Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCDP 99-18; TALLMAN PROPERTY; PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL SOILS INVESTIGATION; 1998-06-27I I I I I I I I I t---t~~ ., &., ElllliIlCC";lIfI, '"C. CIVIL, GEOTECHNICAL, & QUALITY ENGINEERING FOUNDATION DESIGN' LAND SURVEYING -. SOIL TESTING CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT & INSPECTION CLIENT: TALLMAN P~OJECT: TAL 598 A DATE: 27 JUNE 1998 MR. JEFF TALLMAN 2946 State Street, Suite 6 "p:v Carlsbad, CA. 92008 ~ I r-18 Subject: Preliminary Geotechnical Soils Investigation fo'r the proposed Residential Construction located On PioPico Drive, Carlsbad, CA. (APN: 156-350-0~) Dear Mr. Tallman: Pursuant to your request, a Preliminary Geotechnical Soils Investigation was performed at the subject site. The purp6se of the Investigation was to determine the general engineering I characteristics of the soils on and underlying the site and to provide specific r'ecommendations for the design parameter_s for I I -I I I I I I I foundations and retaining structures, slab-on-grade floors and site earthwork. The proposed development consists of the construction o£ a one/two story, single family residence, manufactured house or standard wood framed/stucco type structure. SITE CONDITIONS The subj~ct site is located approximately 0.2 miles east of the San Diego Freeway (1-5) on the west side of Pio Pico Drive~ in the City of Carlsbad. The site topography consists of a gently sloping lot falling at approximately 7% to the west. During this investi~ation, there -1- 1611-A SO. MELROSE DRIVE #285, VISTA, CA 92083-5497 • 760-945-3150 • FAX: 760-945-4221 _ C-bP 9 '7-{ff !I Jr ~I I .1 . 1 .1 J I ,I ,I . 1 ~I I ,I I I I 'I I I',,(:I"lllflillf.-ac'·illfl1 'IIC. I----t-IPI,_+_;~ CIVIL, GEOTECHNICAL, & QUALITY ENGINEERING FOUNDA TION DESIGN· LAND SURVEYING' SOIL TESTING CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT & INSPECTION was evidence of trash and debris existing on the ~ite which will be removed from the area during rough grading. Also, the surface vegetation, shrubs, and any other organic materials shall be removed from the grading area • FIELD AND LABORATORY TESTING On June 27, 1998, a field investigation w'as pe'rformed at the subject site. This investigation consisted of the excavation of one test pit dug with a backhoe. The locations of this test hole is shown on the Plot Plan, Enclosure (1) and the detailed soil log of the Test Pit is presented on Enclosure (2). As the test pit was advanced, the soils were visually classified by the Field Engineer. Undisturbed and bulk samples, as well as in-place density tests, were obtained at various depths representative of the different soils horizons. All samples were returned to our laboratory for detailed testing . Results of the in-place compaction tests, the Maximum Dry Density Test values for the various soils sampled and the Expansion Potential Test results are presented on Enclosure (3). These materials were also tested for Shearing Strength, Enclosure ( 4 ) • Shear tests were made with a direct shear machine of, the strain control type in which the rate of strain is 0.05 inches per minute. The machine is so designed that tests may be performed ensuring a minimum of disturbance from the field conditions. Saturated, remolded specimens were subjected to shear under various normal loads. Expansion tests were performed on typical specimens of natural ioils. These tests were performed in accordance with the procedures outlined in U.B.C. Standard 29-2. -2- 1611-A SO. MELROSE DRIVE #285, VISTA, CA 92083-5497 • 760-945-3150 • FAX: 760-945-4221 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I "& "l1l1fliIlLac'·illfll fllc. ~--+~r-+-:~ CIVIL. GEOTECHNICAL. & QUALITY ENGINEERING SOIL CONDITIONS FOUNDA TlON DESIGN' LAND SURVEYING' SOIL TESTING CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT & INSPECTION As indicated by our Test Pit Logs, Enclosure (2), the site is underlain with approximately 3 feet of topsoil mate~ial consisting of dry, loose, silty sand with some roots. Underlying the topsoil materials is an undetermined depth of Terrace Deposit soils consisting of damp, dense to very dense, silty sands/sandy silts. The depth of our test pit was 7.5 feet below the surface into a very dense, cemented material. GEOLOGICAL HAZARDS The geologic hazards at the site are earthquake effects generated by fault movements. These effects include ground shaking, seismic settlement, differential compaction of loose soils, and ground lurching. The distance from the nearest major active fault (Rose Canyon Fault) decreases the risk from these hazards at this site. No faults have been identified within the site. SLOPE STABILITY The site surface materials consist of sandy clays that are relatively loose in their dry state. These materials as well as the underlying silty sands are susceptible to erosion. Drainage control is essential to maintain the stability of any planned slopes or slope areas. LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL Liquefaction analysis of the soils underlying the site was based on the consideration of various factors which> include the -3- 1611-A SO. MELROSE DRIVE #285, VISTA, CA 92083-5497 • 760-945-3150 • FAX: 160-945-422.1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1--t~rt'H " ... ~" Illlflillf.,'C,·illfl, '"C. CIVIL, GEOTECHNICAL, & QUALITY ENGINEERING FOUNDA TION DESIGN' LAND SURVEYING' SOIL TESTING CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT & INSPECTI9N water level, soil type gradation, relative density, intensity of ground shaking and duration of shaking. Liquefaction potential has been found to be the greatest where the ground water level is shallow and loose fine sands occur within a depth of ~O feet or less. These conditions are not present within the site area and liquefaction is not considered a potential hazard at the site. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on field data and our laboratory tests results, the following Conclusions and Recommendations are presented and are to be utilized in conjunction with the Grading and Building Plans: All grading shall be performed in accordance with the applicable recommended grading specifications contained in this report and the City of Carlsbad Grading Ordinance. On the basis of our investigation, development of the site as proposed is considered feasible from a soils engineering standpoint provided that the recommendations stated herein are incorporated in the design of foundation systems and are implemented in the field. "- Site preparation should begin with the removal of the surface vegetation and any trash, debris, and other deleterious matter. These materials, as well as vegetative :matter, are no.;t suitable for use in structural fills and should be exported fr0m the site. Also, any subsurface structures such as cesspools, wells, or abandoned pipelines, which are uncovered during the grading operation, shall be removed or backfilled in accordance with the requirements of the City of Carlsbad. -4- 1611-A SO. MELROSE DRIVE #285, VISTA, CA 92083-5497 • 760-945-3150 • FAX: 760-945-4221 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I " & " 1~lIflill(.acl·illfl, fllc. J----+""""C-+--O~ CIVIL. GEOTECHNICAL. & QUALITY ENGINEERING FOUNDA TION DESIGN' LAND SURVEYING' SOIl, TESTING CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT & INSPECTION All on-site earth materials are considered suitable for the support of the proposed structures. However, prior to construction or placing fill materials, the loose topsoil materials shall be removed to a depth where firm, hard native soils