The URL can be used to link to this page

Stoneleigh P2-LR001128ALPHA TESTING, INC. 2209 WL~consin St., Suite 100 Do#os, Texos 75229 972/620-8911 - 972/263-4937 (Metro) FAX: 972/406-8023 November 28, 2000 SPRING VALLEY CONSTRUCTION 10950 Alder Circle Dallas, Texas 75238 Attention: Mr. Keller Webster Re: Lime Slurry and Water Pressure Injection STONELEIGH AT RIVERCHASE Buildings 14, 15 and 17 and Garages G-1 .B and G-1 .C Coppell, Texas ALPHA Report No. 00652-36 Submitted herewith are results of our analysis of lime slurry and water pressure injection conducted at the above referenced project. Our analysis consisted of sampling soils al~er lime slurry and water pressure injection to a depth of 7 fi and performing moisture content, pocket- penetrometer and absorption swell tests on representative samples. Sampling of the injected 'soils using test borings was performed on November 28, 2000. A total of 15 test borings (Borings 64-78) were performed at the approximate locations shown on Figure 1, the Boring Location Plan, to obtain samples of the injected soils for laboratory testing. Individual test results are presented on summary data sheets attached to this report. According to the project geotechnical report (re: ALPHA Report No. 98611 dated August 25, 1998), acceptance of lime slurry and water pressure injection should be based upon attaining an average free swell of 1 percent, or les~, from soils within the injected zone. Results of current moisture content tests (Figure 2) indicate the average moisture content of the injected soils at each boring location varies from about 20 to 27. Results of absorption swell tests conducted on samples from the injected zone indicate free swells ranging from about 0.1 to 2.8 percent and averaging about 0.7 percent. Based on results of current moisture content tests and absorption swell tests, it is our opinion the present fre6 swell within the injected soils in Buildings 14, 15 and 17 and Garages G-1.B and G-1.C conforms to the project criteria of I percent, or less. Therefore, it is recommended the lime slurry and water pressure injection at in Buildings 14, 15 and 17 and Garages G-1.B and G-1.C be accepted. Geo~ ~ · C~ Mate,.fa/s Tes/~ · ~ta/E~ · Consu#~g We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. If we can be of further assistance, please contact our office. _~';~ m' ~'~.~ Sincerely yours. f~/e' ~ Vi ~ ALPHA TESTING, INC. .I~'? ................... ~ ',~. ~___~.~llA~.~.~,,- ,/David A. Lewis. P.E. ~mm'- ~ M~ager of Engineering SPlices DAL/pc Attachments Copies: (3) Cliem (1) Jo~ D~ A.I.A. (3) City of Cop~ll SPRING VAT.T.k-'~ ~IC1~I BORING LOC.