HomeMy WebLinkAboutTract Map 31276 As Graded Rough Grading'
~ RECEIVED
JAN 1 4 2005
' CITY OF T~MECULA
,~NGINEERINO D~PARTMENT
'
' AS-GRADED REPORT OF ROUGH GRADING
FOR HARVESTON TRACT 31276
CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA
~
~
1
' Prepared For:
~ = Greystone Homes
= 40980 County Center Drive
' _ Temecula, California, 92591
~
' January 11, 2005
, Project No. 110231-055
~
, ~
~
~ - Leighton and Associates, Inc.
' A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPANY
,
,
1
~
,
~
,
1
'
'
,
'
,
,
'
'
~
Leighton and Associates, Inc.
A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPANY
To: Greystone Homes
40980 County Center Drive
Temecula, California 92591
Attention: Ms. Mary Anne Pazadise
Project No. 110231-055
Subject: As-Graded Report of Rough Grading for Harveston, Tract 31276, City of Temecula,
California
1n accordance with your request and authorization, I,eighton and Associates, Inc. (Leighton) has been
pmviding geotechnical observation and testing services during mugh gading operations of Tract
31276, tocated in the City of Temecula, Califomia (See Figure 1). The accompanying as-gaded
report summarizes our observations, field and laboratory test results and the geotechnical conditions
encountered during the mugh grading of Lots 1 through 60 of Tract 31276 within the Harveston
Community.
If you have any quesrions regazding this report, please do not hesitate to contact this ofl'ice, we
appreciate this opportunity to be of service.
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
Respectfully submitted,
~ ¢Q°NO.~vx~'y~`~'~'~
CEiiTIF!E~ S ~
,t ENGINEEHING *
' OEOLOGI.^i7
Robert F. Riha, CEG 1921 (Exp. 02/28/0 .g~ ~,a,.`Q' Adam Terronez, RC
Vice President/Principal Geologist ~FCpL'~ Senior Project Engir,
RFR/AXT/RM/mm
110231-055/finaVas-gd ryt tract 3 t276
, Copies:
1
'
(6) Addressee (1 Unbound)
January 11, 2005
41715 Enterprise Circle N., Suite 103 B Temecula, CA 92590-5661
909.296.0530 ^ Fax 909.296.0534 ^ www.leightongeo.com
, 110231-055
January il, 2005
' TABLE OF CONTENTS
' Section paae
1.0 INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................1
2.0 SUMMARY OF ROUGH-GRADING OPERATIONS,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
' ...........................................2
2.1 Site Preparation and Removals ....................................................................................
2.2 Feld Density Testin9 ...................................................................................................3
' 2.3 Laboratory Testin9 ......................................................... .......................... 2
............... ....
2.4 FII Placement .............................................................................................................
2.5 Canyon Subdrains .......................................................................................................3
I 3.0 GEOTECHNICALSUMMARY ..............................................................................................4
' 3.1 As-Graded Geologic Conditions ....................................................................................4
3.2 Geologic Units ............................................................................................................
' 3.2.1 Aitificial FII ~A~ ......................................................................................................4
3.2.2 Aitificial FII Leighton ~~) ........................................................................................4
3.2.3 Pauba Formation ~QP) ............................................................................................4
' ` 3.3 Geologic Structure and Faultin9 ...................................................................................4
3.4 Landslides and Surficial Failures ...................................................................................5
, 3.5 Groundwater ..............................................................................................................5
3.6 Expansion Testing of Fnish Grade Soils ........................................................................5
, 4.0, CONCLUSIONS .............................................................................................................
....6
4.1 General ................................................:.....................................................................6
4.2 . Summary of Conclusions ......................................................................................
' .......6
5.0 RECOMMENDAlIONS ........................................................................................................$
, 5.1 Earthwork ..................................................................................................................$
5.1.1 Excavations ...........................................................................................................8
' S.1.2 Utility Backfill, FII Placement and Compaction ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, g
5.2 Foundation and Structure Design Considerations ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, g
' S.3 Foundation Setback from SloPes ................... ...... ......... ......... ............. SO
5.4 Structure Seismic Design Parameters .........................................................................ll
5.5 Corrosion .................................................................................................................11
, 5.6 Lateral Earth Pressures and Retaining Wall Design Considerations ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,li
5.7 Concrete Flatwork ............:........................................................................................12
5.8 Control of Surface Water and Drainage Control,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,a........,, ,13
' S.9 Graded Slop~ ............................................. .......................................................13
5.10 Irrigation, Landscaping and Lot Maintenance ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,14
'
~
, -~ Leighton v
' 110231-055
January li, 2005
' Table of Contents (cont.)
5.11 Post-Grading Geotechnical Review ............................................................................14
' S.11.1 Construction Review ..........................................................................................14
5.11.2 Plans and Specifications .....................................................................................14
' 6.0. LiMITAlIONS .................................................................................................................15
' Accompanying Figures, Tables, Plates and Appendices
' F ures
Fgure 1- Site Location Map Rear of Text
, Fgure 2- Retaining Wall Drainage Detail for Low Expansive Soils Rear of Text
Tables
, Table 1- Lot by Lot Summary of As-graded Geotechnical
Conditions and Recommendations Rear of Text
Table 2- Minimum Conventional Foundatlon Design Recommendations Rear of Text
' Table 3- Minimum Post-Tensioned Foundation Design Recommendations Rear of Text
Table 4- Lateral Earth Pressures Rear of Text
' Plate
Plate 1- Density Test Location Map In Pocket
'
A~oendices
' Appendix A - References
Appendix B- Summary of Feld Density Tests
Appendix C- Laboratory TesGng Procedures and Test Results
, Appendix D- Lot Maintenance Guidelines for Owners
,
'
'
'
,
~
' -"- Leighton
3
'
'
'
'
'
'
,
'
'
'
'
,
'
,
'
,
'
t
110231-055
January 11, 2005
1.0
In accordance with your request and authorization, I.eighton and Associates, Inc. (I.eighton) has
performed geotechnical observa6on and testing services during November through December of the
latest mugh-grading operations of Lots 1 through 60 for single family detached homes of Tract
31276 within the Harveston Community. The subject propeity had been previously "sheeY' mass
graded under the observation and testing of Leighton (I.eighton, 2003). Note that Lot 61 through 66
are intended to be an open space-landscape area and aze included on the Density Test Locarion Map
(Plate 1).