are encountered. Only minor grading is anticipated in order to process the loose surface topsoils. These soils,sh.!l be removed to a depth of 36 inches, the bottom of the excavation shall be ripped, watered, and recompacted, and the native soils shall be recompacted to the design pad grade. All structural fill shall be compacted to at least 90% of maximum dry density at 2% over optimum moisture content as, determined in accordance with ASTM Test Procedure D 1557-91 or equivalent. Site drainage should be dispersed by non-erodible dev~ces in a manner to preclude concentrated runoff over graded and natural areas in accordance with the City of Carlsbad requirements. All grading and/or foundation plans shall be reviewed by the Soil Engineer. FOUNDATIONS It is anticipated that'the proposed structure for this project shall be supported by conventional isolated and/or continuous footings founded on firm native soils. The recommended allowable bearing value is 1750 psf and may be used fo~ footings founded in the native materials. This value is for deAd plus live loads and may be increased by one-third (1/3) for seismic and wind loads where allowed by code. This design bearing value ,is in accordance with the Uniform Building Code and was calculated based on Terzaghis' Formula. -5- 1611-A SO. MELROSE DRIVE #285, VISTA, CA 92083-5497 • 760-945-3150 • FAX: 760-945-4221 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I "&,, IJllfliIlLae,·illfl, '"C. ~-+"""r-+-:rt'M CIVIL, GEOTECHNICAL, & QUALITY ENGINEERING FOUNDA TlON DESIGN· LAND SURVEYING· SOIL TESTING CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT &iNSPECTION In general, the native surface soils and underlying Terrace Deposit soils were found to have a moderate expansive potential according to our Expansion Index Test results. Foundations shall be sized and constructed in accordance with the Structural Engineer's design, based on the above bearing value, ~he lateral load parameters as outlined in the latter part of this r~port, the expected live and dead loads, and the projected wind and seismic loads. FOUNDATIONS It is recommended that the continuous perimeter foundations and concrete slabs for a light weight wood-framed struct"ure shall be reinforced in accordance with the following minimum designs: a. For slab-on-grade floors: it is recommended that ihe continuous perimeter foundations for a single story structure shall extend a minimum depth of 18 inches and a minimum width of 12 inches into the compacted fill material as measured from the lowest adjacent grade. For a two story structure, the fbundations shall be 24 inches deep and 15 inches wide. b. The continuous perimeter foundations shall ~e reinforced with a minimum of four No.4 steel bars; two barS shall be ~laced 3 inches from the top of the foundation and the other bars shall be placed 3 inches from the bottom. As an alternative to the No. 4 steel rebars, one No. 5 steel rebar top and bottom may be u~ed. c. All interior concrete slabs shall be a minimum of four inches in thickness and reinforced with a minimu~ of No. 3 rebar at 18 inches on center both ways placed in the center of the slab. The bars shall be bent downward into the perimeter f00tings to a -6- 1611-A SO. MELROSE DRIVE #285, VISTA, CA 92083-5497 • 760-945-3150 • FAX: 760-945-4221 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I----+-fflr-+:~ "&,, 1~lIfliIlLael·illfl, Illc. CIVIL, GEOTECHNICAL, & QUALITY ENGINEERING FOUNDA TION DESIGN' LAND SURVEYING' SOIL TESTING CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT & INSPECTION depth of 3 inches from the bottom at 18 inches on center. In order to minimize vapor transmission, an impermeable membrane lie: visqueen) shall be placed over 2 inches of clean, poorly graded, coarse sand, decomposed granite, or crushed rock. The membrane