HomeMy WebLinkAboutSubsoil Report for Foundation Designrcn $,,{ffif;',ffiffiniivi*'"
An Employsc Owntd Gompcny
5020CountyRoad 154
Gienwood Springs, CO 81601
phone: (970)945-7988
fax: (970) 945-8454
email : kaglenwood@kurnarusa.com
www.kumarusa.cotn
Office Locations: Denver (HQ), Parker, Colorado Spdngs, Fort Collins, Glenwood Springs, and Summit County, Colorado
SUBSOIL STTIDY
FOR T'OUNDATION DESIGN
PROPOSED RESIDENCE
TBD HIDDEN GLEN OFF MOUNTAIN SPRINGS ROAD
SOUTH OF'388 HIDDEN GLEN
GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO
PROJECT NO. 24-7-655
JANUARY 16,2025
PREPARED tr'OR:
BOULDER CONSTRUCTION SERVICES, LLC
ATTN: MATT JURMU
901 COUNTY ROAD 231
SILTY, COLORADO 81652
matt. i urmu @bouldercs.com
$
N
\r\
a\ \
\
\d
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION
SITE CONDITIONS
FIELD EXPLORATION
DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS............
FOLrNDATIONS..............,.
FOUNDATION AND RETAINING WALLS.
FLOOR SLABS
TINDERDRAIN SYSTEM.,............
SITE GRADING
SURFACE DRAINAGE
LIMITATIONS
FIGURE 1 . LOCATIONS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
FIGURE 2 - LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
FIGURE 3 - LEGEND AND NOTES
FIGURES 4 through 6 - SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
TABLE 1- SLMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
...- I -
I
1
I
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS .,...2-
FOUNDATION BEARING CONDITIONS.... .,,,,,",.2.
3
3
4
5
6
6
7
8-
Kumar & Associates, lnc. o Project No. 24-7.655
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF' STUDY
This report presents the results ofa subsurface study for a proposed residence to be located at
TBD Hidden Glen, south of 388 Hidden Glen, off Mountain Springs Roado Garfield County,
Colorado. The project site is shown on Figure 1. The purpose of the sfudy was to develop
recommendations for foundation design. The study was conducted in accordance with our
agreement for geotechnical engineering services to Boulder Construction Services, LLC dated
November 11,2024.
A field exploration program consisting of exploratory borings was conducted to obtain
information on 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 analyzedto develop recommendations for foundation types, depths and allowable
pressures for the proposed building foundation. This report summadzes the data obtained during
this study and presents our conclusions, design recommendations and other geotechnical
engineering considerations based on the proposed construction and the subsoil conditions
encountered.
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION
At the time of our study, design plans for the residence had not been developed. The building
is proposed in the area roughly between the exploratory boring locations shown on Figure L
The proposed residence is assumed to be a one- or two-story wood-frame structure with attached
garage. We assume excavation for the building will have a maximum cut depth of one level,
about 10 feet below the existing ground surface. For the purpose of our analysis, foundation
loadings for the structure were assumed to be relatively light and typical of the proposed type
of construction.
When building location, grading and loading information have been developed, we should be
notified to re-evaluate the recommendations presented in this report.
SITE CONDITIONS
The subject site was vacant with a recently established access road at the time of our field
exploration. There was approximately 12 inches of snow cover and scattered cobbles on the
ground surface. Vegetation consists of grasses and oak brush. The ground surface was
moderately sloping down to the east. The site elevation is 7,690 feet.
FIELD EXPLORATION
The field exploration for the project was conducted on December I7,2024. Two exploratory
borings were drilled at the locations shown on Figure 1 to evaluate the subsurface conditions.
Kumar & Associates, lnc. o Project No. 24-7-655
-2-
The borings were advanced with a 4-inch diameter continuous flight auger powered by a track-
mounted CME-45 drill rig. The borings were logged by a representative of Kumar & Associates,
Inc. The site was not accessible to a standard truck-mounted drill rig due to the steepness and
snow cover.
