geotechnical engineering services report …...moisture content (astm d 2216) 3. atterberg limits...

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING SERVICES REPORT

For the proposed

Cedar Trails Senior Housing East of Highway 274 near Early Drive

Tool, Texas

Prepared for

Carlson Consulting Engineers, Inc. 7068 Ledgestone Commons

Bartlett, TN 38133

Prepared by

Professional Service Industries, Inc. 310 Regal Row, Suite 500

Dallas, Texas 75247 Telephone (214) 330-9211

PSI Project No. 03421787.R1

November 26, 2019

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No.

1.0 PROJECT INFORMATION ....................................................................................... 1

1.1 Project Authorization ............................................................................................ 1 1.2 Project Description ............................................................................................... 1 1.3 Purpose and Scope of Services ............................................................................... 1

2.0 SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ..................................................................... 3

2.1 Site Location and Description ................................................................................. 3 2.2 Field Exploration................................................................................................... 3 2.3 Geotechnical Laboratory Testing ............................................................................ 5 2.4 Site Geology………. ................................................................................................ 5 2.5 Subsurface Conditions ........................................................................................... 5 2.6 Groundwater Information ...................................................................................... 5

3.0 EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................ 7

3.1 Soil Shrink-Swell Potential ...................................................................................... 7 3.2 Geotechnical Discussion ........................................................................................ 7 3.3 Site Preparation and Fill Materials .......................................................................... 7 3.4 Shallow Foundations Recommendations.................................................................. 9 3.5 Floor Slab Recommendations ................................................................................11 3.6 Seismic Design ....................................................................................................11

4.0 PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................................................... 12

4.1 Subgrade Soil Preparation .....................................................................................12 4.2 Pavement Section ................................................................................................12

5.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS ...................................................................... 15

5.1 Secondary Design Considerations ..........................................................................15 5.2 Construction Materials Testing ..............................................................................16 5.3 Moisture Sensitive Soils/Weather Related Concerns ................................................16 5.4 Drainage and Groundwater Concerns .....................................................................16 5.5 Excavations………… ...............................................................................................16

6.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS......................................................................................... 18

APPENDIX

Site Vicinity Map (Figure 1) Aerial Plan with Boring Location (Figure 2) Boring Location Plan (Figure 3) Building Identification Plan (Figure 4) Boring Logs Key to Terms and Symbols Used on Logs

Project Number: 03421787.R1 Cedar Trails Senior Housing, Tool, Texas

November 26, 2019 Page 1

www.intertek.com/building

1.0 PROJECT INFORMATION 1.1 Project Authorization

Professional Service Industries, Inc. (PSI) has completed the geotechnical exploration for the proposed Cedar Trails Senior Housing to be located east of Highway 274 near Early Drive in Tool, Texas. Mr. Dean Carlson, PE with Carlson Consulting Engineers, Inc. authorized this geotechnical engineering study on August 23, 2019 through Professional Services Agreement #1. The scope of the study was performed in general accordance with PSI Proposal No. 0342-286668 dated August 13, 2019. 1.2 Project Description

Information for this project was provided by Mr. Joseph Parsley, P.E. with Carlson Consulting Engineers and includes a site location, a grading plan, and a brief description of the project. Based on the information provided, it is understood that the project consists of 13 single-story, wood-framed residential buildings with footprints of about 2,000 square feet with associated sidewalks and paved parking and driveway areas. Based on Google Earth aerial imagery, the site appears to be a vacant tract of land consisting of grass ground cover. Based on the grading plan provided, the site slopes down approximately 6 feet from north to south from EL +378 to +372. Based on the grading plan provided, it is understood that the finished grades within the proposed building areas will be approximately within ±2 feet of existing grades. Structural loading information for the proposed buildings was not provided at the time of this report. Based on experience with similar structures, this report assumes that structural column loads will be on the order of about 150 kips and wall loads will be less than 3 kips per linear foot. Acceptable differential soil movements of the floor slab are assumed to be approximately 1 inch. For the proposed pavement, PSI anticipates that traffic loads will be produced primarily by passenger vehicles, light pickup trucks, occasional delivery semi-trucks, and occasional garbage trucks. Both asphalt and concrete pavements will be considered for this project. The geotechnical recommendations presented in this report are based on the available project information, site location, laboratory testing, and the subsurface materials described in this report. If any of the noted information is incorrect, please inform PSI in writing so that we may amend the recommendations presented in this report if appropriate and if desired by the client. PSI will not be responsible for the implementation of its recommendations when it is not notified of changes in the project. 1.3 Purpose and Scope of Services

The purpose of this study was to explore the subsurface conditions at the site and to provide geotechnical evaluation and recommendations for the proposed construction. The scope of work for this project included drilling 20 borings extending to a depth of approximately 10 to 25 feet below the existing grade. The scope also included performing laboratory testing and preparing this geotechnical report containing geotechnical recommendations. This report briefly outlines the testing procedures, presents available project information, describes the site and subsurface conditions, and presents recommendations regarding the following:

http://www.intertek.com/building




• Site preparation recommendations; • Estimated potential soil movements associated with shrinking and swelling soils; • Foundation types, depths, allowable bearing capacities, and an estimate of potential movements

for the proposed structures; • General pavement section design criteria and pavement subgrade preparation; • Definition of the seismic site class using the International Building Code; • Comments regarding factors that may impact construction and performance of the proposed

construction. The scope of services did not include an environmental assessment for determining the presence or absence of wetlands, or hazardous or toxic materials in the soil, bedrock, surface water, groundwater, or air on or below, or around this site. Any statements in this report or on the boring logs regarding odors, colors, and unusual or suspicious items or conditions are strictly for informational purposes. Our scope did not include performing environmental drilling or testing of soil or groundwater samples. A geologic fault study to evaluate the possibility of surface faulting at this site was beyond the scope of this investigation. Should you desire a detailed fault study, please contact us.





2.0 SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 2.1 Site Location and Description

The project site is located east of Highway 274 near Early Drive in Tool, Texas. Based on visual observations, the site consisted of grass ground cover. The site appeared to generally slope down from north to south approximately 6 feet. The truck-mounted drill rig experienced no difficulty in accessing the boring locations. 2.2 Field Exploration

Subsurface conditions at the site were explored by drilling 20 borings at the approximate locations shown on the Boring Location Plan included in the Appendix. The borings were located in the field by PSI personnel using GPS coordinates obtained from Google Earth and a handheld GPS unit. The boring location information is included in Table 2.1 below.

Table 2.1: Boring Location Information

Boring Number Boring Location Boring Depth

(feet)

GPS Coordinates

Elevation (feet) Latitude Longitude

B-01 Building Area 25 32.41255 -97.01325 373

B-02 Building Area 25 32.41255 -97.01307 374

B-03 Building Area 25 32.41224 -97.01325 375

B-04 Building Area 25 32.41223 -97.01306 376

B-05 Building Area 25 32.41240 -97.01316 376

B-06 Building Area 25 32.41271 -97.01330 377

B-07 Building Area 25 32.41271 -97.01290 379

B-08 Building Area 25 32.41240 -97.01290 379

B-09 Building Area 25 32.41201 -97.01291 378

B-10 Building Area 25 32.41255 -97.01325 377

B-11 Building Area 25 32.41255 -97.01307 376

B-12 Building Area 25 32.41224 -97.01325 375

B-13 Building Area 25 32.41223 -97.01306 374

B-14 Detention Pond 15 32.41240 -97.01316 374





Boring Number Boring Location Boring Depth (feet)

GPS Coordinates

Elevation (feet) Latitude Longitude

B-15 Detention Pond 15 32.41271 -97.01330 374

B-16 Pavement Area 10 32.41271 -97.01290 372

B-17 Pavement Area 10 32.41240 -97.01290 374

B-18 Pavement Area 10 32.41201 -97.01291 374

B-19 Pavement Area 10 32.41255 -97.01325 376

B-20 Pavement Area 10 32.41255 -97.01307 378

Note: GPS coordinates are based on handheld GPS unit. Elevations of the ground surface at the boring locations are based on the grading plan provided. The references to depth of the various materials encountered are from the existing grade at the time of drilling. The borings were drilled and sampled in general accordance with ASTM standards. Drilling equipment utilized for this project included truck-mounted rotary drilling equipment with appropriate support vehicles. The borings were drilled using continuous flight auger drilling techniques. The borings were sampled continuously to the depth of 10 feet and at five-foot intervals thereafter. Soil formations were sampled using a three-inch outer-diameter seamless steel tube sampler (ASTM D 1587) and a two-inch outer-diameter split barrel sampler (ASTM D 1586). A hand penetrometer was used as an aid in evaluating the relative shear strength of the soils encountered during drilling. The hand penetrometer readings are shown on the boring logs at the corresponding sample depths. Groundwater level measurements were recorded at the boring locations during the field operations and were noted on the boring logs. The borings were backfilled with soil cuttings after the drilling operations were completed as per the local regulatory requirements. The subsurface conditions during drilling were monitored, logged and visually classified in the field by a geotechnical technician. Field notes were maintained for soil types and description, water levels, changes in subsurface conditions, and drilling conditions. After completion of field activities, the samples were transported to the laboratory in general accordance with ASTM D 4220. The soil samples were sealed in plastic bags and placed in secured containers prior to being transported to the geotechnical laboratory. Boring logs, which include soil descriptions, water level information, laboratory test data, stratifications, classifications based on the ASTM D 2487 and D2488, and sample types and depths are included in the Appendix. A key to descriptive terms and symbols used on the boring logs is also presented in the Appendix.





