MA1001-LR100407r
April 7, 2010
Mr. George Marshall, P.E.
City of Coppell
255 Parkway Blvd.
Coppell, Texas 75019
Phone: (972) 304 -3562
Email: gmarshallCc�coppelltx.gov
• GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING
• ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING
• CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS ENGINEERING AND TESTING
Re: Geotechnical Investigation
Pavement Reconstruction
Intersection of Denton Tap Road & Sandy Lake Road
Coppell, Texas
AGG Report No. E10 -0308
Dear Mr. Marshall:
Please find enclosed our report summarizing the results of the geotechnical investigation
performed at the above referenced project. We trust the recommendations derived from this
investigation will provide you with the information necessary to complete your proposed
project successfully.
For your future construction materials testing and related quality control requirements, it is
recommended that the work be performed by Alliance Geotechnical Group, Inc. in order to
maintain continuity of inspection and testing services for the project under the direction of the
geotechnical project engineer.
We thank you for the opportunity to provide you with our professional services. If we can be of
further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Sincerely,
ALLIANCE GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.
-VA W ' Z � > �q 4N N�
op
Michael . Roland, P. MICHAEL DAINE HOLAN
...... D/ Mark J. Farrow, P. E.
�.... � ........�
Principal l 96 ........ ....
043 Senior Principal
�� �' ��CENSti�•�� i
ONAL�G
F -1970
MEMBER 3228 Halifax Street • Suite A • Dallas, Texas 75247 ���
Tel: 972 - 444 -8889 • Fax: 972 - 444 -8893 • www.aggengr.com A01rt0.9
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
1.0 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................... ............................... 1
1.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .............................................. ..............................1
1.2 PURPOSE AND SCOPE ................................................. ..............................1
2.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION ............................................................ ............................... 1
3.0 LABORATORY TESTING ........................................................... ..............................2
4.0 SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ................................... ..............................2
4.1 GENERAL SITE CONDITIONS ....................................... ..............................2
4.2 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ........................................ ..............................2
4.3 SITE GEOLOGY ............................................................. ..............................3
4.4 GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS .................................... ..............................3
5.0 ANALYSIS AND SUBGRADE RECOMMENDATIONS ............... ..............................3
5.1 SOIL MOVEMENTS ........................................................ ..............................3
5.2 PROOFROLLING AND FILL PLACEMENT .................... ..............................4
5.3 SITE GRADING AND DRAINAGE .................................. ..............................4
5.4 STABILIZATION WITH HYDRATED LIME ...................... ..............................5
5.5 RECOMPACTED PAVEMENT SUBGRADE ................... ..............................6
6.0 PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................... ............................... 7
6.1 PAVEMENT SECTION RECOMMENDATIONS .............. ..............................7
6.2 PAVEMENT CONSIDERATIONS ................................... ..............................9
7.0 FIELD SUPERVISION AND CONSTRUCTION TESTING ......... ............................... 9
8.0 LIMITATIONS ............................................................................. ..............................9
FIGURES
PLANOF BORINGS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -1
LOGSOF BORINGS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- 2 & 3
LEGEND - KEY TO LOG TERMS & SYMBOLS ---------------------------------------------------- - - - - -4
SWELLTEST RESULTS--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -5
SOLUBLE SULFATE TEST RESULTS --------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -6
LIME SERIES RESULTS--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -7
ALLIANCE GEOTECHNICAL GROUP E10 -0308
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
PAVEMENT RECONSTRUCTION
INTERSECTION OF DENTON TAP ROAD & SANDY LAKE ROAD
COPPELL, TEXAS
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project consists of replacing the existing intersection of Denton Tap Road & Sandy Lake
Road in Coppell, Texas. We understand that this existing pavement section consists of
pavers over 8 inches of concrete. We further understand that the existing pavers / concrete
will be removed and replaced with full depth concrete pavement. We understand that this
street will be reconstructed to the same edge to edge dimensions and at the same
pavement grades and that widening will not be performed.
1.2 PURPOSE AND SCOPE
The purposes of this geotechnical investigation were to: 1) explore the subsurface
conditions at the site, 2) provide boring logs that present subsurface conditions encountered
including water level observations and laboratory test results, 3) provide pavement subgrade
stabilization recommendations, and 5) provide concrete pavement recommendations. This
report was prepared in general accordance with our proposal number P10 -0309E dated
March 22, 2010.
