Lakewood A-SY 920720 Geotechnical Engineering ,
A L PHA TESTING, INC.
Consulting Materials Testing
GEOT~CHNICAL EXPLORATION
for
Lakewood Estates
on
Z.akevood Estates (42.37 Acres)
V~lla~e Parkway
Coppell w Tex&-~
ALPHA Report No. 92159
ALPHA TESTING, INC.
2209 VEisconsin St.. Suite
Dallas. Texas 75229
2!4/620-8911
FAX 214/406-8023
July 20, 1992
Lakewood Estates
6161 Harry Hines, Suite 210
Dallas, Texas 75235
Attention: Mr. J. W. Levell
Re: Geotechnical Exploration
Lakewood Estates (42.37 Acres)
Village Parkway
Coppell, Texas
ALPHA Report No. 92159
Sukmitted herewith is the report of our geotechnical explorations
at the site of the referenced project. ~is study was authorized
by Mr. J.W. Levell on April 28, 1992 and was performed in
accordance with our proposal agreement dated April 23, 1992.
During our field exploration, the scope of our services was
expanded on June 15, 1992 to include evaluation of the existing
fill on the site in accordance with our proposal agreement dated
June 10, 1992.
This report contains the results of our findings, an engineering
interpretation of these with respect to the available project
characteristics and recommendations to aid design and construction
of foundations.
We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this
project. If we can be of further assistance, such as providing
our materials testing services during construction, please contact
our off ice.
=~-'"~'.., ,. ...... . -~....~ Very truly yours,
~. ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ -~ AL TESTING, INC
~. ~.'. ~.. ¢.g .'~
-~"~,. -_~_,'.'~ Manager of Engineering Services
m L. Hi~,uu~ P.E.
President
Copies: (3) Client
(2) Unzicker, Schnurbusch and Associates, Inc.
Geotechnica! Engineering I~Construction Materials Testing .Consulting
GIM)TECHNICAL EXPLORATION
_._ for
Lakewoo~ Estates (42.37 Acres)
Village Parkway
Coppel!, Texas
ALPHA Report No. 92159
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE .................................. 1
2.0 PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS ............................ 4
3.0 FIELD EXPLORATION .................................. 5
4.0 LABORATORY TESTS ................................... 7
5.0 GENERAL SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ...................... 8
5.1 Soil Stratigraphy ............................. 8
5.2 Existing Fill ................................. 11
5.2a Fill Composition ......................... ll
._. 5.2b Fill Thickness ........................... 12
5.2c Degree of Compaction ..................... 12
5.3 Groundwater ................................... 14
6.0 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS ............................. 16
6.1 Site Improvements ............................. 17
6.2 SI ab on Grade ................................. 19
6.3 Drainage ...................................... 22
7.0 GENERAL CONSTRUCTION PROCEDURES
AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................ 24
7.1 Site Preparation and Grading .................. 25
7.2 Foundation Excavations ........................ 26
7.3 Fill Compaction ............................... 27
7.4 Groundwater ................................... 28
Table of Contents - Continued
RECOMMENDED SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONTROLLED EARTHWORK
ON HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS ............... 30
APPENDIX
METHODS OF FIELD EXPLORATION
BORING LOCATION PLAN- Figure 1
METHODS OF LABORATORY TESTING
SUMMARY OF SWELL TESTS - Figure 2
RECORD OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
KEY TO SOIL SYMBOLS AND CLASSIFICATIONS
REPORT OF MOISTURE DENSITY RELATIONSHIP OF SOIL
REPORT OF FIELD COMPACTION TESTS
Alpha Report No. 92159
1.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE
The purpose of this geotechnical exploration was to evaluate
the engineering properties of the subsurface materials on the
subject site with respect to development of geotechnical
design parameters for residential, slab on grade foundations.
The field exploration was initially accomplished by securing
subsurface soil and rock samples from widely spaced test
borings performed across the expanse of the site. Due to the
fill encountered in the initial test borings, the fill was
further evaluated by performing field density tests in widely
spaced test pits made across the site. Engineering analyses
were performed from the results of the field exploration (test
borings and test pits) in addition to results of laboratory
tests performed on representative samples. The analyses were
used to develop the geotechnical engineering design parameters
for slab on grade foundations 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 would be used to verify the subsurface
conditions and to aid in ascertaining that the construction
phases are properly carried out.
1
Alpha Report No. 92159
The recommendations were developed from the information
obtained in the test borings and test pits 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 and test pit locations. It should be recognized
that the scope of work was not intended to fully define the
variability of the soil types and conditions which may be
present.
The nature and extent of variations between the borings and
test pits may not become evident until construction. If
significant variations then appear evident, our office should
be contacted and it may be necessary to re-evaluate our
recommendations after performing on-site observations.
The professional services provided in this geotechnical
exploration have been performed, findings obtained and
recommendations prepared in accordance with generally accepted
geotechnical engineering principles and practices. The scope
of our services did not include any environmental assessment
or investigation for the presence or absence of wetlands or
hazardous materials in the soil, surface water or groundwater
at this site.
2
Alpha Report No. 92159
ALPHA TESTING, INC. is not responsible for the conclusions,
opinions or recommendations made by others based on this data.
The information contained in this report is intended for the
-- exclusive use of our client and for the purpose of the design
of the specific structures outlined below in Section 2.0. The
recommendations presented in this report should not be used
for design of any other structures except those specifically
described herein. Further, it should be recognized that
- subsurface conditions can change with the passage of time.
The recommendations contained herein are not considered
applicable for an extended period of time after the completion
date of this report. It is recommended that 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.
The recommendations provided in this report are based on our
understanding of information provided by the client about the
characteristics of the project. If the client notes any
deviation from the facts about the project characteristics,
-- our office should be contacted immediately since this may
materially alter our recommendations. Further, ALPHA is not
responsible for damages resulting from workmanship of
.... designers or contractors and it is recommended that qualified
- 3
Alpha Report No. 92159
personnel be retained by the owner to verify that the work is
performed in accordance with plans and specifications.
2.0 PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS
It is proposed to construct a new residential subdivision on
a site located generally northeast of the intersection of
MacArthur Boulevard and Village Parkway 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 with some
scattered trees. According to a topographic survey provided
by the client, the site slopes downward from northwest to
southeast with a maximum change in surface elevation of about
9 ft (Elev. 451 to 442). Denton Creek is located along the
north portion of the east boundary of the site.
Present plans provide for the construction of 143 single
family residences. The new residences will be one and two
stories and will create relatively light loads to be carried
by the foundations. Current plans provide for the new
residences to be supported on slab-on-grade foundations.
Conversations with Mr. Kevin Kendrick, project civil engineer,
- 4
Alpha Report No. 92159
indicate that about 1 ft of fill will be imported and placed
across the site. No other information was provided.
_ 3.0 FIELD EXPLORATION
The site was explored by drilling a total of 21 test borings
to a depth of 20 ft using standard rotary drilling equipment.
In addition, 40 test pits were excavated to depths of 3 to 11
ft using a backhoe. The approximate location of each test
boring and test pit is shown on the Boring Location Plan,
Figure 1, enclosed in the Appendix of this report. Details
of the drilling and sampling operations are summarized in
Methods of Field Exploration, Section A-1 of the Appendix.
The soil types encountered during our field exploration are
presented on the Record of Subsurface Exploration sheets
included in the Appendix of this report. The boring logs
contain our field technician's interpretation of conditions
that are believed to exist between the actual samples taken.
Therefore, these boring logs contain both factual and
interpretive information.
It should be recognized that fill soils were encountered at
the boring and test pit locations, as will be discussed in
"- 5
Alpha Report No. 92159
Section 5.0. The composition of the fill soils was initially
evaluated based on the samples retrieved from 6-inch maximum
diameter holes. The fill was later further evaluated by
performing in-place density tests in the test pits. Field
density tests were performed at about 1-ft intervals using
nuclear field density methods as the test pits were excavated.
The density testing and test pit excavations extended to a
depth of at least 1 ft into the native subgrade materials.
As the test pits were excavated, periodic samples of the fill
soils were obtained and placed in air-tight containers for
further examination and possible laboratory testing. In
addition, larger field samples of the fill soils were obtained
for standard Proctor analysis in the laboratory.
The composition, compaction and thickness of the fill soils
was evaluated based on results of field density tests,
laboratory tests and visual observations performed in widely
spaced test pit excavations and borings. Since no records
were available of the fill placement, compaction or
uniformity, the subsurface conditions immediately adjacent to
the test borings and test pits could be substantially
different than the conditions observed in the test boring or
test pit. Due to the assumed uncontrolled placement of this
fill, other materials (deleterious or non-deleterious) may
Alpha Report No. 92159
exist within the fill. Further, fill soils that were not
placed under engineering supervision should be considered
subject to unpredictable movements.
4.0 LABORATORY TESTS
Selected samples of the subsurface materials were tested in
the laboratory to assess their index and engineering
characteristics as an aid in providing recommendations for
foundation design and earthwork construction. Standard
Proctor compaction tests were performed on 6 samples from the
test pits to evaluate the compaction characteristics of the
soil encountered. It should be recognized that due to the
variability of the materials encountered, standard Proctor
compaction tests could not reasonably be conducted on each
individual soil type or combination of soils encountered in
the test pits. Rather, standard Proctor compaction tests were
only conducted for the most predominate soil types and
combinations encountered. Details of the testing procedures
are summarized in Methods of Laboratory Testing, Section B-1
of the Appendix. Individual test results are presented either
on the Record of Subsurface Exploration sheets or on summary
data sheets also enclosed in the Appendix.
Alpha Report No. 92159
5.0 GENERAL SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
5.1 Soil Stratigraphy
Within the 20-ft maximum depth explored on the site,
subsurface materials were found to consist generally of fill
underlain by sand (SP), gravel (GP) and deeper sandy clay (CL)
and clay (CH). In Borings 1, 2 and 11, clay shale was
encountered. The letters in parenthesis represent the soils'
classification according to the Unified Soil Classification
System. The following is a brief summary of the subsurface
conditions encountered and certain engineering properties of
the soil/rock stratigraphy.
The surface layer of soils encountered was found to consist
generally of fill. The fill extends to depths of about 1 to
11 ft below existing grade. Fill was not encountered in
Borings 1 and 11 or in Test Pits 15 and 21. The fill is
described in more detail below in Section 5.2.
In Borings 1, 2, 7, 11 and 20 sand, clayey sand or gravel was
encountered either below the surficial fill or at the existing
ground surface. This stratum was not encountered in the other
borings. The granular soils extend to depths of about 6.5 to
Alpha Report No. 92159
19 ft below existing grade. Results of standard penetration
tests conducted in the field indicate that these soils are in
a loose to dense condition.
In Borings 1, 2 and 11, clay shale and shale were encountered
below the sand and gravel soils. These strata extended to the
maximum depths explored. Results of standard penetration
tests conducted in the field indicate that these strata are
competent.
In the remaining borings, the surficial fill and natural
granular soils were underlain by clay. The clay soil extends
to depths ranging from about 10 to the 20-ft maximum depth
explored below the existing ground surface. This stratum was
not encountered in Borings 7 and 18. The clays generally are
very stiff in consistency. Results of Atterberg-limit tests
indicate that the clay has plasticity index (PI) values
varying from about 31 to 49. Therefore, the clay is
considered highly plastic (expansive) and could be expected
to swell and shrink significantly with corresponding
variations in seasonal moisture content. The natural moisture
content of the clay was found to range from about 20 to 35
percent at the time of field testing. Results of pocket
- penetrometer tests indicate that the clay soils have undrained
Alpha Report No. 92159
shear strengths ranging from about 1.5 to more than 4 kips per
sq ft. Results of a free swell test indicate that the clays
tested have a free swell potential of about 0.5 percent at
their current moisture content when provided with free access
to water. The free swell test was conducted after applying
the expected overburden pressures and slab loading to the soil
s ampl e.
In Borings 4, 5, 8, 10, 13, 14 and 16, a sandy or silty clay
was encountered above the native clay stratum previously
described. These soils were noted to extend to depths ranging
from about 8 to 11.5 ft below the existing ground surface.
Results of laboratory tests indicate that the sandy or silty
clays have plasticity index values varying from about 28 to
35. In view of these test results, the sandy or silty clays
are considered moderately to highly plastic and could be
expected to swell and shrink with corresponding variations in
seasonal moisture content.
A deeper sand or sand and gravel strata were encountered in
Borings 6, 7, 12 and 18. These strata were overlain by silty
or calcareous clay in Borings 6, 7 and 18. Results of
standard penetration tests indicate that these strata are in
- a compact to dense condition.
10
Alpha Report No. 92159
5.2 Existing Fill
Due to the variability of the fill soils encountered across
the site, no generalized stratigraphic representations of the
fill can be presented. Rather, comments can only be provided
concerning the individual characteristics of the fill soil
composition, approximate fill thickness and apparent in-situ
degree of compaction.
5.2a Fill Co~position
_ Within the ll-ft maximum depth of the test pits at this site,
subsurface fill and natural materials were found to be highly
variable but were generally found to consist of sandy clay
(CL), sand (SP), clay shale and shaly limestone. The letters
in parenthesis represent the soils' classification according
._ to the Unified Soil Classification System.
The predominate fill soil type encountered during this
investigation was moderately plastic sandy clay. However,
significant amounts of highly plastic clay shale and tan clay
with shaly limestone was also encountered. Results of
Atterberg-limit tests indicate that the fill soils have
plasticity indices varying from about 3 to 31.
Alpha Report No. 92159
The source of the fill material is unknown. In addition, it
should be noted that organic soils were not observed at the
fill and native soil interface. During our investigation,
deleterious material was not observed in the fill. However,
large limestone boulders (4 ft or more in diameter) were
observed in Test Pits 13, 14, 18, 22, 32, 36, 37, 39 and 40.
5.2b Fill ~hickness
The thickness of fill encountered at each test pit location
is shown on Report of Field Compaction Tests forms. In
general, it appears that the fill thickness varies from about
- 1 to 11 ft with an average thickness of about 6 ft.
5.2c Degree of Compaction
The degree of compaction calculated for each field density
test cannot be stated with an absolute degree of certainty.
This is due to the extreme variability in the types of soils
that compose the fill. However, we have taken reasonable
precautions to identify the particular soils tested to
facilitate proper comparison with the applicable Proctor
values. Field density tests were not conducted on all fill
Alpha Report No. 92159
soils but only at widely spaced locations across the site.
Consequently, conditions at intermediate locations may be
different than at those locations tested. It is our opinion
that sufficient correlation of the field density tests with
the Proctor values can be made to allow for meaningful
evaluation of the compaction of the fill soils at this site.
Results of field density tests suggest that some of the fill
soils are compacted to more than 95 percent of standard
Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698). In-place dry unit
weights of the materials tested varied from 80 to 104 percent
of standard Proctor. A minimum compaction level of about 95
percent of standard Proctor is a typical guideline for
placement of most fill soils with plasticity indices less that
25. Soils with plasticity indices of 25 or greater are
generally compacted to a minimum of 93 percent of standard
Proctor maximum dry density. In general, about half of the
site appears to conform to the minimum recommended standard
compaction guideline and the remainder is under-compacted.
The under-compacted areas of the site are indicated on the
Boring Location Plan, Figure 1 attached to this report.
13
Alph9 Report No. 92159
5.3 Groundwater
During the period of time the field investigation was
performed, free groundwater was noted on the drilling tools
in several of the test borings and during excavation of
several of the test pits. Results of the groundwater
observations are tabulated below.
Depth of Observed Groundwater, ft
Location During Drilling At Completion
B-1 4 4
- B-2 8 6.5
B-6 17 17
B-7 8 10
B-11 5.5 3
B-16 5 dry
B-19 5.5 16
B-20 6.5 16.5
B-21 6 15
TP-7 2
TP-16 6
TP-18 4
TP-19 5
TP-22 4
TP-25 6
TP-26 2
TP-30 3
TP-36 5
TP-37 3
TP-39 2
TP-40 2
Groundwater was not observed during drilling in the other
borings or test pits. The subsurface sandy and limestone
materials are relatively permeable and are anticipated to have
14
Alpha Report No. 92159
a moderate to rapid response to water movement. However, the
subsurface clayey materials and clay shale are relatively
impermeable and are anticipated to have a slower response to
water movement. Therefore, several days of observation would
be required to evaluate the actual groundwater level 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 and subsurface
drainage characteristics. It is our opinion that the actual
groundwater table on the site may be located at a considerable
depth below the bottom of the deepest boring and any water
observed within the depths explored may be "perched"
groundwater. However, it is possible that the adjacent Denton
Creek could influence the level of groundwater encountered on
the site. It is not uncommon to detect seasonal groundwater
either in natural fractures within the clay matrix, in the
relatively thin sand and gravel seams encountered at this site
or near the fill/soil interface, particularly after a wet
season. Further details concerning the subsurface materials
and conditions encountered can be obtained from the Record of
Subsurface Exploration sheets provided in the Appendix of this
report.
Alpha Report No. 92159
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
there is any change in the project criteria a review should
be made by this office to determine if modifications to our
recommendations are required. Further, it is recommended that
our office be provided with a copy of the final plans and
specifications for review prior to construction.
Typical foundations for single-family, residential structures
in the Metroplex area consist of stiffened slab-on-grade
- construction. In the following sections are presented
recommendations for slab-on-grade foundations.
It is understood that the existing 30-inch sanitary sewer line
which crosses the southern portion of the site will be
abandoned. It is recommended that the sewer line be removed
to prevent the existing bedding material and utility line from
acting as a conduit for moisture penetration into the deeper
clays at this site. The area disturbed during removal of the
utility line should be re-compacted in accordance with the
recommendations provided in Section 7.3 of this report.
