The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20120643 • PAVEMENT DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE PROPOSED PLATTE VALLEY FIRE STATION TO BE LOCATED NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF U.S. HIGHWAY 34 AND COUNTY ROAD 53, WELD COUNTY, COLORADO FOR PLATTE VALLEY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT • CDS ENGINEERING CORPORATION LOVELAND, COLORADO PROJECT NUMBER 11-5581 OCTOBER 19,2011 • 2012-0643 i" i.'..7 ♦d.„.W'�..na .. , i iryrYY YW" ' nr 117 ' ? te f, ,...4 4'...-'--V4: ' war k.r .'<-7-. ... .:.c.'4.1- r F. .. - .c ' tsrte x 1= .,""MiS af.PGA X • r f W wa..IM[ ' - ^ -- ,u s *,r x v. :'S} ! �t,j. `-mss ,. • - �'5� Kam' r. October 19. 2011 Project No. 11-5581 Platte Valley Fire Protection District c/o RLH Engineering, Inc. 541 E. Garden Drive, Unit S Windsor, CO 80550 Gentlemen, Enclosed are the pavement design recommendations you requested for the Platte Valley Fire Station to be located near the intersection of U.S. Highway 34 and County Road 53.Town of Kersey. • Weld County. Colorado. The site appears to be suitable for the construction of the driveways and parking areas. provided the design criteria and recommendations given in this report are met or exceeded. If you have any further questions concerning the information in this report.please contact this office. Respectfully, FOR AND ON BEHALF OF CDS ENGINEERING CORPORATION s/ `OQ:P�0F. e G/�'h Frs.�9tt4,, l' '' /..•00.-. ;:O 1 la' ' 38387 : " Kevin F. Becker, P.E./ii t ' i Enclosures ttt 't*AI. -- • 165 2nd Street 5.‘`�, • _ . .. .r, • ,,,,:w,,,,. ..•r*--E 8 t.:.l., VrlC:.il t • TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Letter of'Transmittal Table of Contents ii Scope 1 Site Location and Description 1 Field Exploration 1 Subsurface Conditions 2 Pavement Design 3 • Design Methods and Criteria 3 • Minimum Design Values 4 • Pavement Recommendations 4 Special Design Considerations 5 • Highly Loaded Areas 5 Construction Recommendations 5 • • Earthwork and Site Preparation 5 • Soil Sterilization 6 • Compaction 6 • Landscaping and Drainage 6 Pavement Maintenance 7 Limitation and Conclusions 7 Location of Test Borings Drawing No. 1 Symbols and Soil Properties Figure No. 1 Log of Borings Figure No. 2 Swell-Consolidation Test Results Figure No. 3 Summary of Test Results Table No. I Pavement Section Printouts Attachments R-Value Determination Attachment Placement of Compacted Fill Materials Appendix 1 • ii • 1 SCOPE This report presents the results of our pavement design recommendations for the Platte Valley Fire Station located near the intersection of U.S. Highway 34 and County Road 53,Town of Kersey,Weld County.Colorado, These recommendations are based on a Geotechnical Exploration conducted by our firm(Project No. 11-5581,dated October 18.2011). All the data from that report. pertaining to these recommendations.are included with this report. The driveways and parking areas for this project are anticipated to be constructed of rigid pavement(concrete). This exploration was conducted to provide options for pavement sections and suhgrade preparation. These recommendations are based on anticipated traffic conditions, subsurface conditions. and current design methodology. Laboratory tests were conducted on selected samples to provide an AASHTO classification. One(1)R-Value was conducted to determine the support characteristics of the soil. • SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION The site is located north of Kersey. near the northeast corner of the intersection of U.S. Highway 34 and County Road 53. Weld County,Colorado. The site is generally in a plains region. and vegetation consists primarily of cut grasses and weeds. The site is relatively flat. No rock outcrops were observed at this site. Several irrigation ditches and laterals were observed on. or bordering, the property. Water was observed in the ditches and laterals at the time of our exploration. FIELD EXPLORATION The field investigation perlbrmed on October 12. 