HomeMy WebLinkAboutTract Map 13018 Parcel 1 Geotechnical Report of Compaction TestENGEN
C O R P O R A T I O N
Gemechnical&Environmental services
Geotechnical Report of Compaction Test Results
Platts Residence 2n° Unit
41784 Green Tree Rd., Temecula, Ca 92591
Project Number: 4166C1
Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 13018
41625 Enterprise Circle S.,8-2
September 19, 2019
0Temecula,CA 92590
info@engencorp.com .7a
engencorp.com
ph 951.296.3511
fx 951.240.3380 44
SDVOSBIDVBE
lymn N J.
lrinti,vingY1blNLb,.
Prepared for:
Lisa Platts
41784 Green Tree Rd.
Temecula, Ca 92591
Lisa Platts-Platts Residence 2n°Unit
Project Number:4166C1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION NUMBER AND TITLE PAGE
1.0 Project...................................................................................................................................1
1.1 Site Description...............................................................................................................................1
1.2 Project Description........................................................................................................................A
2.0 Scope of Work......................................................................................................................1
2.1 Time of Grading...............................................................................................................................1
2.2 Contractor and Equipment..............................................................................................................1
2.3 Grading Operations.........................................................................................................................2
2.4 Over-excavation..............................................................................................................................2
2.5 Finish Pad Elevations......................................................................................................................2
3.0 Slope Stability.......................................................................................................................2
3.1 Fill slopes........................................................................................................................................2
3.2 Cut Slopes.......................................................................................................................................2
3.3 Slope Maintenance and Protection Recommendations..................................................................3
SurfaceDrainage............................................................................................................................3
SlopeBerms....................................................................................................................................3
SlopeProtection..............................................................................................................................3
ExcessiveIrrigation.........................................................................................................................3
BurrowingAnimals..........................................................................................................................3
4.0 Testing...................................................................................................................................3
4.1 Field Testing Procedures................................................................................................................3
5.0 LABORATORY TESTING......................................................................................................4
5.1 General............................................................................................................................................4
5.2 Classification...................................................................................................................................4
5.3 In-Situ Moisture Content and Density Test.....................................................................................4
5.4 Maximum Dry Density I Optimum Moisture Content Relationship Test..........................................4
5.5 Expansion Test................................................................................................................................4
6.0 Earth Materials......................................................................................................................4
6.1 Earth Materials................................................................................................................................4
6.2 Corrosive Soils................................................................................................................................4
6.3 Expansion index Test......................................................................................................................4
7.0 Foundation Design Recommendations...............................................................................5
7.1 Foundation Design Recommendations...........................................................................................5
7.2 Foundation Size..............................................................................................................................5
7.3 Depth of Embedment......................................................................................................................5
7.4 Bearing Capacity.............................................................................................................................5
7.5 Settlement.......................................................................................................................................5
7.6 Lateral Capacity..............................................................................................................................5
7.7 Slab-on-Grade Recommendations .................................................................................................6
7.8 Exterior Slabs..................................................................................................................................6
7.9 Retaining Wall Recommendations:.................................................................................................7
7.10 Earth Pressures: .............................................................................................................................7
7.11 Retaining Wall Design:......................................................................... ..........................................7
EnGEN Corporation
Lisa Platts—Platte Residence V Unit
Project Number:4166C1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION NUMBER AND TITLE PAGE
7.12 Subdrain:.........................................................................................................................................7
7.13 Backfill:............................................................................................................................................8
7.14 Utility Trench Recommendations: ...................................................................................................8
7.15 Driveway..........................................................................................................................................8
8.0 Conclusions and Recommendations..................................................................................9
8.1 General............................................................................................................................................9
8.2 Suitability for Proposed Use............................................................................................................9
8.3 Post Rough Grading Observation and Testing...............................................................................9
9.0 Closure..................................................................................................................................9
APPENDICES:
APPENDIX 1-TEST RESULTS
PLATES:
PLATE 1
EnGEN Corporation
ENGEN ID41625 Enterprise Circle S r B-2 O info@engencorp.com O engencorp cornTemecula.CA 92590
C O R P 0 R A T 1 O 'i O ph 1 951.296 3511 O fx 19512403380 O SDVOSB I DVBEGeotechnical6Emn,nmenml Services