2.3 Geotechnical Laboratory Testing

Laboratory testing of soils was performed in general accordance with applicable ASTM procedures. The geotechnical laboratory testing program was established so that the engineering design parameters produced from the tests are appropriate for use in the engineering analyses and in support of the conclusions and recommendations. The geotechnical laboratory program included the following tests:

1. Classification (ASTM D 2487 / 2488) 2. Moisture Content (ASTM D 2216) 3. Atterberg Limits (ASTM D 4318) 4. Percent Soil Particles Finer than No. 200 Sieve (ASTM D1140) 5. Unconfined Compressive Tests on Soil (ASTM D 2166)

The samples not tested in the laboratory will be stored for a period of 60 days subsequent to submittal of this report and will be discarded after this period, unless other arrangements are made prior to the disposal period. 2.4 Site Geology

As shown on the Geologic Atlas of Texas, the site is located in an area where Paleocene Age deposits of the Wills Point Formation (PAw) are present at or near the ground surface. The Wills Point Formation (PAw) in the project area generally consists of calcareous sandy clay overlying limestone. The subsurface conditions encountered in the borings are consistent with the mapped site geology. 2.5 Subsurface Conditions

The subsurface conditions identified at the boring locations are shown on the boring logs included in Appendix of this report. A key to terms and symbols used on the logs is also included in Appendix. Based on the subsurface conditions identified by the exploratory borings, the generalized subsurface profile consists of interbedded brown, reddish brown, and tan Clayey Sand (SC) and Sandy Lean Clay (CL). Sandy Fat Clay (CH) was encountered at boring locations B-07, B-12, and B-15. The above subsurface description is of a generalized nature to highlight the major subsurface stratification features and material characteristics. The boring logs included in the Appendix should be reviewed for specific information at individual boring locations. These records include soil descriptions, stratification, locations of the samples, and laboratory test data. The stratification shown on the boring logs represent the conditions only at the actual boring locations. Variations may occur and should be expected across the site. The stratification represents the approximate boundary between subsurface materials and the actual transition may be gradual. Water level information obtained during field operations is also shown on the boring logs. 2.6 Groundwater Information

The initial water levels were monitored in the open boreholes during drilling and attempts were made to measure final water levels. Details of groundwater conditions are summarized in Table 2.3.





Table 2.3: Summary of Groundwater Conditions

Boring Number Boring Depth Measured Groundwater Levels

During Drilling At Completion

B-01 25 23 feet 20 feet

B-02 25 13 feet 17 feet

B-03 25 18 feet 15 feet

B-04 25 18 feet 23 feet

B-05 25 18 feet 24 feet

B-06 25 18 feet 23 feet

B-07 25 23 feet 21 feet

B-08 25 18 feet 21 feet

B-09 25 18.5 feet 20 feet

B-10 25 18 feet 23 feet

B-11 25 23 feet Not Encountered

B-12 25 23 feet 22 feet

B-13 25 23 feet 22 feet

B-14 15 Not Encountered Not Encountered







Groundwater levels fluctuate seasonally as a function of rainfall, proximity to creeks, rivers and lakes, the infiltration rate of the soil, seasonal and climatic variations and land usage. Water seepage will largely depend on the permeability of the soils. If more detailed water level information is required, observation wells or piezometers could be installed at the site, and water levels could be monitored. The groundwater levels presented in this report are the levels that were measured at the time of our field activities. It is recommended that the contractor determine the actual groundwater levels at the site at the time of the construction activities to determine the impact, if any, on the construction procedures.





3.0 EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 3.1 Soil Shrink-Swell Potential

The results of laboratory plasticity tests indicate that moderate to very high plasticity clay soils are present at this site. The soils tend to swell when soil moisture increases and shrink when the soil moisture decreases. The amount of potential soil movement due to shrinking and swelling with soil moisture variations is represented or indicated by Potential Vertical Rise (PVR). In designing the soil-supported structures, the structural/civil engineer should take movements associated with shrinking-swelling soils into account. PVR estimates are based on an assumed depth known as the “Active Depth” to which the soil moisture variations could occur due to seasonal variations. It is noted that the active depth assumed herein may not represent the moisture variations that can occur to deeper depths due to the presence of large tree root systems that could desiccate the soils, or the presence of other heating units, or possible soil wetting due to pipe leaks, poor drainage, etc. It is very difficult to predict the moisture variations under the structure during its service life. Therefore, the PVR estimates provided herein should be considered approximate probable estimates based on industry standard practice and experience, and the movements predicted herein should not be construed as absolute values that could occur in the field. Using the Texas Department of Transportation (TXDOT) TEX-124-E method, the estimated PVR value is on the order of 1 to 2 inches. Poor drainage and water infiltration into the foundation soils can be detrimental to the ground supported structures. Excessive wetting of soil (due to accumulation of water), or, excessive drying (due to the presence large trees, etc.) could possibly result in greater PVR values than those estimated herein. It is recommended that the moisture-related problems be corrected immediately. It is important to help reduce the possibility of moisture changes by following the precautions shown below: 1. Direct surface runoff away from structures by sloping the subgrade away from the floor slabs. 2. Extend paving or other impervious coverings, such as sidewalks, to the slab edge. 3. Extend roof drain downspouts so that the discharge is at least 5 feet from the slab. 4. Avoid placing trees or shrubs adjacent to slab. 5. Avoid excessive drying of soil around the slab. 3.2 Geotechnical Discussion

It is understood that a slab-on-grade with a shallow foundation system will be used to support the proposed buildings. For any ground supported structure or floor slabs, it will be necessary to perform modifications to the subgrade in order to provide uniform support. Detailed geotechnical recommendations are presented in the following sections. 3.3 Site Preparation and Fill Materials

3.3.1 General Site Preparation: The following site preparation recommendations apply to the proposed building and pavement construction areas. It is recommended that the topsoil, organic material, fill materials and other miscellaneous debris be removed from the construction areas. The removal depth of organic material is generally about 6 inches but should be verified in the field during construction. A PSI





representative or qualified personnel should determine the actual depth of removal at the time of construction. After stripping of deleterious materials, the site should be excavated to the desired grade. Desired grade will depend on development and finished elevations and any subgrade modifications as discussed below for building pad preparation and in Section 4.1: Pavement Subgrade Preparation. The exposed soil should then be proof-rolled to locate any soft or loose areas. Proof-rolling shall be performed in accordance with Item 216 of Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT), Standard specification for construction of highways, streets and bridges (TxDOT Spec) or equivalent procedure. Soils that are observed to rut or deflect excessively under the moving load should be undercut and replaced with properly compacted fill materials. A PSI representative or qualified personnel should witness the proof-rolling and undercutting activities. It is advisable to perform the earth-work activities during a period of dry weather. The proof rolled subgrade shall be scarified to a depth of 6-inches and compacted to the compaction specifications as shown in Table 3.3. After the completion of proof-rolling and undercutting activities, necessary fill placement may commence. 3.3.1 Building Pad Preparation: A ground supported slab can be constructed provided the movements associated with shrinking and swelling soils are reduced to a tolerable level and the owner understands the risk associated with such movements. Typically, it is the industry practice to consider one-inch soil movement as the tolerable level. In order to reduce the soil movements, it has been the industry practice to provide an engineered soil layers below the ground supported slab system. The following option for Site Preparation is provided to reduce the soil movements. In order to provide uniform support to the floor slab-on-grade and reduce the potential movements associated with shrink/swell soils and existing fill to about 1-inch, it is recommended that at least 3 feet of low-expansive select fill should be placed below the floor slab. The select fill should be placed within the plan area of the structure and to a distance of at least 5 feet beyond the perimeter of the structure and include building entrances and flatwork sensitive to movements. Plasticity and compaction requirements for the select fill are provided later in this section. 3.3.2 Fill Materials: Fill materials should be free of organics, miscellaneous debris and a particle size of 3 inches or less. If water must be added, it should be uniformly applied and thoroughly mixed into the soil by disking or scarifying. Care should be taken to apply compaction throughout the fill areas. The moisture content and degree of compaction of the fill should be maintained until the construction of structures. Each lift of select fill should be tested by a PSI representative or qualified personnel prior to placement of subsequent lifts. The following types of fill can be used as recommended in this report. Common Fill: Common fill may consist of on-site or imported materials. Imported common fill should be cohesive soils with a plasticity index of less than 30, free of organics and miscellaneous debris and have a particle size of 3 inches or less. The first layer of common fill materials should be placed in a relatively uniform horizontal lift and be adequately keyed into the prepared subgrade soils. Common fill should be placed in maximum 8-inch loose lifts and compacted to the specifications as shown in Table 3.3. Select Fill: Select fill materials shall be sandy lean clay or lean clay (CL) soils that have a liquid limit not greater than 35 and a plasticity index between 8 and 18. Clayey Sand soils that meet the above plasticity





requirements and have a percent passing no. 200 greater than 40% may be reused as select fill. Select fill should be placed and compacted to the specifications as mentioned in Table 3.3. Flexible Base: Flexible base materials should meet TxDOT Item 247 Type A and D Grade 1 or 2. Recycled concrete can be used. Flexible base should be placed and compacted to the specifications as mentioned in Table 3.3. Lime Treated Soils: The lime treated soils are soils that are treated with 6 to 8% of lime expressed as percent of the dry weight of the soil to be treated. In order to determine the percentage of lime addition, lime series testing should be performed in accordance with ASTM D6276 or TxDOT test method TEX-121-E Part III (pH-Series). In addition, the soils should be checked for sulfates (TEX-145-E) prior to the use of lime. Lime treatment should be performed in accordance with the applicable provisions of Item 260 of the TxDOT Specification. Lime Treated soils can be used as Select Fill materials. Lime treated soil should be placed and compacted to the specifications as shown in Table 3.3.

