HomeMy WebLinkAboutSoils Report 02.05.2020CTL I THOMPSON GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INVESTIGATION BURKETT RESIDENCE TRACT 8, ANTLERS ORCHARD DEVELOPMENT GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO Prepared For: BOB BURKETT 384 Jenny Place New Castle, CO 81647 Attention: Bob Burkett Project No. GS06431.000-120 February 5, 2020 234 Center Drive I Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Telephone: 970-945-2809 Fax: 970-945-7411 ir TABLE OF CONTENTS SCOPE 1 SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS 1 SITE CONDITIONS 2 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION 3 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS 3 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 4 SITE EARTHWORK 5 Excavations 5 Subexcavation and Structural FiII 6 Foundation Wall Backfill 6 FOUNDATIONS 7 SLAB -ON -GRADE CONSTRUCTION 8 FOUNDATION WALLS 9 SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE 10 SURFACE DRAINAGE 11 CONCRETE 12 CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS 12 STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING SERVICES 13 GEOTECHNICAL RISK , 13 LIMITATIONS 14 FIGURE 1 — VICINITY MAP FIGURE 2— AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH FIGURE 3— SUMMARY LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGURE 4— SWELL — CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS FIGURE 5— GRADATION TEST RESULTS FIGURE 6— FOUNDATION WALL DRAIN CONCEPT TABLE I — SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TESTING BOB BURKETT BURKETT RESIDENCE PROJECT NO. GS06431.000-120 SCOPE This report presents the results of our geotechnical engineering investiga- tion for the Burkett Residence proposed on Tract 8, Antlers Orchard Develop- ment in Garfield County, Colorado. The scope of our geotechnical engineering investigation was set forth in our Proposal No. GS 19-0290. Our report was pre- pared from data developed from our field exploration, laboratory testing, engi- neering analysis, and our experience with similar conditions. This report includes a description of the subsurface conditions found in our exploratory borings and presents geotechnical engineering recommendations for design and construction of foundations, floor systems, below -grade walls, subsurface drain systems, and details influenced by the subsoils. A summary of our conclusions is below. SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS Subsurface conditions encountered in our exploratory borings were about 2 inches of topsoil and 7 feet to 14 feet of predominantly clayey to silty sand underlain by clayey to silty gravel. Practical au- ger refusal occurred on bedrock fragments at a depth of 15 feet in all three borings. Free groundwater was not found in our explora- tory borings at the time of drilling. Based on our field and laboratory data from the site, and our engi- neering experience, we judge the undisturbed natural soils at the site possess potential for moderate amounts of differential move- ment when wetted under building Toads. The proposed residence and barn can be constructed on footing foundations, provided the soils below the entire areas of the building footprints are subexca- vated to a depth of at least 3 feet. The excavated soils can be mois- ture -treated and replaced as densely -compacted, structural fill. Recommendations for the subexcavation process and design crite- ria for footings are in the report. Slab -on -grade floors are planned in basement and garage areas of the residence. The barn floor will also be a slab. After the recom- mended subexcavation and recompaction process is accomplished below the entire building footprints, we anticipate good performance BOB BURKETT BURKETT RESIDENCE PROJECT NO. GS06431.000-120 1 of slabs -on -grade supported by an at least 3 -foot thickness of densely -compacted, structural fill. 4. Below -grade areas in the buildings should be provided with perime- ter foundation drains to mitigate potential for subsurface wetting. Surface drainage should be designed to rapidly convey surface wa- ter away from the buildings. SITE CONDITIONS The