Riverview Estates-SY 970106Prepared for:
~IFFINF. S & PARTNER, INC.
Dallas, Texas
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
PROPOSED SUBDIVISION
SANDY LAKE AT RIVERCHASE
COPPELL, TEXAS
Prepared by:
MAXIM TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
2575 Lone Star Drive
P.O. BOX 224227
Dallas, Texas 75222
(214) 631-2700
Report Na 0902604637
January 6, 1997
TECHNOLOGIES INC
~uar~ 6, 1997
Mr. Donald B. Huffines
Huffmes & Partner, Inc.
8222 Douglas Avenue, Suite 660
Dallas, Texas 75225
Re:
Preliminary Geotecimical Investigation
Proposed Subdivision
Sandy Lake At Riven:ha-se
Coppell, Texas
Maxim Report No. 0902604637
Gentlemen:
This report presents the results of our preliminary geotechnical investigation at this site and
provides recommendations for design of post-tensioned residential foundations for the proposed
subdivision.
Project Information
The project site is located on the south side of Sandy Lake Road in Coppell, Texas. The
proposed subdivision will consist of 67 one-two story residential structures and two retail
buildings on an approximate 20 acre tract. We understood that the site hms been filled over the
years under the direction and supervision of Kimbrel Excavation Company, Density tests
performed in 1991 on previous shallow fill soils indicated generally accep~le compaction levels
in most areas. Inadequate compaction levels were detected in some areas during the 1991 field
testing. It is understood that the under-compacted areas were re-worked and compacted prior
~o recent additional fill placement by Kimbrel Excavation Company.
Subsurface Conditions
A total of 5 deep borings were drilled and sampled at the site to 20 foot depths on October 10,
1996 for preliminary residential foundation design (Borings B-1 through B-5). In addition, one
sample boring waz drilled and sampled at each residential lot to investigate the fill and natural
subgrade compaction. Three shallow borings were also drilled and sampled on the retail space
along Sandy Lake Road. The boring location diagram is presented on Figure 1. Detailed
1850 Interstate 10S · P.O. Box 5296 · Beaumont, Texas 77726-5296 · 409/842-0414 · FAX 409/842-3949
Asteco · Austin Research Engineers · Chert-Northern · Empire Soils Investigations · Kansas City Testing
Maxim Engineers · Nebraska Testing · Patzig Testing · Southwestern Laboratories · Thomas-Hartig · Twin City Testing
}~r. Donald B. Huffines
Huffines & Partner, Inc.
Maxim Report No. 0902604637
January 6, 1997
Page 2
descriptions of the subsurface conditions encountered at the five deep borings B-1 through B-5
are presented on the Logs of Boring, Figures 2 through 6. Results of compaction tests
performed on representative samples of the fill soils are indicated on Figure 7. The results of
all moisture and density tests performed at each lot are reported in the Appendix.
Generally, fill materials consisting of clay and sandy clay with gravel and sand are present to
depths of 1 to 7 feet. The fill soils are underlain by natural soils consisting of various clays and
sandy clays containing sand seams. A sand layer with large gravel was present below the
natural clay in Boring B-2 at a depth of 15 feet and extended to the top of the dark gray shale.
The dark gray shale was encountered in Boring B-1 below the natural clay soils. Borings B-1
and B-2 were terminated in the d~rk gray shale at a depth of 20 feet.
Penetrometer compressive strength determinations along with moisture content and density tests
were performed on each soil sample during examination and classification. Based on these
results, the fill soils range from stiff to hard and are compact. Average compaction levels of
the fill materials for each lot range fromm90 to 100 percent of Stand_ard FIarvard density.
The clays and sandy clays encountered in the five deep borings exhibited liquid limits of 39 to
71 percent, plastic limits of 18 to 25 percent and plasticity indices of 21 to ,$6. Generally, the
clays and sandy clays ~re moderately to highly active and are subjected to volume changes with
respect to moisture changes. The on-site surficial clay soils were generally moist at the time of
this investigation. The moist condition indicates that the surficial clays and sandy clays have a
slight to moderate swell potential at this time.
Monolithic Slab-on-Grade Foundation System
We understood that post-tensioned slab-on-grade foundation systems are planned for the
residential buildings. The foundation systems must be properly designed and constructed to
resist and/or tolerate some moisture induced movements without inducing unacceptable
differential movements and distress to the foundation or structure.
The subsurface exploration revealed the presence of soils with moderate to high shrink/swell
potential within the zone of seasonal moisture change at the study area. For preliminary de. sigh,
.Mr. Donald B. Huffines
Huffmes & Partner, Inc.
Maxim Report No. 0902604637
~fanuary 6, 1997
Page 3
the Potential Vertical Rise (PVR) is estimated to range from 2.5 inches for a moist condition to
3.5 inches for an assumed 'dry* condition to a depth of seven (7) feet.
Soil movements due to moisture induced soil volume changes will tend to occur differentially
between the lightly loaded interior portions of the slabs and the more heavily loaded perimeter
grade beams. Grade beams supported on the on site soils may be designed using a maximum
allowable bearing capacity of 1,500 pounds per square foot. Grade beams should extend a
minimum of 12 inches below finish grade and be supported on natural soils or properly
compacted fill.
A vapor barrier should be provided beneath those portions of slabs-on-grade which are to be
covered, carpeted, or sealed.
Post-Tensioninp Desitin Parameters
Design criteria for a slab designed in accordance with the Post-Tensioning Institute's (PTI) slab-
on-grade design method have been developed. The PTI computer program (VOLFLO) was used
to derive the estimated PTI differential movements
The edge moisture variation distances (e.) for center lift and edge lift conditions were derived
based on a Thornthwaite Index ranging from -lO to 0 for the project site. The edge moisture
variation distances are provided below based upon the PTI Manual criteria.
