Jefferson-SY 941003Geotechrical Engineering
ALPHA TESTING, INC.
- GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION
for
JPI Texas Development, Inc.
on
Jeffemon at Riverchase
Off MacArthur Boulevard
_ Coppell, Texas
ALPHA Report No. 94534
ALPHA TESTING, INC.
- ~, wk~,-,,~ s~. ~ ~oo October 3, 1994
-- JPI TEXAS DEVELOPMENT, INC.
600 E. Las Colinas Boulevard, Suite 1800
Irving, Texas 75039
Attention: Mr. John O'Connor
I Re: Geotechnical Exploration
-- '-~-~'~_ --- JEFFERSON AT RIVERCHASE
:.':":-~--- Off MacArthur Boulevard
_ Coppell, Texas
ALPHA Report No. 94534
_ Attached is the report of the geotechnical exploration performed for the project
referenced above. This study has been authorized by Mr. John O'Connor on September
9, 1994 and performed in accordance with ALPHA Proposal No. GT 2603 dated
_ September 8, 1994.
This report contains results of field explorations and laboratory testing and an
-- engineering interpretation of these with respect to available project characteristics. The
results and analyses have been used to develop recommendations to aid design and
! construction of foundations.
ALPHA TESTING, INC. appreciates the opportunity to be of service on this proiect. If
' we can be of further assistance, such as providing materials testing services during
-- construction, please contact this office.
Sincerely yours,
- ,.c.
-- ,r~-~,- ........ ,... _~Javlo A. Lewis, V.~-.
'~ 47040 ! ~-
~.'~":.,~f, ~.,,,:~,?vlanager of Engineering Services
-
~ use, P.E. President
DAL/JLH/pc
,~ Copies: (3) Client
_ (1) Fusch-Serold & Partners
(1) Nelson Corporation, Inc.
~, (1) Ayres Associates, Inc.
_ (1) TNRCC
GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION
orr
-- Jefferson at Riverchase
Off MacArthur Boulevard
~ Coppell, Texas
.~ ALPHA Report No. 94534
-- TABLE OF CONTENTS '
1.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE .................................... 1
: 2.0 PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS .............................. 3
3.0 FIELD EXPLORATION ..................................... 4
__ 4.0 LABORATORY TESTS ..................................... 6
,~ 5.0 GENERAL SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ........................ 6
6.0 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS ............................... 8
-- 6.1 Slab on Grade ....................................... 9
' 6.2 Retaining Walls ...................................... 16
6.2.1 Lateral Earth Pressures ............................ 17
-- 6.2.2 Footings ....................................... 18
6.3 Pavements .......................................... 20
~ 6.3.1 Asphaltic Concrete Pavements ....................... 21
6.3.2 Portland-Cement Concrete Pavements ................. 23
_ 6.4 Pavement Specifications ................................ 23
. 6.5 Drainage ........................................... 24
6.6 Compliance with Texas Health & Safety Code, Section 361.538 .... 26
-- Table of Contents (continued)
' 7.0 GENERAL CONSTRUCTION PROCEDURES
- AND RECOMMENDATIONS .................................. 27
7.1 Site Preparation and Grading ............................ 27
; 7.2 Foundation Excavations ................................ 28
' '~7.3--- ~ Eill Compaction ...................................... 29
_ 7.4 ~'Groundwater ........................................ 31
SOIL MODIFICATION LIME SLURRY AND WATER PRESSURE INJECTION
-- GUIDELINE SPECIFICATIONS ..................................... 32
-- APPENDIX
J A-1 METHODS OF FIELD EXPLORATION
-- BORING LOCATION PLAN - Figure 1
LATERAL EARTH PRESSURE - Figure 2
i OFF-LIMITS ZONE FOR HEAVY EQUIPMENT - Figure 3
B-1 METHODS OF LABORATORY TESTING
RECORD OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
- KEY TO SOIL SYMBOLS AND CLASSIFICATIONS
ALPHA Report No. 94534
1.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE
- The purpose of this geotechnical exploration is to evaluate some of the physical
~ and engineering properties of the subsurface materials at the subject site with
respect to development of geotechnical design parameters for proposed
apartment construction. The field exploration has been accomplished by securing
subsurface soil samples from widely spaced test borings performed across the
expanse of the site. Engineering analyses have been performed from results of
the field exploration and results of laboratory tests performed on representative
_ samples. The analyses have been used to develop geotechnical engineering
~ design parameters for foundations and pavements to be constructed on the
project.
Also included is an evaluation of the site with respect to potential construction
problems and recommendations concerning earthwork and quality control testing
-- during construction. This information can be used to verify subsurface conditions
and to aid in ascertaining all construction phases meet project specifications.
-- Recommendations provided in this report have been developed from information
obtained in test borings which depict subsurface conditions only at the specific
boring locations and at the particular time designated on the logs. Subsurface
conditions at other locations may differ from those observed at the boring
-- 1
ALPHA Report No. 94534
locations. The scope of work is not intended to fully define the variability of
-- subsurface materials which may be present on the site.
t
The nature and extent of variations between borings may not become evident until
construction'. If-signifiEant var~t, ions.then appear evident, this office should be
.-..~- ¥ .-
_ contacted to re-evaluate ~our recommendations after performing on-site
observations.
_ Professional services provided in this geotechnical exploration have been
i performed, findings obtained and recommendations prepared in accordance with
generally accepted geotechnical engineering principles and practices. The scope
-- of services does not include an environmental assessment of the site or
investigation for the presence or absence of hazardous materials in the soil,
surface water or groundwater.
ALPHA TESTING, INC. is not responsible for conclusions, opinions or
recommendations made by others based on this data. Information contained in
this report is intended for exclusive use of the Client and design of specific
_ structures outlined in Section 2.0. Recommendations presented in this report
should not be used for design of any other structures except those specifically
described in this report. Further, subsurface conditions can change with passage
ALPHA Report No. 94534
of time. Recommendations contained herein are not considered applicable for an
-- extended period of time after the completion date of this report. It is
~ recommended our office be contacted for a review of the contents of this report
for construction commencing more than one (1) year after completion of this
report.
Recommendations provided in this report are based on our understanding of
information provided by the Client about characteristics of the project. If the
_ Client notes any deviation from the facts about project characteristics, our office
~ should be contacted immediately since this may materially alter the
recommendations. Further, ALPHA TESTING, INC. is not responsible for
-- damages resulting from workmanship of designers or contractors and it is
, recommended that qualified personnel be retained by the owner to verify work is
performed in accordance with plans and specifications.
2.0 PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS
It is proposed to construct a new apartment complex on a site located generally
-- east of MacArthur Boulevard and about 1300 ft north of Belt Line Road in Coppell,
' Texas. A site plan illustrating the general outline of the property is provided as
Figure 1, the Boring Location Plan, in the Appendix of this report. At the time the
field exploration was performed, the site was relatively open and free of any
-- 3
- the site. According to a topographic survey p : ..~- -.~ · - . -.
° downward from south to north with a maxirr
about 2 ft (Elev. 446 to 444).
Present plans provide for construction of 2
apartment buildings). The new structures will be one to three stories and are
-- anticipated to create relatively light loads to be carried by foundations. Current
_ plans provide for the new structures to be supported using slab-on-grade
,, foundations. New area pavement will consist of either as~Phaltic concrete or
portland cement concrete. Preliminary grading plans prepared by The Nelson
_ Corporation (File No. 94046.00 dated 7/8/94) indicate fills of about 1 to 5 ft in
~ building pad areas. Some retaining walls may be constructed during site
development along the eastern boundary of the site. The exact location of the
-- retaining walls had not been determined at the time of this study.
3.0 FIELD EXPLORATION
-- The site has been explored by drilling a total of 21 test borings to a depth of 20
' ft using standard rotary drilling equipment. The approximate location of each test
boring is shown on the Boring Location Plan, Figure 1, enclosed in the Appendix
ALPHA Report No. 94534
heavy vegetation. Several lakes were observed to the north, south and east of
the site. According to a topographic survey provided by the Client, the site-slopes
downward from south to north with a maximum change in surface elevation of
about 2 ft (Elev. 446 to 444).
Present plans provide for construction of 28 new structures (clubhouse and
apartment buildings). The new structures will be one to three stories and are
anticipated to create relatively light loads to be carried by foundations. Current
plans provide for the new structures to be supported using slab-on-grade
foundations. New area pavement will consist of either as_~ph_altic concrete or
portland cement concrete. Preliminary grading plans prepared by The Nelson
Corporation (File No. 94046.00 dated 7/8/94) indicate fills of about 1 to 5 ft in
building pad areas. Some retaining walls may be constructed during site
development along the eastern boundary of the site. The exact location of the
retaining walls had not been determined at the time of this study.
3.0 FIELD EXPLORATION
-- The site has been explored by drilling a total of 21 test borings to a depth of 20
ft using standard rotary drilling equipment. The approximate location of each test
boring is shown on the Boring Location Plan, Figure 1, enclosed in the Appendix
-- 4
ALPHA Report No. 94534
of this report. Details of drilling and sampling .----~,~ :--. ...... :- ... -~. .,- -..--~.:,.
in Methods of Field Exploration, Section A-1 c :: ~-. :: j
Soil types encountered during the field explor~.t~,:..,' :-.,-~., ,::,.-::.:'~~:::~. --
Subsudace Exploration sheets included in the t ": .'.,.. -.- ~~--
logs contain the Field Technician's and Engi~ '~ ..... :--~
believed to exist be~een actual samples retrieved. Therefore, these boring logs
contain both factual and interpretive information. Lines delineating subsurface
strata on the boring logs are approximate and the actual transition be~een strata
may be gradual.
Apparent fill materials have been encountered at all of the boring locations as will
be discussed in Section 5.0. Composition of the fill has been evaluated based on
samples retrieved from 6-inch maximum diameter holes. According to Mr. Mike
Daniel with Nathan Maier Consulting Engineers, Inc. the existing fill was tested
thoroughly during placement by Maxim Engineers, Inc. and in accordance with
typical compaction criteria for residential or light commercial construction.
-- Records of the fill testing have not been provided for our review but it is our
understanding the fill was placed under engineering control.
-- 5
ALPHA Report No. 94534
of this report. Details of drilling and sampling operations are briefly summarized
-- in Methods of Field Exploration, Section A-1 of the Appendix.
Soil types encountered during the field exploration are presented on Record of
- Subsurface Exploration sheets inbluded in the Appendix of this report. The boring
logs contain the Field Technician's and Engineer's interpretation of conditions
believed to exist between actual samples retrieved. Therefore, these boring logs
contain both factual and interpretive information. Lines delineating subsurface
strata on the boring logs are approximate and the actual transition between strata
may be gradual.
_ Apparent fill materials have been encountered at all of the boring locations as will
be discussed in Section 5.0. Composition of the fill has been evaluated based on
samples retrieved from 6-inch maximum diameter holes. According to Mr. Mike
-- Daniel with Nathan Maier Consulting Engineers, Inc. the existing fill was tested
thoroughly during placement by Maxim Engineers, Inc. and in accordance with
typical compaction criteria for residential or light commercial construction,
-- Records of the fill testing have not been provided for our review but it is our
understanding the fill was placed under engineering control.
-- 5
4.0 LABORATORY TESTS
Selected samples of the subsurface material,,
to evaluate their engineering properties as a t
for foundation design and earthwork constru,
procedures used in the laboratory can be foun
Section B-1 of the Appendix. Individual test ~ --
Subsurface Exploration sheets.
5.0 GENERAL SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Within the 20-ft maximum depth explored on the site, subsurface materials
consist generally of fill (CH/CL) underlain by natural clay (CH). The letters in
_ parenthesis represent the soils' classification according to the Unified Soil
Classification System.
-- Following is a brief summary of subsurface conditions encountered and some
engineering properties of the subsurface stratigraphy:
1. The surface layer of soil encountered consists generally of fill and
extends to depths ranging from about 4 to 12 ft below the existing ground
-- surface. The fill consisted generally of clay with sandy clay, sand and
gravel intermixed. No deleterious material was observed in the fill. The
clay fill is generally firm to hard in consistency.
\ a. Results of Atterberg-limit tests indicate the clay fill has plasticity
index (PI) values varying from about 30 to 48. However, in Borings
-- 12, 14, 16 and 18, sandy clay seams were noted within the fill and
-- 6
ALPHA Report No. 94534
4.0 LABORATORY TESTS
Selected samples of the subsurface materials have been tested in the laboratory
to evaluate their engineering properties as a basis in providing recommendations
for foundation design and earthwork construction. A brief description of testing
procedures used in the laboratory can be found in Methods of Laboratory TestiNg, "
Section.B-1 of the Appendix. Individual test results are presented on Record of
Subsurface Exploration sheets.
5.0 GENERAL SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Within the 20-ft maximum depth explored on the site, subsurface materials
consist generally of fill (CH/CL) underlain by natural clay (CH). The letters in
parenthesis represent the soils' classification according to the Unified Soil
Classification System.