This as-graded report suminarizes our geotechnical observations, field and laboratory test results
and the geotechnical conditions encountered during the recent mugh grading of the subject lots
within Tract 32176. In addition, this report provides conclusions and recommendations for the
pmposed development of the subject lots.
The reference 40-scale grading plans for Tract 31267 (RBF, 2004) were annotated and utilized as a
base map (Plate 1) to plot geotechnical conditions and the approximate locations of the field density
tests taken during rough-grading opentions.
~
-1 Leighton
~
' 110231-055
January li, 2005
, 2.0 SUMMARY OF ROUGH-GRADING OPERATIONS
,
Tract 31276 was initially sheet graded as Lot 25 within Tract 29639-1 under the observarion and
' testing of Leighton (I.eighton, 2003). Rough gradiug to the appmved design configuration (RBF,
2003) during the curreut phase of grading was conducted by D.H. Wright, Inc. in November through
December of 2004, under the geotechnical observation and testing services of Leighton. Leighton
' Seld technician(s) and geologist were onsite on a full-time and as-needed basis, respectively, during
gaciing operations. Grading involved the complete removal of dirt stockpiles, desiccated fill, erosion
rills and surface erosion sediments to competent previously-placed compacted fill (L,eighton, 2003)
' and the placement of compacted artificial fill to depths of appmxunately 2 feet to create the design
residential lots and associated roadways.
' 2.1 Site Prer~aration and Remov
' Prior to grading, deleterious materials were removed from the azeas of pmposed development
and disposed of of2'site. Grading of the subject site was accomplished by removal of unsuitable
surficial material. The removals were to a minimum depth of 1-foot or completed until
' competent previously-placed compacted fill (I.eighton, 2003) was encountered in accordance
with the recommendations of the project geotechnical reports (Appendix A) and the
geotechnical recommendadons made during grading operations. Building pads on transition
, lots or lots where expansive soils were encountered and reported in the supplemental report
(I.eighton, 2004a) were not overexcavated to the recommended 5-foot removal. Therefore,
high expansion potential design criteria will be implemented on those lots as provided in the
' pmject geotechnical report. The specific lots aze presented on the foundation section of this
report.
' 2.2 Field Densitv Testing
Field density testing was performed using the nucleaz gauge method (AST'M Test Methods
, D2922 and D301'~. Tested areas appear to meet the minimum required 90 percent relative
compaction with optimum moishue content or above. Areas that tested less than the required 90
percent relative compaction, were reworked, moisture conditioned as necessary and compacted
' until the minimum 90 percent was obtained. The results and approximate locations of the field
density tests are summarized in Appendix B. The approximate locations of the field density tests
' are depicted on the enclosed Field Density Test Locafion Map (Plate 1).
2.3 Laboratory Testing
, Laboratory wmpaction characteristics (maximum dry density and optimum moisture),
expansion index, and soluble sulfate tests of representative onsite soils were performed during
' the course of mugh-grading and aze presented in Appendix C. A description of the laboratory
'
~
- z Leighton
~
~
' 110231-055
]anuary 11, 2005
' test procedures are also presented in Appendix C. The interpretation of the labontory data for
' each lot is presented in Table 1 at the reaz of text.
2.4 Fill Placement
' Fill consisting of the soil types listed in Appendix C was placed in thin lifts, processed and
moisture conditioned to optimum moisture content or above, and compacted in place to a
' minimum of 90 percent of the laboratory derived maximum density. Fill placement and
compaction was accomplished with the use of heary earthwork equipment. For a description
of the removal criteria refer to the previous rough-grading report (Leighton, 2003).
' 2.5 Canyon Subdrains
' The existing canyon subdrain constructed during rough-grading of Tract 29639-i (Leighton,
2003) should be outletted to the planned permanent storm drain system that outlets into the
' Arroyo Channel located northwest of Date Street during the storm drain construction of Tract
30667-3. The approximate location of the subdrain is presented on the Field Density Test
Locadon Map (Plate 1). Canyon subdrains, as constructed, were surveyed by RBF.
'
'
'
~
,
~
'
'
'
,
~
- 3 Leighton
1 --
~
, 110231-055
]anuary 11, 2005
, 3.0 GEOTECHNICAL SUMMARY
, 3.1 As-Graded Geologic Conditions
' The as-graded conditions encountered during grading of the subject lots was essentially as
anticipated. A summary of the geologic conditions, including geologic units, geolo~c structure
and faulring is presented below.
' 3.2 Geologic Units
, The geologic units observed during grading of the subject lots consisted of Artificial Fill (.A~,
previously-placed compacted fill (Afl), and the Pauba Formation (Qp), which aze discussed
, below:
3.2.1 Artifcial Fill fAfl - Locally derived artificial fill soils generally consisted of olive gray to
' olive brown silty sand to locally slightly clayey silty sand. Artificial fill soils were placad
under the observation and field density testing by Leighton representatives during this
phase of grading. After moishue conditioning and thomugh mixing, the artificial fill soils
' were placed in relatively thin liffs and compacted utilizing heavy duty construcrion
equipment.
, 3.2.2 Artificial Fill Leighton (/~fll - The artificial fill encountered from our previous phase of
grading 2002/2003 generally consisted of olive gray to olive bmwn, moist, medium dense
to dense silty to clayey sand. As enwuntered during grading, the artificial fill was generally
, moderately dense nearthe surface, becoming dense with depth. The weathered artificial
fill materials were scarified, moishue conditioned and thoroughly mixed and re-used as
compacted fill.
, 3.2.3 Pauba Formatinn fOnl - The late Pleistocene-aged Pauba Formation generally consists
' of light brown to olive-brown to medium brown, damp to moist, medium dense to dense,
siltstone, sandstone and silty claystone. The Pleistocene-aged formation was moisture
conditioned and re-used as compacted fill.
