Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFoundation Design 06.18.2015June 18. 2015 Michael Egan and Pauli Hayes 928 Branch Road Scottsville, Virginia 24590 (,. eft ' ) Job No. 115 069A Subject: Subsoil Study for Foundation Design, Proposed Residence, Lot 13, Filing 2, Elk Springs, 480 Pinon Point, Garfield County, Colorado Dear Mike and Pauli: As requested, Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. performed a subsoil study for design of foundations at the subject site. We also evaluated the planned septic disposal site. The study was conducted in general accordance with our agreement for geotechnical engineering services to you dated February 26, 2015. The data obtained and our recommendations based on the proposed construction and subsurface conditions encountered are presented in this report. Background Information: l-lepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical previously performed a preliminary geotechnical study for Filings 6 through 9, Elk Springs (formerly Los Amigos Ranch PUD) and reported our findings on February 14, 1997, Job No. 197 617. We also previously performed a subsoil study and percolation test at the subject lot and reported our findings in a report dated June 28, 1996, Job No. 196 285. Information from the 1996 report has been incorporated into this report as needed including the profile pit excavated and percolation testing performed at the septic disposal site. Proposed Construction: The residence will be a single story wood franc structure over a walkout basement lei el located on the lot as shown on Figure 1. The basement and garage floors will be slab -on -grade. Cut depths are expected to range between about 3 to 5' feet. Foundation loadings fir this type of construction are assumed to be relatively Iight and typical of the proposed type of construction. The septic disposal field is planned dou nhi11 and to the south/southwest of residence. -2 If building conditions or foundation Ioadings are significantly different from those described above, we should be notified to re-evaluate the recommendations presented in this report. Site Conditions: The site is located on a rolling upland mesa above the Roaring Fork River Valley. The lot is vacant and vegetated with a pinion and juniper forest with a ground cover of grass and weeds. The ground surface on the lot appears mostly natural and slopes down to the southwest at a grade of about 20 percent. Elevation difference across the proposed building is about 8 or 9 feet. Numerous basalt cobbles and boulders are visible on the ground surface. Subsurface Conditions: The subsurface conditions at the site for the current study were evaluated by excavating three exploratory pits (Pits 3 and 4 and Profile Pit 2) at the approximate locations shown on Figure 1. The approximate locations of the three previous exploratory pits on the site from the 1996 study (Pits 1 and 2 and Profile Pit 1) are also shown on Figure 1. The logs of the current pits are presented on Figure 2. The logs of the previous pits are provided in Appendix A as Figure 2. Note that the elevations shown on the 1996 pit logs are not consistent with the current topography survey shown on Figure 1. The subsoils encountered, below about % to 2 feet of topsoil, consisted of relatively dense, basalt gravel, cobbles and boulders in a sandy silt and clay matrix that extended down to