Following is a brief summary of subsurface conditions encountered and some
engineering properties of the subsurface stratigraphy:
1. The surface layer of soil encountered consists generally of fill and
extends to depths ranging from about 4 to 12 ft below the existing ground
surface. The fill consisted generally of clay with sandy clay, sand and
gravel intermixed. No deleterious material was observed in the fill. The
clay fill is generally firm to hard in consistency,
\ a. Results of Atterberg-limit tests indicate the clay fill has plasticity
index (PI) values varying from about 30 to 48. However, in Borings
-- 121 14, 16 and 18, sandy clay seams were noted within the fill and
-- 6
ALPHA Report No. 94534
have plasticity index values ranging from about 20 to 23.
Therefore, the fill is considered moderately to highly plastic
(expansive) and can be expected to swell and shrink with
corresponding variations in moisture content.
b. At the time of field testing, the moisture content of the fill ranged
from about 13 to 34 percent.
-- '~ -..'~ '-c_. Results of unconfined compression tests indicate the fill has
dandrained shear strengths ranging from about 0.7 to 1.6 kips per sq
2. Below the surficial fill, generally natural clay was noted and extends at
least to the 20-ft maximum depth explored. The natural clay is generally
firm to very stiff in consistency.
a. Results of laboratory tests indicate the clays have plasticity index
values varying from about 30 to 54. In view of these test results,
the clay is considered highly plastic (expansive) and can be
expected to swell and shrink significantly with corresponding
variations in moisture content.
b. At the time of field testing, the natural moisture content of the
clay ranged from about 21 to 39 percent.
c. Results of unconfined compression ".
has undrained shear strengths ranging
per sq ft.
Most of the subsurface materials are relatively impe~
to have a slow response to water movement.
observation will be required to evaluate actual grc
depths explored. Also, the groundwater level at the ,,
seasonally depending on the amount of rainfall, pr,
water level in the adjacent lakes and subsurface drainage characteristics.
7
ALPHA Report No. 94534
have plasticity index values ranging from about 20 to 23.
Therefore, the fill is considered moderately to highly plastic
(expansive) and can be expected to swell and shrink with
corresponding variations in moisture content.
b. At the time of field testing, the moisture content of the fill ranged
from about 13 to 34 percent.
--. .-.c_. Results of unconfined compression tests indicate the fill has --- -~undrained shear strengths ranging from about 0.7 to 1.6 kips per sq
2. Below the surficial fill, generally natural clay was noted and extends at
least to the 20-ft maximum depth explored. The natural clay is generally
firm to very stiff in consistency.
a. Results of laboratory tests indicate the clays have plasticity index
values varying from about 30 to 54. In view of these test results,
the clay is considered highly plastic (expansive) and can be
expected to swell and shrink significantly with corresponding
variations in moisture content.
b. At the time of field testing, the natural moisture content of the
clay ranged from about 21 to 39 percent.
c. Results of unconfined compression tests indicate the clay soil
has undrained shear strengths ranging from about 0.9 to 1.5 kips
per sq ft.
Most of the subsurface materials are relatively impermeable and are anticipated
to have a slow response to water movement. Therefore, several days of
observation will be required to evaluate actual groundwater levels within the
depths explored. Also, the groundwater level at the site is anticipated to fluctuate
seasonally depending on the amount of rainfall, prevailing weather conditions,
water level in the adjacent lakes and subsurface drainage characteristics.
7
ALPHA Report No. 94534
During field explorations, free groundwater was noted on drilling tools and in open
-- boreholes upon completion in Borings 1, 3, 15, 17 and 18 at depths ranging from
' about 8 to 18 ft below the existing ground surface. Free groundwater was not
encountered in the other borings. In our opinion, the current groundwater level
-- on the site may be located about 13-18 ft below the existing ground surface.
Other shallower groundwater may be present as "perched" groundwater on the
site. It is not uncommon to detect seasonal groundwater either in fractures or
granular seams within the fill matrix or near the fill/natural soil interface,
_ particularly after a wet season. If more detailed groundwater information is
required, monitoring wells or piezometers can be installed.
_ Further details concerning subsurface materials and conditions encountered can
be obtained from the Record of Subsurface Exploration sheets provided in the
Appendix of this report.
6.0 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
The following design recommendations have been developed on the basis of the
-- previously described Project Characteristics (Section 2.0) and Subsurface
Conditions (Section 5.0). If project criteria change, including project location on
the site, our office should conduct a review to determine if modifications to the
recommendations are required.
8
ALPHA Report No. 94534
Results of test borings indicate fill is present across the entire site. The following
recommendations are predicated upon our understanding the existing fill
encountered on the site has been compacted in accordance with typical
compaction criteria for residential or light commercial structures and placed under
controlled engineering conditions.~-- --.'---.,, -
During preparation of this report, it was anticipated the required fill for the
building pads would be obtained from either on-site grading (soils with a plasticity
index of generally 42 or less) or off-site sources. If fill sources with soils having
a plasticity index value above 42 are used as fill on the site, the following
recommendations should be reviewed by the geotechnical engineer to determine
if alternate recommendations are required.
6.1 Slab-on-Grade
Slab-on-grade foundations should be designed with exterior and interior grade
beams adequate to provide sufficient rigidity to the foundation system. A net
allowable soil bearing pressure of 2.5 kips per sq ft may be used for design of all
grade beams bearing on either existing fill or new fill soils placed as
recommended in Section 7.3. Grade beams should bear a minimum depth of 12
inches below final grade and should have a minimum width of 10 inches.
ALPHA Report No. 94534
-- All grade beams and floor slabs should be ade'.:,/~ ~1~.~¥,.. ,'~,~*-'..~'~]'/
- reduce cracking as normal movements occur in f¢ ~..-
' barrier of polyethylene sheeting or similar materb
slab and the subgrade soils to retard moistm
-- Further, a thin layer of clean sand can be place- .~.. ~,~'~
improve concrete curing and reduce the potentia" ...
-- Slab-on-grade foundation systems could experience potential movements of up
to about 3.75 inches (Potential Vertical Rise, PVR) if constructed at final grades
. indicated on the preliminary grading plans prepared by The Nelson Corporation
(File No. 94046.00 dated 7/8/94). Further, these movements are estimated
_ assuming materials with a plasticity index of 42 or less are used as fill beneath
buildings. Typically, these potential movements would be considered outside the
normal limits of effective slab-on-grade foundation design. Hence, movement of
-- slab foundations can be reduced by improving subsurface conditions beneath the
slabs as discussed below.
-- "Movement of slab foundations can be reduced by improving subsurface conditions
beneath the slab as follows: (a) elevating the slab with a specified thickness of
select, non-expansive fill, or (b) over-excavating a portion of the existing
-- expansive clay soils and placing a specified thickness of select, non-expansive
-- 10
ALPHA Report No. 94534
All grade beams and floor slabs should be adequately reinforced with steel to
-- reduce cracking as normal movements occur in foundation soils. Also, a moisture
' barrier of polyethylene sheeting or similar material should be placed between the
slab and the subgrade soils to retard moisture migration through the slab.
-- Further, a thin layer of clean sand can be placed over the moisture barrier to
improve concrete curing and reduce the potential for surface cracking.
-- Slab-on-grade foundation systems could experience potential movements of up
to about 3.75 inches (Potential Vertical Rise, PVR) if constructed at final grades
indicated on the preliminary grading plans prepared by The Nelson Corporation
(File No. 94046.00 dated 7~8~94). Further, these movements are estimated
_ assuming materials with a plasticity index of 42 or less are used as fill beneath
buildings. Typically, these potential movements would be considered outside the
normal limits of effective slab-on-grade foundation design. Hence, movement of
-- slab foundations can be reduced by improving subsurface conditions beneath the
slabs as discussed below.
-- "Movement of slab foundations can be reduced by improving subsurface conditions
beneath the slab as follows: (a) elevating the slab with a specified thickness of
select, non-expansive fill, or (b) over-excavating a portion of the existing
-- expansive clay soils and placing a specified thickness of select, non-expansive
-- 10
ALPHA Report No. 94534
soil between the bottom of the floor slab and the top surface of the underlying
materials.
' 1. All select, non-expansive fill or replacement soils should consist of a
material having a liquid limit less than 30 and a plasticity index (PI) not less
than about 4 nor greater than 15.
2. Select fill should be compacted to at least '100 percen~ of s~a~dard-
Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698) and within the ran~e"of 1
percent below to 3 percentage points above the material's optimum
moisture content.
3. Select fill should not extend beyond building lines.
_ Due to variations in subsurface conditions encountered across the site, the
, amount of select fill required will vary depe..~ing upon location on the site. Areas
with common subsurface conditions and requiring similar thicknesses of select,
_ non-expansive fill have been grouped into either Zone I or Zone II and delineated
with heavy broken lines on the Boring Location Plan, Figure 1. Movement of slab
foundations can be reduced to about 3 inches (Potential Vertical Rise) by placing
-- at least 1 ft of select, non-expansive soil between the bottom of the floor slab and
the top surface of the underlying soils for buildings in Zone I. Buildings in Zone
II should be provided with at least 2 ft of select, non-expansive fill in order to
- reduce movements to about 3 inches.
Estimated potential movements (Potential Vertical Rise, PVR) given above for
-- slabs-on-grade have been developed assuming finished floor elevations are
-- 11
ALPHA Report No. 94534
established at final grades indicated on the preliminary grading plans prepared by
The Nelson Corporation (File No. 94046 dated 7~8/94). If finished floor elevations
deviate from this assumption, the estimated movements given above should be
re-evaluated by our office. Other fill required below the minimum select fill
-~-__thicknesses described above could consist of either on-site soils or imported
material provided the plasticity index of the fill soil does not exceed 42.
The above potential movements have been estimated in general accordance with
methods outlined by Texas Highway Department Test Method Tex-124-E and
engineering judgement and experience. Estimated movements have been
calculated assuming the moisture content of the in-situ soil within the normal zone
of seasonal moisture content change varies from a "dry" condition to a "wet"
condition as defined by Tex-124-E. Deep-seated swelling of underlying deeper
soil can cause overall movements exceeding those predicted above if positive
drainage of surface water is not maintained or if soils are subject to an outside
water source, such as leakage from a utility line or subsurface moisture migration
from off-site locations.
An alternate movement reduction method utilizes the procedures of Lime Slurry
and Water Pressure Injection (LSPI). The improvement procedures outlined
below, again, will not eliminate future movement of slabs-on-grade. In choosing
12
ALPHA Report No. 94534
this method of slab movement reduction, the Owner is accepting some post
construction movement of slabs.
Improvement Procedures:
1. Final grades could be achieved using either on-site materials or
imported fill provided the plasticity index of the fill does not exceed 42. All
such fill materials should be compacted as outlined in Section 7.3 of this
- report.
2. Following grading operations for the building pads, the exposed
-- subgrade of the building pads in both Zone I and Zone II should be lime
slurry pressure injected by a double pass to a depth of at least 7 feet.
3. Additional water injections may be required to achieve the desired final
moisture content and corresponding soil swell abatement. If construction
_ of floor slabs on grade is initiated with soils at their current moisture
content level, as many as 1.5 to 2 gallons of water per square foot may be
required to achieve the final moisture content in the injected soils, if
_ uniformly distributed.
4. All injections should extend at least 5 ft beyond the perimeter of the
-- building pad.
-- The purpose of the above procedure is to pre-swell the existing soils and
introduce a water-lime mixture to aid in controlling natural variations in moisture
content of the soils. Satisfactory completion of the injection process is achieved
-- when the desired moisture content and abatement of swell in the injected
subgrade clay soils are reached. Preliminary laboratory tests indicate the desired
final moisture content will be about one-half of the soils' liquid limit. The free
-- swell of the injected soils should not exceed one (1) percent, considering the
-- 13
ALPHA Report No. 94534
applied floor slab loads and final overburden pressures. Performance of post-
-- injection swell testing and moisture content determinations should be employed
~ as final acceptance criteria in engineering analysis to examine accomplishment
of intended objectives of the injection treatment.
The upper soil surface of {-he injected pad becomes wet and soft during the lime
and water injection process. As a result, special track-mounted equipment or
dozer assistance may be required to move drilling equipment across the site to
_ sample the injected soils and verify satisfactory completion of the injection
procedure.
_ Maximum benefit of these movement reduction procedures can be achieved by
employing ALPHA TESTING, INC. to observe, monitor and test the entire process.
Construction specifications for the lime slurry and water pressure injection process
-- are provided in the Appendix of this report.
Between the time the subgrade is lime slurry and water pressure injected and the
-- concrete slab is placed, the upper surface of the injected soil should not be
allowed to dry. A water truck should be on site to keep the ground surface moist.
Another means of maintaining moisture achieved in the lime slurry and water
-- 14
ALPHA Report No. 94534
injected soils is to install deep grade beams (at least 24 inches deep) around the
- perimeter of the building.
To allow for adequate pre-swelling of the soils from the injection procedure,
-- concrete for slabs should not be placed above injected areas until at least 2
weeks following the final water injection. During this 2-week period, the surface
of the injected soil must be kept moist or covered to prevent moisture loss. About
1-1.5 inches of heave can be expected in building pads during and shortly after
_ completion of the injection process.