, 3.3 ~eoloaic Structure and Faulting
, Based on our geologic observations during site grading, the Pauba Formation is massive with
localized bedding, which is generally flat lying. No faulting or indications of faulting were
anticipated or observed within or immediately adjacent to the subject tract. No faulting or
' indications of active faulring was anticipated nor observed within the subject lots during rough-
grading operations. The neazest "zoned" active fault is the Temecula Segment of the Elsinore
Fault Zone located approximately 0.9 miles (1.41mi) to the southwest.
'
,
~
- 4 Leighton
~
'
,
'
'
LJI
,
'
'
'
'
,
'
,
,
~
,
'
,
110231-055
7anuary 11, 2005
3.4 Landslides and Su~cial Failures
Based on our review of the project geotechnical reports (Appendix A) and our geologic
observarions during the course of grading operations, there were no indications of landslides or
other significant surficial failures within the subject tract. It should be noted that unplanted or
unpmtected slopes aze subject to erosion and subsequent surficial instability.
3.5 Groundwater
Groundwater was not encountered during recent or previous (Leighton, 2003) mugh grading.
Canyon subdrains were constructed in general accordance with the project geotechnical
reports (Appendix A) and our field recommendations during the previous grading (Leighton,
2003). However, unforeseen conditions may occur after the complefion of grading and
establishment of site irrigarion and landscaping. Perched groundwater may accumulate at layers
of differing permeability or at bedrock/fill contacts. If these conditions should occur, methods
should be taken to mitigate any resuiting seepage. Presently the majority of the subject site
drains towards the northwest and any surface runoff will tend to collect at low points~until such
time that the proposed design drainage facilities aze constructed. If waYer is allowed to pond 'm
these azeas for any length of time the subgrade in these azeas may become saturated and
additional gad'uig recommendations may be required to mitigate Uvs condition. We
recommend that the project emsion control pmgram be designed and implemented as soon as
possible to limit the potenrial of erosion damage or adverse effects to compacted fill.
3.6 Exnansion Testing of Finish Grade Soils
Expansion index testing was performed on representative neaz finish grade soils of the subject
lots. The test results indicate near-Snish grade soils have a very ]ow to medium expansion
potential in accordance with Table 18-I-B of the 1997 UBC. Test results of samples taken during
the course of grading indicate that very low to very high eacpansive soils exist on site at various
depths and locations on the Harveston project site. Test pmcedures and results aze presented in
Appendix C. A lot by lot interpretation of the as-graded conditions for the subject lots is presented
in Table 1.
~
- 5 Leighton
~
,
'
' 4.1 General
110231-055
]anuary 11, 2005
4.0 CONCLUSIONS
, The grading of the subject lots was performed in general accordance with the project geotechnical
reports and geotechnical recommendations made during the course of rough grading. It is our
professional opinion that the subject lots are suitable for their intended residential use provided
' the recommendations included herein and in the project geotechnical reports are incorporated into
the design and construction of the residential structures and associated improvements.
' 4.2 Summarv of Conclusions
. Geotechnical conditions encountered during rough grading ofthe subject site were generally
, as anticipated.
. Excavations were made to dense previously-placed compacted fill (Afl) or bedrock (Qp)
, material during the grading for the subject lots.
• Fill slopes within the subject site range up to approximately 6 feet in height. It is our
opnrion that the compacted fill slopes on the subject lots are surficially and grossly stable
' (under normal irrigation/precipitation patterns) provided the recommendations in the pmject
geotechnical reports and memorandums are incorporated into the post-grading, construction
, and post-construction phases of site development. Slopes aze inherently subject to erosion.
As such, measures should be taken as soon as possible to reduce erosion for both short term
and long term slope integrity.
~ . Laboratory testing of soils encountered during the course of grading indicates site soils to
possess a very low to very high expansion potential. Some expansive soil related distress to
flatwork should be anticipated.
~
'
'
,
'
'
,
. I,aboratory testing of neaz furish grade soils within building footprints indicates materials
which posses a very low to medium expansion potential and have a negligible concentration
of soluble sulfate. It is our opinion that the near surface soils influencing the design of
foundation and slabs of the subject tract should be considered to be medium expansive or
highly expansive where indicated (see Table 1).
• Testing for mnumum resistivity, chloride concentrates, and pH was not conducted during
the course of rough grading. A licensed corrosion engineer should be contacted in regazd to
detern~ining the potential for corrosion if corrosion sensitive buried improvements aze to be
installed.
. The potential for ground-surface rupture on the site due to a seismic event is considered to
be low; however, as in most of southern Califomia, strong ground shaking should be
anticipated during the life of the structures. The standard design of structures to meet the
seismic design requirements of the Uniform Building Code (i1BC), Seismic Zone 4 will be
required.
~
- 6 Leighton
q
,
110231-OSS
January 11, 2005
' . Where tested, fill material placed during grading of the subject tract was placed at a
' minimum of 90 percent relative compaction (95 percent where recommended) at or above
the optimum moisture content. Field testing of compacrion was performed by the nuclear
gauge method (ASTM Test Methods D2922 and D3017).
, . Foundations should be designed and constructed in accordance with Leighton's miuimum
recommendarions herein, the requirements of the City of Temecula and the applicable
secrions of the 1997 UBC.
, . Due to the relatively dense nature of the bedrock materials that underlie the subject site, the
competency of compacted fills, as well as the lack of permanent shallow groundwater, the
, potential for liquefaction on the site is considered very low.
,
1
~
'
,
'
~
'
'
,
'
~
1 ~ ,~
- ~ Leighton
'
, 130231-055
January 11, 2005
'
5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
' 5.1 Earthwork
' We anticipate that future earthwork at the site will consist of precise grading of the building
pads, foundation installation, trench excava6on and backfill, retaining wall backfill,
prepazation of street subgade, and placement of aggregate base and asphalt concrete
' pavement. We recommend that any additional earthwork on the site be performed in
accordance with the following recommendations and the City of Temecula grading
requirements.