Table 3.3: Compaction Specifications

Fill Type Loose Lift Thickness

Minimum Percent of Maximum Dry Density (MDD)

Range of Compaction Moisture From

Optimum Moisture Content (OMC)

Proctor Test Method

Common Fill or On-site Soils

8 inches 95 or greater 0% to +4% ASTM D 698

Select Fill 8 inches 95 or greater 0% to +4% ASTM D 698

Flexible Base 8 inches 95 or greater -2% to +2% ASTM D 698

Lime Treated Soils 8 inches 95 or greater +0% to +4% ASTM D 698

3.4 Shallow Foundations Recommendations

The proposed buildings may be supported on shallow spread footings/grade beams or monolithic, steel reinforced stiffened slab-on-grade foundation system (i.e., a waffle type grade beam configuration), provided that some differential movement can be tolerated, and the recommended subgrade preparation activities are performed. Shallow foundations should be placed at least two feet below the finished grade on properly compacted structural fill soils and can be designed for a net allowable bearing pressure of 3,000 psf for dead load plus live loads, and 2,000 psf for dead plus sustained live loads, whichever results in a larger bearing area. Stiffened slab-on-grade foundation system or waffle type grade beam foundation configuration can be conventionally reinforced; or, may be designed using the Third Edition of the Post-Tensioning Institute (PTI)1 “Design of Post-Tensioned Slabs-on-Ground” and the Volflo 1.5 design software.

PTI design parameters were developed and are presented in the Table 3.2. The design parameters are based on preparing the building pad as recommended in Section 3.3.1 of this report.

1 Post-Tensioning Institute (PTI DC 10.1-08)- Design of Post-Tensioned Slabs-on-Ground, by the Post-Tensioning Institute, Third Edition 2004





Table 3.2: PTI Design Parameters

PVR Floor Slab Preparation Center Lift Edge Lift

Em (feet) Ym (in) Em (feet) Ym (in)

1 inch Select Fill as Per Section 3.3 9.0 -1.06 4.7 1.5

The grade beams should have a minimum width of 10 inches even if the actual bearing pressure is less than the design value. The perimeter grade beams should bear at least 24 inches below adjacent surface grades (i.e. bottoms of beams and pads should bear at least 24 inches below the adjacent ground surface). If soft or loose soils are encountered at the design bearing level, they should be undercut to stiff or dense soils and the excavation back-filled with concrete. Single isolated footing, with width no larger than eight feet, designed as discussed above, should experience a settlement of less than one inch. If a cluster of closely spaced footings (i.e., if the center to center spacing of the footings is less than two times the width of the footing) are planned, PSI should be contacted to calculate the amount of settlement. The base adhesion/frictional resistance and the passive soil resistance will resist the horizontal loads on shallow foundations. For a footing cast against compacted soil, the adhesion/frictional resistance and the passive soil resistance values for both transient and sustained loading conditions are given herein. For transient loading conditions, an ultimate base adhesion resistance of 440 psf and an ultimate passive resistance of 1,600 psf can be used. For sustained loading conditions, a frictional co-efficient of 0.36 and an ultimate passive resistance of 240 psf per foot depth is recommended. A factor of safety of 2.0 is recommended to arrive at the allowable values. Passive resistance from the upper two feet of soil should be neglected. Also, the passive resistance of any un-compacted fill material should be neglected. The uplift resistance of a shallow foundation formed in an open excavation will be limited to the weight of the foundation concrete and the soil above it. For design purposes, the ultimate uplift resistance should be based on effective unit weights of 120 and 150 pcf for soil and concrete, respectively. This value should then be reduced by an appropriate factor of safety to arrive at the allowable uplift load. If there is a chance of submergence, the buoyant unit weights should be used. The foundation excavations should be observed by a PSI representative or qualified personnel prior to steel or concrete placement to assess that the foundation materials can support the design loads and are consistent with the materials discussed in this report. Soft or loose soil zones encountered at the bottom of the footing or grade beam excavations should be removed and replaced with properly compacted fill as directed by the geotechnical engineer or qualified personnel during construction. After opening, footing or grade beam excavations should be observed and concrete placed as quickly as possible to avoid exposure of the footing or grade beam bottoms to wetting and drying. Surface run-off water should be drained away from the excavations and not be allowed to pond. If possible, the foundation concrete should be placed during the same day the excavation is made. If it is required that footing or grade beam





excavations be left open for more than one day, they should be protected to reduce evaporation or entry of moisture. 3.5 Floor Slab Recommendations

A slab-on-grade floor slab can be constructed provided the site is prepared in accordance with the site preparation recommendations provided in Section 3.3: Site Preparation and Fill Materials of this report. An allowable net bearing pressure of 600 psf can be used for slab-on-grade bearing on compacted select fill. A vapor retarder such as polyethylene sheeting should be provided directly beneath the ground supported slab. Adequate construction joints and reinforcement should be provided to reduce the potential for cracking of the floor slab due to differential movement. 3.6 Seismic Design

The International Building Code (IBC) was used in this report. As part of this code, the design of structures must consider dynamic forces resulting from seismic events. These forces are dependent upon the magnitude of the earthquake event, as well as, the properties of the soils that underlie the site. Part of the IBC code procedure to evaluate seismic forces requires the evaluation of the Seismic Site Class, which categorizes the site based upon the characteristics of the subsurface profile within the upper 100 feet of the ground surface. To define the Seismic Site Class for this project, we have interpreted the results of our test borings drilled within the project site and estimated appropriate soil properties below the base of the borings, as permitted by the code. The estimated soil properties were based upon data available in published geologic reports as well as our experience with subsurface conditions in the general site area. Based upon the evaluation, the subsurface conditions within the site are consistent with the characteristics of the Seismic Site Class D as defined in the building code.





4.0 PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS 4.1 Subgrade Soil Preparation

Based on subsurface soil information, PSI recommends that at least the upper 8 inches of these soils be lime stabilized. Lime treatment should extend at least one foot outside the perimeter of the pavement. Lime treatment of subgrade soils is described in Site Preparation and Fill Materials Section 3.3. In lieu of 8 inches of lime stabilization, 12 inches of select fill can be provided below the pavement materials. Lime stabilized and select fill subgrade should be compacted as provided in Section 3.3 Site Preparation and Fill Materials of this report. As an alternative to preparing the subgrade, the design pavement thickness of rigid pavement can be increased by one inch in addition to the recommended pavement thickness provided in Table 4.1. The thicker pavement section will be constructed over 6 inches of scarified and re-compacted subgrade instead of lime-stabilized subgrade or select fill subgrade. Structurally, both designs (i.e., pavement over lime-stabilized subgrade and pavement with greater thickness over natural soils) are more or less equal. However, it is our opinion that the pavement with lime-stabilized subgrade will perform better than the pavement with 1-inch additional thickness on natural soil. This is primarily due to environmental and drainage factors affecting the performance life of this pavement. Non-stabilized soils are susceptible to movements or softening thus resulting in a loss of support to the concrete pavement structure. The purpose of lime stabilization is to minimize the loss of support and bridge the subgrade from moisture infiltration thereby reducing soil softening and enhancing the performance and life of the pavement. Both pavements would require periodic maintenance. 4.2 Pavement Section

AASHTO design methodology can be used to design the pavements. According to AASHTO design methodology, the pavement design thickness primarily depends on strength of the subgrade soils and type of traffic. Traffic includes several types of vehicles with various magnitudes of axle loads that may be subjected to the pavement during its service life. The design involves a traffic analysis that converts various types of vehicles with various magnitudes axle loads to a number of 18-kip equivalent single axle load (ESAL) repetitions. The design engineer should perform the traffic analyses to compute the number of ESALs repetitions that would be subjected to the pavement during its service life or design life. Based on the computed ESALs, an economical and appropriate pavement can be designed accordingly. AASHTO low volume design methodology can also be used to design pavements. The low volume design methodology depends on typical subgrade conditions for 6 different U.S climatic zones and provides minimum thickness for 3 different levels of traffic. Based on AASHTO low volume design and previous experience, pavement thickness for both a rigid and a flexible pavement system are provided in the tables below. The tables below include thickness design corresponding to 3 levels of traffic (low, medium and high). It is recommended that the pavement design thicknesses correspond to following:

• Low traffic condition: Parking areas expected to receive only passenger vehicles and light pickup truck traffic.





• Medium traffic condition: Secondary drive areas and/or parking areas expected to receive delivery vans or light trucks.

• High traffic condition: Parking and drive areas with heavy traffic, fire lanes, trash pickup areas, main access drive ways, and 18-wheeler loading/unloading.