Burkett Residence is proposed on Tract 8, Antlers Orchard Develop- ment in Garfield County, Colorado. A vicinity map with the location of the site is shown on Figure 1. The lot is a 10.417 -acre parcel accessed by County Road 237 at the east. An aerial photograph of the site is shown on Figure 2. A natural drainage swale trends down to the south in the eastern part of the property. Ground surface at the site generally slopes down to the southeast at grades less than 10 percent. Much of the property was likely flood -irrigated in the past. Veg- etation consists of mostly grasses and weeds. Several inches of snow covered the ground at the time of our subsurface investigation A photograph of the site at the time of our exploratory drilling is below. BOB BURKETT BURKETT RESIDENCE PROJECT NO. GS06431.000-120 2 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION We were provided with preliminary architectural plans by Royal Oak De- sign (dated My 13, 2019). The plans indicate the residence will be a one and two-story, wood -framed building with a basement level and an attached garage. Slab -on -grade floors are proposed in basement and garage areas. A barn with a slab -on -grade floor is also proposed. Maximum excavation depths to attain foun- dation elevations for the residence will likely be on the order of 10 feet. We ex- pect excavation depths of Tess than 5 feet to obtain foundation depths for the barn. Typical foundation loads for this type of construction are about 1,000 to 3,000 pounds per linear foot of foundation wall with maximum 50 -kip interior col- umn loads. We should be provided with more detailed construction plans, when available, so that we can provide geotechnical/geo-structural engineering input. GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS As part of our geotechnical engineering investigation, we reviewed map- ping by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) titled, "Geology Map of the Silt Quadrangle, Garfield County, Colorado", by Shroba and Scott (dated 2001). The mapping indicates the overburden soils below most of the subject property con- sist of eolian loess deposits over pediment deposits that likely consist of the Shire Member of the Wasatch Bedrock Formation. The eolian loess deposits are prone to erosion and hydrocompaction. Undivided alluvium and colluvium de- posits are in the area of the drainage swale in the east part of the property. The Shire Member is described as consisting of intervals of claystone, mudstone, and siltstone interbedded with minor lenses of sandstone. Subsoils encountered in our exploratory borings drilled at the site are consistent with the loess over pedi- ment shown on the geologic mapping. BOB BURKETT BURKETT RESIDENCE PROJECT NO. GS06431.000-120 3 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Subsurface conditions at the site were investigated by drilling three explor- atory borings (TH-1 through TH-3) at the approximate locations shown on Figure 2. Subsoils encountered in our borings were logged by our engineer, who ob- tained samples of the soils for laboratory testing. A photograph taken during drill- ing operations is below. Subsoils encountered in our exploratory borings were about 2 inches of topsoil underlain by clayey to silty gravel and 7 to 14 feet of predominately clayey to silty sand underlain by clayey to silty gravel and fragments of claystone, silt - stone, and sandstone bedrock. Practical auger refusal occurred on bedrock frag- ments at a depth of 15 feet in all three borings. Free groundwater was not en- countered in the borings at the time of drilling. PVC pipe was placed in TH-2 to facilitate future checks of groundwater. Graphic Togs of the soils encountered in our exploratory borings are shown on Figure 3. Subsoil samples from our exploratory borings were returned to our labora- tory where field classifications were checked and representative samples were BOB BURKETT BURKETT RESIDENCE PROJECT NO. GS06431.000-120 4 selected for pertinent testing. Two samples soils selected for one-dimensional, swell -consolidation testing exhibited 1.0 percent consolidation and 