Samples of the subsoils were taken with a 2-inch I.D. spoon sampler. The sarnpler was driven
into the subsoils at various depths with blows from a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches.
This test is similar to the standard penetration test described by ASTM Method D-l586. 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.
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Graphic logs of the subsurface conditions encountered at the site are shown on Figure 2.
Beneath about Yzfootof organic topsoil, the subsoils consist of very stiff to hard, sandy clay
to between 24 and26 feet deep where dense clayey sand and gravel with basalt fragments were
encountered to the maximum drilled depth of 30 feet. The clay portions of these soils can
possess an expansion potential when wetted.
Laboratory testing performed on samples obtained during the field exploration included natural
moisture content and density, finer than sand grain size analyses and liquid and plastic limits.
Swell-consolidation testing was performed on relatively undisfurbed drive samples of the clay
subsoils. The swell-consolidation test results, presented on Figures 4 and 5, indicate low
compressibility under relatively light surcharge loading and a low to moderate expansion
potential when wetted under a constant light surcharge. Undisturbed sampling of the clayey
gravel soils was not possible due to the rock content. The laboratory testing is summarized
in Table l.
No free water was encountered in the borings at the time of drilling and the subsoils were
slightly moist to moist.
F'OUNDATION BEARING CONDITIONS
The subsoils encountered at the site are expansive. Shallow foundations placed on the expansive
soils similar to those encountered at this site can experience movement causing structural distress
if the clay is subjected to changes in moisture content. A drilled pier foundation can be used to
penetrate the expansive materials to place the bottom of the piers in a zone of relatively stable
moisture conditions and make it possible to load the piers sufficiently to resist uplift movements.
Using a pier foundation, each column is supported on a single drilled pier and the building walls
are founded on grade beams supported by a series of piers. Loads applied to the piers are
transmitted to the bedrock partially through peripheral shear stresses and partially through end
bearing pressure. In addition to their ability to reduce differential movements caused by
Kumar & Associates, lnc. o Project No.24-7-655
3
expansive materials, straight-shaft piers have the advantage of providing relatively high
supporting capacity. The piers can be constructed relatively quickly and should experience a
relatively small amount of movernent. Other deep foundation systems such as micro-piles may
be feasible for the proposed construction. Micropile foundation systems are typically design-
build.
DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
FOUNDATIONS
Based on the data obtained during the field and laboratory studies, we recommend straight-shaft
piers drilled into the dense granular soils be used to support the proposed structure.
The design and construction criteria presented below should be observed for a straight-shaft pier
foundation system:
1) The piers should be designed for an allowable end bearing pressure of 15,000 psf
and an allowable skin friction value of 1,500 psf for that portion of the pier in
dense granular soils.
2) Piers should also be designed for a minimum dead load pressure of 5,000 psf
based on pier end area only. If the minimum dead load requirement cannot be
achieved, the pier length should be extended beyond the minimum penetration to
make up the dead load deficit, This can be accomplished by assuming one-half
the allowable skin friction value given above acts in the direction to resist uplift.
3) Uplift on the piers from structural loading can be resisted by utilizing 75o/o of the
allowable skin friction value plus an allowance for the weight of the pier.
4) Piers should penetrate at least three pier diameters into the dense granular soils.
A minimum penetration of 5 feet into the gravel soils and a minimum pier length
of 20 feet are recommended.
5) Piers should be designed to resist lateral loads assuming a modulus of horizontal
subgrade reaction of 50 tcf in the clay soils and a modulus of horizontal subgrade
reaction of 100 tcf in the gtavel soils. The modulus values given are for a long,
1-foot-wide pier and must be corrected for pier size.
6) Piers should be reinforced their full length with one #5 reinforcing rod for each
12 inches of pier perimeter to resist tension created by the swelling rnaterials.
7) A 4-inch void form should be provided beneath grade beams to prevent the
swelling soil and rock from exerting uplift forces on the grade beams and to
concentrate pier loadings. A void form should also be provided beneath pier caps.