Table 4.1: Minimum Rigid Pavement Section

Pavement Material(s) Design Thickness

Low Medium High

Portland Cement Concrete 5.0 inches 6.0 inches 7.0 inches

Pavement Subgrade As Discussed in Section 4.1

Table 4.2: Minimum Flexible Pavement Section

Pavement Material(s) Design Thickness

Low Medium High

Hot Mix Asphalt Concrete TxDOT Item 340. Type D

2.0 inches 2.0 inches 3.0 inches

Flexible Base Material TxDOT Item 247. Type A or D, Grade 1 or 2

6.0 inches 8.0 inches 8.0 inches

Pavement Subgrade As Discussed in Section 4.1

Large front-loading garbage trucks frequently impose concentrated front-wheel loads on pavements during loading. This type of loading typically results in rutting of the pavement and ultimately, pavement failures. Therefore, it is recommended that the pavement in trash pickup areas consist of a minimum 7-inch thick, reinforced concrete slab. During the construction phase of this project, site grading should be kept in such a way that the water drains freely off the site. Proper finishing of concrete pavements requires the use of sawed and sealed joints. Construction joints should be designed in accordance with current Portland Cement Association guidelines. Joints should be sealed to reduce the potential for water infiltration into pavement joints and subsequent infiltration into the supporting soils. Joint spacing is recommended at 15-foot intervals for plain concrete. Dowel bars should be used to transfer loads at the transverse joints including contraction joints and construction joints. Normal periodic maintenance will be required. The design of steel reinforcement should be in accordance with accepted codes. The concrete should have a minimum compressive strength of 3,500 psi at 28 days. The concrete should also be designed with 5 ± 1 percent entrained air to improve workability and durability. Pavement materials and construction procedures should conform to TXDOT or appropriate city and county requirements.





Surface water infiltration to the pavement subgrade layers may soften the subgrade soils. Considering several factors in the pavement design can reduce surface infiltration. The following are some of the factors that need to be emphasized in order to maintain proper drainage.

1) Appropriate slopes should be provided to drain the water freely from the pavement surface.

2) Joints should be properly sealed and maintained.

3) Side drains or sub drains along a pavement section may be provided.

4) Proper pavement maintenance programs such as sealing surface cracks, and immediate repair of distressed pavement areas should be adopted.

5) During and after the construction, site grading should be kept in such a way that the water drains freely off the site and off any prepared or unprepared subgrade soils. Excavations should not be kept open for a long period of time.





5.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS 5.1 Secondary Design Considerations

The following information has been developed after review of numerous problems concerning foundations throughout the area. It is presented here for your convenience. If these features are incorporated in the overall design and specifications for the project, performance of the project will be improved.

1. Prior to construction, the area to be covered by building should be prepared so that water will not pond beneath or around the building after periods of rainfall. In addition, water should not be allowed to pond on or around pavements.

2. Roof drainage should be collected and transmitted by pipe to a storm drainage system or to an area where the water can drain away from buildings and pavements without entering the soils supporting buildings and pavements.

3. Sidewalks should not be structurally connected to buildings. They should be sloped away from buildings so that water will be drained away from structures.

4. Paved areas and the general ground surface should be sloped away from buildings on all sides so that water will always drain away from the structures. Water should not be allowed to pond near buildings after the floor slabs and foundations have been constructed.

5. Backfill for utility lines that are located in pavement, sidewalk and building areas should consist of on-site fill. The backfill should be compacted as described in the Earthwork and Fill Materials section of this report. Lesser lift thicknesses may be required to obtain adequate compaction.

6. Care should be exercised to make sure that ditches for utility lines do not serve as conduits that transmit water beneath structures or pavements. The top of the ditch should be sealed to inhibit the inflow of surface water during periods of rainfall.

7. Flower beds and planting areas should not be constructed along building perimeters. Constructing sidewalks or pavements adjacent to buildings would be preferable. If required, flower beds and planting areas could be constructed beyond the sidewalks away from the buildings. If it is desired to have flower beds and planting areas adjacent to a building, the use of above grade concrete box planters, or other methods that reduce the likelihood of large changes in moisture content of soils adjacent to or below structures should be considered.

8. Water sprinkling systems should not be located where water will be sprayed onto building walls and subsequently drain downward and flow into the soils beneath foundations.

9. Trees in general should not be planted closer to a structure than the mature height of the tree. A tree planted closer to a structure than the recommended distance may extend its roots beneath the structure, allowing removal of subgrade moisture and/or causing structural distress.

10. Utilities that project through the floor slab should be designed with some degree of flexibility and/or with a sleeve to reduce the potential for damage to the utilities should movement occur.

11. Soil supported floor slabs are subject to vertical movements. This often causes distress to interior wall partitions supported on soil supported floor slabs. This should be considered in the design of soil supported floor slabs.





5.2 Construction Materials Testing

It is recommended that PSI or another qualified materials testing firm be retained to provide observation and testing of construction activities involved in the foundations, earthwork, and related activities of this project. PSI cannot accept any responsibility for any conditions that deviates from those described in this report, nor for the performance of the foundations if PSI or another qualified materials testing firm is not engaged to provide construction observation and testing for this project. Observation of all foundation bearing materials, pier construction activities, structural steel and subgrade treatment operations should be performed by a representative of PSI or other qualified personnel. Density testing should be performed at a rate of one per 2,500 square feet per 8-inch lift in building areas, one test per 10,000-square feet per 8-inch lift in paved areas and 1 per 100 linear feet per 8-inch lift in utility trench backfill. A moisture-density relationship (Proctor), Atterberg’s limit and minus 200 sieve test should be performed for each material encountered at finished subgrade elevation. 5.3 Moisture Sensitive Soils/Weather Related Concerns

The upper fine-grained soils discovered at this site could be sensitive to disturbances caused by construction traffic and changes in moisture content. During wet weather periods, increases in the moisture content of the soil can cause significant reduction in the soil strength and support capabilities. In addition, soils that become wet may be slow to dry and thus significantly retard the progress of grading and compaction activities. Construction schedules should account for these conditions during wetter times of the year. 5.4 Drainage and Groundwater Concerns

Water should not be allowed to collect in the foundation excavation, on floor slab areas, or on prepared subgrades of the construction area either during or after construction. Undercut or excavated areas should be sloped toward one corner to facilitate removal of any collected rainwater, ground water, or surface runoff. Positive site surface drainage should be provided to reduce infiltration of surface water around the perimeter of the building and beneath the floor slabs. The grades should be sloped away from the building and surface drainage should be collected and discharged such that water is not permitted to infiltrate the backfill and floor slab areas of the building. PSI recommends that the contractor determine the actual ground water levels at the site at the time of the construction activities. It may be expedient to drill auger holes or excavate test pits adjacent to the building area immediately prior to construction to determine the prevailing water level elevation. Any water accumulation should be removed from excavations by pumping. Should excessive and uncontrolled amounts of seepage occur, the geotechnical engineer should be consulted. 5.5 Excavations

In Federal Register, Volume 54, No. 209 (October 1989), the United States Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) amended its "Construction Standards for Excavations, 29 CFR, part 1926, Subpart P". This document was issued to better insure the safety of workmen entering trenches or excavations. It is mandated by this federal regulation that excavations, whether they be utility trenches, basement excavation or footing excavations, be constructed in accordance with the new OSHA guidelines. It is our understanding that these regulations are being strictly





enforced and if they are not closely followed the owner and the contractor could be liable for substantial penalties. The contractor is solely responsible for designing and constructing stable, temporary excavations and should shore, slope, or bench the sides of the excavations as required to maintain stability of both the excavation sides and bottom. The contractor's "responsible person", as defined in 29 CFR Part 1926, should evaluate the soil exposed in the excavations as part of the contractor's safety procedures. In no case should slope height, slope inclination, or excavation depth, including utility trench excavation depth, exceed those specified in local, state, and federal safety regulations. We are providing this information solely as a service to our client. PSI does not assume responsibility for construction site safety or the contractor's or other party’s compliance with local, state, and federal safety or other regulations.





6.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS The recommendations submitted in this report are based on the available subsurface information obtained by PSI and design details furnished by the client for the proposed Cedar Trails Senior Housing to be located east of Highway 274 near Early Drive in Tool, Texas. If there are any revisions to the plans for this project, or if deviations from the subsurface conditions noted in this report are encountered during construction, PSI should be notified immediately to determine if changes in the foundation recommendations are required. If PSI is not notified of such changes, PSI will not be responsible for the impact of those changes on the project. The geotechnical engineer warrants that the findings, recommendations, specifications, or professional advice contained herein have been made in accordance with generally accepted professional geotechnical engineering practices in the local area. No other warranties are implied or expressed. This report may not be copied, except in the entirety, without expressed written permission from PSI. PSI is not responsible for any claims, damages, or liability associated with the interpretation or re-use of the subsurface data or engineering analysis or the conclusions or recommendations of others based on the findings and recommendations presented herein. After the plans and specifications are more complete, the geotechnical engineer should be retained and provided the opportunity to review the final design plans and specifications to check that our engineering recommendations have been properly incorporated into the design documents. At that time, it may be necessary to submit supplementary recommendations. If PSI is not retained to perform these functions, PSI will not be responsible for the impact of those conditions on the project. This geotechnical report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Carlson Consulting Engineers, Inc. and their representatives for the specific application of the proposed Cedar Trails Senior Housing to be located east of Highway 274 near Early Drive in Tool, Texas.