Potential movements (Potential Vertical Rise, PVR) of slabs-on-grade are
- estimated not to exceed about 3 inches for buildings in both Zone I and Zone II
following lime slurry and water pressure injection as described above. These
estimated movements have been developed assuming the moisture content of the
-- soil within the specified zone has been increased to levels previously
recommended and the corresponding swell abatement in the injected zone has
been achieved (1 percent or less). Also, the estimated movements have been
- developed assuming finished floor elevations are established at final grades
indicated on the preliminary grading plans prepared by The Nelson Corporation
(File No. 94046.00 dated 7/8/94). If finished floor elevations deviate from
-- 15
ALPHA Report No. 94534
assumed grade, the estimated movements given above should be re-evaluated
-- by our office.
The above potential movements have been estimated using methods outlined by
-- Texas Highway Department Test Method Tex-l:~4-E and eng~nee__r~in_g judgement
and experience. Estimated movements have been calculated assuming the free
swell of the injected soils does not exceed 1%. Further, it is assumed the
moisture content of the soil below the injected zone and within the normal zone
of seasonal moisture content change varies from the "dry" condition to a "wet"
condition as defined by Tex-124-E. Deep-seated swelling of underlying deeper
soil can cause overall movements exceeding those predicted above if positive
-- drainage of surface water is not maintained or if soils are subject to an outside
water source, such as leakage from a utility line or subsurface moisture migration
from off-site locations.
6.2 Retaining Walls
Present plans anticipate retaining walls will be constructed along the eastern
-- boundary of this site. Based on grading information provided during this study,
it is anticipated these walls will have a maximum height of about 3 to 4 ft.
-- 16
ALPHA Report No. 94534
6.2.1 Lateral Earth Pressures Retaining walls should be designed to resist the
-- expected lateral earth pressures. The magnitude of lateral earth pressure against
' underground walls is dependent on the method of backfill placement, the type of
: backfill soil, drainage provisions, and whether the wall is permitted to yield after
---.':' ~ _ --' placement of the backfill. It has been demonstrated that when a wall is held
rigidly against horizontal movement, the lateral pressure against the wall is
greater than the normally assumed active pressure. Yielding walls can be
designed for active earth pressures while rigid walls should be designed for higher
_ at-rest lateral earth pressures. The recommendations provided herein assume the
walls are allowed to yield.
-- The client has indicated on-site materials will be used as backfill behind retaining
walls. For on-site materials, an in-place unit weight of 125 pcf and undrained
conditions should be assumed. Since most of the on-site soils will not be free
-- draining, the effects of full hydrostatic pressures should be included in the design
and the submerged unit weight of the backfill material (125-62.4 pct') should be
used. For assumed yielding walls, an active coefficient of lateral earth pressure
- of 0.45 (equivalent fluid unit weight of 28.2 pcf plus hydrostatic pressure) or 90.6
pcf is recommended for backfill compacted to at least 95 percent of standard
Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698). Lateral earth pressures including
ALPHA Report No. 94534
the effects of full hydrostatic pressures can be computed as shown on Figure 2
included in the Appendix of this report.
The effects of surcharge loading must also be taken into consideration. The
active (Ka) coefficient of earth pressure should also be assumed for this case.
The component of lateral earth pressure due to surcharge loading can also be
computed as shown on Figure 2.
_ To reduce the possibility of increases in lateral pressures due to over-compaction,
it is recommended that compaction of backfill adjacent to walls be accomplished
using light weight hand controlled vibrating-plate compactors. Heavy compaction
-- equipment should not be operated within the "off limits" zone as defined on Figure
3 included in the Appendix. It is also recommended that compaction of backfill
soils behind walls not exceed 100 percent Standard Proctor maximum dry density
-- (ASTM D 698) to further limit lateral earth pressures.
6.2.2 Footings The proposed retaining walls can be supported using a shallow
-- footing foundation system. Wall footings (strip type) can be designed for a net
allowable soil bearing pressure of up to 2.5 kips per sq ft. The above bearing
pressure is applicable for footings bearing on either existing fill, new fill
compacted as outlined in Section 7.3 or natural clayey soils.
- 18
ALPHA Report No. 94534
Shallow wall footings with an applied stress of up to 0.5 kips per sq ft could
- experience movements of up to about 3.75 inches. Footings with applied stresses
of 2.5 kips per sq ft could experience movements of up to 2 inches. The above
, potential movements are estimated in general accordance with methods outlined
-- by Texas~-H~gl~w~y:'Department Test Method Tex-124-E and engineering
_ judgement and experience. Estimated movements are calculated assuming the
moisture content of the in-situ soil within the normal zone of seasonal moisture
content change varies from a "dry" condition to a "wet" condition as defined by
_ Tex-124-E. Deep-seated swelling of underlying deeper soil can cause overall
~ movements exceeding those predicted above if positive drainage of surface water
is not maintained or if the soils are subject to an outside water source, such as
-- leakage from a utility line or subsurface moisture migration from off-site locations.
Resistance to sliding will be developed by friction along the base of the footing
-- and passive earth pressure acting on the vertical face of a key installed in the
base of the footing, if required. It is recommended a coefficient of base friction
of 0.45 be used for the clay subgrade. The available passive earth pressure
acting on the vertical face of a key constructed in the base of the footing may be
_ calculated using an allowable passive earth pressure of 1200 psf. Passive
· resistance on the toe of the footing should be neglected due to potential soil
shrinkage away from the footing.
19
ALPHA Report No. 94534
Careful monitoring during construction is necessary to locate any pockets or
-- seams of unsuitable materials which might be encountered in excavations for
footings. These materials, if found, should be removed and replaced with either
lean concrete or select, non-expansive fill (plasticity index less than 15) and
- compacted to at least 100 percent of standard Proctor maximum dry density
(ASTM D 698) and at a moisture content within 2 percentage points of the
material's optimum moisture content.
_ All footings should be located at a depth of at least 1.5 ft below final exterior
grade as measured adjacent to the lower side of the wall. Wall footings should
have a least dimension of 12 inches in width for bearing capacity considerations.
6.3 Pavements
Clay soil encountered near the existing ground surface will probably constitute the
-- subgrade for most parking and drive areas. Therefore, these soils should be
improved prior to construction of pavements. To permit correlation between
information from test borings and actual subgrade conditions exposed during
-- construction, a qualified Geotechnical Engineer should be retained to provide
subgrade monitoring and testing during construction. If there is any change in
project criteria, the recommendations contained in this report should be reviewed
-- by this office.
20
ALPHA Report No. 94534
are based only on the physical and engir :.. :~, -.-.
conventional thickness determination pre ..':~·
such as subgrade drainage, shoulder s. . -~ .. .. .
surface elevations, reinforcing steel, j'oin ............. ,.
_ significantly affect the service life and must be included in the preparation of the
construction drawings and specifications. Normal periodic maintenance will be
required for all pavements to achieve the design life of the pavement system.
6.3.1 Asphaltic Concrete Pavements
After final subgrade elevation in parking and drive areas is achieved, the exposed
-- surface of the pavement subgrade soil should be scarified to a depth of 6 inches
and mixed with an estimated 6 percent of hydrated lime (by dry unit weight) in
conformance with Texas Highway Department Item 260. Assuming an in-place
-- unit weight of 100 pcf for the pavement subgrade soil, this percentage of lime
equates to about 27 lbs of lime per sq yard of subgrade treated. The actual
amount of lime required should be confirmed by additional laboratory tests.
,, 1. Extending lime stabilization procedures at least 1 ft beyond the edge of
the pavement is recommended to reduce effects of seasonal shrinking and
_ swelling upon the extreme edges of pavement. The soil-lime mixture
should be compacted to at least 95 percent of standard Proctor maximum
dry density (ASTM D 698) and within the range of 0 to 4 percentage points
_ above the mixture's optimum moisture content.
ALPHA Report No. 94534
Calculations used to determine the required pavement thickness provided below
-- are based only on the physical and engineering properties of the materials and
_ conventional thickness determination procedures. Related civil design factors
such as subgrade drainage, shoulder support, cross-sectional configurations,
-- surface elevations, reinforcing steel, j'oint 'desigr~"and ~r~vironmental factors will
_ significantly affect the service life and must be included in the preparation of the
construction drawings and specifications. Normal periodic maintenance will be
required for all pavements to achieve the design life of the pavement system.
6.3.1 Asphaltic Concrete Pavements
After final subgrade elevation in parking and drive areas is achieved, the exposed
-- surface of the pavement subgrade soil should be scarified to a depth of 6 inches
and mixed with an estimated 6 percent of hydrated lime (by dry unit weight) in
conformance with Texas Highway Department Item 260. Assuming an in-place
-- unit weight of 100 pcf for the pavement subgrade soil, this percentage of lime
equates to about 27 lbs of lime per sq yard of subgrade treated. The actual
amount of lime required should be confirmed by additional laboratory tests.
... 1. Extending lime stabilization procedures at least I ft beyond the edge of
the pavement is recommended to reduce effects of seasonal shrinking and
_ swelling upon the extreme edges of pavement. The soil-lime mixture
should be compacted to at least 95 percent of standard Proctor maximum
dry density (ASTM D 698) and within the range of 0 to 4 percentage points
_ above the mixture's optimum moisture content.
ALPHA Report No. 94534
2. In all areas where hydrated lime is used to stabilize subgrade soil,
routine Atterberg-limit tests should be performed to assure the resulting
plasticity index of the soil-lime mixture is at/or below 15.
Mechanical lime stabilization of the pavement subgrade soil will not prevent
normal seasonal movements and deep-seated movement of the underlying
untreated materials. Pavements and other fiat work will have the same potential
for movement as slabs constructed directly on the existing soils. Therefore, good
_ perimeter surface drainage with a minimum slope of 2 percent away from the
pavement is recommended. The use of sand or select fill as a leveling course
below pavements supported on expansive clays should be avoided. Future
-- maintenance of pavements should be expected over the life of the structure.
Texas Triaxial Classification tests have not been performed for this specific
-- project, but our previous experience with similar soils indicates the Texas Triaxial
value for lime stabilized clay soils will be about four (4) while the Texas Triaxial
value for natural untreated subgrade will be about six (6). Using the above values
-- and assuming normal traffic for a 15-year project life, the following pavement
sections are recommended below:
1. The pavement section in parking areas can consist of at least 5 inches
of asphaltic concrete composed of 3.5 inches of binder under 1.5 inches
of surface course and overlying a lime stabilized clay subgrade.
-- 22
under ~.5 inches of suflace course)-~;.~~.~~j,,~~~ -- ~-
-- subgrad, should be adequate. ~~,
3. The coarse aoore~ate in the sumac - ...
-- angular crushed limestone rather than ~
-- 6.3.2 Portland-Cement Concrete Pavements ~k.O '-
In the event concrete pavements are utilized, tl~-a-DoveTeco,,~,~.~....._,_ ..........
for mechanical lime stabilization would not be required. Prior to construction of
concrete pavements on untreated soils, the exposed subgrade should be scarified
_ to a depth of at least 6 inches and compacted to at least 95 percent of standard
~ Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698) and within the range of 1 percent
below to 3 percentage points above the material's optimum moisture content.
-- Pavements in parking and drive areas could then consist of at least 5 inches of
adequately reinforced concrete. Concrete pavements joining buildings should be
constructed with a curb and the joint between the building and curb should be
-- sealed. Joints in concrete paving should not exceed 15 ft.
6.4 Pavement Specifications
-- Pavements should be specified, constructed and tested to meet the following
requirements:
1. Hot Mix Asphaltic Concrete: Texas SDHPT Item 340, Type B Base
Course (binder), Type D Surface Course.
-- 23
ALPHA Report No. 94534
2. In drive areas, 6 inches of asphaltic concrete (4.5 inches of binder
under 1.5 inches of surface course) overlying a lime stabilized clay
-- subgrade should be adequate.
3. The coarse aggregate in the surface course should be composed of
-- angular crushed limestone rather than smooth gravel.
-- 6.3.2 Portland-Cement Concrete Pavements " -
In the event concrete pavements are utilized, the above recommended procedure
for mechanical lime stabilization would not be required. Prior to construction of
concrete pavements on untreated soils, the exposed subgrade should be scarified
_ to a depth of at least 6 inches and compacted to at least 95 percent of standard
~ Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698) and within the range of 1 percent
below to 3 percentage points above the material's optimum moisture content.
-- Pavements in parking and drive areas could then consist of at least 5 inch~s of
adequately reinforced concrete. Concrete pavements joining buildings should be
constructed with a curb and the joint between the building and curb should be
-- sealed. Joints in concrete paving should not exceed 15 ft.
6.4 Pavement Specifications
- Pavements should be specified, constructed and tested to meet the following
requirements:
1. Hot Mix Asphaltic Concrete: Texas SDHPT Item 340, Type B Base
Course (binder), Type D Surface Course.
-- 23
ALPHA Report No. 94534
2. Portland Cement Concrete: Texas SD ,~
minimum compressive strength of 3,000 .' ,:: .'- ,.
Concrete should be designed with 5 + ' :..-..,~:.