shall be covered with 2 inches of sand to protect it during construction and the sand should be lightly moistened just prior to placing concrete. All concrete used on this project shall have a minimum compressive strength of 2500 psi unless otherwise stated on the Building Plans. If imported soil materials are used during grading to bring the building pad to the design elevations, or if variations of soils or building locations are encountered, foundation and slab designs shall be reevaluated by our firm upon the completion of the rough grading operation. Footings located on or adjacent to the top of slopes shall be . extended to a sufficient depth to provide a minimum horizontal distance of 7 feet between the bottom edge of the footing and the face of the slope. LATERAL LOAD PARAMETERS The lateral load parameters to be used in the design of the foundations, retaining and restraining walls founded in the fill soils are derived from the angle of friction, ~ (21~), and the Cohesion C= 540 psf, obtained from the direct shear tests from Test Pit #1 at a depth of 2 to 3 feet using the following formulas: A. Active Pressure Coefficient, Ka = 1-sin ~ = 0.47 l+sin Rf B. Passive Pressure Coefficient, Kp = l/Ka = 2.12 C. At Rest Pressure Coefficient, Ko = I-sin ~ = 0.64 -7- 1611-A SO. MELROSE DRIVE #285, VISTA, CA 92083-5497 • 760-945-3150 • FAX: 760-945-4221 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I " & " 1~lIfI;lI{;acl·;lIfI, 'lie .. f---+~r+-;~ CIVIL, GEOTECHNICAL, & QUALITY ENGINEERING FOUNDA TlON DESIGN' LAND SURVEYING· SOIL TESTING CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT & INSPECTION The equivalent fluid pressures are obtained by the formulas: Active Pressure: z Ka ~ = 0.47 x 133.0 = 54 pet Passive Pressure: z Kp ~ = 2.12 x 133.0 = 242 pcf Pressure at Rest: z Ko ~ = 0.64 x 133.0 = 73 pcf Applicable where ~ = soil wet density (133.0 pcf), j;f = 21~, and z : (depth and width of footing) = 1.0'. A coefficient of friction of 0.35 may be used for design of concrete on the native soils. RETAINING WALLS An equivalent fluid pressure of thirty (30) pOl;J.uds per.cubic foot may be used for design of retaining walls. This figure is based on a drained condition and use of level granular backfill. If the existing native soils are used as backfill, the equivalent fluid pressure will be 54 pounds per cubic foot. For 1.5:1 (horizontal to vertical) sloping backfill, an active pressure equivalent to that exerted by a fluid ~eighing ~O pcf should be assumed. BACKFILL If excavations are made by sloping or over-cutting, it will be necessary to place backfill behind the retainihg walls aft~r completion of the structure. Backfill soil should be granular in nature and free of organic matter and debris. All backfill should be placed after inspection has been made of the bottom of the excavation and the installation of the -8- 1611-A SO. MELROSE DRIVE #285, VISTA, CA 92083-5497 • 760-945-3150 • FAX: 760';~45-4221 I I I I I I I I I I I 'I I I I I I I I I----t-fflr-+-:~ "&1' IJlJfliIJLac,·ilJfl, Illc. CIVIL, GEOTECHNICAL, & QUALITY ENGINEERING FOUNOATION DESIGN· LAND SURVEYING. SOIL TESTING CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT & INSPIECTION subdrain behind the wall. Form lumber and other debris shall not be permitted at the base of the backfill. All backfill should be compacted to 90% of the Laboratory Standard. In some areas where the walls approach the excavated embankment, it may prove economical to plaqe gravel rather than soil for backfill. LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS The analysis and recommendations submitted in this Report are based in part upon the data obtained from the test pit excavations performed on the site and our experience and judgement. The nature and extent of variations between the test pits may not become