HomeMy WebLinkAbout20013594.tiff , z- 55 /
FOUNDATION Engineering,
AND SOILS II, Inc.
November 25, 1998
Commission No.: 1759-03-01-01
Ric Hansen
P.O. Box 158
Timnath, Colorado 80547
Dear Mr. Hansen:
•
The enclosed report presents the results of a preliminary geotechnical and percolation investigation
for a parcel in the NE 1/4 of Section 12, T. 7 N., R. 66 W., Weld County, Colorado. This report
contains the results of our investigation and recommendations concerning design and construction
of the foundation, ground-level floor systems and slabs-on-grade.
In summary,sands and clays were encountered to the depths explored.Although the soils and/or rock •
are suitable for support of the proposed structures, care will be needed in both the design and
construction of the buildings to minimize the potential for foundation and floor slab movement. Site
conditions indicate that the majority of the lots have areas which could support standard absorption
sewage disposal systems.
We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. If you have any questions,
please feel free to call.
•
Respectfully,
•
i r '
Thomas W. y,
Engineering Geologist
evr:wed by:
a/wuD
ames A. Cherry, P.E.
FOUNDATION& SOILS ENGINEERING, INC.
❑ LL
5110 Granite Street,Suite D • Loveland,Colorado 80538 • (970)663-0138 • Fax (970) 663-1660
500 Kimbark Street,Suite 101 • Longmont,Colorado 80501 • (303)702-0661 • Fax(303)774-8413 3 5
40 9LJ
VL 1548
i r
I • .
TABLE OF CONTENTS
,SCOPE 1,
SITE DESCRIPTION 1
FIELD INVESTIGATION ( 2
LABORATORY TESTING PROCEDURES 3
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 4
PRELIMINARY FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS 5
FLOOR SYSTEMS AND SLABS-ON-GRADE 6
BELOW-GRADE FLOORS AND SUBDRAINS 6
EARTHWORK 6
PRELIMINARY PERCOLATION INVESTIGATION 8
PONDS . 9
GEOTECHNICAL LIMITATIONS 10
APPENDIX A 1
LIST OF FIGURES
• BORING LOCATION MAP Figure 1
.I{ LEGEND OF SYMBOLS Figure 2
•
} LOG OF BORINGS Figures 3-6
SWELL/CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Figures 7-9
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION CURVE Figure 10
PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS Figure 11
SUMMARY OF TEST RESULTS Table 1
SCOPE
The following report presents the results of our preliminary geotechnical and percolation investigation
fora parcel , situated in the northeast quarter of Section 12, Township 7 North, Range 66.West of
the 6th Prime Meridian, Weld County, Colorado. We understand the site is to be developed into
twenty-three(23)residential lots.. The one or two-story single family residences are anticipated to
be of typical wood frame construction. Walkout basement, full basement,garden-level, crawlspace
and/or slab-on-grade construction with a cast-in-place concrete foundations are anticipated for these
structures. The depths of foundation construction are anticipated to range from three(3)to seven(7)
• feet below grades which existed at the time of this investigation. It is anticipated that final grades may
be adjusted to accommodate drainage and construction depths.
The purpose of this investigation was to identify subsurface conditions and obtain the test data
necessary to provide feasibility estimates for construction of the foundations and septic systems.
Additional data is also provided for the placement of ponds on the property. The conclusions and
recommendations presented in this report are based upon the acquired field and laboratory data and
on previous experience with subsurface conditions in this area.
•
SITE DESCRIPTION
The site is located near the northeast side of Ault at the southwest corner of County Road Nos. 37
and 84. The portion of the site included in this investigation is located in an agricultural field with
relatively gentle slopes. The site was either plowed or was vegetated with onions.
4
1
' FIELD INVESTIGATION
The field investigation consisted of drilling, logging and sampling seventeen(17)borings at selected
locations across the site, as indicated on the Boring Location Map. The borings were drilled to
depths ranging from fifteen(15)to sixteen(16)feet using a thick-mounted continuous flight auger
drilling rig. Shallow holes were hand excavated near most of the deeper borings for percolation
testing.