September 19, 2019
Lisa Platts
41784 Green Tree Dr.
Temecula, Ca 92591
Subject: Geotechnical Report of Compaction Test Results—Grading Operations
41784 Green Tree Drive, Temecula, CA 92591 - 2rd Unit
Project Number: 4166C1
References: 1. EnGEN Corporation, Updated Geotechnical Feasibility Study, Lisa Platts Res.,
2rd Unit, 41784 Green Tree Rd., Temecula, Ca 92591,4166C; Dated: July 12, 2019
2. Bratene Construction and Engineering, Precise Grading Plan, Platts 20d Dwelling
Unit, PA19-077, 41784 Green Tree Rd., Temecula, CA 92591; Dated: May 17, 2019
Mrs. Platts,
In accordance with your request and signed authorization, EnGEN Corporation has performed field
observations, sampling, and in-place density testing at the above referenced site. Submitted, herein, are
the test results and the supporting field and laboratory data.
1.0 PROJECT
1.1 Site Description
The subject property consists of an approximate 2.6 acre essentially rectangular shaped parcel of
residentially developed property located South of Green Tree Rd., in the city of Temecula,
California. Improvements on the property include a single-family residence located in the northern
third of the site. Vertical topographic relief across the entire site is approximately 25 feet with overall
site drainage toward the east to a drainage channel that Flows to the south.
1.2 Project Description
The work performed for this project consisted of observation and testing during rough grading
operations of the proposed 2rd dwelling unit pad (see Plate 1).
2.0 SCOPE OF WORK
2.1 Time of Grading
This report represents geotechnical observations and testing during the construction operations
from September 16, 2019 through September 18, 2019.
2.2 Contractor and Equipment
The grading operations were performed by Advance Erosion Services using 1-938H Rubber
Tired Loader and 1-21 OLE Skip Loader. For moisture conditioning, and dust control, the contractor
utilized 1-2inch fire hose connected to a fire hydrant.
Lisa Platts—Platts Residence 2n° Unit
Project Number:4166C1
September 19, 2019
Page 2
2.3 Grading Operations
Grading within the subject site consisted of typical hillside grading operations. Grasses and weeds
were removed prior to fill placement. Fill material was generated and used to bring the fill slope
and pad portions of the site to finish grade elevation. Removal of alluvium, slopewash, etc., was
performed to depths of approximately 4 feet below original elevation in the 2nd Unit building pad
area prior to fill placement. Over excavated earth material was stockpiled and later used as fill.
Bottoms were observed, probed and found to be into competent Pauba Formation Bedrock by a
representative of this firm. Keying and benching into competent Pauba Formation Bedrock was
observed during the grading operations.
2.4 Over-excavation
Over-excavation was performed in the cut and shallow fill portions of the building pad to depths of
between 4 to 5 feet below finish grade elevation and a minimum of 5-feet beyond the proposed 2nd
Unit foundation perimeter.
2.5 Finish Pad Elevations
The pad areas were generally graded to the elevations noted on the referenced Number 2 grading
plan. However, the actual pad locations, dimensions, elevations, slope locations and inclinations,
etc. were surveyed and staked by others and should be verified by the Project Civil Engineer.
3.0 SLOPE STABILITY
3.1 Fill slopes
All design fill slopes were constructed in substantial accordance with the plans at a slope ratio of
approximately 2:1 (horizontal to vertical. It is our opinion that the fill slopes as constructed possess
gross and surficial stability in excess of generally accepted minimum engineering criteria(Factor of
Safety at least 1.5) and are suitable for their intended purpose, provided that proper slope
maintenance procedures are maintained. These procedures include but are not limited to
installation and maintenance of drainage devices, and planting of slope faces to protect from
erosion in accordance with City of Temecula Grading Codes. The maximum height of fill slope
covered in this report is 9.5 feet.
3.2 Cut Slopes
All cut slopes were constructed in substantial accordance with the plans at a slope ratio of
approximately 3:1 (horizontal to vertical). It is our opinion that the cut slopes as constructed
possess gross and surficial stability in excess of generally accepted minimum engineering criteria
Factor of Safety at least 1.5)and are suitable for their intended purpose. The maximum height of
cut slope covered in this report is 3.5 feet.
