The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20042654.tiff GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT- PAVEMENT EVALUATION LAKOTA LAKES DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED RURAL LOCAUMAJOR INTERIOR ROADWAY SOUTH OF WELD COUNTY ROAD 54 AND EAST OF WCR 15 WELD COUNTY, COLORADO TERRACON PROJECT NO. 20035197 January 8, 2004 Prepared for: DEBRA EBERL WELD COUNTY ROAD 54 JOHNSTOWN, COLORADO 80534 Prepared by: Terracon 301 North Howes Street Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 lierraron 2004-2654 January 8, 2004 • l Terracon 301 N.Howes•P.O.Box 503 Fort Collins,Colorado 80521-0503 (970)484-0359 Fax:(970)484-0454 Debra Eberl Weld County Road 54 Johnstown, Colorado 80534 • • Re: Geotechnical Engineering Report— Pavement Evaluation Lakota Lakes Development • Proposed Rural Local/Major Interior Roadway Southeast Corner of Weld County Roads 54 and 15 Weld County, Colorado Terracon Project No. 20035197 Terracon has completed a geotechnical engineering exploration for the proposed rural local/major interior roadway within the Lakota Lakes Development, a subdivision located south of Weld County Road 54 and east of Weld County Road 15. The intent of this pavement evaluation report is to provide information and recommendations for constructing the proposed interior roadway, which will provide access to the Lakota Lakes Development. The results of our engineering study, including the boring location diagram, laboratory test • results, test boring records, and the geotechnical recommendations needed to aid in the • design and construction of the proposed roadway alignments and other earth connected phases of this project are attached. The subsurface soils encountered on the site generally consisted of approximately 2- inches of base course material underlain by approximately 4-inches of sandy lean clay fill material. Underlying the fill material was native, sandy lean clay and/or sandy silty clay which extended to the maximum depths explored, 10-feet. Groundwater was not • encountered during initial drilling operations or when checked on December 22, 2003. The subsurface soil and groundwater conditions are presented on the Logs of Borings . included in Appendix A of this report. In general, the cohesive subsurface materials exhibited moderate subgrade strength characteristics and low swell potential. Based on the field and laboratory test results, the proposed interior roadway is feasible from a geotechnical engineering viewpoint provided the recommendations contained in this report are followed. Further details and design • recommendations are presented within this report, based upon geotechnical conditions as well as Weld County and/or CDOT design criteria. Arizona ■ Arkansas ■ Colorado ■ Georgia ■ Idaho ■ Illinois■ Iowa ■ Kansas ■ Kentucky ■ Minnesota ■ Missouri ■ Montana Nebraska ■ Nevada ■ New Mexico ■ Oklahoma ■ Tennessee ■ Texas ■ Utah ■ Wisconsin ■ Wyoming Quality Engineering Since 1965 Geotechnical Engineering Report—Pavement Evaluation Terra= Lakota Lakes Development Weld County, Colorado Project No. 20035197 We appreciate being of service to you in the geotechnical engineering phase of this project, and are prepared to assist you during the construction phases as well. If you have any questions concerning this report or any of our testing, inspection, design and consulting services, please do not hesitate to contact us. Sincerely, TERRACON . }1112,A...e. •-•Y• ZALL6T4::::e Gary L. Wilson, P.E. Geotechnical Engine- ,=p%p�.•Rf��st�% iA c to . y ` Reviewed by: David A. ''cizP Geotechnical ngineer/Department Manager Copies to: (2) Addressee (1) Weiland, Inc. — Mr. Joseph M. Wright, P.E. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Letter of Transmittal INTRODUCTION 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1 SITE EXPLORATION 2 Field Exploration 2 • Laboratory Testing 2 Site Conditions 3 Soil and Bedrock Conditions 3 Groundwater Conditions 3 • ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS 4 Geotechnical Considerations 4 Pavement Design and Construction 4 Earthwork 8 General Considerations 8 Site Preparation 8 Subgrade Preparation 9 Fill Materials and Placement 9 Additional Design and Construction Considerations 10 Corrosion Protection 10 GENERAL COMMENTS 10 APPENDIX A Vicinity Map — Figure No. 1 Site Plan and Boring Location Diagram — Figure No. 2 Log of Boring Nos. 1 through 3 APPENDIX B Laboratory Test Results APPENDIX C General Notes • GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT- PAVEMENT EVALUATION LAKOTA LAKES DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED RURAL LOCAUMAJOR INTERIOR ROADWAY SOUTH OF WELD COUNTY ROAD 54 AND EAST OF WCR 15 WELD COUNTY, COLORADO TERRACON PROJECT NO. 20035197 January 8, 2004 INTRODUCTION This report contains the results of our geotechnical engineering exploration for the proposed rural local/major interior roadway within the Lakota Lakes Development, a subdivision located south of Weld County Road 54 and east of Weld County Road 15. The intent of this pavement evaluation report is to provide information and recommendations for constructing a rural local/major interior roadway to provide private access to the Lakota Lakes Development. The site is located in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 28, Township 7 North, Range 67 West of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado. A vicinity map, Figure No. 1 is enclosed in Appendix A, which depicts the project site's location. The purpose of these services is to provide information and geotechnical engineering recommendations relative to: • subsurface soil conditions • groundwater conditions • pavement design and construction • earthwork The recommendations contained in this pavement report are based upon the results of field and laboratory testing, engineering analyses, and experience with similar soil conditions, and our understanding of the proposed project. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project as we understand it is to construct a rural local/major interior roadway, which will provide access for Lakota Lakes, a planned 7-lot single-family residential development. The proposed development is situated south of Weld County Road 54 and east of Weld County Road 15. Geotechnical Engineering Report-Pavement Evaluation iferracon Lakota Lakes Development Weld County, Colorado Project No. 20035197 SITE EXPLORATION The scope of the services performed for this project included a site reconnaissance by an engineering geologist, a subsurface exploration program, laboratory testing and engineering analyses. Field Exploration A total of 3 test borings were drilled throughout the proposed roadway for the Lakota Lakes Development on December 19, 2003 at the locations shown on the Site Plan, Figure No. 2, to approximate depths of 10-feet below existing site grades. The borings were located in the field by pacing from property lines and/or existing site features. All of the borings were advanced with a truck-mounted drilling rig, utilizing 4-inch diameter solid stem augers. Lithologic logs of each boring were recorded by the engineering geologist during the drilling operations. At selected intervals, samples of the subsurface materials were taken by pushing thin-walled tubes and by driving a split-spoon. A composite sample was obtained from Test Boring No. 3 to evaluate the subgrade strength characteristics. Penetration resistance measurements were obtained by driving the split-spoon samplers into the subsurface materials with a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches. The penetration resistance value is a useful index in estimating the consistency, relative density or hardness of the materials encountered. Groundwater conditions were evaluated in each boring at the time of site exploration and follow-up measurements were obtained on December 22, 2003 for the borings drilled. The levels are indicated on the enclosed boring logs. Laboratory Testing All samples retrieved during the field exploration were returned to the laboratory for observation by the project geotechnical engineer and were classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System described in Appendix C. At that time, the field descriptions were confirmed or modified as necessary and an applicable laboratory testing program was formulated to determine engineering properties of the subsurface materials. Boring logs were prepared and are presented in Appendix A. Laboratory tests were conducted on selected soil samples. The test results were used for the geotechnical engineering analyses, and the development of pavement and earthwork recommendations. All laboratory tests were performed in general accordance with the applicable ASTM; local or other accepted standards. 2 Geotechnical Engineering Report-Pavement Evaluation lferracon Lakota Lakes Development Weld County, Colorado Project No. 20035197 Selected soil and bedrock samples were tested for the following engineering properties: • Water Content • Plasticity Index • Dry Density • R-Value • Swell-Consolidation • Site Conditions The site for the proposed Lakota Lakes Development is situated south of Weld County Road 54 and east of Weld County Road 15. The road subgrade is relatively flat and is covered with a • coarse base material. The site surrounding the road is vegetated with natural grasses and agricultural fields. Railroad tracks lie to the east and agricultural field similar in vegetation lie to the south. The site is relatively flat, yet exhibits positive surface flow in the south the southeast directions. Soil and Bedrock Conditions The subsurface soils encountered on the site generally consisted of approximately 2- inches of base course material underlain by approximately 4-inches of sandy lean clay fill material. Underlying the fill material was native, sandy lean clay and/or sandy silty clay which extended to the maximum depths explored, 10-feet. The stratification boundaries shown on the enclosed boring logs represent the approximate locations of changes in soil types; in-situ, the transition of materials may be gradual. The subsurface soil, bedrock and groundwater conditions are presented on the Logs of Borings included in Appendix A of this report. Field and Laboratory Test Results Field tests indicate the clay material is stiff to very stiff in consistency, exhibits low swell potential and moderate load bearing capabilities. Groundwater Conditions Groundwater was not encountered during initial drilling operations or when checked on December 22, 2003. These observations represent groundwater conditions at the time of the field exploration, and may not be indicative of other times, or at other locations. 3 Geotechnical Engineering Report-Pavement Evaluation lferracon Lakota Lakes Development Weld County, Colorado Project No. 20035197 ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS Geotechnical Considerations Based on the subsurface conditions encountered at the site, it is our opinion the proposed pavement improvements are feasible at the site. The subsoils for the pavement sections as encountered within the test boring locations are generally cohesive soils exhibiting moderate subgrade strength characteristics and low expansive potential. The existing in-situ soils are suitable for use as a pavement subgrade for the infrastructure portion of the Lakota Lakes Development placed beneath the asphalt section within the proposed rural local/major interior roadway. Pavement Design and Construction Based on the subsurface conditions encountered at the site, it is our opinion the proposed roadways within the planned development are feasible from a geotechnical engineering point of view. The subsoils within the proposed pavement sections, (i.e. within the upper 4-feet), at the site generally consisted of plastic/cohesive clay soils, exhibiting moderate subgrade strength characteristics and low swell/expansive potential. A composite sample of subgrade soils collected at Test Boring No. 3 exhibited an R-Value of 46. Realizing potentially lower quality of subsoils may be present at various locations throughout the site, and/or between our test borings, we plan on designing the proposed interior roadway using an R-Value equivalent to 15. The swell potential of the soils, based on the swell-consolidation testing procedures to evaluate the foundation requirement for the upper zone and inundated at approximately 150 pounds per square foot, resulted in swell index values of (-) 0.2 %, which is less than the standard 2 percent criteria established by governmental agencies for stabilization of the subgrade due to expansive potential. Asphalt concrete underlain by crushed aggregate base course and non-reinforced concrete pavement are feasible alternatives for the proposed pavement sections. Based on the subsurface conditions encountered at the site, and the laboratory test results from the composite sample collected during the subsurface exploration activities, it is recommended that the interior roadway for this project be designed using a minimum R-value of 15. For flexible pavement design criteria we are using typical default values for rural interior local residential roadways used widely in northern Colorado for determining pavement thickness. For this report we are using 18-kip equivalent daily load application (18-kip EDLA) value of 20 for interior local roadways. This value generally compares with standard default values for 4 Geotechnical Engineering Report- Pavement Evaluation Terra=on �- Lakota Lakes Development Weld County, Colorado Project No. 20035197 residential roadways designed and constructed in Northern Colorado. Therefore, the 18-kip equivalent single axle load (18-kip ESAL)values for the site would be 146,500. Design of pavements for the project have been based on the procedures outlined in the 1993 Guideline for Design of Pavement Structures by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), the local pavement design criteria, and the following data. For flexible pavement design, a design life of 20 years was utilized. Using a minimum design R-value of 15 for the proposed interior roadway improvements, appropriate ESAL/day, environmental criteria and other factors, the structural numbers (SN) of the pavement sections were determined on the basis of the 1993 AASHTO design equation. 