GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING PAVEMENT SECTION THICKNESS DESIGN
RECOMMENDATIONS
For The
Third Street Extension portion of the Montezuma-Cortez High School Project
Prepared For: Mr. Alex Carter, Superintendent
Montezuma County School District RE-1, and, Mr. Jim Ketter, PE, KPMC
Project Number: 53088GE July 15, 2013
PN: 53088GE
July 15, 2013
1
1.0 REPORT INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................ 2
1.1 Scope of Project ................................................................................................................... 3
2.0 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY .................................................................... 3
2.1 Geotechnical Engineering Study Scope of Service .............................................................. 3
3.0 FIELD STUDY....................................................................................................................... 5
3.1 Project location.................................................................................................................... 5
3.2 Site Description and Geomorphology.................................................................................. 5
3.3 Subsurface Soil and Water Conditions ................................................................................ 5
4.0 LABORATORY STUDY ...................................................................................................... 7
5.0 ASPHALT PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................... 8
6.0 CONSTRUCTION MONITORING AND TESTING ...................................................... 11
7.0 CONCLUSIONS AND CONSIDERATIONS ................................................................... 11
FIELD TEST RESULTS………………………………………………………….…Appendix A
Logs of Test Borings
LABORATORY TEST RESULTS………………………………………………….Appendix B
Sieve Analysis and Atterberg Test Limits Results
Dry Density/Moisture Content (Proctor) Results
California Bearing Ration Test Results
PN: 53088GE
July 15, 2013
2
1.0 REPORT INTRODUCTION
This report presents our geotechnical engineering recommendations for the proposed
3rd Street Pavement Study Phase 2, Design Level Geotechnical Engineering Study for
the proposed Montezuma-Cortez High School in Cortez, Colorado. This report was requested by
Mr. Jim Ketter, PE, KPMC, Owners Representative, Project Manager. The field study was
completed on July 2, 2013. The laboratory study was completed on July 15, 2013.
The information provided in this report is used to help develop a design and subsequently
implement construction strategies that are appropriate for the subsurface soil and water
conditions encountered. It is important that the geotechnical engineer be consulted throughout
the design and construction process to verify the implementation of the geotechnical engineering
recommendations provided in this report. Generally the recommendations and technical aspects
of this report are intended for design and construction personnel who are familiar construction
concepts and techniques, and understand the terminology presented below. We should be
contacted if any questions or comments arise as a result of the information presented below.
The following outline provides a synopsis of the various portions of this report;
� Sections 1.0 and 2.0 provide an introduction and an establishment of our scope of
service.
� Sections 3.0 and 4.0 of this report present our geotechnical engineering field and
laboratory studies
� Sections 5.0 presents our geotechnical engineering design data and subsequent
recommendations which are based on our engineering analysis of the data obtained for
the project.
� Section 6.0 provides a brief discussion of construction sequencing and strategies which
may influence the geotechnical engineering characteristics of the site.
The discussion and construction recommendations presented in Section 6.0 are intended to
help develop site soil conditions that are consistent with the geotechnical engineering
recommendations presented previously in the report. The construction considerations section is
not intended to address all of the construction planning and needs for the project site, but is
intended to provide an overview to aid the owner, design team, and contractor in understanding
some construction concepts that may influence some of the geotechnical engineering aspects of
the site and proposed development.
The data used to generate our recommendations are presented throughout this report and in the
attached figures.
PN: 53088GE
July 15, 2013
3
1.1 Scope of Project
We understand that the proposed project will consist of designing and constructing and
extension of 3rd Street adjacent to the north of the proposed Montezuma-Cortez High School site.
We understand the portion of 3rd Street that will be constructed is located east of South Sligo
Street and will end at the east side of the proposed school development. We understand the
current grade within this section of the 3rd Street right-of-way is currently at the approximate
proposed top of subgrade elevation for the street construction. The new roadway extension will
consist of asphalt pavement supported by aggregate base course material.
2.0 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
This section of this report presents the results of our field and laboratory study and our
geotechnical engineering recommendations based on the data obtained.
Our services include a geotechnical engineering study of the subsurface soil and water
conditions of the project sites for the proposed roadway project.
2.1 Geotechnical Engineering Study Scope of Service
The scope of our study which was delineated in our proposal for services, and the order of
presentation of the information within this report, is outlined below.
Field Study
• We advanced five (5) test borings at select locations on the proposed alignment for the
extension of 3rd Street within the City of Cortez Limits.