2011. consisted of drilling, logging, and sampling eight (8) test borings within the approximate building envelope at the site. The borings ranged in depth from ten (10) to sixteen (16) feet. The location of the Test Holes is shown on Drawing No. 1. • • 2 Boring locations were established by a representative of CDS Engineering Corporation based on stakes and a site plan provided by RLH Engineering, Inc. Distances from the referenced features were made by pacing and angles were estimated. Graphical logs of the borings are shown on Figure No. 2. "1'he descriptions of the soils and/or bedrock strata are based,primarily,on visual and tactual methods which are subject to interpretation. The test borings were advanced using a truck mounted,four-inch(4")diameter,continuous flight auger drill rig. Laboratory samples were obtained by driving a two and one-half inch (2%") diameter California Barrel Sampler twelve (12) inches (or as shown) into undisturbed soils with a 140-pound hammer falling thirty (30) inches. Bag samples of auger cuttings may have also been collected. Laboratory tests performed were - Swell-Consolidation, Natural Moisture. Natural Dry Densities,and Grain-Size Analysis. All tests were conducted in accordance with ASTM standards. A Summary of the Swell-Consolidation Test Results is shown on Figure No. 3. A Summary of Test Results is shown on Table No. 1. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Refer to the Log of Borings. Drawing No. 2. The subsurface conditions appear uniform throughout the proposed building site. General descriptions of the soils and/or rock encountered are as follows: TOPSOIL - A thin layer of topsoil,approximately six(6)to twelve(12)inches,overlies the site. The topsoil should not be used as foundation bearing material, structural fill. or backfill. It is suggested that the topsoil be stripped. stockpiled and used for landscaped areas. SAND—Sands with slight to moderate amounts of silt and gravel were encountered to the depths explored in each boring. The sands appear to be slightly moist,medium loose to medium dense, and brown. The sands exhibit moderate bearing capacities and are anticipated to have no swell potential. • • 3 GROUNDWATER Groundwater levels were recorded as the borings were advanced, after completion of the drilling operations,and twenty-four(24)hours after drilling operations were complete. During our field exploration groundwater was not encountered in the test borings. The groundwater table should be expected to fluctuate throughout the year depending on seasonal moisture variations. PAVEMENT DESIGN DESIGN METHODS AND CRITERIA These recommendations are based on anticipated traffic conditions, subsurface conditions, and current design methodology. Laboratory tests were conducted on selected samples to provide an AASHTO classification. One(1)R-Value was conducted to determine the support characteristics of the soils. This information was used as input data for"Pavement Analysis Software-ACPA"which is based on the 1993 AASIITO"Guide for the Design of Pavement Structures." typical construction methods as required by the Colorado Department of Transportation (C DOT) were assumed for determination of design values. The following criteria were used for the pavement section recommendations. Design R-Value Desien MR Value 73 ;27925 Standard t)e ialion(rigid pavement) 0.35 Design Life 20 years(7300 days) Drainage Value(M,) 1.0 Modulus of Rupture(concrete) 000 psi(450 psi.working) Modulus of Elasticity(concrete) 4,050,000 psi Modulus of Suhgrade Reaction(K-Value) 1439 psi in Load Transfer Coefficient(J-Value) ; 3.2 • • 4 MINIMUM DESIGN VALUES Roadway Classification 20-Year Design Life • Serviceability. .: Reliability Traffic Information Index(A psi) (%) • MLA. ESAL Light Vehicle Parking Areas 5 36.500 2.5 75 Fire Truck Access Lanes 50 365.000 '.2 r 90 PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS Recommended alternatives for each roadway classification arc as follows. Recommended Layer. Thickness(iq.) • • padway Classification Concrete Total Option (3000 psi) Thickness Light Vehicle Drives and A -+ 4 Parking Areas Fire Truck Access Lanes A 6 6 • Concrete pavement shall be placed according to current industry standards. The specifications for concrete shall meet the standards for COOT and/or Weld County. Longitudinal