The boring locations were established by Foundation& Soils Engineering, Inc. personnel based on
a site sketch provided by Ric Hansen. Distances from the referenced features are approximate and
were made by pacing. Angles for locating the borings were estimated. The boring locations should
be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the methods used to make those measurements.
Complete logs of the boring operations were compiled by a representative of our firm as the borings
were advanced. Graphical logs of the borings are presented in Figure No. 3. Soil sampling was
•concentrated at approximate foundation-influence elevations. The approximate location of soil and
rock contacts, free groundwater levels, samples and standard penetration tests are shown on each
boring log. The transition between different strata can be, and often is, gradual.
An index of relative density and consistency was obtained in general accordance with the procedures
of the standard penetration test, ASTM Standard Test D-1586. The penetration test result listed on
the log is the number of blows required to drive the two (2)inch diameter split-spoon sampler twelve
(12)inches(or as shown)into undisturbed soil by a one hundred forty(140)pound hammer dropped
thirty (30) inches.
Undisturbed samples for use in the laboratory were collected using thee (3) inch O.D. thin wall
samplers(Shelby) in accordance with ASTM D-1587. In this procedure, a seamless steel tube with
a beveled cutting edge is pushed hydraulically into the ground to obtain a relatively undisturbed,
sample of cohesive or moderately cohesive soil. (A two and one-half(2'/) inch O.D. California
Barrel Sampler was also used to collect partially disturbed samples.) All samples were sealed in the
field and preserved at natural moisture content prior to testing.
LABORATORY TESTING PROCEDURES
The recovered samples were tested in the laboratory to measure their dry unit weights,natural water
contents, and for classification purposes. Selected samples were tested to determine strength and
stability characteristics such as swelling, compressibility, collapse and-shear strength.
One dimensional consolidation-swell tests were performed on selected samples to evaluate the
expansive,compressive and collapsing nature of the soils.and/or bedrock strata. In the consolidation-
swell test, a trimmed specimen is placed in a one-dimensional confinement ring and a vertical load of
500 psf is applied. The sample is then inundated with water.and allowed to swell or consolidate until
no further change in volume is recorded. The confining load is then incrementally increased until the
specimen is compressed to its original volume. Results of those tests are presented at the end of this`
report. A calibrated hand penetrometer was used to estimate the approximate unconfined
compressive strength of selected samples. The calibrated hand penetrometer has been correlated with
unconfined compression tests and provides a better estimate of soil consistency than visual
examination alone. As part of the testing program, gradation analyses were conducted on selected
samples to determine the texture of the soils.
3
}
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
In summary, clays and sands were encountered to the depths explored. Free groundwater was not
encountered in the borings. Refer to the attached boring logs, swell-consolidation curves and
summary of tests.
CLAYS-Clays with moderate to high amounts of sand and silt were encountered in the upper levels
of Test Hole 1-6, 11, 14, 15 and 17 and throughout Test Hole No. 13. The clays are slightly moist
to moist and moderately stiff. The clays exhibit low to moderate bearing capacities with swell
potentials ranging from slight to non-swelling.
SANDS (SILTY, CLAYEY) - Sands with slight to high amounts of silt and clay were encountered
from below the upper clays(where encountered)or from the surface. The sands exhibits very low to
moderate bearing capacities with no swell potential.
SANDS (GRAVELLY) - Sands with slight to high amounts of gravel were encountered from below
the upper sands in Test Hole Nos. 3-12, 15, and 16. The gravelly sands exhibits moderate bearing
1 capacities with no swell potential.
Due to the often variable nature of soil deposits, it is impossible to fully characterize the strength
and swelling properties of these materials at all depths at any given site. Strata may exist at the site
which possess higher or lower swell potentials than these tests indicate.