EnGEN Corporation
Lisa Plaits-Platte Residence 2"d Unit
Project Number:4166C1
September 19.2019
Page 3
3.3 Slope Maintenance and Protection Recommendations
The design and construction of slopes are planned to create slopes that are grossly stable. Surficial
slumping, creep, pop-outs, and other factors are beyond the control of the project Geotechnical
Consultant. The following recommendations are presented for slope protection and maintenance:
Surface Drainage
Surface water should not be allowed to flow over the slopes other than incidental rainfall. No
alteration of pad gradients should be allowed that will prevent pad and roof run-off from being
expediently directed to approved disposal areas away from the tops of slopes.
Slope Berms
Top of slope berms should be constructed and compacted as part of finish grading and should be
maintained by the resident and/or the property owner. The recommended drainage patterns should
be established at the time of finish grading and maintained throughout the Iffe of the project.
Slope Protection
It is recommended that slopes be planted with ground cover, shrubs and trees that possess deep,
dense root structures that require a minimum of irrigation. It should be the responsibility of the
landscape architect to provide such plants initially and of the owner to maintain such planting.
Alteration of the planting scheme is at the property owner's risk.
Excessive Irrigation
If automatic sprinkler systems are installed on the slopes, the use should be adjusted to account
for natural rainfall.
Burrowing Animals
The resident and/or the owner should maintain a program for the elimination of burrowing animals.
This should be an on-going program to protect slope stability.
4.0 TESTING
4.1 Field Testing Procedures
Field in-place density and moisture content testing were performed in general accordance with
ASTM D 6938-17a and ASTM D 3017-05 procedures for determining in-place density and moisture
content,respectively,using nuclear gauge equipment. Relative compaction test results were within
the 90 percent required for all material tested, which is an indication that the remainder of the fill
placed has been properly compacted. Test results are presented in the Appendix of this report.
Fill depths and test locations were determined from review of the referenced grading plans.
EnGEN Corporation
Lisa Platts—Platts Residence 2Id Unit
Project Number:4166C1
September 19,2019
Page 4
5.0 LABORATORY TESTING
5.1 General
The following laboratory tests were performed as part of our services during the grading of the
subject site. Laboratory tests results are presented in the Appendix of this report. Following is a
listing and brief explanation of the laboratory tests which were performed. The samples obtained
will be discarded 30 days after the date of this report. This office should be notified immediately if
retention of samples will be needed beyond 30 days.
5.2 Classification
The field classification of soil materials encountered in the field was verified in the laboratory in
general accordance with the Unified Soils Classification System, ASTM D 2488-00, Standard
Practice for Determination and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedures).
5.3 In-Situ Moisture Content and Density Test
The in-situ moisture content and dry density were determined in general accordance with ASTM D
2216-10 and ASTM D 2937-10 procedures.
5.4 Maximum Dry Density/Optimum Moisture Content Relationship Test
Maximum dry density/optimum moisture content relationship determinations were performed on
samples of near-surface earth material in general accordance with ASTM D 1557-12 procedures
using a 4.0-inch diameter mold.
5.5 Expansion Test
Laboratory expansion tests were performed on samples of near-surface earth material in general
accordance with the California Building Code Standard (CBC 18-2).
6.0 EARTH MATERIALS
6.1 Earth Materials
The natural earth materials encountered on-site generally consists of Pauba Formation Bedrock
material with some silt.
6.2 Corrosive Soils
The soils to be in contact with the proposed footings consist of silty sands and are considered to
have non-corrosive properties. Consequently, normal Type II cement may be used in concrete
that will be in contact with native soils.
6.3 Expansion Index Test
One (1) soil sample was obtained for expansion potential testing within the area of the future
proposed building upon completion of rough grading operations.The expansion test was performed
in accordance with CBC 18-2. The material tested consisted of silty sand,which has an Expansion
Index of 0. This soil is classified as having a very low expansion potential. The results are
presented in the Summary of Expansion Index Results in the Appendix of this report.
EnGEN Corporation
Lisa Platte—Platts Residence 2dd Unit
Project Number:4166C1
September 19,2019
Page 5
7.0 FOUNDATION DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1 Foundation Design Recommendations
Foundations for the proposed structures may consist of conventional column footings and
continuous wall footings founded in properly compacted fill. The recommendations presented in
the subsequent paragraphs for foundation design and construction are based upon a very low
expansion potential for the supporting soils and should not preclude more restrictive structural
requirements. The Project Structural Engineer should determine the actual footing width and depth
in accordance with the latest edition of the California Building Code to resist design vertical,
horizontal, and uplift forces.
