Stratford Manor-SY020124PAVEMENT FAILURE INVESTIGATION
on
STRATFORD DRIVE
(Station 5+00 to 6+00)
Coppeil, Texas
ALPHA Report No. 01878
Prepared for:
RODMAN PAVING, INC.
P.O. Box 2069
Frisco, Texas 75034
Attention: Mr. Leslie Foster
November 27, 2001
Prepared By:
ALPHA TESTING, INC.
2209 Wisconsin Road, Suite 100
Dallas, Texas 75229
ALPHA TESTING, INC.
2209 Wisconsin St,, Suite 100
Dallas, Texas 75229
972/620-8911 - 972/263-4937 (Metro)
FAX: 972/406-8023
November 27, 2001
RODMAN PAVING, INC.
P.O. Box 2069
Frisco, Texas 75034
Attention: Mr. Leslie Foster
Re: Pavement Failure Investigation
STRATFORD DRIVE
(Station 5+00 to 6+00)
Coppell, Texas
ALPHA Report No. 01878
Attached is the report of the pavement failure investigation performed for the project referenced
above. This study has been authorized by Mr. Leslie Foster on November 9, 2001 and performed
in accordance with ALPHA Proposal No. GT 8845 dated November 8, 2001.
This report contains results of field explorations and laboratory testing and an engineering
interpretation of these with respect to available project characteristics. The results and analyses
have been used to develop opinions regarding the "most probable cause" of the existing
pavement failure and recommendations for repair.
ALPHA TESTING, INC. appreciates the opportunity to be of service on this project. If we can
be of further assistance, please contact our office.
Sincerely yours,
ALPHA TESTING, INC.
,, . 47~'~-o ', / / :Ill '1
~ ~av~A, ~wis, P~.
~ ~f Engi~ee~ng Semces
~esident
D~dal
Copies: (2) Cliem
(1) City of Cop~ll, ~. ~ Davis
(1) Huie Cons~cfion, ~. David Whitsett
(1) Dowdey Andemon & Associates, ~. Bill Andemon, P.E.
Geotechnical Engineering · Construction Materials Testing · Environmental Engineering · Consulting
TABLE OF CONTENTS
on
STRATFORD DRIVE
(Station 5+00 to 6+00)
Coppell, Texas
ALPHA Report No. 01878
1.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE .................................................................................................... 1
2.0 PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS ...................................................................................... 1
3.0 FIELD EXPLORATION ..................................................................................................... 2
4.0 LABORATORY TESTS ..................................................................................................... 2
5.0 GENERAL SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS .......................................................................2
6.0 ENGINEERING ANALYSIS ......................................................................... 3
7.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................... 4
APPENDIX
A-1 Methods of Field ExpLoration
Boring Location Plan Figure 1
Subsurface Drain Location Plane Figure 2
Subsurface Drain Cross-Section - Figure 3
B- 1 Methods of Laboratory Testing
Record of Subsurface Exploration
Key to Soil Symbols and Classifications
ALPHA Report No. 01878
1.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE
The purpose of this pavement failure investigation is to evaluate some of the physical and
engineering properties of subsurface materials at the subject site with respect to evaluation of the
most probable cause of pavement distress/failure and formulation of recommendations for repair
of the pavement. The field exploration has been accomplished by securing subsurface samples
from widely spaced test borings performed across the expanse of the study area. Engineering
analyses have been performed from results of the field exploration and results of laboratory tests
performed on selected samples obtained from a series of test borings. Results of a Geotechnical
Investigation for Stradford Manor subdivision (Gee Consultants, Inc. Report No. S-199-0185
dated April 12, 1999) were provided by the Client for our review during this study. The analyses
have been used to develop our opinions and conclusions regarding the most probable cause of
pavement distress/failure and recommendations regarding repair.
Opinions and conclusions provided in this report have been developed from results of laboratory
tests and information obtained in test borings depicting subsurface conditions only at the specific
test locations and at the particular time designated on the logs. Subsurface conditions at other
locations may differ from those observed at the test locations. The scope of work is not intended
to fully define the variability of subsurface materials that may be present in the study area. The
nature and extent of variations between test locations may not become evident until remedial
construction. If significant variations then appear evident, our office should be contacted to
re-evaluate our recommendations after performing on-site observations and tests.