the maximum depth explored of 8 feet. Digging in the dense basalt rocks was difficult and digging refusal was encountered in the deposit. Results o f swell - consolidation testing performed on a relatively undisturbed sample of the sandy silt and clay matrix soils, presented on Figure 3, indicate low compressibility under existing moisture conditions and light loading, and moderate compressibility when loaded after wetting. Results of gradation analyses performed on disturbed bulk sample of subsoils (minus 3 to 5 inch fraction) obtained from the site are presented on Figures 4 and 5. The laboratory testing is summarized in Table 1. Results of a gradation analyses performed on a bulk sample of the subsoils from the previous study (minus 5 inch fraction) are provided in Appendix A as Figure 3. No free water was observed in the pits at the time of excavation and the soils were slightly moist to moist. Foundation Recommendations: Considering the subsoil conditions encountered in the exploratory pits and the nature of the proposed construction, we recommend spread footings placed on the undisturbed natural granular soil designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 2,500 psf for support of the proposed residence. Utility trenches and deep cut areas below about 5 feet may require rock excavating techniques such as chipping or blasting. Job No. 115 069A Gittech -3 - Footings should be a minimum width of 18 inches for continuous wails and 2 feet for columns. Loose and disturbed soils encountered at the foundation bearing level within the excavation should be removed and the footing bearing level extended down to the undisturbed natural soils. Voids created from boulder removal at footing grade should be filled with a structural material such as road base compacted to 98% standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum or with concrete. Exterior footings should be provided with adequate cover above their bearing elevations for frost protection. Placement of footings at least 36 inches below the exterior grade is typically used in this area. Continuous foundation walls should be well reinforced top and bottom to span Local anomalies such as by assuming an unsupported length of at least 12 feet. Foundation walls acting as retaining structures should also be designed to resist a lateral earth pressure based on an equivalent fluid unit weight of at Ieast 50 pcf for the on-site granular soil, excluding topsoil and oversized (plus 8 inch) rocks, as backfill. Floor Slabs: The natural on-site soils, exclusive of topsoil, are suitable to support lightly loaded slab -on -grade construction. To reduce the effects of some differential movement, floor slabs should be separated from all bearing walls and columns with expansion joints which allow unrestrained vertical movement. Floor slab control joints should be used to reduce damage due to shrinkage cracking. The requirements for joint spacing and slab reinforcement should be established by the designer based on experience and the intended slab use. A minimum 4 inch layer of free -draining grave[ should be placed beneath slabs for support and to facilitate drainage. This material should consist of minus 2 inch aggregate with Iess than 50% passing thc No. 4 sieve and less than 2% passing the No. 200 sieve. Underdrain System: Although free water was not encountered during our exploration, it