HomeMy WebLinkAboutSubsoils Report for Foundation DesignH-PVI(UMAR 5020 County Road 154
Glenwood Springs, C0 81601
Phone: (970) 945-7988
Fax: (970) 945-8454
Email: hpkglenwcod@kumarusa.com
Office Locations: Denver (HQ), Parker, Colorado Springs, Fort Collins, Glenwood Springs, Summit County, Colorado
SUBSOIT- STUÐY
FOR FOUNDATION ÐÐSIGN
PR.TPÛSÐÐ RESIDENCE AND SHOP EUTLÐING
l-oT'1, BLOCK 1, CANYON CREEK pR.ûpERTnES
COUÌ\TY ROAÐ 263
G.A.R.FIELÐ COUNTY, COLOR,AÐO
PROJECT NO. X8-7-202
MAY 4,2019
PR.EPAR.ED FOR.:
ER.TAN KI,EII{
1543 BEECH STREET
RIF[,E, COI-ORADO 91650
ccrower@netzero.net
Geotechnical Engineering I Engineering Geology
Materials Testing I Environmental
TABT,E OF CONTITNTS
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY.
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION
SITE CONDITIONS ...
FIEI-D EXPLORATION
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS .
FOUNDATION BEARING CONDITIONS
DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS ....................
FOUNDATIONS
FOUNDATION AND RETAINING V/ALLS
FLOOR SLABS
UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM ...........
SURFACE DRAINAGE
LIMITATIONS
FIGURE 1 - LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
FIGURE 2 - LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
FIGURE 3 - LEGEND AND NOTES
FIGURES 4 through 6 - SV/ELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
TABLE 1- SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
1
a
.........- 3
,,,.,'''.- 3
,.....'..- 4
.........- 5
.'''.,.".- 6
-7
a
-2-
-2-
-7 -
H-P!KUMAR
Project No. 18-7-202
PUR,PÛSE AT{Ð SCOPE ÛF'' ST'UÐV
This report presents the results of a subsoil str,rdy for a proposed residence and shop building to
be located on Lot 1, Block 1, Canyon Creek Properties, County Road 263, east of New Castle,
Garfield County, Colorado. The project site is shown on Figure 1. The purpose of the study was
to develop recommendations for the foundation design, The study was conducted in accordance
with our agreement for geotechnical engineering services to Brian Klein dated March 15, 2018.
A field exploration program consisting of exploratory borings was conducted to obtain
information on the subsurface conditions. Samples of the subsoils obtained during the field
exploration were tested in the laboratory to determine their classification, compressibility or
swell and other engineering characteristics. The results of the field exploration and laboratory
testing were analyzed to develop recomnendations for foundation types, depths and allowable
pressures for the proposed builcling foundations. This repofi summarizes the data obtained
during this study and presents our conclusions, design recommendations and other geotechnical
engineering considerations based on the proposed construction ancl the subsurface conditions
encountered.
PROPC}SED CONSTR.UCTION
The proposed residence will be a two story wood frame structure and the shop building will be a
single story steel frame structuLe, located on the property as shown on Figure l. Both buildings
with have slab-on-grade ground floors at an elevation near to slightly above the existing ground
surface. Grading for the structures is assumed to be relatively minor with cut depths between
about 3 to 5 feet. We assume relatively light foundation loadings, typical of the proposed type of
construction.
If building loadings, location or grading plans change significantly from those described above,
we should be notified to re-evaluate the recommendations contained in this report.
H.PryKUMAR
-2-
STTE CONÐXT'IONS
The site was a vacant lot at the time of field exploration and the ground surface appears mostly
natural. The lot was previously an irrigated field. The ground surface is strongly sloping to the
south at a grades estimated at from about 4 to 57o. The elevation difference across individual
building areas is estimated at about 2 to 4 feet. The site is vegetated by grass and weeds.