'uq ~ i R { r ti' x.e r �� y •r ti .rz =,,. !! ? Local Residential 20 146,000 85 4.5 2.5 2.20 Roadways (1) These values are assumed based on our understanding of the proposed development and generally conform to the standard of the industry for Northern Colorado. If after further review modifications are necessary, we will prepare an addendum to this report. (2) The 18-kip ESAL values are based on a 20-year design life. (3) The Structural Nos. presented herein for the arterials and interior residential roadways were based on using a design R-Value of 15 and the Northern Colorado standard method for determining the soil resilient modulus, which equates to 9325 psi. Local drainage characteristics of proposed pavement areas are considered to vary from fair to good depending upon location on the site. For purposes of this design analysis, fair drainage characteristics are considered to control the design. These characteristics, coupled with the approximate duration of saturated subgrade conditions, results in a design drainage coefficient of 1.0 when applying the AASHTO criteria for design. In addition to the flexible pavement design analyses, a rigid pavement design analysis was completed, based upon AASHTO design procedures. Rigid pavement design is based on an evaluation of the Modulus of Subgrade Reaction of the soils (K-value); the Modulus of Rupture of the concrete, and other factors previously outlined. The design K-value of 100 pounds per cubic inch (pci) for the subgrade soil was determined by correlation to the laboratory tests results. A modulus of rupture of 650 psi (working stress 488 psi) was used for pavement concrete. The rigid pavement thicknesses for each traffic category were determined on the basis of the AASHTO design equation. 5 Geotechnical Engineering Report-Pavement Evaluation lierracon Lakota Lakes Development Weld County, Colorado Project No. 20035197 Recommended alternatives for flexible and rigid pavements, summarized for each traffic area, are as follows:, lFt,. `".' +µ, K S XfF F : N} §I ?J Y i ,..4 .,...,..� r a(3r��fnt'1�. �, lXecommw3nded'M{mmy�m PSyement T;�tckness inches f :4;".W6 ,,,,t i'144,..1b, y -1i€I f to 4k { iFt h e 4-', i . u,s. +�,1'�p a pF b# t 4s X��rr"(,{'�� N i {� wi"a'$t&sx lia`�'t ttdP �i'�»�' c4 rk.#Wb� "�SY> '�'r" �j,,{.'�'.'-kt 'yMrr�„4+.'} r�� 6 ffi� a " r tives �h0-4plinc*e ,,.,, P It4fi -2`%re rs r TT reatd '... Pprtla ^ .. l Re is g °i +rf ddt9 i Ski1d 0a 1 i vd � iT f i III r I li ,3 4� #° r 6 p'a" m :4}T Rat n C oncrete �dtal Y 9�' s 4:' � pfli .,1i x �t„a � fi'�S..ti v:,!1 G3 ` r, oc_s3:br + i' 41Qu Car .,F, '. AI, �'t-,„, read. uR#c �5 z.. 3 ni w'Ealx«#� 'eH$�t iii �'�9�d,#':�'i �t,!1_, F_1 }M'1<unm,„;013 4 �r,� �' i yr� �' i�fb ,13 :R: ��u��; Local (2)A 1.5 2.5 6.0 10.0 2.42/2.20 Residential i31 B 1.5 2.5 6.0 12.0 22.0 3.02/2.20 EDLA-20 '4lC 6 6 N/A - (1) If flyash is utilized for portions of the proposed roadway construction and is to be considered as part of the strength coefficient equation, it is recommended that the upper 12-inches of the subgrade be treated with flyash. Terracon used a strength coefficient value of 0.05 for the required minimum thickness of 12-inches, which results in a total strength value of 0.6 in the pavement thickness formula. Using a minimum thickness of 12- inches of flyash treated subgrade will reduce the required asphalt thickness by approximately 1-1/2-inches. However, in most cases the required minimum asphalt pavement thickness in accordance with the Weld County Pavement Design Criteria, takes; :` precedent in the pavement thickness sections. Therefore no reduction is provided and the use of flyash is not an economical option, unless needed to mitigate for swell potential of the subgrade soils. Flyash, where utilized, should be placed in general accordance with the standard of industry for placement procedures. Terracon is available to provide the required laboratory soil and flyash mix design as well as placement recommendations upon request. (2) Alternative A: Provides the minimum pavement thicknesses for use of asphalt concrete surface material, Grading S, SX and SG, underlain by Class 5 or 6 aggregate road base material. Typically for any residential roadway, the minimum asphalt pavement thickness is 4-inches underlain by a minimum 6-inch thickness of aggregate base course. (3) Alternative B: Provides the minimum pavement thicknesses for use of asphalt concrete surface material, Grading S, SX and SG, underlain by the minimum thickness layers for aggregate base course, underlain by the recommended minimum of 12-inches of flyash treated subgrade. (4) Alternative C: Provides the minimum required pavement thicknesses for use of Portland Cement Concrete pavement. 6 Geotechnical Engineering Report- Pavement Evaluation Terracon Lakota Lakes Development Weld County, Colorado Project No. 20035197 (5) The asphalt pavement thicknesses presented herein should conform the to the minimum and maximum lift thicknesses for Grading SX, S and SG, (i.e. minimum/maximum lifts for Grading SX = 1.5/2.5-inches, Grading S = 2/3.5-inches, and Grading SG = 3/5-inches). Each alternative should be investigated with respect to current material availability and economic conditions. Aggregate base course (if used on the site) should consist of a blend of sand and gravel, which meets strict specifications for quality and gradation. Use of materials meeting Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) Class 5 or 6 specifications is recommended for base course. Aggregate base course should be placed in lifts not exceeding six inches and should be compacted to a minimum of 95% Standard Proctor Density (ASTM D698). Asphalt concrete pavement should be composed of a mixture of aggregate, filler, binders, and additives, if required, and approved bituminous material. The asphalt concrete should conform to an approved mix design stating the Hveem and/or SuperPave properties, optimum asphalt content, job mix formula and recommended mixing and placing temperatures. Aggregate used in the asphalt concrete should meet particular gradations, such as the Colorado Department of Transportation Grading S, SX or SG specifications. Mix designs should be submitted prior to construction to verify their adequacy. Asphalt material should be placed in maximum 3-inch lifts and should be compacted to a within a range of 92 to 96 % of Maximum Theoretical Density. Preventative maintenance should be planned and provided for through an on-going pavement management program in order to enhance future pavement performance. Preventative maintenance activities are intended to slow the rate of pavement deterioration, and to preserve the pavement investment. Preventative maintenance consists of both localized maintenance (e.g. crack sealing and patching) and global maintenance (e.g. surface sealing). Preventative maintenance is usually the first priority when implementing a planned pavement maintenance program and provides the highest return on investment for pavements. Recommended preventative maintenance policies for asphalt and jointed concrete pavements, based upon type and severity of distress, are provided. Prior to implementing any maintenance, additional engineering observation is recommended to determine the type and extent of preventative maintenance. 