and transverse joints should be provided as needed for expansion/contraction and isolation. For unreinforced concrete. the location of the joints should be at regular intervals with a maximum spacing of twelve and one half(121/2)feet for longitudinal joints and fifteen feet,or thirty(30)times the slab thickness, for transverse joints. Saw cut joints shall he installed within 24 hours of concrete placement. The depth of the joints should be a minimum of 25%of the slab thickness,plus 1/4". All joints should be sealed to prevent entry of foreign materials,and doweled where necessary for load transfer. Dowels should he used at all cold joints. All Aggregate Base Course(ABC)shall meet Class 5 or 6 of CDOT standards and have an R -Value of 77 or greater. The pavement sections recommended above may be revised if the materials deviate from those recommended. The supplier should submit verification of material compliance to the owner prior to placement. • • 5 SPECIAL DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS HIGHLY LOADED AREAS Areas which receive discontinuous traffic flow are subject to higher lateral loads on the pavement structure than anticipated for the pavement sections provided above. Areas that may be subjected to stopping, starting, turning or bouncing type of loadings from trucks, such as those generated by garbage trucks in the area of dumpsters.should he constructed of reinforced concrete. The concrete in these areas could range from eight(8)to twelve(12)inches thick with reinforcement consisting of#4 bars placed at twenty four (24) inches on center, both directions. Actual slab thickness and reinforcement shall be designed by a structural engineer for the specific loading conditions. CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS EARTHWORK AND SITE PREPARATION • All earthwork and site preparation shall be conducted in accordance with current industry standards. Earthwork should be evaluated and tested by a representative of CDS Engineering Corporation. Topsoil. vegetation, frozen materials. old structures or other unsuitable materials, shall be removed to a depth satisfactory to the Soils Engineer before beginning preparation of the subgrade. Subgrade soils beneath pavements should be scarified to a minimum depth of six (6) inches. moisture conditioned,and re-compacted. Areas which are too moist or too soft to allow compaction shall be removed and replaced with select approved fill material or overlain with a geotextile approved by the engineer. Fill shall not be placed on frozen or muddy ground. After stripping any existing pavement and/or any deleterious materials, a proof roll of the native, unaltered subgrade should be conducted with heavy equipment and observed by a representative of the Soils Engineer or governing agency to observe any excessive pumping(>3/8" for sections using ABC. >1/4" for full depth asphalt, or to Weld County specifications). If the subgrade does not pump excessively,the subgrade should he scarified to a minimum depth of six(6) inches, moistened or dried as necessary from -2% to -*2% of optimum moisture content and re- • • 6 compacted to at least 95%of maximum dry density(ASTM D-698). We recommend that a test strip be constructed to determine if the conventional moisture/density methods discussed above will produce a stable subgrade.Areas which are too moist or soft to allow compaction should be overlain with a geotex tile approved by the Soils Engineer and/or manufacturer or other approved stabilization methods. SOIL STE.RILI7.A'FION Prior to placement of the pavement section,we recommend a chemical sterilizer be applied to the subgrade. The sterilizer shall be applied per manufacturer's specifications to areas being paved taking care not to sterilize adjacent areas. COMPACTION Suggested recommendations pertaining to compaction of the soils are included in Appendix 1 of this report. Municipal codes, special construction requirements or other controlling factors may • require modifications to those recommendations. LANDSCAPING AND DRAINAGE Every precaution should be taken to prevent wetting of the soils beneath the pavement structure. Controlling the drainage