has been our experience in the area and where clayey soils are present that local perched groundwater can develop during times of heavy precipitation or seasonal runoff. Frozen ground during spring runoff can also create a perched condition. We recommend below - grade construction, such as retaining walls, crawlspace and basement areas, be protected from wetting and hydrostatic pressure buildup by an underdrain system. The drains should consist of drainpipe placed in the bottom of the wall backfill surrounded above the invert level with free -draining granular material. The drain should be placed at each level of excavation and at least 1 foot below lowest adjacent finish grade and sloped at a minimum 1% to a suitable gravity outlet. Free -draining granular material used in the underdrain system should contain less than 2% passing thc No. 200 sieve, less than 50% passing the No. 4 sieve and have a maximum size of 2 inches. The drain gravel backfill should be at least 1% feet deep and be covered by filter fabric such as Mirafi 140N or 160N. Job No. 115 069A HPtech -4 - Surface Drainage: The following drainage precautions should be observed during construction and maintained at all times after the residence has been completed: 1) Inundation of the foundation excavations and underslab areas should be avoided during construction. 2) Exterior backfill should be adjusted to near optimum moisture and compacted to at least 95% of the maximum standard Proctor density in pavement and slab areas and to at least 90% of the maximum standard Proctor density in landscape areas. Free -draining wall backfill should be capped with filter fabric and about 2 feet of the on-site, finer graded soils to reduce surface water infiltration. 3) The ground surface surrounding the exterior of the building should be sloped to drain away from the foundation in all directions. We recommend a minimum slope of 12 inches in the first 10 feet in unpaved areas and a minimum slope of 3 inches in the first 10 feet in pavement and walkway areas. A swale may be needed uphill to direct surface runoff around the residence. 4) Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all backfill. 5) Landscaping which requires regular heavy irrigation should be located at least 5 feet from the building. Septic Disposal Site: The current and previous studies are the basis for our evaluation of the proposed septic disposal site for treatment of the on-site wastewater. Profile Pits 1 and 2 were excavated at the locations shown on Figure 1 the subsoils encountered and consisted of Very Gravelly Sand (per USDA classification system) to the maximum depth explored of 8 feet with no free water encountered. The previous percolation test results at the site are provided on Table 2 in Appendix A. The percolation test results indicate rates from 20 to 60 minutes per inch (mpi) with an average rate of about 37 mpi. Based on the subsurface conditions encountered and the percolation test results, the tested area should be suitable for a conventional infiltration septic disposal system. Limitations: This study has been conducted in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering principles and practices in this area at this time. We make no warranty either express or implied. The conclusions and recommendations submitted in this report are based upon the data obtained from the exploratory