Appendix

SITE VICINITY MAP

ZZ

DATE:

DRAWN:

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING SERVICESCEDAR TRAILS SENIOR HOUSING

EAST OF HIGHWAY 274 NEAR EARLY DRIVETOOL, TEXAS

FIGURE No. 1 CHKD:: KMVPSI PROJECT No.: 03421787

Approximate Site Location

09/30/2019310 Regal Row, Suite 500Dallas, Texas 75247 PHONE: (214) 330-9211

BORING LOCATION PLAN - AERIAL

ZZ

DATE:

DRAWN:



B-07



B-08

B-06

B-20

B-10

B-04

B-19

B-03

B-11B-12

B-02

B-18

B-09

B-05

B-13

B-01

B-17

B-14

B-16

B-15

BORING LOCATION PLAN

ZZ

DATE:

DRAWN:





B-07

B-08

B-06

B-20

B-10

B-04

B-19

B-03

B-11B-12

B-02

B-18

B-09

B-05

B-13

B-01

B-17

B-14

B-16

B-15

BUILDING IDENTIFICATION PLAN

ZZ

DATE:

DRAWN:





Building 2 Building 3 Building 4 Building 5 Building 6

Building 7

Building 1

Building 8Building 9Building 10Building 11Building 12Building 13

8

15

20

18

17

12

16

15

1

23

106

40

47

SILTY SAND (SM), medium dense, brown, withoccasional ferrous nodules

CLAYEY SAND (SC), very stiff to hard, tan andreddish brown

SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL), very stiff to hard, brownand tan, with gravel

1.20

14

34

13

11

LL

UN

IT D

RY

WT

.(P

CF

)

CO

MP

RE

SS

IVE

ST

RE

NG

TH

(ts

f)

LOG OF BORING B-01

GROUND WATER DURING DRILLING: 23 feetGROUND WATER AFTER DRILLING: 20 feetDELAYED GROUND WATER: N/A

DATE DRILLED: 9/6/19DEPTH TO GROUND WATER

PLA

ST

ICIT

YIN

DE

X

PL PI

UUUCSO

IL T

YP

E

% P

AS

SIN

G#2

00 S

IEV

E

DESCRIPTION

DEPTH OF BORING: 25 FEET

PLA

ST

ICLI

MIT

COORDINATE (X) OR EASTING:COORDINATE (Y) OR NORTHING:

LATITUDE: 32.28689LONGITUDE: -96.18466

APPROX. SURFACE ELEVATION:

TYPE OF BORING: SOLID FLIGHT AUGERLOCATION: SEE BORING LOCATION PLAN PSI Project No.: 03421787

Cedar Trails Senior HousingEast of Hwy 274 near Early Drive, Tool, Texas

LIQ

UID

LIM

IT

SP

T -

NT

CP

- T

(BLO

WS

/FT

.)

0 1 2 3 4 5

SA

MP

LES

NOTES: Automatic hammer, 170 lbs, 24-inch drop height

HP

COMPRESSIVESTRENGTH

TONS/SQ.FT.

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

TE

NT

(%

)

DE

PT

H,

FT

.

Geotechnical Consulting Services310 Regal Row, Suite 500Dallas, TX 75247

BL_

DA

LLA

S -

PS

IHO

US

TO

N.G

DT

- 1

0/1/

19

10:1

5 -

\\DA

LLA

S-F

S1\

PR

OJE

CT

S\0

342

DA

LLA

S G

EO

\201

9 G

EO

PR

OJE

CT

S\0

3421

787

CE

DA

R T

RA

IL S

EN

IOR

HO

US

ING

, TO

OL,

TX

-CA

RLS

ON

CO

NS

ULT

IN E

NG

INE

ER

S\A

PP

EN

DIX

\034

2178

7.G

PJ

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

11

15

17

15

15

19

14

18

22

11

116

56

31

CLAYEY SAND (SC), medium dense, brown

SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL), very stiff to hard, tanand reddish brown

CLAYEY SAND (SC), medium dense, tan, with clayseams

2.16

37

21

15

10

LL

UN

IT D

RY

WT

.(P

CF

)

CO

MP

RE

SS

IVE

ST

RE

NG

TH

(ts

f)

LOG OF BORING B-02



PLA

ST

ICIT

YIN

DE

X

PL PI

UUUCSO

IL T

YP

E

% P

AS

SIN

G#2

00 S

IEV

E

DESCRIPTION


PLA

ST

ICLI

MIT






LIQ

UID

LIM

IT

SP

T -

NT

CP

- T

(BLO

WS

/FT

.)

0 1 2 3 4 5

SA

MP

LES


HP

COMPRESSIVESTRENGTH

TONS/SQ.FT.

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

TE

NT

(%

)

DE

PT

H,

FT

.


BL_

DA

LLA

S -

PS

IHO

US

TO

N.G

DT

- 1

0/1/

19

10:1

5 -

\\DA

LLA

S-F

S1\

PR

OJE

CT

S\0

342

DA

LLA

S G

EO

\201

9 G

EO

PR

OJE

CT

S\0

3421

787

CE

DA

R T

RA

IL S

EN

IOR

HO

US

ING

, TO

OL,

TX

-CA

RLS

ON

CO

NS

ULT

IN E

NG

INE

ER

S\A

PP

EN

DIX

\034

2178

7.G

PJ

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

8

11

12

12

13

17

14

22

21

14

12

105 52

20


SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL), very stiff to hard, brownand reddish brown

SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL), stiff to very stiff, tan andgray

CLAYEY SAND (SC), medium dense, brwn

2.57

N: 23

34

26

22

13

12

10

LL

UN

IT D

RY

WT

.(P

CF

)

CO

MP

RE

SS

IVE

ST

RE

NG

TH

(ts

f)

LOG OF BORING B-03



PLA

ST

ICIT

YIN

DE

X

PL PI

UUUCSO

IL T

YP

E

% P

AS

SIN

G#2

00 S

IEV

E

DESCRIPTION


PLA

ST

ICLI

MIT






LIQ

UID

LIM

IT

SP

T -

NT

CP

- T

(BLO

WS

/FT

.)

0 1 2 3 4 5

SA

MP

LES


HP

COMPRESSIVESTRENGTH

TONS/SQ.FT.

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

TE

NT

(%

)

DE

PT

H,

FT

.


BL_

DA

LLA

S -

PS

IHO

US

TO

N.G

DT

- 1

0/1/

19

10:1

5 -

\\DA

LLA

S-F

S1\

PR

OJE

CT

S\0

342

DA

LLA

S G

EO

\201

9 G

EO

PR

OJE

CT

S\0

3421

787

CE

DA

R T

RA

IL S

EN

IOR

HO

US

ING

, TO

OL,

TX

-CA

RLS

ON

CO

NS

ULT

IN E

NG

INE

ER

S\A

PP

EN

DIX

\034

2178

7.G

PJ

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

6

8

14

16

15

13

14

15

14

26

111



SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL), stiff to hard, tan andgray, with gravel seams

CLAYEY SAND (SC), medium dense, brown, withgravel

2.99

N: 15

23

40

9

14

LL

UN

IT D

RY

WT

.(P

CF

)

CO

MP

RE

SS

IVE

ST

RE

NG

TH

(ts

f)

LOG OF BORING B-04



PLA

ST

ICIT

YIN

DE

X

PL PI

UUUCSO

IL T

YP

E

% P

AS

SIN

G#2

00 S

IEV

E

DESCRIPTION


PLA

ST

ICLI

MIT






LIQ

UID

LIM

IT

SP

T -

NT

CP

- T

(BLO

WS

/FT

.)

0 1 2 3 4 5

SA

MP

LES


HP

COMPRESSIVESTRENGTH

TONS/SQ.FT.

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

TE

NT

(%

)

DE

PT

H,

FT

.


BL_

DA

LLA

S -

PS

IHO

US

TO

N.G

DT

- 1

0/1/

19

10:1

5 -

\\DA

LLA

S-F

S1\

PR

OJE

CT

S\0

342

DA

LLA

S G

EO

\201

9 G

EO

PR

OJE

CT

S\0

3421

787

CE

DA

R T

RA

IL S

EN

IOR

HO

US

ING

, TO

OL,

TX

-CA

RLS

ON

CO

NS

ULT

IN E

NG

INE

ER

S\A

PP

EN

DIX

\034

2178

7.G

PJ

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

8

7

14

15

14

10

15

13

5

29 113 44

54


CLAYEY SAND (SC), medium dense, brown andreddish brown

SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL), very stiff to hard, tanand gray

CLAYEY SAND (SC), dense, brown, with gravel

3.57

N: 16

N: 37

25

42

20

13

LL

UN

IT D

RY

WT

.(P

CF

)

CO

MP

RE

SS

IVE

ST

RE

NG

TH

(ts

f)

LOG OF BORING B-05



PLA

ST

ICIT

YIN

DE

X

PL PI

UUUCSO

IL T

YP

E

% P

AS

SIN

G#2

00 S

IEV

E

DESCRIPTION


PLA

ST

ICLI

MIT






LIQ

UID

LIM

IT

SP

T -

NT

CP

- T

(BLO

WS

/FT

.)

0 1 2 3 4 5

SA

MP

LES


HP

COMPRESSIVESTRENGTH

TONS/SQ.FT.

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

TE

NT

(%

)

DE

PT

H,

FT

.