Center Lift Condition
e~ - 5.5 feet
Edge lift Condition
e~ --- 4.2 feet
PTI differential movement (y~) for the soil conditions encountered in the boring were estimated
based on a *dry* constant suction value pF = 4.2. The estimated PTi differential movements
(yin) are provided below.
Mr. Donald B. Huffines
Ituffines & Partner, Inc.
Maxim Report No. 0902604637
January 6, 1997
Page 4
Design PVR = 3.5 inches
Center Lift Condition
y. -- 3.0 inches
Edge lift Condition
y= = 1.9 inches
The Post-Tensioning Institute (PTI) method incorporates numerous design assumptions associated
with the derivation of required variables n__eeded to determine the soil design criteria. The PTI
method of predicting differential soil movement is applicable only when site moisture conditions
are controlled by the climate alone on well graded lots (i.e. no improper drainage, water leaks
or free water sources). Under these conditions, moisture increases within the supporting soils
and the resulting differential foundation movements are much lower than upward movements that
can occur due to post-eonsu'uction movements mused by free water sources near or beneath the
residence. The performance of a slab foundation can be significantly influenced by yard
maintenance, recessed landscaping additions near the residence, water line leaks and any other
free water sources, and deep rooted trees and shrubs. Measurements to minimize these types
of conditions are provided in the Appendix.
Bui]dln= Pad Prevaration
Existing fills are present at the residential lots. The building pads should be proof roiled to
identify any soft areas which may exist. After proof rolling and recompaction of any soft areas
identified, clay subgrade areas should be scarified to a depth of 6 inches and recompacted to a
minimum density of 95 percent and moisture content in the range of +2 to +5 percent above
the optimum moisture content. Any fill placed above grade using the on-site clays should be
placed in 8 inch lifts and compacted as specified herein.
Mr. Donald B. Huffmes
Huffines & Partner, Inc.
Maxim Report No. 0902604637
Jantlary 6, 1997
Page 5
It has been a pleasure to perform this work for you.
can be of further assistance, please call on us.
Sincerely,
MAXIM TECltNOLOGIES, INC.
Geotechnical Division
Mark J. Farrow, P.E.
Manager, Geotechnical Division
If, during the course of this project, we
TECHNOLO(~IES INC
January 6, 1997
Mr. Donald Huffines
Huffines & Partners, Inc.
8222 Douglas Avenue, Suite 660
Dallas, Texas 75225
Re:
79G Letter
Sandy Lake at Riverchase
Coppell, Texas
Maxim Project No. 0902604637
Dear Gentlemen:
Submitted herewith is a letter requested by Mr. Donald Huffmes with Huffines & Partners, Inc.,
regarding thc results of moisture/density tests performed for the project referenced above. The
lots within the referenced subdivision that are included in this 79G letter are indicated on the
attached Figure 1.
The testing for the specified lots occurred during November and December, 1996. All testing
was performed after all fill was in place and the lots had been rough graded to near final grade
by Kimbrel Excavation Company. The testing program was performed in order to form opinions
regarding the contractor's general compliance with the project plans and specifications. The
results do not constitute a guarantee or warranty of the contractor's work. The earthwork that
was observed and tested by us included the following:
· Verification that thc fill soils are free from excessive organics, deleterious materials and
rocks greater than six inches maximum dimension. Based on the types of soils used as
fill material on the project site, the following in place dry density requirements were used
for compacted fill:
· In-Place Density: At least 90 percent of the maximum dry density as
determined by the Standard Harvard Compaction Test.
2575 LONE STAR DR - P.O. BOX 224227 ' DALLAS, TX 75222 ' (214)631-2700 ' FAX(214)920-1818
Austin Research Engineers - Chen-Northern . Empire Soils Investigations
Kansas City Testing . Southwestern Laboratories · Twin City Testing
Idx. Donald Huffines
b~m~'), 6, 1997
Report No. 0902604637
Page 2
Placement of compacted fill was not monitored by a representative of Maxim Technologies, Inc.
Moisture/density tests were performed by Maxim on each lot for the entire filled depth after all
fill was in place and the lots had been rough graded to near final grade by Kimbrel Excavation
Company.
Based on the information developed from our field observations and testing and to the best of
our knowledge, we conclude that the earthwork at the subject lots that was tested by Maxim
Technologies is in substantial accord with the specifications indicated above.
We Ixust this information is sufficiently detailed for your needs. We appreciate the opportunity
to be of continued service. If we may be of further service, please contact our office.
Sincerely,
MAXIM TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Mark I. Faffow, P.E.
Manager of Geotechnical Services
SANDY LAKE ROAD
~R-17
R-1
SCALE: 1" = 200'
NOTE: BORING LOCATIONS ARE
APPROXIMATE.
PLAN OF BORINGS
8ANDY LAKE AT RIVERCHASE
COPPELL, TEXAS
HUFFINES AND PARTNERS
96-4037 FIGURE I
LOG OF BORING NO. B- 1
PROJECT: HUF~NES PROJECT SHEET I o! 1
CUENT: HUFFINES LOCATION: SEE FIGURE 1
COPPELL, TEXAS
DATE: 10110196 SURFACE ELEV:
FIELD DATA I LABORATORY DATA DRILLING METHOD(S): BORING ADVANCED USING
AIR ROTARY DRILLING EQUIPMENT
~ ~: ~ "; GROUNDWATER INFORMATION: Gwoundwater
~"' ~ ~ ~_ ~ ~ ..~ '~';S ~ ~ seep,g, encount.red ,t 14' during drifting. W,tM at
¢3 ~o ~ ~ u - ~ DESCRIPTION OF STRATUM
P-3.5 14 115 Tan and brown SILTY to SANDY CLAY (FILL)
~ P=.2.4 19 108 64 24 40 3.9 11.2
P,-2.4 2O 107 T~n ~nd light gray SILTY CLAY {FILL)
P-2.6 1S 108 4.0
P-2.7 Olive greyish brown moiet CLAY, firm with smd
- $ ~ P=2.25 23 53 21 32
P-3.75 Olive brown .andy c~y
- 10 - -with llm~tone
13.0
Orangish brown SANDY CLAY, wet with medium
~ ~ gr~ve~
I
r~. 15-
GRAY SHALE levered with ,and ,em'n.