GROUNDWATER- Groundwater levels were recorded as the borings were advanced and several
4
•
days after the drilling operation. At the time of our field investigation, free groundwater was not
encountered. The groundwater table can be expected to fluctuate throughout the year depending on
variations in precipitation, irrigation ditch usage, surface irrigation, and runoff on the site.
The groundwater levels recorded, if any, represent the free,static water levels after equalization of
hydrostatic pressures in the borings. This means that the groundwater levels recorded in the borings
may not be present at those levels in the excavations. Flow rates, seepage paths, hydrostatic
pressures, groundwater fluctuations and water quality were not determined in this investigation. •
A program, which may include special well construction, test procedures, long-term monitoring
program and analysis, would be necessary to determine these factors.
PRELIM:NARY FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS
SPREAD FOOTINGS
Based on conditions observed in the field, laboratory tests and the anticipated bearing loads,we feel
that the structures on these lots could be supported by continuous spread footings and isolated pad
foundations. The final determination of foundation type and design parameters are to be made after
a final geotechnical investigation for each lot.
FLOOR SYSTEMS AND SLABS-ON-GRADE
•
The samples of the soils encountered at the site exhibited swell potentials ranging from slight to non-
swelling as moisture contents are increased. Strata may be present which could exhibit higher and
lower swelling than detected during this investigation.. Slabs placed on the native,unaltered clays and
5
sands may experience slight heaving and cracking, but, in our opinion, should not be excessive.
BELOW-GRADE FLOORS AND SUBDRAINS
The ambient groundwater table at the site is not expected to rise to a level which would affect full
basement level construction unless a source of water not presently contributing becomes available.
To alleviate hydrostatic pressures behind the foundation walls, below-grade floor levels should be
constructed with a perimeter drainage system. The type of drain, i.e. interior (undersiab), exterior
or both, should be determined at the time of the excavation inspection.
EARTHWORK
SITE PREPARATION- Recommendations pertaining to site grading are included below and in
Appendix A of this report. We recommend the upper ten to twelve (10-12) inches of the topsoil
below building,filled and paved areas be stripped and stockpiled for reuse in planted areas.The upper
six(6)inches of the subgrade below paved and filled areas should be scarified and recompacted within
plus or minus two percent (±2%) of optimum moisture to at least ninety-five percent (95%) of
standard Proctor density ASTM D-698-78 (See Appendix A of this report). Underground water-
lines, sewer-lines and perimeter drains should be bedded with at least twelve(12)inches of granular
material over the pipe. The water and sewer bedding should not be used within ten(10) feet of the ,
foundation to minimize the transfer any groundwater which may enter the bedding to the foundation.
The foundation and retaining walls should be well-cured and well braced prior to backfilling.
FILL MATERIALS-In our opinion, the on-site soils encountered could be used as backfill against
foundation walls and utility trenches provided the recommendations for compaction,moisture control
6
and testing are followed. If imported backfill materials are used next to the foundation walls, they
should be relatively impervious and non-expansive. Past experience has shown that severe damage
could occur to the foundation walls if excessively expansive material is placed for backfill and allowed
to become wet. The soils should be well pulverized and the proper moisture blended prior to
•
placement for compaction. Refer to Appendix A of this report for recommended moisture contents.
COMPACTION-Suggested recommendations pertaining to compaction of the soils are included in
1 Appendix A 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 subsoils and percolation of water down
along the foundation elements. Controlling the drainage will lessen the chances of water related •
damage. Finished grade should be sloped away from the structure on all sides to give positive
drainage. A minimum of twelve (12) inches fall in the first ten (10) feet is recommended. Where
asphalt or concrete adjoins the foundation'walls, the slope can be reduced to four (4) inches fall in
ten (10) feet (3.3%). Any cracks or joints shall be sealed and maintained so that surface waters
•
cannot penetrate the surface. If the concrete or asphalt extends no further than five(5)feet from the
? foundation,the remaining slope away from the foundation should be ten percent(10%) as described
above. Positive drainage away from the foundation should be maintained throughout the life of the
J ` structure. In the event that the backfill settles, the original grade must be restored so that the site
drains effectively.