7 Geotechnical Engineering Report- Pavement Evaluation lferracon Lakota Lakes Development Weld County, Colorado Project No.20035197 Earthwork • General Considerations The following presents recommendations for site preparation, excavation, subgrade preparation and placement of engineered fills on the project. All earthwork on the project should be observed and evaluated by Terracon. The evaluation of earthwork should include observation and testing of engineered fill, subgrade preparation, foundation bearing soils, and other geotechnical conditions exposed during the construction of the project. • Site Preparation Strip and remove any existing vegetation, debris, and other deleterious materials from proposed building areas prior to any additional fill material being placed. All exposed surfaces should be free of mounds and depressions, which could prevent uniform compaction. Stripped materials consisting of vegetation and organic materials should be wasted from the site, or used to revegetate landscaped areas or exposed slopes after completion of grading operations. All exposed areas which will receive fill, once properly cleared and benched where necessary, should be scarified to a minimum depth of 12-inches, conditioned to near optimum moisture content, and compacted. It is anticipated that excavations in the upper weathered bedrock for the proposed construction can be accomplished with conventional earthmoving equipment. The individual contractor(s) is responsible for designing and constructing stable, temporary excavations as required to maintain stability of both the excavation sides and bottom. All excavations should be sloped or shored in the interest of safety following local and federal regulations, including current OSHA excavation and trench safety standards. Based upon the subsurface conditions determined from the geotechnical exploration, the majority of the underlying subgrade soils exposed during construction are anticipated to be relatively stable; however soft compressible and/or unstable areas may be encountered during construction. The stability of the subgrade may be affected by precipitation, repetitive construction traffic or other factors. If unstable conditions develop, workability may be improved by scarifying and drying. Overexcavation 8 Geotechnical Engineering Report- Pavement Evaluation Terracon Lakota Lakes Development Weld County, Colorado Project No. 20035197 Additional Design and Construction Considerations • Corrosion Protection Results of soluble sulfate testing indicate that ASTM Type I Portland cement is suitable for all concrete on and below grade. However, if there is no, or minimal cost differential, use of ASTM Type II Portland cement is recommended for additional sulfate resistance of construction concrete. Foundation concrete should be designed in accordance with the provisions of the ACI Design Manual, Section 318, Chapter 4. GENERAL COMMENTS Ten-aeon should be retained to review the final design plans and specifications so comments can be made regarding interpretation and implementation of our geotechnical recommendations in the design and specifications. Terracon also should be retained to provide testing and observation during excavation, grading, foundation and construction phases of the project. The analysis and recommendations presented in this report are based upon the data obtained from the borings performed at the indicated locations and from other information discussed in this report. This report does not reflect variations that may occur between borings, across the site, or due to the modifying effects of weather. The nature and extent of such variations may not become evident until during or after construction. If variations appear, we should be immediately notified so that further evaluation and supplemental recommendations can be provided. The scope of services for this project does not include either specifically or by implication any environmental or biological (e.g., mold, fungi, bacteria) assessment of the site or identification or prevention of pollutants, hazardous materials or conditions. If the owner is concerned about the potential for such contamination or pollution, other studies should be undertaken. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of our client for specific application to the project discussed and has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices. No warranties, express or implied, are intended or made. Site safety, excavation support, and dewatering requirements are the responsibility of others. In the event that changes in the nature, design, or location of the project as outlined in this report are planned, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report shall not be considered valid unless Terracon reviews the changes and either verifies or modifies the conclusions of this report in writing. 10 Geotechnical Engineering Report- Pavement Evaluation lferracon Lakota Lakes Development Weld County, Colorado Project No. 20035197 of wet zones and replacement with granular materials may be necessary. Use of lime, fly ash, kiln dust, cement or geotextiles could also be considered as a stabilization technique. Laboratory evaluation is recommended to determine the effect of chemical stabilization on subgrade soils prior to construction. Lightweight • excavation equipment may be required to reduce subgrade pumping. • Subgrade Preparation Subgrade soils beneath interior and exterior slabs on grade should be scarified, moisture conditioned and compacted to a minimum depth of 12-inches. The moisture content and compaction of subgrade soils should be maintained until slab or pavement construction. • Fill Materials and Placement Clean on-site soils or approved imported materials may be used as fill material. Imported soils (if required) should conform to the following: Percent fines by weight Gradation (ASTM C136) 3" 100 No. 4 Sieve 30-80 No. 200 Sieve 60 (max) • Liquid Limit 30 (max) • Plasticity Index 15 (max) • R-Value (for on-site interior roadways) 15 (min) Engineered fill should be placed and compacted in horizontal lifts, using equipment and procedures that will produce recommended moisture contents and densities throughout the lift. It is recommended all fill material be compacted to a minimum 95 percent of Standard Proctor Density ASTM D698. On-site clay soils should be compacted within a moisture content range of 1 percent below, to 3 percent above optimum. Imported granular soils should be compacted within a moisture range of 3 percent below to 3 percent above optimum unless modified by the project geotechnical engineer. 