5.1.1 Excavations -- Temporary excavations with vertical sides, such as utility trenches,
should remain stable to depths of 4 feet or less for the period required to construct the
utility. However, in accordance with OSHA requirements, excavations greater than 4
feet in depth should be shored, or laid-back to inclinations of i:l (horizontal to
vertical), if workers are to enter such excavations. Leighton does not consult in the
azea of safety engineering. The contractor is responsible for the safety of all
excavarions.
5.1.2 Utiiitv Backfily Fill Placement and C~m ion -- All backfill or fill soils
should be brought to optimum moisture conditions and compacted in uniform lifts to
at least 90 percent relative compacrion based on the laboratory maximum dry density
(ASTM Test Method D1557). The optimum lift thiclmess required to produce
uniform compaction will depend on the type, size and condition of compaction
equipment used. In general, the onsite soils should be placed in lifts not exceeding 8
inches in compacted thiclrness and placed on dense existing compacted fill or other
earth material approved by the geotechnical consultant. The backfill that coincides
with pauement subgrade will be reworked and compacted in accordance with
pavement design requirements.
5.2 Foundation and Structure Desian Considerations
It is Leighton's understanding that single-family structures founded on post-tensioned or
conventional foundation systems are proposed. The proposed foundations and slabs should
be designed in accordance with the structural consultants' design, the minimum
geotechnical recommendations presented herein (text, Table 1 through 3), the City of
Temecula requirements and the 1997 UBC. In utilizing the minimum geotechnical
foundation recommendations, the structural consultant should design the foundation system
to acceptable deflection criteria as determined by the shuchual engineer and architect.
High expansion design criteria for the following lots should be implemented as provided in
the project geotechnical report since deeper over-excavations were not performed during
the most recent rough grading:
~
- $ Leighton
~\
,
,
,
,
110231-055
January il, 2005
Buitding Pads witl~ High F~cpansion Design Criteria
Pad No. 1 Through 14, and 60
' We recommend that foundation soils should be founded entirely into properly compacted fill
soils or in undisturbed formarional bedrock materials.
Foundation footings may be designed with the following parameters:
' Allowable Bearing Capacity: 2000 psf at a minimum depth of embedment of 12
inches, plus an additional 250 psf per 6 inches of
' additional embedment to a maximum of 2500 psf.
(per 1997 UBC, capacities may be increased by 1/3 for
short-term loading conditions, i.e., wind, seismic)
, Sliding Coefficient: 0.35
, Settlement: Differential: 1 inch in 40 feet
Total: 1 Inch
, The foofing width, depth, reinforcement, slab reinforcement, and the slab-on-gade thiclrness
should be designed by the stnxctural consultant based on recommendations and soil
characteristics indicated herein (Tables 1 through 3), and the most recently adopted edition of
' the UBC. The effects of seismic shaking on foundation soils may increase the static
dif~'erential settlement noted above to approximately 1 inch in 40 feet.
' The under-slab moisture barrier should consist of 2 inches of sand (S.E. > 30) over 10 mil
vapor barrier (visqueen or equivalent) over an additional2 inches of sand (a total of 4 inches
, of sand). The recommended vapor barrier should be sealed at all penetrations and laps.
Moisture vapor transmission may be addi6onally reduced by use of concrete addirives.
Moisture vapor bamers may retard but not eliminate moisture vapor movement from the
' underlying soils up through the slabs. A slipsheet ar equivalent should be utilized above the
concrete slab if crack-sensitive floor coverings (such as ceramic tiles, etc.) aze to be placed
directly on the concrete slab.
' Our experience indicates that use of reinforcement in slabs and foundations will generally
reduce the potenrial for drying and sluinkage cracking. However, some craclang should be
' expected as the concrete cures. Minor cracking is considered normal; however, it is often
aggravated by a high water/cement ratio, high concrete temperahues at the time of placement,
small nominal aggegate size and rapid moisture loss due to hot, dry and/or windy weather
' conditions during placement and curing. Cracking due to temperature and moisture
~
' ~
~ 9 - Leighton
1
~Z
' 110231-055
January il, 2005
' fluctuations can also be expected. The use of low slump concrete (not exceeding 4 to 5 inches
' at the time of placement) can reduce the potential for shrinkage cracking.
Future homeowners and homeowners' associarion should be made awaze of the importance of
' maintaining a constant level of soil moishue. Homeowners should be made aware of the
potential negarive consequences of both excessive watering, as well as allowing soils to
become too dry. Improperly designed, constructed, or maintained planters often pond water
' and cause deep moisture penetra6on and soil moisture change. Since deep and repeated soil
moisture change can damage the adjacent structure, placement of planters adjacent to
foundarions or other sensitive hazdscape, such as pools and spas, should be discouraged if
' adequate and proper maintenance can not be assured. Our recommendations assume a
reasonable degree of homeowner responsibility, if the homeowners do not adequately
maintain coaect irrigation and drainage, some degree of foundation movement should be
, expected. However, this movement typically does not cause struchual damage, but will cause
such things as stucco cracking and dry wall separation.
, The slab subgrade soils should be presoaked in accordance with the recommendations
presented in Table 1 prior to placement of the moisture barrier and foundation concrete.
' 5.3 Foundation Setback from Sloces
' We recommend a minimum horizontal setback distance from the face of slopes for all
structural footings (retaining and decorative walls, building footings, pools, etc.). This
distance is measured &om the outside bottom edge of the footing horizontally to the slope
, face (or to the face of a retaining wall) and should be a minimum of H/2, where H is the slope
height (in feet). The setback should not be less than 5 feet and need not be greater than 10
feet. Please note that the soils within the structural setback area may possess poor lateral
, stability and improvements (such as retaining walls, sidewalks, fences, pools, patios, etc.)
constructed within this setback azea may be subject to lateral movement and/or differential
settlement. The potential for distress to such improvements may be mitigated by providing a
, deepened footing or a pier and grade-beam foundation system to support the impmvement.
The deepened footing should meet the setback as described above. Modifications of slope
inclinations neaz foundations may reduce the setback and should be reviewed by the design
' team prior to completion of design or implementation.