1
• ' Planted areas are not recommended around the perimeter of the foundations. However,ifthe owners
are willing to accept the risks of foundation and slab movement, low water-use (xeriscape) plant
varieties could be used. An impervious horizontal membrane, such as polyethylene, should not be
used next to the foundation wall. We recommend the use of a landscape fabric which will allow
normal evaporation, in lieu of a plastic membrane. All plants located next to the foundation should
be hand-watered using only the minimum amount of water.
Sprinkling systems should not be installed within ten (10) feet of the structure, and spray from
sprinklers should not fall within five (5) feet of the foundation. Gutters and downspouts are
recommended and should be arranged to cant'drainage from the roof at least five(5)feet beyond the
foundation walls.
PRELIMINARY PERCOLATION INVESTIGATION
A preliminary percolation investigation was conducted to determine the percolation rates and
subsurface conditions for septic system feasibility. Two (2)percolation test holes were excavated in
the vicinity of Test Hole Nos. 1-12 as shown on the boring location map, Figure 1. The results of
those percolation tests are shown on Figure No.11 of this report. ]lased `6nythose,-nsults, ,,
'
approximately,92%a ofthe sttes arg suitable for suppo tmg standard absorp ipiL ystems Percolation g
investigations wdl be required.for'each.,buildtng site pitorto issuing building:permits.9
PONDS
Several fishery,ponds are to be constructed along the west and southwest portions of the property.
Test Hole Nos. 13-17 were drilled in these locations to determine the subsurface conditions and
8
estimate the seepage potential of the soils. Test Hole No. 13 indicates silty and sandy clays to the
depths explored. Test Hole Nos. 14, 15 and 17 indicate approximately seven to nine(7-9)feet of the
clays over the silty, clayey and gravelly sands. Test Hole No. 16 indicates the silty, clayey and
gravelly sands to the depths explored.The clays are anticipated to have relatively slow permeabilities
in the order of 0.1 to one (1) foot per year, whereas, the sands are anticipated to have rapid
permeabilities in the order of three (3)feet or more per year.
The ponds located in the sands will require lining in order to slow the permeabilities to an acceptable
rate. The liner may consist of native clays, native clays amended with bentonite or other approved
system. The clay liner thickness should be in the order of one to three (1-3) feet, depending on the
system used.It is also recommended that the native clays encountered at the bottoms of some of the
ponds be recompacted to close fissures, root holes or other features which could create permeable
conditions. Refer to Appendix A of this report for compaction guidelines. Additional investigation
and testing is recommended in order to give more detailed recommendations.
GEOTECHNICAL LIMITATIONS
The data presented herein were collected to help develop feasibility and cost estimates for this
project. Professional judgments on design alternatives and criteria are presented in this report. These
are based on evaluation of technical information gathered, our understanding of the characteristics
of the structures proposed, and our experience with subsurface conditions in this area. We do not
guarantee the performance of the project in any respect, but only that our engineering work and
judgments rendered meet the standard of care of our profession.
9
The test holes drilled were spaced to obtain a reasonably accurate picture of subsurface conditions
for estimation purposes. Variations in the subsurface conditions often exist. Site specific
investigations are required to develop foundation design parameters and septic system
recommendations.
•
,.I
=a ,
10
! ' APPENDIX A
Suggested Specifications for Placement of Compacted Earth Fills and/or Bacld'dls.
Note:This is uearded to be used as a guideline for this project by the owner or owner's repressemative.Municipal codes,special construction requirements
or other controlling factors may require modifications to these suggested specification.Supervision and control ofthe fill operations is not within the scope
of this investigation This is not a claim that Foundation&Soils Engineering is the Soils Engineer for the fill and compaction operations
GENERAL
Supervision and control of the overlot and structural fill and backfill shall be under the direction of
ii
• the Soils Engineer for the project. The soils engineer shall approve all earth materials prior to their
use, the methods of placing, and the degree of compaction obtained. A letter of approval from the
Soils Engineer will be required prior to the owner's final acceptance of the filling operations.
