River Ridge Add-LR 940217 2575 Lone Star Drive · P.O. Box 224227 · Dallas, Texas 75222
(214) 631-2700 / FAX (214) 920-1891
REPORT OF
IN-PLACE DENSITY
CMENT: ESR, Inc.
Attn: Bobby Rollings
P.O. Box 796303
Dallas, TX 75379-6303 CLIENT NO.: 3452351
REPORT NO.: 95704
PROJECT: River Ridge Addition DATE OF SERVICE: 2/11/94
Coppell, Texas AUTHORIZA]]ON:
REPORT DATE: 2/17/94
SERVICES: Perform in-place density and moisture content tests to determine the degree
of field compaction.
PROJECT DATA MOISTUREK)ENSITY RELATIONS
CONTRACTOR: Parco OPTIMUM MAXIMUM
MATERIALS MOISTURE % DENSITY 0cf
TEST OF: Haul Material Dark brown shaley clay 20.5 103.0
METHOD OF TEST:
DENSrTY: ASTM D 2922 SPECIFICATION
MOISTURE: ASTM D 3017 DENSITY: 95% MIN. DENSITY MOISTURE: NONE
REPORT OF TESTS
FIELD OPTIMUM FIELD MAXIMUM
TEST MOISTURE MOISTURE DENSrPt' DENSITY DENSITY
NO LOCATION (~ (%) (PR (Pcfl (% mw)
1. Second lift fill areas,
center 22.5 20.5 102.1 103.0 99
2. Second lift fill area,
east end 23.5 20.5 99.1 103.0 96
3. Second lift fill area,
west end 19.2 20.5 101.6 103.0 99
Test results on this report meet project
specifications as noted above.
Technician: Vince Mosakowski
Report Distribution:
(1) RBR, Inc. Southwestern Laboratori~-~nc.
(1) CCl~ Engineering
(1) Parco Utilities, Inc. ·
(1) City of Coppe[[ F. King Coo~c, P.E.
~111r I .e~ers a..nd reports .are. f..or the .excl.uslve use ofthe client.to whom they are addressed and shall not be reproduced except In
1007 JM ~u~ w~nout zne approvm oT tne testing3 laboratory ine use o~ our name must receve our w~ten aDoroval. O(Jr letters and reports
apply oniy to the sample tested and/Or Inspecteid, and are not Indicative of the quant/ties of apparently Iclenflcal or similar produ~s.
2575 Lone Star Drive · P.O. Box 224227 · Dallas, Texas 75222
(214) 631-2700 / FAX (214) S20-1891
REPORT OF
IN-PLACE DENSITY
CMENT: R~R, Inc.
Attn: Bobby Rollings
P.O. Box 796303
Dallas, TX 75379-6303 CLIENT NO.: 3452351
REPORT NO.: 95364
PROJECT: River Ridge Addition DATE OF SERVICE: 2/08/94
Coppell, Texas AUTHORIZATION: John
REPORT DATE: 2/17/94
SERVICES: Perform in-place density and moisture content tests to determine the degree
of field compaction.
PROJECT DATA MOISTURE/DENSITY RELATIONS
CONTRACTOR: ?arco OPTIMUM MAXIMUM
MATERIALS MOISTURE % DENSITY pcf
TEST OF: 8" Sanitary Sewer 94906-See remarks 16.5 111.5
94503-See remarks 18.5 103.5
METHOD OF TEST:
DENSITY: ASTM D 2922 SPECIFICATION
MOISTURE: ASTM D 3017 DENSITY: 95% MIN. DENSITY MOISTURE: NONE
REPORT OF TESTS
FIELD OPTIMUM FIELD MAXIMUM
TEST MOISTURE MOISTURE DENSITY DENSITY DENSITY
NO LOCATION (%) ~} (PR (Pc~ ~ max}
1. Line A, station 4+00,
3 ft. below surface 17.6 16.5 109.9 111.5 99
2. Line A, staiton 5+00,
3 ft. below surface 17.2 16.5 110.3 111.5 99
3. Line A, station 6+20,
3 ft. below surface 23.3 18.5 99.7 103.5 96
4. Line A, station 7+20,
2 ft. below surface 21.1 18.5 98.1 103.5 95
Report Of Tests Continued On Page 2
Our letters and reports are for the exclusive use of the client to whom they are addressed and shall not be reproduced except in
1007 JM full wtl~cut the aporoval of the testing laboratory. The use of our name must rece ve our written aporova Our etters and reports
apply oniy to the 5ample tested and/or inspecte~:l, and are not indicative of the quantities of apparently identical or similar products.
RBR, Inc. REPORT NO. 95364
CLIENT NO. 3452351 PAGE 2
DATE OF SERVICE: 2/08/94
REPORT OF TESTS ¢C~tinu~)
FIELD OPTIMUM FIELD MAXIMUM
TEST MOISTURE MOISTURE DENSITY DENSITY DENSITY
NO LOCATION (%1 [%) (Pcf} (Pc'f) [% max)
5. Line A, station 9+00,
3 ft. below surface 20.1 18.5 104.9 103.5 101
6. Line A, station 10+20,
2.5 ft. below surface 19.0 16.5 107.3 111.5 96
Test results on this report meet project
specifications as noted on page 1.
Technician: Terry Smith, CET
Report Distribution:
(1) Ram, ]nc. Southwestern~c.~
(1) CCM Engineering
(1) Parco Utilities, [nc.
(1) City of Coppe[[ F.,-King cook,~P.E.
.Oq..r letters and reports are for the exclusive use of the cent to whom they are addressed and shall not be reproduced except In
1007 JM ~ull vv~thout the approval of the testing laboratory. The use of our name must receive our written al~proval OiJr letters and rel3orts
a[~ply only to the sample tested and/or inspected, and are not Indicative of the quant~ es of apparently identical or similar products.