8) Concrete utilized in the piers should be a fluid mix with sufficient slump so that
concrete will fill the void between the reinforcing steel and the pier hole.
9) Pier holes should be properly cleaned prior to the placernent of concrete. Cobbles
were encountered in the soil in the borings which could cause caving and difficult
drilling. The drilling contractor should mobilize equipment of sufficient size to
effectively drill through possible coarse soils.
Kumar & Associates, lnc. 6 Project No.24-7-655
-4-
10) Although free water was not encountered in the borings drilled atthe site, some
seepage in the pier holes may be encountered during drilling. Dewatering
equipment may be required to reduce water infiltration into the pier holes.
If water cannot be removed prior to placement of concrete, the tremie method
should be used after the hole has been cleaned of spoil, In no case should
concrete be placed in more than 3 inches of water.
1l) Care should be taken to prevent the forming of mushroom-shaped tops of the
piers which can increase uplift force on the piers from swelling soils,
12) A representative of the geotechnical engineer should observe pier drilling
operations on a full-time basis.
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 60 pcf for backfill consisting of
the on-site fine-grained soils and 50 pcf for backfill consisting of imported granular materials.
Cantilevered retaining structures which are separate from the residence and can be expected to
deflect sufficiently to mobilize the full active earth pressure condition should be designed for
alateral earth pressure computed on the basis of an equivalent fluid unit weight of 55 pcf for
backfill consisting of the on-site fine-grained soils and 40 pcf for backfill consisting of imported
granular materials,
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 90% of the maximum
standard Proctor density at a moisture content slightly above optimum. Backfill placed in
pavement areas should be compacted to at leastg5o/o 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. Some settlement of deep foundation wall
backfill should be expected even if the material is placed correctly and could result in distress to
facilities constructed on the backfill'
We recommend imported granular soils for backfilling foundation walls and retaining structures
because their use results in lower lateral earth pressures. Imported granular wall backfill should
contain less than 15% passing the No. 200 sieve and have a maximum size of 6 inches. The
upper 2 feetof the wall backfill should be a relatively impervious on-site soil or a pavement
structure should be provided to prevent surface water infiltration into the backfill.
Kumar & Associates, lnc. @ Project No.24-7-655
-5-
Shallow spread footings may be used for support of retaining walls separate from the residence,
provided some differential movement and distress can be tolerated. Footings should be sized for
a maximum allowable bearing pressure of 3,000 psf. The lateral resistance of retaining wall
footings will be a combination of the sliding resistance of the footing on the foundation materials
and passive earth pressure 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 0.40. Passive pressure 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 should be a nonexpansive granular material
compacted to at least 95% of the maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture content near
optimum.
FLOOR SLABS
Floor slabs present a problem where expansive materials are present near floor slab elevation
because sufficient dead load cannot be imposed on them to resist the uplift pressure generated
when the materials are wetted and expand. We recommend that structural floors with crawlspace
below be used for all floors in the building that will be sensitive to upward movement'
Slab-on-grade construction may be used in the garage area provided the risk of distress is
understood by the owner. We recommend placing at least 3 feet of nonexpansive structural
fill below floor slabs in order to mitigate slab movement due to expansive soils.
To reduce the effects of some differential movement, nonstructural floor slabs should be
separated from all bearing walls, columns and partition walls with expansion joints which allow
unrestrained vertical movement. Interior non-bearing partitions resting on floor slabs should be
provided with a slip joint at the bottom of the wall so that, if the slab moves, the movement
cannot be transmitted to the upper structure. This detail is also important for wallboards,
stairways and door frames. Slip joints which allow at least 2 inches of vertical movement are
recornmended. Floor slab control joints should be used to reduce damage due to shrinkage
cracking. Joint spacing and slab reinforcement should be established by the designer based on
experience and the intended slab use.
A minimum 4 inchlayer of free-draining gravel should be placed immediately beneath slabs-on-
grade. This material should consist of minus 2 inch aggregate with less than 50Yo passing the
No, 4 sieve and less than 2o/opassingthe No. 200 sieve. The free-draining gravel will aide in
drainage below the slabs and should be connected to the underdrain system.