BL_

DA

LLA

S -

PS

IHO

US

TO

N.G

DT

- 1

0/1/

19

10:1

5 -

\\DA

LLA

S-F

S1\

PR

OJE

CT

S\0

342

DA

LLA

S G

EO

\201

9 G

EO

PR

OJE

CT

S\0

3421

787

CE

DA

R T

RA

IL S

EN

IOR

HO

US

ING

, TO

OL,

TX

-CA

RLS

ON

CO

NS

ULT

IN E

NG

INE

ER

S\A

PP

EN

DIX

\034

2178

7.G

PJ

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

11

12

16

14

13

9

17

16

29

14

117

15



CLAYEY SAND (SC), medium dense, tan, withgravel

2.45

N: 20

N: 26

43

24

14

10

LL

UN

IT D

RY

WT

.(P

CF

)

CO

MP

RE

SS

IVE

ST

RE

NG

TH

(ts

f)

LOG OF BORING B-06



PLA

ST

ICIT

YIN

DE

X

PL PI

UUUCSO

IL T

YP

E

% P

AS

SIN

G#2

00 S

IEV

E

DESCRIPTION


PLA

ST

ICLI

MIT






LIQ

UID

LIM

IT

SP

T -

NT

CP

- T

(BLO

WS

/FT

.)

0 1 2 3 4 5

SA

MP

LES


HP

COMPRESSIVESTRENGTH

TONS/SQ.FT.

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

TE

NT

(%

)

DE

PT

H,

FT

.


BL_

DA

LLA

S -

PS

IHO

US

TO

N.G

DT

- 1

0/1/

19

10:1

5 -

\\DA

LLA

S-F

S1\

PR

OJE

CT

S\0

342

DA

LLA

S G

EO

\201

9 G

EO

PR

OJE

CT

S\0

3421

787

CE

DA

R T

RA

IL S

EN

IOR

HO

US

ING

, TO

OL,

TX

-CA

RLS

ON

CO

NS

ULT

IN E

NG

INE

ER

S\A

PP

EN

DIX

\034

2178

7.G

PJ

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

8

8

16

13

5

9

19

19

41

116

37

9


SANDY FAT CLAY (CH), hard tan and reddishbrown

POORLY GRADED SAND WITH CLAY (SP-SC),medium dense to dense, tan

-with gravel at 23.5 feet

5.68

N: 22

N: 15

N: 43

54 13

LL

UN

IT D

RY

WT

.(P

CF

)

CO

MP

RE

SS

IVE

ST

RE

NG

TH

(ts

f)

LOG OF BORING B-07



PLA

ST

ICIT

YIN

DE

X

PL PI

UUUCSO

IL T

YP

E

% P

AS

SIN

G#2

00 S

IEV

E

DESCRIPTION


PLA

ST

ICLI

MIT






LIQ

UID

LIM

IT

SP

T -

NT

CP

- T

(BLO

WS

/FT

.)

0 1 2 3 4 5

SA

MP

LES


HP

COMPRESSIVESTRENGTH

TONS/SQ.FT.

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

TE

NT

(%

)

DE

PT

H,

FT

.


BL_

DA

LLA

S -

PS

IHO

US

TO

N.G

DT

- 1

0/1/

19

10:1

5 -

\\DA

LLA

S-F

S1\

PR

OJE

CT

S\0

342

DA

LLA

S G

EO

\201

9 G

EO

PR

OJE

CT

S\0

3421

787

CE

DA

R T

RA

IL S

EN

IOR

HO

US

ING

, TO

OL,

TX

-CA

RLS

ON

CO

NS

ULT

IN E

NG

INE

ER

S\A

PP

EN

DIX

\034

2178

7.G

PJ

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

8

12

19

15

11

8

15

19

21

19

110


SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL), hard, tan and reddishbrown

CLAYEY SAND (SC), medium dense, tan, with clayseams

2.24

N: 13

N: 19

34

35

13

16

LL

UN

IT D

RY

WT

.(P

CF

)

CO

MP

RE

SS

IVE

ST

RE

NG

TH

(ts

f)

LOG OF BORING B-08



PLA

ST

ICIT

YIN

DE

X

PL PI

UUUCSO

IL T

YP

E

% P

AS

SIN

G#2

00 S

IEV

E

DESCRIPTION


PLA

ST

ICLI

MIT






LIQ

UID

LIM

IT

SP

T -

NT

CP

- T

(BLO

WS

/FT

.)

0 1 2 3 4 5

SA

MP

LES


HP

COMPRESSIVESTRENGTH

TONS/SQ.FT.

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

TE

NT

(%

)

DE

PT

H,

FT

.


BL_

DA

LLA

S -

PS

IHO

US

TO

N.G

DT

- 1

0/1/

19

10:1

5 -

\\DA

LLA

S-F

S1\

PR

OJE

CT

S\0

342

DA

LLA

S G

EO

\201

9 G

EO

PR

OJE

CT

S\0

3421

787

CE

DA

R T

RA

IL S

EN

IOR

HO

US

ING

, TO

OL,

TX

-CA

RLS

ON

CO

NS

ULT

IN E

NG

INE

ER

S\A

PP

EN

DIX

\034

2178

7.G

PJ

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

12

14

16

15

10

11

22

17

10

33 119

43

25


LEAN CLAY WITH SAND (CL), very stiff to hard,tan and reddish brown

CLAYEY SAND (SC), dense, tan

4.16

N: 37

N: 36

23

46

13

13

LL

UN

IT D

RY

WT

.(P

CF

)

CO

MP

RE

SS

IVE

ST

RE

NG

TH

(ts

f)

LOG OF BORING B-09

GROUND WATER DURING DRILLING: 18.5 feetGROUND WATER AFTER DRILLING: 20 feetDELAYED GROUND WATER: N/A


PLA

ST

ICIT

YIN

DE

X

PL PI

UUUCSO

IL T

YP

E

% P

AS

SIN

G#2

00 S

IEV

E

DESCRIPTION


PLA

ST

ICLI

MIT






LIQ

UID

LIM

IT

SP

T -

NT

CP

- T

(BLO

WS

/FT

.)

0 1 2 3 4 5

SA

MP

LES


HP

COMPRESSIVESTRENGTH

TONS/SQ.FT.

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

TE

NT

(%

)

DE

PT

H,

FT

.


BL_

DA

LLA

S -

PS

IHO

US

TO

N.G

DT

- 1

0/1/

19

10:1

5 -

\\DA

LLA

S-F

S1\

PR

OJE

CT

S\0

342

DA

LLA

S G

EO

\201

9 G

EO

PR

OJE

CT

S\0

3421

787

CE

DA

R T

RA

IL S

EN

IOR

HO

US

ING

, TO

OL,

TX

-CA

RLS

ON

CO

NS

ULT

IN E

NG

INE

ER

S\A

PP

EN

DIX

\034

2178

7.G

PJ

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

11

8

14

16

14

12

18

14

23

106

37

12


CLAYEYS SAND (SC), medium dense, tan andreddish brown

CLAYEY SAND (SC), medium dense to verydense, tan, with gravel

2.76

N: 24

N: 83

37 14

LL

UN

IT D

RY

WT

.(P

CF

)

CO

MP

RE

SS

IVE

ST

RE

NG

TH

(ts

f)

LOG OF BORING B-10



PLA

ST

ICIT

YIN

DE

X

PL PI

UUUCSO

IL T

YP

E

% P

AS

SIN

G#2

00 S

IEV

E

DESCRIPTION


PLA

ST

ICLI

MIT






LIQ

UID

LIM

IT

SP

T -

NT

CP

- T

(BLO

WS

/FT

.)

0 1 2 3 4 5

SA

MP

LES


HP

COMPRESSIVESTRENGTH

TONS/SQ.FT.

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

TE

NT

(%

)

DE

PT

H,

FT

.


BL_

DA

LLA

S -

PS

IHO

US

TO

N.G

DT

- 1

0/1/

19

10:1

5 -

\\DA

LLA

S-F

S1\

PR

OJE

CT

S\0

342

DA

LLA

S G

EO

\201

9 G

EO

PR

OJE

CT

S\0

3421

787

CE

DA

R T

RA

IL S

EN

IOR

HO

US

ING

, TO

OL,

TX

-CA

RLS

ON

CO

NS

ULT

IN E

NG

INE

ER

S\A

PP

EN

DIX

\034

2178

7.G

PJ

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

10

19

15

16

11

16

14

11

34

32

110

62

58


SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL), very stiff to hard, brown,tan, and reddish brown

CLAYEY SAND (SC), meduim dense, tan

1.87

N: 19

48

46

14

14

LL

UN

IT D

RY

WT

.(P

CF

)

CO

MP

RE

SS

IVE

ST

RE

NG

TH

(ts

f)

LOG OF BORING B-11

GROUND WATER DURING DRILLING: 23 feetGROUND WATER AFTER DRILLING: NOT ENCOUNTEREDDELAYED GROUND WATER: N/A


PLA

ST

ICIT

YIN

DE

X

PL PI

UUUCSO

IL T

YP

E

% P

AS

SIN

G#2

00 S

IEV

E

DESCRIPTION


PLA

ST

ICLI

MIT






LIQ

UID

LIM

IT

SP

T -

NT

CP

- T

(BLO

WS

/FT

.)

0 1 2 3 4 5

SA

MP

LES


HP

COMPRESSIVESTRENGTH

TONS/SQ.FT.

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

TE

NT

(%

)

DE

PT

H,

FT

.