2.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION
The field investigation consisted of drilling two (2) pavement borings to depths of 10 feet.
The test borings were drilled through the existing pavement. A truck - mounted drilling rig was
used to advance these borings and to obtain samples for laboratory evaluation. The borings
were located at the approximate locations shown on the Plans of Borings (Figure 1).
Undisturbed samples of the soils were obtained at intermittent intervals with standard, thin -
walled, seamless tube samplers. These samples were extruded in the field, logged, sealed,
and packaged to protect them from disturbance and maintain their in -situ moisture content
during transportation to our laboratory.
ALLIANCE GEOTECHNICAL GROUP E10 -0308
PAGE 1
The results of the boring program are presented on the Logs of Borings, Figures 2 and 3. A
key to the descriptive terms and symbols used on the logs is presented on Figure 4.
3.0 LABORATORY TESTING
Laboratory tests were performed on representative samples of the soil to aid in classification
of the soil materials. These tests included Atterberg limits tests, percent passing #200 sieve,
moisture content tests and dry unit weight determinations. Hand penetrometer tests were
performed on the soil samples to provide indications of the swell potential and the
foundation bearing properties of the subsurface strata. The results of these tests are
presented on the Logs of Borings (Figures 2 and 3).
To provide additional information about the swell characteristics of these soils (at their in -situ
moisture conditions), absorption swell tests were performed on selected samples of the clay
soils (see Figure 5). Soluble sulfate testing was also performed on selected samples (see
Figure 6). A lime / Atterberg limits series test was performed on a selected clay soil sample
(see Figure 7.)
4.0 SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
4.1 GENERAL SITE CONDITIONS
The project consists of reconstructing the intersection of Denton Tap Road and Sandy Lake
Road in Coppell, Texas. See Plan of Borings (Figure 1) for site configuration, location and
aerial view.
4.2 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Subsurface conditions encountered in the borings, including descriptions of the various
strata and their depths and thickness, are presented on the Logs of Borings. Note that depth
on all borings refers to the depth from the existing grade or ground surface present at the
time of the investigation. Boundaries between the various soil types are approximate.
ALLIANCE GEOTECHNICAL GROUP E10 -0308
PAGE 2
4.3 SITE GEOLOGY
As shown on the Dallas sheet of the Geologic Atlas of Texas the project site is located in an
area underlain by deposits of the Woodbine Formation. This Formation typically consists of
shale, sandstone, and cemented sand interbedded with clay seams. Soils derived from the
formation are typically moderately to highly active clays exhibiting moderate to high
shrink /swell potential with variations in moisture content.
4.4 GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS
The borings were advanced using continuous flight auger methods. Advancement of the
borings using these methods allows observation of the initial zones of seepage. No
groundwater was encountered in the test borings during drilling. We were unable to obtain
delayed water level readings since the borings had to be backfilled and pavement patched
immediately after drilling completion.
It is not possible to accurately predict the magnitude of subsurface water fluctuations that
might occur based upon short -term observations. The subsurface water conditions are
subject to change with variations in climatic conditions and are functions of subsurface soil
conditions, rainfall and water levels within nearby creeks and ponds.
5.0 ANALYSIS AND SUBGRADE RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 SOIL MOVEMENTS
The subsurface exploration revealed the presence of active clay and sandy clay soils. The
surficial clay soils have a moderate to high shrink /swell potential depending upon their
moisture condition at the time of construction. Potential Vertical Rise (PVR) calculations were
performed using moisture contents, penetrometer readings, and swell test results to
estimate the swell potential of the soil.
PVR values based on current grades and current moisture conditions have been estimated
to range from 2 to 3 inches. It should be noted that if the clay soils are allowed to
significantly dry after pavement removal and prior to placing the new pavement that the
potential vertical rise could increase to over 4+ inches.
ALLIANCE GEOTECHNICAL GROUP E10 -0308
PAGE 3
It is imperative that all cracks and joints in the pavement be sealed and maintained by
routine sealing in order to minimize differential pavement deflections caused by soil swelling.
