
�.—,
p
m
w
m
O N
O U
�+
O
(a
a
2�
Blows
CU CU
'�
°' �
o--
~
(
per
wa
C
of
bin
t
I
a
s
to
L 30-50/5" .15015"1
Total Depth: 14.0 ft
Ground Elevation:
Coordinates:
Location: Buil6ng L
Logged By: M. Skyrman
Final BY: R. Southworth
Material Description
0.0 - 0.3 ft. FILL, GRAVEL w/ sand,
brown and gray.
0.3 - 8.0 ft. Sandy LEAN CLAY, brown,
low to medium plasticity. moist, medium
stiff to stiff.
PAGE
1 of 1
Weather Notes: Sunny
Inclination from Horiz.: Vertical
Night Work: ❑
Symbol
Depth
Date
7.0 ft
-
Atterberg
Limits
AASHTO Field Notes
i=
n
° a
c
°
o -
o -
--
&uses and
o
o
FD
�'
U)
;
Classifi- Other Lab
o
zv
o
(D
�`- N c
JJ a
cations Tests
rn
LL
18.7
8.0 - 12.0 ft. Sandy SILT, brown, low
plasticity, wet, medium stiff.
29.2
12.0 -14.0 ft. GRAVEL w/ sand and silt,
gray and brown, wet, very dense.
Bottom of Hole at 14.0 ft.
31.4 68.6 41 21 A 7 6 13) Chl=.U0778°l0
CL Re-979ohm-cm
UCCS=2988 psf
42.91 53.3
No sample
recovered
Auger Refusal
VAme t FreeUp Storage, Silt Expansion iAoGE
ff i
Yeh and Associates, Inc. Na
Geolechnical • Geological • Construction Services
Project Number. • 222-221 Boring No.: B-5
Boring Began: 5/13/2022 Total Depth: 11.0 ft Weather Notes: Sunny
Boring Completed: 5/13/2022 Ground Elevation: Inclination from Horiz.: Vertical
Drilling Method(s): Solid -Stem Auger (4" OD) Coordinates:
Location: Building K Night Work: ❑
Driller: HRL Compliance Solutions
Drill Rig: Diedrich D-90
Hammer: Automatic (hydraulic), ER: %
r
Soil Samples
O�
Q.
al
L
A
O N
m (D
a m
T
Blows
°
> m
a) a)
I—
.__
per
° ns
�, Mo
o
w
E
0
6 in
a
J
M
D- (If
1 2-3 1 5 1
5
10 � /'\ J f l 3-5-40 145
a
Logged By: M. Skyrman
Symbol
Depth
8.0 ftDate
-
-
Final By: R. Southworth
-
-
-
Atterberg
N
c
=
='
Limits
AASHTO
Field Notes
Material Description
o a
"o
0 o
--
o
--
o
x&
USCS
Classifi-
and
Other Lab
2 Cc:-
U
o
m
N
=
J E
.N
M C
cations
Tests
C�
rn
U_
a
0.0 - 0.3 ft. FILL, GRAVEL wl sand,
brown and gray.
0.3 - 8.0 ft. LEAN CLAY w/ sand,
brown, low plasticity, moist, soft.
Pocket
23.0
101.3
27.0
73.0
32
14
A-6 (8)
25.1
100.4
CL
Penetrometer
=.75 tsf
SIC=1.3% @ 500
UCCS=684 psf
8.0 -11.0 ft. GRAVEL w/ silt and sand,
brown and gray, wet, dense.
of Hole at 11.0 ft.
9.1 1 154.0 1 36.41 9.6
Auger Refusal
Project FreeUp Storage, Silt Expansion PAGE
YAYeh and Associates, Inc- Name: 1 of 1
IF
Geotechnical - Geological - Construction Services
Project Number: 222-221 Boring No.: B-6
Boring Began: 5/13/2022 Total Depth: 14.0 ft Weather Notes: Sunny
Boring Completed: 5/13/2022 Ground Elevation: Inclination from Horiz.: Vertical
Drilling Method(s): Solid -Stem Auger (4" OD) Coordinates:
Location: Building K Night Work: ❑
Driller: HRL Compliance Solutions
Drill Rig: Diedrich D-90
Hammer: Automatic (hydraulic), ER: %
c
L
n
p
o
-
Soil Samples
Cn
(D
O
m
a m
a
N
Blows
O UCn
°
o
-
per
p
n
a) •
L
�.
w
6 in
J
N
E
0
CD(
N
M
a�
4
�
m
0
a 57
V
2
W
}
N
v
n
r
S7
10 J[ X�I� l 5-7-16 23
LU
� I,J"I(
a
N
N
O
N
0
V
J
0
Z
of
0
67
V
O
Logged By: M. Skyrman
Final By: R. Southworth
Material Description
0.0 -0.3 ft. FILL., GRAVEL w/ sand,
brown and gray.
0.3 - 9.0 ft. Silty CLAY wl sand, brown.
low plasticity, moist, medium stiff.
9.0 -14.0 ft. GRAVEL wl sand, brown
and gray, wet, medium dense.
of Hole at 14.0 ft.