0.3 percent swell when wetted under an applied load of 1,000 psf. Swell -consolidation test results are shown on Figure 4. Two samples of the soils selected for gradation analysis contained 1 to 29 percent gravel, 46 to 47 percent sand, and 24 to 53 percent silt and clay (passing the No. 200 sieve). Gradation test results are shown on Figure 5. Engineering index testing performed on one sample of clayey sand indicated a liquid limit of 36 percent and a plasticity index of 13 per- cent. Laboratory testing results are summarized on Table I. SITE EARTHWORK Excavations Excavations at the site to construct the proposed residence and barn can be accomplished using conventional, heavy-duty excavating equipment. From a "trench" safety standpoint, sides of excavations need to be sloped or braced to meet local, state and federal safety regulations. We expect the soils encoun- tered in excavations will classify as Type B or Type C soils based on OSHA standards governing excavations. Temporary excavation slopes that are not re- tained should be no steeper than 1 to 1 (horizontal to vertical) in Type B soils and 1.5 to 1 in Type C soils. Contractors are responsible for maintaining safe exca- vations. Free groundwater was not encountered in our exploratory borings. We do not anticipate excavations for construction of the building foundations will pene- trate the free groundwater table. We recommend excavations be sloped to grav- ity discharges or to temporary sumps where water from precipitation can be re- moved by pumping. BOB BURKETT BURKETT RESIDENCE PROJECT NO. GS06431.000-120 5 Subexcavation and Structural Fill Based on our field and laboratory data from the site, and our engineering experience, the soils at the site possess potential for moderate amounts of differ- ential movement when wetted under building loads. To reduce potential risk of differential movement, we recommend subexcavation of the soils below the en- tire building footprints to a depth of at least 3 feet below footing and slab eleva- tions and replacement with densely -compacted, structural fill. The subexcavation process should extend at least 1 foot beyond the perimeter of the building foot- prints. The subexcavated soils, free of organic matter, debris and rocks larger than 3 inches in diameter can be re -used as structural fill. The structural fill soils should be moisture -conditioned to within 2 percent of optimum moisture content and placed in loose lifts of 8 inches thick or less. Structural fill should be com- pacted to at least 98 percent of standard Proctor (ASTM D 698) maximum dry density. Moisture content and density of structural fill should be checked by a representative of our firm during placement. Observation of the compaction pro- cedure is necessary. Foundation Wall Backfill Proper placement and compaction of foundation backfill is important to re- duce infiltration of surface water and settlement of backfill. The soils excavated from the site can be used as backfill, provided they are free of rocks larger than 3 -inches in diameter, organics, and debris. Backfill soils should be moisture -con- ditioned to within 2 percent of optimum moisture content placed in loose lifts of approximately 10 inches thick or Tess and compacted. Thickness of lifts will likely need to be about 6 inches if there are small confined areas of backfill, which limit the size and weight of compaction equipment. BOB BURKETT BURKETT RESIDENCE PROJECT NO. GS06431.000-120 6 Backfill should be compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum standard Proctor (ASTM D 698) dry density. Moisture content and density of the backfill should be checked during placement by a representative of our firm. Observation of the compaction procedure is necessary. FOUNDATIONS Based on our field and laboratory data from the site, and our engineering experience, the undisturbed natural soils at the site possess potential for moder- ate amounts of differential movement when wetted under building loads. We judge the residence and barn can be constructed on footing foundations, pro- vided the soils below the entire areas of the building