pits excavated at the locations indicated on Figure 1 and to the depths shown on Figure 2, the proposed type of construction, and our experience in the area. Our services do not include determining the presence, prevention or possibility of mold or other biological contaminants (MOBC) developing in the future. If the client is concerned about MOBC, then a professional in this special field of practice should be consulted. Our findings include interpolation and extrapolation of the subsurface conditions identified at the exploratory pits and variations in the subsurface conditions may not become evident until excavation is performed. If Job No. i 15 069A -5 - conditions encountered during construction appear different from those described in this report, we should be notified at once so re-evaluation of the recommendations inay be made. -Phis report has been prepared for the exclusive use by our client for design purposes. We are not responsible for technical interpretations by others of our information. As the project evolves, we should provide continued consultation and field services during construction to review and monitor the implementation of our recommendations, and to verify that the recommendations have been appropriately interpreted. Significant design changes may require additional analysis or modifications to the recommendations presented herein. We recommend on-site observation of excavations and foundation bearing strata and testing of structural fill by a representative of the geotechnical engineer. If you have any questions or if we may be of further assistance, please let us know. Respectfully Submitted, HEPWORTH,- PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Louis E. Eller Reviewed by: L3 = -\\, + - :n I David A. Young, P.E.°�,tj : C." reA 616/-1C:44: LEE/ksw err �' "`•=,.t.+, V+ice attachments Fiygurc 1 = Location of Exploratory Pits Figure 2 — Logs of Exploratory Pits Figure 3 — Swell -Consolidation Test Results Figure 4 — Gradation Test Results Figure 5 — USDA Gradation Test Results Table 1 - Summary of Laboratory Testing Appendix A -- 1996 Report Subsoil and Percolation Test Information Joh No 1 1 i169A Gegtech APPROXIMATE SCALE 1' = 60' LOT 12 okr P-1 P-2A PROFILE PIT 1 p_3 PROPOSED SEPTIC FIELD LOT 14 LEGEND: ■ EXPLORATORY PIT FOR CURRENT STUDY. EXPLORATORY PIT FOR PREVIOUS STUDY, ❑ DATED JUNE 28, 1996, JOB NO. 196 285. Q PERCOLATION TEST HOLE FOR PREVIOUS STUDY, DATED JUNE 28, 1996, JOB NO. 196 285. 115 069A LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY PITS Figure 0 5 10 LEGEND: ...• PIT 3 ELEV.= 1019' -200=26 WC=13.5 D0=79 PIT 4 ELEV.— 1009' WC=17.0 DD -91 -200=92 J PROFILE PIT 2 ELEV.= 1001' GRAVEL=51 _ _ SAND=24 SILT=16 CLAY=9 TOPSOIL; organic sandy silt and clay with basalt cobbles and boulders, slightly moist, dark brown. 5 10 BASALT GRAVEL, COBBLES AND BOULDERS (GUI -GC); in a sandy silt and clay matrix, dense, slightly moist, light brown, calcareous. 2" Diameter hand driven finer sample. Disturbed bulk sample. TPractical digging refusal. NOTES: 1. Exploratory pits were excavated on April 20, 2015 with a John Deere 50D mini -excavator. 2. Locations of exploratory pits were measured approximately by pacing from features shown on the site plan provided. 3. Elevations of exploratory pits were obtained by interpolation between contours shown on the site plan provided. Pit Togs are drawn to depth. 