• Select driven sleeve and bulk soil samples were obtained from the test borings and
returned to our laboratory for testing.
PN: 53088GE
July 15, 2013
4
Laboratory Study
• The laboratory testing and analysis of the samples obtained for the project portion of the
roadway included;
� Moisture content of select samples obtained from the field study,
� One (1) Atterberg Limits test, and one (1) sieve analysis test for classification of
he sample tested,
� One (1) moisture content/dry density (Modified Proctor ASTM D1157) test on a
bulk sample of the subgrade soil materials, and,
� One (1) California Bearing Ratio (CBR) test performed on the subgrade soil
materials.
Geotechnical Engineering Recommendations
• This report addresses the geotechnical engineering aspects of the site and provides
recommendations including;
Geotechnical Engineering Section(s)
� Subsurface soil and water conditions that may influence the project design
and construction considerations
� Geotechnical engineering design data and recommendations that may be
used for the roadway design project.
Construction Consideration Section
� Compaction recommendations for the subgrade soils, aggregate base
course materials, and asphalt pavement materials proposed at the site.
• This report provides design parameters, but does not provide civil engineering design.
The project civil engineer may be contacted to provide a design based on the
information presented in this report.
• Our subsurface exploration, laboratory study and engineering analysis do not address
environmental or geologic hazard issues
PN: 53088GE
July 15, 2013
5
3.0 FIELD STUDY
3.1 Project location
The portion of the proposed road extension project that this report addresses, initiates at the east
side of South Sligo Street and ends at the east side of the proposed school development. The
project site is located in the City of Cortez Limits.
3.2 Site Description and Geomorphology
The proposed road extension will traverse a previously excavated and graded roadway
alignment, which we suspect was completed during the construction of Walmart, located
adjacent and to the north of the 3rd Street project. We observed aggregate road base material on
the ground surface along the 3rd Street road alignment from South Sligo Street east
approximately two hundred and fifty (250) feet. We understand the existing elevation is near
proposed subgrade elevation.
The subsurface soil and rock materials encountered in the vicinity of the project consist of a
variable depth, but generally shallow, sandy clay soil mantle overlying the Dakota Sandstone
Formation. The sandy clay soil materials encountered in the vicinity of the project typically
provide low to moderate strength characteristics for support of flexible asphalt pavement. The
formational material consists of inter-bedded layers of sandstone, shale, and claystone materials.
The sandstone materials encountered are often very hard and may require blasting or other
aggressive techniques for excavation.
3.3 Subsurface Soil and Water Conditions
We advanced five (5) shallow test borings in select areas of the proposed road alignment within
the City of Cortez Limits. The approximate location of the test borings are shown on the figure
below obtained from The City of Cortez. The subsurface conditions encountered in our test
borings are tabulated below.
PN: 53088GE
July 15, 2013
6
The approximate test boring location shown above were prepared using Google Earth and notes
taken during the field work and is intended to show the approximate test boring locations for
reference purposes only.
In Test Boring One, we encountered ten (10) inches of a three-quarter inch minus aggregate
base course material, over a sandy clay soil material. In Test Borings Two through Five, we
encountered slightly moist and medium stiff sandy clay soil material to depths ranging from
about one (1) to one and two (2) feet where we encountered the weathered Dakota Sandstone.
The formational sandstone material encountered was medium hard to hard. The test borings
were advanced to a depth of four (4) feet below the ground surface elevation adjacent to our test
borings.
3RD
TB-1 3RD
TB-2 3RD
TB-3 3RD
TB-4 3RD
TB-5
PN: 53088GE
July 15, 2013
7
The logs of the subsurface soil conditions encountered in our test borings are presented in
Appendix A. The logs present our interpretation of the subsurface conditions encountered
exposed in the test borings at the time of our field work. Subsurface soil and water conditions
are often variable across relatively short distances. It is likely that variable subsurface soil and
water conditions will be encountered during construction. Laboratory soil classifications of
samples obtained may differ from field classifications.
4.0 LABORATORY STUDY
The laboratory study included tests to estimate the strength, swell and consolidation potential of
the soils tested. We performed the following tests on select samples obtained from the test
borings.
Atterberg Limits and Sieve Analysis; the plastic limit, liquid limit and plasticity index of some
of the soil samples was determined in accordance with ASTM D4318. In conjunction with the
Atterberg Limits tests, sieve analysis tests were performed in accordance with ASTM D422 and
D1140. The results of the sieve analysis and Atterberg Limits testing performed are provided in
Appendix B.