will reduce the risk of water related damage. Finished grade should be sloped away from the pavement on all sides. providing positive drainage. Positive drainage away from the paved area should be maintained throughout the life of the pavement structure. In the event that the adjacent soil settles, the original grade must be restored so that the site drains effectively. Planted areas are not recommended around the perimeter of the pavement. However, if the owners are willing to accept the risks of movement, low water-use(xeriscape)plant varieties could be used. We recommend the use of a landscape fabric which will allow normal evaporation,in lieu of a plastic membrane. Sprinkling systems should not be installed within ten (10) feet of the pavement, and spray from sprinklers should minimized in the vicinity of the paved area. • • 7 PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE Preventative maintenance should be planned and provided for an on-going pavement management program in order to maintain the performance of the pavement structure. Preventative maintenance is intended to slow the rate of pavement deterioration and to preserve the pavement investment. Preventative maintenance could consist of crack sealing, patching and surface sealing. Preventative maintenance is usually the first priority when implementing a planned pavement maintenance program and provides the highest return on the pavement investment. The appropriate maintenance program is dependent on the type of pavement structure and the type and severity of the pavement distress. Prior to implementing any maintenance, additional engineering observation may be necessary to determine the type and extent of preventative maintenance. • LIMITATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS The findings and recommendations of this report have been obtained in accordance with accepted professional engineering practices in the field of geotechnical engineering. Alternate engineering and material options may exist which could provide different pavement sections than those listed in this report. These options could be applicable provided the suhgrade is or can be stabilized and that they provide an equal or greater structural number than required for the roadway classification. Site conditions may vary throughout the site which may warrant the need for further evaluation andoor revisions to these recommendations. All materials shall be in accordance with C.D.O.T. or local specifications. and be placed according to current industry standards. If the materials deviate from those recommended in this report. revisions may be required. There is no warranty,either expressed or implied. The report implies only to the type of construction anticipated in the area tested. • ......„<":::l I ` j I �� >� Hwy 34 I 11111 St / 4 I I N w� AP KERSEY _ ,Iiri 1 r' ' t • �►+-4• • • ►,-5 ' I ' TH-3 • 1ATi ITM_7 +na-s I I M-2 "it.Ci,b1 .-________ TH-1 { • I EI I i \} 1 I f f / /11 r1 T i ' . I i I I I i 1 I I I J 1 I I / I 1i 1 malls...2j1 - - - - - Client: Platte Valley Fire Protection Dist. LOCATION OF TEST BORINGS Project: Platte Valley Fire Station, En ineerin• Kersey, Weld County, Colorado CLS g Corporation Approximate Scale: 1" = 100' 165 2nd St. S.W. Project No. 11-5581 Teleeia(9'O) 667-80 0 Dwg. No.: 1 Sy- n3ols 8c Sol . Properties • FIGURE NO. 1 Fill • Gravel N/12 CAL3FORNIA 7. Sand • / Silt / / N/12 SPLIT SPOON • / / /// Silty Clay . Clay � � THIN WALLED (SHELBY) I Weathered Bedrock __ Siltstone - BAG SAMPLE _ - Cloystone • Sandstone II I PITCHER SAMPLE Limestone Igneous & Metamorphic Penetration Resistance and Strength Classifications are Based on The Standard Penetration Test Number of Blows Relative Density Consistency Approximate Per foot (N)* Cohesionless Soils Cohesive Soils Cohesion ksf** 0-4 Very Loose Soft Less than 0.5 4-10 Loose Firm 0.5-1.0 10-30 Medium Stiff 1.0-2.0 30-50 Dense Very Stiff 2.0-4.0 50+ Very Dense Hard Greater than 4.0 • BLOWS PER FOOT - BLOWS OF 140 LB. HAMMER DROPPED 30 IN. TO DRIVE SPLIT2 (IN.) (AS DL56667 SPOON OR CALIFORNIA R ) SAMPLER •• EQUIVALENT TO PP/2 AND Qu/2 CDs Engineering 165 2nd St. 5.P1. Loveland, CO 8fl537 Corporation Tele: (870) 6s�—$oio 70rn o TH-1 TH-2 TH-3 O rn2 0 FT. 0 FT. m2 al i, CO rn 0 r-o 24/12 , 12/12 1 20/12 5 FT. •• 5 FT. .,:j 23/12 `1 26/12 10 FT. •1 8/12 ,: 10 FT. ' 1 19/12 `. • 4 15 FT. — - 15 FT. ji 50/11 i 50/11 20 FT. .. .. • 20 FT. 25 FT. 25 FT. . 