Professional services provided in this pavement failure investigation have been performed,
findings obtained, and opinions and recommendations prepared in accordance with generally
accepted geotechnical engineering principles and practices. The scope of services provided
herein does not include an environmental assessment of the site or investigation for the presence
or absence of hazardous materials in the soil, surface water or groundwater.
ALPHA TESTING, INC. is not responsible for conclusions, opinions or recommendations made
by others based on this data. Information contained in this report is intended for exclusive use of
the Client (and their design representatives).
Opinions and recommendations provided in this report are based on our understanding of
information provided by the Client about characteristics of the project. If the Client notes any
deviation from the facts about project characteristics, our office should be contacted immediately
since this may materially alter the opinions and recommendations.
2.0 PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS
It is our understanding two panels of the original pavement (one in each lane of traffic at about
Station 5+30 of Stratford Drive) were previously removed and replaced due to reported excessive
heave and cracking. Subsequently, the replaced panels have again heaved and are cracking
excessively. Fu~her, the adjacent panels, to the south and up-gradient, are now experiencing
similar apparent heave and cracking. According to our review of the grading plans, the area of
ALPHA Report No. 01878
heave and pavement cracking is located principally in a cut area. No pavement distress has been
reported or noted in adjacent pavement areas (those down-gradient) which were in fill areas.
Storm sewer lines are located along the centerline of the pavement and about 4-6 ft deep (at the
spring line) in the area of pavement distress. The sanitary sewer lines for the project are located
behind the back of curb for the pavement.
3.0 FIELD EXPLORATION
Subsurface conditions on the site have been explored by drilling three (3) test borings in general
accordance with ASTM D 420 to a depth of up to 14 ft using standard rotary drilling equipment.
The approximate location of each test boring is shown on the Boring Location Plan, Figure 1,
enclosed in the Appendix of this report. Borings 1 and 2 were in distressed pavement areas and
Boring 3 was in a non-distressed pavement area. Details of drilling and sampling operations are
briefly summarized in Methods of Field Exploration, Section A- 1 of the Appendix.
Soil and rock (clay shale) types encountered during the field exploration are presented on Record
of Subsurface Exploration sheets included in the Appendix of this report. The boring logs
contain our Field Technician's and Engineer's interpretation of conditions believed to exist
between actual samples retrieved. Therefore, these boring logs contain both factual and
interpretive information. Lines delineating subsurface strata on the boring logs are approximate
and the actual ~sition between strata may be gradual. 5~
Apparent fill materials were encountered below the concrete pavem¢ at the bonng locations as
will be discussed in Section 5.0. Composition of the fill w~.aluated based on samples
retrieved from 6-inch maximum diameter holes. It i~/~i-pated~this fill was placed and
compacted during development of the existing subdivis~o~'-n an~d pavement. However, since no
records were made available of fill placement, compaction or uniformity, subsurface conditions
immediately adjacent to test borings could be substantially different than conditions observed in
test borings.
4.0 LABORATORY TESTS
Selected samples of the subsurface materials have been tested in the laboratory to evaluate their
engineering properties as a basis in providing information for the opinions and conclusions
provided in this report. A brief description of testing procedures used in the laboratory can be
found in Methods of Laboratory Testing, Section B-1 of the Appendix. Individual test results are
presented on Record of Subsurface Exploration sheets enclosed in the Appendix.
5.0 GENERAL SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Within the 14-ft maximum depth explored on the site, subsurface materials below the existing
pavement consist generally of shaly clay (CH) underlain by clay shale. However, in
Boring 3, about 1 ft of clayey sand (SC) was encountered above the shaly clay. The tan, cement
treated sand encountered in Boring 1 was reportedly placed during re-construction of
2
ALPHA Report No. 01878
the distressed pavements. The letters in parenthesis represent the soils' classification according
to the Unified Soil Classification System (ASTM D 2488). More detailed stratigraphic
information is presented on the Record of Subsurface Exploration Sheets attached to this report.
The subsurface clayey sand materials are relatively permeable and are anticipated to have a
moderate to rapid response to water movement. However, the subsurface clayey materials are
relatively impermeable and are anticipated to have a slower response to water movement.
Therefore, several days of observation will be required to evaluate actual groundwater levels
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.