~--~ I P-4.5+ 20.0
I
'--- - 20
25 '
)1~ ~ ~ I~1 )~ I~ .... REMARKS:
THO NO
TUIE AUGER II~rr' ROC3( CONE
~_~.M PI.E ~e-~-M ~"~E ~'OON CORE FEN. RECOt/ERY
64637 FIGURE 2
LOG OF BORING NO. B- 2
PROJECT: HUFFINES PROJECT SHEET I of 1
CLIENT: HUFFINES LOCATION: SEE FIGURE 1
COPPELL, TEXAS
DATE: 10110196 SURFACE ELEV:
FIELD DATA LABORATORY DATA DRILLING METHOD{S): BORING ADVANCED USING
AIR ROTARY DRILUNG EQUIPMENT
z · ~ GROUNDWATER INFORMATION: G~oundwater
:~ IZ _-~ seepege et 15' during drilling. Bodng dry at
~ z = "' completion. Water at 13,5' after 24 hours.
z ~: ~' ;~ o~- ~ ~ ~ c). '< < DESCRIPTION OF STRATUM
I P-4.0 2e 102 D~rk olive brown to tm CLAY and SILTY CLAY (FILJJ
P-2.5 30 97 71 25 46 4.1 3.4
P- 1..9 27 97
P-3.2 27 99 4.0
P-4.5 + Brown SANDY CLAYS
-with lam® lime~ton® fmgmentl -
:5 - P-4.5+
Dirk gmyi~h brown CLAY with orange
~' P-4.5 26 61 25 36
·. · Orange brown coerse SAND, wet with large grave~
~ -- 20 T..¢~_76 ~Derk grly SHALE with .end -e~m$ 2~.
TtJl~ AUOIR I~UT, ROCK '~4D NO
CO~
8AMfftJE ~AMIq. E IFC)ON CORE F"EN. RECOVEffY
64637 FIGURE 3
LOG OF BORING NO. B-3.
PROJECT: HUFFINES PROJECT SHEET I of 1
CLIENT: HUFFINES LOCATION: SEE FIGURE 1
COPPELL, TEXAS
DATE: 10110196 SURFACE ELEV:
FIELD DATA LABORATORY DATA DRILLING METHOD(S): BORING ADVANCED USING
AIR ROTARY DRILUNG EQUIPMENT
z . .~. ~ ~ GROUNDWATER INFORMATION: Seepage
. = completion. Water at 12' after 24 hours.
= m ~ ~: ~' :! = ~. .~ < DESCRIPTION OF STRATUM
.~ P,. 3.5 l e 112 Yellowish light brown SILTY to SANDY ClAY {FILL}
~,~' P-3.0 23 100 4.6 19.0
.~ P,,3.9 23 99
-~- '1 P-,3.9 22 lo6 49 20 29 Tm md gr.y SILTY to SANDY ClAY (FILL)
- S -- P-2.3 23 103 6.0
. ! P - 2.75 Gmyith brown ClAY
"-15 -with sand seam.
· ru~E AUGER ~1.ff- RIX:~ THO NO
~,AMIILE ~AMI"'LE 8/lOON CORE lIEN. RECOVERY __
64637 FIGURE 4
LOG OF BORING NO. B- 4
PROJECT: HUFF]NES PROJECT SHEET 1 of 1
CUENT: HUFFINES LOCATION: SEE FIGURE 1
COPPELL, TEXAS
DATE: 10110196 SURFACE ELEV:
FIELD DATA I LABORATORY DATA DRILUNG METHOD{S): BORING ADVANCED USING
AIR ROTARY DRILUNG EQUIPMENT
~: - GROUNDWATER INFORMATION: No groundwater
~ ;~ i~ ' ~ ;; ~ i~ see;Igeencounteredwh#ed.g. Bo~ngdryst
~¢3 = ~:~'*' ~ 3: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~o, .<. < DESCRIPTION OF STRATUM
P,,3.5 29 lO0 Yeilowi~h light' brown SILTY CLAY (FILl.)
' 1 P-3.5 30 96 55 22 33 5.3 7.3 D~k greyi~h brown CLAYS with sand. I'~neetone
pebbles and graveh~ (FILL}
~ P-4.5+ 19 lOe
~ P-4.5+ 18 10g
~ 5 .- P"3'O 25
' P =, 4.5 + D~k groyi~h brown =~;;; n~o';;t CLAYS
10 -with ltrn~tono fr~gm~mt~
'rIJM AUGER ~4qJT- ROC3( CONE
~.MI~E ~,MI%E ~.~O;; CORE ~N. RECOVERY
64637 FIGURE 5
LOG OF BORING NO. B- 5
~ROJECT: HUFFINES PROJECT SHEET I of 1
CLIENT: HUFFINES LOCATION: SEE FIGURE 1
COPPELL, TEXAS
OATE: 10110196 SURFACE ELEV:
FIELD DATA LABORATORY DATA DRILUNG ML~rHOD(S): BORING ADVANCED USING
MR ROTARY DRILLING EQUIPMENT
o ~: >~ ~ ~, GROUNDWATER INFORMATION:
o~ ~" := ~ ~ 50 -~ ~ ~o "- ~ DESCRIPTION OF STRATUM
.~, P-4.5 + 13 112 Brown ~nd tan SANDY CLAY (FLU.)