BL_

DA

LLA

S -

PS

IHO

US

TO

N.G

DT

- 1

0/1/

19

10:1

5 -

\\DA

LLA

S-F

S1\

PR

OJE

CT

S\0

342

DA

LLA

S G

EO

\201

9 G

EO

PR

OJE

CT

S\0

3421

787

CE

DA

R T

RA

IL S

EN

IOR

HO

US

ING

, TO

OL,

TX

-CA

RLS

ON

CO

NS

ULT

IN E

NG

INE

ER

S\A

PP

EN

DIX

\034

2178

7.G

PJ

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

10

7

20

17

16

18

17

13

36

11

112

34


SANDY FAT CLAY (CH), stiff to hard, tan andreddish brown

CLAYEY SAND (SC), medium dense, tan, withgravel

3.21

54

23

18

12

LL

UN

IT D

RY

WT

.(P

CF

)

CO

MP

RE

SS

IVE

ST

RE

NG

TH

(ts

f)

LOG OF BORING B-12



PLA

ST

ICIT

YIN

DE

X

PL PI

UUUCSO

IL T

YP

E

% P

AS

SIN

G#2

00 S

IEV

E

DESCRIPTION


PLA

ST

ICLI

MIT






LIQ

UID

LIM

IT

SP

T -

NT

CP

- T

(BLO

WS

/FT

.)

0 1 2 3 4 5

SA

MP

LES


HP

COMPRESSIVESTRENGTH

TONS/SQ.FT.

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

TE

NT

(%

)

DE

PT

H,

FT

.


BL_

DA

LLA

S -

PS

IHO

US

TO

N.G

DT

- 1

0/1/

19

10:1

5 -

\\DA

LLA

S-F

S1\

PR

OJE

CT

S\0

342

DA

LLA

S G

EO

\201

9 G

EO

PR

OJE

CT

S\0

3421

787

CE

DA

R T

RA

IL S

EN

IOR

HO

US

ING

, TO

OL,

TX

-CA

RLS

ON

CO

NS

ULT

IN E

NG

INE

ER

S\A

PP

EN

DIX

\034

2178

7.G

PJ

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

53

22

15

21

16

8

15

15

26

21

110

66


SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL), stiff to hard, tan andreddish brown

CLAYEY SAND (SC), medium dense, tan and gray,with gravel

1.75

37

32

11

11

LL

UN

IT D

RY

WT

.(P

CF

)

CO

MP

RE

SS

IVE

ST

RE

NG

TH

(ts

f)

LOG OF BORING B-13



PLA

ST

ICIT

YIN

DE

X

PL PI

UUUCSO

IL T

YP

E

% P

AS

SIN

G#2

00 S

IEV

E

DESCRIPTION


PLA

ST

ICLI

MIT






LIQ

UID

LIM

IT

SP

T -

NT

CP

- T

(BLO

WS

/FT

.)

0 1 2 3 4 5

SA

MP

LES


HP

COMPRESSIVESTRENGTH

TONS/SQ.FT.

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

TE

NT

(%

)

DE

PT

H,

FT

.


BL_

DA

LLA

S -

PS

IHO

US

TO

N.G

DT

- 1

0/1/

19

10:1

5 -

\\DA

LLA

S-F

S1\

PR

OJE

CT

S\0

342

DA

LLA

S G

EO

\201

9 G

EO

PR

OJE

CT

S\0

3421

787

CE

DA

R T

RA

IL S

EN

IOR

HO

US

ING

, TO

OL,

TX

-CA

RLS

ON

CO

NS

ULT

IN E

NG

INE

ER

S\A

PP

EN

DIX

\034

2178

7.G

PJ

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

9

11

16

19

17

13

19

106

41


LEAN CLAY WITH SAND (CL), very stiff to hard,brown and reddish brown

LEAN CLAY WITH SAND (CL), very stiff, tan andgray

1.58

34 15

LL

UN

IT D

RY

WT

.(P

CF

)

CO

MP

RE

SS

IVE

ST

RE

NG

TH

(ts

f)

LOG OF BORING B-14

GROUND WATER DURING DRILLING: NOT ENCOUNTEREDGROUND WATER AFTER DRILLING: DRYDELAYED GROUND WATER: N/A


PLA

ST

ICIT

YIN

DE

X

PL PI

UUUCSO

IL T

YP

E

% P

AS

SIN

G#2

00 S

IEV

E

DESCRIPTION


PLA

ST

ICLI

MIT






LIQ

UID

LIM

IT

SP

T -

NT

CP

- T

(BLO

WS

/FT

.)

0 1 2 3 4 5

SA

MP

LES


HP

COMPRESSIVESTRENGTH

TONS/SQ.FT.

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

TE

NT

(%

)

DE

PT

H,

FT

.


BL_

DA

LLA

S -

PS

IHO

US

TO

N.G

DT

- 1

0/1/

19

10:1

5 -

\\DA

LLA

S-F

S1\

PR

OJE

CT

S\0

342

DA

LLA

S G

EO

\201

9 G

EO

PR

OJE

CT

S\0

3421

787

CE

DA

R T

RA

IL S

EN

IOR

HO

US

ING

, TO

OL,

TX

-CA

RLS

ON

CO

NS

ULT

IN E

NG

INE

ER

S\A

PP

EN

DIX

\034

2178

7.G

PJ

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

9

7

17

18

16

15

40

113

CLAYEY SAND (SC), medium dense

SANDY FAT CLAY (CH), stiff to hard, brown, tan,and reddish brown, with sand seams

3.08

54 14

LL

UN

IT D

RY

WT

.(P

CF

)

CO

MP

RE

SS

IVE

ST

RE

NG

TH

(ts

f)

LOG OF BORING B-15



PLA

ST

ICIT

YIN

DE

X

PL PI

UUUCSO

IL T

YP

E

% P

AS

SIN

G#2

00 S

IEV

E

DESCRIPTION


PLA

ST

ICLI

MIT






LIQ

UID

LIM

IT

SP

T -

NT

CP

- T

(BLO

WS

/FT

.)

0 1 2 3 4 5

SA

MP

LES


HP

COMPRESSIVESTRENGTH

TONS/SQ.FT.

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

TE

NT

(%

)

DE

PT

H,

FT

.


BL_

DA

LLA

S -

PS

IHO

US

TO

N.G

DT

- 1

0/1/

19

10:1

5 -

\\DA

LLA

S-F

S1\

PR

OJE

CT

S\0

342

DA

LLA

S G

EO

\201

9 G

EO

PR

OJE

CT

S\0

3421

787

CE

DA

R T

RA

IL S

EN

IOR

HO

US

ING

, TO

OL,

TX

-CA

RLS

ON

CO

NS

ULT

IN E

NG

INE

ER

S\A

PP

EN

DIX

\034

2178

7.G

PJ

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

7

9

18

18

17

35CLAYEY SAND (SC), medium dense, brown

SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL), very stiff, brown andreddish brown

LL

UN

IT D

RY

WT

.(P

CF

)

CO

MP

RE

SS

IVE

ST

RE

NG

TH

(ts

f)

LOG OF BORING B-16



PLA

ST

ICIT

YIN

DE

X

PL PI

UUUCSO

IL T

YP

E

% P

AS

SIN

G#2

00 S

IEV

E

DESCRIPTION


PLA

ST

ICLI

MIT






LIQ

UID

LIM

IT

SP

T -

NT

CP

- T

(BLO

WS

/FT

.)

0 1 2 3 4 5

SA

MP

LES


HP

COMPRESSIVESTRENGTH

TONS/SQ.FT.

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

TE

NT

(%

)

DE

PT

H,

FT

.


BL_

DA

LLA

S -

PS

IHO

US

TO

N.G

DT

- 1

0/1/

19

10:1

5 -

\\DA

LLA

S-F

S1\

PR

OJE

CT

S\0

342

DA

LLA

S G

EO

\201

9 G

EO

PR

OJE

CT

S\0

3421

787

CE

DA

R T

RA

IL S

EN

IOR

HO

US

ING

, TO

OL,

TX

-CA

RLS

ON

CO

NS

ULT

IN E

NG

INE

ER

S\A

PP

EN

DIX

\034

2178

7.G

PJ

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

6

12

17

15

15

27

110

55

SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL), stiff to very stff, brown

SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL), very stiff to hard, brownand reddish brown 1.25

40 13

LL

UN

IT D

RY

WT

.(P

CF

)

CO

MP

RE

SS

IVE

ST

RE

NG

TH

(ts

f)

LOG OF BORING B-17



PLA

ST

ICIT

YIN

DE

X

PL PI

UUUCSO

IL T

YP

E

% P

AS

SIN

G#2

00 S

IEV

E

DESCRIPTION


PLA

ST

ICLI

MIT






LIQ

UID

LIM

IT

SP

T -

NT

CP

- T

(BLO

WS

/FT

.)

0 1 2 3 4 5

SA

MP

LES


HP

COMPRESSIVESTRENGTH

TONS/SQ.FT.

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

TE

NT

(%

)

DE

PT

H,

FT

.