16
Alpha Report No. 92159
6.1 Site Improvements
Fill was encountered to depths of 1 to 11 ft below existing
grade in the test borings and test pits. Clear delineation
of the lateral extent and variation in depth of the fill
across the could not be determined from results of our field
investigation. Based on results of our field density testing,
laboratory analysis and field observations, it is our opinion
that portions of the existing fill material present on-site
are not suitable for direct support of residential, slab-on-
grade foundations in its present state. Therefore, it is
recommended that the existing fill within the shaded area
shown on the Boring Location Plan be improved as outlined
below prior to construction of slab on grade foundations.
Due to the presence of large limestone boulders and under
compaction of the existing fill within the shaded area (see
Figure 1), it is recommended that the upper 5 ft of existing
fill in this area be totally removed and replaced with clean,
well compacted backfill. The exposed surface of the
excavation should be proof rolled with heavy equipment and
further tested by probing as necessary. After re-compaction,
proofrolling and testing the exposed surface, any weak or
highly organic soils noted should be removed. Upon completion
Alpha Report No. 92159
of [he above proofrolling and monitoring, the existing fill
can be re-used on the site as backfill provided all material
greater than 6 inches in size are either removed from the
existing fill or mechanically reduced in size to no larger
than 6 inches. The re-processed existing fill or new fill
should be compacted as outlined in Section 7.3 of this report.
In the remainder of the subdivision area, the fill was
generally compacted to acceptable levels. However, again,
due to possible variations in conditions between test pits and
borings, the most positive method of using the existing fill
would be to remove and re-compact the upper 5 ft of the
existing fill. As an alternate method, the upper 0.5 ft of
existing fill should be removed and the exposed surface should
be proofrolled with heavy equipment and further tested by
probing as necessary. After re-compaction, proof rolling and
testing the exposed surface, any weak or highly organic soils
noted should be removed. Upon completion of the above
proof rolling and monitoring, the soils previously removed
could be re-used provided these materials are free of any
deleterious substances and are compacted to at least 98
percent Standard Proctor at/or above optimum.
Alpha Report No. 92159
6.2 Slab on Grade
The following recommendations for design of slab-on-grade
foundations are provided assuming that the existing fill is
improved as recommended above in Section 6.1. Further, it is
assumed that all imported fill materials will be low to
moderately plastic soils with plasticity indices of 30 or
less. If alternate fill soils are used, the foundation design
recommendations provided below may need to be altered and our
office should be contacted.
Our findings indicate that the proposed residences could be
adequately supported on a slab-on-grade foundation system.
Slab foundations should be designed for potential movements
(swell or consolidation) of about 3.5 inches if constructed
within about 1 ft of existing grade. An effective plasticity
index value of about 44 as calculated by procedures outlined
by Housing and Urban Development could be used for design of
.... slabs.
The above potential movements were estimated considering
potential consolidation of the deeper fills which are not
removed and recompacted at outlined above and potential
- swelling of the clayey materials based on the results of free
Alpha Report No. 92159
swell tests and in general accordance with methods outlined
by the Texas Highway Department Test Method Tex-124-E and
engineering judgement and experience. The estimated swell
movements were calculated assuming that the moisture content
of the in-situ clay soils within the normal zone of seasonal
moisture content change varies from a "dry" condition to a
"wet" condition. Deep seated swelling of underlying deeper
clay soils could 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.
Slabs should be designed with exterior and interior grade
beams adequate to provide sufficient rigidity to the
foundation system utilized. A net allowable soil bearing
pressure of 1.5 kips per sq ft may be used for design of all
grade beams bearing in either natural, undisturbed soils,
existing proofrolled fill or new fill soils placed as
recommended in Section 7.3. Grade beams should bear at a
minimum depth of 12 inches below final grade and should have
a minimum width of 10 inches.
Ail grade beams and floor slabs should be adequately
reinforced with steel to minimize cracking as normal movements
20
Alpha Report No. 92159
occur in the 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 could be placed over the moisture barrier to assist
concrete curing and reduce the potential for surface cracking.
The above design criteria (potentLal movements and effective
plasticity index values) given in this report were developed
assuming slabs are constructed about 1 ft above existing grade
using fill soils with a plasticity index of 30 or less.
Further substantial filling on the site could alter the
recommended foundation design parameters. Therefore, it is
recommended that our office be contacted following completion
of any additional filling on the site to verify that the
appropriate design parameters are utilized for final
foundation design.
If it becomes impractical to design slabs to accommodate the
potential movements indicated above, additional design
recommendations could be provided to reduce movement of slabs.
Briefly, these might consist of either overexcavating and
replacing a portion of the existing clays with select, non-
expansive soil or lime slurry pressure injecting the existing
Alpha Report No. 92159
soils to a specified depth below the bottom of the floor slab.
_ Our office should be contacted if further details about these
or other improvement procedures are desired.
6.3 Drainage
Adequate drainage should be provided at the site to reduce
seasonal variations in moisture content of the foundation
soils. All pavements or sidewalks should be sloped away from
the new residences to prevent ponding of water around the
foundations. A minimum slope of 1 percent should be provided,
such that final grade slopes away from the structure for a
minimum distance of 10 ft. Maintaining positive surface
drainage throughout the life of the structures is essential.
In areas with pavement or sidewalks adjacent to the new
structures, care should be exercised to maintain a positive
seal between the structures and the pavement or sidewalk to
prevent seepage of water into the underlying supporting soils.
It is not uncommon to experience post-construction movement
of pavement and flatwork. Normal maintenance should include
inspection of all joints in paving, sidewalks, etc. and
resealing where necessary.
Alpha Report No. 92159
There are several factors related to civil and architectural
design and/or maintenance which may significantly affect
future movements of a foundation and floor slab system. In
cases where positive surface drainage cannot be achieved by
sloping the ground surface adjacent to the building, a
complete system of gutters and downspouts should carry runoff
water a minimum of 10 feet from the completed structure.
Landscaping should avoid planting large trees or shrubs near
the foundation in consideration of their significant moisture
demand upon maturing. All trees and shrubs should be a
minimum of one-half their mature height from the new
structure. Care should be taken to maintain the as-placed
moisture conditions constant around the edge of the slab.
Ponding of water in planters, in un-paved areas and around
joints in paving and sidewalks can cause slab movements beyond
those predicted in this report. Planters placed adjacent to
buildings should be provided with a means to assure that a
concentration of water is not provided to the subsoil
stratigraphy. Finally, architectural design of the floor slab
should avoid additional features such as wing walls as
extensions of the slab.
Trench backfill for utilities should be properly placed and
compacted in conformance the local governing requirements.
23
Alpha Report No. 92159
Since a granular backfill is generally provided around the
utility lines, care should be taken to prevent the backfilled
trench from becoming a french drain and allowing access for
surface or subsurface water beneath the new structure. The
use of concrete cut-off collars or clay plugs may be required
to prevent this from occurring. The trench backfill should
_ be compacted to the requirements of Section 7.3.
7.0 GENERAL CONSTRUCTION PROCEDURES AND RECOMMENDATIONS
It is possible that variations in subsurface conditions will
be encountered during construction. In order to permit
correlation between the test boring data and the actual
subsurface conditions encountered during construction, it is
recommended that a registered Geotechnical Engineer be
retained to observe construction procedures and materials.
Some construction problems, particularly as to 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 by the
borings.
24
Alpha Report No. 92159
7.1 Site Preparation and Grading
Ail areas that will support floor slabs 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 as needed. Any undesirable material (i.e.
organic material, wet, soft, or loose soil) still in place
should be removed. The exposed subgrade should be further
inspected by proofrolling with 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. The
proofrolling procedures should be observed by the project
geotechnical engineer or his representative. Any unsuitable
materials thus 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. If
grading plans indicate that slopes greater than 4 (horizontal)
to 1 (vertical) or greater than 3 ft high will exist, it is
recommended that our office be contacted regarding the need
for stability analysis.
Alpha Report No. 92159
Due to the clay and sandy fill soils found near the surface,
the traffic of heavy equipment including heavy compaction
equipment, may create pumping and general deterioration of the
shallower soils. Therefore, it should be anticipated that
some construction difficulties could be encountered during
periods when these soils are saturated.
7.2 Foundation Excavations
Ail foundation excavations should be properly monitored to
assure that all excessively loose, soft or otherwise
undesirable materials are removed and that foundations will
bear on satisfactory material. Soil exposed in the base of
all satisfactory foundation excavations should be protected
against detrimental change in condition such as from distur-
bance, rain or excessive drying. Surface runoff should be
drained away from the excavations and not allowed to pond.
If possible, all concrete for foundations should be placed
the same day the excavation is made. That is, it is not
intended that the exposed foundation soils be allowed to
become excessively dry or wet before placement of concrete
but that the natural condition of the soils be maintained
during construction.
26
Alpha Report No. 92159
7.3 Fill Compaction
Sandy materials with a plasticity index below 25 should be
compacted to a dry density of at least 95 percent of standard
Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698) and at a moisture
content in the range of 1 percentage points 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 between 93 and 98
percent 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 5 percentage points above
optimum. The clay fill should be processed such that the
largest particle or clod is less than 6 inches prior to
compaction.
Limestone or other rock-like materials used as fill should be
compacted to at least 95 percent of standard Proctor maximum
dry density. The compacted moisture content of limestone or
other rock-like materials is not considered crucial with
regard to proper performance. However, it may be possible to
minimize the compactive effort required to achieve the minimum
Alpha Report No. 92159
compaction criteria if the material's moisture content during
placement is within three percent of optimum. No individual
rock pieces larger than about 6 inches in dimension should be
used as fill. Additionally, no rock fill should be used
within 1 ft below the bottom of floor slabs.
Compaction should be accomplished by placing the fill in about
6 to 8-inch thick loose lifts and compacting each lift to at
least the specified minimum dry density. Field density and
moisture tests should be performed on each lift as necessary
to assure that adequate compaction is achieved. As a guide,
1 test per 2,500 sq ft per lift is recommended in the building
areas. In larger site areas, a test frequency of 1 test per
5000 sq ft or greater per lift may be used. Utility trench
backfill should be tested at a rate of 1 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 the
foundation excavations with pumps or other conventional
dewatering equipment should be sufficient.
28
Alpha Report No. 92159
Due to the perched groundwater encountered within the fill in
the test pits, some water seepage should be anticipated during
removal and re-compaction of the existing fill. It is
expected that the water seepage encountered can be effectively
handled by pumping from the excavations with pumps or other
conventional dewatering equipment.
Alpha Report No. 92159
RECONNENDED SPECIFICATIONS FOR COI~ROLL~) ~R~ ON
HOUSING AI~ URBAN DEVELOPNEI~ PROJECTS
1. Site Preparation: All surface vegetation and foreign
materials such as timber, logs, trees, grass, roots, etc.,
shall be stripped and removed.
2. Scarifying Area to be Filled: In areas where fills are
desired, the stripped surface shall be scarified to a depth
of at least six inches for uniform compaction. The scarified
surface shall be such that it is free from large lumps and
uneven surfaces.
3. Compacting Area to be Filled: After clearing and scarifying
the area to be filled, the soils shall be compacted
mechanically to at least 95 percent of Standard Proctor
- maximum dry density (ASTM D 698) at or above the Optimum
Moisture Content for the material.
4. Fill Material: On-site soil and/or rock could be used as
random fill provided such material is free from vegetation
and other deleterious substances. No fill material shall
contain rocks or lumps having a diameter larger than 6 inches.
5. Depth and Mixing of Fill Lavers: The fill materials shall be
placed in level, uniform layers. Each layer shall be
· - thoroughly blade mixed during spreading to insure uniform
compaction. These materials shall be placed in loose lifts
with compacted thicknesses not to exceed six inches per lift.
__ The compacted field density and in-situ moisture content shall
conform to that specified for random fill.
6. Compaction of Fill Laver: Compaction equipment shall be
.... capable of compacting all fill soils to the specified density.
Compaction of all fill shall be accomplished with the material
at the specified moisture content. Each fill layer shall be
- compacted uniformly with sufficient effort to achieve the
specified minimum degree of compaction.
_ 7. Amount of Compaction: After each fill layer has been placed,
mixed and spread evenly, it shall be thoroughly compacted to
the specified density. All slight to moderately expansive
materials (soils with a plasticity index, PI, below 25 and
- limestone) shall be compacted to at least 95 percent of
standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698). Expansive
soils (soils with a plasticity index equal to or greater than
25) shall be compacted to at least 93, but not exceeding 98
percent of standard Proctor.
3O
Alpha Report No. 92159
8. Moisture Content: Ail fill material shall be compacted at
the appropriate moisture content as defined for the particular
soil or rock type. The compacted moisture content of all
soils shall be at or above the material's optimum moisture
content as defined by ASTM D 698. The compacted moisture
content of limestone or other rock-like materials is not
considered crucial provided the proper degree of compaction
is attained.
9. Field Density: Field density tests of fill and/or backfill
shall be controlled by an Engineering Testing Laboratory.
Density tests shall be taken in the compacted material below
the disturbed surface. When these tests indicate that the
density of any layer of fill is below the required density,
the particular soil or rock layer shall be reworked until the
proper density and/or moisture content is achieved. Field
density tests shall be performed at a rate of at least 1 test
per lift per each 500 cubic yards of material placed.
10. Slope Control: In areas where cut or fill slopes exceed three
(3) feet in depth/height, a detailed slope stability analysis
is recommended. For slopes less than 3 ft in height, a slope
ratio of one (vertical) to four (horizontal) shall not be
exceeded.
11. Supervision: Supervision by the Soils Engineer shall be of
such continuity during the grading operations that he can
adequately describe the work done and evaluate that work in
comparison with the specifications. Actual supervision shall
be by the Contractor's Supervisor.
12. Reports: The Soils Engineer shall send one copy of each test,
inspection, or evaluation report to the Engineer, Contractor,
and appropriate District FHA office.
APPEI~)IX
Alpha Report No. 92159
A-1 METHODS OF FIELD EXPLORATION
Using standard rotary drilling equipment or a backhoe, a total
of 21 test borings and 40 test pits were performed for this
geotechnical exploration at the approximate locations shown
on the Boring Location Plan, Figure 1. The number, depth and
location of the borings on the site were determined by ALPHA
TESTING, INC., in concurrence with the client. The test
boring locations were staked in the field by pacing from
reference points shown on the site plan provided during this
investigation which could be identified in the field. The
surface elevations provided on the Record of Subsurface
Exploration sheets were 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 were obtained by hydraulically pressing 3-inch O.D.
thin-wall sampling tubes into the underlying soils at selected
depths (ASTM D1587). These samples were removed from the
sampling tubes in the field and examined visually. One
representative portion of each sample was sealed in a plastic
bag for use in future visual examinations and possible testing
in the laboratory.
In addition, representative samples of the subsurface
materials were obtained employing split-spoon sampling
procedures in accordance with ASTM Standard D1586. Disturbed
samples were obtained at selected depths in the borings by
driving a standard 2-inch O.D. split-spoon sampler 18 inches
into the subsurface material using a 140-pound hammer falling
30 inches. The number of blows required to drive the split-
spoon sampler the final 12 inches of penetration (N-value) is
recorded in the appropriate column on the logs.
Logs of all borings have been included in the Appendix of this
report. The logs show visual descriptions of all soil and
rock strata encountered using the Unified Soil Classification
System. Sampling information, pertinent field data, and field
observations are also included. The soil and rock samples
will be retained in our laboratory for at least 30 days and
then discarded unless the client requests otherwise.
"~ . ~ ~ ~00 200 300
Alpha Report No. 92159
B-1 METHODS OF LABORATORY TESTING
The 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 D2216),
^tterberg-limit tests (ASTM D4318) and dry unit weight
determinations were performed on selected samples. In
addition, unconfined compression (ASTM D2166) and pocket-
penetrometer tests were conducted on selected soil samples to
evaluate the soil shear strength. The compaction
characteristics of the fill soils were evaluated by performing
standard Proctor compaction tests in the laboratory. Results
of all laboratory tests described above are provided on the
accompanying Record of Subsurface Exploration sheets included
- in the Appendix of this report or on summary data sheets as
noted.
In addition to the Atterberg-limit tests, the expansive
properties of the clay layer was further analyzed by free
swell tests. The free swell test was performed by placing
a selected sample in the consolidation machine and applying
the overburden pressure and then allowing the sample to absorb
water. When the sample exhibited very little tendency for
further expansion, the height increase was recorded and the
percent free swell and total moisture gain were calculated.
Results of the free swell test are provided on the Swell Test
Data sheet, Figure 2 included in this appendix.
33
- ABSORPTION SWELL TEST DATA
BORING NO .............................. 4 16
DEPTH, ]mT .............................. 2-4 8.5-10.5
DRY UNIT WEIGHT, PCF ................... 110 99
LIQUID LIMIT, % ........................ 63 74
PLASTIC LIMIT, % ....................... 20 25
PLASTICITY I]~)EX (PI) .................. 43 49
'- INITIAL MOISTURE CONTENT, % ............ 17.3 25.2
FINAL MOISTURE CO~, % .............. 23.5 26.6
PERCENT FREE SWELL ..................... 5.8 0.5
.__ DAT.T.d%.~, ~ FIO. J]:LE 2
PROJECT NAME ~ :]~-~T~ PROJECT NO. DATE
COPPI~.T., ~ 92159 7/22/92
ALPHA TESTING, INC.
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100 RECORD OF
Dallas, Texas 75229
(2 4) 620-89 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Client [,~ ]~~ Bonng # B-]. ~ 9 ]~K A__
Arcmtect/Eng,neer Job ~
Project Name ~ ~~ Drawn by
Project Location ~.~.~ ~ Approved By
_ TEST DATA
DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION
Date Staded 5--[~--9~ Hammer Wt. [~0 ~ lbS.
Da~e Completed ~ Hammer Drop ~0 m.