7.2 Foundation Size
Continuous footings should have a minimum width of 12-inches and should be continuously
reinforced with a minimum of one (1) No. 4 steel reinforcing bar located near the top and one (1)
No. 4 steel reinforcing bar located near the bottom of the footings to minimize the effects of slight
differential movements which may occur due to minor variations in the engineering characteristics
or seasonal moisture change in the supporting soils. Column footings should have a minimum
width of 18-inches by 18-inches and be suitably reinforced, based on structural requirements. A
grade beam,founded at the same depths and reinforced the same as the adjacent footings, should
be provided across all doorway entrances, including the garage door opening.
7.3 Depth of Embedment
Exterior and interior footings founded in properly compacted fill should extend to a minimum depth
of 12-inches below lowest adjacent finish grade for the proposed structure. Perimeter footings for
two-story structures should be placed to a minimum depth of 18-inches below lowest adjacent
grade.
7.4 Bearing Capacity
Based on the grading completed for the subject pad at the time this report was published, the
allowable bearing value for design of continuous and column footings for the total dead plus
frequently-applied live loads is 1,500 psf for footings in properly compacted fill. The allowable
bearing value has a Factor of Safety of at least 3.0 and may be increased by 33.3 percent for short
durations of live and/or dynamic loading such as wind or seismic forces.
7.5 Settlement
Footings designed according to the recommended bearing values and the maximum assumed wall
and column loads are not expected to exceed a maximum settlement of 0.75-inch or a differential
settlement of 0.50-inch in properly compacted fill under static load conditions.
7.6 Lateral Capacity
Additional foundation design parameters based on compacted fill for resistance to static lateral
forces, are provide on Table 1.
EnGEN Corporation
Lisa Platts-Plaits Residence 2'"Unit
Project Number:4166C1
September 19, 2019
Page 6
TABLE 1
ALLOWABLE LATERAL PRESSURE (EQUIVALENT FLUID PRESSURE) PASSIVE CASE)
Allowable Lateral Pressure E ulvalent Fluid Pressure -Passive Case
En ineered Fill 150 of
Allowable Coefficient of Friction
En ineered Fill 1 0.35
Lateral load resistance may be developed by a combination of friction acting on the base of
foundations and slabs and passive earth pressure developed on the sides of the footings and stem
walls below grade when in contact with undisturbed, properly compacted fill material. The above
values are allowable design values and may be used in combination without reduction in evaluating
the resistance to lateral loads. The allowable values may be increased by 33.3 percent for short
durations of live and/or dynamic loading, such as wind or seismic forces. For the calculation of
passive earth resistance, the upper 1.0-foot of material should be neglected unless confined by a
concrete slab or pavement. The maximum recommended allowable passive pressure is 5.0 times
the recommended design value.
7.7 Slab-on-Grade Recommendations
The recommendations for concrete slabs, both interior and exterior, excluding FCC pavement, are
based upon the anticipated building usage and upon a very low expansion potential for the
supporting material as determined by Chapter 18 of the California Building Code. Concrete slabs
should be designed to minimize cracking as a result of shrinkage. Joints (isolation, contraction,
and construction) should be placed in accordance with the American Concrete Institute (ACI)
guidelines. Special precautions should be taken during placement and curing of all concrete slabs.
Excessive slump(high water/cement ratio)of the concrete and/or improper curing procedures used
during either hot or cold weather conditions could result in excessive shrinkage, cracking,or curling
in the slabs. It is recommended that all concrete proportioning,placement,and curing be performed
in accordance with ACI recommendations and procedures. Slab-on-grade reinforcement and
thickness should be provided by the structural engineer based on structural considerations, but as
a minimum, it is recommended that concrete floor slabs be at least 4-inches nominal in thickness
and reinforced with at least No.3 steel reinforcing bars placed 24-inches on center both ways, or
equivalent, placed at mid-height of the slab cross-section. In areas where moisture sensitive floor
coverings are anticipated over the slab,we recommend the use of a polyethylene vapor barrier with
a minimum of 10.0 mil in thickness be placed beneath the slab. The moisture barrier should be
overlapped or sealed at splices and covered top and bottom by a 1.0-inch to 2.0-inch minimum
layer of clean, moist (not saturated) sand to aid in concrete curing and to minimize potential
punctures.