Symbol
Depth
Date
9.5 ft - 1
- -
Atterberg
c
Limits
AASHTO
Field Notes
w
--
o --
o --&
0
uscS
and
o C
a
> =
=
�-Other
TSAF—i-L
Classifi-
Lab
v
o>
LL
cations
Tests
(6
21.1 95.0 I , 27.4 172.6I 25 5 I CL-ML
Yeh and Associates, Inc.
t FreeUp Storage, Silt Expansion
PAGE
INProject
Na
1
Geolechnical • Geological • Construction Services
Project Number. 222-221
Boring No.: B-7
Boring Began: 5/13/2022
Total Depth: 15.5 ft
Weather Notes: Sunny
Boring Completed: 5/13/2022
Ground Elevation:
Inclination from Horiz.: Vertical
Drilling Method(s): Solid -Stem Auger (4" OD)
Coordinates:
Location: Building I
Night Work: ❑
Driller: HRL Compliance Solutions
Groundwater Levels:
Drill Rig: Diedrich D-90
Logged By: M. Skyrman
Symms
e
Hammer: Automatic (hydraulic), ER: /o
Final By: R. Southworth
Depth
7.0 ft
-
-
-
Soil Samples
Atterberg
--
--
a
m
o
m
o c�i
�' '
c
Limits
AASHTO
Field Notes
co CD
a a)
T
Blows
m a
—6
Material Description
N
D a
o
00 o
0 o
- o
� x
& uscs
and
a'> .�°'.
p .�°'.
,�,
per
b v
.Cn
o
-
--
-
;
.� �,
w
classifi-
Other Lab
W
°=
E
0
6 in
C
m m
J
o
o
m
tC0
rn
LL
E
e
-
cations
Tests
to
0.0 - 0.3 ft. FILL, GRAVEL w/ sand,
brown and gray.
it
0.3 -10.0 ft. Sandy Silty CLAY, brown,
low plasticity, moist to wet, soft to
zi
medium stiff.
0
pH=6.9
S=.014%
0
2-2
4
20.9
95.1
55.9
24
7
Chl=.00778%
0
5
Re--979ohm•cm
=
Pocket
}
Penetrometer
0
=0.5 tsf
0
c�
LU
a 1-4 5 (No sample
a w 10.0 -12.0 ft. FAT CLAY, brown, high recovered)
pH=7.6
10
Dlasticitv. wet. soft to very soft. c- na not
Chl=.00647%
12.0 -15.5 ft. GRAVEL wl silt and sand, Re=1820ohm•cm
bW.
rown and gray, wet, very dense.
Ai7X
w I' Auger Refusal
N
5-21-50/5" .71/11, 7.8 59.0 31.5 9.5
15
O
N Bottom of Hole at 15.5 ft.
a
c�
fN
J
Z
0
O
In
w
U'
O
co
m
a
w
w
w
of
LL
N
r
0
0
FO
S
tl�
N
O
0i
1A Yeh and Associates, Inc. Namet FreeUp Storage, Silt Expansion PAGE
1of1
Geotechnical - Geological - Construction Services
Project Number: 222-221 Boring No.: B-8
Boring Began: 5/13/2022 Total Depth: 15.0 ft Weather Notes: Sunny
Boring Completed: 5/13/2022 Ground Elevation: Inclination from Horiz.: Vertical
Drilling Method(s): Solid -Stem Auger (4" OD) Coordinates:
Location: Building I Night Work: ❑
Driller: HRL Compliance Solutions
Drill Rig:
Diedrich D-90
Logged By: M. Skyrman
Hammer: Automatic (hydraulic), ER:
%
Final By: R. Southworth
L Soil Samples
O.�
a -o
L..
O U
T
rn
Blows
o
Material Description
m
p per
.w
N w
Ea 6in
m
0.0 0.3 ft. FILL, GRAVEL w/ sand,
broand gray,
�-1
0.32.0 ft. Clayey $AND, brown, I
plasticity, moist to wet, loose.
NJ
12.0 -15.0 ft. GRAVEL w/ sand, brown
and gray, wet, dense.
Bottom of Hole at 15.0 ft.
Symbol
Depth
Date
7.0 ft
-
Atterberg
Limns
AASHTO Field Notes
w
`�
n
° --
Uo
0-
Uo
o --
Uo
--
pox
&uses and
°
F —
—
y --
; „
Classifi- Other Lab
U
o
N
:
J a
cations Tests
16.4 106.8 58.0 42.0 23 g 1 A-4 (0) Pocket
SC Penetrometer
=0.75 tsf
UCCS=787 psf
28.0 193.0 I 1 142.1
Auger Refusal
YA Yeh and Associates, Inc.
Project
Name:
FreeUp Storage, Silt Expansion PAGE
I Of 1
Geolechnical - Geological - Construction Services
Project Number. • 222-221
Boring No.: B-9
Boring Began: 5/13/2022
Total Depth: 16.0 ft
Weather Notes: Sunny
Boring Completed: 5/13/2022
Ground Elevation:
Inclination from Horiz.: Vertical
Drilling Method(s): Solid -Stem Auger (4" OD)
Coordinates:
Location: Building J
Night Work: ❑
Driller: HRL Compliance Solutions
Groundwater Levels:
Drill Rig: Diedrich D-90
Logged By: M. Skyrman
Symbol
Hammer: Automatic (hydraulic), ER: %
Final By: R. Southworth
-
Depth 7.0 ftDate
- -
L
Soil Samples
Atterberg
o
m
°
o
Y
''
o
w
c
c
Limits
-
AASHTO
Field Notes
0
O U
Blows
m
—°O
Material Description
N
o Q
o
a
o
o X
& uscs
and
w
0
c
per
p
�'
c
r
o
g
a, �-
o -
--
lT = N
Classifi-
Other Lab
n
E
Q
6 in
co.