30 FT. • 30 FT. 35 FT. - 35 FT. Borings drilled 10/12/11 using SAND: sl. silty, with gravel, medium to dense, a 4" diameter, continuous flight tan to brown, sl. moist, with intermittent truck mounted drilling rig. lenses of soft, v. moist clayey silt --1.7-- = Groundwater @ drilling 4- = Groundwater on 10/13/11 All soil and/or rock contocts shown on boring logs ore approximate and represent subsurface conditions at time of drilling. Boring logs and information presented on_logs ore subject to discussion and limitations of this report. LOG OF BORINGS CLIENT: Platte Valley Fire Protection Dist. Engineering •ROJENO. 11-5581 Cor oration CT P Platte Valley Fire Station 165 2nd St S.W. PROJECT LOCATION Kersey, Weld County, Colorado Loveland. co 80537 Fig. No.. 2 Tele: (970) 667-8010 m rn 70 f T l v -I TH-4 TH-5 TH-6 0 m = 0 FT. 0 FT. m = CD ,,. • rn • r- r ';, 10/12 .' 16/12 . 5 FT. —� ..1 13/12 5 FT. .1 23/12 10 FT. • 1 37/12; 10 FT. ' 31/12 • 15 FT. ,..`. 15 FT. 1 50/10 • . 20 FT. 20 FT. 25 FT. 25 FT. • 30 FT. 30 FT. 35 FT. 35 FT. Borings drilled 10/12/11 using SAND: sl. silty, with gravel, medium to dense, a 4" diameter, continuous flight tan to brown, sl. moist, with intermittent truck mounted drilling rig. lenses of soft, v. moist clayey silt -� = Groundwater ® drilling "� = Groundwater on 10/13/11 All soil and/or rock contacts shown on boring logs are approximate and represent subsurface conditions at time of drilling. Boring logs and information presented on logs are subject to discussion and limitations of this report. LOG OF BORINGS CLIENT: Platte Valley Fire Protection Dist. cps Engineering "'PROJECT NO. 11-5581 Corporation Platte Valley Fire Station PROJECT LOCATION Kersey, Weld County, Colorado 185 2nd Stn S.W. Loveland, co 80537 Fig. No.: 3 Tele: (970) 007-6010 CI 0 m i TH-7 TH-8 PTH-1 a = 0 FT. 0 FT. m • ca rn m • 0/12 L7/12 O i „ :4.1 21/12 1 . 18/12 5 FT. 5 FT. I 4 .• ., • 4 10 FT. • '_ 10 FT. 15 FT. 15 FT. 20 FT. 20 FT. • 25 FT. . . 25 FT. 30 FT. • . 30 FT, 35 FT. . . 35 FT. Borings drilled 10/12/11 using SAND: sl. silty, with gravel, medium to dense, a 4" diameter, continuous flight tan to brown, s1. moist, with intermittent truck mounted drilling rig. lenses of soft, v. moist clayey silt = Groundwater C4) drilling --L = Groundwater on 10/13/11 All soil and/or rock contacts shown on boring logs are approximate and represent subsurface conditions at time of drilling. Boring logs and Information presented on logs ore subject to discussion and limitations of this report. LOG OF BORINGS CLIENT: Platte Valley Fire Protection Dist. cps Engineering "'PROJECT NO. 11-5581 Corporation Platte Valley Fire Station PROJECT LOCATION Kersey, Weld County, Colorado Lovei 2nd coSt. 80537 Fig. No.: 4 Tele: (970) 887-8010 CDS Engineering Corporation • GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS Client: Platte Valley Fire Protection District Job No; 11-5581 Project: Platte Valley Fire Station Tech: JDE Date; 10/17/11 Boring No. 7 Depth: 1' Sample No: NA Location: Pavement Area Soils Description: Silty sand, brown - Sieve Sizes #200 #100 #60 #40 #30 #20 #10 #4 3/8"1/2" 3/4" 1" 1.5" 2" 1000 I I I I 90.0 80.0 . -_ .,700 Pe t 60.0 .. .4 1u i' 50.0 -i . T a c'' 40.0 N N a 30.0 - . - i • 20.0 a 10.0 0.0 • , . 0.0 0 1 1.0 10 0 100 0 Sieve Opening(mm) Silt/Clay [I Sand Gravel Percent Spec. Sample Information Sieve No. Retained Percent Passing Required Sample Date: 10/13/11 Type: Tube By: JDE Moisture Content: 8.7 Atterberg LL: 0 PL: 0 P1: 0 1.5 100.0 Gradation (%) 3/4" 100.0 Gravel: 0.7 Sand: 80.6 Silt/Clay: 18.7 3/8" 100.0 4 0.7 99.3 Classification 10 4.5 95.5 USCS. SM AASHTO: 40 42.3 57.7 200 81.3 18.7 IlCDS Engineering Corporation• 165 2nd St SW•Loveland.Colorado 80537•(970)667-8010•(800)933-8011 •Fax.