Drill Foreman ~ S~on Sampler OD ~ in. ~ ~
inspector Rock Core D~a. in. 9 ~
Bor,ng Melh~ C~ Shelby Tube OD~ in. ~ ~ ~
~ ~rly graded G~ ~ ~ ~ : SS ~ 5
~ G~ S~ MI~R~ (GP) --
~ - 2 SS 7 44
- ~ Dark gray C~Y S~E ~. 4 SS 33
~ --~5 SS ~ 18 P~28
: ~ 50
_ ~rk gray S~E ' -- 7 SS ~5"' 14
SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER DEPTH BORING METHOD
SS- DRIVEN SPLIT SPOON U AT COMPLETION 4 FT HSA - HOLLOW STEM AUGERS
ST- PRESSED SFiELBY TUBE CFA- - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS
-- CA- CONTINUOUS FLIGI~T AUGER ~' AFTER HRS FT. DC - DRIVEN CASING
RC- ROCK CORE WATER ON RODS ~x FT MD - MUD DRILLING
TCP- TEXAS CONE PENETRATION TEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC.
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100 RECORD
OF
Dallas. Texas 75229
1214/620-891 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Client ~ ES']~I~Zt~ES Boring # ]3-2 ~ 3.4 BI[3CK A
- ArchitectiEngineer Job # 92159
Projecl Name LAK]~wI]~ ES~ Drawn by MP
Prolect Location ~p~,],, ~ Approv~ By
TEST DATA
DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION
Date Sta~ed ~1 1 --92 Hammer Wt. 140 ~_ lbs.
Date Complet~ 5--1 1--~ Hammer Drop 30 in.
Drill Foreman ~T S~on Sampler OD 2
Inspector Rock Core Dia. in
Bonng Meth~ C~ Shelby Tube OD
' d ~ o 9 ~ - ~'--
i ' o
m ~ SOIL CLASSIFICATION
,
' ~ SURFACE ELEVATION ~ ~< ~ & ~ o ~ u ~ ~ ~¢ Z ~ 8 ~ ~ :, ,, ,,
~ T~ and bro~ hard alte~ating
_ ~ C~OUS C~Y/S~Y C~Y/ 1 ST 4+
~ C~Y S~ (CL/~) with a
~ trace of gravel - F~L 4' _: 2 ST 4.6 4+ 115 16 '~P~18
~ { ~PI=22
~ ; Tannish bro~ co~ F~ 5- 3 ST 11
~ S~(SP) with a trave of -
gravel -
- ~ 8' 4 ~ SS 10
~ T~nish bro~ and gray
- ~ s~dy clay ~d clay se~
~ 11.5'
T~ co. ct F~ S~ (SP) --
~ -with a trace of gravel 15--~ 6 SS 12
~ ~low 15' _~ .
~ 19 ' -~_
_ ~ ~ 50
D~k gray C~Y S~(CH) -~ 7 SS ~ 5'~
~ OF ~ ~ ~20'
~ ~ _'.
SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER DEPTH BORING METHOD
SS- DRIVEN SPLIT SPOON V AT COMPLETION 6o ~ FT HSA - HOLLOW STEM AUGERS
CFA- - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS
ST- PRESSED SHELBY TUBE ~' AFTER HRS FT
CA- CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER DC - DRIVEN CASING
RC- ROCK CORE WATER ON RODS 8 FT MD - MUD DRILLING
TCP- TEXAS CONE PENETRATION TEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC.
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100
..... Dallas, Texas 75229 RECORD OF
(2 4) 620-89 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Chant ~ ]~q1~--, Bor,ng # B-3 ~ 1 ~ D
Arch~tectiEngineer Job # 97-159
Project Name 1./~ ~~ Drawn by
Prelect Location ~.1~ ~ Approved By
TEST DATA
DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION ~
Date Sta~ed 5--] ] --~2 Hammer Wt. _~ lbs.
Date Compleled ~? Hammer Drop in.
Drill Foreman ~T S~on Sampler OD ~ in. ~
Inspector~ Rock Core D~a. in ~ ~c
Boring Meth~ ~ Shelby Tu~ OD .~ ~n. o ~ o ~ ~
~ SOIL CLASSIFICATION = ~ m m ~ =~ .It~. m~.
SURFACE ELEVATION ~ c ~ ~ ~ , , .
~ T~ and br~ ve~ stiff to _ '
~ h~d alternating C~Y/S~Y 2 1 ST , 4+
~ C~Y(~/CL) with a trace of ~ ~ ~35
m ~ 3 ST ' 2.8 20
~ -soft w~th ~nd soa~ bol~ -
i ~ 4 S~ 0.5 24
~ Dark br~ very stiff C~Y(~
~ with a trace of calcareous - 5 ST 3.6 31
~ -tannish br~ w~th a trace
~ -, 6 ST 3.4 28 ~P~24
~ _: 7 ST 2.8
~ ' 20 _]
SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER DEPTH BORING METHOD
SS- DRIVEN SPLIT SPOON ~' AT COMPLETION FT HSA - HOLLOW STEM AUGERS
ST- PRESSED SHELBY TI)BE DRY CFA- - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS
CA- CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER T AFTER HRS. FT DC - DRIVEN CASING
RC- ROCK CORE WATER ON RODS ~ FT MD - MUD DRILLING
TCP- TEXAS CONE PENETRATION TEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC.
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100 RECORD OF
__ Dallas, Texas 75229
(214) 620-8911 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Client [,~%K]~O(]~ ~ Bonng # B~-4 ~ 5 ~ D
-'- Arch~tect..'E ngineer Job # 92]_59
Project Name ~ ~ Drawn by ~ _
Project Location ~,T,, ~ Approv~ By
TEST DATA
.
DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION ',
Date Sta~ed 5--[[--92 Hammer Wt .... lbs.
._ Date Cornplet~ 5--[[--92 Hammer Drop in. ~ I
Dnll Foreman ~ S~on Sampler OD __ in. ~ ~ ~
Inspector__ Rock Core Dia. m. ~ i N
Boring Meth~ ~ Shelby Tube OD 3 ~n. ~ ~ ~ · ~
SO~L
CLASSIFICATION
SURFACE ELEVATION ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~o~~ ~
~ C~Y/C~~ C~Y/C~Y ~63
_4 S~(CH/CL/~) with a trace ~ 4' E 2 :' ST 4+ 110 17 P~20
, ~f gravel - F~,I, ~ ---~ PI=43
~' B~ stiff to ve~ stiff -- 5 --~ 3 ~ ST 3.8 26
~ S~DY C~Y(CL) ~ ; ~=47
-- P~17
- ~ __ 4 ST 0.8 22
~ 8 5' PI=30
~ ' - ~=78
~ Dark br~ ve~ stiff to hard E, 5 ~ ST 3.6 [P~28
__~ C~Y(CL) ~th a trace of ~1~[ ~ ,~ , ~Pi=50
~ cla~reous n~ules
~ -tannish br~ with a trace '~ --
4 of silt ~low 13' -
~ - 6 , ST 4+ , 25
__ _ ~,.
~ -- 7 ST ~ 3.0
~ OF ~ ~ ~20'
SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER DEPTH BORING METHOD
SS- DRIVEN SPLIT SPOON V AT COMPLETION DRY FT HSA - HOLLOW STEM AUGERS
..- ST- PRESSED SHELBY TUBE CFA- - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS
CA- CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER ~" AFTER HRS. FT DC - DRIVEN CASING
RC- ROCK CORE WATER ON RODS ~ FT MD - MUD DRILLING
TCP- TEXAS CONE PENETRATION TEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC.
2209 Wisconsin St.. Suite 100 RECORDOF
-- Dallas. Texas 75229
(214) 620-8911 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
.- Client ~ ~ Boring # ~--5 [J~ 10 ~ D
Architect/Engineer Job # 92159
Project Name ~ ]~ Drawn by BP
Proiect Location ~J~l:~l~, ~ Approved By___ UAL
TEST DATA
DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION
Date Started 5--]_]_--9)- Hammer Wt __ lbs.
!
--- Date Completed 5--11--92 Hammer Drop ~n.
Drill Foreman ~I Spoon Sampler OD in.
Inspector__ Rock Core Dia. in.
.>
Bor~ng Method C[~I~ Shelby Tube OD 3 ,n. cu°° ~ ~ ~ .
SOIL CLASSIFICATION ;! ~ ~- 3 o
~ Tan gray and brown hard -~ i
- ~ alternating CI.&Y/SPaNDY CI_~Y/ --! 1 ST 4+
-~ SAND(CH/CL/SP) with limestone __-i I LL=50 .
-~ fra~'~nts - F'I-I',I, ~ 2 ST 4+ 17 IPL=18
.... .1>1=32.
~ 5 - 3 ST 4.0 22
Brown very stiff to hard -t,
-- -~-~ ----i
~ SANDY CLAY(CL) 4 ST 4+ 24
-- !
~ Dark bromn very stiff CItY(CH ~ 5 ! ST 3.4
-- ---~ with a trace of calcareous ' 10---
~ nodules -
- -' 6 ST 3.2 25
-i ' i
~ -tannish brown with a trace --'
-J of silt bolow 18' . ,
~ _: 7 ~ ST 2.5
~ 120 !
--i. BETFI'flVl OF ~ Bf3R]I~IG @20' I --
SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER DEPTH BORING METHOD
SS- DRIVEN SPLIT SPOON ~' AT COMPLETION DRY' FT HSA - HOLLOW STEM AUGERS
--' ST- PRESSED SHELBY TUBE CFA- - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS
CA- CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER ~' AFTER HRS FT. DC - DRIVEN CASING
RC- ROCK CORE WATER ON RODS [1~'[~ FT MD - MUD DRILLING
-CP- -EXASCONE PENETRAT~ONTEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC.
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100 RECORD OF
Dallas, Texas 75229
(214) 620-891, SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Clien! ~ ]~ Boring # P.-(~ [jor~ '14 ~ D
" Arch~tect~Engineer Job #
Prolect Name ~ ]~ Drawn by
Project Location COPI:~','I'.~, ~ Approved By
TEST DATA
DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION
Date Started 5--'1-1--92 Hammer Wt. lbs.
Date Completed 5--'1'1--9)- Hammer Drop ~n.
Dnll Foreman ]~)-r Spoon Sampler OD ~n. ~. ~
Inspector__ Rock Core D~a. ~n. ~ ~
Bonng Method C~I~_ Shelby Tube OD 3 ~n. o 'f '-
~o · o ~o ~ _
[ SOIL CLASSIFICATION I · ~.~. -o
! = SURFACE ELEVATION ( ~- ~- -~ ~ n uJ .. ~ ~ z: _o
Tan and brown very stiff to -, 1 ST 4+ I
_~ hard alten~ating CLAY/ _:
~ LIMESTONE/SANDY CLAY(CH/CL) LL=44'
' FILL ~ ! -- 2 ST 2.3 18 PL=i~c
! - PI=25
~ ' 5_~ 3 ST
~ 6.5'!
~ Dark brown very stiff CLAY(CH'. -- 4 ST 3.4 33
~ -
~ 10'~]i--! 5 ST 3.5 26 PL=2~pi=4~
~ Tannish brown stiff silty /0~
--' SILTY CLAY(CA) -!
I ~ I
- - 6 ST 2.0 26 PB=~]ll'
-- '15 ?T=~G
-- '17~ --
-- --~ 7 [ST I .5
~ BOTlX~ OF ~T BORING @20' ! -:
~ i i
-!
SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER DEPTH BORING METHOD
SS- DRIVEN SPLIT SPOON V AT COMPLETION -17 FT HSA - HOLLOW STEM AUGERS
CFA- - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS
__ST- PRESSED SHELBY TUBE %~ AFTER HRS. FT
~A- CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER DC - DRIVEN CASING
~C- ROCK CORE WATER ON RODS 17 FT MD - MUD DRILLING
..'CP- TEXAS CONE PENETRATION TEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC.
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100
-- Dallas. Texas 75229 RECORD OF
(214) 620-8911 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Chant LAK]~JOOD ]~"T~ Bonng # B-7 IDT '14 RI'riCK D
ArcmtectTEng~neer Job # 9~-159
Prolect Name ~ ~ Drawn by
Project Location ~~,~ ~ Approv~ By
-- TEST DATA
DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION
Date Started 6~ Hammer Wt. ~0 lbs.
.._ Date Completed 6~ _Hammer Drop 30 ~n.
Drill Foreman ~[ S~on Sampler OD~ ~ ~ ~n. ~
Inspector~ Rock Core D~a. ~n '~
_ Bor,ng Meth~ C~ Shelby Tu~ OD 3 ,n. ~ ~
SOIL CLASSIFICATION = I · ~ ~ c ~ -
~ SURFACE ELEVATION < ~ ~ u
~m ~0 0 ~ xo ~m U~c uc .... '
-- ~ stiff to ha~ alte~ating ~ 1 ST 3.2
_- (~/CL) - FTT,T. ,' _-- 2 ST 4+ 13 iPL=18
6' _ 3 S~ 4+ 13
~ w~th a trace of ~mvel ~ 8' -- 4 SS 14 11
~ T~ and g~y ~iff
~ C~~US S~Y C~Y(CL) ~ ST 1.5 20 PL=17
~ T~ ~d g~y co~a~ FINE ~ --
_ S~D(SP) ~ _
~ ~ -- 6 SS 12
~ 17.5 --
-- MI~R~(GP) --~ 7 SS 29
SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER DEPTH BORING METHOD
SS- DRIVEN SPLIT SPOON %' AT COMPLETION '10 FT HSA - HOLLOW STEM AUGERS
-- ST- PRESSED 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
~'CP- TEXAS CONE PENETRATION TEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC.
2209 Wisconsin St.. Suite 100 RECORD OF
Dallas, Texas 75229
(214) 620-8911 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Client [,~ E~[I~-~ Bor,ng # R--8 ~ 18
Architect;Engineer Job # 921.59
Project Name ~ ]~~ Drawn by
Prolect Location ~~ ~ Approv~ By
TEST DATA
DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION
Date Sta~ed 5--~--92 Hammer Wt. ~ lbs.
Date Completed 5-1 ~-92 Hammer Drop in.
Drill Foreman ~T S~on Sampler OD _~ m. ~
Ins~ctor~ Rock Core D~a. ~ ~n. ~ ~ --
Boring Ueth~ C~ Shelby Tube OD .... ~ in. 3 '~ ~ ~ ~
~ E E
SOIL CLASSIFICATION ~ ~ c ~ ~ ~
-Tan and bro~ very stzff to
~ :hard alte~ating C~Y/ -i 1 ST 4+
~ L~~/S~Y C~Y/S~Y ~46
I
C~Y(CH/CL) inte~xed with ~ 2 ST 4+ 20 PL=18
~ gravel - FI~ i , PI=28
~ ~i 3 .~ ST 2.~ 25
T~nish bro~ hard C~Y (CH)
with silty ~nd l~nations i 2 5 ST , 4+ 20 P~l~
~ Bro~ very stiff C~Y(CH) wit~ _.~.
~ a trace of calc~eous n~ules~ --
~ I
-- --i 6 ~ 3.0 27
~ -ta~ish br~ with a trace _,
~ of silty s~d ~low 15.5'
-- -- 7 ~ ST ' ' 2.5
~ .
~ ~ OF ~ ~ ~20' -- :
SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER DEPTH BORING METHOD
SS- DRIVEN SPLIT SPOON V AT COMPLETION D[~Y FT HSA - HOLLOW STEM AUGERS
ST- PRESSED SHELBY TUBE CFA- - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS
~' AFTER HRS FT
CA- CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER DC - DRIVEN CASING
RC- ROCK CORE WATER ON RODS ~ FT MD - MUD DRILLING
TCP- TEXAS CONE PENETRATION TEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC.
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100
-- Dallas, Texas 75229 RECORD OF
(214) 620-89 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Client__ L~ EST. A~ Bor,ng # ~'-9 LOT 7 B.~ E
Arch,tect,'Engineer Job · 92159
Project Name T~ ~ Drawn by
Project L~atmon ~,T~ ~ Approv~ By
TEST DATA
DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION
Date Sta~ed 5--1~--~ Hammer Wt. lbs
Date Complet~ 5--1~--9~ Hammer Drop ~ mn.
Drill Foreman ~I S~on Sampler OD mn. ~
Inspector__ Rock Core Oma mn ~
Bonng Meth~ C~ Shelby Tube OD__ 3 ,n. o ~
; o ~
SOIL CLASSIFICATION ~ m ~
~ SURFACE ELEVATION <~ ~ j~ ~ ~ ~
~ T~ and bro~ very stiff to
-' 1 ST 4+
i h~d alternating LI~S~/ --,
~ C~Y/S~Y C~Y ( CL/~ )
j inte~ixed wi~ c~y shale --:~ ;~35
' a~ sand - FI~ ~] 2 ST 4+ 13 P~20
~ -s~nd se~s ~1~ 6' ~ PI=15
-- 3 ST 4+ 24
-
'- ~ 8~ ~ 4 ST 3.6 16
] Bro~ ve~ stiff to hard --i
-- C~Y(~) wi~h a ~ace off ~', 5 S~ 4+ 2~
~ ca~ca~eous n~u~es ;10
~ -j
~~ - 6 : ST 3.3 27
~ -~annish br~ ~[ow ~8' ' -
'-- ~ ~ _ 7ST 3.5
!20'
~ O~ ~ ~ ~20'
~ i
SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER DEPTH BORING METHOD
SS- DRIVEN SPLIT SPOON V AT COMPLETION FT. HSA - HOLLOW STEM AUGERS
ST- PRESSED SHELBY T'JBE DRY CFA- - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS
CA- CONT NUOUS FLIGHT AUGER [' AFTER HRS FT DC - DRIVEN CASING
RC- ROCK CORE WATER ON RODS [~D~ FT MD - MUD DRILLING
TCP TEXAS CONE OENETRATION TEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC.
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100 RECORD OF
Dallas1 Texas 75229
(214/620-89 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Chent ~ ES'EA_']~:S Boring # B-10 IXTI' 19 BLOCK
"- Architect:Engineer __ Job # .__92]_59
ProJect Name I~ ESr]~ Drawn by
Project Location _ COP _~.T.w '1~ Approved By DAL
.... TEST DATA
DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION
Date Started 5-12-92 Hammer Wt. 140 __ lbs.