Moisture content-dry density relationship (Proctor) tests; We performed laboratory moisture
content-dry density tests to assess the relationship between the soil moisture content and dry
density. The Proctor tests were performed in accordance with ASTM D1557. We obtained a
maximum dry density ranging of 129.0 pounds per cubic foot at an optimum moisture content of
9.0 percent for the subgrade soil materials encountered in our test borings. The results of the
laboratory Proctor tests are presented in Appendix B.
California Bearing Ratio (CBR) Tests; We assessed the pavement section support
characteristics of select composite soil samples of the subgrade materials in general accordance
with ASTM D1883. We obtained a CBR value of about 6.5 assuming the subgrade soil materials
are compacted to at least ninety (90) percent of the maximum dry density as defined by the
Modified Proctor (ASTM D1557). The results of the CBR tests are presented in Appendix B.
PN: 53088GE
July 15, 2013
8
5.0 ASPHALT PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
We performed a California Bearing Ratio (CBR) test on a composite sample of soil obtained
from the project site. Based on the results of the CBR test we used an R-Value of 15 in our
analysis for the pavement section thickness design.
The existing aggregate base course material encountered in Test Boring One and observed along
the western 250 feet of the road alignment may be used to establish roadway subgrade elevations.
We do not believe that it will be feasible to adequately excavate remove and stockpile this
materials without significant contamination of the material with fine grained clay material.
However, if it is desirable to utilize the existing aggregate materials within the pavement sections
provided below, the material should be removed and stockpiled prior to reuse. We should be
contacted to observe and perform additional tests on the stockpiled material to provide additional
pavement section thickness recommendations. This material is suitable for incorporation into the
subgrade soils, and may be particularly useful for stabilizing any subgrade soil areas where soft
or yielding conditions are encountered.
We recommend that the subgrade soils be proof-rolled prior to the scarification and processing
operations. Any soft areas observed during the proof-rolling operations should be removed and
replaced with properly processed materials and/or granular aggregate materials as part of the
subgrade preparation.
The site subgrade pavement section support soils must be scarified to a depth of twelve (12)
inches, moisture conditioned and compacted prior to placement of the overlying aggregate
pavement section materials. The material should be moisture conditioned to within about two (2)
percent of the optimum moisture content and compacted to at least ninety (90) percent of
maximum dry density as determined by the modified Proctor test, ASTM D1557. In areas where
hard formational material is encountered, the scarification process is not necessary.
The surface of the subgrade soil should be graded and contoured to be approximately parallel to
the finished grade of the asphalt surface.
The aggregate materials used within the pavement section should conform to the requirements
outlined in the current Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction, Colorado Department of
Transportation (CDOT). The aggregate base material should be a three-quarter (3/4) inch minus
material that conforms to the CDOT Class 6 aggregate base course specifications and have an R-
value of at least 78. The aggregate sub-base course should conform to the CDOT specifications
for Class 2 material and should have a minimum R-value 70. Other material may be suitable for
PN: 53088GE
July 15, 2013
9
use in the pavement section, but materials different than those listed above should be tested and
observed by us prior to inclusion in the project design or construction. Aggregate sub-base and
base-course materials should be compacted to at least ninety-five (95) percent of maximum dry
density as defined by the modified Proctor test, ASTM D1557.
We recommend that the asphalt concrete used on this project be mixed in accordance with a
design prepared by a licensed professional engineer, or an asphalt concrete specialist. We should
be contacted to review the mix design prior to placement at the project site. We recommend that
the asphalt concrete be compacted to between ninety-two (92) and ninety-six (96) percent of the
maximum theoretical density.
We have provided several pavement section design thicknesses below. The structural support
characteristics of each section are approximately equal. The project civil engineer, or contractor
can evaluate the best combination of materials for economic considerations.
We have provided pavement section thicknesses for 100,000 to 500,000 - 18,000 pound
equivalent single axle loads (18k ESAL). We are available to provide additional design sections,
if these are desired. We recommend that a relatively detailed attempt be made to project the
potential type and frequency of traffic use for the roadway.