It is also imperative that positive drainage be provided along the pavement edges to prevent
ponding near the curb lines.
5.2 PROOFROLLING AND FILL PLACEMENT
Prior to placing fill, the exposed subgrade at base of cut should be proofrolled. Proofrolling
should also be performed after removing the existing pavement and cutting to final grades.
Proofrolling can generally be accomplished using a heavy (25 ton or greater total weight)
pneumatic tired roller making several passes over the areas. The proofrolling operations
should be performed under the direction of the geotechnical engineer. Where soft or
compressible zones are encountered, these areas should be removed to a firm subgrade.
Any resulting void areas should be backfilled to finished subgrade in 8 inch compacted lifts
as specified below.
After completion of proofrolling, the ground surface should then be scarified to a depth of 8
inches and recompacted to levels specified below prior to placement of additional fill. We
recommend that fill soils be compacted at -11% to +3% above optimum to 98% of standard
Proctor density (ASTM D698).
5.3 SITE GRADING AND DRAINAGE
All grading should provide positive drainage away from the proposed roadway and should
prevent water from collecting or discharging near the pavements. Water must not be
permitted to pond adjacent to or beneath the pavements during or after construction.
Otherwise, upward soil swell movements could exceed the estimates contained in this
report.
The pavements will be subject to some post construction movement (see Section 5.1 of this
report). Joints in the concrete pavements should be sealed to prevent the infiltration of
water. Since post construction movement of pavement may occur, joints should be
periodically inspected and resealed where necessary.
ALLIANCE GEOTECHNICAL GROUP E10 -0308
PAGE 4
5.4 STABILIZATION WITH HYDRATED LIME
The subsurface exploration revealed surficial materials consisting of plastic clay and sandy
clay soils having a moderate to high shrink /swell potential. These clay soils react with
hydrated lime, which serves to improve their support value and provide a firm, uniform
subgrade beneath the paving.
Based on the anticipated soil materials to be exposed at pavement subgrade and based
upon a Lime / Atterberg Limits series test (see Figure 7) performed on a selected clay
sample, seven (7) percent hydrated lime by dry weight (48 pounds per square yard per 8-
inch depth) will be required to stabilize the existing clay subgrade.
Soluble sulfate testing on selected samples of the clay soils resulted in soluble sulfate
concentrations ranging from 100 to 130 (see Figure 6). Based upon these concentration
levels, the risk of sulfate / lime induced heave is low.
The lime should be thoroughly mixed and blended with the active subgrade soil (TxDOT
Item 260) and the mixture compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of maximum dry density
as determined in accordance with ASTM D698, within -1% to +3% of the soil's optimum
moisture content. We recommend that this lime stabilization extend 1 to 2 feet beyond
exposed pavement edges, if possible, in order to reduce the effects of shrinkage during
extended dry periods. After final grading has been achieved, depth checks should be
performed to verify that the specified depth of stabilization is present.
Sand should be specifically prohibited beneath pavement areas during final grading (after
stabilization), since these more porous soils can allow water inflow, resulting in heave and
strength loss of subgrade soils. It should be specified that only lime- stabilized soil will be
allowed for fine grading. After fine grading each area in preparation for paving, the subgrade
surface should be lightly moistened, as needed, and recompacted to obtain a tight non -
yielding subgrade.
Project specifications should allow a curing period between initial and final mixing of the
lime /soil mixture. After initial mixing, the lime treated subgrade should be lightly rolled and
maintained at or within 5 percentage points above the soil's optimum moisture content until
final mixing and compaction. We recommend a 3 -day curing period for these soils. The
ALLIANCE GEOTECHNICAL GROUP E10 -0308
PAGE 5
following gradation requirements are recommended for the stabilized materials prior to final
compaction:
Minimum Passing 1 3/4" Sieve
Minimum Passing 3/4" Sieve
Minimum Passing No. 4 Sieve
Percent
100
85
60
All non - slaking aggregates retained on the No. 4 sieve should be removed prior to testing.
After final grading has been performed, depth checks and PI verification checks should be
performed to verify that proper stabilization has been achieved.
The prepared subgrade should be protected and moist cured or sealed with a bituminous
material for a minimum of 7 days or until the pavement materials are placed. Pavement
areas should be graded at all times to prevent ponding and infiltration of excessive moisture
on or adjacent to the pavement areas.