Date Completed 5--] :2--92 Hammer Drop 30 ,n.
Drill Foreman 'P33I Spoon Sampler OD 2 __ in. ~
Inspector___ Rock Core Dia. ,n. ~> ~ .>
Bonng Method CFA Shelby Tube OD _~ in. o '~
SOIL CLASSIFICATION :E i ~o ne
_ '1~ and bro~ hard alte~ating
~ S~Y C~Y/C~Y(CL/CH) with ~~ ST 4+
- -st~f w~th s~d se~ SS 10 12
-- ' T~nish bro~ ve~ stif~ S~Y __-~ 5 ~ ST 1.2
~ ~C~Y(CL) with silty s~d and ~ L~ '
~ ]Bro~ very stiff to hard _; ,
~ :C~Y(CH) with a trace of _.
~ calcareous n~ules --I_.
~ ~] 7 j ST , 4+ 30
SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER DEPTH BORING METHOD
SS- DRIVEN SPLIT SPOON V AT COMPLETION DRY FT HSA - HOLLOW STEM AUGERS
CFA- - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS
ST- PRESSED SHELBY TUBE %" AFTER HRS FT
CA- CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER DC - DRIVEN CASING
RC- ROCK CORE WATER ON RODS [~[~)"1[,~ FT MD - MUD DRILLING
'~CP TEXAS CONE PENETRATION TEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC.
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100 RECORD OF
Dallas, Texas 75229
(2 4) 620-89 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Chent LAK~OC~ ]~-~ Boring # B-il ~ 2 BIZ](~ A
'- Architect/Engineer _ Job # 92159
Project Name . [~ ]~--'rJ~fl~b-'~[ Drawn by ~
Prolect Location ~p~., ~ Approved Bye___
-- TEST DATA
DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION
Date Sta~ed 5-1~92 Hammer Wt. ~40 __ lbs.
Date Completed 5--1~92 _Hammer Drop ~0 in.
Drill Foreman ~ S~on Sampler OD ~ ~n. ~ ~
Ins~ctor.~ Rock Core D~a. ~n. ~ ~
~ o
Boring Meth~ C~ Shelby Tu~ OD ~ ,n. ~ ~
~ E E
SOIL CLASSIFICATION ~ ~ z c e ~
_ o~ ~ .~. ~.
o c~ ~ ~ -- ., ,, ,,
~ SURFACE ELEVATION ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~m o ~ c o c _
~ 45[~ ~a ~m mz m~ ~ ~ ~Z
- S~(S~) - [ S~ ~
~~ SS I14 35 12
-- :, 5.5 '~ --~ 3 SS 26 11
~ Tannish bro~ c~ct G~L ~ -- 4 SS 22 8
~ 'A~ S~(~)
- 7.5'
~ - Tan a~ gray ve~' stiff S~Y -- 5 SS 18
~ ~c~Y ( CH ) 9' -~ 5 0
~. Dark gray C~Y S~T,E with SS 5~" 26
inter~ttent silty sand -~
~ l~nations -i
~ - 50 ,
-- - 7 SS 5.5" ~ 21
~ I
, I
50
--- ~ = ~ ,
-~ 8 SS 5"
~ ~ OF ~ ~ ~20'
--- ~
-
SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER DEPTH BORING METHOD
SS- DRIVEN SPLIT SPOON [' AT COMPLETION 3 FT HSA - HOLLOW STEM AUGERS
CFA- - CONTINUOUS FUGHT AUGERS
ST- PRESSED SHELBY TUBE ? AFTER HRS. FT. DC - DRIVEN CASING
CA- CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER 5 o 5
RC- ROCK CORE WATER ON RODS I~T. MD - MUD DRILLING
TCp TEXAS CONE PENETRATION TEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC.
2209 Wisconsin St.. Suite 100 RECORD OF
Dallas. Texas 75229
620-89 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Chent ~ ]~w]][l~S Bor,ng # B-12 [J3~ 8 B[.OCK C
Architect,'Engmeer Job # 92]_59 _
Prolect Name ~ ~~ Drawn by ~_
Project Location ~,L~ ~ Approved By
TEST DATA
DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION
Date Sta~ed 5--~4--92 Hammer Wt. ~0 ~ lbs.
Date Completed 5-14-92 Hammer Drop 30 in.
Drill Foreman ~ S~on Sampler OD 2 ~ ,n. ~ ~
Inspector__ Rock Core D~a. in. ~ ~ '-
Bor,ng Meth~ C~ Shelby Tube OD 3 ,n. ~0 ~ ~ ~ ~
~ SURFACE ELEVATION ~= ~ ~O~ < ~ O <~= ~ & ~ ~ -~ ~- ~ = ~ = ~ ~ ~ ~ -- '
- , Dark ~ray C~Y S~E - FI~ , i ~=52
~ ~ ~ 3 ST 4+ 18 P~26
..... Bm~ ve~ ~iff C~Y(CH) w~t -- 4 ST 2.1
~ ~ ~ silty ~nd ~4
~ T~ni~ b~ ~a~ FINE [ ,[
C~ S~ ( SC )
~ -' 6 ST 18
2 with gravel se~s,s~dstone ~ '
~ and clay l~nation s :,_.
SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER DEPTH BORING METHOD
SS- DRIVEN SPLIT SPOON V AT COMPLETION 10 FT HSA - HOLLOW STEM AUGERS
ST- PRESSED SHELBY TUBE CFA- - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS
V AFTER HRS FT
CA- CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER DC - DRIVEN CASING
RC- ROCK CORE WATER ON RODS ~[1.5 FT MD - MUD DRILLING
TCP- TEXAS CONE PENETRATION TEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC.
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100 RECORD OF
Dallas, Texas 75229
!244) 62o-89 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Arch,tect'Engineer __ Job # 92159
Prolect Name ~ SSrJ~B~.~ Drawn by
Prolect Location ~)Pi:~-~'.]'., "!~ Approved By
.... TEST DATA
DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION i
Date Starled 5--12--9~- Hammer Wt lbs.
_. Date Completed 5-12-92 Hammer Drop in. i
Drdl Foreman ]~T Spoon Sampler OD in. ~ ~
Inspector Rock Core Dia. ~n. ~ ~
Bonng Method ClOt% Shelby Tube OD 3 ~n.
~ SOIL CLASSIFICATION ~; m = ~ ~ =~ .~=~.. ~.
~ SURFACE ELEVATION ( ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
_ to ha~ alter~ting L~~,/ L~ 1 ST 4+
- C~Y/S~Y C~Y(CL/CH) - FI~
i ~ 2 ST 4+ 15
'-
~ 3 ST 4+ 1
- 7.5' ' 4 ST 2.1 17
~ T~nish bro~ very stiff SA~Y
~ C~Y(CL) with s~d se~ -
10' - 5 ~ ST 2.2 24
.
Bro~ very st~ff C~Y(CH) w~th --I
~ a ~race of calcareo~ n~ulos 2~
~ -- 6 ST 3.4 29
--- ~ -tannish br~ ~low 16.5' 21 '
-- 7 ST :, ~ 3.2
~ B OF ~ ~ ~20'
..... ~ : I
SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER DEPTH BORING METHOD
SS- DRIVEN SPLIT SPOON T AT COMPLETION DRY FT HSA - HOLLOW STEM AUGERS
-- ST- PRESSED SHELBY TUBE CFA- - CONTINUOUS FUGHT AUGERS
t- AFTER HRS. FT
CA- CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER DC - DRIVEN CASING
RC- ROCK CORE WATER ON RODS ~ FT MD - MUD DRILLING
TCP- TEXAS CONE PENETRATION TEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC.
2209 Wisconsin St.. Suite 100 RECORD OF
Dallas, Texas 75229
(2 4) 620-89 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Client ~ ]~ Boring # B-'I4 Lor~ 5
Archdect~Engineer _ Job # 92].59 _
Project Name ~ ~ Drawn by
Prolect Location ~,L~ ~ Approv~ By _
TEST DATA
DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION
Date Sta~ed 5--12--92 Hammer Wt. ___ lbs.
Date Completed 5--~2--92 _Hammer Drop ~n.
Drill Foreman ~[ Spoon Sampler OD ~n. ~
Inspector Rock Core D~a. ~n. = ~
Boring Meth~ C~ Shelby Tube OD 3 in. ~ ~
~ i SOIL CLASSIFI6ATION ~ ~
~ ' SURFACE ELEVATION ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ' . and b~o~ ~e~ s~fi to
~ C~Y(CL/CH) - F~L '
~ Dark gray very stiff C~Y ' ~58[
~ S~(CH) - FI~ 5 ~ 3 ST ~ 2.2 27 P~30~
D 7.5' 4 ST 3 3
~ T~n~sh bro~ hard S~Y _ ~47
~ C~Y(CL) 5 ST 4+ 13 P~19
~ ' : PI=28
- Bro~ verv stiff C~Y(CH) --;
; -I
d -' 6 ST 2.4 28
-tannish br~ ~low 17' -i
~ with a trace of calc~eous __ ,
3
7
~1 7 ST .
-
SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER DEPTH BORING METHOD
SS- DRIVEN SPLIT SPOON V AT COMPLETION DRY FT HSA - HOLLOW STEM AUGERS
ST- PRESSED SHELBY TUBE CFA- - CONTINUOUS FL GHT AUGERS
t' AFTER HRS FT
CA- CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER DC - DRIVEN CASING
RC- ROCK CORE WATER ON RODS ~[)'L~ FT MD - MUD DRILLING
TCP TEXAS CONE PENETRATION TEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC.
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100 RECORD OF
- Dallas. Texas 75229
(214) 620-8911 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Chent T_~ ]~ Bonng # B'-]_5
Architect;Engineer Job ~ 92~59
Prolect Name ~~ ~~ Drawn by
Project Location ~~ ~ Approved By
-- TEST DATA
DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION
Date Sta~ed 5--[~--~ Hammer Wt. lbs.
Date Completed 5--~--9~ Hammer Drop ._ ~n.
Drill Foreman ~ S~on Sampler OD __ m. ~
Inspector~ Rock Core Dia. m. ~
Bor,ng Meth~ C~ Shelby Tube OD 3 in. ~ ~ ~
SOIL CLASSIFICATION = ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ SURFACE ELEVATION ( ~ ~ ~ m ~
~ ,.hard C~Y(CH/CL) inte~x~ ~'. 1 ST I 4+'.
~ ~with ii,stone, calcareous __ ~ ~47
~ .clay, s~dy clay - FI~ -- 2 ST: ~ 4+ 18 P~18
~~ - ~ Pi=29·
5
?
~ Bro~ very stiff C~Y(CH) with ~ ' ~50
-' 5 ST
a trace of calc~eous
n~ules
3.6
21
P~19
~ ~10 PI=31
~ -~ 6 ~ ST~ 3.0 28
- ~ -~7 ST~ 3.2~
/
~ ' ,20 _
q ~OF~~ ~20' --
_1
SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER DEPTH BORING METHOD
SS- DRIVEN SPLIT SPOON V AT COMPLETION FT. HSA - HOLLOW STEM AUGERS
--- ST- PRESSED SHELBY TuBE D~,Y CFA- - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS
CA- CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER ~' AFTER HRS FT DC - DRIVEN CASING
RC- ROCK CORE WATER ON RODS ~ FT. MD - MUD DRILLING
TCp- TEXAS CONE PENETRATIONT£S'r
ALPHA TESTING, INC.
2209 Wisconsin St.. Suite 100
-- Dallas, Texas 75229 RECORD OF
!2 4) 620-89 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
__ Client ~z~-'Jll~}OD ~'!~1~:[ Boring # P,--1 6 ~ ~-7 ]~.J~K D
ArchltecFEngmeer .~ Job ~ 92159
Prolect Name T~ ~A~ Drawn by
Projec~ Location ~~ ~ Approved By~
TEST DATA
DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION
Date Sta~ed ~ Hammer Wt. 1 40 ~ lbs.
Date Complet~ ~2 Hammer Drop ]0 in. ~ i
Drill Foreman ~T S~on Sampler OD ~ in. ~
Inspector~ Rock Core Dia. in. o ~ .-
... Bonng aeth~ ~ Shelby Tube OD 3 in. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .=
: ~ ~ ~ ~ o
: ~
~ SOIL CLASSIFICATION : z ~
~ ~ SURFACE ELEVATION ~ ~< ~O ~ ~ xo ~m
~ T~ and g~y ~x~ C~Y(CH) _ ~0
2 with a trace of ~mes~ne , -~ 1 , ST 1.5 26
~P~19
~ f~ts - F~.L 2.5 ' --~ , ~PI=41
~ ; 2 ' ST 1.8
~ G~y ~d t~ L~NE - FI~
~ 5.5' ~ 3 SS 7 20
~ B~ stiff SIL~ C~Y(CL) -J 4i SS 19 27
~ with ~nd l~nations
~ _~ 5 ~ ST 1.5
~ B~ ve~ ~iff C~Y(CH) Z~' i ~=74
a
trace
--[ ·
~ w~th of cal~r~us 6 ', ST 3.8 99 25 IPB=25
- nodules -~ PI=49
,
~~ -' 7 ST 3.5 29
-tannSsh b~n be~w 15' 15_m.~
~ 8 ST 2.8
_._ 2 ~ O~ ~ ~ ~20'
-
-I
SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER DEPTH BORING METHOD
SS- DRIVEN SPLIT SPOON ~' AT COMPLETION FT HSA - HOLLOW STEM AUGERS
--- DRY CFA- - CONTINUOUS FUGHT AUGERS
ST- PRESSED SHELBY TUBE t" AFTER HRS FT
CA- CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER DC - DRIVEN CASING
RC- ROCK CORE WATER ON RODS 5 FT MD - MUD DRILLING
TCP- TEXAS CONE PENETRATION TEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC.
2209 Wisconsin St.. Suite 100 RECORD OF
- Dallas. Texas 75229
(244) 620-89 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Client L~ ~ Bor,ng # B-17 ~ 9 ]~ F
Job # 92159
Architect, Engineer __
Project Name ~[]~11111:~](~[) ~ Drawn by __
Project Location COP[:~',]',, ~ Approv~ By.~
--- TEST DATA
DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION
Date Sta~ed 5-12-92 Hammer Wt __ lbs.
Date Completed 5-12-92 Hammer Drop in
Dnll Foreman EI S~on Sampler OD ____ m. ~
Inspector__ Rock Core D{a. m. ~
Bormng Method C~ Shelby Tu~ OD 3 ,n. ~ ~
~ SURFACE ELEVATION ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o
~ Tan and b~ very stiff to -
~ h~d alte~ating C~Y/S~Y ~ _:.
~ ~ ~2 ~ ST 4+ 20
~ Dark gray very stiff to hard -
~ C~Y S~(CH) - FI~ i ~ 4 ST 4+ 21
~ Bro~ ve~ stiff C~Y(CH) ~ _~
-- -~th a trace of sand to 12'~ -j
~ -' 6 ST 2.7 25
.... ~ -tannish brow~ ~low 16.5' -
-- with a trace of calcareous -
~ n~ules
-- - 7 ST 2.6
-
SAMPLER TYPE ,~ROUNDWATER DEPTH BORING METHOD
SS- DRIVEN SPLIT SPOON v AT COMPLETION DRY FT HSA - HOLLOW STEM AUGERS
--. ST- PRESSED SHELBY TUBE CFA- - CONTINUOUS FUGHT AUGERS
CA- CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER T AFTER HRS. FT. DC - DRIVEN CASING
RC- ROCK CORE WATER ON RODS ~ VT MD - MUD DRILLING
TCp- TEXAS CONE PENETRAT~ONTEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC.
2209 Wisconsin St.. Suite 100 RECORD OF
Dallas, Texas 75229
(214) 620-8911 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Chent LAK',~ ES'rJ~A..']~ Boring # B-I8 ~ 49 BLOCK
-- Architect/Engineer _ Job # 92]_59
Project Name T,AK'~ '1;'~'"]~ Drawn by .... MP
Prolect Location f~,-lp]:ml~]-,T~ T~c; Approved By DAL
._ TEST DATA
DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION
Date Started 5--'14--92 Hammer Wt. ]-40 __ lbs.
.__ Date Completed _5-14-92 Hammer Drop 30 ~n.
Drill Foreman ]~I Spoon Sampler OD 2 in.
Inspector__ Rock Core Dia. ~n. ~ ~- '-
Bonng Method CF~ Shelby Tube OD 3 in.
~ hard alte~ating C~Y/S~Y -I 1 'ST { 4+
~ inte~xed ~th limestone ~d~ . ~ ~=37
~ gravel - FI~ ~ 2~ 2 ST = 4+ 15 PL=17
-- -- ! PI=20
~ -~ g~v clay shale below ~, 3 ~ST 4+ 11
-- ; 4 ~ST 4+ 16
. ~ 5 ~ST ~ 2.5 18 PL=26
~ T~ni~ b~ d~se S~D(SP) ~{
~ with gravel se~s s~dstone --
~ and c~y ~nations
~ I
2
.
SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER DEPTH BORING METHOD
SS- DRIVEN SPLIT SPOON V AT COMPLETION ]-0 FT HSA - HOLLOW STEM AUGERS
CFA- - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS
--- ST- PRESSED SHELBY TUBE t' AFTER HRS FT
CA- CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER DC - DRIVEN CASING
RC- ROCK CORE WATER ON RODS ]-]- ;T MD - MUD DRILLING
TCP- TEXAS CONE PENETRATION TEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC.
2209 Wisconsin St.. Suite 100 RECORD OF
- Dallas, Texas 75229
!244) 620-89 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Chent ~ ]~,]~ Boring # B-19 ~ 44 I[i3CK D
Arch~tecuEngineer Job # 92159
Prolect Name ]-~ ~ Drawn by
Project Location ~,T~ ~ Approved By D~
TEST )ATA
DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION ~
Date Sta~ed 5--[~--~ Hammer Wt. lbs.