MATERIALS
The soils used for compacted fill beneath interior floor slabs and backfill around foundation walls
should be relatively impervious and non-swelling for the depth specified in the soils report. No
material with a maximum dimension of six(6)inches or greater shall be used for fill. All fill materials
shall be subject to the approval of the Soils Engineer prior to placement.
{ SUBGRADE PREPARATION
All 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. The
subgrade surface of the area to be filled shall be thoroughly scarified to a minimum depth of six (6)
inches, moistened or dried as specified in the attached tables, and compacted in a mariner specified
below for the subsequent layers of fill. Fill shall not be placed on frozen or muddy ground.
1
•
• MOISTURE CONTROL
The fill material, while being compacted, shall as nearly as practical contain the amount of moisture '
�S as required in the attached table of this Appendix. The moisture shall be uniform,throughout the fill.
In the event that water must be added to the soils or that the soils must be dried to meet the
specifications,the soils must be thoroughly pulverized,mixed,blended and cured prior to placement. •
The effort required for optimum compaction will be minimized by keeping stockpile soils near
-1 Optimum Moisture Contents. When moisture is added to dry, clayey soils, a curing period of several
days may be needed to allow uniform absorption of the water into the soil. Freezing temperatures
and/or inclement weather conditions may impede moisture control and compaction operations.
PLACEMENT OF FILL MATERIALS
Distribution of material in the fill shall be such as to preclude the formation of lenses of material
differing from the surrounding material. The materials shall be delivered and spread on the fill or
prepared surface in such a manner as will result in a level, uniformly compacted fill. Prior to
compacting,each layer shall have a maximum"loose-lift"height of twelve(12)inches(or as dictated
by the compaction equipment and/or soil conditions) and its upper surface shall be relatively
horizontal. Test areas are recommended to detente the optimum lift thickness. Thinner lifts may
be necessary in order to achieve the required compaction. Each lift shall be approved by the Engineer
prior to placing each succeeding lift.
M1.
COMPACTION
When an acceptable uniform moisture content is obtained, each lift shall be compacted by a method
acceptable to the Soils Engineer to the densities and moisture contents specified in the foregoing
2
Ii
report or the attached table of this Appendix and as determined by the standard Proctor test
(procedures in ASTM D698). Compaction shall be performed by rolling or tamping with approved
tamping rollers, pneumatic-tired rollers, three-wheel power rollers, or other equipment suited to the
soil being compacted. If a sheepsfoot roller is used, it shall be provided with cleaner bars attached
in a manner which would prevent the accumulation of material between the tamper feet. The roller
should be so designed that the effective weight can be increased. If the required compaction cannot
be achieved with the equipment supplied, thinner "loose-lifts" and/or heavier equipment are
recommended.
I
MOISTURE-DENSITY DETERMINATION: STANDARD AND MODIFIED PROCTORS
Samples of representative materials to be used for fill shall be furnished by the contractor to the Soils
Engineer at least forty-eight(48)hours prior to compaction testing.Wetter samples will require extra
time for test results due to the required drying for sample preparation. The sample is to be tested for
determination of the maximum dry densities and optimum moisture contents(Proctor test)for these
l.
materials. Tests for these determinations will be made using methods conforming to the most recent
procedures of ASTM D698 and AASHTO T99 (standard Proctor) or ASTM D1557 and AASHTO
T180 (modified Proctor), whichever applies. 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.