Due to the presence of expansive clay soils, pavement movements should be anticipated.
Inspection during construction is particularly important to insure proper construction
procedures are followed.
5.5 RECOMPACTED PAVEMENT SUBGRADE
If lime- stabilization of the pavement subgrade is not performed, we recommend that the
upper eight -(8) inches of subgrade soil be compacted at -2% to +2% of optimum moisture to
a minimum of 98% Standard Proctor density (ASTM D 698). The subgrade should be proof-
rolled prior to subgrade compaction.
Only on -site soil (comparable to the underlying subgrade soil) should be used for fine
grading the pavement areas. After fine grading, the subgrade should again be watered if
needed and re- compacted in order to re- achieve the moisture and density levels discussed
above and provide a tight non - yielding subgrade.
Sand should be specifically prohibited beneath pavement areas during final grading, since
these more porous soils can allow water inflow, resulting in heave and strength loss of
subgrade soils. It should be specified that only clay soils will be allowed for fine grading.
After fine grading each area in preparation for paving, the subgrade surface should be lightly
moistened, as needed, and recompacted to obtain a tight non - yielding subgrade.
ALLIANCE GEOTECHNICAL GROUP E10 -0308
PAGE 6
The subgrade moisture content and density must be maintained until paving is completed.
The subgrade should be watered just prior to paving to assure concrete placement over a
moist subgrade. If a rain event occurs prior to paving, the subgrade should be aerated and
re- tested prior to paving.
Due to the presence of expansive clay soils, post construction upward pavement
movements should be anticipated. Inspection during construction is particularly important to
insure proper construction procedures are followed.
6.0 PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
The required pavement section depends on the traffic volume and the frequency of truck
traffic. We understand that the following design traffic data should be used for the design
lane.
Annual ESALs 300,000
Growth Rate 2.5%
Design Life 30 Years
The pavement section recommendations provided below in this report have been developed
based upon the above traffic information:
6.1 PAVEMENT SECTION RECOMMENDATIONS
The pavement section recommendations provided below were designed based upon
AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures using DARWin 3.1 computer program. A
summary of the inputs are provided below:
Design E 18's:
13,171,000
Initial Serviceability:
4.5
Terminal Serviceability:
2.5
Modulus of Rupture:
588 psi (4,000 psi Concrete)
Elasticity Modulus:
3,969,000 psi
Effective k- value:
225 psi /in - for 8 inches of lime- stabilized subgrade
100 psi /in — for 8 inches of compacted subgrade
Reliability Level:
85%
Standard Deviation:
0.39
Load Transfer J:
3.2
Drainage Coefficient:
1.0
ALLIANCE GEOTECHNICAL GROUP E10 -0308
PAGE 7
Table 1 presents the recommended pavement section for this project:
TABLE 1 - RECOMMENDED PAVEMENT SECTIONS
PAVEMENT RECONSTRUCTION
11.0 inch Portland Cement Concrete*
8.0 inch Lime - Stabilized Subgrade **
Or
12.0 inch Portland Cement Concrete * **
8.0 inch Compacted Subgrade * * **
* A construction tolerance of about '/a inch is included.
** Should be placed in accordance with Section 5.4 of this report.
* ** A construction tolerance of about 1 /2 inch is included.
* * ** Should be placed in accordance with Section 5.5 of this report.
The concrete should have a minimum 28 day compressive strength of 4,000 psi and a
minimum 28 day flexural strength of 588 psi. Concrete quality will be important in order to
produce the desired flexural strength and long term durability. Assuming a nominal
maximum aggregate size of 1 inch to 1 3/8 inches, we recommend that the concrete have
entrained air of 5 percent (± 1 %) with a maximum water cement ratio of 0.45.
Proper joint placement and design is critical to pavement performance. Load transfer at all
joints and maintenance of watertight joints should be provided. Control joints should be
sawed as soon as possible after placing concrete and before shrinkage cracks occur. All
joints including sawed joints should be properly cleaned and sealed as soon as possible to
avoid infiltration of water.