I~
,
'
~
' ~
- lo - Leighton
1
~3
'
'
'
'
~
5.4 Structure Seismic Design Parameters
110231-055
January 11, 2005
Siruchues should be designed as required by provisions of the Uniform Building Code (iJBC)
for Seismic Zone 4 and state-of-the-art seismic design pazameters of the Struchual Engineers
Associarion of California. This site is located with UBC Seismic Zone 4. Seismic design
pazameters in accordance with the 1997 UBC aze presented below.
Seismic Source Type = B
, Neaz Source Factor, Na =1.3
Neaz Source Factor, N~ =1.6
, Soil Profile Type = SD
Horizontal Peak Ground Acceleration = 0.68g
(10% probability of exceedance in 50 years)
' 5.5 rrosi n
1
,
,
'
,
'
'
,
'
'
For sulfate exposure and cement type refer to Table 1 and the conesponding sections of the
UBC. Other than buried concrete improvements, a licensed corrosion engineer should be
contacted in order to determine the potential for corrosion if corrosion sensitive buried
improvements aze planned.
5.6 Laterel Earth Pressures and Retaining Wali Design Considerations
The recommended lateral pressures for very low to low expansive soil (expansion index less
than 51) and level or sloping backfill are presented on Table 4(rear of text). The onsite wall
excavation materials should be reviewed by the geotechnical consultant prior to use as wall
backfill.
Embedded structural walls should be designed for lateral earth pressures exerted on them. The
magritude of these pressures depends on the amount of deformation that the wall can yield
under load. If the wall can yield enough to mobilize the full sheaz strength of the soil, it can be
designed for "active" pressure. If the wall cannot yield under the applied load, the sheaz
strength of the soil cannot be mobilized and the earth pressure will be higher. Such walls
should be designed for "at rest" conditions. If a structure moves toward the soils, the resul6ng
resistance developed by the soil is the "passive" resistance.
The equivalent fluid weights of Table 4 assume very low to low expansive, free-draining
conditions. If conditions other than those assumed above aze anticipated, equivalent fluid
weights should be pmvided on a case by case basis by the geotechnical engineer. Surcharge
loading ef~'ects from adjacent structures should be evaluated by the structural engineer. All
~
-11- Leighton
~~
' 110231-055
January 11, 2005
' retaining wall structures should be provided with appropriate drainage and waterproofing. The
' outlet pipe should be sloped to drain to a suitable outlet. Typical wall drainage design is
illustrated in Figute 2.
' Lateral passive pressures may be detemuned using the values provided in Table 4. In
combining the total lateral resistance, the passive pressure or the fricrional resistance should
be reduced by 50 percent. Wall footings should be designed in accordance with structural
~ considerations. The passive resistance value may be increased by one-third when considering
loads of short duration, including wind or seismic loads. The horizontal distance between
foundation elements providing passive resistance should be a minimum of three times the
~ depth of the elements to aliow full development of these passive pressures. The totai depth of
retained earth for design of canrilever wa11s should be the vertical distance below the ground
surface measured at the wall face for stem design or measured at the heel of the footing for
, overturning and sliding.
_' Foundations for retaining walls in competent formarional soils or pmperly compacted fill
should be embedded at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent finish grade. At this depth,
an allowable bearing capacity of 2,250 psf may be utilized. The bearing capacity may be
' increased by 250 psf for each additional six inches of embedment to a maximum of 4000 psf.
Wall backcut excavations less than 5 feet in height can be made near vertical. For backcuts
, greater than 5 feet in height, the backcut should be flattened to a gradient not steeper than 1:1
(horizontal to vertical). Backfill soils should be compacted to at least 90 percent relative
compaction (based on ASTM Test Method D1557). Backfill should extend horizontally to a
' minimum distance equal to one-half the wall height behind the wa11s. The walls should be
wnstructed and backfilled as soon as possible after backcut excava6on. Prolonged exposure
of backcut slopes may result in some localized slope instability.
' For unrestrained retaining walls within this tract that are greater than 5 feet (exposed; retained
earth) or that may present a life/safety hazard during strong ground shaking, the lateral earth
' pressures should be increased by a seismic surchazge (seismic increment) in general
accordance with chapter 16 of the 1997 UBC. The locarion, distribution and magnitude of tlvs
surchazge will be pmvided if such walls are proposed. Walls designed with such seismic
' increment should achieve a factor of safety between 1.1 and 1.2 when evaluating stability
(sliding and overturning) of the wall (NAVFAC DM7.02).
, 5J Concrete Flatwork
' Expansive soils aze laiown to exist onsite and therefore concrete flatwork should be designed
and conshvcted with the an6cipation of expansive soil related distress. Closer spacing of
control joints, reinforcement and keeping the flatwork subgrade at or above optimum
' moisture prior to the placement of concrete may mi~rimize cracking and differen6al
movement.
-'
~
7
' 12 Leighton \
' 110231-055
January 11, 2005
' City of Temecula Standard No. 401 "Sidewallc and Curb" specifies aggregate base or
' approved select material under sidewalks and curbs when expansive soil is present. In lieu of
the aggregate base or select material under sidewalks and curbs, and with the approval of the
City of Temecula, the sidewallc and curb subgrade may be presoaked such that 120% of
' optimum moisture content to a minimum depth of 8 inches is achieved prior to the placement
of concrete. Moisture testing must be performed by the geotechnical consultant prior to
concrete placement.
' S.8 ~ntrol of Surtace Water and Drainaae Control
~ Positive drainage of surface water should be maintained away from shuctures. No water
should be allowed to pond adjacent to buildings. Positive drainage may be accomplished by
providing drainage away from buildings at a gradient of at least 2 percent for a distance of at
- ----least 5 feet, and fiuther maintained by aswale on drainage path at a-gradient af-at-least-l-- --
percent. Where limited by narmw side yards, drainage shouid be directed away from
foundations_ for a minimum of 3 feet and into a collector swale or pipe system. Where
' necessary, drainage paths may be shortened by use of azea drains and collector pipes and/or.:
paved swales. Eave gutters also help reduce water infiltradon into the subgrade soils if the
downspouts are properly connected to appropriate outlets.