F'TELÐ EXPT,ÛR.ATIÛIE
The field exploration for the ploject was conducted on AprtI2,2018. Three exploratory borings
were drilied at the locations shown on Figure 1 to evaluate the subsurface conditions. Boning 1
was drillecl at the shop building site and borings 2 and 3 were dlilled at the residence site. The
borings were advanced with 4-inch diameter continuous flight augers powered by a truck-
mounted CME-458 ddll rig. The borings were logged by a representative of F{-PlKumar.
Sarnples of the subsoils were taken with a 2 inch I.D. spoon sampler. The sampler was driven
into the subsoils at various depths with blows from a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches. This
test is sirnilar to the standarcl penetration test described by ASTM Method D-1586. The
penetration resistance values are an indication of the relative density or consistency of the
subsoils. Depths at which the samples were taken and the penetration resistance values are
shown on the Logs of Exploratory Borings, Figure 2. The samples were returned to our
laboratory for review by the project engineer and testing.
SUBSUR.FACE CONDITIONS
Graphic logs of the subsurface conditions encountered at the site are shown on Figure 2. The
subsoils encountered, below about I foot of organic topsoil, consisted of about 10 to 14 feet of
medium dense, silty to very silty clayey sand with scattered gravel overlying about 5 to L3V2feet
or more of very stiff, sandy to very sandy clay with scattered gravel. Below depths of about 20
and 23 feet in Borings I and 2, respectively, medium dense, clayey, silty to very silty sand with
scattered gravel was encountered. The sandy to very sandy clay soils extended down to the
depth drilled in Boring 3 of 26 feet.
H-PVKUMAR
Project No. 18-7-202
-3-
Laboratory testing performed on samples obtained from the borings included natural moisture
content and density, and percent finer than sand size gradation analyses. Results of swell-
consolidation testing performed on relatively undisturbed drive sampies, preserrted on Figures 4
through 6, indicate low to moderate compressibility under conditions of loading and wetting.
The samples typically showecl nil to minor hydro-compression potential. One sample (Boring 2
at 10') showed a low swell potential when wetted under a constant i,000 psf surcharge. The
laboratory testing is summarizecl in Table 1.
No free water was encountered in the borings at the time of drilling ancl the subsoils were
slightly moist.
F'OUNÐ,A.TTON EEAR.ING CONDITTOI\{S
The soils at assumed excavation subgrade possess low bearing capacity and some settlement
potential, especially when wetted. Lightly loaded spread footings bearing on the natural soils
appoar feasible for foundation support of the buildings with some risk of settlement. The risk of
settlement is primarily if the bearing soils were to become wetted and precautions should be
taken to prevent wetting. The low expansion potential encountered in one of the samples is
believed to be an anomaly and can be neglected in the foundation design. A lower risk of
settlement would be to remove and replace a depth (typically 3 feet) of the on-site soils as
compacted structural fill below the footings, or use a helical pier or screw pile foundation
system.
Provided below are recommendations for spread footings. If recommendations for structural fill
below the footings or for a helical pier or screw pile foundation system are desired, we should be
contacted.
DESIGN R.ECOMMENDATIO¡{S
FOUNDA,TIONS
Considering the subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory borings and the natule of
the proposed construction, we believe the building be founded with spread footings bearing on
the natural soils with some risk of settlement.
H.P+KUMAR
Project No. 18-7-202
-4-
The design and construction criteria plesented below should be observed fol a spread footing
foundation system.
1) Footings placed on the r-rndisturbed natural granular soils should be designed for
an allowabie bearing pressure of 1500 psf. The shop buiiding footings can be
designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of 2,000 psf. Basecl on
experience, we expect settlement of footings designed ancl constructed as
discussed in this section will be about 1 inch. Some additional settlement could
occur if the bearing soils rvere to become wetted.
2) The footings should have a minimum width of 18 inches for continuous walls and
2 feet for isolated pads.
3) Exterio¡ footings and footings beneath unheated areas should be provided with
adequate soil cover above their bearing elevation for frost protection. Placement
of foundatiorls at least 36 inches beiow exterior grade is typically used in this
atea.