During field explorations, no free groundwater has been noted on drilling tools or in open
boreholes upon completion. In our opinion, the current groundwater level on the site may be
located below the bottom of the borings. It is not uncommon to detect seasonal groundwater
either from natural fractures within the clay matrix, within sand strata, near the sand/clay or
soil/rock interfaces or from fractures in the rock, particularly after a wet season. If more detailed
groundwater information is required, monitoring wells or piezometers can be installed.
Further details concerning subsurface materials and conditions encountered can be obtained from
the Record of Subsurface Exploration sheets provided in the Appendix of this report.
6.0 ENGINEERING ANALYSIS
Review of field observations and information developed during this study indicate the following
salient items.
Visual observation of the study area indicates the distress/failure in the pavement is
generally localized and in the vicinity of Station 5+00 to 5+50 of Stratford Drive and
is present across the entire pavement width. The observed distress is typical of heave
caused by swelling in the underlying soils.
A storm sewer is located near the center of Stratford Drive. The spring line of the
storm sewer is reportedly about 4 to 6 ft below the pavement in the vicinity of the
observed distress.
3. Borings 1 and 2 were located within severely distressed pavement areas and Boring 3
was located in a non-distressed pavement area.
Pavement in the vicinity of Boring 1 had previously been removed and replaced due
to reported excessive heave and cracking. Pavement at Boring 2 had not been
previously replaced but is presently exhibiting distress.
ALPHA Report No. 01878
Conversations with the client indicate the observed pavement distress is near the
transition point between areas with cut and areas with fill. The area south of the
distressed area is in an area of cut and the area north of the distressed area was
generally filled during site development.
6. Review of the subsurface stratigraphy reported by Gee Consultants indicates sand
strata were encountered above the highly plastic clays in the central and southern
portions of the site. A sand stratum was encountered in ALPHA's Boring 3 drilled
during this study but was not identifiable in ALPHA's Borings 1 and 2.
7. The moisture content of the shaly clay soils is similar in each of the current borings..~
8. Groundwater was not encountered in ALPHA's test borings.
7.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Based upon visual observations regarding the pattern of pavement distress and the subsurface
stratigraphy encountered in the test borings, it is our opinion the distress/failure of the pavement
at observed locations is primarily due to swelling of the highly plastic clays encountered beneath
the pavement. Highly expansive clays, such as encountered at this site, have significant
shrinking and swelling potentials with variations in soil moisture content. Possible sources of
water, which could cause swelling of the highly expansive clays, include leaks from utility lines
(water, sanitary sewer or storm sewer) or seepage of perched groundwater along the sand/clay
interface. Since a thin sand stratum was encountered in Boring 3 but not in Borings 1 and 2, the
area of the pavement distress may be near the end-point where permeable sand overlies the
highly expansive clay soils. Therefore, excess irrigation water or rainfall from up-gradient (south
of the distressed pavement) could flow down gradient (to the north) along the sand/clay interface
and accumulate between Borings 2 and 3 since the sand stratum may terminate near this point.
The accumulation of perched groundwater could cause swelling of the highly expansive clay
soils. It should be noted that considering the clay content of the sand stratum encounll~red in
Boring 3, the time which the test borings were open and observed during this study may not have
been sufficient for a measurable amount of groundwater seepage to occur or the water source
may not have been active at the time this study was performed.
It is recommended the currently distressed pavement areas be replaced with pavement
conforming to the City of Coppell's standard specifications. The existing utility lines should be
tested for leakage and repaired if leaks are detected. In addition, it is recommended a subsurface
drain be constructed either along or just outside the curb lines of the repaired pavement and
extend transverse across the pavement at the southern limits of the repaired area. A sketch of the
subsurface drain location and cross-section is provided as Figures 2 and 3 in the Appendix of this
report. The subsurface drain should extend at least 1 ft into the highly expansive clays (but not
less than 2.5 ft below the top of the pavement) and sloped to drain into an appropriate receptacle.
4
ALPHA Report No. 01878
It is expected the highly expansive clays extend up-gradient (south) of the existing distressed
pavement. Therefore, distress of the pavement south of the existing distress is possible if water
is available to the highly expansive clays. Extending the subsurface drains along curb lines to the
south of the repaired pavement could be considered to reduce the potential for water seepage
along the sand/clay interface beneath the existing pavement up-gradient of the existing distressed
pavement.
