Park Meadow-LR 851113Maxim Engineers Inc. 2342 Fa:bens
Geotechnical P.O. Box 59902
Materials Testing Dallas, Texas 75229
Consu',ta~,t~ (214) 24/-7575
Moisture/Density Relations of Soil
Report Date
To
Project
11/13/85 Sample Data 11/08/85
Coppell Municipal Utility District, c/o Pierce-Lunsford Associates, Inc.
Park Meadow I - Coppell, Texas
Te.tProced,,re ASTM D 698
Method A
Results
Rammer Type ........................
Preparation Procedure ..............
Material Description ................
Unified Soil Classification .........
Liquid Limit ......................
Plastic Limit ......................
Plastic Index ......................
Percent Passing No. 200 Sieve ......
Maximum Density ....................
Optimum Moisture ...................
Mechanical
Moi st
Dark gray and reddish brown clay
intermixed with some limestone fragments
and calcareous nodules.
CL
41
17
24
68
102.7 lbs./cu, ft.
20.2 percent
3155-410236
Technician: C.B.
/tg
Distribution:
Coppell Municipal Utility District, c/o Pierce-Lunsford Associates, Inc. -
Jeff Hawkins
Coppell Municipal Utility District, c/o Pierce-Lunsford Associates, Inc. -
Craig Goodpastor
Threadgill, Dowdey & Associates, Inc. - George Dudley
Ginn, Inc. - Steve Pennington ~.. .....
Maxim Engineers, Inc.
Maxim Engineers Inc.
Geotechnical
Materials Te~ting
Consultants
2342 Fabens
P,O. Box 59902
Dallas, Texas 75229
(214) 247-7575
in-Place Density of Soil
Report Date 11/13/85
Sample Date
Page 1
11/08/85
To
Coppell ~nicipal Utility District c/o Pierce-Lunsford Associates, Inc.
Project
Park Meadow II - Coppell, Texas
Material
1. Dark brown clay
2. Brown and light brown sandy clay
3. Tan and brown sandy clay
Maximum Dry Density Optimum Moisture
(Lbs./Cu. Ft.) (Percent)
102.7 20.2
101.3 16.2
108.2 17.9
Density Test Methods:
AEIMD 2922 and D 3017
Method of Compaction:
ASIMD 698
Test Material
No. .No.
12 1
13 1
14 2
15 2
16 2
17 2
18 3
Lift
Location
Density
Lbs./Cu. Ft.
3' below
grade
2' below
grade
2' below
grade
2' below
grade
2' below
grade
3' below
grade
3' below
grade
Sanitary lateral,
fronting Lot #1,
Block 7
Moisture Content
(%)
Sanitary lateral,
fronting Lot #3
Sanitary lateral,
fronting Lot #5,
Block 7
Percent (%) of
Maximum Dry Density
97.05 23.7 95.0
Sanitary lateral,
fronting Lot #8,
Block 7
97.7 23.3 95.1
Sanitary lateral,
fronting Lot #10,
Block 7
103.3 18.5 102.0
Sanitary lateral,
fronting Lot #12,
Block 7
100.4 19.4 99.1
Sanitary lateral,
fronting Lot #14,
Block 7
106.3 19.9 104.9
102.9 17.0 101.6
108.7 19.5 100.5
-- All tests comply with Project Specifications unless noted °then~vise --
Remarks and/or Distribution
Maxim Engineers, Inc. Reviewed by:
Maxim Engineers Inc.
Geotechnical
Mat~ials Teeing
Consultants
2342 Fabens
P,O. Box 59902
Dallas, Texas 75229
(214) 247-7575
In-Place Density of Soil
Report Date 11/13/85
Sample Date
Pa~e 2
11/08/85
To
Coppell Municipal Utility District c/o Pierce-Lunsford Associates, Inc.
Project
Park Meadow II - Coppell, Texas
Material
1. Dark brown clay
2. Brown and light brown sandy clay
3. Tan and brown sandy clay
Maximum Dry Density Optimum Moisture
(Lbs./Cu. Ft.) (Percent)
1. 102.7 1. 20.2
2. 101.3 2. 16.2
3. 108.2 3. 17.9
Density Test Methods:
ASTMD 2922 and D 3017
Method of Compaction:
ASIM D 698
Test Material
No. No.
19 3
20 2
21 1
22 2
Lift
Density
Location Lbs./Cu. Ft.
Below
grade
1' below
grade
1' below
grade
2' below
grade
Waterline, fronting 109.7
Lot #13, Block 7
Waterline, fronting 99.2
Lot #7, Block 7
Waterline, fronting 99.6
Lot #3, Block #7
Sanitary Line "J", 100.3
Sra. 3+25
Moisture Content
(%)
Percent (%) of
Maximum Dry Density
16.6 101.4
19.2 97.9
22.9 97.0
19.1 99.0
3155-411026
Technician: C.B.
/lb
-- Ail tests comply with Project Specifications unless noted otherwise --
Coppell Municipal Utility District c/o Pierce-Lunsford Associates,
Coppell Municipal Utility District c/o Pierce-LunsfordAssociates,
Inc. - GraigGoodpastor
Ginn, Inc. - Steve Pennington
Wiseco Land Develotrnent - Tc~nWise
American Developers ~ Contractors - Glen Hemphill
Maxim Engineers, Inc. Reviewed by:
Inc.-Jeff Hawkins