J
o
°
m
to
u_
c
in a-
cations
Tests
I
D
l
0.0 - 0.5 ft. FILL, GRAVEL w/ sand,.
brown and gray.
0.5 - 9.0 ft. Silty Clayey SAND, brown,
low plasticity, moist to wet, very loose.
2-2 4 21.7 93.4 42.2 23 4 Pocket
5 Penetrometer
=0.25 tsf
PUSH 'US 9.0 -13.0 ft. Sandy LEAN CLAY, brown, 26.5 89.1 Pocket
10 low plasticity, wet, very soft. Penetrometer
=0.25 tsf
UCCS=785 psf
13.0 -16.0 ft. GRAVEL w/ silt and sand,
brown and gray, wet, dense.
15 18-22-23 45 H83 57.0 30.8 12.2�,AugerRefusal
of Hole at 16.0 ft.
VAYeh and Associates, Inc- Name t FreeUp Storage, Silt Expansion
Geotechnical - Geological - Construction Services
Project Number: 222-221
Boring Began: 5/13/2022 Total Depth: 13.5 ft
Boring Completed: 5/13/2022 Ground Elevation:
Drilling Method(s): Solid -Stem Auger (4" OD) Coordinates:
Location: Building J
PAGEI
1of1
No.: B-10
Weather Notes: Sunny
Inclination from Horiz.: Vertical
Night Work: ❑
Driller: HRL Compliance Solutions
grounawater Levels.
Drill Rig: Diedrich D-90
Logged By: M. Skyrman
Symbol
Depth 7.0 ft -
Hammer: Automatic (hydraulic), ER:
%
Final By: R. Southworth
Date - -
a
Soil Samples
A erbtsg
�
.2
AASHTO
Field Notes
m - a)
Blows
m
o
Material Description
y
o a
U
& uscS
0 x
and
> m (D 1— rn
per
y
o
m --
o --
to - 3 : ._ d Classifi-
�,
Other Lab
._
o
z
o
>
�._ cations
J c
Tests
W 0
6 in
rn
ii ii
to
IY
0.0 - 0.5 ft. FILL, GRAVEL wl sand,
brown and gray.
0.5 - 9.5 ft. Sandy LEAN CLAY, brown,
low plasticity, moist to wet, soft to very
soft.
Pocket
2-2
4
Penetrometer
5
-11
=0.25 tsf
(Poor Recovery)
10-17 27 (Poor Recovery)
10 9.5 -13.5 ft. GRAVEL w/ silt and sand,
•. brown and gray, wet, medium dense to
r�. very dense.
50/5.5'
Bottom or Hole at
Auger Refusal
m
0
0
0
0
U
W
r
N
N
a.
D
w
w
tr
u_
N
N
N
N
N
0
J
w
J
U)
N
0
0
U
RA Yeh and Associates, Inc. Name t FreeUp Storage, Silt Expansion
Geotechnical Geological •Construction Services
Project Number: 222-221
Boring Began: 5/13/2022 Total Depth: 10.0 ft
Boring Completed: 5/13/2022 Ground Elevation:
Drilling Method(s): Solid -Stem Auger (4" OD) Coordinates:
Location: Between Building H and L
PAGE
1 of 1
No.: B-11
Weather Notes: Sunny
Inclination from Horiz.: Vertical
Night Work: ❑
Driller: HRL Compliance Solutions
Groundwater Levels:
Drill Rig:
Diedrich D-90
Logged By: M. Skyrman
Symms
Hammer: Automatic (hydraulic), ER:
%
Final By: R. Southworth
-
Depth 7.0 ftDate
- -
L
Soil Samples
Atterberg
-�
aai o
s -- 6 w
o chi
tm
�' '
c
c
Limits
AASHTO
Field Notes
Blows
—°
o
Material Description
N
o a
0
o
� o
0 o oz' x & uscs
and
m
p „ r-
per
v
o
Z
� --
>
.o -
C
cn �- .� „ classifi-
0 "o
Other Lab
lJJ
n
E a
6 in
a)�
J
o
o
a
U)
c•— U) cations
LL J J a s
Tests
to
(LtY
0.0 - 0.3 ft. FELL, GRAVEI wl sand,
brown to gray.
0.3 -10.0 ft. Sandy LEAN CLAY, brown.
low plasticity, wet, very loose.
pH=6.9
S=.014%
1-2
3
24.2
92.4
62.5
37.5
Chl=.00778%
5
18.6
98.1
Re=979 ohm -cm
Pocket
Penetrometer
=0.5 tsf
UCCS=422 psf
S/C=0.3% @ 500
PUSH
PUS
27.9
90.8
41.1
Bottom of Hole at 10.0 ft.