~TICIq~ ~, TI!iXAS BLI~ #14,15, & 17 ~, TI!:XAS 00652-36 11/28/00 MOISTURE CONTENT BORING It64 BORING 1165 BORING Ri6 DEPTH % MOIST. HAND PEN DEPTH % MOIST. HAND PEN DEPTH % MOIST. HAND PEN 0-1 28.8% 0.50 0-1 24.0% 0.00 0-1 35.0% 1.00 0-1 38.2% 0.50 0-1 24.7% 1.25 0-1 24.3% 1.25 1-2 15.5% 3.00 1-2 ' 19.1% 1.25 1-2 20.6% 1.75 1-2 14.0% 4.50 1-2 20.9% 1.00 1-2 18.4% 2.50 2-3 14.0% 2.00 2-3 18.2% 1.75 2-3 25.8% 2.00 2-3 18.9% 2.00 2-3 18.4% 1.75 2-3 22.8% 2.25 3-4 9.0% 2.00 :34 24.1% 2.25 3-4 20.9% 3.00 3-4 15.6% 2.50 3-4 19.6% 2.75 3-4 14.4% 2.50 4-5 25.9% 2.75 4-5 26.8% 1.00 4-5 13.2% 4.50 4-5 25.8% 1.75 4-5 18.8% 2.25 4-5 14.6% 4.50 5-6 22.9% 2.75 ,56 23.8% 1.00 5-6 28.8% 2.00 5-6 28.5% 2.25 5-6 25.2% 2.50 5-6 21.9% 2.00 6-7 24.3% 2.25 6-7 28.0% 3.75 6-7 21.1% 2.00 6-7 29.0% 2.50 6-7 26.3% 3.50 6-7 29.7% 2.00 Spring V~lley.,: ~ Construction Labora.,l~.est Data ~ Terns 2L~ 2 MOISTURE CONTENT BORING ~7 BORING ~ BORING t69 DEPTH % MOIST. HAND PEN DEPTH % MOIST. HAND PEN DEPTH % IdOIST. HAND PEN 0-1 25.1% 1.50 0-1 28.8% 0.50 0-1 21.7% 0.75 0-1 22.8% 1.00 0-1 18.8% 1.75 0-1 22.0% 1.25 1-2 18.8% 2.00 1-2 7.2% 4.5+ 1-2 23.0% 0.75 1-2 23.7% 1.50 1-2 19.7% 1.50 1-2 20.9% 1.00 2-3 19.5% 1.75 2-3 11.8% 3.50 2-3 14.3% 2.75 2-3 16.7%. 1.75 2-3 14,7% 4.5+ 2-3 24.2% 1.75 3-4 16,3% 3,50 3-4 21.1% 2,00 3-4 10.3% 4.5+ 3-4 21.2% 3,75 3-4 22.6% 3.00 3-4 14.4% 4.5+ 4-5 23.8% 2,50 4-5 1 3.4% 4.50 4-5 22.9% 4.5+ 4-5 23,7% 2,50 4-5 13,7% 4,5+ 4-5 20,8% 4,5+ 5-6 29.6% 2.00 5-6 25,6% 2,50 5-6 . 28,1% 3.00 5-6 23,7% 2',00 5-6 20,6% 3,50 5-6 29,3% 2.00 6-7 25,3% 2.75 6-7 28.1% 1.25 6-7 29,1% 1,50 6-7 13.5% 3,1)0 6-7 23,9% 1,00 6-7 22,7% 2.25 Spring Valley Construction i~ Test Data MOISTURE CONTENT BORING #70 BORING #71 BORING #72 DEPTH % MOIST. HAND PEN DEPTH % MOIST. HAND PEN DEPTH % MOIST. HAND PEN '0-1 22.6% 0.25 0-1 27.2% 0.50 0-1 24.0% 0.75 0-1 30.2% 0.25 0-1 28.9% 0.50 0-1 31.7% 0.75 1-2 24.8% 1.00 1-2. 27.5% 1.00 1-2 22.1% 0.75 1-2 19.7% 1.00 1-2 21.7% 1.75 1-2 26.1% 1.50 2-3 20.9% 0.75 2-3 23.6% 0.50 2-3 28.6% 1.25 2-3 18.9% 1.25 2-3 22.5% 1.25 2-3 25.8% 1.50 3-4 24.2% 0.75 3-4 16.1% 2.00 3-4 23.1% 2.50 3-4 21.1% 1.75 3-4 22.7% 3.50 3-4 23.7% 3.25 4-5 21.1% 4.00 4-5 15.5% 2.00 4-5 32.0% 1.75 4-5 22.9% 0.38 4-5 19.0% 3.25 4-5 28.9% 2.00 5-6 25.2% 4.50 5-6 22.8% 3.25 5-6 32.4% 2.75 5-6 20.9% 4.5+ 5-6 12.5% 4.5+ 5-6 29.2% 2.50 6-7 23.7% 2.00 6-7 17.9% 3.50 6-7 29.8% 2.25 6-7 33.3% 3.00 6-7 24.2% 3.75 6-7 27.2% 3.25 Spring Valley Construction Laboratory Test Data MOISTURE CONTENT BORING #73 BORING #74 BORING #75 DEPTH % MOI~I'. HAND PEN DEPTH % MOIST. HAND PEN DEPTH % MOIST. HAND PEN 0-1 23.1% 0.20 0-1 26.8% 0.75 0-1 24.3% 0.50 0-1 22.6% 0.25 0-1 19.9% 