.~' P-4.5+ 14 117 39 18 21
.~ P-4.25 15 117
!'i ' P-I.6 23 104 Ten and brown SILTY ClAY (FILl.)
- P-.4.5 + 2;3 107
- 5 -- Olive gr~yi~h brawn CLAYS
P,,,4.6 +
~ ' P-4.$ 10 60 221 28 : 10.0
I
2 - 10 ! Greyish brown SANDY CLAY
1 $ ' -very moist end sandy with light gray stringers
TU~E AUO~R ~'1'- ROCK ~ID HO
CONE RECOVERY
64637 FIGURE 6
COMPACTION TEST SUMMARY
(Maxim Report No. 96-4637)
Moisture-Density Relations
Standard Harvard Compaction Method
A 1~.5 18.5
B 107.5 18.5
C 1~.0 18.0
D 110.5 16.5
G 95.3 23.0
H ~.9 26.0
I 93.1 25.9
Soil Description:
A
B
C
D
E
F
H
I
Dark gray and brown sandy clay
Dark brown and gray mmdy clay
Tan and light gray silty clay
Tan and brown sandy clay
Compact sand fill
Natural clay subgrade soil
Yellowish brown clay
Dark grayish brown clay
Dark brown clay
Figure 7
APPENDIX
Moisture and Density Results
on Existing Residential Lot Fills
! ! ! I I ! I I I
DENSITY TEST SUMMARY
(Maxim Report No. 96-4637)
~ :<~ ~.:~<:'============================================ ............. ~ ................... ~ ..................... ~ ...........
B-I 0-1 3,5 115 14 D 104
2-3 2.4 1~ 20 C 101
34 2,6 10g 15 C 102
4-5 2,7 - - F -
Avenge Com~cfion ~vel of Fill
B-2 0-1 4.0 1~ 26 B/H
1-2 2.5 97 30 C 92
2-3 1.9 97 27 C 92
34 3.2 ~ 27 C 93
4-5 4.5~ -
~ Avenge Come.on ~vel of Fill 94
I
! ! ! I I ! I I I I :
DENSITY TEST SUMMARY
(Maxim Report No. 96-4637)
1-2
2-3 3.9 ~9 23 C 93
3-4 2.6 104 21 C 98
4-5 3.9 105 22 D 95
5-6 2.3 103 23 C 97
6-? 2.8 -
Average Compaction Level of Fill 96
B-4 0-1 3.5 101 29 C 94
1-2 3.5 96 30 MH 96
2-3 4.5-1- 106 19' B 99
3-4 4.5+ 109 18 B 101
4-5 3.0 106 25 A I00
5-6 3.4 105 25 D 95
6-7 4.5+ -
Average Compaction Level of Fill 98
DENSITY TEST SUMMARY
0Vfaxim Report No. 96-4637)
B-5
P-6
0-1
I-2
2-3
3-4
4-5
5-6
0-1
1-2
2-3
3-4
4-5
5-6
6-7
4.5+
4.5
4.5+
2.6
4.5+
4.5+
112 13 D
117 14 D
117 15 D
104 23 C
107 23 C
- F
Average Compaction Level of Fill
4.5+ 107 21 C
2.7 103 26 C
4.5+ 113 21
114 16
4.5+
4.5+
4.5+
4.0
117
108
12
17
Average Compaction Level of Fill
D
D
D
D
F
101
106
106
98
101
102
101
97
102
103
106
98
101
I I I I I I I I I I
DENSITY TEST SUMMARY
(Maxim Report No. 96-4637)
P-7 0-1 0.9 91 33 CIG , ,, 90
1-2 1.6 94 28 C/G 93
2-3 1.9 95 27 C/G 94
3-4 4.5 + 116 16 D 105
4-5 4.5 + 114 15 D 103
5-6 4.5+ 112 16 D 101
7~8 3.5 . - F
Average Compaction Level of Fill 98
P-8 0-I 2.9 94 31 A/H 94
1-2 2.0 95 29 A/H 95
2-3 4.0 107 20 D 97
3-4 4.5+ 98 14 A 92
4-5 4.5 + 104 11 B 97
5-6 4.5 + 113 16 D 102
6-7 4.5+ -
· - Average Compaction Level of Fill 96
! ! I ! I I I I I I I
DENSITY TEST SUMMARY
(Maxim Report No. 96-4637)
~i~.......~.~ .................. ~:-~ ~ ~'~'::~'~
'~:~:"~"'~ ~::~:::::::~:~ l~ .......... ~.:~:~:......~.~.~ .......... ~:::.:.:::.~:~
P-9 ~ 1 4.5 · 1 ~ 20 C 98
1-2 3.9 1~ 22 C 94
2-3 4. I 1~ 21 D 96
3~ 4.5~ 118 15 D
4-5 4.5~ 98 12 C 92
5-6 4.5~ - F -
Average Compaction ~vel of Fill 97
P-10 0-1 1.5 91 33
1-2 3.4 ~ 30 A/H 97
2-3 4.0 ~ 30 C 93
34 4.5~ 99 24 C' 93
4-5 4.5~ - F -
Average Com~cfion ~vel of F~I 94
I
! ! ! 1 I I ! 1 I I
DENSITY TEST SUMMARY
(Maxim Report No. 96-4637)
P-I 1 0-1 4.0 117 16 D 106
1-2 4.5 118 15 D 107
2-3 4.5 + 112 18 D I01
3-4 4.5 + 110 19 D 100
4-5 1.9 I00 26 C 94
5-6 2.5 101 26 C 95
6-'7 4.5+ - - F
Average Compaction Level of Fill 101
P-12 0-1 3.3 93 31 G 97
1-2 2.5 96 28 CIG 95
2-3 3.0 100 21 C 94
3-4 4.3 102 25 B 95
4-5 2.9 99 28 C 93
5-6 2.5 97 31 C 92
6-7 - . - E -
7-8 4.5+ - F -
Average Compaction Level of Fill 94
! ! I ! ! ! I I I I !