Appendix C
LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
co
0
W
W
W
W
m
co
00
z
v
O
(O
(O
t.0
m
W
V
-1
-I
to
M
U7
Cn
W
N
N
7
m
N
3
N
W
A
O
A
O
A
A
O
A
A
?
O
A
A
A
N
90
W
(n
CD
(.n
cn
Cn
N
Vl
cn
C.TI
O
CI7
UI
A
O
7
N
CYI
W
x
n
n
n
n
0
0
�
n
C)
n
C)
C)
x
CD
fD
O Z
W
m
�
N
p�
V
O
(NT
NW
co
W
V
W
V
V
O.
c 0
A
W
v
W
C.
N
V
OD
t0
O)
W
07
tD C
7 N
v z
to
to
CD
A
W
A
w
Q)
A
N
T
UI
Ln
(JI
y
+
V
0
-AI
0
I
I
o
0
I
I
I
A
0
r
O
I
o
o
0
I
e N
N
W
CT
j
W
N
A
W
O
.-. cn
N
W
O
r
f
OD
1
I
I
O
V
N
(O
tT
I
o
N
OD
O
tr
A
O
t9
O
O
UI
7
a
ty
O
O
N
A
N
A
j
A
N
O
I
CII
OI
V
N
V
W
tr
V
tT
O
OI
A
O
V
c N'
7
coN
N
O
cn
w
'
O
O
O
m
?
m
W
O N
n
1
W
w
A
1
N
E
to m
v
I
r
1
1
(n
I
JIlaI
W
I
ap
I
Q
(D
I
I
A
I
co
I
1
V
vl
I
A
o
I
to
I
_
N
a
I
r
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
1
I
T
I
I
1
2
c Cl)
0
o
A
N
(D O' fD
c �
O 'D
to
7 N
O
ci L
3
o
0
0
n
>
1
I
I
i
I
I
OD
-4
a
CD
n o
o
d_ C) N
l
I
I
!
1
I
1
1
Cil
I
I
I
I
O F
7 W
7 N
,O
O
C
N
N
O-
m
fT
1
OVD
V
I
l
I
?
I
m
N
OD
M
I
f
[
I
toil j 0
t0 - 7
S
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
p�j
c
m
D
D
D
D
A
CD6
g
o
coW
W
o
N
T_
(7
C')
r
r
r
C
n
O
z
C�
cn
N
O
r
d
a
O
d
O
CD
N
CD
U)
�. !'•ZVI
1 1 1 1 1 .1 11 1 11
"
11■1■111.1110■I1111111■il�i
ill
l■■IIIIl111■■IIII111■■
■■1111111W1111111111■■11111�1►�'i111i111■■1111111■■
r�{1111■\`l111111\1\11111111■■Ilfilll■■
.11■■IIIIIII■
:,11■■1111111■■1�i11�1�■11i�111■I�iIIIIf11■■111i111■■
11■
■I
Ili
111■®11111114�!
Illll
ll�\�1I111111
■■
1111111■■
11■■IIIIf11■■IlIi111■��1111111\■�111111■■1111111■■
11■■I111111■■
Ill
I III■�iI
111111■
\`�
�i111■■1111111■■
:,11■■1111111■®1111111■■1111111■■11�i111■■IIIIIII■■
11■■1111111■®IIIlIi1■■IIIIIII■■11:1111■
IIIIIII■■
11■■1111111■■1111111■■1111111■■1111111■
IIIIIII■■
INN
Illll
l l
■
■1111111
■■
111�
11■■
I III111
■■
1111111■■
Ell
11■
■
I llll
l l
■
■IIIIIII
■■
Illl1�1■■ll
II
II
I
■■IIIIIII■
■
11■■1111111■■1111111■■1111111!■■1111111■■IIIIIII■■
INS
1
11■
■I
II1111■■Ill
I III
■
■I
IIi111
■
■1111111■■IIIIIII
■
■
/�
1111111■�1111111■�
,11■■1111111■■1111111■■1111111■
11■■1111111■■I111111■
■1111111
■■
Ml�
1111■■1111111■■
11■■1111111■■1111111■■1111111■■I111111■■111i111■■
11■■1I11111■■l
l 11111■■1111111■■IIIIIII
■■
II11111■■
111■■1111III■
■1111111■■1111111■■
I111111
■■
II I1111■■
11 111
11 1 Bill
:..AASHTOClassification
��■
■■M
o
t
mmm��
AGeotechnical Yeh and Associates, Inc. I SIEVE ANALYSIS
- Geological • Construction Services
Project No. 222-221 Date: 06-10-2022
Report By: M. Connors Yeh Lab: Grand Junction
Checked By: M. Skyrman
FreeUp Storage, Silt Expansion
Silt, CO
N
O
9
0
r
0
a.