footprints are subexcavated to a depth of at least 3 feet below planned bottom of footing elevations. The ex- cavated soils can be moisture -treated and reused to build mats of densely -com- pacted, structural fill below the buildings. Structural fill should be processed, placed, and compacted in accordance with recommendations in the Subexcava- tion and Structural Fill section. We expect the subexcavation and structural fill process will result in good performance of footings, however, some risk of differential settlement will still ex- ist. It will be critical to adhere to recommendations in the SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE and SURFACE DRAINAGE sections. Recommended design and construction criteria for footing foundations are presented below. 1. The residence and barn can be constructed on footing foundations supported by an at least 3 -foot thickness of moisture -treated, densely -compacted structural fill soils in accordance with the Subexcavation and Structural Fill section. BOB BURKETT BURKETT RESIDENCE PROJECT NO. GS06431.000-120 7 2. Footings on the structural fill can be sized using a maximum allowa- ble bearing pressure of 2,000 psf. 3. Continuous wall footings should have a minimum width of at least 16 inches. Foundations for isolated columns should have minimum dimensions of 24 inches by 24 inches. Larger sizes may be re- quired, depending upon foundation Toads. Grade beams and foundation walls should be well reinforced, top and bottom, to span undisclosed loose or soft soil pockets. We rec- ommend reinforcement sufficient to span an unsupported distance of at least 12 feet. 5. The soils under exterior footings should be protected from freezing. We recommend the bottom of footings be constructed at a depth of at least 36 inches below finished exterior grades. The Garfield County building department should be consulted regarding required frost protection depth. SLAB -ON -GRADE CONSTRUCTION Slab -on -grade floors are proposed in basement and garage areas of the residence. The barn floor will also be a slab -on -grade. Soils below the entire ar- eas of the building footprints should be subexcavated to a depth of at least 3 feet below planned bottom of slabs. The excavated soils can be moisture -treated and reused to build mats of densely -compacted, structural fill below the buildings. A 1 -foot thickness of structural fill is recommended below exterior slabs and flat - work. Sub -excavation and structural fill should be in accordance with the recom- mendations in the Subexcavation and Structural Fill section. We expect the subexcavation and structural fill process will result in good performance of slabs, however, some risk of differential settlement will still exist. BOB BURKETT BURKETT RESIDENCE PROJECT NO. GS06431.000-120 8 It will be critical to adhere to recommendations in the SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE and SURFACE DRAINAGE sections. We recommend the following precautions for slab -on -grade construction at this site. 1. Slabs should be separated from exterior walls and interior bearing members with slip joints which allow free vertical movement of the slabs. The use of underslab plumbing should be minimized. Underslab plumbing should be pressure tested for leaks before the slabs are constructed. Plumbing and utilities which pass through slabs should be isolated from the slabs with sleeves and provided with flexible couplings to slab supported appliances. 3. Exterior patio and porch slabs should be isolated from the building. These slabs should be well -reinforced to function as independent units. Movements of these slabs should not be transmitted to the building. 