, Planters with open bottoms adjacent to buildings should be avoided, if possible. Planters
~ should not be designed adjacent to buildings unless provisions for drainage, such as catch ..
basins and pipe drains, aze made. No ponding of water from any source (including
irrigation) should be permitted onsite as moisture infiltration may increase the potential for
t moisture-related distress. Experience has shown that even with these controls £or surface
drainage, a shallow perched ground water or subsurface water condirion can and may
develop in areas where no such condition previously existed. This is particulazly true where
' a substantial increase in surface water infiltration resulfing from site irrigation occurs.
Mitigarion of these conditions should be performed under the recommendadons of the
geotechnical consultant on a case-by-case basis.
~ 5.9 Graded Siooes
' It is recommended that all slopes be planted with drought-tolerant, ground cover vegetation
as soon as practical to protect against erosion by reducing runoff velocity. Deep-rooted
vegetation should also be established to provide resistance to surficial slumping.
' Oversteepening of existing slopes should be avoided during fine grading and construction.
Retaining structures to support graded slopes should be designed with structural
considerations and appropriate soil parameters provided in Section 5.6.
'
'
~
' \~
-13-
' Leighton
' 110231-055
January 11, 2005
, 5.10 Irrigation Landscaoina and Lot Maintenance
' Site irrigation should be controlled at all times. We recommend that only the minimum
amount of irrigation necessary to maintain plant vigor be utilized. For irrigation of trees and
' shrubs, a drip imgation system should be considered. We recommend that where possible,
landscaping consist primarily of drought-tolerant vegetation. A landscape consultant should
be contacted for proper plant selection. For large graded slopes adjacent to open space
' azeas, we recommend native plant species be utilized and that irrigation be utilized only
until plants aze well established. At that time, irrigation could be signiScantly reduced.
' Upon sale of homesites, maintenance of lots and common areas by the homeowners and
homeowner's association, respectively, is recommended. Recommendations for the
maintenance of slopes and property aze included in Appendix D for your review and
' distribution to future homeowners and/or homeowner's associarions.
' 5.11 Post=Greding Geotechnical Review
5.31.1 ~onstruction Review -- ConstrucUon observation and testing should be performed
' by the geotechnical consultant during future excavations, utility trench backfilling
and foundation or retaining wall construction at the site. Additionally, footing
excava6ons should be observed and moisture determinarion tests of subgrade soils
, should be performed by the geotechnical consultant prior to the pouring of concrete.
5.11.2 Plans and Snecificatinns -- The geotechnical engineer should review foundation
' plans to evaluate if the recommendarions herein have been incorporated. Foundation
design plans and specifications should be reviewed by the geotechnical consultant
prior to excavarion or installation of residential development.
'
'
1
'
'
'
•
-~ ~ ~~
-14-
, Leighton
' 110231-055
January 11, 2005
, 6.0 LIMITA7IONS
' The presence of our field representative at the site was intended to provide the owner with
professional advice, opinions, and recommendations based on observarions of the conh~actor's
, work. Although the observations did not reveal obvious deficiencies or deviarions from project
specifications, we do not guazantee the contractor's work, nor do our services relieve the contractor
or his subcontractor's work, nor do our services relieve the contractor or his subcontractors of their
' responsibility if defects aze subsequently discovered in their work. Our responsibiliries did not
include any supervision or direction of the actual work procedures of the contractor, his personnel,
or subcontractors. The conclusions in this report aze based on test results and observations of the
' gracling and earthwork pmcedures used and represent our engineering opinion as,to the compliance
of the results with the project specifications.
, This report was prepazed for Greystone Homes, based on their needs, directions, and requirements at
the time. This report is not authorized for use by, and is not to be relied upon by any party except,
Greystone Homes, with whom Leighton contracted for the work. Use of or reliance on this
' report by any other party is at that party's risk. Unauthorized use of or reliance on this Report
consritutes an agreement to defend and indemnify Leighton and Associates from and against any
' liability which may arise as a result of such use or reliance, regardless of any fault, negligence, or
strict liability of Leighton and Associates.
'
'
~
,
'
'
~
'
~
' ~
-15-
, Leighton
~~
e
q~'~
~~ °P\'~ `a~/
~~
op.~
~@ L~ ~,,~ ~
'\''''s\ c~°o-P~~~,T~~r ~c~ ~ o4~i
P ,~ pG',. ~r`, ~:.co. `~
~~
~
tg
,~+ ~.
t V
:~o ~
. , ~~4 j`'7'`t~ /~ ol~'ir~, 1
~ ..~° `~'~v~ :~~r~
,~ `~\ 4?~ ~ C1_ (I ~-Y~N V<4
~
~,
f ^
oo- ~ r
~'CON ~'• ~~ /~y7\/~~y! /~\ ~°j
~~ 9 ,~• ,;` ~`'~`/~/ ~~ ~YF•
C').oQ- Q~J ~y~ ~~/ t' ~' ? w~
y
• / ;
tt~ s~:~R ~ °'~
~ ~
~
p
et"E j 4\ .. ,, ~`T ,`~ 6 4 f
~ 'Pr G~c6
A
` s~
~ya~ ~ O [
/ t
,
N F~ ~\ cxccn; ,~,, ~oo c~E
~~,..-~a } ,Q„rn&. +[rortLL J;j
~_
1~
1 `
.
~
~
Grq '~`i OdO~~ _) J`~, 1 d
I ~i .~~a `a a~ ~~~~\'- r~
'
A
~~ p0 ~
,° '! ~~n ~ ~U ~T ~c, `"~ r
'r,~ ~ E ~ `/ ~ -:~ DR
G ~'
'~
~~
i'
a
a'
,
`,
~
\ \v
~~
4~ ~ ~
.