9 APPENDIX A lierracon 1` _. „' .-•,�-�. \ �, -s+'; l •'t Jr% i I s.N'I 1 _ - ..,}r2S3- , \, ' `\ ,.'��'� h'sl r. •\ 4T •,` �,.,� iII� .' \ ...-••••_._," r _-.. 1t..5...,••• ..r1 1 •• •,�� j• ti y• /�, ti� ' �r t��^ �,.e OElh�p 'II 1 ' r'.�.lr I,l�-Ml2L• .G.i�.•t3 ' ••„N. 't . " '••� \`••\ • ''O •flt��\t� ��_`�i . ,t,,1 •4:'.._,'/If',"• /. f i� . • \4y `.�; tt-! ,t,/,. . ` //1'.f j r• 7:-..!I/;/1 ( (r ' i".73 .•\ mil. ,.ti � 1 -?'.. i(� , 'I��/'i -- 4500 I .,*• 1, `\ `\ -.r '/ ICS ice+ \i \ 'y /11 •1 "'1r..n........:77..:1„•a' .Y 1\.�.`_ —t\ //efi fir;: ---- `: \'•y0 `.. ..%1;^ '`� r �rf l�n�d0o-^� �` ',� — f�J-'ifit i' t...� ,./.) „ \' t,� . /�' ;b '~ �� I 2.- ''.,, , & PROJECT SITE •r 't'i] ; I i -'/;/+ r '', aala9 WCR 54 i , • . `• + I I i' , - IVc. \•" -- •-T, !_ilk.", �1 III -, + \+ _ � ' )r .L..• ....._ I ,I f \ l'etgo \ :.LitrP-d'.../( ° j • A, ,`-i-.79- 'yJ • 1 �j � • }(\ . y it'... v7 1,3,1 Z" "\--, "`••• '--.. f'• .' • \- *dare '`1,._ ' , I r.. \ (� N y \•�{ '"t_ 6• .T` Sri -, \' - BM -:.\\\\ l I /4• 1 ... '. 7�5 0 ,I , -444:171\"1i,1 f I / ,S •a.4826 t ;.- \ 4772 L1 •Il ! _ _� r L.•��/ \ tit • �C`� �1 1 / '``, `� • 1 �'�,:,4 V --,/ -,-,NO \-......... t i \ `1 • Hf •r �/ 1 M 1 '� 1. 7 ✓/_ a-ero ,• ( �, • I .(r1:4 j • . s Ilm !"'..---,, '''N, \ .. FIGURE 1:SITE VICINITY MAP PAVEMENT EVALUATION LAKOTO LAKES PUD • If.: S/E/C OF WELD COUNTY ROAD 54&WCR 15 WELD COUNTY,COLORADO IirProject Mngr: te^ DAR Project No. 20035197 Designed By. l ii r ra c o n Sc.Ie. NTS Checked By: Ga:o DAR 301 N.Howes Street 01/07/04 Approved By: DAR Fort Collins,Colorado 80521 Drawn By: DIAGRAM IS FOR GENERAL LOCATION ONLY, JLS AND IS NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES. File Name: 20035197-1 Figure No. \\ . 1 J . • WCR 54 NO.1 std LOT 2 ITc LOT 3 • NO.2 LOT 4 LOT 5 NO.3 s LOT6 LEGEND LOT 7 S APPROX. TEST BORING LOCATIONS FIGURE 2:SITE DIAGRAM PAVEMENT EVALUATION-LAKOTA LAKES PUD S/E/C OF WELD COUNTY ROAD 54&WCR 15 WELD COUNTY,COLORADO Project hinge DAR Project No. • 20035197 Designed By. lierracon Scale: "=2,000' Checked By: Date: DAL 301 N.Howes Street 01/07/04 Approved By: Fort Collins,Colorado 80521 Drawn By: DIAGRAM IS FOR GENERAL LOCATION ONLY, DAR JLS AND 15 NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES. File Name: 20035197-2 Figure No. 7 LOG OF BORING NO. 1 Pa•e 1 of 1 CLIENT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER Debra Eberl SITE South West Corner of WCR 54 and 13 PROJECT Fort Collins, Colorado Lakota Lakes SAMPLES TESTS o DESCRIPTION m > to KP > K w Z ~ u.co _ _ m > Zy Eno ZOZ w a O O W rim aT a0 Z� K �U O a DN rIt 02 ,2"COARSE BASE 'ii'i 0.5 FILL MATERIAL (Sandy Lean Clay SANDY L I S LEAt, stiff NDEAN CLAY CL 1 ST 12 Brown, moist, stiff to very stiff CL 2 SS 12 16 9.7 � 'j%/f/�//� CL 3 SS 12 11 13.4 5 • . -- CL 4 SS 12 12 22.9 Y//lo 10 BOTTOM OF BORING z 0 QU W The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines between soil and rock types: in-situ,the transition may be gradual. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft BORING STARTED 12-19-03 WL Y DRY WD DRY lierracon RIG CME-55 FOREMAN BORING COMPLETED I2 19CG WL Water Level Reading on 12/22/03 APPROVED DAR JOB # 20035197 • • LOG OF BORING NO. 2 Page 1 of 1 • CLIENT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER Debra Eberl SITE South West Corner of WCR 54 and 13 PROJECT Fort Collins, Colorado Lakota Lakes SAMPLES TESTS 0eL J DESCRIPTION O } w ccr r Z� d _ `/1 w > zN Kw z zU cC w > a. O ~o az Y �� CD D Z F- u o �UU C a !LT) w• 0 2 -2"COARSE BASE • AS 0.5 FILL MATERIAL (Sandy Lean Clay j%/�/ Brown, moist, stiff SANDY LEAN CLAY CL 1 ST 12 8.1 112 Brown, moist, stiff to very stiff /// CL 2 SS 12 10 10.7 / ✓/ CL 3 SS 12 10 6.8 0 CL 4 SS 12 12 23.2 10 10 BOTTOM OF BORING ee O 0 O QU W tk The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines crk between soil and rock types: in-situ,the transition may be gradual. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft BORING STARTED 12-19-03 WL Q DRY WD = DRY �err�con BORING COMPLETED 12-19-03 IoI W L s Y W RIG CME-55 FOREMAN CG WL Water Level Reading on 12/22/03 APPROVED DAR JOB# 20035197 LOG OF BORING NO. 3 Page 1 of 1 CLIENT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER Debra Eberl SITE South West Corner of WCR 54 and 13 PROJECT Fort Collins, Colorado Lakota Lakes SAMPLES TESTS C N DESCRIPTION m > o W a two o • g a' w x ~ ~ -H 2?o ran m w > , w- D Ow -t=% w 0 a, w0 HO Hz > U� �Q^ 2 H K CO �0 Eta Er) Jao •• _Q 2 ,2"COARSE BASE • - 0.5 FILL MATERIAL _ \Sandy Lean Clay • Brown, moist, stiff SANDY SILTY CLAY - CL 1 ST 12 7.2 104 Brown, moist, medium stiff to very stiff j — CL 2 SS 12 14 13.2 COMP. SAMPLE @0 4 • CL 3 SS 12 15 9.6 25/7/67 • • • j 95 SM 4 SS 12 6 8.7 SILTY SAND 10 ,Brown, moist medium stiff 10 BOTTOM OF BORING 0 O z 0 LLD 0 U W The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines in between soil and rock types: in-situ,the transition may be gradual. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft BORING STARTED 12-19-03 WL Q DRY WD = DRY lbrracon BORING COMPLETED 12-19-03 d WL s Y RIG CME-55 FOREMAN CG WL Water Level Reading on 12/22/03 APPROVED DAR JOB # 20035197 APPENDIX B lierracon -4 • -2 2 r D 4 6 • 10 1 0.1 1 APPLIED PRESSURE,TSF Specimen identification Classification Yd, pcf WC,% I • 2 1.0ft SANDY LEAN CLAY 112 8 N Notes: 0 O, 01 CONSOLIDATION TEST Project: Lakota Lakes g.cr) 1 erracon Site: South West Corner of WCR 54 and 13 Fort Collins, Colorado Job#: 20035197 Date: 1-6-04 -4 - -2 • r 2 O . O v 4 • 6 8 10 0.1 1 APPLIED PRESSURE,TSF Specimen Identification Classification Yd, pcf WC,% 0 • 3 1.0ft SANDY SILTY CLAY 104 7 0 Notes: z O 0 a rn 0 0 z CONSOLIDATION TEST Project: Lakota Lakes p,u) Derr On Site: South West Corner of WCR 54 and 13 Fort Collins, Colorado 0 0 Job #: 20035197 0 Date: 1-6-04 60 - CL CH 50 P L A s 40 T I C 30 Y 20 X 10 CL-ML j ML MN 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 LIQUID LIMIT Specimen Identification LL PL PI %Fines Classification • 3 3.0ft 25 18 7 67 SANDY SILTY CLAY(CL-ML) • . r I- z o, _ m N - M 0 0 N N ATTERBERG LIMITS RESULTS Project: Lakota Lakes co fe rr acon Site: South West Corner of WCR 54 and 13 Fort Collins, Colorado Job#: 20035197 _ Date: 1-6-04 P.Olierracon 301 Box 503 301 North Howes Street FORT COLLINS,COLORADO 80521 (970)484-0359 FAX(970)484-0454 r c a x k}rr v.,-,-4 -71 Cvvl�iig�eP A of o u iElko ili k[�ii J.