•
DENSITY TESTING
A 24-hour notice shall be given to the Soils Engineer or testing agency for scheduling compaction
tests. The density and moisture content of each layer of compacted fill will be determined by the Soils
I 3
if
•
Project No. MSS-03-01-01
4/'-- - - — -'ate - —- —- - - --L - -- - _—q 12- ?-4 c.
lir Ia, ` w a 1
Li e a )
\�`� S m E6.4 u''---TN I-6. E
J R i
�7
il
`, ; s S N F 0 ,.6.\Tho1? _ ----- i 147..c. 11; 47.I el'
143
' ; H ti I'ill:: '. .H,::- „,.., c i ,if.t., • t'l 1
8. ;. �. a ,� \ '
`
, .,,. .. I t,. ,,..i � � ¢ V
il4 .. _! \cicr_ q ..... ._
:� 7:1 �or ...7 J �.1 0 , 1
�3r I
tIn. t I '-\� tr Oa t.
es \ o
II � rer �h/� \ 'I
•
NE 1'4 Section 12
T1 N., R66 W.
Weld County, Colorado
ORTH
1 :50 SOIRIN& LOCATION MAP
FOUNDATION 4 SOILS ENGINEERING FIGURE NO. I
1 ICJ O
NO.' NO2 NO3 NO.4
ill �i mFT. p 0FT. m
npt / 7 / O�
E 1e / /i2 a / � tiE1
/Z / B /� -
5 FT. �2 /� 5 FT.
r i
e1 /
t.
�i2 ;•:j 2)12
I0 FT. Ill
+ 10 FT.
-.
=r
�'e
15 FT. -.— .:E, 1 Y 15 FT.
l2
"7; CLAY, silty, al. sandy to sandy, el. to v. moist,
z// med. to stiff, brown to grey-brown
20 FT. 20 FT.
SAND, clean to silty 4 clayey, el. moist, med.
tight, brown to grey-brown
25 FT. 26 FT.
•.". . i! SAND, el. gravelly to gravelly, moist, tight, brown
1:7:rs
30 FT. 30 FT.
All soil and/or rock contacts shown are approximate. drilled 10/SS
CLIENT: HANSON LOCATION: NEI4 Section 12
T. 1 NQ R. 66 w. LOG OF BORINGS
Weld County, Colorado
FOUNDATION 4 SOILS ENGINEERING JOB NO. 1159-03-01-01 FIGURE NO. 3
:. .
1
r .9 NO NO.10 . NO.I1 NO.12 - $ 1
mr OFt. - OFT. nit
►Mt / — �i
2 r ;. . r
- rr. s/1a — 2
9 •;C B/@ e,14
5 FT. ,� "` 5 FT.
T —
9/�
— E 'i2 ;� 112 —
lo Fr. 111 5v 10 FT.
77 tr.
.tr •l —
'.r: 7.
.` �,• rz i '�.`• -
t'
15 PT. '•y i 15 FT.
v7/ CLAY, silty, el. sandy to sandy, el. to v. moist,
med. to stiff, brown to grey-brown
//A
20 FT. 20 FT.
SAND, clean, to silty 4 clayey, el. moist, loose to
..:- med. tight, brown to grey-brown
' 25 FT. 25 FT:
t*:,-' SAND, el. gravelly to gravelly, moist to v. moist,
!c:'7,'. tight, brown
30 FT. 30 FT.
All soil and/or rock contacts shown are approximate. drilled 10/98
CLIENT: HANSON LOCATION: NEI/4 Section 12
T. 1 N., R. 66 w. LOG or BORINGS
Weld County, Colorado FOUNDATION 4 5011.5 ENGINEERING JOB NO. 1759-03-01-01 FIGURE NO. 5
tili
11 NO.13 NO.14 NO.15 NO.I6 NO.11 1
m mFT. .2. 72
/ mFT. mz%E - / /
f.5 FT. j r/ / •s- _ :j 5 FT.
'; • % • 1
. t.
10 FT.' / '� �' 10 f7.
/ fV
/ i 't
• ' r.. _ -
15 FT. '/L 12 15 FT.
� to etll CLAY, silty, el. sandy to sandy, el. to v. moist,
/ med. stiff, brown to grey-brown
20 FT. - 20 FT.
SAND, clean to silty 1 clayey, el. moist, med.
tight, brown to grey-brown
25 Ft 25 FT.
».I-..r SAND, el. gravelly to gravelly, moist, tight; brown
• 30 FT. 30 FT.