Date Completed 5--[~--~2 Hammer Drop in.
Dnll Foreman ~[ S~on Sampler OD ~_ ~n. ~
Inspector Rock Core D~a. m. ~ ~ >
Boring Meth~ ~ Shelby Tube OD 3 ~n. o ~ o
SOIL CLASSIFICATION = .i z ~
~ SURFACE ELEVATION ~ ~ ~ < ~ ~ = ~ ~ , , o c
- hard alte~ating C~Y/S~Y -~ 1 ST , 4+
~ C~Y/L~NE ( CH/CL ) --' '
~ inte~xed with g~vel - FI~ --, 2 ST 4+ 11
~ - 3 ST 2.8
~ ~' 4 ST 2.1 20 PB=32
~ :PI=37
~ Bm~ stiff to ve~ stiff 1~[ i ' i
~ ,i C~Y(~) with a trace of -i ,,
] ~l~r~us nodules ~d silty ]~
q
--~ 6 j ST 1.5 '29 ~L=28
~ -tannish b~ ~d gray
]~ below 16' ~ ·
SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER DEPTH BORING METHOD
SS- DRIVEN SPLIT SPOON V AT COMPLETION ]_6 FT HSA - HOLLOW STEM AUGERS
ST- PRESSED SHELBY TUBE CFA- - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS
CA- CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER ~' AFTER HRS FT DC - DRIVEN CASING
RC- ROCK CORE WATER ON RODS 5 o 5 FT MD - MUD DRILLING
TCP- TEXAS CONE PENETRATION TEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC.
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100 RECORD OF
Dallas, Texas 75229
(214) 620-8911 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Chent LA~ ]~ Bonng #
Job ~ 92159
Architect-Engineer
Prolect Name ~~ ~~ Drawn by
Project Location ~~ ~ Approved By
TEST DATA
DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION
Date Staded __ 6--9~2 Hammer Wt ~ lbs.
Date Completed 6~) Hammer Drop m.
Drill Foreman ~T S~on Sampler OD ~ in. ~ ~
Inspector~ Rock Core D~a. m ~ ~~
- c
Method ~ Shelby Tube OD 3 ,n. ~ ~ .9
Bonng
' = o ---
SOiLCLASSIFICATION ~ ; ~ ~
~ SURFACE ELEVATION ~ ~( ~ ~ ~ m , ~ ~ -, ,,"
T~ b~ ~ ~a~ ~i~ to -
~ ve~ ~iff alternating C~Y/ ~:, 1 . ST 1.2
--~ .I ~=40
m L~I~,/S~Y C~Y/C~Y~ ,
~ S~D(CH/CL/SC)- FI~ --' 2 ST 0.8 1.3 110 17 P~18
~ ~--, PI:22
~ 5 '3 · ST 3.9 30
-- 6'
~ T~ni~ b~ ~a~ C~ 7.5' ~{ 1
~ Dark b~ ~f~ to ve~, ~ff -~ 5 ~ST .~ 2.9 28 P~26
~ ~C~Y{CH) w~h a trace o~ 1~ ~ ' PI=42
~ cal~rmus nodules
~ -! ~=75
~ -': 6 ST 1.6 29 P~26
PI=49
2 -t~ish b~ below 16 5' '~--'
-- q ,
-- i
m I '
~ I ~ I
~ -~ 7 ST ~
.. !
SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER DEPTH BORING METHOD
SS- DRIVEN SPLIT SPOON V AT COMPLETION 16o 5 FT HSA - HOLLOW STEM AUGERS
ST- PRESSED SHELBY TUBE CFA- - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS
CA- CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER t" AFTER HRS. FT DC - DRIVEN CASING
RC- ~OCK CORE WATER ON RODS 6.5 FT MD - MUD D~ILL!NG
TCP- "-EXAS CONE PENETRATION TEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC.
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100 RECORD OF
Dallas, Texas 75229
(244) 620-89 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Chenl ~ ~ Bor,ng # ~-21 ~ 37 B. J3CK !)
Architect,-Eng~neer Job # 92159 _
Project Name 1,~ ]~rj~ Drawn by
Prelect Locabon (~--~,1~ ~ __ Approved By
TEST DATA
DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION
Date Started. 6--~--~)- Hammer Wt. lbs.
Date Completed 6~2 _Hammer Drop ,n. ~
Drill Foreman ]~)I Spoon Sampler OD ,n. ~ ~
Inspector ROCk Core D~a. ~_ in. ~ ~
Boring Meth~ C~ Shelby Tube OD__ 3 ~n. ~ ~ ~
Il ~ SOIL CLASSIFICATION ~= [m ~m m~ '~ om°~ =~$
~ SURFACE ELEVATION < ~ ~ ~ o
T~ bm~ ~d g~y ~iff to --
2 ve~ ~iff alternating C~Y/ ~ 1 ST I 1.2
~_ 3 ST { 2.5 20 ~P~20
~ Dark b~ vo~ s~ff C~Y(CH ~ 4 ST 2.7 22 ,'
with a trace of cal~r~us _. ~=77
-- 10 =
_ -tannish b~ with silty ~
~ --: 6 ST 2.6 35 P~29
SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER DEPTH BORING METHOD
SS- DRIVEN SPLIT SPOON V AT COMPLETION ].5 FT HSA - HOLLOW STEM AUGERS
ST- PRESSED SHELBY TUBE CFA- - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS
CA- CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER T AFTER HRS. FT DC - DRIVEN CASING
RC- ROCK CORE WATER ON RODS 6 FT MD - MUD DRILLING
TCP "'tEXAS CONE PENETRATION TEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC.
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100
Dallas, Texas 75229
(214) 620-8911
KEY TO SOIL SYMBOLS AND CLASSIFICATIOHS
-- THE ABBREVIATIONS COMMONLY EMPLOYED ON EACH "RECORD OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION",
ON THE FIGURES RHD IH THE TEXT OF THE REPORT, FIRE RS FOLLOWS:
SOIL OR ROCK TYPES
(SHOWN IN SYMBOLS COLUMN)
CLAY SILT SAND LIMESTOHE SHALE ASPHALT/CONCRETE
SOIL DESCRIPTION III AELATIUE PROPORTIOHS
(R> COHESIOMLESS SOILS DESCRIPTIVE TERM PERCEHT
RELATIVE DEHSITY 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
VERY DENSE OVER 50
IV PARTICLE SIZE IDENTIFICATION
(B> COHESIVE SOILS BOULDERS -8 INCH DIAMETER OR MORE
CONSISTEHCY Qu TSF COBBLES -3 TO 8 INCH DIAMETER
' GRAUEL -COARSE - 3/4 TO 3 INCH
'- UERV SOFT LESS THAN .25 -FINE - 5.0 MM TO 3/4 IHCH
SOFT .25 TO .50 SAND -CORPSE - 2.0 MM TO 5.0 MM
FIRM .50 TO 1.00 -MEDIUM - 0.4 MM TO 2.0 MM
.__ STIFF 1.00 TO 2.00 -FINE - 0.07 MM TO 0.4 MM
UERV 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 DRILLING AND SAMPLIHG SYMBOLS
- DEGREE OF PLASTICITY AU' AUGER SAMPLE
PLASTICITY INDEX AC: ROCK CORE
TCP: TEXAS COHE PEHETRRTION TEST
NONE TO SLIGHT 0 - 4 SS: SPLIT-SPOOH 1 3/8" I.D. 2" O.D.
'- SLIGHT 5 - 10 EXCEPT WHERE HOTED
MEDIUM 11 - 30 ST: SHELBY TUBE = 3" O.D. EXCEPT
HIGH TO VERY HIGH OUER 30 WHERE HOTED
WASHED SAMPLE
HSR' HOLLOW STEM AUGERS
CFA' COHTIMUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS
MD' MUD DRILLING
._ NOTE' ALL SOILS CLASSIFIED ACCORDING TO
THE UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATIOH
SYSTEM <ASTM D-2487>
d~ ALPHA TESTING, INC.
_ 2209 Wisconsin St.
Suite 100
Dallas, Texas 75229
(214) 620-8911
Client: LAKEWOOD ESTATES - DALLAS, TEXAS
Project Name: LAKEWOOD ESTATES - COPPELL, TEXAS
Our Report No.: 92159 Oate: 06/25/92
135 Soil Classification: LIGHT BRO~RN CLAYEY SAND (SC)
" Soil I.D. Number: ]- Test Method: ASTM D-698
.... 130 ' Maximum Dry Unit Weight: 114,3 pcf
, Optimum Moisture Content: 13 · 8 %
.... 125 , Liquid Limit 23.0 % Plasticity Index 9.0
12o ,, REPORT OF MOISTURE DENSITY
' ' RElaTIONSHIP OF SOIL
-~ 110
(D 105 , ,
~ lOO , ,
>-
....................... T ..... ZERO AIR VOIDS CURVES
95 , , FOR
........ ~ ........ SPECIFIC GRAVITIES OF
....... i 2.80
-- 90 I i , ! , ~ ! 2.70
2.60
I , [ I ,
75 I '. ..... .. i , · ; i ,
: I .... I I ! i 1
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
MOISTURE CONTENT - %
ALPHA TESTING, INC.
2209 Wisconsin St.
- Suite 100
Dallas, Texas 75229
(214) 620-8911
Chent: LAKEWOOD ESTATES - DALLAS. TE.YaAS
Project Name: LAKEWOOD ESTATES - COPPELL. TEXAS
- Our Report No.: 92159 Date: 06/25/92
135 Soil Classification: TANNISH BROWN CLAYEY S_A~'~D (SC)
I ' Soil I.D. Number: 2 Test Method: ASTM D-698
130 , Maximum Dry Unit Weight: 116.0 pcf
~ Optimum Moisture Content: 12.0 %
125 ' ' Liquid Limit 17.0 % Plasticity Index 3.0
---~2o ; REPORT OF MOISTURE DENSITY
:-*..---: RELATIONSHIP OF SOIL
115
5 110 , ~ = ,
T 105
L?, '
LU
I.--
~ 100 , , , ,
>-
ZERO AIR VOIDS CURVES
95 , ' ' FOR
-- i ..... . SPECIFIC GRAVITIES OF
,. i
: . - , ; ,~k
....... i , i ~.k' '~
75..
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
MOISTURE CONTENT - %
ALPHA TESTING, INC.
_ 2209 Wisconsin St.
Suite 100
Dallas, Texas 75229
(214) 620-8911
Client: LAKEWOOD ESTATES - DALLAS, TEXAS
Project Name: LAKEWOOD ESYATES - COPPET.I., TEXAS
- Our Report No.: 92159 Date: 06/25/92
135 Soil Classification: BRO~'N CLAY (CH) WITH INTE~IXED
-- "" k T~CE OF S~ND
~ Soil I.D. Number: 3 Test Method: AS~ D-698
130 Maximum Dry Unit Weight: 105.0 pcf
Optimum Moisture Content: 18.1 %
, , Liquid Limit 50.0 % Plasticity Index
-- 125
,~o ...... REPORT OF MOISTURE DENSI~
; '. , RE~TIONSHIP OF SOIL
115
110
105
--
100
~* ~- --~ ~ *' '~ ~ ZERO AIR VOIDS CURVES
95
._ ' ' ' '~ FOR
+ ....... SPECIFIC GRAVITIES OF
I I ~ I , '
- ~ , i i , , , ~ 2.70
i 'L
! ' ~'
II ~ ~ll: I ~ I ~ 1--
, , ~ .......... ~ ~ '~k~,
0 5 10 15 20 25 ~ 35 40 45
MOISTURE CONTENT - %
ALPHA TESTING, INC.
2209 Wisconsin St.
- Suite 100
Dallas, Texas 75229
(214) 620-8911
Client: LAKEWOOD ESTATES - DAI.I.AS, TEXAS
Project Name: LAKEWOOD ESTATES - COPPELL, TEXAS
.... Our Report No.: 92159 Date: 06/25/92
135 Soil Classification: TAN SANDY CLAY (CL)
Soil I.D. Number: 4 Test Method: ASTI~[ D-698
130 Maximum Dry Unit Weight: 107.2 pcf
Optimum Moisture Content: 17.0
125 , Liquid Limit 41.0 % Plasticity Index 24.0
,20 "; ',~ REPORT OF MOISTURE DENSlT~
',- .... RELATIONSHIP OF SOIL
115 i ,
~ 110 ,
r'~
F-
(D 105 , , i ,
F--
~ lO0 , , ,
95 , , , ZERO AIR VOIDS CURVES
. - FOR
..... i ? ..... SPECIFIC GRAVITIES OF
i ~ .... 2.80
-- ~ ~ ' ' ' 2.70
2.~
g ...... I I
-+' ~'-~ .... + ....... ~' ~+ ' ~ I
; i-- , I
0 5 10 15 ~ 25 ~ 35 40 45
MOISTURE CONTENT - %
ALPHA TESTING, INC.
2209 Wisconsin St.
'- Suite 1OO
Dallas, Texas 75229
(214) 620-8911
Client: LAKEW00D ESTATES - DALLAS, TEXAS
Project Name: LAKEW00D ESTATES - COPPELL, TEXAS
- Our Report No.: 92159 Date: 06/25/92
135 Soil Classification: DAPJ<. G~-~.Y SEALE
' Soil I.D. Number: 5 Test Method: ASTH D-698
130 : , ~ , Maximum Dry Unit Weight: 98.0 pcf
Optimum Moisture Content: 22.2 %
,
_ 125 ,I Liquid Limit 54.0 % Plasticity Index 31.0
- ,2o, REPORT OF MOISTURE DENSITY
, REI_~TIONSHIP OF SOIL
~ 110
~ ,
T 105 .............................
~ 100 , , , , ,
95. ZERO AIR VOIDS CURVES
FOR
- SPECIFIC GRAVITIES OF
90 . . .:.
_ . ~ .\ \ · 2.70
-- 85 . _. ......... = ....... ._.~___
I -
''1' '' I ' ' ' ' I ' '
75 i ..........
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
MOISTURE CONTENT ~ %
a~ ALPHA TESTING, INC.
2209 Wisconsin St.
Suite 100
Dallas, Texas 75229
(214) 620-8911
Client: LAKEWOOD ESTATFS - DALLAS, TEXAS
Project Name: LAKEWOOD ESTATES - COPPELL, TEXAS
- Our Repor~ No.: 92159 Date: 06/28/92
135 Soft Classification: TAN CLAY WITH LIMESTONE
~ ' ' ' Soil I.D. Number: 6 Test Method: AS~ D-698
130 ' Maximum Dry Unit Weight: 108.0 pcf
Optimum Moisture Content: 18.8 %
125 Liquid Limit 29.0 % Plasticity Index 14.0
-- ~2o REPORT OF MOISTURE DENSITY
--~ ' RELATIONSHIP OF SOIL
115
110 , i ,
i
105
---' ZERO AIR VOIDS CURVES
95
'. ' ' FOR
'--*-' ........... SPECIFIC GRAVITIES OF
SO , ~ ~ I , ~ , , ,
0 5 10 15 20 25 ~ 35 ~ 45
MOISTURE CONTENT - %
ALPHA TESTING, INC. REPORT OF FIELD
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100
Dallas, Texas 75229 COMPACTION TESTS
(214) 620-8911
TESTED FOR: LAKEWOOD ESTATES DATE: JUNE 15, 1992
DALLAS, TEXAS
PROJECT: LAKEWOOD ESTATES OUR RE~ORTNO. 92159
COPPELL, TEXAS
TISST DATA:
· ~'~.o ,~ °"' ~...... '""1 ---.'°"" I ::::F-I:::';i**"'~;'~ '":':i= !'"'*,:;',*~:"i-.,.-.o."'""' [ ~o...... I
--', 1_ i 06/15 EG-1 2 12 0 116 0 7 7 116 6 100 1-A
2 i 06/15 EG-2 2 12.0 116.0 10.2 11l .2 96 1-A
TESTLOCATION:
ELEVATION 449 +/- FILL TO 2.5'
__ 1 TEST PIT {1, BLOCK A, LOT 9
2
{
1. FILL ° A. TEST RESULTS COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS Respectfully Submitted.
2. NATURAL SUBGRADE B. COMPACTION DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS
3. LIME STABILIZED C. MOISTURE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS ALPHA TESTING, INC.
4. D. RETEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC. REPORT OF FIELD
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100
'-- Dallas, Texas 75229 COMPACTION TESTS
(214) 620-8911
TESTEDFOR: LAKEWOOD ESTATES DATE: JUNE 15, 1992
--' DALLAS, TEXAS
PROJECT: LAKEWOOD ESTATES OURRE~RTNO. 92159
COPPELL, TEXAS
TEST DATA:
I TEST j DATE ~l. Ev. 1OIL IO OPTIMUM MAXIMUM LAB IN PLACE IN PLACE
NO. I NUMBER MOIITUEE ONY DifNIITY MOISTUNE DaY OXNIITY PEN CENT COMMENT*
1 j 06/15 EG-1 4 17 . 0 107 . 2 18.5 101 . 4 95 1-A
__ 2 i 06/15 EG-2 2 12.0 116.0 10.7 113.6 98 1-A
3 I 06/15 EG-3 2 12.0 116.0 11.5 112.2 97 1-A
I
TEST LOCATION: ELEVATION 449 +/- FILL TO 3.5'
1 TEST PIT ~2, BLOCK A, LOT 12
2
3
1. FILL ° A. TEST RESULTS COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS Respectfully Submitted,
2. NATURAL SUBGRADE B. COMPACTION DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS
3. LIME STABILIZED C. MOISTURE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS ALPHA TESTING. INC.
4. D. RETEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC. REPORT OF FIELD
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100
- Dallas, Texas 75229 COMPACTION TESTS
(214) 620-8911
I
TESTED POR: LAKEWOOD ESTATES DATE: JUNE 13, 1992
'- DALLAS, TEXAS
PROJECT; LAKEWOOD ESTATES our REPORT NO. 92159
COPPELL, TEXAS
TEST DATA:
, TEST DATE ~-..~LIV. lOlL iC OPTIMUM MAXIMUM LAB IR PLACE IN PLACE
· NO NUMIER MOIITUIli DRY OENIITY MOISTURE Oily DENIITY PEN CENT COMMKNTe
t hEPTH ~,.~j ~) PCP qb PCP' COMPACTION
1 06/13 EG-1 4 17.0 107.2 18.7 99.3 93 1-B
2 06/13 EG-2 2 12.0 116.0 15.2 108.0 93 1-B
3 06/13 EG-3 2 12.0 116.0 16.4 106.0 91 1-B
_ 4 06/13 EG-4 2 20 . 2 99.0 2
-TEST LOCATION: ELEVATION 449 +/- FILL TO 3'
TEST PIT #3, BLOCK A, LOT 15
1. FILL ° A. TEST RESULTS COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS Respectfully Submitted,
2. NATURAL SUBGRADE B. COMPACTION DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS
_ 3. LIME STABILIZED C. MOISTURE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS A~PHA TESTING, INC.