Required fil|beneath slabs can consist of a suitable imported granular material, excluding topsoil
and oversized rocks. The suitability of structural fill materials should be evaluated by the
geotechnical engineer prior to placement. The filI should be spread in thin horizontal lifts,
Kumar & Associates, lnc. o Project No.24-7-655
-6-
adjusted to at or above optimum moisture content, and compacted to 95% of the maximum
standard Proctor density. All vegetation, topsoil and loose or disturbed soil should be removed
prior to fill placement.
The above recommendations will not prevent slab heave if the expansive soils underlying slabs-
on-grade become wet. However, the recommendations will reduce the effects if slab heave
occurs. All plumbing lines should be pressure tested before backfilling to help reduce the
potential for wetting.
LINDERDRAIN SYSTEM
Although groundwater was not encountered during our exploration, it has been our experience
in the area andwhere clay soils are present, that local perched gtoundwater may develop during
times of heavy precipitation or seasonal runoff. Frozen ground during spring runoff can create a
perched condition. Therefore, we recommend below-grade construction, such as crawlspace and
basement areas (if any), be protected from wetting by an underdrain system. The drain should
also act to prevent buildup of hydrostatic pressures behind foundation walls.
The underdrain system should consist of rigid perforated PVC drainpipe surrounded by free-
draining granular material placed at the bottom of the wall backfill. The drain lines should be
placed at each level of excavation and at least I foot below lowest adjacent finish grade, and
sloped at a minimum%o/o grade to a suitable gravity outlet. Free-draining granular material used
in the drain system should consist of minus 2 inch aggregate with less than 50% passing the No.
4 sieve and less than2o/opassing the No. 200 sieve. The drain gravel should be at least 2 feet
deep. Void form below the grade beams can act as a conduit for water flow. An impervious
liner such as 20 mil PVC should be placed below the drain gravel in a trough shape and attached
to the grade beam with mastic to keep drain water from flowing beneath the grade beam and to
other areas of the building.
SITE GRADING
Fill material used inside building limits and within 3 feet of pavernent grade should consist of
nonexpansive, granular material. Fill should be placed and compacted to at least 95% of the
maximum standard Proctor density near the optimum moisture content. Fill should not contain
concentrations of organic matter or other deleterious substances. The geotechnical engineer
should evaluate the suitability of proposed fill materials prior to placement. In fill areas, the
natural soils should be scarified to a depth of 6 inches, adjusted to a moisture content near
optimum and compacted to provide a uniform base for fill placement.
The natural soil encountered during this study will be expansive when placed in a compacted
condition. Consequently, these materials should not be used as fill material beneath building
areas or directly beneath pavement areas. The natural soil can be used for fill material near the
bottom of fills outside building areas.
Kumar & Associates, lnc. o Project No. 24-7-655
-7 -
A detailed slope stability evaluation and resultant recommendations are beyond the scope of this
report. However, general guidelines are presented below so planning and design of the structure
can be accomplished by the project designers and contractor. After initial planning and design
are completed, we should be contacted to review the information and conduct additional analysis
as needed,
l)
3)
4)
SURFACE DRAINAGE
The following drainage precautions should be observed during construction and maintained at
all times after the residence has been completed:
1) Excessive wetting or drying of the foundation excavations and underslab areas
should be avoided during construction. Drying could increase the expansion
potential of the soils.
2) Exterior backfill should be adjusted to near optimum moisture and compacted to
at least 95o/a of the maximum standard Proctor density in pavement areas and to at
least 90% of the maximum standard Proctor density in landscape areas. Free-
draining wall backfill should be capped with about 2 to 3 feet of the on-site 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 l0 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.
2)
Permanent unretained cuts in the overburden soils less than 10 feet in height
should not exceed 2horizontal to 1 vertical. The risk of slope instability will be
signifrcantly increased if seepage is encountered in cuts.