D
:'
1■1■IIIIIII�i1®IYIIVIII�■IYi�1r1�■IIII1111■■Illllll■■
.,
1■■IIIIIII■�■IIII111►■1111111i■IIIIIII■■Illllll■■
.11■■IIIIIII■�11111i11■►�I��1111■�i1111111■■IIIIIII■■
11■■IIIIIII■1111111111■i1111111
■Illlll■■■IIIIIII■■
11■■
111I111■l1
[I11111
■■
II111
�1
■
11►1�I111■■
I[II111■■
,11■■I111111■IIIIIII■■111111I■■I��IIII■■IIIIIII■■
11■■IIIIIII■■IIIIIII■■IIIIIII►■IIIIIII■■IIIIIII■■
INS
■1111111■■ill11l■■■II11111■\III1111■■IIIIIII■■
11■■IIIIIII■■I1f1111■■Illllll■■i1�1111■■IIIIIII■■
,11■■I11111■■milli'll■■■1II1111■■Illl11■■■IIIIIII■■
,11■■1111111■■I[IIl�1■■II1I111■■1111111■■1111111■■
,.
,,11■■IIIIIII■■IIIIII�1■■1111111■■IIIIIII■■Illllll■■
11■■II11111■■1111111
�:�I111111■■IIIIIII■■Illllll■■
,11■■1111111■■IIIIIIIi
.,
llllll■■■lIl1I1■■■IIIIIII■■
,11■■1111111■®IIIIIII■■Illllll■■IIIIIII■■1111111■■
11■■IIIIIII■■1111111■■elf
I111■■lI1I111■■IIIIIII■■
11■■IIIIIII■®IIIIIII■■IIIf111■■1111111■■IIIIIII■■
,11■■IIIIIII■■IIIIIII■■IIIIIII■
1.1�1111■■IIIIIII■■
11■
■I
111111■■IIIIIII■
■I
Il
IIII■■I
I�
IIII■
■II
I1111■■
.
II■
■
l 111111■■
II I
II11
■■
l II
II11■■IIIIIII■
■I
I1I111■■
Classification
Classificati
w
NIN Yeh and Associates, Inc.
LL
NGeotechnical • Geological • Construction Services
x
Ui
w -
N Project No.
Z Report By:
222-221 Date: 06-10-2022
M. Connors Yeh Lab: Grand Junction
Checked By: M. Skyrman
o
SIEVE ANALYSIS
FreeUp Storage, Silt Expansion
Silt, CO
i• ■'•
HIM
.,11■■IIIIIII■■IIIIIII■1111111�!■IIIIIII■■IIIIIII■■
■I1111111�
■II
[IIII\■I
IIIIIIN■IIIIIII■■IIII
III■
■
.11■
11■■IIIIIII�I■IIIlI11■t\IIIIIII\1■IIIIIII■■1111111■■
11■■I111111■■IIIIIII■■IIIIIII■■fII1111■■1111111■■
11■■II11111■I�IIII111■■III�lII■■IIIIIII■■i111111■■
11■■IIIIIII■i1I111111■■IIIIIII■!�
IIIIIII■■1111111■■
;,
■■■1111111■��II[Illl■■IIIIIII'■\\1![IIII■■IIIIIII■
■■■III
IIII
■■�
II
I I
I I■■IIIIIII\\1lllllll
■■IIIIIII
■
,1■■■IIIIIII■®IIIIIII■■IIIIIII■■IIIIIII■■IIIIIII■■
,. ,11■■IIIIIII■■III►111■■IIIIIII■r11�1111■■llllll■■■
1,
,11■■IIIIIII■■IIII��1■■IIIIIII■■I��IIII■■IIIIIII■■
11■
■
I Illf
I I■
■
II III11■■IIIIIII■■Ill
III■■■I
1II111■
■
,11■■IIIIIII■■IlfI111t�■IIIIIII■■I[11111■■IIIIIII■■
1
11■
■
I I ll
I1■■
■
llllll■■o-IIIIIII■
■IIII
III■■
II I1111■■
,11■■IIIIIII■■IIIIIII■■��[IIII■■IIIIIII■■IIIIIII■■
11■■IllIIII■®IIIIIII■■11111�1■■II[Illl■■IIIIIII■■
,11■■IIIIIII■■IIIIIII■■IIIIIII■�7lIIIIII■■IIIIIII■■
11■■IIIIIII■■IIIIIII■■IIIIIII■■IIIIIII■■IIIIIII■■
,11■■IIIIIII■■IIIIIII■■IIIIIII■■IIIIIII■■IIIIIII■■
W
W
EF
LL
N
N
N
N
IN
2
W
N
Project No.
Z
Report By:
0
Checked By:
Yeh and Associates, Inc.
Geotechnical • Geological • Construction Services
222-221 Date: 06-10-2022
M. Connors Yeh Lab: Grand Junction
M. Skyrman
SIEVE ANALYSIS
FreeUp Storage, Silt Expansion
Silt, CO
"
11■■IIIIII�I�i�IY[Illi�■IrilY11111111■IIIIIII■■1111111■■
.,11■■IIIIIIIII®I[IIIIII■111111111■1111111■■lflllll■
.11■■IIIIII111®f
IIIIII■■1111111■■IIIIIII■■[IIIIII■
:,11■■IIIlIIII�I■IIIIIII■►\III1111■1[IIIIII■■[IIIIII■
11■■[lll1111��■IIIIIII■■[
III111■
la■[I
IIIII■■I
I I1111■
■
,11■■If
IIIIII■fllllll■■ff11111■I�lllllll■■IIllI11■■
1■■
■I
I II111�1
��l
IIII
II■■IIIIIII■
ail
II1111
■■I
IIl111■■
:,11■■IIIIIII■■1111111■■IIIIIII■�11111111■■IIIIIII■■
11■
■I111111
■■!III
III■■IIIIIII►
�1111II
II
■■IIIIIII■■
II■■IIIIIII■>�i�111111■■1f11111■t1111111■■I111111■■
I I■■III
IIII
■��I..