'P
~~
s
f c
~
~
\~ Q~
o
~
` Pti j
ORWJ !`!
y ~`
~o
~
E BL~SS~M W P~~' ~"4`' ~~~~j 2~~~ 1
O GrF ~. NE(/p _~
~y~~
~
O ~
~
~
~6~t $\' ,"~ ~ ~~-,' t~"~~
'O ?t
~ o '~'~
"~o~~ ~ p~q, ~D _
pP ~ o~as~~ o o~
° ~ ~
f
~oo~ 1
R~~~(Oai r {~~,~~l
TOylNSyjp ~ c ,
I ~s /
R
~
~P
F,~, ~~ ~
~
D ~
Site Location ~ ''
Q ARUES7pN
~~ y~" wv
r
~ ~~~! ~'o
~, ~~A
~
~ o ~9oc
.;~ ~
l" ~ ,?/ ti
~
0
~ ~ . ~ urn~s~~ ' ,
M=A~U6'S
cC1
~~`hfy C
~` A~y`
~
~ ~I~ ~~
~'~ f
~
~
y
`
DR ~
/
o
~ WINCHEST .,4- -- - . --~3. --'
MARKET 3,/~'-'~ 1 ~~G~
ACE 9 c
PL y N~ ~
~ ~ cg~as~s ~
A7 ~,
~
ti~ ,~. ,,~ ~~~U~ N ati~~~,
Base Map: The Thomas Guide Digital Edition Inland Empire 2004, Not To Scale
Greystone Homes Project No. ~
Harveston,Tract 31276 $ITE ~.OCATION 710231-055
Temecula, California ~AP Date ~~
Riverside County, California ,lanuarv 2oos Figure No.1
SUBDRAIN OPTIONS AND BACKFILL WHEN NAIIVE MATERIAL HAS DCPANSION INDEX OF <50
OFRON 1: P7PE SURRWNDED WITH
CLASS 2 PERMEABIE M47ERIqL OPTION 2: GRAVEL WRAPPED
IN FILTERFAeRIC
WITH PROPER WITH PROPER
SURFA~ DRAMAGE SURFA~ DRARJAGE
SIAPE SLOPE
OR LEVEL OR LEVEL
12" 12" ,
NATIVE NATNE
WATERPROOFlNG
~
(SEE GENERAL NOTES) WA7ERPROOFING
-r ~
(SEE GENERAL N07E5) Fll7ER FABRIC
12" MINIMUM (SEE NOTE 4)
CLASS 2 PERMEABIE 12" MINIMUM
WEEP HOIE FIL7ER MATERiqL
(SEE GRADAT[ON)
EE WEEP HOLE V. ro IVx mqi s¢E
(S
N07E ~ (SEE NOIE ~ GM~EL WR/PPED PI FIl7ER
4INCH DIAMEfER FaBRtC
LEVELOR PERFORATEDPIPE LEVELOR
SLOPE " (SEE N01E 3) S~,ppE
Ciass 2 Filter Permeable Material G2dation
Per Caltrans Specifications
Sieve Size Pg~nt Pa~na
1" 100
3/4" 90-500
3/8" 40-100
No.4 25-40
ryQ g 18-33
No.30 5-15
No.50 4-~
No.200 0-3
GENERAL N07E5:
* Waterprooflrg sFrould be provided where rtaisture nuisance problem through the wall is undesirabie.
' Water proofing of the walls is not under purview of the geotechniol engineer
* All drains should have a gradient of 1 percent minimum
xOuUet patian of the ~bdrain should have a 4-inch diameter sdid pipe discharged into a suitable disposal area designed by the project
engincer. The subdrain pipe should be aaessible for maintenance (rodding)
*Other subdrdin bac~l~ optlons are subject to the review by the geotechnical engirceer and modification of design parameters.
Notes:
1) Sand should have a sand equivalent of 30 or greater and rtiay be densfied by water jetting. .
2)1 Cu. ft. per ft. of 1/4- to 1 1/2-Inch size gravel wrapped in filter fabric
3) Pipe type should be ASlTA D1527 Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene (ABS) SDR35 or ASTM D1785 Pdyvinyl Chloride plastlc (PVC), Schedule
40, Armm A2000 PVC, w appro~ed equivatent. Pipe should be installed with perforations down. Perforations should be 3/8 inch tn
diameter placed at the ends of a 120-degree arc in two rows at 3-Inch on center (staggered)
4) Fiter fabric should be Mirafi 140NC or apprwed equivalent.
5) Weephole should be 3-inch mintmum diameter and provided at 10-foot mvdmum intervals. If e~2 is permitted, weepholes should
be located 12 inches above finished grade. If exposure is not pertnitted such as for a wall adjacent to a sdewalk/curb, a pipe underthe
sidewalk to be discharged through the curb face or equivalent should be provided. For a basement-rype wall, a proper subdrain outlet
s/stem should be provided,
6) Retaining wall plans should be reviewed and approved by the geotechnical engineer.
7) Walls over six feet in height are subject to a special review by the geotechnical engineer and modiflpdons to the abwe requlrements,
RETAINING WALL BACKFILL AND SUBDRAIN DETAIL
FOR WALLS 6 FEET OR LESS IN HEIGHT
WHEN NATIVE MATERIAL HAS IXPANSION INDEX OF <50
7~
Figure No. ~.
' ~' N
.ti
N ~
, ~ ~
ti ~
C
n
'
L~
'
'
~ 1
'
'
~1
,
,
'
'
'
'
1
'
~. m
N (n
~
' m
N ~n
N
' v
N i m
N m
N
' (n
N v
N ~ ln
N v
N ~ rn
N y
N y
N q
~ y
y
e.. .~
V .t i
U . .
V .l
U : .~
U S.
U .s:
U .C
U . . .
U ' .~
U : . .
U ' .~:
U .G
U .
' J"
U '
. . .
U ' .q
U
~ ~ .'r~ ' ..~ . .~ .~ .~ .~ .~ .G .~ .~ .~ .'~~ ' .~ .~ ~ ~
~
' Q N N N N N N N N N N N N N N .
N .