(970)667-8024 'Mow.cds-enq net 10/19/2011 11-5581 Grad 07 01.xlsx • CDS Engineering Corporation GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS Client: Platte Valley Fire Protection District Job No: 11-5581 Project: Platte Valley Fire Station Tech: JDE Date: 10/17/11 Boring No. 7 Depth: 4' Sample No: NA Location: Pavement Area Soils Description: Poorly graded sand with gravel, brown Sieve Sizes #200 #100 #60 #40 #30 #20 #10 #4 3/8"1/2" 3/4' 1" 1.5" 2" 1000 L I I ! _ I , 1 1 . 90.0 800 — . 70.0 . O r 60.0 , pi d i' 50.0 I- - . . - sa ' 40.0 - is 0.• 300 - _ E 41) m 200 ' ,- . - n. 1C0 I Q o — i 7- 0.0 0 1 1.0 10.0 100.0 Sieve Opening(mm) Silt/Clay Sand Gravel ` Percent Spec. Sample Information Sieve No. Retained Percent Passing Required ' Sample Date: 10/13/11 Type Tube By: 581.9 Moisture Content: 2.9 Atterberg LL: 0 PL: 0 Pl 0 1.5 4 100.0 Gradation(%) 3/4" 100.0 Gravel: 26.1 Sand: 71.3 Silt/Clay: 2.6 3/8" 10.3 89.7 4 26.1 73.9 Classification 10 50.2 49.8 USCS: SP AASHTO: 40 88.9 11.1 200 97.4 2.6 i i 0i 9:33-601 • CDS En9ineenng Corporation • 165 gnu St SW• Lovelat!d,GOIGrd00 80537 .1°70(661-bU.L'180x; 1 Fax (970)567- 024 vvvvvy cds-en ne, 10/19/2011 11-5581 Grad 07 04.xlsx • CDS Engineering Corporation GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS Client: Platte Valley Fire Protection District Job No: 11-5581 Project: Platte Valley Fire Station Tech: JDE Date: 10/17/11 Boring No. 8 Depth: 1' Sample No: NA Location: Pavement Area Soils Description: Silty sand, brown Sieve Sizes #200 #100 #60 #40 #30 #20 #10 #4 3/8" 1/2" 3/4" 1" 1.5` 2" 100 0 I Ili '�' 1 4 90 0 800 700 c 600 iD 50.0 a 400 - N a 30.0 • 8 200 a. 10.0 --� 0.0 4 - 0 0 0 1 1.0 10 0 100.0 Sieve Opening(mm) Silt/Clay Sand Gravel Percent Spec. Sample Information Sieve No. Percent Passing Retained Required Sample Date: 10/13/11 Type: Tube By: 581.9 Moisture Content: 7.9 Atterberg LL: 0 PL: 0 PI: 0 1.5 100.0 Gradation (%) 3/4" 100.0 Gravel: 1.5 Sand: 79.7 Silt/Clay: 18.8 3/8" 100.0 4 1.5 98.5 Classification 10 9.6 90.4 USCS. SM AASHTO: 40 51.2 48.8 200 81.2 18.8 • cos Engineering Corporation • 165 2nd St SW•Loveland,Colorado 80537•(970)667-8010• (800)933-8011 •Fax.(970)667-8024 www cas-ena.net 10/19/2011 11-5581 Grad 08 01 xlsx CDS Engineering Corporation 0 GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS , Client: Platte Valley Fire Protection District Job No: 11-5581 Project: Platte Valley Fire Station Tech: JDE Date: 10/17/11 Boring No. 8 Depth: 4' Sample No: NA Location: Pavement Area Soils Description: Poorly graded sand with gravel, brown Sieve Sizes #200 #100 #60 #40 #30 #20 #10 #4 3/8"1/2" 3/4" 1" 1.S" 2" 1000 - -- I I - . , - L , I 14 90.0 800 , 700 , , E 60 0 . - , a' 50.0 - , >, a o' 40.0 - --1 _ ' ,. .N N ra a 30.0 C 0 20.0 I , m a 100 -* 00 r 0.0 0 1 1 0 10 0 100.0 Sieve Opening(mm) Silt/Clay Sand Gravel T Percent Spec. Sample Information Sieve No. Percent Passing Retained Required Sample Date: 10/13/11 Type: Tube By: 581.9 Moisture Content: 4.4 Atterberg LL 0 PL: 0 Pl: 0 1.5 100.0 Gradation(%) 3/4" 100.0 Gravel: 17.3 Sand: 79.9 Silt/Clay: 2.8 3/8" 10.1 89.9 4 17.3 82.7 Classification 10 30.5 69.5 USCS: SP AASHTO: 40 61.4 38.6 200 97.2 2.8 III CDS Engineering Corporation• 155 2nd St SW•Lovelana.Colorado 80537• (970)667-8010• (800)933-801': •Fax.(970)667-8024 www cds-enq.net 10/19/2011 11-5581 Grad 08 04.xlsx • CDS Engineering Corporation GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS Client: Platte Valley Fire Protection District Job No: 11-5581 Project: Platte Valley Fire Station Tech: JDE Date: 10/17/11 Boring No. 7 &8 Depth: 1'-3' Sample No: RV-1 Location: Pavement Area Soils Description: Poorly graded sand with silt and gravel, brown Sieve Sizes #200 #100 #60 #40 #30 #20 #10 #4 3/8"1/2" 3/4" 1" 1.5" 2" 100 0 l I I I , l I `� 90.0 - 800 - - 700 . - .. Z 600 - 0, 4) 3 50.0 a n 40.0 . N . w . 300 - a)0 ;-.., 20.0 _ _ 0. 100 A A i 0.0 0.0 0.1 10 100 1000 Sieve Opening(mm) Silt/Clay _ Sand Gravel J Percent Spec. Sample Information Sieve No. Percent Passing Retained Required Sample Date: 10/13/11 Type Tube By: 581.9 Moisture Content: 3.8 Atterberg LL: 0 P1: 0 PI: 0 1.5 100.0 Gradation(%) 3/4" 100.0 Gravel: 23.6 Sand: 69.5 Silt/Clay: 6.9 3/8" 13.1 86.9 4 23.6 76.4 Classification 10 39.4 60.6 USCS. SP•SM AASHTO: 40 73.0 27.0 200 93.1 6.9 • CDS Engineering Corporation• 165 2nd St SW•Loveland Colorado 80537•(970)667-8010• (800)933-8011 •Fax'(970)667-8024 Awry cds.eng.net 10/19/2011 11-5581 Grad RV-1.xlsx 13 15 > > ra ( �.co pc > C -a (0 0 CD cn c .. (n • _ >. 