4. Frequent control joints should be provided, in accordance with American Concrete Institute (ACI) recommendations, to reduce problems associated with shrinkage and curling. FOUNDATION WALLS Foundation walls which extend below -grade should be designed for lateral earth pressures where backfill is not present to about the same extent on both sides of the wall, such as adjacent to basement and crawl space areas. Many factors affect the values of the design lateral earth pressure. These factors in- clude, but are not limited to, the type, compaction, slope and drainage of the backfill, and the rigidity of the wall against rotation and deflection. For a very rigid wall where negligible or very little deflection will occur, an "at -rest" lateral earth pressure should be used in design. For walls that can de- flect or rotate 0.5 to 1 percent of wall height (depending upon the backfill types), BOB BURKETT BURKETT RESIDENCE PROJECT NO. GS06431.000-120 9 lower "active" lateral earth pressures are appropriate. Our experience indicates typical below -grade walls in residences deflect or rotate slightly under normal de- sign Toads, and that this deflection results in satisfactory wall performance. Thus, the earth pressures on the walls will likely be between the "active" and "at -rest" conditions. If the on-site soils are used as backfill and the backfill is not saturated, we recommend design of below -grade walls at this site using an equivalent fluid den- sity of at least 50 pcf. This value assumes deflection; some minor cracking of walls may occur. If very little wall deflection is desired, a higher design value for the "at -rest" condition is appropriate using an equivalent fluid pressure of 60 pcf. SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE Water from surface precipitation, snowmelt, and irrigation frequently flows through relatively permeable backfill placed adjacent to a residence and collects on the surface of Tess permeable soils occurring at the bottom of foundation ex- cavations. This process can cause wet or moist conditions in below -grade areas, such as basements and crawl spaces, after construction. It can also result in subsurface wetting below the building, which can cause volume changes in the soils and differential building movement and associated damage. We recommend that exterior foundation drains be installed around the pe- rimeters of the basement and other below -grade areas of the buildings. The ex- terior foundation drains should consist of 4 -inch diameter, slotted, PVC pipe en- cased in free -draining gravel. A prefabricated drainage composite should be placed adjacent to foundation walls. Care should be taken during backfill opera- tions to prevent damage to drainage composites. The drains should lead to posi- tive gravity outlets, or to sump pits where water can be removed by pumping. Gravity outlets should not be susceptible to clogging or freezing. Installation of clean -outs along the drain pipes is recommended. The foundation drain concept is shown on Figure 6. BOB BURKETT BURKETT RESIDENCE PROJECT NO. GS06431.000-120 10 SURFACE DRAINAGE Surface drainage is critical to the performance of foundations, floor slabs, and concrete flatwork. Surface drainage should be designed to provide rapid runoff of surface water away from the residence and barn. Proper surface drain- age and irrigation practices can help control the amount of surface water that penetrates to foundation levels and contributes to settlement or heave of soils and bedrock that support the foundation and slabs -on -grade. Positive drainage away from the foundations and avoidance of irrigation near the foundation also help to avoid excessive wetting of backfill soils, which can lead to increased backfill settlement and possibly to higher lateral earth pressures, due to in- creased weight and reduced strength of the backfill. We recommend the follow- ing precautions. The ground surface surrounding the exterior of the residence and barn should be sloped to drain away from the building in all direc- tions. We recommend a minimum constructed slope of at least 12 inches in the first 10 feet (10 percent) in landscaped areas around the buildings, where practical. Backfill around the foundation walls should be moistened and com- pacted pursuant to recommendations in the Foundation Wall Back- fill section. 3. Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the lim- its of all backfill. Splash blocks and/or extensions should be pro- vided at all downspouts so water discharges onto the ground be- yond the backfill. We generally recommend against burial of down- spout discharge. Where it is necessary to bury downspout dis- charge, solid, rigid pipe should be used, and it should slope to an open gravity outlet. 