DENSITY TEST SUMMARY
(Maxim Report No. 96-4637)
P-13 0-1 4.0 106 15 B 99
1-2 1.6 90 31 G 94
2-3 1.5 101 26 A 95
3-4 1.9 102 25 C 96
4-5 2,5 103 25 C 97
5-6 3.5 10'7 22 D 97
- F
6-7 4.5+ -
Average Compaction Level of Fill 96
P-14 0-1 3.8 97 26 A/H 97
I-2 1.7 93 30 C/G 92
2-3 2.8 113 20 D 102
3-4 3,6 112 19 D 101
4-5 4.5 + 107 19 D 97
5-6 3.9 104 24 C 98
6-7 4.3 . F
Average Compaction Level of Fill 97
! ! ! I ! ! I I I I I
DENSITY TF_~T SUMMARY
(Maxim Report No. 96-4637)
· '""'"':'"~':':':';:': ........... '~"'"~"" '":: ......... ~i :::::::::::::::::::::: ~:~::'"'~:'""~:~'~:: ~'":::~:: ~:::":~ ':: "~':~::'~""~:'¥::::::: ~':'~::::":~:::: ': ....................... .............. ~:'
................... :v:.~i:': ":~.<i~"~'"'"~''' "'~i'' '"~:~:~'!::~ :~: ~.~$? :' '~ '~ ====================== ::: '":":":':'::':" ' :::::::::¥:::::'
:::::::::::::::::::::::: ............ ..~,~....~.~....:::.,~:~: ~:.:~,,:~:~.:.~ ~.~:.~ ........... ~:~::~ ...~.:.~,...~.,,~.~¥.¥.~:::. ................................................... ~ .............................. :: ..........
::~i~?=~::~:~...~t~::::.,~.~..:~ ~..,....-..~=.~:.~.~.:~:~?.-~:~,~:-~:~..::. ;.=--.~ .................................... : ................ L:::. ................... . ............................. .:
~...:*:...~:~::?::~:~:~:~:~*~..~.~:...:~:~.~:?~?~:~.~:.:....:~:~:~::~ ~i~iii~'e~i~ii~iliiii! ................................. ~.~::.:~:::.~ ................ ~.~.: ..-..,:~..,.:..,~::.:~ ........ ~gon~.~-~ ..................................................................................
li~!~i~-...?-..~....::~i!i??ii~i~!:~:?::~?~:.~ ...........................................................................
?-15 0-1 4.5-1- 110 15 D 100
1-2. 4.5 + 102 12 C 96
2-3 2.6 98 27 A 92
3-4 2.8 103 24 C 97
- F
4-5 4.5-t-
i Average Compaction Level of Fill 96
R-16 0-1 4.5-1- 113 18 D 102
1-2 4.5-F 113 ,' 18 D 102
2-3 3.5 112 18 D I01
3.4 2.3 109 20 D 99
4-5 2.3 106 22 D 96
5-6 3.3 - F
Average Compaction Level of Fill 100
I I ! ! I I ! I I I
DENSITY TEST SUMMARY
(Maxim Report No. 96-4637)
R-17
R-t8
0-1
1-2
2-3
0-1
1-2
2-3
3-4
4.0 114 19
2.8 115 17
4.5+ '
Average Compaction Level of Fill
3.0 100 28
3.6 100 27
4.5 + 105 18
4.5+ '
Average Compaction Level of Fill
D
D
F
A
C
C
F
103
104
104
94
94
96
DENSITY TEST SUMMARY
(Maxim Report No. 96-4637)
L-1 0-1 1.5 99 24 C 93
1-2 3.6 99 23 A 93
2-3 3.9 97 '25 G 96
3-4 3.1 108 20 C 102
4-4.5 4.5 104 21 C 98
- F
4.5-5 4.5+ -
Average Compaction Level of Fill 96
L-2 0-1 2.9 93 29 H 100
1-2 2.0 99 25 B 92
2-3 2.6 101 23 , C 95
3-4 2.8 98 28 C/G 97
4-5 3.0 97 24 C/G 96
5_6 -
Average Compaction Level of Fill 95
DENSITY TEST SUMMARY
(Maxim Report No. 96-4637)
L-3
L-5
0-1
1-2
2-3
3-4
4-5
5-6
0-1
1-2
2-3
3-4
4-5
5-6
1.3
1.5
2.6
1.5
2.8
97
100
101
112
98
27
25
25
25
24
Average Compaction Level of Fill
3.0
1.0
1.1
1.8
2.6
94
93
97
98
96
28
29
26
27
26
Average Compaction Level of Fill
C
C
DIG
D
B/H
F
H
A/H
B/I
A
CIG
F
92
94
98
101
98
96
101
93
96
92
95
95
DENSITY TEST SUMMARY
(Maxim Report No. 96-4637)
:::::::::::::::::::::::: "~'~' ............