- 101T11;1'1' s 4 . q .t A SK `₹# MVl; # i�Ad'� f.'r tilli'ijK(Enid } 41L ,�-.-0Ai ( : 'ais "" *,� �r�� stiff r ti, a ,1,A qK r 1 'fir ''r3 r d�' �',' '. is x t i't"� a :" a r ' t t°ai d .x lk'� �`�x4;:�# �tt '. Sr 7 f,; : ! e N' ,.�' €i �T-;' T -i .It4 iIs }%ry ° ,1$* �qz .r�,ix�rr � W �*d�N.tt�i�i'��YC1 =,;ohs .��-+. w,. . , z.,,.._ hr:* : .s1}u .( +t 4�cr,i, 5 . 3. . - � 1 r� CLIENT: Debra Eberl DATE OF TEST: 05-Jan-04 PROJECT: Lakota Lakes Subdivision - Proposed Interior Roadway LOCATION: Composite Sample Test Boring-No. 3 @ 0.5' -4.0' TERRACON NO. 20035197 CLASSIFICATION: Clayey Sand with Gravel-SC; AASHTO A-4 ly a m^cp �+r�.+A� wptte gF R yN',} o © ++M tletswp m }y� s ;,,+, ,,,, . TEST SPECIMEN NO. 1 2 3 COMPACTION PRESSURE (PSI) 110 130 150 • DENSITY(PCF) 120.1 121.7 121.7 MOISTURE CONTENT (%) 13.3 12.4 11.5 EXPANSION PRESSURE (PSI) 0.06 0.28 1.09 HORIZONTAL PRESSURE @ 160 PSI 83 63 • 38 SAMPLE HEIGHT (INCHES) 2.47 2.44 2.47 . EXUDATION PRESSURE (PSI) 237.1 375.5 661.9 CORRECTED R-VALUE 41.3 51.8 71.8 UNCORRECTED R-VALUE 41.3 53.0 71.8 R-VALUE @ 300 PSI EXUDATION PRESSURE= 46 100 90 80 70 w 60 50 eC 40 . 30 i 20 I 10 , 0 ' 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 '� EXUDATION PRESSURE - PSI ) ) ) CLIENT: Debra Eberl li erracon PROJECT. Lakota Lakes Development PROJECT NO. 20035197 DATE: 1/8/04 LOCATION: South of Weld County Road 54 and East of WCR 15 RIGID PAVEMENT ANALYSIS 146,000 FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT ANALYSIS (1) DESIGN 18-kip- (ESAL's) 20 (1) DESIGN 18-kip(ESAL's) 146,000 (2) RELIABILITY 85% (2) RELIABILITY 85% (3) OVERALL DEVIATION 0.34 (3) OVERALL DEVIATION 0.44 (4) MODULUS OF RUPTURE 600 3,420,000 (5) MODULUS OF ELASTICITY 3.1 (6 LOAD TRANSFER (4) R-VALUE (HVEEM STABILOMETER) 1.0 15 (7) MODULUS OF SUBGRADE REACTION 100 (5) SOIL RESILIENT MODULUS 9,325 (8) DRAINAGE COEFFICIENT 4.5 (9) INITIAL SERVICEABILITY (6) INITIAL SERVICEABILITY 4.5 (10)TERMINAL SERVICEABILITY 2.5 (7) TERMINAL SERVICEABILITY 2.5 Alternative C CALCULATED RIGID PAVEMENT THICKNESS,(IN): 4.77" CALCULATED STRUCTURAL NUMBER: 2.20 s,. 1 " d C'Laf. 'f' 1 to k(�t�� "!t a kf"m= -""°"'r' '" , " . ^q a�tyr i�'. H x r } w3r i G 1661Y t x --J., . .sue t A P -S ----11:---,-2't" i a-lY,v 4x"2 J 3 ! z py � .rd• �{ UPPER 0.44 1.5 ASPHALTSURFACE-GRADINGS,SX 1.0 0.66 2 0.44 2.5 ASPHALT SURFACE-GRADING S,SG 1.Q 1.10 2 0.11 6.0 AGGREGATEBASECOARSE-CLASS . 1 0 0.66 S OR6 Alternative A TOTAL 10.0 TOTAL 2.42 2.20 UPPER 0.44 1.5 ASPHALT SURFACE-GRADING S,SX 1.Q 0.66 2 0.44 2.5 ASPHALT SURFACE-GRADING S,SG 1.0 1.10 3 0.11 6.0 AGGREGATE BASE COARSE.CLASS 1.0 0.66 SORB 3 0.05 12.0 FLY ASH TREATED SUBGRADE 1.0 0.60 Alternative B TOTAL 22.0 TOTAL 3.02 2.20 GENERAL NOTES DRILLING &SAMPLING SYMBOLS: SS: Split Spoon- 1-3/8" I.D., 2"O.D., unless otherwise noted HS: Hollow Stern Auger .-. ST: Thin-Walled Tube-2" O.D., unless otherwise noted PA: Power Auger RS: Ring Sampler-2.42' I.D., 3"O.D., unless otherwise noted HA: Hand Auger DB: Diamond Bit Coring-4", N, B RB: Rock Bit BS: Bulk Sample or Auger Sample WO: Wash Boring or Mud Rotary The number of blows required to advance a standard 2-inch O.D. split-spoon sampler(SS)the last 12 inches of the total 18- inch penetration with a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches is considered the "Standard Penetration" or "N-value". For 3' O.D. ring samplers (RS)the penetration value is reported as the number of blows required to advance the sampler 12 inches using a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches, reported as "blows per foot," and is not considered equivalent to the"Standard Penetration" or"N-value". WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT SYMBOLS: WL: Water Level - WS: While Sampling WCI: Wet Cave in WD: While Drilling DCI: Dry Cave in BCR: Before Casing Removal AB: After Boring ACR: After Casing Removal Water levels indicated on the boring logs are the levels measured in the borings'atthe times indicated. Groundwater levels at other times and other locations across the.site could vary. In pervious soils,.the indicated levels may reflect the location of groundwater. In low permeability soils, the accurate determination of groundwater levels may not be possible with only short- term observations. - - DESCRIPTIVE SOIL CLASSIFICATION: Soil classification is based on the Unified Classification System. Coarse Grained Soils have more than 50% of their dry weight retained on a #200 .sieve;their principal descriptors are: boulders, cobbles, gravel or sand. Fine Grained Soils have less than 50% of their dry weight retained on a #200 sieve; they are principally described as clays if they are plastic, and silts if they are slightly plastic or non-plastic. Major constituents may be added as modifiers and minor constituents may be added according to the relative proportions based on grain size. In addition to gradation, coarse-grained soils are defined on the basis of their in-place relative density and fine-grained soils on the basis of their consistency. FINE-GRAINED SOILS COARSE-GRAINED SOILS BEDROCK • IRS LSS1 LE) JSSI Relative IRSl fa . Blows/Ft. Blows/Ft. Consistency Blows/Ft. Blows/Ft. Density Blows/Ft. Blows/Ft. Consistency <3 <2 Very Soft 0-6 < 3 Very Loose <30 <20 Weathered 3-4 2-3 Soft 7-18 4-9 Loose 30-49 20-29 Firm 5-9 4-6 Medium Stiff 19-58 10-29 Medium Dense 50-89 30-49 Medium Hard - 10-18 7-12 Stiff 59-98 30-49 Dense 90-119 50-79 Hard 19-42 13-26 Very Stiff >98 >49 Very Dense > 119 > 79 Very Hard >42 >26 Hard RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF SAND AND GRAIN SIZE TERMINOLOGY GRAVEL • Descriptive Terms of Percent of - Major Component Other Constituents Dry Weight of Sample Particle Size Trace < 15 Boulders Over 12 in. (300mm) With 15—29 Cobbles 12 in. to 3 in. (300mm to 75 mm) Modifier > 30 Gravel 3 in. to#4 sieve(75mm to 4.75 mm) Sand #4 to#200 sieve(4.75mm to 0.075mm) Silt or Clay Passing#200 Sieve(0.075mm) RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF FINES PLASTICITY DESCRIPTION Descriptive Terms of Percent of Other Constituents Dry Weight Term Plasticity Index Trace <5 Non-plastic 0 With 5— 12 Low - 1-10 Modifiers > 12 Medium 11-30 High 30+ lierracon UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory TestsA Soil Classification ^ Group Symbol Group Name° Coarse Grained Soils Gravels Clean Gravels Cu≥4 and 1 5 Cc 5 3E GW Well graded gravel" More than 50%retained More than 50%of coarse Less than 5%finest Cu<4 and/or 1 >Cc>3E GP Poorly graded gravelr . fraction retained on on No.200 sieve No.4 sieve Gravels with Fines More Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silty gravelF°'" than 12%finest Fines classify as CL or CH GC Clayey graveIF°" Sands Clean Sands Cu z 6 and 1s Cc 5 3E SW Well graded sand' 50%or more of coarse Less than 5%finest Cu<6 and/or 1 >Cc>3E SP Poorly graded sand' fraction passes ' No.4 sieve Sands with Fines Fines classify as ML or MH SM Silty sand°,w More than 12%finest Fines classify as CL or CH SC Clayey sand"' Fine-Grained Soils Silts and Clays inorganic PI>7 and plots on or above"A"line' CL Lean clay" 50%or more passes the Liquid limit less than 50 - 1 K�" No.200 sieve PI<4 or plots below"A"line ML Sit[ organic Liquid limit-oven - Organic claytw dried <0.75 OL • Liquid limit-not Organic siItKLL" ' dried ' - Silts and Clays inorganic PI plots on or above"A"line CH Fat claywE Liquid limit 50 or more PI plots below"A"line MH Elastic silt"' organic . Liquid limit-oven dried Organic clayA4" <0.75 OH • Liquid limit-not dried Organic siltKLA"° Highly organic soils Primarily organic matter,dark in color,and organic odor PT Peat A Based on the material passing the 3-in.