IlI1111■
■IIIIIII
■■Ill
IIII
■■
IIII
III■■
,..
,,11■■IIIIIII■■�l�ll��l■■IIIIIII■■[i�IlI1■■IIIIIII■■
11■■1111111■■f
IIIIIII■1111111■■f
Ig1111■■1[IIIII■■
,11■■[IIIIII■■IIIII�I�l�I,Illlll■■IIIIIII■■1[fllll■■
11■■f
IIII11■■11111114�II��y11■■[III111■■IIIIIII■■
,11■■IIIIIII■■IIIIIII■iii
110101■IIIIIII■■f
IIIIII■■
11■
■IIII
III
■®IIIIIII■■
Illi1�1�!'_�7_I
I�II11■■IIIIIII■
■
II■■IIIIII■■®IIIIIII■■IIIIIII■i���M1111■■IIIIIII■■
11
■■IIIIIII
■®IIII
III■
■[IIIIII
■■I
I�
II11
■■IIIIIII■
■
,11■■IIIIIII■■IIIIIII■■[IIIIII■■IIIIIII■■IIIIIII■■
.:MUD R
:..USCSClassification
o
=_
■11
I
�
ImYeh and Associates, Inc.
Geotechnical • Geological • Construction Services
Project No. 222-221 Date: 06-10-2022
Report By:
SIEVE ANALYSIS
FreeUp Storage, Silt Expansion
M. Connors Yeh Lab: Grand Junction Silt, CO
Checked By: M. Skyrman
52 Yeh and Associates, Inc.
Gootcchnical • Geological • Construction gwVicw
Clay Lab - Denver
16.0
14.0
12.0
10.0
e
Water Added
8.0
6.0
rA
4.0
0
'd
2.0
0.0
o
c
U
-2.0
-4.0
-6.0
-8.0
-10.0
-12.0
-14.0
—
i
-
t
1-
-16.0.
— -- --
0.1
1
10 100
Applied Normal Pressure, ksf
Boring Number
Depth, ft
Natural Dry
Density, pef
Moisture
Content,
Consolidation(-)SWELL
/Swell(+), %
Soil Classification
/CONSOLIDATION
GRAPH
B-5
4-4.5
101.3
23.0%
-1.3
A-6 ( 8) / CL
Drawn By: M.A
Job No: 1
222-221
Project Name:
Freeup Storage, Silt Expansion
I Checked By: M.S.
YEH & ASSOCIATES, INC
31 Yeh and Associates, Inc.
C"tecib ticai - Grological - Coastructlon Satvicee
Clay Lab - Denver
16.0
14.0
12.0
10.0
- —
-
e
Water Added
..;
8.0
6.0
4.0
0
2.0
ea
:b
0.0
0
o
U
-2.0
-4.0
-6.0
-8.0
-10.0
-12.0
-14.0
-16.0
0.1 1
10 100
Applied Normal Pressure, ksf
Boring Number
Natural Dry
Depth, ft Density, pcf
lluisturc
Content,
Consolidation(-)
/Swell(+), %
Soil Classification
SWELL / CONSOLIDATION
GRAPH
B-11
4.5-5 98.1
18.6%
-0.3
A-4 (0) / SM
Drawn By: M.A
Job No: 1
222-221
Project Name:
Freeup S1or:ige, Silt Expansion
Checked By: M.S.
YEH & ASSOCIATES, INC
Yeh and Associates, Inc.
Cieoaeehninal nealogicxl Can„Inclw ga�f� Clay- Lab Denver
STRESS -STRAIN CURVE
OF COHESIVE SOIL (ASTM D 2166)
Project No: _
Sampled by: M. Skyrman
Boring No: _ B-3
Tested by: _
Soil Classification:
222-221
Axial
Strain
Axial
Stress
(%)
sf
0.0%
0.0
0.3%
131.7
0.5%
161.7
0.8%
191.5
1.0%
226.3
1.3%
260.8
1.5%
285.1
1.8%
324.3
2.0%
358.3
2.3%
402.1
2.5%
440.7
2.8%
474.1
3.0%
517.2
3.3%
550.3
3.5%
597.8
3.8%
635.4
4.0%
721.5
4.3%
773.1
4.5%
809.8
4.8%
865.8
5.0%
916.5
5.3%
962.2
5.5%
1012.5
5.8%
1072.0
6.0%
1131.2
6.3%
1175.8
6.5%
1239.1
6.8%
1235.7
7.0%
1284.4
7.3%
1337.4
7.5%
1394.8
7.8%
1451.9
8.0%
1504.0
8.3%
1560.5
8.5%
1616.6
8.8%
1677.0
9.0%
1732.5
9.3%
1787.6
9.5%
1837.8
9.8%
1956.4
10.0%
1950.9
10.3%
2059.4
10.5%
2126.3
10.8%
2165.7
11.0%
2204.8
11.3%
2261.6
11.5%
2309.1
Project Name:
Date Sampled
Depth (ft):
MA
Freeup Storage, Silt Expansion
5/16/2022 Date Tested: 5/18/22
4-5 Blow Counts:
Checked by: M. Skyrman
A-4(3) /CL
Stress -Strain Curve
4000.0
3900.0'-__::- 1"== _1==.:..,_1_- i'1,
3800.0 ------ - ---- - .