Fills up to 10 feet in height can be used if the fill slopes do not exceed 2
horizontal to I vertical and they are properly compacted and drained. The ground
surface underlying all fill should be prepared by removing all organic matter,
scarifying to a depth of 6 inches and compacting to 95o/o of the maximum
standard Proctor density prior to fill placement. Fills should be benched into
hillsides exceeding 5 horizontal to 1 vertical.
Positive surface drainage should be provided around all permanent cuts and fills
and steep natural slopes to direct surface runoff away from the slope faces.
Slopes and other stripped areas should be protected against erosion by
revegetation or other methods.
Site grading, drain details and building plans should be prepared by qualified
engineers familiar with the problems in the arca. A construction sequence plan
of excavating, wall construction and bracing and backfilling indicating the time
required should be prepared by the contractor.
Kumar & Associates, lnc. o Project No. 24-7-655
-8-
Landscaping which requires regular heavy irrigation should be located at least
10 feet from foundation walls.
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 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 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 borings and variations in the subsurface
conditions may not become evident until excavation is performed. If conditions encountered
during construction qppear to be different from those described in this report, we should be
notified at once so re-evaluation of the recommendations may be made.
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use by our client for design puf,poses, 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 recommendationso and to veriry that the recommendations
have been appropriately interpreted. Significant design changes may require additional analysis
or modifications of the recommendations presented herein. We recommend on-site observation
of excavations and foundation bearing shata and testing of strucfural filI by a representative of
the geotechnical engineer.
Sincerely,
Kurlrar & A{sscaimte$, lr}s"
Robert L Duran, P.E.
Reviewed by:
5)
b
Daniel E. Hardin, P.E.
RLDlkac
Kunnar & Associates, lnc,6 Project No.24-7"65$
a72 aarJaa,
aF,Jtla4J,,
\/
-.,r Ja)"\ap t€
tr \\.\
BORING 1 \tto l.
.a
#'\
Hrl
lr
T \
,#*.
BORING 2 I
I
III
II
t\tI
sf""
txt
swsq
t\&
s 't
\l$\
60
1
APPROXIMATE SCALE-FEET
Fig. 1LOCATIONS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGSKumar & Associates24*7-655t
,9
t:
I
t:
BORING 1 BORING 2
0 s4/ 12
WC=20.9
DD= 1 00
LL=57
Pl=33
0
35/ 12
5
41/12 2s/ 12
WC=19.5
DD= 1 03
5
10
30/ 12
tNC=17.2
DD=1 10
27 /12
WC=22.0 10
DD= 1 02
-2OO=92
F
lrJtrjL
I-F(L
LJo
15
30/ 12
WC= 1 .5.2
DD=114
s3/ 12
15
FLJL!u
I
JF
CL
Lllc:
20
47/12
WC= 19.5
DD= 1 08
4s/ 12
WC= 1 9.1
DD= 1 08
20
25
21 /6, 29/5 sol3.s
25
30
50/5
WC=17.4
DD=88
-200=51
30
24-7 -655 Kumar & Associates LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS Fig. 2
T
!
t?
I
t.
LEGEND
N
N
TOPSOIL; CLAY, SANDY, ORGANICS, FIRM/FROZEN, SLIGHTLY MOIST, MEDIUM BROWN
CLAY (CL); SANDY, VERY STIFF TO HARD' SLIGHTLY MOIST, MIXED BROWN.
rT,i'm
lfElldfl
$RAVEL AND SAND (cC-Ct); CLAYEY, BASALT FRAGMENTS, DENSE, SLIGHTLY MOIST' MIXED
BROWN AND GRAY.
!DRIVE SAMPLE, 2-INCH I.D. CALIFORNIA LINER SAMPLE.
2^/1O DRIVE SAMPLE BLOW COUNT' INDICATES THAT 34 BLOWS OF A 1 o-POUND HAMMERE-/ IL FALLING 30 INcHES WERE REQUIRED TO DRIVE THE SAMPLER 12 INCHES.