(75-mm)sieve "If fines are organic,add"with organic fines"to group name. • r °If field sample contained cobbles or boulders,or both,add"with cobbles or ' If soil contains≥15%gravel,add"with gravel"to group name. boulders,or both"to group name. 'If Atterberg limits plot in shaded area,soil is a CL-ML,silty clay. • `Gravels with 5 to 12%fines require dual symbols: GW-GM well graded K If soil contains 15 to 29%plus No.200,add"with sand"or"with gravel with sift,GW-GC well graded gravel with clay,GP-GM poorly graded gravel,"whichever is predominant. gravel with silt,GP-GC poorly graded gravel with clay. L °Sands If soil contains≥30%plus No.200 predominantly sand,add"sandy with 5 to 12%fines require dual symbols: SW-SM well graded sand to group name. . with silt, SW-SC well graded sand with clay,SP-SM poorly graded sand with "If soil contains≥30%plus Na 200, predominantly gravel,add silt,SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay "gravelly"to group name. 2 E Cu=Dso/D10 Cc= (g°) "PI≥4 and plots on or above"A"line. Dec X D60 °PI<4 or plots below"A"line. "If soil contains≥15%sand,add"with sand"to group name. "PI plots on or above"A'line. °If fines classify as CL-ML,use dual symbol GC-GM,or SC-SM. °PI plots below"A"line. 60 r I For classification of fine-grained I i% soils and fine-grained fraction I 5o_of coarse-grained soils 'tc` 6Jc 0 , Equation of"A"-line J� +P E_ Horizontal at Phf to LL=25.5. I W 40 Y then PI=0.73(LL-20) --- --- '—0÷C Equation of"U'-line o Z Vertical at LL=16 fo P1=7, G� >- 30 j then PL=0.9(LL-8) R I I / I i 3 za O I ri I MH or OH 10 i - I 4� _; :'�e� � T@t3r-...'*- ML or OL 0 -. � I , � I I L L- i 0 10 16 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 LIQUID LIMIT(LL) 1 lerracon _ . LABORATORY TEST SIGNIFICANCE AND PURPOSE TEST SIGNIFICANCE PURPOSE California Bearing Used to evaluate the potential strength of subgrade soil, Pavement Thickness Ratio subbase, and base course material, including recycled Design materials for use in road and airfield pavements. Consolidation Used to develop an estimate of both the rate and amount of Foundation Design both differential and total settlement of a structure. Direct Shear Used to determine the consolidated drained shear strength Bearing Capacity, of soil or rock. x Foundation Design, and Slope Stability Dry Density Used to determine the in-place density of natural, inorganic, Index Property Soil fine-grained soils. Behavior Expansion Used to measure the expansive potential of fine-grained Foundation and Slab soil and to provide a basis for swell potential classification. Design Gradation Used for the quantitative determination of the distribution of Soil Classification particle sizes in soil. • Liquid &Plastic Limit, Used as an integral part of engineering classification Soil Classification Plasticity Index systems to characterize the fine-grained fraction of soils, - ^ and to specify the fine-grained fraction of construction materials. • Permeability Used to determine the capacity of soil or rock to conduct a Groundwater Flow liquid or gas. - Analysis PH Used to determine the degree of acidity or alkalinity of a Corrosion Potential soil. Resistivity Used to indicate the relative ability of a soil medium to carry Corrosion Potential electrical currents. R-Value Used to evaluate the potential strength of subgrade soil, Pavement Thickness subbase, and base course material, including recycled Design materials for use in road and airfield pavements. Soluble Sulfate Used to determine the quantitative amount of soluble Corrosion Potential sulfates within a soil mass. Unconfined To obtain the approximate compressive strength of soils Bearing Capacity Compression that possess sufficient cohesion to permit testing in the , Analysis for unconfined state. Foundations Water Content Used to determine the quantitative amount of water in a soil Index Property Soil mass. Behavior 1 rerracon REPORT TERMINOLOGY (Based on ASTM D653) Allowable Soil The recommended maximum contact stress developed at the interface of the foundation Bearing Capacity element and the supporting material. Alluvium Soil, the constituents of which have been transported in suspension by flowing water and subsequently deposited by sedimentation. Aggregate Base A layer of specified material placed on a subgrade or subbase usually beneath slabs or • Course pavements. Backfill A specified material placed and compacted in a confined area. Bedrock A natural aggregate of mineral grains connected by strong and permanent cohesive forces. Usually requires drilling, wedging, blasting or other methods of extraordinary force far excavation. Bench A horizontal surface in a sloped deposit. Caisson (Drilled A concrete foundation element cast in a circular excavation which may have an enlarged ' ' Pier or Shaft) base. Sometimes referred to as a cast-in-place pier or drilled shaft. Coefficient of A constant proportionality factor relating normal stress and the corresponding shear stress Friction at which sliding starts between the two surfaces. Colluvium Soil, the constituents of which have been deposited chiefly by gravity such as at the foot of a slope or cliff. Compaction The densification of a soil by means of mechanical manipulation Concrete Slab-on- A concrete surface layer cast directly upon a base, subbase or subgrade, and typically used Grade as a floor system. Differential Unequal settlement or heave between, or within foundation elements of structure. Movement Earth Pressure The pressure exerted by soil on any boundary such as a foundation wall. ESAL Equivalent Single Axle Load, a criteria used to convert traffic to a uniform standard, (18,000 • pound axle loads). Engineered Fill Specified material placed and compacted to specified density and/or moisture conditions under observations of a representative of a geotechnical engineer. Equivalent Fluid A hypothetical fluid having a unit weight such that it will produce a pressure against a lateral support presumed to be equivalent to that produced by the actual soil. This simplified approach is valid only when deformation conditions are such that the pressure increases linearly with depth and the wall friction is neglected. Existing Fill(or Materials deposited throughout the action of man prior to exploration of the site. Man-Made Fill) Existing Grade The ground surface at the time of field exploration. 