~?:~L~.::' ' :, ::.~.:..::~li~.ii.~::.::::i.' 'i'"'~::ii~i~iii~
~:~:~i~i~:.~ii~:~:~:::a~;~:~.~.:aa:~: · .... ~:~ ,. ¥~ ~.;:~ :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
L-6 0-1 1.1 92 31 B/I 92
1-2 1.4 111
2-3
3~ 3.0 101 ~ C 95
4-5 2.4 89 28 I 96
5_6 -
Avenge Compaction Mvel of Fill 97
L-7 0-1 1.3 95 28 C/G 94
1-2 1.9 113 18 D
2-3 1.1
3~ 1.3 97 28 C
4-5 2.4 92 27' G 97
5-6 - - F
Avenge Com~ction Mvel of Fill 97
DENSITY TEST SUMMARY
(Maxim Report No. 96-4637)
L-8 0-1 1.6 108 19 D 98
1-2 3.6 104 20 D 94
2-3 1.3 104 24 D 94
3-4 3.4 104 22 D 94
. F
4.5 -
Average Compaction Level of Fill 95
L-10 0-1 2.0 97 27 C/G 96
1-2 1.7 97 25 C 92
2-3 3.3 103 23 C 97
3-4 3.8 97 25 G I01
4-5 2.0 98 24 C 92
5.6 -
Average Compaction Level of Fill 96
I I I I I I I ! I I
DENSITY TEST SUMMARY
(Maxim Report No. 96-4637)
i.:.:<.:-:.-.:.:.:.:.i~'~.:.:.:~.:.'.:..~.~.'..~:.:-:.:.:-:.:-.~J.... !~<':'-'.:.~.>.'- :~,~ .:~-"-~i~:~: "':"".::-~:'~i~i::~ ::::'.~::::::::~i::;::~:*~'::~:~:~?).ii:~:i*i:~:!:i::':::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: . =============================
L-11 0-1 1.5 98 26 C 92
1'2 1.6 96 26 B/I 96
2-3 1.6 96 25 B/I 96
3-4 3.5 105 1'7 D 95
4-5 4.5 + 102 17 D 92
-. F
5_6 -
Average Compaction Level of Fill 94
L-12 0-1 1.5 102 24 D 92
1-2 2.3 99 25 B 92
3--4 _ F
Average Compaction Level of Fill 92
L-13 0-1 1.5 90 32 I 96
1-2 1.5 84 37 H 90
2-3 1.0 80 34 H 90
3-4 1.5 96 26 B/I 96
4-5 4.5 110 20 B 102
= F
5-6 - -
Average Compaction Level of Fill 95
I
I ! ! ! I I I ! I !
DF.~NSlTY TF~T SUMMARY
(Maxim Report No. 96-463~
L-14 ~1 1.3 94 29 CIG 93
1-2 1.6 96 28 A/I 96
2-3 1.4 ~ 27 B 92
3-4 2.0 97 28 C 92
Average Compaction ~vel of Fill ~ 93
L-16 0-1 1.6 98 27 C 92
I-2 1.5 ~ 30 ~H 92
2-3 1.7 93 29 A/I 93
3-4 2.0 96 28 A/I 96
4-5 4.5+ 1~ 19 B 101
5~ - -
· · 94
I I I I 1 I
DENSITY TEST SUMMARY
(Maxim Report No. 96-4637)
L-I? 0-1 2.4 104 22 C 98
1-2 1.$ 95 29 A/H 95
2-3 4.5+ 94 23 B/I 93
3-4 3.5 107 17 B 100
4-5 - F -
Average Compaction Level of Fill 97
L-18 0-1 2.0 95 29 C/G 94
1-2 4.5 + 101 21 C 95
2-3 3.0 99 26 A 93
3-4 2.5 102 25 D 92
4-5 2.8 97 26 B/I 96
5_6 .... F -
Average Compaction Level of Fill 94
DENSITY TEST SUMMARY
(Maxim Report No. 96-4637)
L-I9 (gl 2.7 97 27 C 92
2-3 3.3 , 113 16 D 102
3-4 4.1 116 13 D 105
4-5 3.3 98 26 CIG 97
Average Compaction Level of Fill 99
L-20 (gl 2.3 108 20 D 98
1-2 2.8 102 23 D 92
2-3 3.5 96 27 C 100
3-4 3.5 99 26 CIG 98
Average Compaction Level of Fill 97
! I I I ! ! I I I I
DENSITY T~T SUMMARY
(Maxim Report No. 96-463'~
. ~i~!~i?:~i~??i:~'"' a~:?:: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
L-22 0-1 1.9 88 32 O 92
1-2 3.9 93 30 O 98
2-3 2.8 92 29 I 99
- F
3~ -
Average Compaction ~vel of Fill 98
L-23 0-I 1.6 93 31 G 98
. F
I-2 - -
Avenge Compaction ~vel of Fill 98 ,,,
L-24 0-1 3.1 1~ 26 C 96
1-2 3.0 93 30 H 98
2-3 1.6 97 26 C 92
3-4 1.6 92 30 G 97
- F
4-5 - '
Avenge Compaction Mvel of Fill 96
! ! ! I I I ! I I I I
DENSITY TEST .SUMMARY
(Maxim Report No. 96-4637)
.................. ,..,., .,..., ........ :~...:.~,.~.......,.~ .............................. ':~...~..~.;.....:.: ..................... ~......~::i~' ...." .~:.: :~: :.
L-25 0-1 1.4 102 22 B 95
1-2 1.9 97 26 B/I 96
2-3 1.3 93 26 B/H 93
3-4 1.9 93 29 G/G 92
4-5 3.0 95 25 I I00
5-6 - - F
Average Compaction Level of Fill 9:5
L-26 0-1 1.1 98 23 B 91
1_2 - _ F -
Average Compaction Level of Fill 9!
L-27 0-1 1.0 92 31 C/G 91
1-2 1.1 93 31 G/G 92
2-3 1.6 100 25 C 94
3-4 3.8 99 26 C 93
4_5 - _ . F -
t,, Average Compaction Level of Fill 93
! ! I I I I I I I I
DENSITY TEST SUMMARY
(Maxim Report NO. 964637)
t-2 98 c 92
_ F
3_4
Average Compaction Level of Fill 93
L-29 0-1 1.4 92 31 C/G 91
1-2 1.3 86 32 H 92
2.3 - F -
Average Compaction Level of Fill 91
L-31 0-1 2.0 101 24 D 91
1-2 1.4 95 27 C/G 94
2-3 1.1 95 26 C/G 94
3-4 2.3 111 25 B 103
4-5 2.5 103 22 D 93
5-6 4.3 112 16' D 101.
