HomeMy WebLinkAboutPE 2.85.31; POINSETTIA VILLAGE; IN PLACE DENSITY TEST; 1985-12-19I-'
CIO
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING, INC.
6200 RIVERDALE ST. SAN DIEGO, CALIF. 92120 • TELE 280-4321 • P.O. BOX 20627 SAN DIEGO, CALIF. 92120
74-831 V E L I E WAY PALM DESERT. CALIF.. 92260 • T E L E 346-1078
678 ENTERPRISE ST. ESCONDIDO, CALIF. 92025 • T E L E 746-4544
December 19, 1985
B.A. Worthing
Post Office Box 1041 SCS&T 8521118
Carlsbad, California 92008 Report.No. 2
Attention: Henry Tubbs
SUBJECT: Report of In-Place Density Tests, Lots 3, 6, 7and 8, Map 10870,
Bruce Road & Park Drive, Carlsbad, California.
Reference: Report of Geotechnical Investigation, Lot 3 and 6
- 8, Map
10870, Bruce Road and Park Drive, Carlsbad, California, by
Southern California Soil & Testing, Inc., dated June 6, 1985.
Gentlemen:
In accordance with your request, this report has been prepared to present the
results of the in-place density tests performed on the prepared natural ground,
recompacted embankment, and retaining wall backfill at the subject site by
Southern California Soil & Testing, Inc. These tests, were performed between
November 1 and December 18, 1985.
AVAILABLE PLANS .
To assist in determining the locations and elevations of our field density
tests and to define the general extent of the site grading for this phase of
work, we were provided with a grading plan prepared by Toal Engineering, Inc.,
dated October 25, 1985.
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND. TESTING. INC.
. . SCS&T 8521118 December 19, 1985 Page 2
SITE PREPARATION
Prior to the placing of embankment, the existing loose artificial fills and
native soils were removed down to firm natural ground and stockpiled onsite
for future use. These removals were performed in all areas to receive fills
or structural loads, with the exception of fills which lie beneath existing
roadway pavements. The native medium dense to dense sandy subsoils exposed
at the bottom of the removal areas were then scarified to a depth of approx-
imately 12 inches, watered to slightly above optimum moisture content, and
recompacted. Fill soils, taken from the stockpiles and onsite cuts, were
then placed in six to eight inch lifts, watered to at least optimum moisture
content, and compacted by means of a sheepsfoot roller and heavy construction
equipment.
FIELD TESTING
Field density tests were performed bya representative of Southern California
Soil & Testing, Inc. as the grading work was in progress. The density tests
were taken according to A.S.T.M. Test 1556-74 and the location and results of
those tests are shown on the attached plates. The locations and elevations
of the in-situ tests were determined in accordance with their importance and
the accuracy and proximity of the survey control provided by other than
Southern California Soil & Testing, Inc. representatives. Unless otherwise
noted, their locations and elevations were determined by pacing and hand level
methods and should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the
method used.
LABORATORY TESTS
Maximum dry density determinations were performed on representative samples of
the soils used in the compacted fills according to A.S.T.M. Test 1557-78,
Method A. This method specifies that a four (4) inch diameter cylindrical
mold of 1/30 cubic foot volume be used and that the soil tested be placed in
five (5) equal layers with each layer compacted by twenty-five (25) blows of a
10 pound hammer with a 18 inch drop. The results of these tests, as presented
on attached plates, were used in conjunction with the field density tests to
determine the percent of relative compaction of the compacted fill.
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTIN
G
.
I
N
C
.
40 SCS&T 8521118 December 19, 1985 Page 3,
CONCLUSIONS
Based upon our field observations and the in-place density
t
e
s
t
r
e
s
u
l
t
s
,
i
t
is our opinion that the grading work was performed substanti
a
l
l
y
i
n
a
c
c
o
r
d
-
ance with the recommendations contained in the referen
c
e
d
R
e
p
o
r
t
o
f
G
e
o
t
e
c
h
-
riical Investigation.
This report covers only the work performed between Oct
o
b
e
r
3
1
a
n
d
D
e
c
e
m
b
e
r
:18, 1985. Additional testing will be required for retain
i
n
g
w
a
l
l
'
b
a
c
k
f
i
l
l
s
and utility trench backfill located under areas to be pav
e
d
o
r
w
i
t
h
i
n
f
i
v
e
feet of the proposed structures.
As limited •by the scope of the services which we agreed to perfor
m
,
o
u
r
opinions presented herein are based on our observations and
t
h
e
r
e
l
a
t
i
v
e
compaction test results. Our work was performed in accord
a
n
c
e
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
currently accepted standards of practice and in such a man
n
e
r
a
s
t
o
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
a reasonable measure of the compliance of the mass grading o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
w
i
t
h
the job requirements. No warranty, express or implied
i
s
g
i
v
e
n
o
r
i
n
t
e
n
d
e
d
with respect to the services which we have performed, and
n
e
i
t
h
e
r
t
h
e
p
e
r
-
formance of those services nor the submittal of this report
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
c
o
n
-
strued as relieving the grading contractor of his primary
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
t
o
conform with the job requirements.