4)Continuous fonndation 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
lateral earth pressures as discussed in the "Foundation and Retaining Walls"
section of this repofi.
All existing fill, topsoil and any loose or disturbed soils should be removecl and
the footing bearing level extended down to the firm natural soils. The exposed
soils in footing area shouìd then be moistened and compacted.
A representative ofthe geotechnical engineer should observe all footing
excavations prior to concrete placement to evaluate bearing conditions.
5)
FOUNDATION AND RETAINING WALLS
Foundation walls and retaining structures which are laterally supported and can be expected to
undergo only a slight amount of deflection should be designed for a lateral earth pressure
computed on the basis of an equivalent fluid unit weight of at least 55 pcf for backfill consisting
of the on-site soils. Cantilevered retaining structures which are separate from the buildings and
canbe expected to deflect sufficiently to mobilize the full active earth pressure condition should
6)
H.PryKUMAR
Project No. 18-7-202
5
be clesigned for a lateral earth pressure computed on the basis of an equivalent fluid unit weight
.of at least 45 pcf for backfill consisting of the on-site soils. The backfill should not contain
topsoil or rocks larger than about 6 inches.
All foundation and retaining structures should be designed for appropriate hydrostatic and
surcharge pressures such as adjacent footings, traffic, construction materials and equipment. The
pressures recommended above assume drained conditions behind the walls and a horizontal
backfill surface. The buildup of water behind a wall or an upward sloping backfill surface will
increase the lateral pressure imposed on a foundation wall or retaining structure. An underdrain
should be provided to prevent hydrostatic pressure buildup behind walls.
Backfill should be placed in uniform lifts and compacted to at least 95Vo of the maximum
standard Proctol density at a moistttre content near optimum. Backfill in pavement and walkway
areas should be compacted to at least 95Vo of the maximum standard Proctor density. Care
should be taken not to overcompact the backfill or use large equipment near the wall, since this
could cause excessive lateral pressure on the wall.
The lateral resistance of lbunclation or retaining wall footings will be a combination of the
sliding resistance of the footing on the foundation materials and passive earth pressnre against
the side of the footing. Resistance to sliding at the bottoms of the footings can be calculated
based on a coefficient of friction of 0.35. Passive presslrre of compacted backfill against the
sides of the footings can be calculated using an equivalent fluid unit weight of 350 pcf. The
coefficient of friction and passive pressure values recommended above assume ultimate soil
strength. Suitable factors of safety should be included in the design to limit the strain which will
occur at the ultimate strength, particularly in the case of passive resistance. Fill placed against
the sides of the footings to resist lateral loads can consist of the on-site soils compacted to at least
957o of the maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum.
FLOOR. SLABS
The natural on-site soils, exclusive of topsoil, are suitable to suppoft lightly loaded slab-on-grade
construction. There could be some slab settlement or heave if the subgrade were to become
H-PÈKUMAR
Project No. 18-7-202
6-
wetted. Providing a depth (typically lVzto 2 feet) of road base such as CDOT Class 2, 5 or 6
agglegate base course below the slabs could be done to reduce the risk of movement. We should
observe the slab subgrade conditions at the time of construction fo determine if subexcavation of
potentially expansive or other unsuitable soils and replacement with road base is needed.
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 rcduce 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 6 inch layer of snad and gravekl
road base should be placed beneath floor level slabs for support and to facilitate drainage. This
material should consist of minus 2 inch aggregate with at least 50Vo retained on the No. 4 sieve
and less than 1ZVo passing the No. 200 sieve.
All fill materials for support of floor slabs should be compacted to at least 957o of maximum
standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. Required fitl can consist of the on-
site soils devoid of topsoil and oversized (plus 6 inch) rocks.
UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM
It is our understanding the proposed finished floor elevations at the lowest levels is at or above
the surrounding grade. Therefore, a foundation dl'ain system is not required. It has been our
experience in the arca and where clayey soils are present that local perched gronndwater can
develop during times of heavy precipitation or seasonal runoff. Frozen ground during spring
runoff can also create a perched condition. We recommenci below-grade construction, such as
retaining walls, crawlspace and basement areas, be protected from wetting and hydrostatic
pressure buildup by an undordrain and wall drain system.
If the finished floor elevation of the proposed structure is revised to have a floor level below the
surrounding grade, we should be contacted to provide recommendations for an underdrain
system. All earth retaining structures should be properly drained,
H-PVKUMAR
Projeci No. 18-7-202
-7 -
SURFACE DRAINAGE
Positive surface drainage is an important aspect of the project to prevent wetting of the bearing
soils. The following drainage precautions should be observed during construction and
maintained at all times after the residence and shop have been completed:
1) Inundation ofthe foundation excavations and underslab areas should be avoided
during construction.
2) Exterjor backfill should be adjusted to near optimLlm moisture and compacted to
at least 957o of the maximum standard Proctor density in pavement and slab areas
and to at least 9OVo of the maximum standard Proctor density in landscape areas.
3) The ground surface sulrounding the exterior of the buildings 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 paved areas.
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 10
fèet from foundation walls.
N.IMTTATXONS
This str-rdy has been conducted in accorclance with generally accepted geotechnicai engineering
principles and plactices 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 borings drilled at the locations indicated on Figure 1, the proposed type of
construction and our experience in the area. Our services do not include determining the
presence, prevention or possibility of rnold 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 ihe exploratory borings and variations in the subsurface
conditions may not become evident until excavation is performed. If conditions encountered
H.PVKUMAR
Project No. 18-7-202
-8-
during construction appear different from those described in this report, we should be notified so
that re-evaluation of the recommendations may be made.
This 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 thai 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.
Respectfully Submitted,
H-P+ KUMAR
-þ**
James H. Parsons, E.I.
Reviewed by
David A. Young, P
JHP/kac
,:"1
6,
H.PÑKUM¡/AR
Project No.18-7-202
I
Ê
I:
:
toT l ccP SuBDlvtstoN
PARCEL #21810s101293
BORING_"--_a_,.{
l
I
3Jry
E&*ÈrJ Ësrô4r.]Bteur&
-*'*_ç.I
PROPOSED
RES IDENCE
BORIN G 2
L
to
@N
ô
o
t-z
fo
O
..æryi*
PROPO D
SHOP
BUILDI
B
l,.eFd 5¡e Id
åftC ldúbñ nè 4âg
IRFøþff¿. ¡5¡221
,1
(,/ú'rúl
25 0 0
APPROXIMATE SCALE-FETT
18-7 -202 H-PryKUMAR LOCAÏION OF TXPLORATORY BORINGS Fí9. 1
¡
s
I
I
Ê
I
BORING 1 BORING 2 BORING 3
0 0
21/12
WC=5.1
DD=97
-2OO=46
16/ 12
tNC=7.5
DD=1 1 0
35/12
WC=4.0
DD=119
5 53s/12
WC=6.5
DD= 1 06
36/12 46/12
WC=3.1
DD= 1 0B
-200=27
10 33/12 102s/12
WC=8.4
DD=1 17
21/12
WC=5.5
DD=1 13
F
LiJ
LJ
L!
I-t-fLtJÕ
15 t.)
FL¡
LJ
LL
I-F
L
L¡(f
25/12
WC=3.5
DD=1 27
41/12 32/12
WC=9.6
DD=118
20
15/ 12 48/ 12
WC=4.9
nñ- r to
-200=66
20
1B/ 12
ZJ
33/12 252e/12 16/12
30 SHOP BUILDING R ESI DENC T 30
18-7 -202 H-PryKUMAR LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS Fig. 2
I
ı
¡
I
Ê
ñ
LEGEND
TOPSOIL; ORGANIC SILTY CLAYEY SAND, FIRM, MOIST, DARK BROWN
SAND (SM-SC); SILTY TO VERY SILTY, TYPICALLY CLAYEY, SCATTERED GRAVIL AND SMALL
COBBLES, MEDIUM DENSE, SLIGHTLY MOIST, BROWN.