All soil and/or rock contacts shown are approximate. drilled 10/98
CLIENT: HANSON LOCATION: NE'4 Section 12
T. 1 N., R. 66 W. LOG OF BORINGS
Weld County, Colorado
FOUNDATION 4 SOILS ENGINEERING JOB NO. 1159-03-01-01 i ' ~FIGURE NO. 6
Project No. 1199-03-0I-01
LOAD Cps?) se® WOO 6000 10000
6 Inundated Test Hole No. I
Sample Depth (ft.) 2-3
w 2
0
4
0
6
i u
Sample of SILTY CLAY
Moisture Content (%) 223 Dry Density (PCF) 101.4
LOAD (psf) aro 1000 50120 won
Inundated Test Mole No. 3
6 Sample p Depth (ft) 3-4
J 4 •
co co 2
0
2
a 4 —
0 6
co
•
z 8
°u
Sample of' SANDY CLAY
Moisture Content (am) n8 Dry Density (PCF) 1092 .
SWELL - CONSOL f DATE ON TEST
FOUNDATION 4 SOILS ENGINEERING FIGURE NO. 1
• - Project No. 1159-03-01-01
LOAD (per) e®o Ufa e� tree
Inundated Test Hole No. 1
6 Sam le
1�u
p Depth Cfta 3-4
•
ccn 2 .
0
ii 6 2
I FE -
Sample of CLAYEY SAND
Moisture Content (%) 93 Dry Density (PCF) 111.1
LOAD (psf) see r000 eOWm i__
DO
Inundated Test Hole No. 11
6 Sample• p Depth (ft.) 2-3
4
cA 2
a' m
6 2
p 6
N
0 8
Sample of SANDY CLAY
Moisture Content C%J 12.6 Dry Density (PCF) 113.1
SWELL - CONSOL IDATION TEST
FOUNDATION 4 SOILS ENGINEERING. FIGURE NO. 8
Project No. 1159-03-01-01 •
LOAD (per) Dm moo
soon ate
} 6 Inundated. Test Hole No. 13
Sample Depth at) 6-1
_1 4
2
CE
O 6
N
6 8
' Sample of SILTY. SANDY CLAY
Moisture Content (am) 112 Dry Density CFCF) II1.8
i
1
LOAD Cps?) sCC VEND BCCO VOW
1
I 6 Inundated Test Hole No. 15
Sample • Depth Cft.) 8-9
4
N 2
O
I
O 2
i-
4 E
Q
-1-i
O
N
O .
O
Sample of' SILTY CLAY
Moisture Content (%) 223 Dry Density CPCF) 94.9
•
SWELL - CONSOL f DATE ON TEST
FOUNDATION 4 SOILS ENGINEERING FIGURE NO. 9
.I I
GRAIN SIZE OISTRISUTION CURVE
100 SIEVE WS SO Y Y r r r • • w r• w• wry
• I 1 - I I I l I l l _ 100
90 - `0
7p 10 80 80
it _ ICU A
,j 10
Q .