4. D. RETEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC. REPORT OF FIELD
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100
Dallas, Texas 75229 COMPACTION TESTS
(214) 620-8911
TESTED FOR: LAKEWOOD ESTATES DATE: JUNE 15, 1992
-- DALLAS, TEXAS
PROJECT: LAKEWOOD ESTATES OUM REI~)RT NO. 92159
COPPELL, TEXAS
TEST DATA:
TEST DATE: ~.~t. iv. .oil lO OPTIMUM MAX,MUM LA. ,N I)t. ACX IN I)LACX
NO NUMIER NOIITUIIIE DRY DENIITY MOIITURI DRY DKNIITY I'El CKNT COMMENTe
1 06/15 EG-1 3 18 1 105 0 24 6 91 7 87 1-B
2 06/15 EG-2 3 18 1 105 0 24 3 92 6 88 1-B
3 06/15 EG-3 3 18 1 105 0 25 4 91 3 87 1-B
4 06/15 EG-4 4 17 0 107 2 16 6 107 2 100 1-A
5 06/15 EG-5 4 17 0 107 2 16 4 106 0 99 1-A
6 06/15 EG-6 4 17 0 107 2 17 2 102 8 96 1-A
TEST LOCATION: ELEVATION 449 +/- FILL TO 6'
.._ 1 TEST PIT ~4, BLOCK D, LOT 2
2
3
4
5
6
L
1. FILL ° A. TEST RESULTS COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS Respectfully Submilted,
2. NATURAL SUBGRADE B. COMPACTION DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS
.... 3. LIME STABILIZED C. MOISTURE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS ALPHA TESTING. INC.
4. D. RETEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC. REPORT OF FIELD
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100
- Dallas, Texas 75229 COMPACTION TESTS
(214) 620-8911
TESTED FOR: LAKEWOOD ESTATES DATE: JUNE 15, 1992
-- DALLAS, TEXAS
PROJECT: LAKEWOOD ESTATES OUR REPORT NO. 92159
COPPELL, TEXAS
TEST DATA:
NO. I r]EPTH ~ NUMBER IdOllTUNI DRY DENIITY MOISTURE DRY DENSITY PER CENT COMMB. NTe
) qb Pc1 qb PcP COMPACTION
-I 1 06/15 EG-1 4 17 0 107 2 18 0 99 1 92 1-B
i '
2 06/15 EG-2 4 17.0 107.2 15.9 101.5 95 1-A
i 3 06/15 EG-3 4 17 0 107 2 21 7 97 7 91 1-B
__[ 4 06/15 EG-4 21.0 89.8 2
I
TEST LOCATION: ELEVATION 449 +/- FILL TO 4'
1 TEST PIT #5, BLOCK D, LOT 5
2
1. FILL · A. TEST RESULTS COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS Respectfully Submitted.
2. NATURAL SUBGRADE B. COMPACTION DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS
._ 3. LIME STABILIZED C. MOISTURE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS ALPHA TESTING. INC.
4. D. RETEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC. REPORT OF FIELD
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100
-- Dallas, Texas 75229 COMPACTION TESTS
(214) 620-8911
TESTED FOR: LAKEWOOD ESTATES DATE: JUNE 15, 1992
-- DALLAS, TEXAS
PROJECT: LAKEWOOD ESTATES OU~ RE~OaTNO. 92159
COPPELL, TEXAS
TEST DATA:
: ~ ELarv_ OPTIMUN MAXIMUM LAB IN PLACE IN PLACE
TEST i DATE: r3EPT~ SOIL ID PER CENT
NO. NUMBER MOIITUIIE OIlY DENIITY MOIITUIIE ORY OENIITY COMMENTe
'- 1 ~ 06/15 EG-1 3 18.1 105.0 14.8 96.1 92 1-B
2 ~ 06/15 EG-2 3 18.1 105.0 15.9 104.7 100 1-A
3 06/15 EG-3 3 18.1 105.0 16.6 83.8 80 1-B
4 06/15 EG-4 3 18.1 105.0 20.2 96.4 92 1-B
I
TEST LOCATION: ELEVATION 449 +/- FILL TO 5'
1 TEST PIT ~6, BLOCK D, LOT 8
2
-- 3
4
1. FILL ° A. TEST RESULTS COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS Respectfully Submitted,
2. NATURAL SUBGRADE B. COMPACTION DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS
.... 3. LIME STABILIZED C. MOISTURE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS ALPHA TESTING, INC.
4. D. RETEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC. REPORT OF FIELD
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100
- Dallas, T.xas 75229 COMPACTION TESTS
(214) 620-8911
TESTED FOR: LAKEWOOD ESTATES DATE: JUNE 15, 1992
DALLAS, TEXAS
PROJECT: LAKEWOOD ESTATES OUR REK)RTNO. 92159
COPPELL, TEXAS
TEST DATA:
iTEST i ~EL,EV. lOlL, ID OPTIMUM MAXIMUM LAM IN PLACE IN PL,ACE
~ DATE MOIITUIIE DRY DENSITY MOIITUIIE DRY OENIITY PER CENT COMMENTe
!
NUMIER lm PCP 'b PCP COMPACTION
-
1 06/15 EG-1 3 18.1 105.0 17.5 89.7 85 1-B
i 2 06/15 EG-2 4 17.0 107.2 15.6 92.9 87 1-B
i 3 06/15 EG-3 4 WATER IN EXCAVkTION
---i 4 06/15 EG-4 4 WATER IN EXCAVkTION
TEST LOCATION: ELEVATION 449 +/- FILL TO 4'
__ 1 TEST PIT #7, BLOCK D, LOT 10
2
4
1. FILL * A. TEST RESULTS COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS Respectfully Submitted.
2. NATURAL SUBGRADE B. COMPACTION DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS
3. LIME STABILIZED C. MOISTURE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS ALPHA TESTING. INC.
4. D. RETEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC. REPORT OF FIELD
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100
-- Dallas, Texas 75229 COMPACTION TESTS
(214) 620-8911
LAKEWOOD ESTATES JUNE 16, 1992
TESTED FOR: DATE:
_ DALLAS, TEXAS
LAKEWOOD ESTATES 92159
PROJECT: OUR RE.BT NO.
COPPELL, TEXAS
TEST DATA:
TESTmu DAT£ ~ NUMBERIOIL ID MOIITuREOPTIMUM MAXIMUM LAM IN PLACE iN PLACE
..__. DRY OENIITY MOIITUB! DRY OBNIITY P'~R CENT COMMKNT'
I, PClr ~A PCP COMPACTION
1 i 06/16 EG-1 4 17 . 0 107 · 2 22 · 8 91 . 6 85 1-B
2 06/16 EG-2 6 18.8 108.0 18.1 88.3 82 1-B
3 I 06/16 EG-3 6 18.8 108.0 19.7 89.2 83 1-B
TEST LOCATION: ELEVATION 449 +/- FILL TO 4'
1 TEST PIT #8, BLOCK D, LOT 13
2
1. FILL * A. TEST RESULTS COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS Respectfully Submitted.
2. NATURAL SUBGRADE B. COMPACTION DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS
-- 3. LIME STABILIZED C. MOISTURE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS ALPHA TESTING. INC.
4. D. RETEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC. REPORT OF FIELD
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100
Dallas, Texas 75229 COMPACTION TESTS
(214) 620-8911
TESTED FOR: LAKEWOOD ESTATES DATE: JUNE 15, 1992
-- DALLAS, TEXAS
PROJECT: LAKEWOOD ESTATES oun nEK)RT NO. 92159
COPPELL, TEXAS
TEST DATA:
TEST i DATE loll. i~) MOllTtJa, DaY DINIITY MOIITUai DaY DINIITY P.N (:~NT COMMENTe
i NO i NtJMI,a qb PGF qb pGIf (:OMPACTION
1 i 06/15 FILL TOO THIN TO TEST
I 2i06/15
t
TEST LOCATION: ELEVATION 450+/- FILL TO 1'
TEST PIT {9, BLOCK A, LOT 7
1. FILL ° A. TEST RESULTS COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS Respectfully Submitted.
2. NATURAL SUBGRADE B. COMPACTION DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS
· -3. LIME STABILIZED C. MOISTURE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS ALPHA TESTING. INC.
4. D. RETEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC. REPORT OF FIELD
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100
Dallas, Texas 75229 COMPACTION TESTS
(214) 620-8911
JUNE 15, 1992
TESTEDFOR: LAKEWOOD ESTATES DATE:
DALLAS, TEXAS
92159
PROJECT: LAKEWOOD ESTATES OURRE~RTNO,
COPPELL, TEXAS
TEST DATA:
i TEST DATE MOl UNI MOIITURE DRY BINIITY PER CENT COMMENTe
NO. rJEPTH NUMBER I~ qb PCP COMPACTION
1 06/15 EG-1 4 17.0 107.2 15.7 106.3 99 1-A
2 06/15 EG-2 4 17.0 107.2 11.4 109.9 103 1-A
3 06/15 EG-3 1 13 . 8 114.3 13 . 1 106 . 4 93 1-B
__ 4 06/15 EG-4 1 13 . 8 114.3 12 . 3 108.3 95 1-A
TEST LOCATION: ELEVATION 450 +/- FILL TO 5'
1 TEST PIT ~10, BLOCK B, LOT 12
2
3
4
1. FILL ° A. TEST RESULTS COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS Respectfully Submitled,
2. NATURAL SUBGRADE B. COMPACTION DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS
3. LIME STABILIZED C. MOISTURE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS ALPHA TESTING, INC.
4. D. RETEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC. REPORT OF FIELD
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100
Dallas, Texas 75229 COMPACTION TESTS
(214) 620-8911
TESTEDFOR: LAKEWOOD ESTATES DATE: JUNE 13, 1992
DALLAS, TEXAS
PROJECT: LAKEWOOD ESTATES our REPORT NO. 92159
COPPELL, TEXAS
TEST DATA:
, TEST i DATE ~-~,.~LEV. lOlL, ia, OPTIMUM MAXIMUM LAB IN PLACE IN PI. ACE
NO. [ ,.T, EPTN ~.~. NUMBER MOIITUIII BEY D~'NIITY MOIITLIEE BEY OENIITY PEN CENT COMMENTe
!~ PCF lb poif COMPACTION
- 1 06/13 EG-1 3 18.1 105.0 18 1 102 9 98 1-A
..i 2 06/13 EG-2 3 18.1 105.0 23 1 100 5 96 1-A
[ 3 06/13 EG-3 3 18.1 105.0 25 1 100 6 96 1-A
.-- 4 06/13 EG-4 3 18.1 105.0 20 3 102 1 97 1-A
5 06/13 EG-5 17 3 107 0 2
6 06/13 EG-6 17 4 101 3 2
TEST LOCATION: ELEVATION 450 +/- FILL TO 4.5'
1 TEST PIT ~11, BLOCK C, LOT 1
2
-- 3
4
5 ~
6
1. FILL ' A. TEST RESULTS COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS Respectfully Submilted.
2. NATURAL SUBGRADE B. COMPACTION DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS
3. LIME STABILIZED C. MOISTURE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS ALPHA TESTING. INC.
4. D. RETEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC. REPORT OF FIELD
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100
Dallas, Texas 75229 COMPACTION TESTS
(214) 620-8911
TESTED FOR: LAKEWOOD ESTATES DATE: JUNE 16, 1992
DALLAS, TEXAS
PROJECT: LAKEWOOD ESTATES OUR REPORT NO. 92159
COPPELL, TEXAS
TEST DATA:
, TEST [ DATE ~..,~LIKv. 1OIL ID OPTIMUM MAXIMUM LAB IN PLACE IN PLACE
HO i NUMBER MOIITUIII ONY DENIITY MOIITUIII DRY DENIITY PER CENT COMMENTe
! ,
1 106/16 EG-1 6 18 8 108,0 13 7 109.5 101 1-A
'
' i
2 06/16 EG-2 4 17 0 107.2 17 7 106.7 99 1-A
3 06/16 EG-3 4 17 0 107.2 17 9 100.9 94 1-B
__ 4 06/16 EG-4 4 17 0 107.2 17 3 108.1 101 1-A
I 5 I 06/16 EG-5 4 17 0 107.2 18 8 106.0 99 1-A
I 6 06/16 EG-6 4 17 0 107 2 17 9 106 8 100 1-A
TEST LOCATION: ELEVATION 450 +/- FILL TO 6'
1 TEST PIT #12, BLOCK E, LOT 4
3
4
5
6
1. FILL ° A. TEST RESULTS COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS Respectfully Submitted,
2. NATURAL SUBGRADE B. COMPACTION DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS
-., 3. LIME STABILIZED C. MOISTURE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS ALPHA TESTING. INC.
4. D. RETEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC. REPORT OF FIELD
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100 COMPACTIONTESTS
- Dallas, Texas 75229
(214) 620-8911
TESTEDFOR: LAKEWOOD ESTATES DATE: JUNE 16, 1992
DALLAS, TEXAS
PROJECT: LAKEWOOD ESTATES OUR~E~RTNO. 92159
COPPELL, TEXAS
TEST DATA:
; OPTIMUM MAXIMUM LAM IN PLACE IN PLACE
, 1OIL In MOIITUIE DRY DENIITY MOIITUll DIY DENIITY PER CENT COMMENTe
qb pCIr qb PGF COMPACTION
1 : 06/16 EG-1 6 18.8 108.0 15.1 109.3 101 1-A
2 I 06/16 EG-2 4 17.0 107.2 20.3 92.7 86 1-B
3 06/16 EG-3 4 17.0 107.2 21.2 93.0 87 1-B
WATER BELOW 3'
TEST LOCATION: ELEVATION 450 +/- FILL TO 4.5'
__ 1 TEST PIT {~13, BLOCK E, LOT 9
1. FILL ° A. TEST RESULTS COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS Respectfully Submitted,
2. NATURAL SUBGRADE B. COMPACTION DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS
-- 3. LIME STABILIZED C. MOISTURE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS ALPHA TESTING, INC.
4. D. RETEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC. REPORT OF FIELD
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100 COMPACTIONTESTS
- Dallas, Texas 75229
(214) 620-8911
I
TESTED FOR: LAKEWOOD ESTATES DATE: JUNE 16, 1992
-' DALLAS, TEXAS
PROJECT: LAKE"WOOD ESTATES OUR REPORT NO. 92159
COPPELL, TEXAS
TEST DATA:
i TEST I ~ELEV. 1OIL I0 OPTIMUM MAXIMUM LAB IN PLACE IN PLACE
MOIITUIE DRY DENIITY MOIITUIE DIY OENIITY PER CENT COMMENT"
OATF
NO i r)RPTH ~ NUMEER qb pClr qb PCP' COMPACTION
i i 06/16 EO-1 4 17.0 107.2 17.4 104.6 98 1-A
2 06/16 EG-2 6 18.8 108 . 0 16.3 93 . 0 86 1-S
3 06/16 EG-3 6 18.8 108.0 18.2 90.7 84 1-B
TEST LOCATION: ELEVATION 449 +/- FILL TO 4'
1 TEST PIT #14, BLOCK D, LOT 16
1. FILL ° A. TEST RESULTS COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS Respectfully Submitted,
2. NATURAL SUBGRADE B. COMPACTION DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS
3. LIME STABILIZED C. MOISTURE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS ALPHA TESTING, INC.
4. D. RETEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC. REPORT OF FIELD
_ 2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100
Da,as, Texas 75229 COMPACTION TESTS
(214) 620-8911
TESTEDFOR: LAKEWOOD ESTATES DATE: JUNE 13, 1992
-- DALLAS, TEXAS
PROJECT: LAKEWOOD ESTATES OUR REPORT MO. 92159
COPPELL, TEXAS
TEST DATA:
TFST DATE ~EL,EV. lOlL, ID OPTIMUM MAXIMUM LAM IN PLACE IN PLACE
MOIITUII DaY DINIITY MOIITUNX DRY DENIITY PER CENT COMM:rNTe
NO. ,)EPTH ~ NUMBER ~ PCP ~ PCP COMPACTION
1 ~ 06/13 EG-1 NO FILL
2 I 06/13 EG-2
3 06/13 EG-3
4 06/13 EG-4
5 06/13 EG-5
6 06/13 EG-6
TEST LOCATION: ELEVATION 450 +/- NO FILL
1 TEST PIT ~15, BLOCK A, LOT 4 TEST PIT EXCAVATED TO 3'
2
3
5
1. FILL * A. TEST RESULTS COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS Respectfully Submitted,
2. NATURAL SUBGRADE B. COMPACTION DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS
.... 3. LIME STABILIZED C. MOISTURE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS ALPHA TESTING. INC.
4. D. RETEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC. REPORT OF FIELD
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100
- Dallas, Texas 75229 COMPACTION TESTS
(214) 620-8911
JUNE 15, 1992
TESTEOFOR: LAKEWOOD ESTATES DATE:
-- DALLAS, TEXAS
92159
LAKEWOOD ESTATES OuR REPORT NO.