Our previous experience indicates that joint spacing on 12 to 15 foot centers have generally
performed satisfactorily. It is our recommendation that the concrete pavement be reinforced
with a minimum of No. 3 bars placed on chairs on approximately 18 —inch centers in each
ALLIANCE GEOTECHNICAL GROUP E10 -0308
PAGE 8
direction. We recommend that the perimeter of the pavements have a stiffening section to
prevent possible distress due to heavy wheel loads near the edge of the pavements.
6.2 PAVEMENT CONSIDERATIONS
All joints and pavements should be inspected at regular intervals to ensure proper
performance and to prevent crack propagation. The soils at the site are active and
differential heave within the paving areas could potentially occur. The service life of paving
may be reduced due to water infiltration into subgrade soils through heave induced cracks in
the paving section. This will result in softening and loss of strength of the subgrade soils. A
regular maintenance program to seal paving cracks will help prolong the service life of the
paving. The life of the pavement can be increased with proper drainage. Areas should be
graded to prevent ponding adjacent to curbs or pavement edges. Backfill materials, which
could hold water behind the curb, should not be permitted. Flat pavement grades should be
avoided.
7.0 FIELD SUPERVISION AND CONSTRUCTION TESTING
Field density and moisture content determinations should be made on each lift of fill with a
minimum of 1 test per lift per 5,000 square feet of pavement. Supervision by the field
technician and the project engineer is required. Some adjustments in the test frequencies
may be required based upon the general fill types and soil conditions at the time of fill
placement.
Many problems can be avoided or solved in the field if proper inspection and testing
services are provided. It is recommended that site preparation, lime- stabilization, concrete
placement, and fill compaction be monitored by a qualified engineering technician. Density
tests should be performed to verify compaction and moisture content of any earthwork.
Inspection should be performed prior to and during concrete placement operations. Alliance
Geotechnical Group, Inc. employs a group of experienced, well- trained technicians for
inspection and construction materials testing who would be pleased to assist you on this
project.
8.0 LIMITATIONS
The professional services, which have been performed, the findings obtained, and the
recommendations prepared were accomplished in accordance with currently accepted
ALLIANCE GEOTECHNICAL GROUP E10 -0308
PAGE 9
geotechnical engineering principles and practices. The possibility always exists that the
subsurface conditions at the site may vary somewhat from those encountered in the test
borings. The number and spacing of test borings were chosen in such a manner as to
decrease the possibility of undiscovered abnormalities, while considering the nature of
loading, size, and cost of the project. If there are any unusual conditions differing
significantly from those described herein, Alliance Geotechnical Group, Inc. should be
notified to review the effects on the performance of the recommended foundation system.
The recommendations given in this report were prepared exclusively for the use of the City
of Coppell and their consultants. The information supplied herein is applicable only for the
design of the previously described development to be constructed at locations indicated at
this site and should not be used for any other structures, locations, or for any other purpose.
We will retain the samples acquired for this project for a period of 30 days subsequent to the
submittal date printed on the report. After this period, the samples will be discarded unless
otherwise notified by the owner in writing.
ALLIANCE GEOTECHNICAL GROUP E10 -0308
PAGE 10
FIGURES
P
f
I�
I
I
awo
O
1
N
11'C
1
ntt p:!Aqww . d ,qpa
w
...