4. Irrigation should be limited to the minimum amount sufficient to maintain vegetation; application of more water will increase likeli- hood of slab and foundation movements. Landscaping should be carefully designed and maintained to minimize irrigation. Plants placed close to foundation walls should be limited to those with low BOB BURKETT BURKETT RESIDENCE PROJECT NO. GS06431.000.120 11 moisture requirements. Irrigated grass should not be located within 5 feet of the foundation. Sprinklers should not discharge within 5 feet of the foundation. Plastic sheeting should not be placed be- neath landscaped areas adjacent to foundation walls or grade beams. Geotextile fabric will inhibit weed growth yet still allow natu- ral evaporation to occur. CONCRETE Concrete in contact with soil can be subject to sulfate attack. We meas- ured a water-soluble sulfate concentration of 0.11 percent in one sample of the soils from the site. For this level of sulfate concentration, ACI 332-08, Code Re- quirements for Residential Concrete, indicates concrete shall be made with ASTM 6150 Type II cement, or an ASTM C595 or C1157 hydraulic cement meet- ing moderate sulfate -resistant hydraulic cement (MS) designation. Alternative combination of cements and supplementary cementations materials such as Class F fly ash, shall be permitted with accurate test records for sulfate durability. In our experience, superficial damage may occur to the exposed surfaces of highly -permeable concrete, even though sulfate levels are relatively low. To control this risk and to resist freeze -thaw deterioration, the water-to-cementitious materials ratio should not exceed 0.50 for concrete in contact with soils that are likely to stay moist due to surface drainage or high-water tables. Concrete should have a total air content of 6% +1- 1.5%. We recommend all foundation walls and grade beams in contact with the subsoils be damp -proofed. CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS We recommend that CTL 1 Thompson, Inc. be retained to provide con- struction observation and materials testing services for the project. This would allow us the opportunity to verify whether soil conditions are consistent with those found during this investigation. If others perform these observations, they must accept responsibility to judge whether the recommendations in this report remain appropriate. Our experience indicates it is beneficial to projects, from economic BOB BURKETT BURKETT RESIDENCE PROJECT NO. GS06431.000-120 12 and practical standpoints, when there is continuity between engineering consulta- tion and the construction observation and materials testing phases. STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING SERVICES CTL I Thompson, Inc. is a full-service geotechnical, structural, materials, and environmental engineering firm. Our services include preparation of struc- tural framing and foundation plans. We can also design earth retention systems. Based on our experience, CTL 1 Thompson, Inc. typically provides value to pro- jects from schedule and economic standpoints, due to our combined expertise and experience with geotechnical, structural, and materials engineering. We would like the opportunity to provide a proposal for structural engineering ser- vices on your project. GEOTECHNICAL RISK The concept of risk is an important aspect of any geotechnical evaluation. The primary reason for this is that the analytical methods used to develop ge- otechnical recommendations do not comprise an exact science. The analytical tools which geotechnical engineers use are generally empirical and must be tem- pered by engineering judgment and experience. Therefore, the solutions or rec- ommendations presented in any geotechnical evaluation should not be consid- ered risk-free and, more importantly, are not a guarantee that the interaction be- tween the soils and the proposed structure will perform as desired or intended. What the engineering recommendations presented in the preceding sections do constitute is our estimate, based on the information generated during this and previous evaluations and our experience in working with these conditions, of those measures that are necessary to help the building perform satisfactorily. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of the client for the purpose of providing geotechnical engineering design and construction criteria for the proposed residence. The information, conclusions, and recommendations BOB BURKETT BURKETT RESIDENCE PROJECT NO. GS06431.000-120 13 presented herein are based upon consideration of many factors including, but not limited to, the type of structures proposed, the geologic setting, and the subsur- face conditions encountered. The conclusions and recommendations contained in the report are not valid for use by others. Standards of practice continuously change in the area of geotechnical engineering. The recommendations provided in this report are appropriate for about three years. If the proposed project is not constructed within three years, we should be contacted to determine if we should update this report. LIMITATIONS Our exploratory borings provide a reasonably accurate picture of subsur- face conditions at the site. Variations in the subsurface conditions not indicated by the borings will occur. Our representative should be called to observe the subexcavation process and test moisture and density of structural fill during placement. This investigation was conducted in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by geotechnical engineers currently practicing under similar conditions in the locality of this project. No warranty, express or im- plied, is made. If we can be of further service in discussing the contents of this report, please call. CTL I THOMPSON, INC. Reviewed by: /e/✓rim, Ryan W. DeMars,E.I.T. 1Jmes D. Kellogg, P.E. Staff Engineer Division Manager RWD:JDK:ac cc: Via email to alitecbob@gmail.com BOB BURKETT BURKETT RESIDENCE PROJECT NO. GS06431.000-120 14 0 1000 2000 ilmil SCALE: 1' = 2000' NOTE: IMAGE FROM GOOGLE EARTH Bob Burkett Burkett Residence Protect No. GS06431.000-120 Vicinity Map FIg. 1 0 100 200 SCALE: 1" = 200' LEGEND: TH-1 APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF • EXPLORATORY BORING APPROXIMATE PROPERTY BOUNDARY NOTE: IMAGE FROM GOOGLE EARTH Bob Burkett Burkett Residence Project No. GS06431.000-120 Aerial Photograph Flg. 2 "—'0 — 5 — 15 TH-1 TH-2 TH-3 50/12 29/12 50/12 20/5 20/12 I 117/12 01 5- 10 — 15 — --20 20 BOB BURKETT BURKETT RESIDENCE PROJECT NO. GS06431.000-120 LEGEND: ® TOPSOIL, CLAY, SILTY, SANDY, GRAVEL, MOIST, LIGHT BROWN. SAND, CLAYEY, SILTY, LENSES OF SANDY CLAY, MEDIUM DENSE TO DENSE, SLIGHTLY MOIST, BROWN. (SC -SM, CL -ML) HGRAVEL, CLAYEY, SILTY, LENSES OF SANDY CLAY, FRAGMENTS OF CLAYSTONE, SILTSTONE AND SANDSTONE, DENSE TO VERY DENSE, MOIST, LIGHT BROWN. (GC -GM) I DRIVE SAMPLE. THE SYMBOL 50)9 INDICATES 50 BLOWS OFA 140 -POUND HAMMER FALLING 30 INCHES WERE REQUIRED TO DRIVE A 2.5 -INCH 0 D. SAMPLER 9 INCHES TT * PRACTICAL DRILL REFUSAL NOTES: SUMMARY LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS 1. EXPLORATORY BORINGS WERE DRILLED ON JANUARY 6, 2020 WITH 4 -INCH DIAMETER, SOLID -STEM AUGER AND A TRACK- MOUNTED DRILL RIG. FREE GROUNDWATER WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED IN OUR BORINGS AT THE TIME OF DRILLING 2. PVC PIPE WAS PLACED IN TH-2 TO FACILITATE FUTURE CHECKS OF GROUNDWATER 3. LOCATIONS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS ARE APPROXIMATE. 