PROJECT:
COPPELL, TEXAS
TEST DATA:
TEST DATE: ~ELEV. mOlL ID OPTIMUM MAXIMUM LAI IN PLACE IN PLACE
MOISTURE DRY DENliTY MOIITUNE DaY DENSITY PER CENT COMMKNTe
NO rJEPTH ~ NUMBER 4k PCP ~ PCP COMPACTION
1 ! 06/15 EG-1 3 18.1 105.0 17.0 99.5 95 1-A
2 i 06/15 EG-2 3 18.1 105.0 13.4 102.7 98 1-A
3 I 06/15 EG-3 2 12.0 116.0 14.6 109.6 94 1-B
_ 4 06/15 EG-4 3 18.1 105.0 24.1 92.0 88 1-B
5 06/15 EG-5 3 18 . 1 105.0 22 . 7 94.6 90 1-B
6 06/15 EG-6 3 WATER _'N EXCAV%TION
TEST LOCATION: ELEVATION 451 +/- FILL TO 6.5'
1 TEST PIT ~16, BLOCK B, LOT 7
2
- 3
4
5 '
6
1. FILL ° A. TEST RESULTS COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS Respectfully Submitted,
2. NATURAL SUBGRADE B. COMPACTION DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS
-- 3. LIME STABILIZED C. MOISTURE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS ALPHA TESTING, INC.
4. D. RETEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC. REPORT OF FIELD
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100
Dallas, Texas 75229 COMPACTION TESTS
(214) 620-8911
TESTED FOR: LAKEWOOD ESTATES DATE: JUNE 13, 1992
DALLAS, TEXAS
PROJECT: LAKEWOOD ESTATES OU~ nE~O~TNO. 92159
COPPELL, TEXAS
TEST DATA:
· TEST DATE: ~lV. 1OIL. ID OPTIMUM MAXIMUM LAM IN PLACE IN PLACE
NO. NUflOEil NOIITUNE DNT DENIITY MOIITUNE DaY OENIITY PIE CENT COMMENTe
1 i 06/13 EG-1 4 17 0 107 2 15.3 111 5 104 1-A
2 i 06/13 EG-2 4 17 0 107 2 16.8 106 8 100 1-A
[
3 06/13 EG-3 5 22 2 98 0 27.1 95 6 98 1-A
---i 4 06/13 EG-4 5 22 2 98 0 26.0 96 5 98 1-a
5 06/13 EG-5 5 22 2 98 0 28.3 95 8 98 1-A
6 06/13 EG-6 4 17 0 107 2 16.6 107 3 100 1-A
TEST LOCATION: ELEVATION 451 +/- FILL TO 7'
1 TEST PIT ~17, BLOCK C, LOT 11
2
5
6
1. FILL ° A. TEST RESULTS COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS Respectfully Submitled,
2. NATURAL SUBGRADE B. COMPACTION DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS
-_ 3. LIME STABILIZED C. MOISTURE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS ALPHA TESTING. INC.
4. D. RETEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC. REPORT OF FIELD
2209 wisconsin St., Suite 100
Dallas, Texas 75229 COMPACTION TESTS
(214) 620-8911
TESTED FOR: LAKEWOOD ESTATES DATE: JUNE 16, 1992
DALLAS, ?EXAS
PROJECT: LAKEWOOD ESTATES OUR ~E~O~T NO. 92159
COPPELL, TEXAS
TEST DATA:
TEST ! DATE sOlE. IN OPTIMUM MAXIMUM LAB IN PI.AGB IN Pi. ACK
NO. I NUMBER MOISTURE ORY OKNIITY MOIITUBE Oily NXNIITY PIN CENT COMMENTS
1 i 06/16 EG-1 4 17.0 107.2 16.4 105.0 98 ~-A
2 i 06/16 EG-2 6 18.8 108.0 20.5 101.4 94 2-R
3 06/16 EG-3 6 18.8 108.0 25.0 95.8 87 1-B
4 06/16 EG-4 WATER IN EXCAVATION
TEST LOCATION: ELEVATION 451 +/- FILL TO 8'
1 TEST PIT ~t18, BLOCK E, LOT 17
2
3
!
1. FILL * A, TEST RESULTS COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS Respectfully Submitted,
2. NATURAL SUBGRADE B. COMPACTION DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS
3. LIME STABILIZED C. MOISTURE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS ALPHA TESTING. INC.
4. D. RETEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC. REPORT
OF
FIELD
2209 wisco.sin st.. Suite 100 COMPACTION TESTS
- Dallas, Texas 75229
(214) 620-8911
TESTED FOR: LAKEWOOD ESTATES OAT':: JUNE 16, 1992
DALLAS, TEXAS
LAKEWOOD ESTATES our RE~ORT NO. 92159
PROJECT:
COPPELL, TEXAS
TEST DATA:
TEST ~ELEV. lOlL iO OPTIMUM 14A'KIMUM LAI IN PLACE IN PLACE
MOIITUNi ONY DENIITY IdOIITUEI DRY DENIITY PEN CENT COMMENTe
N O r~EFTH ~ NU kl BEN ~& PCF qb PCP COil PA CT ION
DATE;
1 06/16 EG-1 4 17.0 107.2 15.6 107.3 100 1-A
2 06/16 EG-2 6 18 . 8 108 . 0 17 . 2 91 . 3 85 1-B
3 06/16 EG-3 3 & 4 18.1 105.0 23.5 95.7 91 1-B
4 06/16 EG-4 3 & 4 18.1 105.0 19.6 101.7 97 1-A
5 06/16 EG-5 WATER *N EXCAVATION
TEST LOCATION: ELEVATION 450 +/- FILL TO 6'
1 TEST PIT ~19, BLOCK E, LOT 12
2
- 3
5 ~
1. FILL * A. TEST RESULTS COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS Respectfully Submitled,
2. NATURAL SUBGRADE B. COMPACTION DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS
3. LIME STABILIZED C. MOISTURE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS ALPHA TESTING, INC.
4. D. RETEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC. REPORT OF FIELD
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100 COMPACTION
TESTS
" Dallas, Texas 75229
(214) 620-8911
TESTED FOR: LAKEWOOD ESTATES DATE: JUNE 16, 1992
.... DALLAS, TEXAS
PROJECT: LAKEWOOD ESTATES OUR REPORT NO. 92159
COPPELL, TEXAS
TEST DATA:
1=?· "*""'-
· TEST DATE .oi~. lo ol~Y OINIITY MOIITUlII OIY O,NIITY P=I C,NT COMMENTe
NO. NUMICll I"CF el) PCF COMPACTION
I
- i
' 1 06/16 EG-1 4 17.0 107.2 14.5 109.6 102 1-A
2 06/16 EG-2 6 18.8 108.0 16.7 98.5 91 1-B
3 06/16 EG-3 6 18.8 108.0 18.0 97.8 91 1-B
TEST LOCATION: ELEVATION 449 +/- FILL TO 3.5'
1 TEST PIT ~t20, BLOCK D, LOT 19
2
1. FILL ° A. TEST RESULTS COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS Respectfully Submitted.
2. NATURAL SUBGRADE B. COMPACTION DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS
_ 3. LIME STABILIZED C. MOISTURE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS ALPHA TESTING, INC.
4. D. RETEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC. REPORT OF FIELD
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100 COMPACTIONTESTS
-- Dallas, Texas 75229
(214) 620-8911
JUNE 13, 1992
LAKEWOOD ESTATES DATE:
TESTED FOR:
.... DALLAS, TEXAS
92159
LAKEWOOD ESTATES OURRE~RTNO.
PROJECT:
COPPELL, TEXAS
TEST DATA:
· I
i TEST DATE: loll. ID OPTIMUM MAXIMUM LAB IN PLACE IN PLACE
MOIITIJNE DRY OENIITY MOIITUII DRY DENIITY PER CENT COMMi[N.Te
NO. NUMIEN (k PGP. ~ PCP' COMPACTION
"-', 1 ~ 06/13 EG-1 NO FILL
:I 2 06/13 EG-2
-! 3 06/13 EG-3
~ 4 06/13 EG-4
5 06/13 EG-5
.... 6 06/13 EG-6
TEST LOCATION: ELEVATION 451 +/- NO FILL
1 TEST PIT #21, BLOCK A, LOT 1 TEST PIT EXCAVATED TO 3'
5
6
1. FILL ° A. TEST RESULTS COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS Respectfully Submitled,
2. NATURAL SUBGRADE B. COMPACTION DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS
-- 3. LIME STABILIZED C. MOISTURE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS ALPHA TESTING. INC.
4. D. RETEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC. REPORT OF FIELD
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100 COMPACTIONTESTS
Dallas, Texas 75229
(214) 620-8911
JUNE 13, 1992
TESTEDFOR: LAKEWOOD ESTATES OATE:
DALLAS, TEXAS
92159
PROJECT: LAKEWOOD ESTATES OURRE~ATNO.
COPPELL, TEXAS
TEST DATA:
i TEST DATE ~ lOlL lo OPTIMUM MAXIMUM LAB IN PLACl IN
MOIITUNi DNY DKNIITY MOIITUNI DRY DENIITY PKR tINT COMMENT'
j NO NUMI'N ~ PCP ~ PCP COMPACTION
- 1 06/13 EG-1 4 17.0 107.2 22.2 100.2 93 1-B
2 06/13 EG-2 5 22.2 98.0 18.2 99.6 102 1-A
3 06/13 EG-3 5 22.2 98.0 17.4 100.5 103 1-A
._. 4 06/13 EG-4 WATER AT TEST
5 06/13 EG-5 5 22.2 98.0 30.7 96.6 99 1-A
6 06/13 EG-6 5 22.2 98.0 30.2 98.2 100 1-A
'-TESTLOCATION: ELEVATION 451 +/- FILL TO 7'
1 TEST PIT #22, BLOCK B, LOT 4
2
4
5
6
1. FILL ° A. TEST RESULTS COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS Respectfully Submitted.
2. NATURAL SUBGRADE B. COMPACTION DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS
3. LIME STABILIZED C. MOISTURE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS ALPHA TESTING. INC.
4. D. RETEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC. REPORT OF FIELD
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100
Dallas, Texas 75229 COMPACTION TESTS
(214) 620-8911
TESTED FOR: LAKEWOOD ESTATES DATE: JUNE 13, 1992
'' DALLAS, TEXAS
PROJECT: LAKEWOOD ESTATES OUR R[PORT NO. 92159
COPPELL, TEXAS
TEST DATA:
NO. NUMBER MOIITUII DRY DENIITY MOIITUai DRY DENIITY PER CENT COMM [NTe
1 06/13 EG-1 4 17 0 107.2 21 7 92 6 86 1-B
2 !06/13 EG-2 4 17 0 107.2 15 7 101 2 94 1-B
3 06/13 EG-3 5 22 2 98.0 27 3 86 9 89 1-B
4 06/13 EG-4 5 22 2 98.0 27 0 88 3 90 1-B
I 5 06/13 EG-5 5 22 2 98.0 28 6 89 2 91 1-B
'- 6 06/13 EG-6 5 22 2 98.0 28 7 87 1 89 1-B
TEST LOCATION: ELEVATION 451 +/- FILL TO 8'
TEST PIT #23, BLOCK B, LOT 1
1. FILL ° A. TEST RESULTS COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS Respectfully Submitted.
2. NATURAL SUBGRADE B. COMPACTION DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS
3. LIME STABILIZED C. MOISTURE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS ALPHA TESTING. INC.
4. D. RETEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC. REPORT OF FIELD
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100 COMPACTIONTESTS
Dallas, Texas 75229
(214) 620-8911
TESTED FOR: LAKEWOOD ESTATES DATE: JUNE 13, 1992
DALLAS, TEXAS
PROJECT: LAKEWOOD ESTATES our REPORT NO. 92159
COPPELL, TEXAS
TEST DATA:
TEST DAT£ ~ELEV, BOiL In OPTIMUM MAXIMUM LAI IN PLACE IN PLACE
· MOIITUIIE DRY DENSITY MOISTURE DRY DENIITY PER CENT COMMKNTe
NO. hEPTH ~ NUMBER ~k PCP ~& PCP COMPACTION
1 i 06/13 EG-1 4 17 0 107 2 18 5 98.9 92 1-B
__ 2 I 06/13 EG-2 6 18 8 108 0 15 0 114.0 105 1-A
3 06/13 EG-3 5 22 2 98 0 26 9 89.8 92 1-B
--[ 4 06/13 EG-4 5 22 2 98 0 27 2 90.2 92 1-B
I 5 06/13 EG-5 5 22 2 98 0 29 5 88.3 90 1-B
- 6 06/13 EG-6 5 22 2 98 0 29 1 88.2 90 1-B
TEST LOCATION: ELEVATION 451 +/- FILL TO 8'
._ 1 TEST PIT #24, BLOCK C, LOT 6
I2
.:
3
5
1. FILL · A. TEST RESULTS COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS Respectfully Submitted,
2. NATURAL SUBGRADE B. COMPACTION DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS
-- 3. LIME STABILIZED C. MOISTURE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS ALPHA TESTING, INC.
4. D. RETEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC. REPORT
OF
FIELD
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100 COMPACTIONTESTS
Dallas, Texas 75229
(214) 620-8911
TESTEDFOR: LAKEWOOD ESTATES DATE: JUNE 17, 1992
-. DALLAS, TEXAS
LAKEWOOD ESTATES OUR REPORT NO. 92159
PROJECT:
COPPELL, TEXAS
TEST DATA:
MOISTURE DaY DENIITY MOIITUBE DRY DENSITY liED CENT COliiMi, NTI
.... 1 ~ 06/17 EG-1 4 17.0 107.2 14.2 110.2 103 1-A
2 06/17 EG-2 5 22.2 98.0 27.1 92.0 94 1-A
3 06/17 EG-3 5 22 . 2 98 . 0 22 . 8 92.2 94 1-A
4 06/17 EG-4 5 22.2 98.0 21.8 92.2 94 1-A
5 06/17 EG-5 5 22 . 2 98 . 0 25.3 90 . 9 93 1-A
-' 6 06/17 EG-6 WATER IN EXCAVATION
TEST LOCATION: ELEVATION 451 +/- FILL TO 7'
.._! 1 TEST PIT ~25, BLOCK F, LOT 2
4
5 '
6
1. FILL ° A. TEST RESULTS COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS Respectfully Submilted.
2. NATURAL SUBGRADE B. COMPACTION DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS
3. LIME STABILIZED C. MOISTURE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS ALPHA TESTING. INC.
4. D. RETEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC. REPORT OF FIELD
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100
Dallas, Texas 75229 COMPACTION TESTS
(214) 62o-8911
TESTED FOR: LAKEWOOD ESTATES OATE: JUNE 17, 1992
DALLAS, TEXAS
PROJECT: LAKEWOOD ESTATES OUR REPORT NO. 92159
COPPELL, TEXAS
TEST DATA:
TEST DATE soil IO OPTIMUM MAXIMUM LAB IN Pi. ACK IN PLACE
NO. NUMIKR MOISTURE ORY OENIITY MOIITUNi DRY i)ENliTY FEll CI[NT
~ PCF ~ ~CF COMPACTION
1 { 06/17 EG-1 6 18 8 108 0 15 4 100 3 93 1-B
.
2 i 06/17 EG-2 5 22 2 98 0 23 4 91 9 94 1-A
3 06/17 EG-3 5 22 2 98 0 23 7 90 7 93 1-A
5 06/17 EG-5 5 22 2 98 0 23 6 90 7 93 1-A
6 06/17 EG-6 2 12 0 116 0 14 3 110 1 95 1-A
SOME WA~ER SEEFAGE BELOW 3'
TEST LOCATION: ELEVATION 451 +/- FILL TO 6'
1 TEST PIT {26, BLOCK D, LOT 30
2
1. FILL ° A. TEST RESULTS COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS Respectfully Submitted,
2. NATURAL SUBGRADE B. COMPACTION DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS
-- 3. LIME STABILIZED C. MOISTURE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS ALPHA TESTING, INC.
4. D. RETEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC. REPORT OF FIELD
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite lOO
- Dallas. Texas 75229 COMPACTION TESTS
(214) 620-8911
TESTED FOR: LAKEWOOD ESTATES DA?E: JUNE 17, 1992
-- DALLAS, TEXAS
PROJECT: LAKEWOOD ESTATES our RE~ORT NO. 92159
COPPELL, TEXAS
TEST DATA:
MOIITUNX ONY DXNIITY MOIITUEX Oily DENIITY COMMENT·
NO I. NUMBER ~ PCP ek PCP COMPACTION
1 i 06/17 EG-1 4 17.0 107.2 23.5 91.6 85 1-B
2 ~ 06/17 EG-2 6 18.8 108.0 16.4 104.2 96 1-A
3 06/17 EG-3 6 18.8 108.0 15.7 105.5 98 1-A
_ 4 06/17 EG-4 6 18.8 108.0 16.2 104.2 96 1-A
TEST LOCATION: ELEVATION 450 +/- FILL TO 4.5'
TEST PIT #27, BLOCK F, LOT 26
1. FILL ° A. TEST RESULTS COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS Respectfully Submitted.
2. NATURAL SUBGRADE B. COMPACTION DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS
.._ 3. LIME STABILIZED C. MOISTURE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS ALPHA TESTING. INC.
4. O. RETEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC. REPORT OF FIELD
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100
Dallas, Texas 75229 COMPACTION TESTS
(214) 620-8911
TESTED FOR: LAKEWOOD ESTATES DATE: JUNE 16, 1992
DALLAS, TEXAS
PROJECT: LAKEWOOD ESTATES OuR REPORT NO. 92159
COPPELL, TEXAS
TEST DATA:
TEST DATF. ~ELEV. 1OIL I0 OPTIMUM MAXIMUM LAB IN Pi. ACK IN PLACE
NO. hEPTN ~.~,,~ NUMBIli MOIITUNi DRY DIrNIITY MOIITUllE ORY OENIITY PER CI'NT COMM~,N1.e
~ PCF ~ PCF COMPACTION
1 i 06/16 EG-1 4 17.0 107.2 16.2 107.8 101 1-A
2 i 06/16 EG-2 6 18.8 108.0 20.2 100.2 93 1-B
3 ' 06/16 EG-3 6 18.8 108.0 16.9 105.2 97 1-A
rEST LOCATION: ELEVATION 449 +/- FILL TO 4'
TEST PIT #28, BLOCK D, LOT 22
I. FILL ° A. TEST RESULTS COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS Respectfully Submitted,
2. NATURAL SUBGRADE B. COMPACTION DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS
...3. LIME STABILIZED C. MOISTURE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS ALPHA TESTING, INC.