CLAY (CL); SANDY TO VERY SANDY, SCATTERED GRAVEL AND SMALL COBBLES, VERY
STIFF, SLIGHTLY MOIST, BROWN.
RELATIVELY UNDISTURBED DRIVE SAMPLE; 2-INCH l.D. CALIFORNIA LTNER SAMPLE
t1 /11 DRIVE SAMPLE BLOW COUNT. INDICATES THAT 21 BLOWS OF A 140-P0UND HAMMER
FALLING 30 INCHES WERE REQUIRED TO DRIVE THE CALIFORNIA OR SPT SAMPLER 12 INCHES.
NOTES
1. THE EXPLORATORY BORINGS WERE DRILLED ON APRIL 2, 2O1B WITH A 4_INCH DIAMETER
CONÏINUOUS FLIGHT POWER AUGER.
2, THE LOCATIONS OF ÏHE EXPLORATORY BORINGS WERE MEASURED APPROXIMATELY BY PACING
FROM FEATURES SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN PROVIDED.
5. THE ELEVATIONS OF THE EXPLORÄTORY BORINGS WERE NOT MTASURED AND THE LOGS OF THE
EXPLORATORY BORINGS ARE PLOTTED TO DEPTH.
4. THE EXPLORATORY BORING LOCATIONS SHOULD BE CONSIDERED ACCURATE ONLY TO THE
DEGREE IMPLIED BY THE METHOD USED.
5. ÏHE LINES BETWEEN MATERIALS SHOWN ON THE EXPLORATORY BORING LOGS REPRESENT THE
APPROXIMATE BOUNDARIES BETWTEN MATERIAL TYPES AND THE TRANSITIONS MAY BE GRADUAL.
6. GROUNDWAÏER WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED IN THE BORINGS AT THE TIME OF DRILLING
7. LABORATORY ÏEST RESULTS:
WC = WATER CONTENT (%) (ASTM D 2216);
DD = DRY DENSITY (PCf) (ASTM D 2216);
-2Oo= PERCENTAGE PASSING NO. 200 SIEVE (ASTM D 1 140)
18-7 -2A2 H-PryKUMAR LEGEND AND NOTES Fig.3
SAMPLE OF: Silly Cloyey Sond
Grovel
FROM:Boringl@5'
WC = 6.3 %, DD = 106 pcf
with
ii
i-?
\
not b. reproduc.d,
wilhoúl the wdttèn opp.ovol of
ond ßsociotes. lnc Ssell
Coñsolidolion te3ting pedormed in
occordonce w¡lh Æru D-4546.
¡
I
I
I
I
I
f
I
I
I
i,t.
I
l
I
I
I
i.l-
li
-i- i -liil
i'lli
ll
I
i
l
-,+ii
tii,
l:
Iitti
I
l
I
I
I
l
I
i
j
I
I
,1
i
:
l
I
1
I
i
I
i
I
l
i
i
'1
ADDITIONAL COMPRESSION
UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE
DUE TO WETTING
i
I
I
I
I
i
r
I
I
I
i
I
-..1.
I
lt'
I
I
I
I
l
I
i
I
I
-i
I
¡
1
i
f,
I
I
i
I
I
,l
l
I
I lr
rl
I -r f l
l
,i
o
JJ
LJ
=Ø
-l
z
z
tr
Õ
Jo(n
z.o
-6
-7
.0 APP t0
18-7 -2A2 H-PryKUMAR SWILL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RTSULTS li9. 4
E
I
SAMPLE OF: Sondy Cloy with Grovel
FROM: Boring 1 @ 15'
WC = 3.5 %, DD = 127 pcÍ
I
I
I
I
l
I
I
I
l
NO MOVEMENT UPON
WETTING
{
L
I
I
\l \r
t\
l
i
I
I
.i.