Pavement Section Design Thickness
100,000 18k ESAL
Pavement Section Component Alternative Thicknesses of Each Component
(inches)
Asphalt Concrete 3 3 3.5 3.5 4
Class 6 6 11 4 10 8
Class 2 7 0 8 0 0
Reconditioned Subgrade 12 12 12 12 12
Pavement Section Design Thickness
150,000 18k ESAL
Pavement Section Component Alternative Thicknesses of Each Component
(inches)
Asphalt Concrete 3 3 3.5 3.5 4 4
Class 6 6 13 4 6 4 9
Class 2 9 0 9 6 6 0
Reconditioned Subgrade 12 12 12 12 12 12
PN: 53088GE
July 15, 2013
10
Pavement Section Design Thickness
250,000 18k ESAL
Pavement Section Component Alternative Thicknesses of Each Component
(inches)
Asphalt Concrete 3 3 3 3.5 3.5 4 4 4
Class 6 6 8 15 6 14 4 6 12
Class 2 12 10 0 10 0 11 8 0
Reconditioned Subgrade 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12
Pavement Section Design Thickness
500,000 18k ESAL
Pavement Section Component Alternative Thicknesses of Each Component
(inches)
Asphalt Concrete 4 4 4.5 4.5 4.5 5 5
Class 6 6 8 4 6 8 6 12
Class 2 13 10 13 11 8 8 0
Reconditioned Subgrade 12 12 12 12 12 12 12
The pavement section thicknesses tabulated above are appropriate for the post-construction
traffic use. Heavy construction equipment traffic will have a significant influence on the quality,
character, and design life of the pavement sections tabulated above. If possible we recommend
that a partial section be constructed followed by construction of an overlay after completion of
the construction operations. If portions of the roadway will have repetitive truck traffic, we
recommend the asphalt concrete layer be a minimum of four (4) inches in these areas. We are
available to discuss this with you as the project progresses.
Although structural numbers for twenty (20) year design life calculations were used in our
analysis, our experience in the area indicates that an overlay or other roadway reconditioning
strategy will likely be required in ten (10) to fifteen (15) years after the initial pavement
construction date. This is in part due to the very high rate of freeze-thaw cycles and high
ultraviolet exposure that southwestern Colorado receives.
PN: 53088GE
July 15, 2013
11
6.0 CONSTRUCTION MONITORING AND TESTING
Construction monitoring including engineering observations and materials testing during
construction is a critical aspect of the geotechnical engineering contribution to any project.
Unexpected subsurface conditions are often encountered during construction. If the subsurface
conditions encountered during construction are different than those that were the basis of the
geotechnical engineering report then modifications to the design may be implemented prior to
placement of asphalt pavement materials.
Compaction testing of fill material should be performed throughout the project construction so
that the engineer and contractor may monitor the quality of the fill placement techniques being
used at the site. We are available to monitor compaction of the pulverized roadway section,
provide unconfined compressive strength tests of samples from the pulverized and treated
section, and perform asphalt testing during placement of the asphalt mat. We are available to
develop a testing program for soil, aggregate materials, and asphaltic concrete for this project.
7.0 CONCLUSIONS AND CONSIDERATIONS
The information presented in this report is based on our understanding of the proposed
construction that was provided to us and on the data obtained from our field and laboratory
studies. We recommend that we be contacted during the design and construction phase of this
project to aid in the implementation of our recommendations. Please contact us immediately if
you have any questions, or if any of the information presented above is not appropriate for the
proposed site construction.
The recommendations presented above are intended to be used only for this project site and the
proposed construction which was provided to us. The recommendations presented above are not
suitable for adjacent project sites, or for proposed construction that is different than that outlined
for this study.
Our recommendations are based on limited field and laboratory sampling and testing.
Unexpected subsurface conditions encountered during construction may alter our
recommendations. We should be contacted during construction to observe the exposed
subsurface soil conditions to provide comments and verification of our recommendations.
We are available to review and tailor our recommendations as the project progresses and
additional information which may influence our recommendations becomes available.
PN: 53088GE
July 15, 2013
12
Please contact us if you have any questions, or if we may be of additional service.
Respectfully submitted, TRAUTNER GEOTECHTRAUTNER GEOTECHTRAUTNER GEOTECHTRAUTNER GEOTECH LLC LLC LLC LLC
Thomas R. Harrison II, P.E.