evident until construction. If variations then appear evident, it will be necessary to-re-evaluate the recommendations of this Report. Findings of the Report are valid as of this date; however, changes in conditions of a property can occur with passage of time whether they be due to natural process or works of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in applicable or appropriate standards occur whether they result from legislation or broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, findings of this Report may be invalidated wholly or partially by changes outside our control. Therefore, this Report is subject to review and should not be relied upon after a period of one year. In the event that any changes in the nature, design or locations of buildings are planned, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this Report shall not be considered valid unless the changes are reviewed and conclusions of this Report modified or verified in writing. -9- 1611-A SO. MELROSE DRIVE #285, VISTA, CA 92083-5497 • 760-945-3150 • FAX: 760-945-4221 I· 1 I, I I I· 1 I I I I 1 1 I 1 I 1 "& " Ellflill~aclillfl, JIIC. f-...... ~r+:~ CIVIL, GEOTECHNICAL, & QUALITY ENGINEERING FOUNDATION DESIGN· tAND 'SURVEYING "SQIL TESTING CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT & INSPECTION This Report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner, or of his representative, to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are called to the attention of the Architect and Engineer for the project and incorporated into the plans and that the,neces~ary steps are taken to see that the contractor and subcontractors . carry out such recommendations in the field. The Soil Engineer has prepared this Report for the exclusive use of the client and authorized agents. This Re~or~has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted s6±1 and foundation" engineering practices. No other warranties either.expressed or implied are made as to the professional advice provided under the terms of this agreement, and included in the Report. It is recommended that the Soil Engineer be pro~ided the opportunity for a general review of the finai design and specifications in order that earthwork and foundation recommendations may be properly interpreted and implemented in the design and specifications. (If the Soil Engineer is not accorded the privilege of making this recommended review, he can aSsume no responsibility for misinterpretation of his recommendations). B & B Engineering, Inc. appreciate this opportunity to be of service. Should you have any questions regarding this project, please do not hesitate to contact our office. Sincerely, ~B~RQERGE -10- 1611-A SO. MELROSE DRIVE #285, VISTA, CA 92083-5497 • 760-945-3150 • ,FAX: 760-945-4221 I . ! I I I I I I I I I I I I ,I I I I I I I ~ TP-l . ~ APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF FIELD EXPLORATORY TEST PIT P LOT OWNER: M rt..-, J fi.yr-,tl-U---I-/l AN LOCATION: PIO PICO OfZ...We" c~ 12, C"q.., A.P.N.: 156-350-0 6 PROJECT: 74'--5"98,4 DATE: ~/9B P LAN ~4-ffi-~ 11 .. (lllll,gil,ccril'!I, illt)" CIVIL, GeOTeCHNICAL, & QUALITY eNGINeeRS • STRUCTURAL eNGINeeRING' LAND SURVeYING • PeRCOLA TION & SOIL TeSTING • CONSTRUCTION MANAGeMeNT & INSPeCTION ENCLOSURE (1) I I I I I I I I I. I I I I· I I I I I I I--+-fl'\-~ IJt~lll!Jil!ljllccrjll!I' jilt". LOG CIVIL, GEOTECHNICAL, & QUALITY ENGINEEF.lS • STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING· LAND SURVEYING • PERCOLA TlON & SOIL TESTING • CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT & INSPECTION OF T·E S T P·I T S TAlLV\AN ··J{)IJ e:. 1998 • 5/zZ/9B Backhoe: JD 310 ~ EXCAVATED, PIT DIMENSIONS IN FEE T II I W 3" L 30 D 7,t; I TP-I SURFACE ELEVATION IN FEET DATUM. Mean Se.a Level GEOLOGICAL ~ ... ::ct:; ..J ~ ENGINEERING TEST DATA -w 0 iii ~w .... w III ..I CLASSIFICATION 8i"" Go CLASSIFICATION AND o . >"" :E 2 DESCRIPTION wz o~ >-c DESCR I PT ION M lRCf" 0 ..J_ U) ~ w TbPsol~ .