1.00 0-1 23.4% 1.00 1-2 23.0% 1.25 1-2 26.5% 0.75 1-2 28.9% 1.25 1-2 25.9% 2.00 1-2 19.3% 1.75 1-2 20.8% 1.75 2-3 25.6% 1.75 2-3 34.4% 0.75 2-3 25.6% 1.00 2-3 24.8% 2.25 2-3 23.2% 1.25 2-3 22.8% 1.50 3-4 22.8% 4.00 3-4 33.6% 0.75 3-4 27.7% 1.75 3-4 26.1% 2.50 3-4 27.2% 1.50 3-4 16.8% 2.25 4-5 24.5% 4.50 4-5 30.6% 2.50 4-5 25.0% 2.25 4-5 22.3% 4.50 4-5 29.3% 2.25 4-5 23.2% 2.50 5-6 26.8% 2.50 5-6 32.1% 2.00 5-6 19.7% 3.50 5-6 25.8% 1.50 5-6 22.5% 2.50 5-6 22.3% 4.50 6-7 26.3% 2.00 6-7 25.0% 1.00 6-7 28.1% 1.00 6-7 27.7% 2.25 6-7 28.6% 3.75 6-7 29.3% 1.75 Spring Valle]~ Construction Laboratory Test Data Dallas, Texas Figure 2 Stonelelgh At Riverchase MOISTURE CONTENT BORING #76 BORING #77 BORING #78 DEPTH % MOIST. HAND PEN DEPTH % MOIST. HAND PEN DEPTH % MOIST. HAND PEN 0-1 23.4% 1.00 0-1 25.7% 0.50 0-1 24.8% 0.00 0-1 20.7% 1.25 0-1 17.3% 1.25 0-1 24.8% 0.25 1-2 17.7% 2.00 1-2 24.5% 1.25 1-2 22.7% 1.00 1-2 18.6% 2.00 1-2 26.8% 2.00 1-2 16.3% 1.75 2-3 28.7% 1.25 2-3 27.6% 2.00 2-3 22.5% 1.50 2-3 23.4% 1.75 2-3 22.8% 4.50 2-3 22.1% 3.50 3-4 16.6% 3.00 3-4 19.6% 4.50 3-4 21.5% 4.00 3-4 17.8% 4.50 3-4 22.1% 2.50 3-4 20.1% 4.5+ 4-5 16.3% 2.75 4-5 21.2% 3.50 4-5 28.7% 2.25 4-5 18.3% 2.75 4-5 29.5% 1.50 4-5 24.5% 2.25 5-6 19.0% 1.50 5-6 20.2% 3.00 5-6 30.3% 3.00 5-6 21.5% 2.25 5-6 23.5% 3.00 5-6 23.1% 3.00 6-7 18.0% 2.75 6-7 22.5% 3.00 6-7 30.0% 1.75 6-7 19.6% 2.75 6-7 16.7% 2.00 6-7 30.2% 2.25 Spring Valley Construction Laboratory Test Data .Ds~as, Texas Figure 2 ~ Al; ~iven:lmse AB~ORPTION~N~qJ. TF.~TDATA BORBIQ NO ....................... 64 64 65 65 65 08 67 67 ~ lit ........... 2-3 5-6 3-4 6-7 1-2 4-5 2-3 5-6 IX~( IJIMT WEIGHT, IK~ .............. 113 100 102 94 107 114 107 93 INITIAL ~ CONTENT, %. ..... 15.8 22.9 21.9 28.0 19.4 14.6 19.2 23.7 FINAL ~ CONTENT, % ..... 18.1 26.3 25.1 32.2 20.2 14.8 2'i.5 25.2 PERCENT FREE ~ ........ 0.3 1.3 1.4 1.0 0.1 0.1 0.7 0.2 IlllAL ~ CQNI'INT, ~ 10.9 21.3 13.1 24.2 19.7 21.2 22.7 24.2 FINAL MiNWllMM C~NI'BiT, % --.-- 15.3 24.2 13.8 24.9 21.0 24'5 23.4 27.0 ~ FRBE ~; - ... 0.8 0.7 0.1 0.4 0.3 2.8 0.2 0.5 · BORMQ II0 · ._ - ...... . 72 72 73 73 74 74 75 75 DEFTH, liT... 2-3 5-6 3-4 5-6 1-2 4-5 1-2 5-6 DRY UNIT IlIMIQHT, ~ ............. go gO 101 95 105 gO 104 101 FINAL IIOIITU/IE CONTENT, % ---- 27.3 33.7 27.9 30.4 20.4 31.1 22.4 23.3 ~ FREE ~ i . 0.4 0.~ 2.1 0.1 0.4 0,5 0'5 0.3 ~ NO , - .... 76 '/~ 77 77 78 78 IXIBrrH, FT ..... 2.3 5.4 2.3 6-7 1-2 5-6 UNIT WEIGHT, IK:F ......... 95 108 93 105 105 e3 Iq. AtTIC LIMT, % -- ~ ~ (N]NTENT, %,--_ 27.1 19.0 27.8 21.3 16.3 30.2 INNAL ~ CONTENT, % ........ 28.9 19.7 28.8 22.0 22.0 31.4 ~ FREE ~ ~ . 0.5 0.2 0.8 0.5 0.5 1.5 ~ V~ ~ Swdl T~ l~t~