Staff Geotechnical Engineer
PN: 53088GE May 6, 2013
APPENDIX A
Field Study Results
07-1
2-20
13 T
:\Cur
rent
GE
\530
04G
E th
ru 5
3096
GE\
5308
8GE,
MC
HS
Mon
tezu
ma
Cor
tez
Hig
h Sc
hool
\PH
ASE
II Te
st B
orin
g Lo
gs\M
CH
S 3R
D T
B-1
.bor
LOG OF BORING 3RD TB-1
PN:53088GEMr. Jim Ketter, PE, KPMC
Mr. Alex Carter, SuperintendentPhase II, Design Level
Montezuma-Cortez High School
Depthin
feet
0
1
2
3
4
5
DESCRIPTION
Sample TypeMod. California Sampler
Bag Sample
Standard Split Spoon
Water LevelWater Level During Drilling
Water Level After Drilling
MAN-PLACED FILL MATERIAL, GRAVEL, CLAY, medium dense, brown to tan
CLAY, sandy, stiff, dry to slightly moist, brown to tan
Bottom of test boring at four (4) feet
US
CS
GC
CL
GR
AP
HIC
Sam
ples
Blo
w C
ount
Wat
er L
evel
REMARKS
Field Engineer : T. HarrisonHole Diameter : 6" solidDrilling Method : Continuous Flight AugerSampling Method : BulkDate Drilled : 07/02/2013Total Depth (approx.) : 4 feetLocation : See Figure in Report
07-1
2-20
13 T
:\Cur
rent
GE
\530
04G
E th
ru 5
3096
GE\
5308
8GE,
MC
HS
Mon
tezu
ma
Cor
tez
Hig
h Sc
hool
\PH
ASE
II Te
st B
orin
g Lo
gs\M
CH
S 3R
D T
B-2
.bor
Field Engineer : T. HarrisonHole Diameter : 6" solidDrilling Method : Continuous Flight AugerSampling Method : BulkDate Drilled : 07/02/2013Total Depth (approx.) : 4 feetLocation : See Figure in Report
LOG OF BORING 3RD TB-2
PN:53088GEMr. Jim Ketter, PE, KPMC
Mr. Alex Carter, SuperintendentPhase II, Design Level
Montezuma-Cortez High School
Depthin
feet
0
1
2
3
4
5
DESCRIPTION
Sample TypeMod. California Sampler
Bag Sample
Standard Split Spoon
Water LevelWater Level During Drilling
Water Level After Drilling
US
CS
GR
AP
HIC
Sam
ples
Blo
w C
ount
Wat
er L
evel
REMARKS
SAND, clayey, few gravels, medium dense, dry to slightly moist, brown to tan
WEATHERED FORMATIONAL MATERIAL, Dakota Sandstone Formation, medium hard, dry, tan
Bottom of test boring at four (4) feet
SC
07-1
2-20
13 T
:\Cur
rent
GE
\530
04G
E th
ru 5
3096
GE\
5308
8GE,
MC
HS
Mon
tezu
ma
Cor
tez
Hig
h Sc
hool
\PH
ASE
II Te
st B
orin
g Lo
gs\M
CH
S 3R
D T
B-2
.bor
Field Engineer : T. HarrisonHole Diameter : 6" solidDrilling Method : Continuous Flight AugerSampling Method : BulkDate Drilled : 07/02/2013Total Depth (approx.) : 4 feetLocation : See Figure in Report
LOG OF BORING 3RD TB-3
PN:53088GEMr. Jim Ketter, PE, KPMC
Mr. Alex Carter, SuperintendentPhase II, Design Level
Montezuma-Cortez High School
Depthin
feet
0
1
2
3
4
5
DESCRIPTION
Sample TypeMod. California Sampler
Bag Sample
Standard Split Spoon
Water LevelWater Level During Drilling
Water Level After Drilling
US
CS
GR
AP
HIC
Sam
ples
Blo
w C
ount
Wat
er L
evel
REMARKS
SAND, clayey, few gravels, medium dense, dry to slightly moist, brown to tan
WEATHERED FORMATIONAL MATERIAL, Dakota Sandstone Formation, medium hard, dry, tan
Bottom of test boring at four (4) feet
SC
07-1
2-20
13 T
:\Cur
rent
GE
\530
04G
E th
ru 5
3096
GE\
5308
8GE,
MC
HS
Mon
tezu
ma
Cor
tez
Hig
h Sc
hool
\PH
ASE
II Te
st B
orin
g Lo
gs\M
CH
S 3R
D T
B-2
.bor
Field Engineer : T. HarrisonHole Diameter : 6" solidDrilling Method : Continuous Flight AugerSampling Method : BulkDate Drilled : 07/02/2013Total Depth (approx.) : 4 feetLocation : See Figure in Report