7.8 Exterior Slabs
All exterior concrete slabs cast on finish subgrade (patios, sidewalks, etc., with the exception of
FCC pavement) should be a minimum of 4-inches nominal in thickness. Reinforcing in the slabs
EnGEN Corporation
Lisa Platts—Platts Residence 2nd Unit
Project Number:4166C1
September 19,2019
Page 7
and the use of a compacted sand or gravel base beneath the slabs should be according to the
current local standards.
7.9 Retaining Wall Recommendations:
7.10 Earth Pressures:
Retaining walls backfilled with non-expansive granular soil (EI=O) or very low expansive potential
materials (Expansion Index of 20 or less)within a zone extending upward and away from the heel
of the footing at a slope of 0.5:1 (horizontal to vertical) or flatter can be designed to resist the
following static lateral soil pressures:
Condition Level Backflll 2:1 Slope Seismic
Active 1 30 pcf 1 45 pcf I Kh=0.2
At Rest 1 60
Further expansion testing of potential backfill material should be performed at the time of retaining
wall construction to determine suitability. Walls that are free to deflect 0.01 radian at the top may
be designed for the above-recommended active condition. Walls that need to be restricted from
this amount of movement should be assumed rigid and designed for the at-rest condition. The
above values assume well-drained backfill and no buildup of hydrostatic pressure. Surcharge
loads, dead and/or live, acting on the backfill behind the wall should also be considered in the
design.
7.11 Retaining Wall Design:
Retaining wall footings should be founded to the same depths into firm, competent, undisturbed,
engineered fill or standard foundations and may be designed for an allowable bearing value of
1,500 psf(as long as the resultant force is located in the middle one-third of the footing), and with
an allowable static lateral bearing pressure of 150 psf/ft and allowable sliding resistance coefficient
of friction of 0.35. When using the allowable lateral pressure and allowable sliding resistance, a
Factor of Safety of 1.5 should be achieved.
7.12 Subdrain:
A subdrain system should be constructed behind and at the base of retaining walls equal to or in
excess of 4-feet in height to allow drainage and to prevent the buildup of excessive hydrostatic
pressures. Gravel galleries and/or filter rock, if not properly designed and graded for the on-site
and/or import materials, should be enclosed in a geotextile fabric such as Mirafi 140N, Supac 4NP,
or a suitable substitute in order to prevent infiltration of fines and clogging of the system. The
perforated pipes should be at least 4.0-inches in diameter. Pipe perforations should be placed
downward. Gravel filters should have volume of at least 1.0 cubic foot per lineal foot of pipe. For
retaining walls with an overall height of less than 4-feet, subdrains may include weep holes with a
continuous gravel gallery, perforated pipe surrounded by filter rock, or some other approved
EnGEN Corporation
Lisa Platte-Platte Residence 2n°Unit
Project Number:4166C1
September 19,2019
Page 8
system. Subdrains should maintain a positive flow gradient and have outlets that drain in a non-
erosive manner.
7.13 Backfill:
Backfill directly behind retaining walls(if backfill width is less than 3 feet)may consist of 0.5 to 0.75-
inch diameter, rounded to subrounded gravel enclosed in a geotextile fabric such as Mirafi 140N,
Supac 4NP,or a suitable substitute or a clean sand (Sand Equivalent Value greater than 50)water
jetted into place to obtain proper compaction. If water jetting is used, the subdrain system should
be in place. Even if water jetting is used, the sand should be densified to a minimum of 90 percent
relative compaction. If the specified density is not obtained by water jetting, mechanical methods
will be required. If other types of soil or gravel are used for backfill, mechanical compaction
methods will be required to obtain a relative compaction of at least 90 percent of maximum dry
density. Backfill directly behind retaining walls should not be compacted by wheel, track or other
rolling by heavy construction equipment unless the wall is designed for the surcharge loading. If
gravel, clean sand or other imported backfill is used behind retaining walls, the upper 18-inches of
backfill in unpaved areas should consist of typical on-site material compacted to a minimum of 90
percent relative compaction in order to prevent the influx of surface runoff into the granular backfill
and into the subdrain system. Maximum dry density and optimum moisture content for backfill
materials should be determined in accordance with ASTM D 1557-12 procedures.