NOTES
1, THE EXPLORATORY BOR]NGS WERE DRILLED ON DECEMBER 17' 2024 WITH A
4-INCH-DIAMETER CONTINUOUS-FLIGHT POWER AUGER,
2. THE LOCATIONS OF THE EXPLORATORY BORINGS WERE MEASURED APPROXIMATELY BY PACING
FROM FEATURES SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN PROVIDED.
3. THE ELEVATIONS OF THE EXPLORATORY BORINGS WERE NOT MEASURED 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. THE LINES BETWEEN MATERIALS SHOWN ON THE EXPLORATORY BORING LOGS REPRESENT THE
APPROXIMATE BOUNDARIES BETWEEN MATERIAL TYPES AND THE TRANSITIONS MAY BE GRADUAL.
6. GROUNDWATER WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED IN THE BORINGS AT THE TIME OF DRILLING
7 LABORATORY TEST RESULTS:
WC = WATER CONTENT (%) (ASTM D2216);
DD = DRY DENSITY (PCi) (ASTU D2216);
-2OO= PERCENTAGE PASSING NO. 2OO SIEVE (ASTM D11AO);
LL = LIQUID LIMIT (ASTM D4318);
PI = PLASTICITY INDEX (ASTM D45I8).
24-7 *655 Kumar & Associates LEGEND AND NOTES Fig. 5
I
I
SAMPLE 0F: Sondy Clcy
FROM:Borlngl@2'
WC = 20.9 %, DD = 100 pcf
LL=57,P|=53
ln
al
EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT
PRESSURE UPON WETTING
7
6
E
c\S
j4
lrJ
=n
r3
zotr
o
=zovl
oc)1
0
-1
-2
1,0 r00
24-7 -655 Kumar & Associates SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 4
q
1
SAMPLE OF: Sondy Cloy
FROM:Borlngl@9'
WC = 17.2 %, DD = 110 pcf
EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT
PRESSURE UPON WETTING
N
JJ
LrJ
=tt1
I
zo
F
o
JonzoO
N
JJld
'lt1
I
zot-
o
Joazo(J
1
0
-1
-2
-3
-4
2
1
0
-1
-2
- KSF t0 t00
SAMPLE OF: Sondy Cloy
FROM: Boring 1 @ 14'
WC = 13.2 %, DD = 114 pcf
ln
opprcvol of
ln
EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT
PRESSURE UPON WETTING
_?
t00
Fig. 5SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS24-7 -655 Kumar & Associates
L
I
a.
SAMPLE 0F: Sondy Cloy
FROMrBorlng2@^4'
WC = 19.5 %, DD = 103 pcf
-2O0 = 92 %
of
EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT
PRESSURE UPON WETTING
5
4
bs
Jlrj
=tn
I
zotr
o
Joazo(J
3
2
0
-1
-2
PRESSURE - KSF 100
24-7 -655 Kumar & Associates SWILL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 6
lcn f,umr&Assoffies,lnc."
Geotechnical and Materiais Engineers
and Environrnental Scieniists
TABLE 1
SUMITIARY OF I.ABORATORY TEST RESULTS
Proiect No.2'l-7655
2
1
BORING
SAI'PLE LOCANON
I 9
9
4
29
t9
t4
9
2
DEPTH
{ftI
l9.l
22.0
19.5
t7.4
19.5
13.2
t7,2
20.9
TIATURAL
TOISTURE
CONTEI{T
{%}
r08
rcz
r03
88
108
tt4
110
100
ilAruRAL
DRY
DEIISITY
{Dcll
GMDANON ATIERBERG LMITS
GRAVEL
t%)
SAIID
{%)
PERCE}IT
PASSTT{G NO.
200 stEvE
LlQt [)uiln PLASNC
rt{DEx
92
92
5t
57 33
uNcoftFtltED
coiltPREssIl/E
STRETIGTH SOILTYPE
Sandy Clay
Sandy Clay
Sandy Clay
Clayey Sand and Gravel
Sandy Clay
Sandy Clay
Sandy Clay
Sandy Clay