LOG OF BORING 3RD TB-4
PN:53088GEMr. Jim Ketter, PE, KPMC
Mr. Alex Carter, SuperintendentPhase II, Design Level
Montezuma-Cortez High School
Depthin
feet
0
1
2
3
4
5
DESCRIPTION
Sample TypeMod. California Sampler
Bag Sample
Standard Split Spoon
Water LevelWater Level During Drilling
Water Level After Drilling
US
CS
GR
AP
HIC
Sam
ples
Blo
w C
ount
Wat
er L
evel
REMARKS
SAND, clayey, few gravels, medium dense, dry to slightly moist, brown to tan
WEATHERED FORMATIONAL MATERIAL, Dakota Sandstone Formation, medium hard, dry, tan
Bottom of test boring at four (4) feet
SC
07-1
2-20
13 T
:\Cur
rent
GE
\530
04G
E th
ru 5
3096
GE\
5308
8GE,
MC
HS
Mon
tezu
ma
Cor
tez
Hig
h Sc
hool
\PH
ASE
II Te
st B
orin
g Lo
gs\M
CH
S 3R
D T
B-2
.bor
Field Engineer : T. HarrisonHole Diameter : 6" solidDrilling Method : Continuous Flight AugerSampling Method : BulkDate Drilled : 07/02/2013Total Depth (approx.) : 4 feetLocation : See Figure in Report
LOG OF BORING 3RD TB-5
PN:53088GEMr. Jim Ketter, PE, KPMC
Mr. Alex Carter, SuperintendentPhase II, Design Level
Montezuma-Cortez High School
Depthin
feet
0
1
2
3
4
5
DESCRIPTION
Sample TypeMod. California Sampler
Bag Sample
Standard Split Spoon
Water LevelWater Level During Drilling
Water Level After Drilling
US
CS
GR
AP
HIC
Sam
ples
Blo
w C
ount
Wat
er L
evel
REMARKS
SAND, clayey, few gravels, medium dense, slightly moist, brown to tan
WEATHERED FORMATIONAL MATERIAL, Dakota Sandstone Formation, medium hard, dry, brown to tan
FORMATIONAL MATERIAL, medium hard, dry, brown to tan
Bottom of test boring at four (4) feet
SC
PN: 53088GE May 6, 2013
APPENDIX B
Laboratory Test Results
Project No. :
Figure:Date:
DR
Y D
EN
SIT
Y (P
CF)
MOISTURE CONTENT (%)
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 3580
85
90
95
100
105
110
115
120
125
130
135
140
145
2.62.72.8
Zero Air Voids forSpecific Gravity
Project:
Sample Source:
Sample Description:
Test Method:
Maximum Dry Density:
Optimum Moisture Content:
Laboratory Number:
MCHS Pahse II-3rd Street Extension
Bulk - Subgrade
ASTM D1557 Method C
129.0 pcf
9.0 %
11295-A
53088GE
Bulk
7/3/13
(no specification provided)
PL= LL= PI=
USCS= AASHTO=
D85= D60= D50=D30= D15= D10=Cu= Cc=
*
SC - Clayey sand#4#10#40
#200
100969040
12 21 9
SC A-4(0)
0.3134 0.1305 0.0980
7-16-13 G. Jadrych
11295-A Bulk 7-3-13
R. Barrett Engineer Tech.
Mr. Jim Ketter Owners Rep.
Cortez High School District RE-1
53088GE
Material Description
Atterberg Limits (ASTM D 4318)
Classification
Coefficients
Date Tested: Tested By:
Remarks
Sample No.: Source of Sample: Date Sampled:Location: Elev./Depth:
Checked By: Title:
Client:
Project:
Project No: Figure
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.* PASS?
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)
PE
RC
EN
T F
INE
R
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.0010.010.1110100
% +3"Coarse
% Gravel
Fine Coarse Medium
% Sand
Fine Silt
% Fines
Clay
0 0 0 4 6 50 40
6 in
.
3 in
.
2 in
.
1½
in.
1 in
.
¾ in
.
½ in
.
3/8
in.
#4
#1
0
#2
0
#3
0
#4
0
#6
0
#1
00
#1
40
#2
00
Particle Size Distribution Report