6-7 2.3 105 21 D 95
7-8 - '
Average Compaction Level of Fill 96
I 1 I I I I I I I I i
DENSITY TEST SUMMARY
(Maxim Report No. 96-4637)
L-32 0-1 1.4 97 27 C 92
1-2 2.:5 96 29 C/G 95
2-3 3.4 112 23 D 101
3-4 4.5 + 103 19 D 93
4-5 3.5 98 22 G 100
5-6 2.8 99 24 G/C 98
6-7 3.4 95 28 G 100
_ F
%8 -
Average Compaction Level of Fill 97
L-34 0-1 1.0 96 26 C 91
1-2 0.9 86 32 G 90
2-3 1.6 101 25 C 95
3-4 1.3 101 23 D 91
4_5 - F -
Average Compaction Level of Fill 92
I
! I I ! I ! I ~
DENSITY TEST SUMMARY
(Maxim Report No. 96-4637)
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ================================== ~?~i~:~.~:~h:~:~:~.:~'~:~:~:'--::!.:'..~!~:~i:!:!:i?!:!:!:i~i:~
L-35 0-1 1.4 99 26 C 93
1-2 4.4 110 20 B 102
- F
Average Compaction Level of Fill 98
L-37 0-1 2.3 103 23 D 93
1-2 1.5 99 27 D 90
2-3 2.3 104 22 D 94
3-4 3,3 104 22 D 94
4-5 . F
Average Compaction Level of Fill 93
L-38 0-1 2.4 102 25 C 96
1-2 2.1 99 25 B 92
2-3 2,5 103 23 B 96
3-4 2.9 106 22 C 100
- F
4-5 - '
Average Compaction Level of Fill 96
! ! I ! I ! I I
DENSITY TEST SUMMARY
(Maxim Report No. 96-4637)
~:::::!$.'.'.~:... '. .... <~:~+> ~ ,~:~:::!~i:!~gigi~: '~ ..:~:ii~ii:~:~i!~:: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
~:.:.:.:~.:.:.~ ............. ~ ................... :s
L-39 0-I 1.3 92 27 C 92
1-2 2.8 103 16 D 103
2-3 4.5 1~ 15 D
3-4 4.4 101 15 D 101
4_5 - . F -
Average Compaction ~vel of Fill
C-I 0-1 1.4 101 24 C 95
1-2 2.2 95 26 C 90
2-3 3.8 1~ 21 D 96
34 4.5+ 1~ 20 D 92
4-5 4.5+ 108 19 B
- W -
5_6 -
Avemg~ Com~ction ~vel of Fill 95
I ! ! I I
DENSITY TEST SUMMARY
(Maxim Report No. 96-4637)
C-2 0-1 2.1 ~ 25 B
1-2 2.5 1~ 23 C 96
2-3 3.5 106 21 D 96
3-4 4.5+ 1~ 18 D
4-5 4.5+ 97 15 C 92
Average Compaction ~v,l of Fill 95
C-3 0- I 4.5 + I05 20 D 95
1-2 3.8 10l 24 B 94
2_3 -
Average Compaction ~vel of Fill 94
C-4 0-1 1.0 98 25 C 92
2-3 4.4 112 14 D 101
3-4 4.5 + 103 21 C 97
4-5 4.5+ 110 14 B
5-6 - F
Avenge Compacfi?n ~vel of Fill
DENSITY TEST SUMMARY
(Maxim Report No. 96-4637)
C-5 0-1 4.4 124 13 D 112
1-2 3.3 108 20 D 98
2-3 3,4 107 1'7 D 9?
3-4 4.1 108 20 B 100
4-5 4.5+ 104 21 C 98
5-6 - . F -
Average Compaction Level of Fill ,. 101
C-6 0- I 3.9 115 15 D 104
1-2 3.4 112 18 B 104
2-3 4.0 111 16 D 100
3-4 3.3 104 21 D 94
4-5 4.1 100 25 B 93
5-6 - - F
Average Compaction Level of Fill 99
DENSITY TEST SUMMARY
(Maxim Report No. 96-4637)
C-7 0-1 3,1 106 22 D 96
1-2 1,6 96 28 B/H 95
2-3 4,1 106 21 C I00
3-4 3,8 103 22 B 96
4-5 4,5+ 102 19 C 96
5-6 F -
Average Compaction Level of Fill 96
C-8 0-1 2,6 99 25 A 93
1-2 1,5 97 27 A 91
2-3 1,8 101 23 B 94
3-4 3,0 104 23 B 97
4-5 3.4 107 18 B 100
5-6 - , . F -
Average Compaction I.~vel of Fill 95
I I I I I 1 I
DENSITY TEST SUMMARY
(Maxim Report NO. 96-463'0
iii~i~i~i:~tln'gi?~T '.:~:;:::.i::?:i!~i::::iii::i::i:ii:':iiii ~ii~:: i:::ii::ii~!~:::.~::~i::ii~!!~i~ ~::~:~:~:~::..`~.:~..~..~::~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~::::::~.~:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::~.:.:.:..~ :::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :~)~:~s~?~)~?~::~)~)::~:~s::~s~:~s:~*~:~.:~::~s:~s:~: s~s:~::::?;~s~s:~s?~s~ss~ssss~ ................ s~;~:s:s:~:s: ~?:::~)~?;~?~::~::?:~::~;~ ........... ~.:~. ............................
c-~ o-~ ~.~ ~ ~s c
~.~ ~.~ ~8 ~ c
- F
2-3 - '
Avenge Compaction ~vel of Fill
C-10 0-1 2.9 96 27 MH ,,. 95 ....