APPENDIX
ALPHA Report No. 01878
A-1 METHODS OF FIELD EXPLORATION
Using standard rotary drilling equipment, a total of three (3) test borings have been performed for
this pavement failure investigation at the approximate locations shown on the Boring Location
Plan, Figure 1. The test boring locations have been staked by either pacing or taping and
estimating right angles from landmarks which could be identified in the field and as shown on
the site plan provided during this study. The location of test borings shown on the Boring
Location Plan is considered accurate only to the degree implied by the method used to locate the
borings.
Relatively undisturbed samples of the cohesive subsurface materials have been obtained by
hydraulically pressing 3-inch O.D. thin-wall sampling tubes into the underlying soils at selected
depths (ASTM D 1587). These samples have been removed from the sampling tubes in the field
and examined visually. One representative portion of each sample has been 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 have been obtained employing
split-spoon sampling procedures in accordance with ASTM Standard D 1586. Disturbed samples
have been 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 Record of Subsurface
Exploration sheets.
Logs of all borings have been included in the Appendix of this report. The logs show visual
descriptions of all soil and rock (clay shale) strata encountered using the Unified Soil
Classification System. Sampling information, pertinent field data, and field observations are also
included. Soil and rock samples not consumed by testing will be retained in our laboratory for at
least 30 days and then discarded unless the Client requests otherwise.
LANE
UyOH £S3tlO~13G
.5
c
,7"/ et o
a
o• ro
tt
CJ
aN
C L
•0
A 4,
au
v
v�
�, o0
up r
as 0 -
a .Q C
4
L
C
U
"p < 0
C
O CC
L
E A
ae
y U
y V
ae .0 yo � 4
.
L.
co-. Q cs
O V ) i z
E Ck C ci PRINCEWARD "0
Q a a Z LANE C
we CI)a
d O i y L
A C b+ �+ 0
00 0 •°- z a> ;9 ° a
^* a col L d 4.4.
L. W " a 0
R y
= O o d Flo S ms
cot
F
4 et
n V
.
Q
.1 ei
/�1 - t
(4
CI �A
4 W o
x
( ) hill,. c,..)
0
17— ,...:
Qvox ISaroJaa
z
Top of pavement or finished grade,
6" of pavement or --
12" of clay
-- ~ _ new pavement or compacted
/
_ ._. L...clay (PI>30) plug
Size 57 stone '
~ 'as required,
1 minimum 2.5'
b
Geomembrane
(Mirafi 140N or
equivalent)
4-6" slotted P¥C
:i ~ ~- pipe sloped to drain
6" ~ t Base of french drain
~ - ~'- -- "~ to be at leastl'into
L _- shaly clay
F 12"
Rodman Paving, Inc. ~ Subsurface Drain Cross-Section
Frisco, Texas~ Figure 3
stratford ~rive 01878 : 11/27/01
Coppell, Texas
ALPHA Report No. 01878
B-1 METHODS OF LABORATORY TESTING
Representative samples are inspected and classified by a qualified member of the Geotechnical
Division and the boring logs are edited as necessary. To aid in classifying the subsurface
materials and to determine the general engineering characteristics, natural moisture content tests
(ASTM D 2216) and Atterberg-limit tests (ASTM D 4318) are performed on selected samples. In
addition, pocket-penetrometer tests are conducted on selected soil samples to evaluate the soil
shear strength. Results of all laboratory tests described above are provided on the accompanying
Record of Subsurface Exploration sheets.
ALPHA TESTING, INC.
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100
Dallas, Texas 75229
(972) 620 8911
RECORD OF
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Client
Architect/Engineer
Project Name
Proiect Location
RODMAN PAVING, INC.
STRATFORD DRIVE
COPPELL, TSXAS
Boring No. B-1 STATION 5+39, 4' LEFT
Job No. 01878
Drawn By ~
Approved By DAL
DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION TEST DATA
Date Started 11-13-01 Hammer Wt. lbs
Date Completed 11-13-01 Hammer Drop in. ,r
Drill Foreman EDI Spoon Sample OD in.
Inspector Rock Core Dia. in.
Boring Method CFA Shelby Tube OD 3 in.
SOIL CLASSIFICATION ~ ~ ~ .