Pavement Reconstruction
PLAN OF BORINGS
FIGURE
ALLIANCE
Denton Tap & Sandy Lake, Coppell
GEOTECHNICAL
GROUP
Drawn b
fv�DR
Date
4/06/10
Revised
N/A
Scale
1 " 50'
Protect No
E10 -0308
LOG OF BORING B -1
Project: Pavement Reconstruction - Denton Tap & Sandy Lake - Coppell, Texas Project No.: E10 -0308
Date: 03/26/2010 Elev.: Location: See Figure 1
Depth to water at completion of boring: Dry
Depth to water when checked: during drilling was: Dry
Depth to caving when checked: was:
ELEVATION/ SOIL SYMBOLS
DEPTH SAMPLER SYMBOLS DESCRIPTION MC LL PL 200 DD P.PEN UNCON Strain
feet & FIELD TEST DATA % % % P % pd tsf ksf %
( Via: — — -—
-2.5
- 5
-7.5
10
12.5
15
17.5
3 PAVER over 1 SAND over 8 CONCRETE
Reddish brown & tan CLAY w/ sand (FILL) 77 19
Reddish brown sandy CLAY w/ trace gravel 3.6 — —
4.4
16 48 16 32 116 4.5+
Light brown & light gray sandy CLAY w/ gravel 45 +
13 36 13 23 124 4.5+
4.5+
Light brown &light gray sandy CLAY numerous 4.5+
gravel
4.3
Light brown & light gray sandy CLAY w/ sand seams 3.6 — —
4.3
Boring terminated at 10'
Notes: FIGURE:2
ALLIANCE GEOTECHNICAL GROUP
LOG OF BORING B -2
Project: Pavement Reconstruction - Denton Tap & Sandy Lake - Coppell, Texas Project No.: E10 -0308
Date: 03/26/2010 Elev.: Location: See Figure 1
Depth to water at completion of boring: Dry
Depth to water when checked: during drilling was: Dry
Depth to caving when checked: was:
ELEVATION/ SOIL SYMBOLS MC LL PL -200 DD P.PEN UNCON Strain
DEPTH SAMPLER SYMBOLS DESCRIPTION PI
(feet) & FIELD TEST DATA % % % % PCf tsf ksf
F0 3" PAVER over I SAND over 6.5" CONCRETE
Brown & gray sandy CLAY w/ gravel (FILL) 3 -0
Reddish brown & gray very sandy CLAY ,s 30 13 17 5s 3.25 — —
16 2.25
-2.5
-5
-7.5
2.0
Reddish brown & light gray very sandy CLAY 15 57 1 — s
1.75
Light brown & light gray CLAY w/ sand f4.3
3.6
4.2
4.4
10
12.5
15
17.5
Notes
Boring terminated at 10' 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
FIGURE:3
ALLIANCE GEOTECHNICAL GROUP
KEY TO LOG TERMS & SYMBOLS
Symbol Description
Strata symbols
:tz.o;e Paver over Sand
over Concrete
.d• Oy15 .
z CLAY
CLAY,
sandy
Soil Samplers
Rock
Core
Thin Wall
Shelby Tube
I1. Exploratory borings were drilled on dates indicated using truck
mounted drilling equipment.
12. Water level observations are noted on boring logs.
3. Results
of tests conducted on samples
recovered are reported on the
boring
logs. Abbreviations used are:
DD =
natural dry density (pcf)
LL =
liquid limit (%)
MC =
natural moisture content M
PL =
plastic limit (%)
Uncon.=
unconfined compression (tsf)
PI =
plasticity index
P.Pen.=
hand penetrometer (tsf)
-200 =
percent passing #200
4. Rock Cores
REC = (Recovery) sum of core sample recovered divided by length
of run, expressed as percentage.
RQD = (Rock Quality Designation) sum of core sample recovery 4"
or greater in length divided by the run, expressed as
percentage.
FIGUREA1
ALLIANCF GFOTFCHNICAI GROl1P
SWELL TEST RESULTS
BORING
DEPTH
UNIT
ATTERBERG
LIMITS
IN -SITU
FINAL
LOAD
%
NO.
(FEET)
WEIGHT
MOISTURE
MOISTURE
(PSF)
VERTICAL
LL
PL
pi
CONTENT
CONTENT
SWELL
B -1
2 -3
116.2
48
16
32
15.9
17.8
313
2.7
B -1
4 -5
123.8
36
13
23
12.7
13.6
563
0.8
PROCEDURE:
1. Sample placed in confining ring, design load (including overburden) applied, free
water with surfactant made available, and sample allowed to swell completely.
2. Load removed and final moisture content determined.
SOLUBLE SULFATES TEST
RESULTS (PPM)
BORING NO.
DEPTH
(FEET)
SOLUBLE SULFATES
(PPM)
B -1
1 - 1.5
130
B -1
2-3
100
B -1
4-5
110
ALLIANCE
G GEOTECNnICHL
GROUP
LIME SERIES RESULTS
BORING
DEPTH
LIME
LIQUID
PLASTICITY
NO.
(FEET)
ADDED
LIMIT
INDEX (PI)
( /o)
( /o)
0
48
32
4
15
17
B -1
2 -3
6
42
11
8
40
9
ALLIANCE
qG GEOTECHnICAL
GROUP