BL_

DA

LLA

S -

PS

IHO

US

TO

N.G

DT

- 1

0/1/

19

10:1

5 -

\\DA

LLA

S-F

S1\

PR

OJE

CT

S\0

342

DA

LLA

S G

EO

\201

9 G

EO

PR

OJE

CT

S\0

3421

787

CE

DA

R T

RA

IL S

EN

IOR

HO

US

ING

, TO

OL,

TX

-CA

RLS

ON

CO

NS

ULT

IN E

NG

INE

ER

S\A

PP

EN

DIX

\034

2178

7.G

PJ

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

8

20

17

10

13

18

104

44


CLAYEY SAND (SC), medium dense, brown andreddish brown 1.30

28 10

LL

UN

IT D

RY

WT

.(P

CF

)

CO

MP

RE

SS

IVE

ST

RE

NG

TH

(ts

f)

LOG OF BORING B-18



PLA

ST

ICIT

YIN

DE

X

PL PI

UUUCSO

IL T

YP

E

% P

AS

SIN

G#2

00 S

IEV

E

DESCRIPTION


PLA

ST

ICLI

MIT






LIQ

UID

LIM

IT

SP

T -

NT

CP

- T

(BLO

WS

/FT

.)

0 1 2 3 4 5

SA

MP

LES


HP

COMPRESSIVESTRENGTH

TONS/SQ.FT.

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

TE

NT

(%

)

DE

PT

H,

FT

.


BL_

DA

LLA

S -

PS

IHO

US

TO

N.G

DT

- 1

0/1/

19

10:1

5 -

\\DA

LLA

S-F

S1\

PR

OJE

CT

S\0

342

DA

LLA

S G

EO

\201

9 G

EO

PR

OJE

CT

S\0

3421

787

CE

DA

R T

RA

IL S

EN

IOR

HO

US

ING

, TO

OL,

TX

-CA

RLS

ON

CO

NS

ULT

IN E

NG

INE

ER

S\A

PP

EN

DIX

\034

2178

7.G

PJ

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

9

14

13

11

13 18

117

40


CLAYEY SAND (SC), medium dense, brown andreddish brown 5.18

31 13

LL

UN

IT D

RY

WT

.(P

CF

)

CO

MP

RE

SS

IVE

ST

RE

NG

TH

(ts

f)

LOG OF BORING B-19



PLA

ST

ICIT

YIN

DE

X

PL PI

UUUCSO

IL T

YP

E

% P

AS

SIN

G#2

00 S

IEV

E

DESCRIPTION


PLA

ST

ICLI

MIT






LIQ

UID

LIM

IT

SP

T -

NT

CP

- T

(BLO

WS

/FT

.)

0 1 2 3 4 5

SA

MP

LES


HP

COMPRESSIVESTRENGTH

TONS/SQ.FT.

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

TE

NT

(%

)

DE

PT

H,

FT

.


BL_

DA

LLA

S -

PS

IHO

US

TO

N.G

DT

- 1

0/1/

19

10:1

5 -

\\DA

LLA

S-F

S1\

PR

OJE

CT

S\0

342

DA

LLA

S G

EO

\201

9 G

EO

PR

OJE

CT

S\0

3421

787

CE

DA

R T

RA

IL S

EN

IOR

HO

US

ING

, TO

OL,

TX

-CA

RLS

ON

CO

NS

ULT

IN E

NG

INE

ER

S\A

PP

EN

DIX

\034

2178

7.G

PJ

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

8

9

14

15

13

3

130

37SILTY SAND (SM), medium dense, brown


3.38

16 13

LL

UN

IT D

RY

WT

.(P

CF

)

CO

MP

RE

SS

IVE

ST

RE

NG

TH

(ts

f)

LOG OF BORING B-20



PLA

ST

ICIT

YIN

DE

X

PL PI

UUUCSO

IL T

YP

E

% P

AS

SIN

G#2

00 S

IEV

E

DESCRIPTION


PLA

ST

ICLI

MIT






LIQ

UID

LIM

IT

SP

T -

NT

CP

- T

(BLO

WS

/FT

.)

0 1 2 3 4 5

SA

MP

LES


HP

COMPRESSIVESTRENGTH

TONS/SQ.FT.

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

TE

NT

(%

)

DE

PT

H,

FT

.


BL_

DA

LLA

S -

PS

IHO

US

TO

N.G

DT

- 1

0/1/

19

10:1

5 -

\\DA

LLA

S-F

S1\

PR

OJE

CT

S\0

342

DA

LLA

S G

EO

\201

9 G

EO

PR

OJE

CT

S\0

3421

787

CE

DA

R T

RA

IL S

EN

IOR

HO

US

ING

, TO

OL,

TX

-CA

RLS

ON

CO

NS

ULT

IN E

NG

INE

ER

S\A

PP

EN

DIX

\034

2178

7.G

PJ

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

CONSISTENCY N-VALUE

(Blows/Foot) SHEAR STRENGTH

(tsf) HAND PEN VALUE

(tsf)

Very Soft 0 TO 2 0 TO 0.125 0 TO 0.25

Soft 2 TO 4 0.125 TO 0.25 0.25 TO 0.5

Firm 4 TO 8 0.25 TO 0.5 0.5 TO 1.0

Stiff 8 TO 15 0.5 TO 1.0 1.0 TO 2.0

Very Stiff 15 TO 30 1.0 TO 2.0 2.0 TO 4.0

Hard >30 >2.0 OR 2.0+ >4.0 OR 4.0+

KEY TO TERMS AND SYMBOLS USED ON LOGS

CONSISTENCY OF COHESIVE SOILS

DESCRIPTION OF ROCK QUALITY

RQD

Very Poor (VPo) 0 TO 25

Poor (Po) 25 TO 50

Fair (F) 50 TO 75

Good (Gd) 75 TO 90

Excellent (ExInt) 90 TO 100

ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION

(RQD)

DESCRIPTION OF RECOVERY

% CORE RECOVERY

Incompetent < 40

Competent 40 TO 70

Fairly Continuous 70 TO 90

Continuous 90 TO 100

RECOVERY

ROCK CLASSIFICATION

DENSITY (GRANULAR)

CONSISTENCY (COHESIVE)

THD (BLOWS/FT)

FIELD IDENTIFICATION

Very Loose (VLo) Very Soft (VSo) 0 TO 8 Core (height twice diameter) sags under own weight

Loose (Lo) Soft (So) 8 TO 20 Core can be pinched or imprinted easily with finger

Slightly Compact (SICmpt)

Stiff (St) 20 TO 40 Core can be imprinted with considerable pressure

Compact (Cmpt) Very Stiff (VSt) 40 TO 80 Core can only be imprinted slightly with fingers

Dense (De) Hard (H) 80 TO 5”/100 Core cannot be imprinted with fingers but can be penetrated with pencil

Very Dense (VDe) Very Hard (VH) 5”/100 to 0”/100

Core cannot be penetrated with pencil

SOIL DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY

DEGREE OF PLASTICITY

PLASTICITY INDEX (PI)

SWELL POTENTIAL

None or Slight 0 to 4 None

Low 4 to 20 Low

Medium 20 to 30 Medium

High 30 to 40 High

Very High >40 Very High

DEGREE OF PLASTICITY OF COHESIVE SOILS

MORHS’ SCALE

CHARACTERISTICS EXAMPLES APPROXIMATE THD

PEN TEST

5.5 to 10 Rock will scratch knife Sandstone, Chert, Schist, Granite, Gneiss, some Limestone

Very Hard (VH)

0” to 2”/100

3 to 5.5 Rock can be scratched with knife blade

Siltstone, Shale, Iron Deposits, most Limestone

Hard (H) 1” to

5”/100

1 to 3 Rock can be scratched with fingernail

Gypsum, Calcite, Evaporites, Chalk, some Shale

Soft (So) 4” to

6”/100

BEDROCK HARDNESS

DESCRIPTION CONDITION

Absence of moisture, dusty, dry to touch

DRY

Damp but no visible water MOIST

Visible free water WET

MOISTURE CONDITION OF COHESIVE SOILS

U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZE(S)

6" 3" 3/4" 4 10 200

GRAVEL SAND

152 76.2 19.1 4.76 2.0 0.42 0.074 0.002

GRAIN SIZE IN MM

SILT OR CLAY CLAYFINE

40

COARSE FINE COARSE MEDIUMCOBBLESBOULDERS

SAMPLER TYPES SOIL TYPES

APPARENT DESNITY

SPT (BLOWS/FT)

CALIFORNIA SAMPLER

(BLOWS/FT)

MODIFIED CA. SMAPLER

(BLOWS/FT)

RELATIVE DENSITY (%)

Very Loose 0 to 4 0 to 5 0 to 4 0 to 15

Loose 4 to 10 5 to 15 5 to 12 15 to 35

Medium Dense 10 to 30 15 to 40 12 to 35 35 to 65

Dense 30 to 50 40 to 70 35 to 60 65 to 85

Very Dense >50 >70 >60 85 to 100

RELATIVE DENSITY FOR GRANULAR SOILS

ABBREVIATIONS

CLASSIFICATION OF GRANULAR SOILS

PL – Plastic Limit

LL – Liquid Limit

WC – Percent Moisture

QP – Hand Penetrometer

QU – Unconfined Compression Test

UU – Unconsolidated Undrained Triaxial

Note: Plot Indicates Compressive Strength as Obtained By Above Tests

INITIAL GROUND WATER

FINAL GROUND WATER

CONSISTENCY OF ROCK CORES

CONSISTENCY UNCONF. COMP.

STRENGTH IN TSF

Very Soft 10 TO 250

Soft 250 TO 500

Hard 500 TO 1000

Very Hard 1000 TO 2000

Extra Hard >2000

geotechnical engineering services report …...moisture content (astm d 2216) 3. atterberg limits...

Documents