3. Lime Stabilized Subgrade: Texas SDHF ' · . "-., '
6 percent of hydrated lime (by dry unit ~ ..... ~
existing clay soil which has been scarifi'-. :
The actual amount of lime required " '~('
- additional laboratory tests prior to construction. ' ......
a. The soil-lime mixture should be compacted to at least 95
percent of standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D
698) and within the range of 0 to 4 percentage points above
optimum moisture. The moisture content of the subgrade
should be maintained until the pavement surface is placed.
b. In all areas where hydrated lime is utilized to stabilize the
subgrade soil, routine Atterberg-limit tests should be
performed prior to completion of construction to assure the
resulting plasticity index of the soil-lime mixture will be at/or
below 15. Gradation, Atterberg-limits and density tests
should be performed at a frequency of I test per 5000 sq ft
-- of pavement.
4. Re-compacted Subgrade: On-site clay materials should be scarified
-- to a depth of at least 6 inches and re-compacted to at least 95
percent of standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698)
and within the range of 1 percent below to 3 percentage points
- above the material's optimum moisture content. The moisture
content of the subgrade should be maintained until the pavement
surface is placed. Density tests should be performed at a frequency
-- of 1 test per 5000 sq ft of pavement.
- 6.5 Drainage
Adequate drainage should be provided to reduce seasonal variations in moisture
? content of foundation soils. All pavements and sidewalks should be sloped away
from the buildings to prevent ponding of water around the structures. Final
-- 24
ALPHA Report No. 94534
2. Portland Cement Concrete: Texas SDHPT Item 360. Specify a
minimum compressive strength of 3,000 lbs per sq inch at 28 days.
Concrete should be designed with 5 _+ 1 percent entrained air.
3. Lime Stabilized Subgrade: Texas SDHPT Item 260. An estimated
6 percent of hydrated lime (by dry unit weight) should be applied to
existing clay soil which has been scarified to a depth of 6 inches.
: The actual amount of lime required should be confirmed by
- additional laboratory tests prior to construction.
a. The soil-lime mixture should be compacted to at least 95
percent of standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D
698) and within the range of 0 to 4 percentage points above
optimum moisture. The moisture content of the subgrade
should be maintained until the pavement surface is placed.
b. In all areas where hydrated lime is utilized to stabilize the
subgrade soil, routine Atterberg-limit tests should be
performed prior to completion of construction to assure the
resulting plasticity index of the soil-lime mixture will be at/or
below 15. Gradation, Atterberg-limits and density tests
should be performed at a frequency of 1 test per 5000 sq ft
of pavement.
4. Re-compacted Subgrade: On-site clay materials should be scarified
to a depth of at least 6 inches and re-compacted to at least 95
percent of standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698)
and within the range of I percent below to 3 percentage points
above the material's optimum moisture content. The moisture
content of the subgrade should be maintained until the pavement
surface is placed. Density tests should be performed at a frequency
of 1 test per 5000 sq ft of pavement.
6.5 Drainage
Adequate drainage should be provided to reduce seasonal variations in moisture
content of foundation soils. All pavements and sidewalks should be sloped away
from the buildings to prevent ponding of water around the structures. Final
24
ALPHA Report No. 94534
grades within 10 ft of the structure should be adjusted to slope away from the
structure at a minimum slope of 2 percent. Maintaining positive surface drainage
throughout the life of the structure is essential.
-- In order to enhance performance of slabs underlain by select non-expansive fill
at this site, every reasonable precaution must be taken to inhibit infiltration of
groundwater and surface water into select fill. Past problems have occurred with
slabs underlain by even extensive select fill thicknesses when poor drainage
causes saturation of the select fill. In this instance, the select fill can act as a
reservoir for water, and cause swelling beyond normally assumed amounts in the
underlying clays. Therefore, it is recommended all backfill soils immediately
-- adjacent to exterior grade beams consist of native clay soils compacted as
outlined in Section 7.3 of this report. Select, non-expansive fill should not extend
beyond building lines.
In areas with pavement or sidewalks adjacent to the new structure, a positive seal
must be maintained between the structure and the pavement or sidewalk to
-- minimize seepage of water into the underlying supporting soils. Post-construction
movement of pavement and fiat-work is not uncommon. Normal maintenance
should include inspection of all joints in paving and sidewalks, etc. as well as re-
sealing where necessary.
-- 25
in Section 7.3 of this report and in accord~, .:..:.-- -'..:-' .',-~- . ,.,- .... .,.
· standards. Since granular bedding backf '~ ...". ..
backfilled trench should be prevented frorr ..-. .....
access for surface or subsurface water
Concrete cut-off collars or clay plugs shoui-~J--15~--C~rovram~-~ .................
building lines to prevent water from travelling in the trench backfill and entering
beneath the structure.
6.6 Compliance with Texas Health & Safety Code, Section 361.538
Pursuant to the requirements of Texas Health & Safety Code Section 361.538
("Section 361.538"), ALPHA TESTING, INC. has tested the soil on the subject
property. After conducting visual examinations of soil samples retrieved from the
test borings, as well as conducting interviews with our drilling personnel, a
registered professional engineer with ALPHA TESTING, INC. has discovered no
evidence the subject site overlays a closed municipal solid waste landfill.
-- Please note, Section 361.538 also requires that a developer of property larger
than one (1) acre provide results of soil testing to the Executive Director of the
Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, located in Austin, Texas, at
-- least thirty (30) days prior to beginning development of the site.
-- 26
ALPHA Report No. 94534
Trench backfill for utilities should be properly placed and compacted as outlined
-- in Section 7.3 of this report and in accordance with requirements of local City
' standards. Since granular bedding backfill is used for most utility lines, the
backfilled trench should be prevented from becoming a conduit and allowing an
access for surface or subsurface water ~o traVe! ._toward the new structure.
Concrete cut-off collars or clay plugs should be p~ovided where utility lines cross
building lines to prevent water from travelling in the trench backfill and entering
beneath the structure.
6.6 Compliance with Texas Health & Safety Code, Section 361.538
Pursuant to the requirements of Texas Health & Safety Code Section 361.538
("Section 361.538"), ALPHA TESTING, INC. has tested the soil on the subject
property. After conducting visual examinations of soil samples retrieved from the
test borings, as well as conducting interviews with our drilling personnel, a
registered professional engineer with ALPHA TESTING, INC. has discovered no
evidence the subject site overlays a closed municipal solid waste landfill.
Please note, Section 361.538 also requires that a developer of property larger
than one (1) acre provide results of soil testing to the Executive Director of the
Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, located in Austin, Texas, at
least thirty (30) days prior to beginning development of the site.
26
ALPHA Report No. 94534
7.0 GENERAL CONSTRUCTION PROCEDURES AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Variations in subsurface conditions could be encountered during construction. To
permit correlation between test boring data and actual subsurface conditions
encountered during construction, it is recommended a registered Geotechnical
Engineer be retained to observe construction procedures and materials.
Some construction problems, particularly degree or magnitude, cannot be
anticipated until the course of construction. The recommendations offered in the
_ following paragraphs are intended, not to limit or preclude other conceivable
: solutions, but rather to provide our observations based on our experience and
understanding of the project characteristics and subsurface conditions
_ encountered in the borings.
7.1 Site Preparation and Grading
-- All areas supporting floor slabs and pavements should be properly prepared.
After completion of the necessary stripping, clearing, and excavating and
- prior to placing any required fill, the exposed subgrade should be carefully
inspected by probing and testing.
-- Any undesirable material (organic material, wet, soft, or loose soil) still in
place should be removed. The exposed subgrade should be further
inspected by proof-rolling with either a heavy pneumatic tired roller, loaded
-- dump truck or similar equipment weighing approximately 10 tons to check
for pockets of soft or loose material hidden beneath a thin crust of possibly
better soil.
-- 27
ALPHA Report No. 94534
Proof-rolling procedures should be observed by the project geotechnical
engineer or his representative.
Any unsuitable materials exposed should be removed and replaced with
well-compacted material as outlined in Section 7.3.
Slope stability analysis of embankments (natural or constructed) was not within
the scope of this study. Trench excavations should be braced or cut at stable
-- slopes in accordance with Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)
requirements, Title 29, Items 1926.650-1926.653 and other applicable building
codes.
_ Due to clay fill found near the surface, traffic of heavy equipment (including heavy
compaction equipment) may create pumping and general deterioration of shallow
soils. Therefore, some construction difficulties should be anticipated during
-- periods when these soils are saturated.
7.2 Foundation Excavations
- All foundation excavations should be property monitored to assure all excessively
loose, soft or otherwise undesirable materials are removed and foundations will
bear on satisfactory material. Soil exposed in the base of all foundation (grade
-- beam) excavations should be protected against detrimental change in condition,
such as surface sloughing or side disturbance, rain or excessive drying.
-- 28
ALPHA Report No. 94534
Surface runoff should be drained away from excavations and not allowed to pond
in the bottom of the excavation. If possible, all concrete for foundations should
be placed on the same day the excavation is made. That is, the exposed
foundation soils should not be allowed to become excessively dry or wet before
.... __. ~olacement of concrete. The moisture content and condition of these soils should
be maintained in a damp, but not wet, condition both during and after
construction.
7.3 Fill Compaction
Sandy materials with a plasticity index below 25 should be compacted to a dry
-- density of at least 100 percent of standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM
D 698) and within the range of 1 percent below to 3 percentage points above the
material's optimum moisture content.
_ Clay soils with a plasticity index equal to or greater than 25 should be compacted
to a dry density of at least 100 of standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM
D 698). The compacted moisture content of the clays during placement should
_ be within the range of 0 to 4 percentage points above optimum. Clay fill should
be processed and the largest particle or.clod should be less than 6 inches prior
to compaction.
_ 29
ALPHA Report No. 94534
Limestone or other rock-like materials used as fill should be compacted to at least
100 percent of standard Proctor maximum dry density. The compacted moisture
· content of limestone or other rock-like materials is not considered crucial to proper
, performance. However, if the material's moisture content during placement is
within 3 percentage points of optimum, the compactive effort required to achieve
_ the minimum compaction criteria may be minimized. Individual rock pieces larger
than 6 inches in dimension should not be used as fill. However, if rock fill is
utilized within 1 ft below the bottom of floor slabs, the maximum allowable size of
_ individual rock pieces should be reduced to 2 inches.
The above compaction criteria is required to achieve a bearing capacity of 2.5 ksf
-- for grade beams bearing on new compacted fill. Compaction of other fill to be
placed in pavement and landscape areas may be reduced to 95 percent of
standard Proctor maximum dry density. The compacted moisture content of these
-- materials during placement should be within the range of 1 percentage point
below to 3 percentage point above optimum, however, no moisture content criteria
is required for limestone fill.
Compaction should be accomplished by placing fill in about 8 to 10-inch thick
loose lifts and compacting each lift to at least the specified minimum dry density.
Field density and moisture content tests should be performed on each lift as
-- 30
ALPHA Report No. 94534
necessary to assure adequate compaction is achieved. As a guide, one test per
-- 21500 sq ft per lift is recommended in building areas. In larger site areas, a test
' frequency of one test per 5000 sq ft or greater per lift may be used. Utility trench
backfill should be tested at a rate of one test per lift per each 200 linear feet of
-- trench. . --
7.4 Groundwater
No significant dewatering problems are anticipated during foundation excavations.
_ However, if any minor water seepage is encountered during construction, pumping
, from foundation excavations with pumps or other conventional dewatering
equipment should be sufficient.
-- 31
ALPHA Report No. 94534
SOIL MODIFICATION
LIME SLURRY AND WATER PRESSURE INJECTION
GUIDELINE SPECIFICATIONS
Purpose
The purpose of this specification is to provide a procedural basis for using lime slurry
and water pressure injection methods to obtain a relatively uniform, moist, pre-swelled
. zone of soil beneath the floor slab.
Material
1. The lime slurry will consist of clean fresh water and surfactant and will be
continuously agitated to ensure uniformity of the mixture.
2. The hydrated lime (calcium hydroxide) will conform to the applicable parts of
_ ASTM #C207 Type N.
- 3. A non-ionic surfactant (wetting agent) will be used according to manufacturer's
_ recommendations, but in no case will proportions be less than one part (undiluted)
per 3,500 gallons water.
%
-- Application
' 1. The lime slurry pressure injection work is to be accomplished after the site has
-- been brought to subgrade and prior to installation of any plumbing, trenches and
utilities.
-- 2. The lime injection vehicle will have a minimum gross weight of 5 tons and be
capable of making straight vertical penetrations to minimize pressure loss around
the injector rods to at least 7 ft.
3. Injections will be continued to "REFUSAL" (until the maximum quantity of slurry
has been injected into the soil, and slurry is running freely at the surface, either
-- out of previous injection holes or from areas where the surface soil has fractured.
The amount of slurry flowing at the surface will be approximately equivalent to the
volume of slurry being pumped into the soil. Minimum injection should be at least
30 seconds at each injection interval unless altered by the Geotechnical
. Engineer). The slurry will be maintained within the immediate injection area and
not be allowed to flow into ditches or other off-site areas.
-- 32
ALPHA Report No. 94534
Note: Loss of slurry or blowback around injector pipes does not constitute refusal.
Continued loss of slurry in this manner may indicate inadequate injection
equipment or techniques, or in some instances, surficial soil that will not form an
adequate seal to contain the slurry. In either instance, the owner representative
" should be contacted and an on-site observation made to determine appropriate
steps.