4 EXPLORATORY BORINGS ARE SUBJECT TO THE EXPLANATIONS, LIMITATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS CONTAINED IN THIS REPORT. FIG. 3 Z O W Z < -4 a x w Z • -s 0 0) co w -6 2 0 U -7 111 I I 1111 1111 111 1111 11111111 ADDITIONAL COMPRESSION UNDER— CONSTANT PRESSURE DUE TO WETTING 0.1 APPLIED PRESSURE - KSF Sample of SAND, CLAYEY, SILTY (SC -SM) 1.0 From TH-3 AT 4 FEET COMPRESSION % EXPANSION 3 2 0 -1 -2 -3 -4 -5 • 10 100 DRY UNIT WEIGHT= 108 PCF MOISTURE CONTENT= 6.2 % s • - EXPANS ON UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE DUE TO WETTING • 111 0.1 APPLIED PRESSURE - KSF Sample of SAND, CLAYEY, SILTY (SC -SM) From TH-3 AT 14 FEET 1.0 BOB BURKETT BURKETT RESIDENCE PROJECT NO. GS06431.000-120 10 100 DRY UNIT WEIGHT= 122 PCF MOISTURE CONTENT= 8,1 % Swell Consolidation Test Results Sample of SAND, CLAYEY (SC) From TH - 1 AT 9 FEET GRAVEL SILT & CLAY PLASTICITY INDEX SAND LIQUID LIMIT 47 % I HYDROMETER ANALYSIS 1 SIEVE ANALYSIS 25 HR. 7 HR. TIME READINGS U.S. STANDARD SERIES CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS 45 MIN. 15 MIN. 60 MIN. 19 MIN. 4 MIN. 1 MIN. '200 '100 50 40 '30 16 '10 '8 '4 3/8" 3/4" 114 3" 5"6" 8" 100 !ERCCNT PASSINCJ 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ��© Cp 0 0 0 -4 0 CI 0 0 0 0 0 PERCENT RETAINED — MC A 10 i EM� 80 ^� 20 M=�IMm= ME i''''"''"111L X70 Cw- ��-��Ci ��MM <60 =El 30 E I- E/01..5, TIPM6111 = z z 1— 40 Iiicc 50 cc �im Wili aw -40..rw.p M. 50 50 w M f _ U I �■ --- K 30 MI 60 o. ._.._� 20 � i� 70 M 10 �!_ 1 80 o ... 90 .001 0 002 .005 .009 .019 .037 .074 .149 .2970.42 .590 1 19 2 0 2.3B 4 76 9 52 19.1 36.1 76.2 127 00 152 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS CLAY (PLASTIC) TO SILT (NON -PLASTIC) SANDS GRAVEL FINE I MEDIUM I COARS FINE I COARSE I COBBLES Sample of SAND, CLAYEY (SC) From TH - 1 AT 9 FEET GRAVEL SILT & CLAY PLASTICITY INDEX SAND LIQUID LIMIT 47 % Sample of CLAY, SILTY, SANDY (CL -ML) From TH - 2 AT 14 FEET BOB BURKETT BURKETT RESIDENCE PROJECT NO. GS06431.000-120 GRAVEL 1 % SAND SILT & CLAY 53 % LIQUID LIMIT PLASTICITY INDEX Gradation Test Results 46 FIG. 5 I HYDROMETER ANALYSIS —I SIEVE ANALYSIS 25 HR. 7 HR. TIME READINGS U.S. STANDARD SERIES CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS 45 MIN. 15 MIN. 60 MIN. 19 MIN. 4 MIN. 1 MIN '200 '100 50 40 30 '16 '10 '8 '4 3/8" 3/4" 1W 3" 5"6" 8- 100 0 !ERCCNT PASSINCJ 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 ^� 20 i''''"''"111L 30 E z 1— 40 ix 1- 50 50 w _ U --- K 60 o. ._.._� 70 1 80 90 ... �r — 100 .001 0 002 .005 .009 .019 .037 .074 .149 .297 .590 1 19 2 0 2.38 4 78 9 52 19.1 36.1 76.2 12752200 0.42 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS CLAY (PLASTIC) TO SILT (NON -PLASTIC) SANDS GRAVEL FINE I MEDIUM I COARS FINE I COARSE COBBLES Sample of CLAY, SILTY, SANDY (CL -ML) From TH - 2 AT 14 FEET BOB BURKETT BURKETT RESIDENCE PROJECT NO. GS06431.000-120 GRAVEL 1 % SAND SILT & CLAY 53 % LIQUID LIMIT PLASTICITY INDEX Gradation Test Results 46 FIG. 5 SLOPE OSHA COVER ENTIRE WIDTH OF GRAVEL WITH NON—WOVEN GEOTEXTILE FABRIC (MIRAF1 1 40N OR EQUIVALENT). SLOPE PER REPORT BACKALL PREFABRICATED DRAINAGE COMPOSITE (MIRADRAIN 6000 OR EQUIVALENT) 2-3' ATTACH PLASTIC SHEETING TO FOUNDATION WALL PO -: '4 �,. xy• firs" ,.. tot 2" MINIMUM 8" MINIMUM — OR BEYOND 1:1 SLOPE FROM BOTTOM OF FOOTING (WHICHEVER IS GREATER) 4—INCH DIAMETER PERFORATED RIGID DRAIN PIPE. THE PIPE SHOULD BE PLACED IN A TRENCH WITH A SLOPE OF AT LEAST 1/8—INCH DROP PER FOOT OF DRAIN. ENCASE PIPE IN 1/2" TO 1-1/2" WASHED GRAVEL EXTEND GRAVEL LATERALLY TO FOOTING AND AT LEAST 1/2 HEIGHT OF FOOTING. FILL ENTIRE TRENCH WITH GRAVEL BELOW—GRADE WALL SLIP JOINT ;SLAB -ON -GRADE ; " . FOOTING OR PAD NOTE: THE BOTTOM OF THE DRAIN SHOULD BE AT LEAST 2 INCHES BELOW BOTTOM OF FOOTING AT THE HIGHEST POINT AND SLOPE DOWNWARD TO A POSITIVE GRAVITY OUREf OR TO A SUMP WHERE WATER CAN BE REMOVED BY PUMPING. Bob Burkett Burkett Residence Prnlear4 AI., (CncA97 nnn 4 nn Foundation Wall Drain Concept EXPLORATORY BORING DEPTH (FEET) MOISTURE CONTENT (%) DRY DENSITY (PCF) TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TESTING PROJECT NO. GS06431.000-120 ATTERBERG LIMITS LIQUID LIMIT (%) PLASTICITY INDEX (%) SWELL* (%) SOLUBLE SULFATES (%) PERCENT GRAVEL (%) PERCENT SAND (%) PASSING NO. 200 SIEVE (%) DESCRIPTION TH-1 4 10.3 TH-1 9 TH-2 14 TH-3 TH-3 TH-3 4 9 4.7 7.3 36 111 13 36 SAND, CLAYEY (SC) 29 _ 47 24 SAND, CLAYEY (SC) 120 1 46 53 CLAY, SILTY, SANDY (CL -ML) 14 6.2 8.1 108 122 -1.0 0.3 0.11 SAND, CLAYEY, SILTY (SC -SM) SAND, CLAYEY, SILTY (SC -SM) SAND, CLAYEY, SILTY (SC -SM) SWELL MEASURED WITH 1000 PSF APPLIED PRESSURE. NEGATIVE VALUE INDICATES COMPRESSION. Page 1 of 1