~ FILL LIG\..~I BrZOWN 5tLT1 SAI'J D(S1'12 50mfi I) e: f3 r2.1 J,-L200 IT/_eo A.iJuS 3 O(UI 1 i...-Oo?e. . _____ Te (2.12A Ce 5 RuSI-Bl'<oWN 5AN~S\I.)(~_~.~ DE.f'OSITS '\ Df.)fV1 P_,-_LpoSe To D/z..NSe [\.. .. -7.5" _.IAN:Jl,uS f6.{4.~(L._~ J /,. T'1 .. _~ ~Nf)j \ S 'fj!:!..QS._ ~.l.~r..(?~).j2.~.m.e+~{ crJ!j 10 I-1\ DE~JSI3' C.£VV1£I\JTtZO @ 1" -_ ... -)._--.-.-------.. -.. -----_ .... -._ .. _- _~1TO"1\ or-T~>.r_ err e. 7. s ' J5 PIT DIMENSIONS IN FEET W L D SURFACE "ELEVATION IN FEET 15 I I I a.IOO: rA L..L MDIJ I Test Test Test No. Date Location I / 5/93 I 2' 1/ TP-l TP-I r.;~ IJ,ftIJ hilgillcCrill!l,illl:. Yl~ CIVIL, GEOTECHNICAL, & QUALITY ENGINEERS WitY . STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING. LAND SURVEYING ,,:'" ~ • PERCOLA TlON & SOIL TESTING --• CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT & INSPECTION FmECT: TAL 593 mlE: Test Sol1 Dry Density. pef Moisture .S El/Depth Type Field Maximum. Field Opt. 3' A, /1.?,3 133,7 ~, / B,B 5' A /22,3 1??,7 II,&, 8.8 0u,v1:: 1996 Relative R,t,st C~mpact10n No. 94- 9/ ! .. ., I~~~~~~~~~~ .. I~~~~~~~~--~l I~~--~~~~~~~~ I~~~~~~~~--~ .. I~~~~~~~~--~ I~' ~ __ ~~~~~~~~ IL-____________________ ~ __ ~C=O=MP==A=C=T=I=O=N==C=UR=VE===D=A=T=A~~--~-·--~r----------.~~ I OPT~MUM MAXIMUM DRY SOIL TYPE AND DESCRIPTION MOISTURE % DENSITY (pef): ~-----------------+~-+~~~ 1,4 rAN -/2..Ll~r-l3tJ..owIU 5)1..-7'1 S?/IVO I I r-XPIJ.IJ:510N INO£5L - EXPANSION POTENTIAL ~ 8 070tlbt4TC) . __ .J: e $1 F-@l!L .... r(J-) e 3~5 I !3,$; 135,7 1 -20 = Very Low 21 -50 = l;.ow S1 -90 = MOderate 91 -130 = High . I 131 -above=Critical ~----------------------------------------------------------------------~ .. ~.~ I~ ________________ ~_E_X_PA_N_S_I_O_N __ AND ___ C_O_M_P_A_C_T_I_O_N_TE __ S_T __ D_A_T_A ____ ~E~N~C~L~O~SU~R~E~(~3~)~~' I~------~--------~----------~~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 2000 Li: C/). 1600. a. -:t: ... (!) Z LIJ a: 1200 ... C/) (!) Z a: <t 800 LIJ :t: C/) 400 o o 400 800 1200 ;1600 NORMAL LOAD (PSF) SOIL TYPE .-:g BORING NO. DEPTH· MOISTURE II) 0 -0 E c CD (aN) =' ~ X rp~3 CIVIL, GEOTECHNICAL, & QUALITY ENGINEERS • STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING. LAND SURVEYING • PERCOLATION & SOIL TESTING • CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT & INSPECTION (ft) (%) , ~ 19',0 Z-s I SHEARING STRENGTH iE ST 2000 COHESION ANGLE OF (PSF) FRICTION to) ·5"40 .-._-?/~. .. . . , .~ ~ . . TAL· 5.98 RECEIVED JUN 09 2000 ENGINeERING O€PAR.rME:NI I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I . ' ee I---Hf\-~ ",~" 1111fJ;IIL-Cr;IIfJ, iIJC • CIVIL. GEOTECHNICAL. & QUALITY ENGINEERING FOUNDATION DESIGN' LAND SURVEYING' SOIL TESTING CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT & INSPECTION This Report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner, or of his representative, to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are called to the attention of the Architect and Engineer for the project and incorporated into the plans and that the necessary steps are taken to see that the contr'actor and s,l,.Jbcontr(:1ctors carry out such recommendations in the field. The Soil Engineer has prepared this Report for the exc1~aive use of the client, and authorized agents. This Report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted soil and foundation engineering practices. No other warranties either expressed or implied are made as to the professional advice provide~ under the terms of this agreement, and included in the Report.' It is recommended that the Soil Engineer be provided the opportunity for a general review of the final design and specifications in order that earthwork and foundation