After completion of lime injection, the lime injection contractor will submit lime
delivery tickets which reflect the total quantity of lim~ used wittY_his i'n~/Oice for
payment. ~
The invoice will show the minimum and maximum quantity of lime required, based
on the Geotechnical Engineer's soil report and the actual amount injected. In no
instance will the total quantity of hydrated lime injected during the first pass be
less than 4 pounds per square foot of treated area. The total quantity of
hydrated lime injected in the second pass will not be less than 3 pounds per sq
ft of treated area.
After completion of lime injection, if less than the specified quantity of lime has
been injected, the area will be re-injected to the same depth and spacing to
achieve at least the minimum specified quantity. The amount of lime deficiency
will be uniformly injected over the entire site.
4. Injection pipe(s) will penetrate the soil in approximately 12 to 18-inch intervals,
injecting to refusal at each interval for a total depth of 7 feet or impenetrable
-- material, whichever occurs first. A minimum of five (5) injection intervals will be
provided for the 7-ft injection depth. The lower portion of the injection pipe will
consist of a hole pattern that will uniformly disperse the lime slurry throughout the
entire depth.
5. Injections will be accomplished by a double pass. Spacing for the injections will
-- not exceed 5 feet on center each way and injection will be carried a minimum of
5 feet outside the building line. The second pass of the equipment will be offset
laterally at one-half the distance in both directions between the original injection
-- centers.
6. Injection pressures should be adjusted to inject the greatest quantity of slurry
possible within a pressure range of 50 - 200 psi pump pressure.
-- 33
ALPHA Report No. 94534
7. Lime slurry should be proportioned within the range of 2.5 to 3.0 pounds of
hydrated lime per gallon of water. Specific gravity of the slurry should be
measured with Ertco Hydrometer #2545. Specific gravity readings will range from
1.14 to 1.17. Specific gravity readings should be taken at both the mixer tank and
' at injection pipes.
If quicklime is slaked, the specific gravity of the slurry must be adjusted to
compensate for the elevated temperatures. The contractor will provide a
~ ._ hydrometer, Baroid Scale or other suitable method to accurately verify slurry
*-" mixes.
8. After a minimum curing time of 48 hours, the double lime injected pad can be
tested for moisture content and swell abatement to determine if additional
injections with water are necessary. The water injections will be 5 feet on center
each way and spaced 2 1/2 feet offset in two orthogonal directions from the initial
injection.
9. Upon completion of the final pressure injection, the free surface lime should be
scarified into the top 6 inches of the soil .--,:'J re-compacted to between 95 and
100 percent of standard Proctor density (ASTM D 698) and at a moisture content
between 0 and 4 percentage points above the optimum values. Compaction tests
should be performed at a frequency of 1 test per 5,000 sq ft with a minimum of
- 2 tests.
10. The moisture content of the injected soil will be maintained until the floor slab is
-- placed. Loss of moisture from the surface or sides of the building pad must be
prevented by watering or use of a membrane. Any open trenches should be
sealed or kept wet to prevent loss of moisture. All trenches should be backfilled
with the excavated material. The water content of the backfill should be
maintained in the range of 0 to 4 percentage points above optimum.
Monitoring
A full-time ALPHA TESTING, INC. technician should be retained and present throughout
- the injection operations. Moisture content and swell samples should be taken at 1-foot
intervals to the total depth injected from a minimum of one test hole per each 4,000 sq
feet of injected area (minimum of two). The moisture content of each sample will be
-- determined. Swell tests will be performed on selected samples at a frequency of 2 swell
tests per test boring. The swell tests will be performed with a surcharge equal to the
overburden pressure anticipated upon completion of the new structure. Based upon the
test results, the swell potential of the injected soil should be determined by the project
34
ALPHA Report No. 94534
Geotechnical Engineer. Acceptance of the injection will be based upon a free swell of
less than 1 percent in the injected zone. Depending upon the moisture content and the
potential swell remaining in the existing injected soil, additional injections with water
containing surfactant may be required until these requirements are met.
Wet and soft surface conditions, resulting from lime and water injection procedures, will
will require the contractor to provide access to drilling equipment used to obtain the soil
samples which verify the injection process. Special track equipment may be required
to provide the required access.
35
-- APPENDIX
ALPHA Report No. 94534
A-1 METHODS OF FIELD EXPLORATION
-- Using standard rotary drilling equipment, a total of 21 test borings have been
performed for this geotechnical exploration at the approximate locations shown
· on the Boring Location Plan, Figure 1. The test boring locations have been
-- staked by pacing from reference points which could be identified in the field and
as shown on the site plan provided during this study. The surface elevations
provided on the Record of Subsurface Exploration sheets have been obtained by
-- plotting the boring locations on the site plan and interpolating the surface
elevation. Surface elevations given on the boring logs are approximate.
-- Relatively undisturbed samples of the cohesive subsurface materials have been
obtained by hydraulically pressing 3-inch O.D. thin-wall sample tubes into the
underlying soil at selected depths (ASTM D 1587). These samples have been
removed from the sampling tubes in the field and examined visually. A
representative portion of each sample has been sealed in a plastic bag for use
_ in future visual examinations and possible testing in the laboratory.
Logs of all borings have been included in the Appendix of this report. The logs
_ show visual descriptions of all soil strata encountered using the Unified Soil
Classification System. Sampling information, pertinent field data, and field
observations are also included. The soil samples will be retained in the laboratory
_ for at least 30 days and then discarded unless the Client requests otherwise.
-- 36
-- ~ BORING LOCATION PLAN
FIGURE 1
100 200 300
0PI TF.%AS DEVRLOPMK~T, INC.
IRVII~, TEXAS
Graphic Scale in Feet 94534
, JEFFERSON AT R~R
COPPELL, TEXAS
Existing Grade and Design
High Water Level
~ Hydrostatic
~ ~ Pressure
· .,~-~(Applicable only
. ~ - '- } _ ~ for undrained
RETAINING --- ~conditions behind
OR -- ng walls)
UNDERGROUND
WALL
I !'
I Kc K',''~
K = Coefficient of lateral earth pressure
~'' = Buoyant or effective unit weight of soil(125pcf - 62.4pcf for
undrained conditions behind retaining walls)
(125pcf for drained conditions behind stem walls)
q = Uniform surcharge load
'~'~ = Unit weight of water (62.4pcf)
JPI TEXAS DEVELOPMENT, INC. LATERAL EART~ PRESSURE
IRVING, TEXAS FIGURE 2
JEFFERSON AT RIVERCHASE
COPPELL, TEXAS 94534 10/20/94
Final Grade
/
· / '
__ ~ ~ · Backfi!l---~ ' ,
-.. ./ -/. o-~-Li~it-~ zone
~.~~2For Hea~ E~iwment
~ ~ ~TAININGoR " '. "
~-~ DE RG R~L~D
~ W~L .
.
'
-- JPI TEXAS D~PMENT, INC. OFF-LIMITS ZONE FOR HEAVY
IRVING, TEXAS EQUIPMENT FIGURE.3
JEFFERSON AT RIVERCRASE
COPPELL, TEXAS 94534 10/20/94
ALPHA Report No. 94534
B-1 METHODS OF LABORATORY TESTING
_, Representative samples were inspected and classified by a qualified member of
the Geotechnical Division and the boring logs were edited as necessary. To aid
in classifying the subsurface materials and to determine the general engineering
.,_ characteristics, natural moisture content tests (ASTM D 2216), Atterberg-limit tests
(ASTM D 4318) and dry unit weight determinations were performed on selected
samples. In addition, unconfined compression (ASTM D 2166) and pocket-
-_.. penetrometer tests v~ere conducted on selected soil samples to evaluate the soil
shear strength. Results of'all labo-rat..or~ .-tests described above are provided on
the accompanying Record of Subsurface Exploration sheets.
:._ 37
ALPHA TESTING, INC. RECORD OF
wisco,,in st.. suite SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Dallas. Texas 75229
(214) 620-8911
Chent JPI ~ DEVF_J.,O~, INC. BonngNo. B-1
Arcmtect/Engmeer F[ISCB-S]~ROLD & PAR'I'N~S Job No. 94.534
Project Name ~FFERSON AT RIV~RC~J~E Drawn By
Project Location COpp~r.L · ~'EXAS Al)proved By DAL
DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION TEST DATA
· -~ Date Started 9-'! 5-94 Hammer Wt. lbs. u.
Date Completed 9-1.5-94 Hammer Drop in. ~;
Drill Foreman EDT SDoon Sampler OD in, ~'~m
..,.-, Inspector Rock Core Dia. in. ~- ~
SURFACE ELEVATION < ~ ~ ~
446+ mc~
--Tan and Brown firm to very stiff --
--CLAY(CH) intermixed with sand and _-- 1 ST 1.9
~ -- gravel - FILL __ LL=67
-- -- 2 ST 0.7 0.6 103 17 PL=27
_ PI=40
~ 5~ 3 ST 1.5 28
-- LL=70
z_ _ _ 4 ST 2.3 28 PL=~4
-- 8 ' ~ PI=46
Dark Brown very stiff CLAY(CH) --
_ 5 ST 2.7 ~7
~_ --with a trace of silty sand _
-- -tannish brown below 11' _
_
-- 6 ST 2 . 3 21 PL--18
-- Pi=30
~ 15_
-- -- 7 ST 2.3
-- BOTT~ OF ~_~T BORING @2~' --
SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS BORING METHOD
HSA -HOLLOW STEM AUGERS
SS - STANDARD PENETRATION TEST AT COMPLETION ].3 FT.
ST - SHELBY TUBE CFA - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS
CA - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER AFTER HRS. FT. DC - DRIVEN CASING
MD- MUD DRILLING
-- RC - ROCK CORE WATER ON RODS 13 FT.
ALPHA TESTING, INC. RECORD OF
- 2209 Wisconsin ~t., ~uite 1 O0
Dallas, Texas 75229 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Chant JpT TEXAS D[Fv'I~.LOPi~H~T, TNC. BonngNo. B-2
Arch~teclJEng, neer FOSCR-SEROLD & PARTNERS JODNO. 94534
· Proiect Name JEFFERSON AT RIVERCHASE Drawn By
Project Loc, at,on COPP~LL, ~""J~fJ~ Approved By
DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION TEST DATA
'-- Date Started 9-15-94 Hammer Wt. lbs.
U.
Date Completed 9-15-94 Hammer Drop in. ~
Drill Foreman EDI Spoon Sampler OD in. - -
O
~__ Inspector Rock Core Dia. in. ~ 1~
SURFACE ELEVATION < ~ E ~ = '" "~
_ Tan, Brown and Tannish Brown firm --
--to very stiff CLAY(CH) intermixed -- 1 ST 2.3
--with sand and gravel - FILL
-- -- 2 ST 3.1 24
---- S---- 3 ST 0.8 24
~- -- 4 ST 3.2 27
--Brown firm to very stiff CLAY(CH) --
_ -a trace of gravel to 11' _ LL=66
-- -possible fill to 11' _ 5 ST 3.2 30 PL=27
-~ 10 -- PI=39
-- -tannish brown below 11' --
_-- -- 6 ST 0.7 28
~ 15_
-- -- 7 ST 2.1
__ 20
-- BOTTOM OF ~S? BORING @20' --
SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS BORING METHOD
SS - STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HSA-HOLLOW STEM AUGERS
ST - SHELBY TUBE AT COMPLETION DRY FT. CFA -CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS
CA - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER AFTER HRS. FT. DC - DRIVEN CASING
RC - ROCK CORE WATER ON RODS NONE FT. MD - MUD DRILLING
ALPHA TESTING, INC. RECORD OF
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Dallas, Texas 75229
(214) 620-8911
Client JPI TE, XAE, DEVELOPtRENT, INC. BonngNo. B-3
Architect/Engineer FOSCR-SEROLD &PAR. TNE~S JobNo. 94534
Proiect Name JEFFERSON AT RI%,'E~CHASE Drawn By
Project Loc, at,on COppI~t',T., ~ Approved By DAL
DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION TEST DATA
_ Date Started q-1 R-q4 Hammer Wt. lbs.
Date Completed q-1 =,-q4 Hammer Drop irt. ~ j
Drill Foreman EDT Spoon Sampler OD in. ~ m
Borin~ M~thod CFA ShelBy Tul~ OD ] in. ~
~ -:- :~.. SOIL CLASSIFICATION ~0.~
~- SURFACE ELEVATION < ~- ~ ~ ~. "'" R
:20. ~
=o_ <zd
n
-- 444+ ~c~ =co
--Tan and Brown stiff CLAY(CH) --
-- 1 ST 1.7
_--intermixed with sandy clay an~ _
_ -- gravel - FILL __
-- -- 2 ST 1.8 22
-- __ 5-- 3 ST 1.4 27
-- 7' -- 4 ST 0 8 29
L __ Brown firm to very stiff CLAY(CH) --
_ LL=76
-- -- 5 ST 0.9 1.5 89 32 PL=26
-- PI=50
L - lO
-
-
-- -- 6 ST 1.8 26
-tannish brown with a trace of 15
-- silty sand below 15' _
_ - 7 ST 2.1
-- 20
;
-- BOTTOM OF TEST BORING @20' --
-- SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS BORING METHOD
HSA -HOLLOW STEM AUGERS
SS - STANDARD PENETRATION TEST AT COMPLETION 13 FT.