If you should have any questions after reviewing this rep
o
r
t
,
p
l
e
a
s
e
d
o
n
o
t
hesitate to contact our office. This opportunity to b
e
o
f
p
r
o
f
e
s
s
i
o
n
a
l
service is sincerely appreciated.
Respectfully submitted,
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL & TESTING, INC.
Charles H. Christian, R.C.E. #22330
CHC/DH/rr
cc: (5) Submitted
(1) SCS&T, Escondido
SOUTHEPN CALIFORNIA SOIL
A
N
D
T
E
S
T
I
N
G
.
I
N
C
.
FIGURE NO. 2 •DATE 12-19-85
ELEV. OR
TEST DEPTH OF MOIST.
NO. DATE LOCATION TESIFT oj
8521118
JOB NO.
DRY DEN, 11 0/0
LBS. / SOIL RELATIV
(U PT TV DC ('CAP
1 11-1-85 Lot 8 26.5 12.4 120.2 1 93.1
2 11-1-85 Lot 8 28.0 13.0 118.6 11 91.9
3 11-5-85 Lot 8, Retaining Wall 28.5 8.7 114.0 1 88.3
4 11-5-85 Lot 8, Retaining Wall 27.0 8.7 112.7 1 87.3
5 11-6-85 Lot 8 29.5 8.1 128.8 - 1 99.8
6 11-6-85 Lot 8 30.5 14.9 119.9 1 92.9
7 11-6-85 Lot 8 31.5 14.0 114.5 2 96.5
8 11-6-85 Retest of #3 28.5 14.3 118.0 1. 91.4
9 11-6-85 Retest of #4 27..0 14.0 119.1 1 92.2
10 11-6-85 Lot 3 89.0 15.6 114.0 2 96.1
11 11-8-85 Lot 8 33.0 13.6 112.8 2 95.1
12 11-8-85 Lot 8 33.5 13.0 112.6 2 94.9
13 11-14-85 Lot 8 34.0 15.6 117.0 2 98.7
14 11-14-85 Lot 8 35.0 14.9 116.7 2 98.4
15 11-14-85 Lot 8 34.5 11.1 114.5 2 96.6
16 11-14-85 Lot 8 33.0 13.0 113.1 - 2 95.4
17 11-14-85 Lot 6 42.0 11.1. 117.8 1 91.2
18 11-21-85 Lot 7, Retaining Wall 36.0 13.6 117.2 1 90.8
19 .11-21-85 Lot 7, Slope 38.0 .12.0 116.8 1 90.5
20 11-21-85 Lot 7 42.0 11.1 116.2 2 98.0
21 11-22-85 Lot 6 44.0 11.1 117.1 2 98.7
22 11-22-85 Lot 8 38.4FG 12.4 122.5 1 94.9
23 11-22-85 Lot 7 44;3 FG 11.1 118.0 1, 91.4
24 12-4-85 Lot 6, Slope 46.0 14.9 104.9 1 81.3
25 12-6-85 Retest of #24 46.0 13.6 113.9 1 88.2
FIGURE NO. 2
ST
D. bTE LOCATION
DATE 12-19-85
ELEV. OR
DEPTH OF MOIST.
TEST,FT 0/0
JOB NO. 8521118 Page 2
DRY DENS •I0 LBS. / SOIL RELATIV
Cl! P T TV DC ((MP
6 12-6-85 Lot 8, Slope. . . . 34.0 13.6 111.9 1 86.7
7 12-9-85 Retest of #25 46.0 15.6 116.2 1 90.0
8 12-9-85 Retest of #26 3.4.0 . 14.3 120.7 1 935
9 12-9-85 Lot 8 31.0 13.6 119.2 1 92.3
0 12-18-85 Lot 8 34.0 14.3 120.1 1 93.0
1 12-18-85 Lot 8 36.0 FG 16.3 116.2 1 90.0
2 12-18-85 Lot 8, Slope 33.0 14.9 116.9 1 90.5
3 12-18-85 Lot 3, Retaining Wall 82.5 8.7 109.5 2 92.3 Backfill
4 12-18-85 Lot 3, Retaining Wall 85.0 9.3.
. 112.0 2 94.4 Backfill
5 12-18-85 Lot 3, Retaining Wall 47.5 9.9 112.5 2 94.9 Backfill
6 12-18-85 Lot 3, Retaining Wall 49.0 8.7 110.5 2 93.2 Backfill
7 12-18-85 Lot 3, Retaining Wall 57.5 9.3 113.7 2 95.9 Backfill
SOIL TYPE OPTIMUM MO STURE MAXIMUM DR'i DENSITY
(PERCENT . (LBS./CU.FT.)
1 9.5 129.1 . .
Red Brown, Fine to Med ium, Silty S nd
2 13.0 118.6
Beige, Fine to Coarse, Silty Sand