recommendations may be properly interpreted and implemented in the design and specifications. (If the Soil Ehgineer is not accorded the privilege of making this recommended review, h~can assume no respons;bilitj for misinterpretation of his recommendations). B & B Engineering, Inc. appreciate this opportunity to be of service. Should you have any questions regarding this project, please do not hesitate to contact our office. Sincerely, h~~~ Arthur C. Beard RCE RQE RGE -10- 1611-A So. MELROSE DRIVE #285, VISTA, CA 92083 • 760-945-3150 • FAX: 760-945-4221 GO? qt/-If) PIC PiC G ;::.< / ;, :1 I I I .g d') ,( I I r ri!1 1" ! A /~ / I / I 7/ ~~-._:t.l.Ltt-i __ VI /~~ i: , -) P-I ~ APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF FI~LD EXPLORATORY TEST PIT P LOT OWNER: Je.;:-r 1,Ci UI"'iI]IJ LOCATION: FlO p/c-o ClZ/VE.. CAd.L5 cJ), A.P.N.: /56-35"0-03 PROJECT: -rAt-593 DATE: S -~'::"'='--1 P LAN f--+-fPr~.II .. ~III!JIJ!JiIJeeril/!J, iI/C. CIVIL, GEOTJiCHNICAL. & QUALITY ENGINEERS , SMUCTURAL ENGINEERING. LAND SURVEYING • PERCOLA TlON & SOIL TESTING • CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT & INSPECTION e e 1---i-1'f\-~ 11 .. ,IIIJllgiIICerillg, illl,~" CIVIL, GEOTECHNICAL, & QUALITY ENGINEERS • STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING '-LAND-SURVEYING • PERCOLA TlON & SOIL TESTING • CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT & INSPECTION T/-lC, 598 LOG o F TEST PITS EXCAVATED: 5" /~-r /9 B Backhoe ,J/ D; '9-/0 /3. . i t W g~11 I D 5 _TP-l PIT DIMENSIONS IN FE E T L. /8 SURFACE ELEVATION IN FEET DATUM Mean Sea l,..eve I GEOLOGICAL ~ ... ::tt .J " ENG I-NEE R I N G TEST DATA -w 0 w "'w t w al ..J CLASSIFICATION ~u. :e A. CLASSIFICATION AND [} wu. s DESCRIPTION Wz o!: >-c DESCRIPTION M -'RC) 0 .J_ en " w /OPSo/~ !,./GJ.-i, 8!20YJN 5ILT1 5.4#0/51>1/' Ie !2.-/Z.AC£ I"~ Oil-VI t,OD 51! I ~Clm e /2O::rrs _-- vr5P05IT~ ~ \ ,!2vsr b,wtWJ SA//(J'! Jltr(S/'O 5 1.)4(,-'?j? I tClcJ5E 70 O£IJJE \ ;r4;U,..;a(/5T-~/ZI£.'i :51t:-7'1 SANti; \ $A/J{J'! 5IU(,0) Ot4ff!iPl vert-! OEluS t I CEtv?8;J;r£O @ 4 '. 10 r-'-801'/011 or-7,£.;,/ Pile s-I ;..It) 1;{/411£12; ;JtJ CAI//NC; -, t5 PIT DIMENSIONS IN FEET W L. D SURFACE ELEVATION IN FEET 15 __ I ~ I _ •• , _ /,.-..""\ . . ~ CIVIL, GEOTECHNICAL, &. OUALITY ENGINEERS • STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING' LAND SURVEYING • PERCOLA TlON &. SOIL TESTING , CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT & INSPECTION 0.100: 0i.L/v"J,L/;J F'fnICT: /4~ 598 j)\JE~ Jv/:/£ 1998 Test Test Test Test So11 Dry Dens1ty.pct Ho~~-,_! Relative Rete.st Ho. Date Location El/Depth Type Field Kaximum. Field Opt. Compaction 'Ho. I i;f8 TP-/ c' A //8,9 /33. 1_ /0,7 g.8 88.9 2 II Tjl,.2 4' A /25,3 /33,7 ~) 8,8 97,3 . COMPACTION CURVE DATA , SOIL TYPE AND DESCRIPTION OPTIMUM MAXIMUM DRY MOISTURE % DENSITY (pef) A 1/11). /2V5T-C)1.t.6'1 ..5Jt,TLj 5,4NO /5ANtJ'I 511-i 8,8 13317 EXPANSION POTENTIAL Ey,c;dIJ 510lj /1..//./£'/ -:::: G B (~oocl.!../-rr£.·) 1 -20 Very Low = 21 -50 = Low • I ;£5>/ ~/U!1'1 rf? r / ,.1-'1 ;:? .... 3 1/£ ?r/..} 51 -90 = Moderat~ -91 -130 High = 131 -above=Critica1 EXPANSION AND COMPACTION TEST DATA ENCLOSURE ( 3) t/ I J 2000 I I -IJ... (f) 1600' a. -.. -I ::I: l- e.!) z IJ.J ~ I a:: 1200 I-en I ~ ~. I I I I [ f (!) z a:: c:4 800 IJ.J ::I: (f) ~ -- ~ ~ 400 o o 400 800 1200 1600- NORMAL LOAD (PSF') . :g SOIL TYPE -BORING NO. DEPTH MOISTURE If) 0 5£I/./Or; 1---+.fPr-~~ " E c Q;) (BN) ::I ... .:5/C,;/ X ij?-/ IJ .. ~/J IfLllgillcCrill!/, illL~. CIVIL, GEOTECHNICAL, '" QUALITY ENGINEERS • STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING' LAND SURVEYING • PERCOLA TlON '" SOIL TESTING • CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT'" INSPECTION ( f t) . (%) 2) 0,) vI SHEAR1NG STRENGTH TE ST , .. . . 2000 COHESION ANGLE OF (PSF) FRICTION (0) 0CO /b 0 ..