0
5
0
·an Cemented ~eeted S~-F[~ 2'
~-~a~ ~t~f~ ~LA~ (CH/CL) wi~h 3' 2 ST 67 1.2 28 LL=65
-~om~ s~lt~ slay. _ ...... ~ 3 ST 4.5+ 29 PL=24
Tan and Gray hard S~LY CLAY 4 ST 4.5+ 30 PI=41
(CH) with silt laminations and 5 LL=79
calcite deposit, 5 ST 4~5+ ~ 29 PL=30
6 ST 4.5+ 29 PI=49
-- 7 ST 4.5+ 28 LL=70
8 ST 4.5+ 31 PL=24
PI=46
9 ST 4.5+ 30
__ 10
- 10 ST 4.5+ 28 LL=70
shale seams below 11' . - 11 ST 4.5+ 32 PL=24
PI=46
~bentonite seams below 12' ~ 12 ST 4,5+ 40. LL=75
- 13 ST 4.5+ 42 PL=27
BOTTOM OF TEST BORING AT 14'. PI=48
~ 20--
~ 25--
30 -
SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS BORING METHOD
HSA - HOLLOW STEM AUGERS
SS - STANDARD PENETRATION TEST AT COMPLETION DRY FT.
ST SHELBY TUBE CFA - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS
CA - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER AFTER HRS.. FT. DC - DRIVEN CASINGS
TCP- TEXAS CONE PENETRATION TEST WATER ON RODS NO~ FT. MD -MUD DRILLING
ALPHA TESTING, INC.
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100
Dallas, Texas 75229
(972) 620-8911
RECORD OF
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Client
RODMAN PAVING, INC.
Boring No. B-2 STATION 5+22, 4' LEFT
Architect/Engineer Job No. 01878
Project Name STRATFORD DRIVE Drawn By ~
Project Location COPPELL, TEXAS
DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION
Approved By DAL
TEST DATA
Date Started 11-13 - gl Hammer Wt, .t.~u ~DS
Date Completed 11-13-01 Hammer Drop 30 in. '~
Drill Foreman EDI Spoon Sample OD 2 in. ~ ~ o~
Inspector Rock Core Dia. in. u~ ~-- ~
Boring Method CFA Shelby Tube OD 3 in. ~ ~ ~ _
SOIL CLASSIFICATION ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
SURFACE ELEVATION ~ i I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ = [ ~ '- ~ :~[~ ®
6" of Concrete Slab and 6" 1' 0 Non-
-'Geme~ Tr~a[e~ ffa~ ..... j .... 1 SS 8 28 Plasti~
Tan and Gray stiff S~LY C~Y
_ (CH) with loose sand-FILL 3' -- 2 ST 1.7 28 LL=63
.............. ~ - - -- PL=24
Tan and Gray hard S~LY C~Y 3 ST 3.2+ ,30
PI=39
(CH) with silt laminations, 4 ST 4.5+ 28
-- calcium and calcite deposit. 5
5 ST 4.5+ 29
~ blocky structure below 5' . 6 ST 4.5+ 31
-- 7 ST 4.5+ 29
8 ST 4.5+ 29
9 ST 4.5+ 31
10
11' 10 ST 4.5+ 26
Gra~ C~Y S~LE 11 ST 4.5+ 21
BOTTOM OF TEST BORING AT 12'
15--
20--
25--
30 -
SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS BORING METHOD
SS - STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HSA - HOLLOW STEM AUGERS
ST - SHELBY TUBE AT COMPLETION DRY FT. CFA - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS
CA - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER AFTER HRS.. FT. DC - DRIVEN CASINGS
TCP- TEXAS CONE PENETRATION TEST WATER ON RODS DA~:~ FT. MD -MUD DRILLING
ALPHA TESTING, INC.
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100
Dallas, Texas 75229
(972) 620-8911
RECORD OF
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
RODMA.N PAVING, INC.