3700.0 ----_ _ ----- I_'
3600.0 - - -- i - -- -
3500.0------
3400.0 -�--- m L-v-- T-- -_ - ----- -
3300.0---
3200.0----
3100.0
3000.0
--_ l
2900.0 i -- --
2800.0 _ - ----- --- --- - - ----
2700.0 _ _::---
2600.0
j..
00.0
2500.0-
2300.0 1 - ___ __ --- --- --L
w 2200.0 = --- -- ----
a 2100.0 --=-T----_ - -- - - -r----
w 2000.0 -- --- -- .......
---- -- - -- -
2 1900.0 _ �-------- - j ---=
i-
in 1800.0 -__ -- - _ .. -- ------ -
1700.0 - - - --- -- - .....
1600.0
1500.0;---
1400.0 -- --- --', - --- ----
1300.0 -�- . , -- -- -- • -
1200.0
1100.0
1000.0 - - - -- -- - --
900.0 _-... _�� ----- - - - - --� ---.
800.0 --- ----------! - ----
_
700.0500.0
600.0
_i
400.0 - --- =�- ----- -- -- - -
300.0 = -- - =- - -- - -=----
200.0
DO 0
-�-
0.0 - -- -
1
0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.6% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0% 10.0%11.0%12.0%13.0%14.0%15.0%
Strain ((Percent)
Unconfined Compressive Strength (q„) _
Natural Moisture:
17.8
%
Natural Density(Dry):
108.4
pcf
Average Diameter (D):
1.900
inches
Average High (L):
3.984
inches
L/D Ritio:
2.10
2385 psf @ 12.0% Strain
11.8% 1 2302.6
YYeh and Associates, Inc.
Oeowhal"l • Geological • coa.lncdon servic" Clay- Lab Denver
STRESS -STRAIN CURVE
OF COHESIVE SOIL (ASTM D 2166)
Project No: 222-221
Sampled by: M. Skyrman
Boring No: _ B-4
Tested by: _
Soil Classification:
Axial
Strain
Axial
Stress
(%)
(Psf)
0.0%
0.0
0.3%
247.5
0.5%
390.0
0.8%
521.9
1.0%
653.2
1.3%
827.9
1.5%
913.8
1.8%
1057.7
2.0%
1181.3
2.3%
1309.2
2.5%
1441.3
2.8%
1558.2
3.0%
1664.8
3.3%
1775.6
3.5%
1885.9
3.8%
1990.8
4.0%
2076.0
4.3%
2179.8
4.5%
2268.8
4.8%
2343.1
5.0%
2431.1
5.3%
2504.6
5.5%
2577.6
5.8%
2645.5
6.0%
2708.3
6.3%
2770.8
6.6%
2814.4
6.8%
2866.9
7.1 %
2914.5
7.3%
2943.4
7.6%
2967.5
7.8%
2982.3
8.1 %
2987.8
8.3%
2979.6
8.6%
2971.4
MA
4000.0
3900.0
3800.0
3700.0
3600.0
3500.0
3400.0
3300.0
3200.0
3100.0
3000.0
2900.0
2800.0
2700.0
2600.0
2500.0
2400.0
2300.0
2200.0
En
a 2100.0
m 2000.0
P 1900.0
C� 1800.0
1700.0
1600.0
1500.0
1400.0
1300.0
1200.0
1100.0
1000.0
900.0
800.0
700.0
600.0
500.0
400.0
300.0
200.0
100.0
0.0
0.0%
Project Name: Freeup Storage, Silt Expansion
Date Sampled: 5/16/2022 Date Tested: 5/18/22
Depth (ft): 4.5-5 Blow Counts:
Checked by: M. Skyrman
A-7-6 ( 13 ) / CL
Stress -Strain Curve
1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0% 10.0%11.0%12.0%13.0%14.0%15.0%
Strain ((Percent)
Unconfined Compressive Strength (q„) _
Natural Moisture:
18.7
%
Natural Density(Dry):
103.7
pcf
Average Diameter (D):
1.922
inches
Average High (L):
3.969
inches
L/D Ritio:
2.06
2988 psf @ 8.1 % Strain
INYeh and Associates, Inc,
6061084=1 • Clay- Lab Denver
STRESS -STRAIN CURVE
OF COHESIVE SOIL (ASTM D 2166)
Project No: _
Sampled by: M. Sk rman
Boring No: B-5
Tested by:
Soil Classification:
222-221
Axial
Strain
Axial
Stress
(%)
psf
0.0%
0.0
0.3%
70.2
0.5%
80.0
0.8%
104.7
1.0%
114.4
1.3%
119.1
1.6%
148.4
1.8%
157.9
2.1 %
177.2
2.3%
191.4
2.6%
200.7
2.9%
224.6
3.1%
233.7
3.4%
247.7
3.6%