1
-0 60 - -
D 60
CURVE HI
50 50
01
r0 40 - h 40
30 . — - 30
20 _ : _ . 40
4
0 — • -- 0
am 14 Nunn Oa el L•I IN III
TEST HOLE NO. 2 CURVE A TEST HOLE NO. 8___ CURVE 5
DEPTH (Ft.) 1-8 DEPTH (Pt.) 12-13
SAMPLE OF CLAYEY SAND SAMPLE OP SLIGHTLY CLAYEY SAND
FOUNDAtION 4 SOILS ENGINEERING JO5 NO. 1159-03-0I-f l FIGURE NO. 1O
I Project No. 1759-03-01-01
t
PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS
Test Hole Depth to Depth to Perc rate Est. type&
No. bedrock(ft.) groundwater (mpi) size of
(ft.) system(ft.) *
•
1 >15 >15 34,40 - A,1070
2 >15 >15 W 34;60 A,1185
:� 3 >15 >15 {ita60,48 A,1290
4 >15 >15 48,40 A,1155
5 >15 >15 27,40 A,1035
6 >15 >15 60;120, ; ETA,2000
7 >15 >15 20,20 846
8 >15 >15 30,30 A,975
9 >15 >15 48,34 A,1116
10 >15 >15 48,24 A,1062
11 >15 >15 40,27 A,1035
12 >15 >15 14,20 A,804
Bed areas are based on a 3 bedroom house; sizes are estimated � �r
1
A=Absorption bed, ETA=Evapotranspiration/Absorption(ETA) water-balance
Figure No. 11
Summary of Test Results Project No. 1759-03-01-01
Unconfined Standard
Boring Moisture Dry % passing Liquid Plasticity Compressive Penetration Soil
No. Depth, ft Content, % Density, pcf No.200 sieve Limit, % Index Strength, psf Test Description
1 2-3 22.3 107.4 9000+ Silty clay
1 3-4 17.6 9/12 Silty day
1 ' 7-8 16.9 9/12 Silty, clayey sand
1 15-16 4.0 16/12 Sand
2 2-3 14.6 6/12 Silty clay
2 7-8 9.7 102.7 26 Clayey sand
2 8-9 9.1 10/12 Silty sand
3 3-4 17.8 109.2 6000 Sandy clay
3 4-5 14.9 5/12 Silty, sandy day
3 8-9 3.3 23/12 Sand
4 3-4 . 11.3 7/12 Silty, sandy clay
4 8-9 3.7 Sand
4 9-10 4.8 15/12 Sand
5 2-3 8.9 122.9 Clayey sand
5 3-4 10.8 11/12 Clayey sand
5 7-8 12.5 3/12 Sand
5 15-16 3.5 42/12 Sand
6 2-3 16.3 5/12 Clayey silt
6 7-8 3.0 Sand
6 8-9 2.3 50/12 Gravelly sand
7 3-4 9.3 117.1 9000+ • Clayey sand
7 4-5 10.0 7/12 Clayey sand
7 8-9 5.6 23/12 Silty sand
8 3-4 .8.3 2/12 Clayey sand
8 8-8.5 2.1 Gravelly sand
FOUNDATION & SOILS ENGINEERING Table No.'1
Sheet 1 of 2
-- - -
Summary of Test Results Project No. 1759-03-01-01
Unconfined Standard
Boring Moisture Dry % passing Liquid Plasticity Compressive Penetration Soil
No. Depth, ft Content, % Density, pcf No.200 sieve Limit, % Index Strength, psf Test Description
8 8.5-9.5 5.2 31/12 Clayey sand
9 3-4 10.9 109.6 Clayey sand
9 4-5 11.7. - 9/12 Sandy clay
9. 8-9 8.7 4/12 Sand
10 3-4 9.2 8/12 Clayey sand
10 8-9 13.8 Sand
10 9-10 7.0 50/11 Sand
11 2-3 12.6 9000+ Sandy Gay
11 3-4 12.0 8/12 Clayey sand
• 11 7-8 10.1 9/12 Clayey sand
12 2-3 8.5 8/12 Silty, sandy day
12 7-8 11.1 112.5 Sand
12 8-9 4.1 19/12 Sand
13 6-7 17.2 111.8 _ 9000+ Silty, sandy clay
13 7-8 18.6 15/12 Silty clay
14 10A1 5.2. - Sand
14 11-12 3.2 25/12 Sand
15 . 8-9 22.3 94.9 Clayey silt
15 9-10 3.7 18/12 Gravelly sand
16 7-8 8.1 Sand
16 8-9 4.4 16 14/12 Sand
17 13-14 4.9 Sand
17 14-15 5.3 - 20/12 Sand
FOUNDATION & SOILS ENGINEERING Table No. 1
Sheet 2of2
Hello