I
Ì
à(
JJ
trl
=(n
I
zo
t--
of
(nz
UO
J
JU
=tn
I
zo
F-
ô:oazoO
0
-1
-z
_J
0
-l
-2
2
-J
1.0 APPLIED PRESSURE _ KSF 100
SAMPLE OF: Silty Cloyey Sond wilh
Grovel
FROM:Boring2e^2.5'
WC = 7.5 %, DD = 110 pcfI
I
I
I
I
I
j
I
l
II
I
!
I
l:
i
l
I
I
.t
J
l
l
I
l
I
I
I
'i'.-
Ì
I
ij';-'' ' i- i-
ADDITIONAL COMPRESSION
UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE
DUE TO WETTING
Kùmar ond bsociot.s, lnç.swell
Consôlidolioh tcst¡ñ9 pêdormêd ¡n
occo¡donc. with Añ D-4546.
full, *ithout thc vriH¿n opprovol of
1.0 100
18-7 -202 H-PryKUMAR SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RTSULTS Fig. 5
9
É
l
l
I
i
I
l
SAMPLE OF: Sondy Cloy with Grovel
FROM: Boring2@ 1A'
WC = 8.4 %, DD = 117 pcf
Ì
I]__
I
I
I EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT
PRESSURE UPON WETTING
\
l
l
I
l
I
I
I
I
ì
ì
I
I
I
I
-l
l
l
2
0
-1
_L
_z
-4
0
-1
_z
JJ
t¡J
=tn
I
z.o
Ê
o
=o(n
z.
O
--JJ
Lil
=TN
z
t-
Õ
Jo(nz
O
1.0 APPLIED PRESSURE - KSF
APPLIED PRESSURE - KSF
10
10
100
SAMPLE OF: Siliy Cloyey Sond with
Grovel
FR0M: Boring 5 @ 10'
WC = 5.5 %, DD = 113 pcf
I
I
l
I
l
I
I
I
l
i
L
I
I
l
l
l
ì
I
l
l
i
1
I
i
li
ii
i
I
I
I
l
i
I
I
I
l
i
ADDITIONAL COMPRESSION
UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE
DUE TO WETTING
:l
li
l
l
I
I
l
lhes. tcs! resuhs opply oñly to th.
soñplês t¿ded. lh¿ tlsìi¡g rcpod
sholl not bc r¿produccd, cxccpt in
flrl, without th€ w.iRcñ opprovol of
Xúmor ond Associolcs, lnc. Swcll
Consolidotioñ t6sti¡9 p¿do.med iñ
occordaÀc. w¡ü ASM 0-4546.
I
l
_A
1.0 100
18-7 -202 H-PryKUMAR SWTLL_CONSOLIDATION TTST RTSULTS Fis.6
FI-HÈKUIVIAH
TABLE 1
SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
Pnoject f$o. '! 8-7-202
UNCONFINED
COMPRESSIVE
STRENGTH SOILTYPE
Very Silty Clayey Sand
with Gravel
Silty Clayey Sand with
Gravel
Sandy Clay with Gravel
Silty Clayey Sand with
Gravel
Sandy Clay with Gravel
Sandy Clay
Silty Clayey Sand with
Gravel
Silty Clayey Sand with
Gravel
Silty Clayey Sand with
Gravel
Sandy Clay with Gravel
ATTERBERG LIMITS
PLASTIC
INDEX
(%l
LIQUID
LIMIT
(%l
NATURAL
DRY
DENSITY
GRADATION
GRAVEL
(%)
SAND
(%)
PERCENT
PASSING
NO.200
SIEVE
46
66
27
91
106
r2l
110
1t7
129
119
108
113
118
LOCATION NATURAL
MOISTURE
CONTENTBORINGDEPTH
5 I
6.3
3.5
7.5
8.4
4.9
4.0
3.1
5.5
9.6
zYz
5
I 5
2Vz
10
20
2V2
5
10
1 5
I
2
3