4. The exploratory pit locations and elevations should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the method used. 5. The lines between materials shown on the exploratory pit logs represent the approximate boundaries between material types and transitions may be gradual. 6. No free water was encountered in the pits at the time of excavating. Fluctuation in water level may occur with time. 7. Laboratory Testing Results: WC = Water Content (%) DD = Dry Density (pcf) 4 = Percent retained on the No. 4 sieve -200 = Percent passing No. 200 sieve Gravel = Percent retained on No. 10 Sieve Sand = Percent passing No. 10 sieve and retained on No. 325 sieve Silt = Percent passing No. 325 sieve to particle size .002mm Clay = Percent smaller then particle size ,002mm 115 069A H Hepworth—PawlaeCh k Geatachnical LOGS OF EXPLORATORY PITS Figure 2 Compression 0 3 4 5 0.1 Moisture Content = 13.5 percent Dry Density 79 pcf Sample of: Sandy Silt and Clay Matrix From: Pit 3 at 3 Feet 10 APPLIED PRESSURE - ksf Compression upon wetting 10 100 115 069A Hepworth—Pawtak Geotachntcal SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Figure 3 ERCENT RETAI HYDROMETER ANALYSIS I R�{ TIME READING'S24 0 45 MIN. 15 M N.60MINI9MIN.4 MIN. 1 MIN #200 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 MMl SIEVE ANALYSIS U.S. STANDARD SERIES 1 CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS Ij #100 #50 #30 #16 #8 #4 3/8` 3/4' 1 1/2' 3 5.6' 8' 100 ala -- 1E MMa i1alMMMMgMMtMMI MMMMMIMIIni aa MMMw� —IMnallmlata MMMM—Mel MMMMMMwMMMM—www MMMMMMMI Mww w_ Tai . MI as Mena. Balm aMal, -Main !Ma Mme, w— aM IIwwIMMMM��;_ am !MMM—MMMT w!- ! MMS MMMMMMMaMMAMMa sM lMMMMMmlMMwwIMa aMIM- w■! Mw lw.w lows www— mm w ww! mMwww Miew N- —� i--I,.— aww.-- —rMMIM! l'iama= MMMM Pala..., El MMMT ma l.A1. -- mi lMMrw MMMwMw MMMMM! Mwwl l� — —� www mmovInd MI MMM MMMMI Em--w -�MMMwIlMIN/MMMMw ' MMM.wwM! ialM lall`+no+ 'AMMO MM— Mom wmionlinoMMMT wAnvJ MMMMwt lel MMMM_ MMMMM_ _ MMI MM'I•=tsm.! MYMniM—Mwwli —lwMMM1 nmNMoI mM. 'M. nrMoiNnmmm — - =�MMiiImmMg I MM mioi —1 11/ 1 —!www M.M.m i o _ _ ��rMMr tm•i�=in MMia MMMw___ __—M—lam �w 4 '—�MMMMMMr•IM�MMM�Mr�Mw— iMoommil MMMMwlMM• -— ���MM�MI MM—wli� nm onmnrMMM—� .mi mi. l— �l— -MMT MM►_MnMMMMMMM MM—I MMM♦MMMMMMM im MMMM oim MMMMMMMMM lMMMI -MmMMMwA�Mrin `M= MMl '�r+MMMMMMM MM—Mlr� wMMMr�wwwwli am mi Oni_ MwMMI , _ M!I MMMMMr. MMM—MPs ���=MMMMIrwMMIMMI I M---w— nokk wMiMMMI _ l� MM—MM—I�lMMrAwlMMw_—!Meer MI kol 11001111 N• MMMMMwMMMlll as '�� M��` �= MIN= MM—MM—w— MMMMMMw MM—MMMM� M� MimMommonMMww•!ti—r w— wwwwlM — MMMMMMMe M� � wwr � lalaMelt r�I wMan — r l MMMMMMMMMMKMMMMI MMMa! www w MMPI M��M�� -- Mi � — C- --Mli — — MMMMMMM>_ MMl aam MMMMI MMMwMw :— `anmoll— MMI MM!Ma alai= wwwlMMMM—Mel MMMMIMMww�n mr MMMM�MMMM—Mel --MMI MwMMMMJmoliimmr MM�wMMMI inol —onimi MMMMM�i~ MM—MM—lMIM MM—MMMMM —MMI INIMa 11111111 w`I�MMMMMwr —MMIMMMMM- MMI MM—MMMMMMMMMI MMI --=:= ! MMy MMMMl MMS MMMMA w ween` MMI- MMS !� MMMMMMMI—1 MMMMI l Ml r w�iw lMMMMMMMMl M =r — II aMM!rwwMMMMwMMMMww— l�IMMa Iw+! MM�MMAMMMMMMM�a MIME= w !wl MM MM. l MMMMI�~>=�IEMM MMMMM[!