1-2 1.0 98 26 B 91
2-3 1.3 96 25 C 91
34 1.8 97 27 B/I 96
4-5 4.5 105 20 B 98
5-6 3.8 1~ 24 C 94
6-7 3.6 108 17 D 98
%8. - - F -
- Avenge Compaction ~vel of Fill 94
! I ! I I !
DENSITY TEST SUMMARY
(Maxim Report No. 96-4637)
....................I
C-Il 0-1 2.8 97 25 C 92
1-2 1.0 106 21 C 1~
2-3 4.0 113 17 C 107 ,
3-4 4.4 106 21 B 99
4.5 - . _ F -
Average Compaction ~vel of Fill 1~
C-12 0-1 0.7 88 32 G 92-
1-2 1.3 110 19 C 1~
2-3 2.3 105 20 C 99
3-4 2.0 111 19 C 105
4-5 3.6 105 20 B 98
5 -6 3.1 96 27 I 1 ~
6.7 - F -
Average Compaction ~vel of Fill 99
! I ! I 1 1 I I I
DENSITY TEST SUMMARY
(Maxim Report No. 96-4637)
C-13 0-I 1.6 88 31 H 94
I-2 1.1 97 27 C 92
2-3 1.9 94 27 G 99
3-4 2.8 103 22 C 97
4-5 3.1 111 20 C 105
5-6 3.3 - F
Average Compaction Level of Fill 97
C-14 0-1 3.3 94 29 I 100
1-2 2.1 104 23 C 98
2-3 4.3 103 22 C 97
3-4 3.9 102 23 C 96
4-5 4.5 + 113 16 D I00
5-6 4.3 114 18 D 100
6.7 -
Average Compaction Level of Fill 99
I ! I I I I I I I I
DENSITY TEST SUMMARY
(Maxim Report No. 96-4637)
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: '.;-~!.':~ ":".':i~i:~:i::.::.:~!~:'.':~:~:'i!
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
C-15 0-1 1.3 $7 35 H 93
1_2 F -
Average Compaction Level of Fill 93
C-16 0-1 1.5 91 31 G 96
1-2 3.1 108' 19 C 102
2-3 1.5 94 29 C/G 93
- F
3-4 - '
Average Compaction Level of Fill 96
C-17 0-1 0.9 88 34 G 92
I-2 2.9 106 20 D 96
2-3 4.0 120 14 D 109
3-4 3.3 115 15 D 104
4-5 1.6 110 18 C 104
5-6 4.5+ 10! 17 C 95
- F -
6-7 - -
Average Compaction Level of Fill . 99
I ! I I ! !
DENSITY TEST SUMMARY
(Maxim Report No. 964637)
0-18 0-1 0.8 ~ 32 I
1-2 1.4 107 20 D
2-3 1.8 92 31 H 99
4-5 2.8 97 22 B/I 96
5-6 4.5 + 93 19 B/I 92
~7 . F
Avenge Commotion ~vel of Fill
1-2 2.4 97 25 A/H 96
2-3 1.3 97 24 B/I 96
34 3.3 111 20 D
4-5 2,9 1~ 22 D 96
5-6 4.5 110 19 B
- F
Average Com~c~on ~vel of Fill
DENSITY TEST SUMMARY
(Maxim Report No. 96-4637)
~i~::i:i:::i:~:~:~!::.:~:::!:~ - ============================== '--.>~.~ .,. . .
C-21 0-1 2.6 93 29 I 100
1-2 2.8 102 25 C 96
2-3 2.9 114 18 D 100
3-4 1.9 104 23 C 98
4.5 - . F -
, Average Compaction Level of Fill 99
C-22 0-1 2.5 114 18 D 100
I-2 1.5 106 20 D 96
2-3 1.5 92 31 B/H 92
3-4 1.2 97 27 B 90
4-5 - _ _ F -
Average Compaction Level of Fill 94
DENSITY TEST SUMMARY
(Maxim Report No. 964637)
~?:::~::::::::::~?;~a~?:~ :....;.:::~ ........ -:.~-.-:.:,.:,,:,.~:,.: ~;a..~,-~.:.'~t~t~;: ................... '~ ............... ;:~-:t~'.';-"':~ ..... ~.-:-:';~u-~"~' ~.~:~ .......... ~-~ .......... ~::. ~ ......... :'~ ....... ~ ............................................... -~ ..............
~:~:~:~e~:~i~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~;~:~:~::~:~::. ~.~:~::::~:~;~::::~:~.:~:~::~:::::~ :.:.:.~:.:~.:~.:~i~?;.;:..~e,.:...:.:....-~ .......... .......~...~....~,~:~.~.:,: .......... c,. .........
C-23 0-1 1.3 ~ 27 C 103
1-2 2,0 1~ 25 C 94
2-3 3,1 101 26 C 95
3~ 3.1 94 30, O
- F
4.5 -
Avenge Compaction ~vel of Fill 97
C-24 0-1 2.8
1-2 2.4 98 27 C/G 97
2-3 3.5 112 18 D I~ ,,,
34 4.5+ 111 18 D
- F
4-5 - -
98
Avenge Com~c6on ~vel of Fill
DENSITY TEST SUMMARY
(Maxim Report No. 96-4637)
C-25 0-1 1.1 93 29 A/H 93
1-2 0.8 93 29 C/G 92
2-3 0.9 94 29 C/G 93
3-4 2.9 103 23 B 96
4_5 - _ F -
Average Compaction Level of Fill 93
C-26 0-1 1.3 95 29 B/I 94
1-2 3.4 93 ~3l G 98
2.3 - . F -
I Average Compaction Level of Fill 96