271.2
3.9%
285.0
4.2%
303.5
4.4%
321.8
4.7%
330.5
4.9%
344.0
5.2%
357.3
5.5%
375.4
5.7%
388.5
6.0%
401.6
6.2%
419.4
6.5%
437.0
6.8%
449.9
7.0%
462.6
7.3%
475.3
7.5%
487.9
7.8%
500.4
8.1%
512.9
8.3%
529.9
8.6%
533.0
8.8%
545.2
9.1 %
552.8
9.4%
564.9
9.6%
576.9
9.9%
584.3
10.1%
596.1
10.4%
607.9
10.7%
615.1
10.9%
622.3
11.2%
624.9
11.4%
636.5
11.7%
647.9
12.0%
654.8
MA
2000.0
1900.0
1800.0
1700.0
1600.0
1500.0
1400.0
1300.0
1200.0
N 1100.0
a
N 1000.0
2
in 900.0
800.0
700.0
600.0
500.0
400.0
Project Name: Freeup Storage, Silt Expansion
Date Sampled: 5/16/2022 Date Tested: 5/18/22
Depth (ft): 4.5-5 Blow Counts:
Checked by: - M. Skyrman
Stress -Strain Curve
off
off
1W MCI
rrr w rw 'i � rrrrrw
Unconfined Compressive Strength (q„) _
Natural Moisture:
25.1
%
Natural Density(Dry):
100.4
pcf
Average Diameter (D):
1.910
inches
Average High (L):
3.846
inches
L/D Ritio:
2.01
684 psf @ 13.3% Strain
12.2% 1 661.7
VYeh and Associates, Inc.
Otatmhrlcal - 0e0101oc11 - cmalmett°r savior Cla - Lab Denver
STRESS -STRAIN CURVE
OF COHESIVE SOIL (ASTM D 2166)
Project No: 222-221
Sampled by: M. Skyrman
Boring No: B-8
Tested by: MA
Soil Classification:
Axial
Strain
Axial
Stress
(%)
Sf)
0.0%
0.0
0.3%
49.6
0.5%
69.2
0.8%
98.6
1.0%
142.6
1.3%
181.5
1.5%
229.9
1.8%
283.0
2.1 %
335.8
2.3%
393.1
2.6%
440.5
2.8%
487.6
3.1 %
534.5
3.3%
585.9
3.6%
637.0
3.9%
678.3
4.1%
719.4
4.4%
741.2
4.6%
758.2
4.9%
779.8
5.1 %
787.1
5.4%
785.0
5.6%
782.9
5.9%
757.3
6.2%
750.6
Project Name: Freeup Storage, Silt Expansion
Date Sampled: 5/16/2022 Date Tested: 5/18/22
Depth (ft): 4.5-5 Blow Counts:
Checked by: M. Skyrman
A-4(0) /SC
Stress -Strain Curve
/11 1
nwrr� Y
•11 1 rWi
Y MW
un
.11 1
11 1
rrrr
11 1
wn rrN =wwi�MR
off y 0...
off
ME :. w�.
0 In •11 1 �w En HIM
�rgqisNNwrwNlrrll� �W
rE�� wY=.rxy.ls.R�lfRA
mm
mien
11 1 riear �p'��w�rri �a�
YNN
Y>1>r� wr
mYr.rai
11 1
Unconfined Compressive Strength (q„) _
Natural Moisture:
16.4
%
Natural Density(Dry):
106.8
pcf
Average Diameter (D):
1.921
inches
Average High (L):
3.894
inches
LID Ritio:
2.03
787 psf @ 5.1 % Strain
Yeh and Associates, Inc.
CieauckRlael Ougiagiul - Cmainaioasariaa Clav- Lab Denver
STRESS -STRAIN CURVE
OF COHESIVE SOIL (ASTM D 2166)
Project No: 222-221
Sampled by: M. Sk rman
Boring No: B-11
Tested by: MA
Soil Classification:
Axial
Strain
Axial
Stress
(%)
(Psf)
0.0%
0.0
0.3%
88.4
0.5%
105.8
0.8%
125.6
1.0%
145.3
1.3%
165.0
1.5%
184.5
1.8%
198.9
2.0%
218.3
2.3%
242.5
2.5%
261.6
2.8%
275.7
3.0%
294.6
3.3%
303.6
3.5%
322.4
3.8%
326.4
4.0%
345.0
4.3%
353.8
4.5%
362.5
4.8%
376.0
5.0%
379.8
5.3%
393.2
5.5%
401.7
5.8%
410.2
6.0%
413.9
6.3%
422.3
6.5%
421.1
6.8%
420.0
7.0%
418.9
Project Name: Freeup Storage, Silt Expansion
Date Sampled: 5/16/2022 Date Tested: 5/18/22
Depth (ft): 4-4.5 Blow Counts:
Checked by: M. Skyrman
Stress -Strain Curve
Unconfined Compressive Strength (q„) _
Natural Moisture:
24.2
%
Natural Density(Dry):
92.4
pcf
Average Diameter (D):
1.903
inches
Average High (L):
3.976
inches
L/D Ritio:
2.09
422 psf @ 6.3% Strain