— ME ke i~ 0 ,300 .600 1.18 2.36 4.75 9.5 19.0 12.5 .001 .002 .005 .009 .019 .037 .074 .150 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 DIAMETER OF PARTICLES IN MILLIMETERS 37.5 76.2 152 203 127 CLAY TO SIT FAE GRAVEL 34 % LIQUID LIMIT % SAH) J GRAIL 1 I !coin l FINE I COARSE =US mum SAND 40 % SILT AND CLAY 26 % PLASTICITY INDEX % FROM: Pit 3 at 2 to 3 Feet SAMPLE OF Silty Clayey Sand and Gravel with 115 069A Cobbles H He. worth—Puy/kik Geotechnical GRADATION TEST RESULTS `' ERCENT PASSI Figure 4 I HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS 24Iyypp� ] Hq TIME READINGS 1 MIN U.S. STANDARD SERIES 1 CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS 1 0 45 MIN.15 MIN, 60MIIVIMIN 4 MIN. #325 #140 #60 #35 # 1B #10 #4 3/e" 314" 1 112" 5' S 6" B' 100 Illi—i—r �I�iYYIl�1�I1i���i�WYY�i—. AAIIIYl i�A-i-- -.iaY.-ice. iii-A--- il--a-'-`i IMI iMOMO IaMwi----- i _Simim AA �_ra-Ila�d����__. __-- ......my Ar II IMI+..r++r--�i1M`iiiiMIlarr- ��r-r---1Ari-Ji-s- 1B .M. .1. i>l�-Y-a-lili+r--sil ai-l- i�-i— i.1m101 —moi i— Jrrrr--i immmIMMMIMMIMMM. ==mt^I---r— i� .-- —_—_DRi ME/ Ji i—w- IMMMM i--i--MIIi�i mimm. PM ii ll __i -i Mi ---IIIIY ON ��ls—iii--i—A— il�—i--is is—Sim•Mfii — III --- i—r—i--iiiai IMiIIlllq—i—•iia- i irk----MIMI •mI All—. __l 1 11---- a—WMrt Imo=i--- !mlI!l>—rM IIMI1r—f ammmlll—ar —J--s- iri—iir—li•�iiAJi�i�iiis- iii—RII.� !�#—lei—J�i�l...i—_— ii�l.lri.--iNYMlmmi NM'/ i�—iIA i ii• ir�lr i i• — i — _ li a—�!• �r i ===.1.-lwM i— — -MIr��'—rr-moi►_ 70 _1I- 20 — — --.. . —i-- J—i•1_i—ate —11I111l� �sI.111i i1ll���i—MOIII — — arw— MINIr�— ---ice i�—i —1m imimilim i1�—J—NI MIM �i i• 11 r—i — —lr —i— —>iw i �—t im1 � ii'i--� iii ---moi* i>i•�i. —i• .MI II— —I�Ps�—ice 20 90 go 40 50 60 70 80 93 I�IJi�i�— a— rte IIS- IIIIII11Illrl�l I—IIIYI�.I.! a i Y— irr i>i>--A7—i >•ir—a /MI �ii lAi — —ars ��i�i r--�Ilq i-ilsi-i Iii lllr` —r— ilYr��IiY i�s�"►J!i i!i i IApIIIIAMI. ��i lYII pMMOMMMII=MM, All �•i—tii r—i IM=.11lll Y-sAII 1111 1.1111 �rY-ai �lilir -- qi =MEMO rr l—um w ----ACJ—!MMOr_�� !—i•l---im1a—i _ Mil M'a. mmo.I—is—Y--r— i I!i' MI II IMM-YYYYY� i�ms/r. -- a—_—a--i ii—il— >•—r--t— iii—i- ilmi1l a—i=— iii—r —f/=.1.YSYY IIIb ii a—.l.ml= —Irll iii i—Mti ii— -i Y --- MEM. iiiW— a---- Y—>♦I_r- --Iw— iis- -MM IMLi =I— —s- -r I!l i— AI -FYI ill—i>—YIu— iii—r NOME r— i--.— il•Yi—M- -MIJi rrriN.i MEM I_____ fs� —7� —Yr mit i •—� nn MIMENi•iMI..",..M11 . rel .1..1 r� = mil I -Ir___ -e IIlwr —mm>si--I I I lid aMM.I�—i—M=Ilf ill ff. i—_ail --iA i —>• Allrmrwl .mm., --/1 >•—Ai tri —... mm Amommrl.I wlr — MWAINI — -- r— MININW iai sII>—i—r11.i ri—i—Ara-iii —��-� i MI.MI.I Ills ri i�--.-tom r,d ft — -- i 11011—A MMPI II -Mm i—lllw—lr —+w—'ice mmi—qm>� tw...MMrl-1--MEM 1.,..rrl--liMMIMEM. Ari i -Ilii -i ii MOMPIIMMI .I Irl l.+.i•i 1. Ari YiMipmmt mmommm i=MN i i>•i i��1ii i i Irr1- Ji a� Ilra- -____ ^tea-err -rI1l�a�i 1- i >�i lIw- MMIMMIMNI.t1011 �-Ylt -M Yir -rI1I.= �Ir.n..l"IIIr MI=.== m=1.1 iii i -w MPIM ia- Y-i-J- =:= llrY11=IIY— l_I^r_i--- -YYa—ilmi i i>--w— l.iI1111rriA �i•li>—ii—MI —Mm MIs — 1l—.=MIM-! ii—s MNIMII viii ]011011 -� 100 .001 .002 .005 .009 .010 .045 .106 .025 .500 1-00 2.00 CLAY DIAMETER OF PARTICLES IN MILLMETE.RS GRAVEL 51 % i -s- i-a— a— i�—�— i —t—•— >•— J—i —r Mm." -1>---- 4.75 4.5 19.0 37.5 76 2 152 203 SAND 24 % USDA SOIL TYPE: Very Gravelly Loarny Sand SILT 16 % CLAY 9 % 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 FROM; Profile Pit 2 at 2 to 3 Feet agaa 7WII 115 069A GaZtech HEPWORTH•PAWLAK GEOTECHNFCAL USDA GRADATION TEST RESULTS Figure 5 Job No. 115 069A Z J J co ULis rz Z 1— 2 co U w } o WL Q O T gwo J 0 coco < • 1' J = o e) - w 0) TTERRERG LIMITS Sandy Silt and Clay Matrix Sandy Silt and Clay Matrix Very Gravelly Loamy Sand GRADATION W Z N W re a 0v) a. a. Q to 01 N Ot N SAMPLE LOCATION 0 'CY m 0, si E E¢ N • 4-1 co co m = _mQ d -0 Q = L'S Lhy-a C C N O U L O L • 0. 