7.14 Utility Trench Recommendations:
Utility trenches within the zone of influence of foundations or under building floor slabs, hardscape,
and/or pavement areas should be backfilled with properly compacted soil. It is recommended that
all utility trenches excavated to depths of 5.0-feet or deeper be cut back to an inclination not steeper
than 1:1 (horizontal to vertical) or be adequately shored during construction. Where interior or
exterior utility trenches are proposed parallel and/or perpendicular to any building footing, the
bottom of the trench should not be located below a 1:1 plane projected downward from the outside
bottom edge of the adjacent footing unless the utility lines are designed for the footing surcharge
loads. Backfill material should be placed in a lift thickness appropriate for the type of backfill
material and compaction equipment used. Backfill material should be compacted to a minimum of
90 percent relative compaction by mechanical means. Jetting of the backfill material will not be
considered a satisfactory method for compaction. Maximum dry density and optimum moisture
content for backfill material should be determined according to ASTM D 1557-12 procedures.
7.15 Driveway
Due to construction operations, the driveway will experience typical construction related
disturbance associated with vehicle traffic. Consequently, this office should be notified after
construction traffic has ceased to verify that compaction meets city of Temecula requirements.
EnGEN Corporation
Lisa Platts—Platts Residence 2nd Unit
Project Number:4166CI
September 19,2019
Page 9
8.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
8.1 General
There were no conditions which would require special geotechnical recommendations or detailed
subsurface investigations. As a result, design and construction can proceed in accordance with
typical California Building Code requirements and the specific recommendation of this report.
8.2 Suitability for Proposed Use
Based on the observations and tests performed during grading, the subject site, in the areas noted
as test locations, has been completed in accordance with the Referenced Reports,or as amended
in the field based on conditions encountered, the project plans and the Grading Code of the City of
Temecula. The graded site, in the areas noted as graded, is determined to be adequate for the
support of a typical residential development. Any subsequent grading for development of the
subject property should be performed under engineering observation and testing performed by
EnGEN Corporation. Subsequent grading includes, but is not limited to, any additional fill
placement and excavation of temporary and permanent cut and fill slopes.
8.3 Post Rough Grading Observation and Testing
EnGEN Corporation should observe all foundation excavations. Observations should be made
prior to installation of concrete forms and/or reinforcing steel so as to verify and/or modify, if
necessary, the conclusions and recommendations in this report. Observations of over-excavation
cuts, fill placement, finish grading, utility or other trench backfill, pavement subgrade and base
course, retaining wall backfill, slab pre-saturation, or other earth work completed for the
development of the subject site should be performed by EnGEN Corporation. If any of the
observations and testing to verify site geotechnical conditions are not performed by EnGEN
Corporation, liability for the safety and performance of the development is limited to the actual
portions of the project observed and/or tested by EnGEN Corporation.
9.0 CLOSURE
This report has been prepared for use by the parties or project named or described above. It may
or may not contain sufficient information for other parties or purposes. The findings and
recommendations expressed in this report are based on field and laboratory testing performed
during the rough grading operation and on generally accepted engineering practices and principles.
No further warranties are implied or expressed beyond the direct representations of this report.
EnGEN Corporation
Lisa Plants—Platts Residence 2n°Unit
Project Number:4166C1
September 19,2019
Page 10
Thank you for the opportunity to provide these services. If you should have any questions regarding this
report, please do not hesitate to contact this office at your convenience.
Respectfully submitted,
En N C rporation
a e
En
ey Sbj maten ' cipal
Field Operations M ager GE I
QINOF ESS/OHWB/OB:pm O
Distribution: 2 Addressee y o`' Zm )
C9 m
No. 162 A
it t}
Srq
OF CAl1F0\
P
EnGEN Corporation
Lisa Platts—Platte Residence 2n0 Unit
Project Number:4166C1
September 19,2019
Appendix
APPENDIX 1 -TEST RESULTS
Laboratory Test Results—Summary
Selected samples were tested using the guidelines of ASTM D 1140
MOISTURE AND DENSITY TEST:
SAMPLE LOCATION MATERIAL DESCRIPTION MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY
OPTIMUM MOISTURE
MATERIAL cQ CONTENT 1%1
Al _Brown Silty Sand -- 128.9 9.9
A2 Yellow Brown Silty Sand 12" 9.9
The maximum dry density and optimum moisture comers representative samples were determined using the guidelines of ASTM D1557
EXPANSION INDEX:
SAMPLE LOCATION MATERIAL DESCRIPTION EXPANSION INDEX EXPANSION POTENTIAL
E1_ _ Silty Sand,Brown 0 Very Low
The expansion potental of representative samples was evaluated using the guidelines of ASTM D 4829
EnGEN Corporation
Lisa Plains-Plains Residence 2" Unit
Project Number:4166C1
September 19,2019
Appendix
Summary of Field In-Place Compaction Test Results
NG = Nuclear Density Test/ SC= Sand Cone Test
SG = Subgrade / FG = Finish Grade
OPT.