1 ierracon REPORT TERMINOLOGY (Based on ASTM D653) Expansive The potential of a soil to expand (increase in volume) due to absorption of moisture. Potential Finished Grade The final grade created as a part of the project. Footing A portion of the foundation of a structure that transmits loads directly to the soil. Foundation The lower part of a structure that transmits the loads to the soil or bedrock. Frost Depth The depth at which the ground becomes frozen during the winter season. Grade Beam A foundation element or wall, typically constructed of reinforced concrete, used to span between other foundation elements such as drilled piers. Groundwater Subsurface water found in the zone of saturation of soils or within fractures in bedrock. Heave Upward movement. Lithologic - The characteristics which describe the composition and texture of soil and rock by observation. Native Grade The naturally occurring ground surface. Native Soil Naturally occurring on-site soil, sometimes referred to as natural soil. .^- Optimum Moisture The water content at which a soil can be compacted to a maximum dry unit weight by a Content given compactive effort. Perched Water Groundwater, usually of limited area maintained above a normal water elevation by the presence of an intervening relatively impervious continuous stratum. Scarify To mechanically loosen soil or break down existing soil structure. Settlement Downward movement. Skin Friction (Side The frictional resistance developed between soil and an element of the structure such as a Shear) drilled pier. Soil(Earth) Sediments or other unconsolidated accumulations of solid particles produced by the physical and chemical disintegration of rocks, and which may or may not contain organic matter. Strain The change in length per unit of length in a given direction. Stress The force per unit area acting within a soil mass. Strip To remove from present location. Subbase A layer of specified material in a pavement system between the subgrade and base course. Subgrade The soil prepared and compacted to support a structure, slab or pavement system. 1 ferracon ROCK CLASSIFICATION (Based on ASTM C-294) Sedimentary Rocks Sedimentary rocks are stratified materials laid down by water or wind. The sediments may be composed of particles or pre-existing rocks derived by mechanical weathering, evaporation or by chemical or organic origin. The sediments are usually indurated by cementation or compaction. Chert Very fine-grained siliceous rock composed of micro-crystalline or cryptocrystalline • quartz, chalcedony or opal. Chert is various colored, porous to dense, hard and has a conchoidal to splintery fracture. Claystone Fine-grained rock composed of or derived by erosion of silts and clays or any rock containing clay. Soft massive and may contain carbonate minerals. Conglomerate Rock consisting of a considerable amount of rounded gravel, sand and cobbles with or without interstitial or cementing material. The cementing or interstitial material may be quartz, opal, calcite, dolomite, clay, iron oxides or other materials. Dolomite A fine-grained carbonate rock consisting of the mineral dolomite [CaMg(CO3)2]. May contain non-carbonate impurities such as quartz, chert, clay minerals, organic matter, gypsum and sulfides. Reacts with hydrochloric acid (HCL). Limestone A fine-grained carbonate rock consisting of the mineral calcite (CaCO3). May contain non-carbonate impurities such as quartz, chert, clay minerals, organic matter, gypsum and sulfides. Reacts with hydrochloric acid (HCL). Sandstone Rock consisting of particles of sand with or without interstitial and cementing materials. The cementing or interstitial material may be quartz, opal, calcite, dolomite, clay, iron oxides or other material. Shale Fine-grained rock composed of or derived by erosion of silts and clays or any rock containing clay. Shale is hard, platy, of fissile may be gray, black, reddish or green and may contain some carbonate minerals (calcareous shale). Siltstone Fine grained rock composed of or derived by erosion of silts or rock containing silt. Siltstones consist predominantly of silt sized particles (0.0625 to 0.002 mm in diameter) and are intermediate rocks between claystones and sandstones and may contain carbonate minerals. 1 rerracon LABORATORY TEST SIGNIFICANCE AND PURPOSE TEST SIGNIFICANCE PURPOSE California Bearing Used to evaluate the potential strength of subgrade soil, Pavement Thickness Ratio subbase, and base course material, including recycled Design materials for use in road and airfield pavements. Consolidation Used to develop an estimate of both the rate and amount Foundation Design of both differential and total settlement of a structure. Direct Shear Used to determine the consolidated drained shear strength Bearing Capacity, of soil or rock. Foundation Design, and Slope Stability Dry Density Used to determine the in-place density of natural, index Property Soil inorganic, fine-grained soils. Behavior Expansion Used to measure the expansive potential of fine-grained Foundation and Slab soil and to provide a basis for swell potential classification. Design Gradation Used for the quantitative determination of the distribution Soil Classification of particle sizes in soil. Liquid& Plastic Limit, Used as an integral part of engineering classification Soil Classification Plasticity Index systems to characterize the fine-grained fraction of soils, and to specify the fine-grained fraction of construction materials. Permeability Used to determine the capacity of soil or rock to conduct a Groundwater Flow liquid or gas. Analysis pH Used to determine the degree of acidity or alkalinity of a Corrosion Potential soil. Resistivity Used to indicate the relative ability of a soil medium to Corrosion Potential carry electrical currents. R-Value Used to evaluate the potential strength of subgrade soil, Pavement Thickness subbase, and base course material, including recycled Design materials for use in road and airfield pavements. Soluble Sulfate Used to determine the quantitative amount of soluble Corrosion Potential sulfates within a soil mass. Unconfined To obtain the approximate compressive strength of soils Bearing Capacity Compression that possess sufficient cohesion to permit testing in the Analysis for unconfined state. Foundations Water Content Used to determine the quantitative amount of water in a Index Property Soil soil mass. Behavior 1 ierrecon Hello