0 Q ic APPENDIX A 1996 Report Subsoil and Percolation Test Information Job No. 115 069A 0 5 10 LEGEND: TOPSOIL; sandy silty clay, scattered gravel, organics, slightly moist to moist, brown. NOTES: PIT 1 ELEV. = 999' J WC 12.3 +4-41 -200 - 30 U. 37 PI - 12 PIT 2 ELEV. = 988' PROFILE PIT ELEV. = 980' GRAVEL and COBBLES (GC ); sandy siity clay matrix, with boulders up to 4 feet diameter, medium dense, slightly moist to moist, fight brown to white, subangular to angular basalt rock, calcareous. Disturbed bulk sample. 0 5 10 1. Exploratory pits were excavated on June 17,1996 with a backhoe. 2. Locations of exploratory pits were measured approximately by pacing from features shown on the site plan provided. 3. Elevations of exploratory pits were obtained by interpolation between contours on the site plan provided. Logs of exploratory pits are drawn to depth. 4. The exploratory pit locations and elevations should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the method used. 5. The lines between materials shown on the exploratory pit logs represent the approximate boundaries between material types and transitions may be gradual. 6. No free water was encountered in the pits at the time of excavating. Fluctuations in water level may occur with time. 7. Laboratory Testing Results: WC = Water Content (%) LL = Liquid Limit (%) +4 = Percent retained on No. 4 sieve. PI = Plasticity Index (`Yo) -200 = Percent passing No. 200 sieve. 196 285 HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. LOGS OF EXPLORATORY PITS Fig. 2 24 HR. 45 MRI. 100 70 7RR. 15 MOL W ASN. I9M9L 1400E 1 MK 1200 1100 IINOROMETE71ANALYSIS TIMENEADIN69 50 40 30 10 0 D01 ELS. STANDARD, 5E111E3 140 1.35 110 M SI EVE ANALYSIS 1 CLEAR SOUME OPE/13142S 14 318' 1/2' 3.44' 1 1R Y 5' E' 1 1 } r 4 F t- 1- r. 1 1 .00R Das .119 .015 .077 .074 .150 .300 .800 1.18 2.7E 4.71 DIAMETER OF PARTICLES IN MILLIMETERS 880 19.0 378 752 102 12.5 477 0 10 20 30 40 50 40 70 100 707 CAYTO 547 SAND GRAVEL 1 MFOglM 1 COARSE 1 Fjj� 1 COARSE GRAVEL 41 % SAND 29 % SILT AND CLAY 30 % LIQUID LIMIT 37 % PLASTICITY INDEX 12 % SAMPLE OF; Silty Clayey Sandy Gravel FROM: Pit 1 from 4 to 6 Feet i- 196 285 HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC_ GRADATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 3 HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL„ INC. TABLET. PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS JOB NO. 196 285 HOLE NO. P-1 P-2 P-3 HOLE DEPTH (INCHES) 46 44 1/2 45 LENGTH OF INTERVAL (MIN) 15 refill refill 15 refill 15 refill refill WATER DEPTH AT START OF INTERVAL (INCHES) 7 1/4 WATER DEPTH AT END OF INTERVAL (INCHES) 6 1/4 DROP IN AVERAGE WATER PERCOLATION LEVEL RATE (INCHES) (MIN.IINCHI 1 6 1/4 5 1/4 1 7 3/4 6 314 1 6 3(4 6 1/4 1/2 6 1/4 5 314 1/2 7 3/4 7 1/4 1/2 7 114 6 3/4 1/2 6 3/4 8 1/2 6 1/4 7 3/4 1/2 3/4 7 3/4 7 3/4 7 6 1/2 1/2 6 1/2 6 1/2 6 5 3/4 1/4 8 314 8 1/2 1/4 8 1/2 8 1/4 114 8 114 8 1/4 8 6 1/2 1/4 1 3/4 6 1/2 5 1/4 1 114 8 1/2 7 1/4 1 1/4 7 1/4 6 1/4 1 6 1/4 5 114 1 8 1/2 7 3/4 3/4 7 3/4 7 3/4 7 6 1(4 3/4 30 60 20 Note: Percolation test holes were hand dug in the bottom of backhoe pits and soaked on June 17, 1996. Percolation tests were conducted on June 1 8, 1996.