DEPTH MAX MOISTURE MOISTURE DRY RELATIVE REQUIRED
TEST TECK ELEVATION DENSITY CONTENT CONTENT DENSITY COMPACTIO COMPACTIO 'TEST
NO. 447E TEST LOCATIONS INITIALS (Fr) SOIL TYPE (PCF) (%) PCF)N(%) N(%)TYPE
1 9/16/19 Bottom NE Slope Keyw ay TJZ 1522 A2 128.5 9.9 7.9 113.3 88.2% 85% NG
2 9/16/19 Bottom NE Slope Keyw ay TJZ 1523 A2 128.5 9.9 8.2 112.4 87.5% 85% NG
3 9116/19 Fill over NE Keyw ay TJZ 1522 A2 128.5 9.9 104.0 116.9 91.0% 90% NG
4 9116/19 Fill over NE Keyw ay TJZ 1523 A2 128.5 9.9 9.6 116.6 90.7% 90% NG
5 9/16/19 Fill on NE Slope TJZ 1525 A2 128.5 9.9 9.3 116.8 90.9% 90% NG
6 9/16/19 Fill on NE Slope TJZ 1526 A2 128.5 9.9 10.9 118.2 92.0% 90% NG
7 9/16/19 Fill on NE Slope TJZ 1528 A2 128.5 9.9 10.6 117.8 91.7% 90% NG
8 9/17/19 Bottom Building Footprint TJZ 1529 A2 128.5 9.9 11.2 115.7 90.1% 85% NG
9 9117/19 Bottom Building Footprint TJZ 1531 A2 128.5 9.9 8.1 111.8 87.0% 85% NG
10 9/17/19 Fill Pad TJZ 1532 A2 128.5 9.9 10.8 116.0 90.3% 90% NG
11 9/17/19 Fill Pad TJZ 1532 A2 128.5 9.9 10.6 116.5 90.7% 90% NG
12 9/17/19 Fill Pad TJZ 1533 A2 128.5 9.9 10.9 115.9 90.2% 90% NG
13 9/17/19 Fill Pad TJZ 1534 A2 128.5 9.9 11.5 116.9 91.0% 90% NG
14 9118/19 RII Pad TJZ 1534 A2 128.5 9.9 10.8 116.4 90.6% 90% NG
15 9/18/19 Fill Pad TJZ 1535 A2 128.5 9.9 11.4 117.0 91.1% 90% NG
16 9/18119 Fill Pad TJZ FG A2 128.5 9.9 9.6 116.1 90.4% 90% NG
17 9/18/19 Fill Pad TJZ FG A2 128.5 9.9 10.2 116.5 90.7% 90% NG
18 9/18/19 Fill Pad TJZ FG A2 128.5 9.9 10.7 116.0 90.3% 90% NG
19 9/18119 Finished Slope Test TJZ 1530 A2 128.5 9.9 9.0 117.4 91.4% 90% NG
20 9/18/19 Finished Slope Test TJZ 1526 A2 128.5 9.9 10.1 116.6 90.7% 90% NG
EnGEN Corporation
Lisa Platte—Platte Residence 2n0 Unit
Project Number:4166C1
September 19,2019
Plates
PLATE 1
EnGEN Corporation
ti r
TO ' " Legend
t Approximate Density Test Locations
Limitaof Over{ItGvaYM
qSeeseaionTlSofCompaionliepanT'
Over-Excavation limits no less thanI.Post Hough GrAiN Driveway lmp,ovements t
r„o,,,,, Sft outside building footprint
11
x.s c rn/u
cwvhc scat
Compaction Test Report Site Plan
Pro"ect Name:Plans Residence 2nd Unit Date:9/19/19
Pro ect Number:4166C Client:Lisa Platt
a escnpt n:.im&c nnnaatm,e.uyusxspt plate Number:t