45 0 — o — Luca o r) -a 0 W @ co 0) > ? > U) > —cu v .` cu o W o ,, >, T > — > v tl spy C7 Yi a, t/1.(n (� (7 t7 j C7 C7 Z c 0 0 y'' 0 mi a. ( rn Q) :5 M C N 1 N N N E U) CO 0 I N N (C) °3co .- cm p o (O CV to h. cei .-- M f - co N aj N6 m > co f7 I N CO 0) tf7 Cr N M N. -- M �` ,,- ato in CA Q a 0 ON) 0) 00 00 co rn o aa) O ONO N- 000 °� C) O 0) N co 00 G O w i 2 2 5 2 a a. 0, a. a (on, aaa aca.. a �? n.. mca. (0 j N co cn a cn U7 u) GO cn d cn CO cn CO co v3 R ci (1) (.0 0 5 v ' n H ` 1, o a cn J c aci n DtiN U) .. - .. W0 X Eae r J c W Z a) fa' • 0 W -J o 0 U. J Q m ¢ °1 co) Q w N a CA d o eo D Q 4_ o u c 2 - 7 • N 2 3 © „) > CU • - 2) .2 0 d Q N tU = o v z a a 3 a t °a r, m ti (t • r > c0 CL y o, y N {i _ a �J p 41 Lo • E a t O03 8 To E (O t.0 M d. p a) CD CO N '4' 'O' M (CI LC) n C) CT) v Z - • r N N N NZ Z v (V N N N tD N N' M V a0 N N 4 M • a) 2 N c N 01 e in Q C a N N N N r- N N N N N N N O N (V (N N N "y E o 2 ' .^- — r _ r r e- r- 'c- .- ,r ♦— r 3 0 th a N N 10 25 N. (0 N N E M O N O. M C O) ^ —. G V.- 8 J C L y U • o x N 00 M N, N M �_N CO 't C. �t V y I ' $ t Crl CO o Z '- '- '- N N N M M M rl R if) IC) rt) CO CO N- N- 0) CO. 1 a7 t` • DATAFILE.OUT 10-19-2011 State: Colorado Job Number: 11-5581 Agency: Company: Location: Platte valley Contractor: Fire Station Engineer: CDS Engineering Corp --- Rigid Analysis Pavement Depth = 4.00 inches Design E 18's = 36, 500 Reliability = 90.00 percent Overall Deviation = 0.35 Modulus of Rupture = 600.0 psi Modulus of Elasticity = 4,050,000 psi Load Transfer, J = 3.20 Mod. of Subgrade Reaction = 1,439 psi/in Drainage Coefficient = 1.00 Initial Serviceability = 4. 50 Terminal Serviceability = 2.30 For k determination: - Resilient mod. subgrade = 27,925 psi - Resilient Mod. Base = 0 psi - Base Thickness = 0.0 inches - Depth to Rigid Foundation = i > 10 feet - Loss of Support value = 0 • 0 • Page 1 • DATAFILE.OUT 10-19-2011 State: Colorado Job Number: 11-5581 Agency: Company: Location: Platte valley Contractor: Fire Station Engineer: CDS Engineering Corp Rigid Analysis PaDesign vmnt Dpth = 6.00 inches t 365,000 E Reliability e = 90.00 percent Overall Deviation = 0.35 Modulus of Rupture = 600.0 psi Modulus of Elasticity = 4,050,000 psi Load Transfer, J = 3.20 Mod. of subgrade Reaction = 1,439 psi/in Drainage Coefficient = 1.00 Initial serviceability = 4. 50 Terminal Serviceability = 2. 30 For k determination: - Resilient Mod. Subgrade = 27,925 psi - Resilient Mod. Base = 0 psi - Base Thickness = 0.0 inches - Depth to Rigid Foundation = i > 10 feet - Loss of support value = 0 • O 0 Page 1 • RESISTANCE R-VALUE & EXPANSION PRESSURE OF E COMPACTED SOIL - ASTM D2844 G PROJECT: Platte Valley Fire Protection Department- Kersey Site PROJECT NO. 1115025A LOCATION: Kersey, Weld County, Colorado DATE October 2011 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION: Silty Sand with Gravel(SM) SAMPLE LOCATION: Composite Subgrade Sample-Test Boring Nos. 7 and 8 @ 1 -4-feet LIQUID LIMIT: Not Reported (NR) I PLASTICITY INDEX: NR I %PASSING #200: NR R-VALUE LABORATORY TEST RESULTS TEST SPECIMEN NO. 1 2 3 COMPACTION PRESSURE (PSI) 350 350 350 DENSITY (PCF) 128.7 130.6 131.9 MOISTURE CONTENT(%) 9.7 7.8 6-7 EXPANSION PRESSURE(PSI) 0.00 0.00 0.00 HORIZONTAL PRESSURE @ 160 PSI 30 28 26 SAMPLE HEIGHT (INCHES) 2.43 2.47 2.52 EXUDATION PRESSURE(PSI) 194.9 309.1 583.1 UNCORRECTED R-VALUE 71.0 73.2 76.5 CORRECTED R-VALUE 69.0 73.2 76.5 R-VALUE @ 300 PSI EXUDATION PRESSURE= 73 RESILIENT MODULUS, PSI= 27,925 • 100 � - - - , 90 .. .. . _ I 70 I 60 _.. T.._... _... __;_..- - _.._i_... .. i .._I I -, - v • 50 -- i CC 40 - ------- .--- __ • 30 • j 20 I 4 --- ' - --�-}-- 1 o j . --- --- � - - I i 0 L . 