ST - SHELBY TUBE CFA - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS
CA - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER AFTER HRS. FT. DC - DRIVEN CASING
_ RC - ROCK CORE WATER ON RODS 8 FT. MD - MUD DRILLING
ALPHA TESTING, INC. RECORD OF
22og w/gcon /n st.. 700 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Dallas, Texas 75229
(214) 620-8911
CI,ent GPT ~ DI~V~_.ZZ)~w~, TNC. BonngNo. R-4
Architect/Engineer FOSCR-S~OLD & P~R'[~TI~.S Job No. 94534
Project Name J~FFERSON RT RIVERC[I~SR Drawn By [lip
Project Locat,on COPD]~. · ~ ApDrovecl By D~.T.
DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION TEST DATA
Date Started ¢l-1 q-q4 Hammer Wt. lbs.
Date Completed ~J-1 9-q4 Hammer Drop in.
Drill Foreman ]~DI Spoon Sampler OD in.
O
Inspector Rock Core Dia. mn.
SOIL OLASSIFIOATION :~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ._~ ~ -
SURFACE ELEVATION < ~- ~- .~~. a. ,,,
~-uJ "'0 <>- ~ E c'- o
--Brown, Tan and Tannish Brown stiff --
--to hard CLAY(CH) intermixed with _-- 1 ST 2.6
--sandy clay and gravel - FILL
-- -- LL=49
-- _-- 2 ST 4+ 18 PL=19
-- PI=30
~ 5-- 3 ST 1.6 33
-- -- 4 ST
-- 8' -- 2.1 14
--Dark Brown stiff CLAY(CH) with a -- LL=73
--trace of silty sand _ 5 ST 2.0 34 PL=26
-- 10 PI=47
-- -brown 12-16.5' --
_-- _-- 6 ST 1.4 31
-- 15
-- -tannish brown below 16.5' --
-- -- 7 ST 18
__ 20
-- BOTTOM OF TEST BORING @20' --
SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS BORING METHOD
SS - STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HSA -HOLLOW STEM AUGERS
ST- SHELBY TUBE AT COMPLETION DRY FT.
CFA - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS
CA - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER AFTER HRS. FT. DC - DRIVEN CASING
RC - ROCK CORE WATER ON RODS NOL~TE FT. MD - MUD DRILLING
ALPHA TESTING, INC. RECORD OF
w s o,s n st., SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Dallas, Texas 75229
(214) 620-8911
Chent ,.T~I '[~ZA~ DE'v'~LO[~(I~iT, II, lC. Boring No. B-5
Architect/Eng,neer ~ISCI~-S~O[,D & PAI~.'~TI~.S JohN0. 94534
Project Name J-~[;'];"~SON AT ]~IV~CI~L~E Drawn By ~
Project Locahon CO[~PI~I'.?., ~ Al)proved By Da,]'.
DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION TEST DATA
,.
.m. Date Started 9-'15 - 94 Hammer Wt. lbs.
IA,.
9-'15-94 Hammer Drop in.
Date
Completed
Drill Foreman ];D! Spoon Sampler OD in.
.3_ Inspector Rock Core Dia. m.
Bonng Method CFA Shelby Tube OD 3 in.._
· :" SOlE CLASSIFICATION' ~- :~ ~ o ~ --'- -
~ -- o~ ~ .... __
SURFACE ELEVATION- ~<~ ~ ~<zd ~
446+_ ~o ~
_Tannish Brown, Brown and Tan stif~ --
--to very stiff CLAY(CE) intermixed -- 1 ST 2.3
--with sandy clay and gravel - FILL
-- -- 2 ST 1.5 23
-- LL=73
__ 5-- 3 ST 1.5 1.0 96 29 PL=25
-- -- PI=48
-- _ 4 ST 2.3 29
-- _ 5 ST 1.7 33
-- __ 10
-- 11' --
--Dark Brown stiff CLAY(CH) --
_ LL=82
-- -- 6 ST 1.5 30 ~L=28
_ -- PI=54
-- 15--
-- -brown below 16' --
-- -- 7 ST 1.6
_ -- 20
-- BOTTOM OF TEST BORING @20 ~ --
SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS BORING METHOD
SS - STANDARD PENETRATION TEST AT COMPLETION DR1Z FT. HSA -HOLLOW STEM AUGERS
ST - SHELBY TUBE CFA - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS
CA - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER AFTER HRS. FT. DC- DRIVEN CASING
MD - MUD DRILLING
~ RC - ROCK CORE WATER ON RODS ~O[[~j~ FT.
ALPHA TESTING, INC. RECORD OF
2209 wisconsin st., Suite 100
Dallas, Texas 75229 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
(214) 620-8911
Chant d-PT ~ DEV~T,.,OPM]~]~, Tt~]C. BonngNo.
Architec"JEngineer I;'OSCB-S~2~OLD & Pz~.TN'E~S Job No. 94534
Project Name JEFFERSON AT RIVERCHASE Drawn By
Project Locabon COPP~.T.T, · ~ Approved By D~,]'.
DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION TEST DATA
Date Started 9-16-94 Hammer Wt. lbs.
h
Date Completed 9-16-94 Hammer Drop in. ~ ~
Drill Foreman ~DT Spoon Sampler OD in. ~ ·o
Inspector Rock Core Dia. in. ~ ~
SOIL CLASSIFICATION ~ ~. ~c o ~
SURFACE ELEVATION < ~- .~ ~. ~ ~ c ~ ,~
8~c
446_+ ~c~ ao~ ~Z0 ~ o~ ~
--Brown and Tan st±£f ~o very st~ff --
--CLA¥(C~) ~nterm~xed with sandy -- [ ST 3.3
--clay, sand and gravei- FILL
-- -- 2 ST 2.6
-- LL=6I
~ 5~ 3 ST 2.3 27 P~,=23
_ PI=38
-- 7.5' _ 4 ST 1.4 28
--Brown st~ff to very s~±ff CLAY(CH',
-- -poss±b[e f±[l to ll' -- 5 ST 2.3 21
~-- ~0--
--' -- 6 i ST 1.7 25
__ -tannish brown below 15'
15--
-- -- 7 ST 1.2
-- ~ OF ~S? BORING @20' --
SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS BORING METHOD
SS - STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HSA -HOLLOW STEM AUGERS
ST - SHELBY TUBE AT COMPLETION DRY FT. CFA -CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS
CA - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER AFTER HRS. FT. DC - DRIVEN CASING
RC - ROCK CORE WATER ON RODS NONE FT. MD - MUD DRILLING
ALPHA TESTING, INC. RECORD OF
· . 2209 wisconsin St., Suite 100
Dallas, Texas 75229 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
(214) 620-8011
Chent JPI TEXAS DEVF.,LO~, TNC. Boring No. R-7
Architect/Engineer FOSCH-SB:ROLD & PARTN]~tS Job No. 04534
'_._ Project Name ~FFERSON AT ltIVERC~.~E Drawn By
Project Location COPPI~'.?., ~ Al)proved By D~L
DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION TEST DATA
a Date Stoned 9-16-9 4 Hammer Wt. lbs.
U.
Date Completed 9--'16-9 4 Hammer Drop in. ,. ~
O
Drill Foreman ~DI Spoon Sampler OD m. ~ ~
L Inspector Rock Core Dia. in. ~;
Boring Method CFA Shelby Tube OD 3 m. .~ ~
SOIL CLASSIFICATION --- ~. a.~ ~=~
SURFACE ELEVATION <~- ,-.~ ~. a.,,,
444+ coo oc0 u~z u3~- ~
_ Brown and Tan stiff to very stiff _
--CLAY(CH) intermixed with sand and -- ! ST 3.5
-- gravel - FILL
-- -- 2 ST 3.3 18
-- 5-- 3 ST 2.1 24
-- LL=66
~ -- -- 4 ST 1.4 26 PL=25
-- -- PI=41
_ _ 5 ST 1.6 26
-- 11' --
--Brown stiff to very stiff CLAY(CH) --
-- --: LL= 65
-- -- 6 ST I 1.8 28 PA=25
-- -- I PI=40
-- -- -tannish brown below 15'
15
-- -- 7 ST 2.2
'
-- BOTTOM OF TEST BORING @2~' --
SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS BORING METHOD
SS - STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HSA -HOLLOW STEM AUGERS
ST - SHELBY TUBE AT COMPLETION DRY FT. CFA - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS
CA -CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER AFTER HRS. FT. DC - DRIVEN CASING
~ RC - ROCK CORE WATER ON RODS NO[~TE FT. MD - MUD DRILLING
ALPHA TESTING, INC. RECORD OF
wisconsin su,e 700 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Dallas, Texas 75229
(214) 620-8911
Chen! HI ~ DEVl[I.,O~, INC. BonngNo.
Architect/Engineer I~ISCH-S~P, OI, D & P.,~t~S JOPNo. 94534
Project Name ,j-~FFERSON AT ltIVERCI~J~E Drawn By
Project Location COPpI~I'.T,, ~ Al)proved By
DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION TEST DATA
,.L, Date Started 9-19-94 Hammer Wt. lbs. u.
9-19-94 Hammer Drop in. ~5;
Date
Completed
Drill Foreman ~I)I Spoon Sampler OD in. ; a3
~ Inspector ROCk Core Dia. in. t-.- ~
Boring Method CFA Shelby Tube OD 3 ~n. .~ ~-
-- SOIL CLASSIFICATION ~d ~. ~ o ~ .g' "
SURFACE ELEVATION ~<~. ~' :~_. ,~ ~
-- 444_+ ~o o~ _
--Brown and Tan stiff to very stiff --
--CLAY(CH) intermixed with sandy -- 1 ST 2.6
_ --clay and gravel - FILL
-- -- 2 ST 3.0 24
__ 5-- 3 ST 1.2 29
-- 4 ST 2.2 16
-- 5 ST 2.5 34
-- 9.5' --
-- --Dark Brown stiff CLAY(CH) 10
-- -brown 12-15 ' --
--' -- 6 ST 1.8 31
-- -- -tannish brown below 15' 15
-- -- 7 ST 1.7
-- 20
-- BOTTO~ OF TEST BORING @20' --
-- SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS BORING METHOD
SS - STANDARD PENETRATION TEST AT COMPLETION D1:{¥ FT. HSA -HOLLOW STEM AUGERS
ST - SHELBY TUBE CFA -CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS
CA - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER AFTER HRS. FT. DC - DRIVEN CASING
MD - MUD DRILLING
~ RC - ROCK CORE WATER ON RODS NOI~T~ FT.
ALPHA TESTING, INC. RECORD OF
Z2 3 Wisconsin 3uite 100 Ui , URFACE EXPLORATION
Dallas, 'Texas 75229
(214) 620-8911
Chent d-PI ~ D~TL,OI~[BI~ 1'1~. Boring No.
ArcflJtect/Eng,neer ~ S~l:! -S]~-OTL~) & P;~'Z~[RS Job No. 94534
· Projecl Name ,.TP_.FPI~RSON A'I~ RIVI~R~- Drawn By
Project Location COPP~I',T,, ~ Approved By
DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION TEST DATA
~ Date Staffed 9-].6-94, Hammer Wt. lbs.
Date Completed 9-].6-94 Hammer Drop in. ~ ~
O O
Drill Foreman ~DT Spoon Sampler OD in. ~ ~
~__ Inspector Roc~ Core Dia. in. ~ 1~
-- SOIL CLASSIFICATION z~ ~' o :.~
~Brown and Tan stiff CLAY(CH) with --
--a trace of sand and gravel - FILL -- 1 ST 1.8
-- -- 2 ST 1.8 28
~ ~ 5-- 3 ST 1.5 27
-- 4 ST 1.2 22
LL=63
--Brown stiff to very stiff CLAY(CH -- 5 ST 1.4 2.6 100 25 PL=23
--with a trace of silty sand -- PI=40
-- -tannish brown below 12' --
_ LL=59
-- -- 6 ST 2.1 24 PL=22
_ -- PI=37
15
-- -- 7 ST 1.9
-- BOTTOM OF ~?~? BORING @2~' --
~ SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS BORING METHOD
SS - STANDARD PENETRATION TEST AT COMPLETION DRY FT. HSA -HOLLOW STEM AUGERS
ST - SHELBY TUBE CFA - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS
CA - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER AFTER HRS. FT. DC -- DRIVEN CASING
__ RC - ROCK CORE WATER ON RODS NON~ FT. MD - MUD DRILLING
ALPHA TESTING, INC. RECORD OF
_ too SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Dallas, Texas 75229
(214) 620-8911
Chent JPI ~ D13VF_J.,OI:~[I~'~ INC, BodngNo. B-10
Architect/Engineer [;'OSCB-$~I~OLD & PJ%~TN]~.S Job No. 94534
__ Project Name JEFFERSON AT RIVERCHAS~. Drawn By
Project Location COPP]~.,L, '1~;~x,%~ Approved By D~T.
DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION TEST DATA
; Date Started 9-15-94 Hammer Wt. lbs.
9-15-94 Hammer Drop in. ~ ~_
Date
Completed
Ddll Foreman ~I Spoon Sampler OD in. ~ ~
=. Inspector Rock Core Dia. in. ~ ~
SOIL CLASSIFICATION ~.
SURFACE ELEVATION < ~- ~ :2=. ~=
--~ro~ and ?an very stiff to hard --
--CLAY(CE) intermixed with sandy -- 1 S? 4+
= --cla~, gravel and clay shale
--_FILL -- 2 ST 3.7 22
-- -sandy clay to 2' --
-- 5-- 3 ST 2.8 21
~__ -- 4 ST 2.5 23
--Dark Brown stiff to very stiff --
-- CLAY ( CH ) --
_ 5 ST 1.6 30
-- -- -brown 13-16 '
-- -- 6 ST 2.0 28
-- -- 15--
-- -tannish brown with a trace of --
-- silty sand below 16' --
-- -- 7 ST 1.5
-- 20--
-- BOTTOM OF TEST BORING @20' --
SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS BORING METHOD
SS - STANDARD PENETRATION TEST AT COMPLETION DRY FT. HSA -HOLLOW STEM AUGERS
ST o SHELBY TUBE CFA - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS
CA - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER AFTER HRS. FT. DC - DRIVEN CASING
~ RC -ROCK CORE WATER ON RODS NON~ FT. MD - MUD DRILLING
ALPHA TESTING, INC. RECORD OF
221:]9 wisconsin st., Suite 100
Da, as, Texas 75229 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
(214) 620-8911
Chent ,.3'PI ~ DI~Fdl~LOP[~I~F/', 'rNc. Boring No. R-] ]
Architect/Engineer [~q3SCB-S][P, OT.r) & PAR'/'I~TI~,S JobNo. 94534
Project Name JI~FFERSON AT RIVERCHASE Drawn By
Project Locabon COPPI~'.T., ~ Approved By DA1'.
DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION TEST DATA
~ Date Started 9-16-94 Hammer Wt. lbs.
Date Completed 9-] 6-94 Hammer Drop in. ~
Drill Foreman ~DT Spoon Sampler OD m. ~ ~
j_ Inspector Rock Core Dia. in. ~' ~
Boring Method CFA Shelby Tube OD 3 in. .~ ~
SOIL CLASSIFICATION ~ ~ =
SURFACE ELEVATION ~ ~
--~a~±sh Brow~ a~d Brow~ very s1:±~ --
--1:o hard CLAY(CH) w±th a trace o~ -- I S~
--sa~ a~d g~avel - FTLL
_-- - 2 S~
~ 5-- 3 S? 2.3 24
· ~. -- _ 4 $? 2.2 26
--Dar~ ~ow~ $1:±~ 1:o very s1:i£~ -- T.L=?3
-- CLAY(CH) _ 5 ST 2.9 3! PL=27
L ~ 10 PI=46
_ _ 6 ST 1.8 27
_ 15_
-- -tannish bro~ below 17' --
~ - 7 ST 2.[
' -- 20
SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS BORING M~HOD
SS - STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HSA -HOLLOW STEM AUGERS
ST SHELBY TUBE AT COMPLETION DRY FT.
- CFA - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS
CA - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER AFTER HRS. FT. DC - DRIVEN CASING
__ RC - ROCK CORE WATER ON RODS NO~ ~. MD - MUD DRILLING
ALPHA TESTING, INC. RECORD OF
~)90g Wi§e~ns{n {~t., Guite 100
Da,as. Texas ?S229 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
(214) 620-8011
Client ,.3~I ~ D~'VF.,LOPtl:]~, INC. BorlngNo. B-12
Architect/Engineer :FOSCB-S:I~]~oT.rl & PAI~'~I~ Job No. 94534
Project Name ~rl~FI~IiSON AT I~IVI~Cl~,SR. Drawn By
Project Location COPP~r.T., ~ Al)proved By
DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION TEST DATA
Date Started 9-1 6-94 Hammer Wt. lbs.
Date Completed 9-16-94 Hammer Drop in. ~
Drill Foreman l~I Spoon Sampler OD in. ~ ~
~_ Inspector Rock Core Dia. in. t~ ~
SOIL CLASSIFICATION ' ~- ~
. ~-- _.. .. '~ .--"~
SURFACE ELEVATION ~< ~ ~_ ..j ~. c.. ,,, ~~ co
446+_ co~ aco co~- ~ ~ ~co~""o a.~-°° c3~ .~.~.~--
--Tannish Brown, Tan and Brown stiff --
--to hard CLAY(CH) intermixed with -- 1 ST 1.4
--sandy clay, sand and gravel
-~ FILL -- LL=35
-- 2 ST 3.2 15 PL=15
-- PI=20
-- 5-- 3 ST 4+ 14
: _ -- 4 ST 1.7 27
_ _ 5 ST 2.9 24
-- 11' --
--Brown stiff to very stiff CLAY(CH' --
--. -- 6 ST 1.8 25.
_ -tannish brown below 16' 15_
-- -- 7 ST 2.2
.~. __ 20
-- ~ O~ '~__~'Z' ~)~TNG @20' --
SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS BORING METHOD
SS- STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HSA -HOLLOW STEM AUGERS
ST - SHELBY TUBE AT COIdPLETION DRY FT. CFA - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS
CA - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER AI:TE~ HI=IS. FT. DC - D~IVEN CASING
~ RC - ~OCK CORE WATE~ ON RODS NObl-~ IT. ~D - ~UD DRILLING
ALPHA TESTING, INC. RECORD OF
220g Wigoon~in ~;t., Suite 1{30
DalLas, Texas 75229 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
(214) 620-8911
Chenl jPT '/'ff, XAS D~'V~,.T.,O~, TNC. Boring No. B-13
Architect/Engineer FDSCB-S]~,OLD & P~a~:'I'['~"]~S Job No. 94534
Project Name JI~FFI~SON A? RIV~RCI~E Drawn By
Project Location COPP3;~T.?., ~ Approved By DAT.
DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION TEST DATA
Date Started 9- ].6- 94 Hammer Wt. lbs.
U.
Date Completed 9-16-94 Hammer Drop in. ~ '~
Drill Foreman ~l)I Spoon Sampler OD in. ~ ~
~ Inspector Rock Core Dia. ~n. ~ ~
Boring Method CFA Shelby Tube OD 3 in. . ~. '~ ~ 'i ' oE
SOIL CLASSIFICATION
~-:r ~, ~ '~' 8~' .-~'-' ---
SURFACI~ I~LEYATION
--/'an and Brown st±ff to very st±ff --
-- CLAY(CH/CL) intermixed with sandy -- 1 ST 1.9
- -- clay, limestone, and gravel
-- FILL --
-- -sandy clay 2-4' -- 2 ST 2.5 13
, -- _ LL=59
-- 5-- 3 ST 2.4 26 PL=23
-- PI=36
i_ -- -- 4 ST 2.2 29
-- LL= 48
_ _ 5 ST 3.5 22 PL=21
~-- -- 10 PI=27
-- 12' --
--Brown stiff to very stiff CLAY(CH) --
-- LL--5$
-- ~ 6 ST 2.3 27 PL=23
-- I PI=35
-- 15_
-- -tannish brown below 16'
-- -- 7 ST 1.1
/_ __
-- BOTTOM OF TEST BORING @20' --
SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS BORING METHOD
SS - STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HSA -HOLLOW STEM AUGERS
ST - SHELBY TUBE AT COMPLETION DR~ FT. CFA - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS
CA - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER AFTER HRS. FT. DC - DRIVEN CASING
RC - ROCK CORE WATER ON RODS ~O[%~E FT. MD - MUD DRILLING
ALPHA TESTING, INC. RECORD OF
su. SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Dallas, Texas 75229
(214) 620-8911
Client 3'DI ~ D]['VE[Z)PM]~F~, It~. Bormg No. B-14
ArchitectJEng~neer ~SCB-S]~OLD & P~rJ~S Job No. 94534
Project Name JEFFERSON A? ltIVERCq~ASE Drawn By
PrOleCt Location COppl~r.T., ~ Approve~ By
DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION TEST DATA
'~ Date Started 9-16-94 Hammer Wt. lbs.
Dale Completecl 9-'I 6-94 Hammer Drop in. ~ ~
Ddll Foreman ]~:)I Spoon Sampler OD in. ~ m
.~_ Inspector Rock Core Dia. in. ~- ~
B0ringMeth0d C'A Shelby Tube OD 3 in' i~ { '[ i~ ~ ~' ~-o ~'~''i-,_ ..~ E° -
-- SOIL CLASSIFICATION z ~ ~.
SURFACE ELEVATION < ~' ~- -~ =' =- ,,, ,~ ~
. ,,,o
-- 444+_ co= =co ~z ~ ~ ~
--Tan an~ Brown stiff ~o very stiff --
-- CLAY(CH/CL) wi~h a trace of san~ _-- i ST
__ -- and gravel - FILL LL=38
-- -- 2 ST 2.7 18 PL=17
-- _. PI=21
-- ~ 5.5' 5---- 3 ST 2..7 26
--Brown stiff to very stiff CLAY(CH) _
-- -possible fill to 11' _ 4 ST 2.8 23
_ LL= 71
-- _ 5 ST 2.0 30 PL=27
-- -- PI=44
-- __
-- 6 ST 1.9 26
-tannish brown below 16' 15_
-- -- 7 ST 1.8
~ -- 20
-- BOTTO~ OF TEST BORING @2~' --
-- SAM~kHR TY~H GROUNDWATER OSSHBYAT}ONS BORING
HSA - HOLLOW STE~ AUGERS
SS - STANDARD PENETRATION TEST AT COMPLETION DRY FT.
ST - SHELBY TUBE CFA - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS
CA - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER AFTER HRS. FT. DC - DRIVEN CASING
MD- MUD DRILLING
~ RC - ROCK CORE WATER ON RODS ~O[~1-~ FT.
ALPHA TESTING, INC. RECORD OF
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Dallas, Texas 7,5229
(214) 620-8911
Client j-PT '1"~7,3%S D~"V'ff. LOP[uL]~J', TNC. BodngNo.
ArchitectJEngmeer I;13SCR-S]Q~OLD & PJl~R:'II~]~,S Job No. 94,534
Project Name ,.7~I;'la'J~E~OI~ A'J' ~,IV~I~CI~IAS~. Drawn By
Project Location COPP1;~T.'r., '1~ Al)proved By
DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION TEST DATA
Date Starled 9-16-94 Hammer Wt. lbs.
U.
Date Completed 9-16-94 Hammer Drop in. , ~
O
Drill Foreman ~DI Spoon Sampler OD in. 1; ~
..- Inspector Roci( Core Dia. in. ~ 1;
Boring Method CFA Shelby Tube OD 3 in. ~ ~ ~ >
:- _; _SOIL CLASSiFiCATION ~
SURFACE
ELEVATION
~ ~ ~ ~ o= ~.~ .~,,,
--Tannish Brown very stiff to hard --
--CLAY(CH) with some silty sand -- 1 ST 4+
-- FILL
-- ~ LL=65
-- -- 2 ST 3.0 16 PL=28
~ ~ ' PI=37
--Dark Brown stiff to very stiff 5~ 3 ST 2 6 32
_CLAY(CH) with a trace of silty _ '
-- sand
- -- -- 4 ST 1.5 31
_ _ 5 ST 1.9 31
-- -tannish brown below 12.5' --
-- LL=60
_ _ 6 ST 1.6 26 PL=23
-- -- PI=37
_ 15_
-- -- 7 ST 1.5
-- BOTTOM OF ~EST BORING @20' --
SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS BORING METHOD
SS - STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HSA -HOLLOW STEM AUGERS
ST - SHELBY TUBE AT COMPLETION ].3 FT.
CFA -CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS
CA - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER AFTER HRS. FT. DC - DRIVEN CASING
RC -ROCK CORE WATER ON RODS 13 FT. MD - MUD DRILLING
ALPHA TESTING, INC. RECORD OF
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Dallas, Texas 75229
(214) 620-8911
Chent JPI ~ DEV~]~I]~I~, INC. BonngNo. B-16
Architect/Engineer FOSCH-SEROLD & P~~ Job No. 94534
PrOl~ Name ~~N AT ~I~~g Dra~ By ~
Proj~ L~t~on ~pp~.T.~ ~ A~rov~ By D~T.
DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION TEST DATA
= I
Date St~ q-3 q-q4 Hammer Wt. lbs. ~
Date ~mplet~ ~-~ 9-~4 H~mer Drop in. ~ ~
Drill Forem~ ~I ~n ~m~r OD in. ~ ~
Ins~or R~ ~re ~a. in. ~ ~ ·
z
SURFACE ELEVATION <~ ~ ~m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
--Tannish Brown an4 Brown stiff to --
~very stiff C~Y(CH) with some ~ 1 SI 1.5
--sanO- FILL
-- -- LL=40
-- -- 2 ST 1.6 2.6 112 17 PL=17
-- PI=23
~ 5~ 3 ST [.5 25
-- 4 ST 2.8 28
~Dark Brown very stiff CLAY(CH) --
L~69
_ _ 5 ST 2.7 26 P~25
~ 10 -- PI=44
-- -tannish bro~ with a trace of --
__ silty san~ below 12' __
-- ~63
6 ST 2.0 26 P~25
-- -- PI=38
15_
-- -- 7 ST 2.5
20
-- ~ OF ~T ~RI~ 920' --
SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS BORING M~OD
SS - STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HSA -HO~OW STEM AUGERS
ST - SHELBY TUBE AT COMPLETION DRY ~. CFA -CO~INUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS
CA - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER AFTER HRS. ~. DC - DRIVEN CASING
RC - R~K CORE WATER ON RODS NO~ ~. MD - MUD DRILLING
ALPHA TESTING, INC. RECORD OF
2209 Wisconsin St.. Suite 100 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Dallas, Texas 75229
(214) 620-8911
Client ,.TPI ~ DEV~J~OPtI~]~I-~, INC. BonngNo. B-17
Arcmtect/Engmeer 1;'OSCR-S~I~OLD & P,%]~'I'~I]~S Job No. 94534
_.I Project Name ,,T~I;'FJ~,SON AT RTVE~CB~S~. Drawn By
Project Location COPP~;~'.T., ~ Approved By
DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION TEST DATA
! Date Started q-1 R-q4 Hammer Wt. lbs.
Date Completed 9-1 I~-q4 Hammer Drop in. ~ ~
Drill Foreman ~nz Spoon SamWer OD m. ~ ~.~
.]. Inspector Rock Core Dia. in. r- ~
Boring Method CFA Shelby Tube OD 3 in. o ._o~§~-
SOIL CLASSIFICATION '-- : ~. z = ~
- ,-a. ·
SURFACE ELEVATION < ~- o
446+_ ~ o~
_ Tannish Brown and Brown stiff to _
--very stiff CLAY(CH) with some san~ -- 1 ST 1.4
~ --and a trace of gravel - FILL
-- -- 2 ST 2.3 18
~- __ §---- 3 ST 2.6 23
-- _ 4 ST 3.5 29
-- -burned wood and ashes @8' 8'
--Dark Brown very stiff CLAY(CH) -- 5 ST 2.4 32
- _~ with a trace of silty sand 1~-
-- -- 6 ST 2.4 30
-- -- 15_
-- -tannish brown firm below 17.5' --
-- -- 7 ST 0.6
--
k --
-- BOTTOM OF TEST BORING @2~' --
:
~ SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS BORING METHOD
SS - STANDARD PENETRATION TEST AT COMPLETION 18 FT. HSA -HOLLOW STEM AUGERS
ST - SHELBY TUBE CFA - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS
CA - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER AFTER HRS. FT. DC - DRIVEN CASING
~ RC -ROCK CORE WATER ON RODS 18 FT. MD - MUD DRILLING
ALPHA TESTING, INC. RECORD OF
220g Wisconsin g,., guit~ 1 O0
Dallas, Texas 75229 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
(214) 620-8911
Chent ,3~PT ~ Di~'V'Y-,Z, OI:~I]~I~m INC, Boring No. R,-] 8
Architect/Engineer [~'[]SCB-$]~OT.,D & ~~S Job No. 94534
Proj~ Name ~~N ~ RI~~ Dra~ By
Proj~ L~tion ~p~.T.~ ~ A~rov~ By
DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION TEST DATA
Date St~ 9-] 6-94 H~mer Wt. lbs.
Date ~mplet~ 9-16-94 Hammer Dr~ in.
Drill Foreman ~I ~n Sam~r OD in.
SOIL CLASSIFICATION
SURFACE ELEVATION E~ ~ < ~d ~ ~
~ to ha~8 C~AY(CH) with a tgace o~ ~ ~ S~ 4+
-- -- ~=40
-- -- 2 S~ 4+
-- P[=23
-- 5-- 3 S~ 4+ 23
-- 4 S~ 2.5 27
-- ~=63
_ _ 5 S; [.8 28 P~=24
~ -tannish b~o~ with a t~ace o~ ~
SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS BORING M~HOD
SS - STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HSA -HOLLOW STEM AUGERS
ST SHELBY TUBE AT COMPLETION ~8
- CFA - CO~INUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS
CA - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER AFTER HRS. ~. DC - DRIVEN CASING
RC - ROCK CORE WATER ON RODS ~8 ~. MD - MUD DRILLING
ALPHA TESTING, INC. RECORD OF
220g Wi~oon~i~ Ct., ~;uite 100
Dallas, Texas 75229 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
(244) s2o-8o
Chent J'PI ~ DE"FEIZ)I~LI~IT, INC. BonngNo. B-19
Architect/Engineer 1;13SCH-S]G{O[J:) & PAR'I"'N]~,S Job No. 94534
Project Name J~FFERSON AT RIVERCHASE Drawn By
Project Location COPper.?., ~ Al:~roved By
DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION TEST DATA
Date Started 9-19-94 Hammer Wt. lbs.
Date Completed 9-19-94 Hammer Drop in. ~ ~
Drill Foreman ~D! Spoon Sampler OD in. ~ ~
O
Inspector Roc~ Core Dia. in. ~- ~
Boring Method CEA Shelby Tube OD 3 in. ~3 ~
.-.. ¢
SOIL CLASSIFICATION z- - . ~ ~ -~ .~ z'
SURFACE
ELEVATION
_Tan and Brown stiff to very stiff --
--CLAY(CH) intermixed with sandy -- I ST 3.1
--clay and gravel - FILL
-- -- 2 ST 3.9 13
_ LL=64
-- 5---- 3 ST 1.2 1.5 94 28 PL=24
_ PI=40
_ -- 4 ST 2.3 21
-- LL=52
_ _ 5 ST 2.5 20 PL=21
---- 10 -- PI=31
-- 11' --
--Brown to Tannish Brown very stiff --
--CLAY(CH) with a trace of sand --
-- LL=60
_-- _-- 6 ST 2.0 26 PL=23
-- -- PI=37
-- 15
-- -- 7 ST 2.1
-- ~ OF ~S? BORING @2~' --
SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS BORING METHOD
SS - STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HSA -HOLLOW STEM AUGERS
ST - SHELBY TUBE AT COMPLETION DRY FT. CFA-CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS
CA - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER AFTER HRS. FT. DC - DRIVEN CASING
RC - ROCK CORE WATER ON RODS ~O~P. FT. MD - MUD DRILLING
ALPHA TESTING, INC. RECORD OF
wi oon. . SUBSURFACE
EXPLORATION
Dallas, Texas 75229
(214) 620-8911
Chent ,3"P~' ~ D~-.].~O~, Tt~]C. Boring No.
Architect/Engineer YOSCB-S][RO[,D & P~S JoO No. 94534
Proj~ Name ~~N AT ~I~~E Drawn By
Proj~ L~t~on ~~ ~ ~ A~rov~ By
DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION TEST DATA
Date St~ 9-~9-9& Hammer ~. I~. ~
9-[9-9~ H~mer Drop in. ~ ~
Date
~m~et~
Drill Forem~ ~Z ~n ~m~er OD in. ~ ~
Insect R~ ~re ~a. in. ~ ~
Boring Meth~ CFA Sh~ T u, OD 3 in. 6~ 'g~e~ ~ ~~ '-~ ~o~
SURFACE
ELEVATION
~O ~E c~o
--Brown anO ~an s~ ~o very s~f~ --
--sandy c~ay anO grave~ -
-- -- 2 ST 3.5 20
~ 5~ 3 ST 3.2
-- -piece o~ wo~en chips ~7.5' 7.5' -- 4 ST 1.9 26
--~=~n ve=y s~i~ C~Y(CE)
-- _ 5 ST 2.~ 27
~ 10
_ -~annish b=o~ ~h a e~ace o~ --
-- sand below 11' --
- 1
-- -- 6 ST 2.5 26
~5
-- -- 7 ST 2.3
-- 20
~ O~ ~ ~R~ ~20~ --
SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS BORING M~HOD
SS - STANDARD PENETRATION TEST AT COMPLETION DR~ ~. HSA -HOLLOW STEM AUGERS
ST - SHELBY TUBE CFA - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS
CA - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER AFTER HRS. ~. DC - DRIVEN CASING
MD - MUD DRILLING
RC - ROCK CORE WATER ON RODS ~O~ FT.
ALPHA TESTING, INC. RECORD OF
Dallas. Texas 7s22g SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Cl,ent JPI ~ DE'v-ffJ~)Pt[I~, INC. BonngNo. B-21
Architect/Eng, neer [;I]SCFI-S]G~OLD & P~'~"'BRS Jot~No. 94534
Project Name ,.T~J;'~SON AT ~,IV]Q~CI~J%S~. Drawn By
Project Locabon COPPI~I'.T., ~ Approved By DAL
DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION TEST DATA
Date Started 9-19-94 Hammer Wt. lbs.
LL
Date Completed 9-19-94 Hammer Drop in. ~ ~
o
Drill Foreman EDT Spoon Sampler OD in. ~- ~
..L Inspector Rock Core Dia. in. ~ ~
SOIL CLASSIFICATION z' ~ ~ 8 ~° ..~ ~ n z-
iii ..~ 0 ~
446_+ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~,~ --
--Brown and Tan very stiff to har~ --
--CLAY(CH) intermixed with sandy -- 1 ST 4.0
--clay and gravel - FILL
-- -- LL=64
-- -- 2 ST 4+ 17 PL=23
-- PI=41
-- 5---- 3 ST 2.8 24
--Brown stiff to very stiff CLAY(CH', --
-- -- 4 ST 2.1 29
LL=74
_ _ 5 ST 1.5 1.2 86 39 PL=28
-- 10 PI=46
- - i
-- -tannish brown below 1~' --
_ _ 6 ST 2.5 24 PL=22
~- -- -- PI=37
_ 15_
-- -- 7 ST 2.7
2O
-- BOTTOM OF TEST BORING @28' --
-- I --
SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS BORING METHOD
SS - STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HSA -HOLLOW STEM AUGERS
ST SHELBY TUBE AT COMPLETION DRY FT.
- CFA - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS
CA - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER AFTER HRS. FT. DC - DRIVEN CASING
RC - ROCK CORE WATER ON RODS NONJ~ FT. MD - MUD DRILLING
ALPHA TESTING, INC.
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100
Dallas, Texas 75229
(214) 620-8911
KEY TO SOIL SYMBOLS AND CLASSIFICATIONS
THE RBBREUIRTIOHS COMMONLY EMPLOYED ON EACH "RECORD OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION",
ON THE FIGURES RND IN THE TEXT OF THE REPORT, RRE RS FOLLOWS:
SOIL OR ROCK TYPES
(SHOWN IN SYMBOLS COLUMN)
CLAY ?-- SILT SAHD LIMESTONE SHALE ASPHALT/CONCRETE
SOIL DESCRIPTION II1. RELRTIUE PROPORTIOHS
(A) COHESIONLESS SOILS DESCRIPTIVE TERM PERCENT
RELRTIUE DENSITY N, BLOWS/FT TRACE 1 - 10
LITTLE 11 - 20
VERY LOOSE 0 TO 4 SOME 21 - 35
LOOSE 5 TO 10 AND 36 - 50
COMPACT 11 TO 30
DENSE 31 TO 50
UERY DENSE OUER 50
IU. PARTICLE SIZE IDENTIFICATION
(B) COHESIUE SOILS
BOULDERS: -8 INCH DIAMETER OR MORE
CONSISTENCY Qu, TSF COBBLES -3 TO 8 INCH DIRMETER
GRAVEL -COARSE - 3/4 TO 3 INCH
VERY SOFT LESS THAN .25 -FINE - 5.0 MM TO 3/4 INCH
SOFT .25 TO .50 SAND -COARSE - 2.0 MM TO 5.0 MM
"fIRM .50 -~,v 1.00 -~mlU~"-~ ,, - 0.4 MM TO ~ ~.v ~ MM
STIFF 1.00 TO 2.00 -F NE - 0.07 MM TO 0.4 MM
UER¥ STIFF 2.00 TO 4.00 SILT -0 002 MM TO 0,07 MM
HARD OUER 4.00 CLAY -0 002 MM
II. PLASTICITY U, DRILLIHG RHD SAMPLING SYMBOLS
DEGREE OF PLASTICITY AU' AUGER SAMPLE
PLASTICITY INDEX RC: ROCK CORE
TCP: TEXAS CONE PENETRRTION TEST
NONE TO SLIGHT 0 - 4 SS: SPLIT-SPOON 1 3/8" I.D. 2" O.D.
SLIGHT 5 - 10 EXCEPT WHERE NOTED
MEDIUM 11 - 30 ST: SHELBY TUBE = 3" O.D. EXCEPT
HIGH TO VERY HIGH OVER 30 WHERE NOTED
WS: WRSHED SRMPLE
HSR: HOLLOW STEM AUGERS
CFA: CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS
MD: MUD DRILLIHG
NOTE: ALL SOILS CLASSIFIED ACCORDING TO
THE UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION
SYSTEM (RSTM D-2487)