~,. D. RETEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC. REPORT OF FIELD
2209 Wisconsin St,, Suite 100
-'- Dallas, Texas 7S229 COMPACTION TESTS
(214) 620-8911
TESTED FOR: LAKEWOOD ESTATES DATE: JUNE 17, 1992
DALLAS, TEXAS
92159
PROJECT= LAKEWOOD ESTATES OURAE~RTNO.
COPPELL, TEXAS
TEST DATA:
TEST DATE ;)lp?~.~ 1Oil. ID Pill tiNT
NO. NUMIil MOIITUll DaY DENIITY MOIITUll DRY DENIITY COMMENT·
1 ! 06/17 EG-1 4 17.0 107.2 16.3 103.9 97 1-A
2 i 06/17 EG-2 4 17.0 107.2 15.9 104.3 97 1-A
{
3 06/17 EG-3 5 22.2 98 . 0 24.7 96.2 99 1-A
4 06/17 EG-4 5 22.2 98.0 23.7 94.4 96 1-A
5 06/17 EG-5 5 22.2 98.0 20.2 94.0 96 1-A
I
TEST LOCATION: ELEVATION 450 +/- FILL TO 6'
i 1 TEST PIT #29, BLOCK F, LOT 22
2
'-3
5
L_
1. FILL " A. TEST RESULTS COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS Respectfully Submitted,
2, NATURAL SUBGRADE B. COMPACTION DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS
3. LIME STABILIZED C. MOISTURE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS ALPHA TESTING, INC.
4. D. RETEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC. REPORT OF FIELD
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100
.... Dallas, Texas 75229 COMPACTION TESTS
(214) 620-8911
TESTED FOR: LAKEWOOD ESTATES OATE: JUNE 17, 1992
DALLAS, TEXAS
PROJECT: LAKEWOOD ESTATES OUR R£~OR?NO. 92159
COPPELL, TEXAS
TEST DATA:
. TEST ! ~ El. KY. OP,rIMUM MAXIM%JM I,.AI IN PI.ACS IN PI. ACK
NO I C)ATr [JEPTH~ lOlL IO PER CENT
NUMBER MOIl'rUNE DRY OINIITY MOIITUNE OIlY DENIITY
I 1 ! 06/17 EG-1 4 17.0 107.2 22.6 89.8 84 1-B
_; 2 06/17 EG-2 $ 18.1 105.0 21.6 97.4 93 1-A
~ I WATER IN EXCAVATION
TE$'r[OCA'nO~: ELEVATION 449 +[- ~ILL TO 5'
_ 1 TEgT PIT #30, BI,OCK D, LOT 24
2
.u I
1. FILL ' A. TEST RESULTS COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS Respectfully Submitted,
2. NATURAL SUBGRADE B. COMPACTION DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS
--- 3. LIME STABILIZED C. MOISTURE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS ALPHA TESTING, INC.
4. D. RETEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC. REPORT OF FIELD
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100
'- Dallas, Texas 75229 COMPACTION TESTS
(214) 620-8911
TESTED FOR: LAKEWOOD ESTATES DATE: JUNE 17, 1992
DALLAS, TEXAS
PROJECT: LAKEWOOD ESTATES OUR REK)RT NO. 92159
COPPELL, TEXAS
TEST DATA:
: ~ -----.. OPTIMUM MAXIMUM LAD IN PLACE IN PLACE
TEST DATE: hE~ 1OIL ii3 PEN CENT
NO. NUMIEN MOIITUNE DRY OENSITY MOISTUNE DDY DENSITY COMMENT·
· ~, PCP qb PCP COMPACTION
1 ! 06/17 EG-1 4 17.0 107 2 15 4 111 3 104 1-A
2 06/17 EG-2 4 17.0 107 2 21 0 102 5 96 1-A
3 i 06/17 EG-3 4 17.0 107 2 17 8 105 8 99 1-A
4 06/17 EG-4 5 22.2 98 0 22 3 96 1 98 1-A
5 06/17 EG-5 5 22.2 98 0 23 6 95 2 97 1-A
6 06/17 EG-6 2 22.2 98 0 23 1 95 1 97 1-A
TEST LOCATION: ELEVATION 450 +/- FILL TO 7 '
1 TEST PIT #31, BLOCK F, LOT 19
~ 2
5 '
6
1. FILL ° A. TEST RESULTS COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS Respectfully Submitted.
2. NATURAL SUBGRADE B. COMPACTION DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS
3. LIME STABILIZED C. MOISTURE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS ALPHA TESTING. INC.
4. D. RETEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC. REPORT OF FIELD
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100
Dallas, Texas 75229 COMPACTION TESTS
(214) 620-8911
TESTED FOR: LAKEWOOD ESTATES DATE: JUNE 17, 1992
DALLAS, TEXAS
PROJECT: LAKEWOOD ESTATES OUR AE~ORTND. 92159
COPPELL, TEXAS
TEST DATA:
. TEST I DATI:' ~ NUMBENIOIL ID MOIITUlIEOPTIMUM MAXIMUM LAB IN PLACE IN PLACE
NO DRY DI[NIITY MOISTUEI OEY DENIITY PEN CENT COMMENT'
. ~ pclr qb PClr COMPACTION
·
-i 1 i 06/17 EG-1 4 17.0 107.2 17.4 103.0 96 1-A
2 i 06/17 EG-2 NOT TESTABLE DUE TO LARGE LI~4ESTONE
--TEST LOCATION: ELEVATION 449 +/- FILL TO 6'
TEST PIT #32, BLOCK D, LOT 27
J
1. FILL ° A. TEST RESULTS COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS Respeclfully Submitted,
2. NATURAL SUBGRADE B. COMPACTION DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS
3. LIME STABILIZED C. MOISTURE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS ALPHA TESTING. INC.
4. D. RETEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC. REPORT OF FIELD
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100
Dallas, Texas 75229 COMPACTION TESTS
(214) 620-8911
TESTED FOR: LAKEWOOD ESTATES DATE: JUNE 18, 1992
DALLAS, TEXAS
PROJECT: LAKEWOOD ESTATES OUR REPORT NO. 92159
COPPELL, TEXAS
TEST DATA:
~ ~ -- ---- OPTIMUM MAXIMUM LAB IN PLACE IN PLACE
TEST ' hE~ bOIL ID PER CENT
NO. DA'r[ MOIITUIIE DRY OENIITY MOIITUEI BaY OENIITY COMMENT·
1 06/18 EG-1 4 17 0 107 2 15 7 99 1 92 1-B
-
2 { 06/18 EG-2 6 18 8 108 0 16 2 107 5 100 1-A
I
I
3 06/18 EG-3 5 22 2 98 0 22 1 95 3 97 1-A
4 06/18 EG-4 5 22 2 98 0 24 2 96 2 98 1-A
98 0 25 2 92 7 95 1-A
5
06/18
EG-5
5
22
2
6 06/18 EG-6 5 22 2 98 0 24 3 90 2 92 1-B
TEST LOCATION: ELEVATION 450 +/- FILL TO 9'
1 TEST PIT #33, BLOCK F, LOT 10
2
3
5
6
1. FILL ° A. TEST RESULTS COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS Respectfully Submitted.
2. NATURAL SUBGRADE B. COMPACTION DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS
3. LIME STABILIZED C. MOISTURE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS ALPHA TESTING, INC.
4. D. RETEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC. REPORT OF FIELD
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100 COMPACTIONTESTS
.... Dallas, Texas 75229
(214) 620-8911
TESTED FOR: LAKEWOOD ESTATES DATE: JUNE 15, 1992
'- DALLAS, TEXAS
PROJECT: LAKEWOOD ESTATES OUR REPORT NO. 92159
COPPELL, TEXAS
TEST DATA:
TEST DATE ~ELEV. lOlL ID OPTIMUM MAXIMUM LAB IN PLACE IN PLACE
NO. I)EPTH ~ NUMBER MOIITURE DRY DENIITY MOIITUIIE DRY EENIITY Pill GENT COMMENT*
~ pGIr ~ pCgr COMPACTION
~ 1 ~,06/18 EG-1 4 17.0 107 2 15 6 107 6 100 1-A
__ 2 { 06/18 EG-2 4 17.0 107 2 15 6 108 4 101 1-A
. 3 ~ 06/18 EG-3 4 17.0 107 2 16 5 104 4 97 1-A
._~ 4 06/18 EG-4 5 22.2 98 0 19 5 96 8 99 1-A
[ 5 06/18 EG-5 5 22.2 98 0 22 0 95 6 98 1-A
- 6 06/18 EG-6 5 22.2 98 0 21 9 95 9 98 1-A
TEST LOCATION: ELEVATION 449 +/- FILL TO 8'
1 TEST PIT #34, BLOCK F, LOT 16
2
--. 3
5 ~
~-_
1. FILL ° A. TEST RESULTS COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS Respectfully Submilted.
2. NATURAL SUBGRADE B. COMPACTION DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS
__ 3. LIME STABILIZED C. MOISTURE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS ALPHA TESTING. INC.
4, D, RETEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC. REPORT OF FIELD
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100
Dallas, Texas 75229 COMPACTION TESTS
(214) 620-8911
JUNE 17, 1992
TESTED FOR: LAKEWOOD ESTATES PATE:
DALLAS, TEXAS
92159
PROJECT: LAKEWOOD ESTATES OU. RE~.?NO.
COPPELL, TEXAS
TEST DATA:
· TEST DATE ~ 1OIL ID OPTIMUM MAXIMUM LAB IN PLACE IN PLACE
MOIITUNI ONY OENIlTY MOIITUNE DRY DENIITY PEN CENT COMM[NTe
NO NUMBER ~ PCP ~ PCP COMPACTION
1 06/17 EG-1 4 17.0 107.2 23.1 93.3 87 1-B
2 06/17 EG-2 4 17.0 107.2 21.8 94.9 89 1-B
3 06/17 EG-3 6 18.8 108.0 15.8 103.2 96 1-A
4 06/17 EG-4 6 18.8 108.0 15.5 104.4 97 1-A
"TESTLOCATION: ELEVATION 448 +/- FILL TO 5'
1 TEST PIT #35, BLOCK D, LOT 30
2
- 3
1. FILL ° A. TEST RESULTS COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS Respectfully Submilted.
2. NATURAL SUBGRADE B. COMPACTION DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS
3. LIME STABILIZED C. MOISTURE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS ALPHA TESTING, INC.
4. D. RETEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC. REPORT OF FIELD
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100
-'- Dallas, 'exas ?5229 COMPACTION TESTS
(214) 620-8911
TESTEDFOR: LAKEWOOD ESTATES OATi~: JUNE 18, 1992
DALLAS, TEXAS
PROJECT: LAKEWOOD ESTATES OU~ ~E~O~? NO. 92159
COPPELL, TEXAS
TEST DATA:
NO. I DATE IJIPTH~ lOlL ID
NUMBIN MOIITUlll DNY DINIIT¥ klOIITUml Dray O.NelTY I)Ell CmNT COMM[NTe
I
I I 06/i8 EG-I 4 i?.0 107.2 16.4 I01.4 95 I-A
j 06/18 EG-2 6 18.8 108.0 12.5 95.0 88 1-B
2
I
3 I 06/18 EG-3 6 18.8 108.0 18.2 100.5 93 1-B
I
LARGE LIMESTONE AND WA'['ER BEL~4 4'
TEST LOCATION: ELEVATION 449 +/- FILL TO 10.5'
1 TEST PIT #36, BLOCK D, LOT 48
1. FILL ° A. TEST RESULTS COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS Respectfully Submitted.
2. NATURAL SUBGRADE B. COMPACTION DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS
3. LIME STABILIZED C. MOISTURE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS ALPHA TESTING. INC.
4. D, RETEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC. REPORT OF FIELD
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100
Dallas, Texas 75229 COMPACTION TESTS
(214) 620-8911
TESTED FOR: LAKEWOOD ESTATES DATE: JUNE 18, 1992
- DALLAS, TEXAS
PROJECT: LAKEWOOD ESTATES OUR RE~ORTNO. 92159
COPPELL, TEXAS
TEST DATA:
NC) i fJ"rPTH i i ]NUMIillJaOiII'UIII DRY DKNIITY uoIrrugll DRY DBNIITY Piti tINT COMMI:NT*
II. ,PC.~W_ (& PCP COMPACTION
1 I 06/18 EG-1 6 18.8 108.0 14.9 107.8 100 1-A
2 06/18 EG-2 6 18.8 108.0 13.9 102.2 95 1-A
I
WATER ENCOUNTERED BELOI; 3'
LARGE LIMESTONE BELOW 5'
TEST LOCATION: ELEVATION 449 +/- FILL TO 11'
1 TEST PIT #37, BLOCK D, LOT 45
-i
i
1. FILL ° A. TEST RESULTS COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS Respectfully Submitted,
2. NATURAL SUBGRADE B. COMPACTION DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS
3. LIME STABILIZED C. MOISTURE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS ALPHA TESTING, INC.
4. D. RETEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC. REPORT OF FIELD
2209 wisconsin St., Suite 100
Dallas, Texas 75229 COMPACTION TESTS
(214) 620-8911
TESTED FOR: LAKEWOOD ESTATES DATE: JUNE 18, 1992
DALLAS, TEXAS
PROJECT: LAKEWOOD ESTATES OUN REPORT NO. 92159
COPPELL, TEXAS
TEST DATA:
TEST DATE ~-.~EV. lOlL Iem OPTIMUN MAXIMUM kal IN PLACE IN PLACE
NO. r)~PTH ~ NUMBER MOIITURI DRY DENIITY MOISTURE Oily DENSITY PER GENT COMMi:NTe
1 06/18 EG-1 6 18.8 108.0 14.4 102 1 95 1-A
: 2 06/18 EG-2 6 18.8 108.0 14.0 103 4 96 1-A
3 06/18 EG-3 6 18.8 108.0 19.0 95 5 88 1-B
· 4 06/18 EG-4 6 18.8 108.0 18.0 97 7 90 1-B
5 06/18 EG-5 2 29.8 86 1
._16 06/18 EG-6 2 24.1 81 1 2
I
TEST LOCATION: ELEVATION 448 +/- FILL TO 5.5'
I 1 TEST PIT ~38, BLOCK D, LOT 33
2
5
1. FILL ° A. TEST RESULTS COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS Respectfully Submitled,
2. NATURAL SUBGRADE B. COMPACTION DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS
3. LIME STABILIZED C. MOISTURE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS ALPHA TESTING. INC.
4. D. RETEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC. REPORT OF FIELD
2209 wisconsin St., Suite 100
- Dallas, Texas 75229 COMPACTION TESTS
(214) 620-8911
TESTED FOR: LAKEWOOD ESTATES DATE: JUNE 18, 1992
_ DALLAS, TEXAS
PROJECT: LAKEWOOD ESTATES our REPORT NO. 92159
COPPELL, TEXAS
TEST DATA:
· TEST I DATF boil ID OPTIMUM MAXSMUM LAM IN PLACE IN PLACE
NO I NUMIEN MOIITUIll ONY DENIITY MOISTUIII DEY DENSITY PER tINT COMMKNT'
t . ! ~, PCP qb PCP COMPACTION
--i 1. [ 06/18 SC-1 6 18.8 108.0 11.5 100.4 93 1-B
, 2 i 06/18 EG-2 6 18.8 108.0 22.1 90.6 84 1-B
i WATER ~ LARGE LIMESTON~ ENCOUNTERED FROM 2' TO 7'
TEST LOCATION: ELEVATION 448 +/- FILL TO 7'
._ 1 I TEST PIT ~39, BLOCK D, LOT
39
i 2
1. FILL ° A. TEST RESULTS COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS Respeclfully Submilted.
2. NATURAL SUBGRADE B. COMPACTION DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS
__ 3. LIME STABILIZED C. MOISTURE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS ALPHA TESTING. INC.
4. D. RETEST
ALPHA TESTING, INC. REPORT OF FIELD
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100
· - Dallas, Texas 75229 COMPACTION TESTS
(214) 620-8911
TESTED FOR: LAKEWOOD ESTATES DATE: JUNE 18, 1992
_ DALLAS, TEXAS
92159
PROJECT: LAKEWOOD ESTATES OU~nE~TNO.
COPPELL, TEXAS
TEST DATA:
· TEST DATE: ~.~l. lv. lOlL ID OPTIMUM MAXIMUM LAB IN PLACE IN PLACE
NO. DEPTH ~ NUMIEII MOIITUNE DRY OENIITY MOIITURI OEY DENSITY PER CENT COMMKNT'
I -- ~ ~ PCP Ii PCP' COMPACTION
,,1. 06/18 EG-1 4 17.0 107.2 18.2 87.2 81 1-B
, 2 06/18 EG-2 6 18.8 108.0 13.5 104.8 97 1-A
{ WATER & LARGE LIMESTON~ ENCOUt~TERED FI.OM 2' TD 7'
--TEST LOCATION: ELEVATION 448 +/- FILL TO 7 '
1 TEST PIT {{40, BLOCK D, LOT 35
__ t
1. FILL ° A. TEST RESULTS COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS Respectfully Submitled,
2. NATURAL SUBGRADE B. COMPACTION DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS
.._ 3. LIME STABILIZED C. MOISTURE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SPECIFICATIONS ALPHA TESTING. INC.
4. D. RETEST