Boring No. B-3 STATION 4+32, 3' WEST
Architect/Engineer Job No. 01878
Project Name STRATFORD DRIVE Drawn By ~
Project Location COPPELL, TEXAS
DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION
Approved By DAL
TEST DATA
Date Completed 11-13-01 Hammer Drop 30 ,n. %
Drill Foreman EDT Spoon Sample OD 2 in. ~ ~_ ~
Inspector Rock Core Dia. *n. ~ ~ ~ uA
Boring Method CFA Shelby Tube OD 3 in. ~ c ® -~ >~
SOIL CLASSIFICATION = = = $ · ~ m~E
SURFACE ELEVATION ~ ~. ~ }~ ~
6" of Concrete Slab and 6" 1' 0
~emen~. T~%ated Sa~ .... ~ 2' 1 SS 16 28 18
~ Tannish Brown Compact CLAYEY /- - -
Tan and Gray hard SHALY CLAY 3 ST 4.5+ 25 PL=24
PI=39
(CH) with silt laminations. 4 ST 4.5+ 26
5
-calcium deposit 3-?'. 5 ST 4.5+ 32
6 ST 4.5+ 30 LL=71
-blocky structure with shale 8' ~ 7 ST 4.5+ 29 PL=25
-s~a~s below~. ..... ¢- - - PI=46
Gray CLAY SHALE 8 ST 4.5+ 18 LL=50
9 ST 4,5+ 17 PL=20
10
BOTTOM OF TEST BORING AT 10'. PI=30
15~
20~
25~
30 -
SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS BORING METHOD
SS STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HSA - HOLLOW STEM AUGERS
AT COMPLETION DRY FT.
ST SHELBY TUBE CFA - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS
CA - CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER AFTER HRS.. FT. DC - DRIVEN CASINGS
TCP- TEXAS CONE PENETRATION TEST WATER ON RODS DA~ FT. MD -MUD DRILLING
~4 ~.pI-IA TESTING, INC
2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100
Dallas, Texas 75229
(972) 620-8911
KEY TO SOIL SYMBOLS AHA CLASSIFICATIOHS
THE ABBREUIATIONS COMMONLY EMPLOYED OM EACH "RECORD OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION",
ON THE FIGVRES AND IN THE TEXT OF THE REPORT, ARE AS FOLLOWS:
CLAY S I LT
SOIL OR ROCK TYPES
(SHONM Iii SYMBOLS COLUMN)
SAND L I NESTONE
SHALE ASPHALT/CONCRETE
I, SOIL DESCRIPTION
(A) COHESIOMLESS SOILS
RELATIVE DENSITY N, B~OWS/FT
UERV LOOSE 0 TO 4
LOOSE 5 TO 10
COMPACT 11 TO 30
DENSE 31 TO 50
UERY'DENSE OUER 50
(B) COHESIUE SOILS
CONSISTENCY Ou, TSF
VERY SOFT LESS THAN .25
SOFT .25 TO .50
FIRM .$0 TO 1.00
STIFF 1.00 TO 2.00
UERV STIFF 2.00 TO 4.00
HARD OUER 4.00
III. RELATIVE PROPORTIONS
DESCRIPTIUE TERN
TRACE
LITTLE
SOME
AND
PERCENT
1 - I0
11 - 20
21 - 35
36 - 50
IU. PARTICLE SI
BOULDERS:
COBBLES
GRRUEL
SAND
SILT
CLAY
ZE IDENTIFICATION
-8 INCH DIAMETER OR MORE
-3 TO 8 INCH DIAMETER
-COARSE - 3/4 TO 3 I~CH
-FINE - 5.0 HM TO 3/4~IHCH
-COARSE - 2.0 NM TOeS:lO tlli
-MEDIUM 0.4 ~
YOr~';O~~
-FINE - 0.07 MH TO 0~'¢ MB
-0.002 MM TO 0.07 HM
-0.002 MM
I. PLASTICITY
DEGREE OF PLASTICITY
PLASTICITY INDEX
NONE TO SLIGHT 0 - 4
SLIOHT 5 - 10
MEDIUM 11 30
HIGH TO UERY HIGH OUER 30
NOTE:
ALL SOILS ~LASSIFIED ACCORDING TO
THE UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION
SYSTEM (RSTM D-2497)
V. DRILLIHO AND SRUPLINO SYMBOLS
AU: AUOER SRMPLE
RC: ROCK CORE
TCP: TEXAS CONEPENETRRTION TEST
SS: SPLIT-SPOON 1 3/8" I.D. 2" O.D.
EXCEPT WHERE NOTED
ST: SHELBY TUBE = 3" O.D, EXCEPT
WHERE NOTED
NS: WASHED SAMPLE
HSR: HOLLOW STEM RUOERS
CFR: COHTIHUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS
HD: MUD DRILLINO