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 IIIExudation Pressure, PSF • APPENDIX 1 GENERAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE PLACEMENT OF COMPACTED FILL MATERIAL Moisture-Density Determination Representative samples of the materials to be used for fill shall be furnished by the contractor at least seventy two (72) hours prior to compaction testing. Samples with higher moisture contents will require extra time for test results due to the required drying for sample preparation. Tests to determine the optimum moisture and density of the given material will be made using methods conforming to the most recent procedures of ASTM D698 (standard Proctor) or other approved methods, whichever may apply. Copies of the Proctor Curves will be furnished to the contractor. These test results shall be the basis of control for the field moisture/density tests. Materials The soils used for compacted fill shall be selected or approved by the Engineer. The material shall be free of vegetation, topsoil or any other deleterious materials. The material should be relatively impervious and non-swelling for the depth specified in the soils report with no material greater than six (6) inches in diameter. • Site Preparation All timber, logs, trees.brush and rubbish shall be removed from the area and disposed in a manner approved by the local governing agency. All vegetation and a substantial amount of topsoil shall be removed from the surface upon which the fill is to be placed. Where applicable, the surface shall then be scarified to a depth of at least six (6) inches. moistened or dried as necessary to allow for uniform compaction by the equipment being used, The scarified surface shall be compacted to not less than 95% of maximum dry density based on ASTM D698. or to such other density as may be determined appropriate for the materials and conditions and acceptable to the Engineer. Fill shall not be placed on frozen or muddy ground. Moisture The fill material,while being compacted shall contain,as nearly as practical (typically+/-2%),the optimum amount of moisture as determined by the Standard Proctor Test ASTM D698, or other approved method. The moisture shall be uniform throughout the fill material. The effort required for optimum compaction will be minimized by keeping soils near optimum moisture contents. Freezing temperatures and/or inclement weather conditions may impede moisture control and compaction operations. • Placement of Fill The Geotechnical Engineer shall be retained to supervise the placement of fill material. The fill material shall be placed in uniform layers and be compacted to not less than 95%of maximum dry density based on ASTM D698, or to such other density as may be determined appropriate for the materials and conditions and acceptable to the Engineer. Prior to compacting,each layer shall have a maximum loose layer height of twelve (12) inches (or as dictated by the compaction equipment and/or soil conditions)with the surface relatively level. Test areas are recommended to determine the optimum layer thickness. Thinner lifts may be necessary in order to achieve the required compaction. Compacted layer thickness shall not exceed six(6)inches. Each twelve(12)inches of compacted fill shall be approved by the Engineer prior to placing succeeding lifts. Fill shall be compacted with machinery appropriate for the type of earthen material being installed. Granular materials shall be compacted with vibratory type machinery. Clay and silt material shall be compacted with a sheepsfoot or other segmented pad type compaction equipment. "Wheel rolling" is not considered an appropriate method to achieve the recommended compaction specifications. "Wheel rolling"is not recommended for extensive areas or depths and cannot be relied upon to give uniform results. • Moisture and Density Testing It is the contractor's responsibility to contact the Engineer with a minimum of 24-hours notice to schedule compaction testing. The density and moisture content of each layer of compacted fill will be determined by the Engineer, or qualified technician, in accordance with ASTM D6938 (nuclear method), or other approved method. If the tests show inadequate density, that layer, or portion thereof,shall be reworked until the required conditions are obtained. Additional layers shall not be placed until each underlying lift has been approved. The results of all density tests will he furnished to both the owner and the contractor, by the Engineer. • Hello