N
~ ..y ~-- ~ .-- i .-y ~-- i ~-. .-- i ~-. ~-- ~ .- ~ ~-- ~ .-r ~-- i ~-r ~-. .r
~
G
O
~
~
~
~
~
Y
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
{a.~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
C
O N
~ ~ ln VJ fA VJ N N fA fq fA fq Y
VJ fA N N Vl
~ / ~ ~ / / ~ ~ / ~ ~
~
~ -r
~
~
~ -y
~ -r
~ I
1
~
~ --~
~
~ -/-~
~ /--
~ -
~ ,
~ 1 -/4
~ ~--I
~ ~
~ I F1
~
~
~ H ~ ~~ ~
Y ~ ~ ~ ^^^
~ ~ ~ ~
~~ ~
~ ~ ~
~ .~ ~~ .~ .~
C
c ~ V V Y Y V Y Y ~J Y V V
a
d
o 0
o 0
~ 0
e 0
o 0
0 o
0 e
0 o
0 0
0 0
0 0
~ 0
o 0
~ 0
e 0
~
~ O
N O
N O
N O
N O
N O
N O
N O
N O
N O
N O
N O
N O
N O
N O
N O
N
C ~--i ~-. ..-i ~-. .--~ .--i ~-r ~--~ ~--i .r ~--~ ..-~ .--i .--~ ~-. .-r
10
C
G ^ N
V ~~ ~
w~
9 ~ ~ ~ ~
C k"' N 4"
C m..
„
t~ h
v N
~ ~A
V ~n
v v~
v v~
V v~
V v~
V O
N N
N ~n
V
00
O0 v1
V v~
V
V a~
,~
~
n-
~"~ N C ~
a
d~~
A
J M
V o
}1
Q V i7
F
O ~~
:d N a~+ y~"~
~
O y
~
ai
~ ~
w
?pE
9 C j k~" " v
O b O
M M
N oO
~-+ v'f
V ~n
V ~n
V v'~
V vl
V ~n
V .-. ~+1 ~O v'i N
~ O
~
~ ~ N N N N N .~
'
p
OI V~~..,
•v Q..
Pr
Q~"'~y C
U1 ~
Q
O ~
~ ~..1 ~ N~ ~
.O ti
p ti
fl ~
p H
D ~
A ~-~-1
O ~
p ti
p ^~-I
D ~
fl H ~
~ ti ~ ti
Ci «. ~
~
W
~0
~1 .
~
~ .
~A
~ .
~4
~
~ .
~ .
W A
0~
~}1 .O
OU p
~ p
~
~
~ ~
~ ,^~ O
~ k¢, :-:
O~A ;-:
~D ;-:
~ :=r
b~A '
~ rr
~0 '"
b~A
~ ;-:
~ ;-:
~ 'r
~ ~=.
~ ~
~ ;-:
~ ~.:
~ 'r
~
~ d W z Z z Z Z z Z Z z z Z z z Z z z
O
J ~
~'
a ~ G7..
„ o ~
J ~ ~ ~ 'ob '~ :ob 'ob '~b oxb 'oh 'o~t, '~b 'ob 'ob ob 'ob '~b 3 3
x x x x x x ~ x x x x x x x ~ ~
w W a
~
~
z ~ N m 7 vi ~O t~ oo O~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
.-~
O
a
2~
~ Qa
~~r„7i N
N ^
., ~
H =
c
' O Z.
n
'
1
'
,
,
'
'
'
'
'
'
'
,
i
1
'
,
" V J V
N Q I V
) N
' J v
N
' J V
N J v
~ l V
N i V
N l V 1 N
N ~ V
Q ] V
) l U
N J V
N J
N 4J fA
N N
~ .r
c i . .
~ c ,~
~ o i , r
o ' .r
c ' ,~
~ o .' . r
0 ' ,S
o i .~:
c : .q
~ o ,J
c _ .i
~ o : . .
c ' .
~ c .' .
~ c' .C
o 0
o q •C •~ .~ .~ .~ .~ .~ .~ .~ .~ . ~ .~ .p . ~ . ~ .~
N
' N
r .- N
~ ' N
. ' N
. .r N
' N
r .~ N
' N
r ' N
r
- N
. o
. 0 0
. 0 N
. N N
~ . ' . ' .- ~ ' r ..
~
y ~
U N
~ N
~ N
~ N
~ N
~ N
~ N
~ ~
~ N
~ N
~ N
~ ~
~ N
~ N
~ N
~ N
~
C
O N
~ V i N (O V i V l VJ VJ V i V l V I t/ ~ V J V J V J N %
~
~
~ ~~
~ 1 ~
1 ~ ~~
-/- I 0
~ ~ ~~
-/- I ~0
i ~-- I ~~
I -/4 1 ~~
~-- 1 ~~
I
/ 1 ~
~ ~~
/ I ~0
/ 1 ~~
/ 1 ~~ I ~~ 1 ~~1
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~ -
-
~ ~
~ -
-
~ i -
-
~ ~ -
-
~ ~ -/-
~ i ~--
~ I I -~1
~
~ N •0 ~
~~ ~
F ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ^~~
1~ ~ N V Y V V Y V Y V V V
8
O O O O O O O O ~
O ~
O O
O O
O O
O O
\ O
O O
O
~ 0
N ~
N Q
N ~
N ~
N ~
N ~
N ~
N ~
N ~
N Q
N 0
N ~
N 0
N ~
N ~
N
~
C 'r '. .-. .-. '. '. '. .r '. .-~ .r .-r .. .r .-i
R
N
C
O w
^ ti
~ ~ ~
9 c~ w U ~
~ c~ Q ~
v a~"
y
~ V
."'
N V ~ V ~ ~ ~ V V V O
.-~ O
.-. O
.-~ ~
.-r M
.
j
,
1-i ~
~
a .
'i ^
N C a
~
Q Q
F-~
N
J M
y
V O
F
d a~ ~ N ,-~
F
(9 ~ ~~o y a~~i
~ w
~
U ,
X'~~' V v
O ~
~
~ .~
~--~ N
N N
N O
M 'V'
~--~ ~O
~--~ l~
N N
N ~D
M o0
M 00
M oO
M ~O
M 7
M 7
M M
t+l
'~
~
~
~ V
~ -(
..
r
~ '
" w O
CI ~
N ~
Q ~
O
~ C7
N N
~ a>
p ~ a~
Q a~
.fl a~
Q a~
:D a~
p a~
O a~ a~ a~ a~ a~ a~
O ,~ c:
~
t~.~
y
~ p
ED
E}J
Eq
~
GA
S~A .
~0 p
~ p
E~0 A
~A .O
Gq p
6A ;
EA .O
6A p
~
^
C
~ ~
~ O
~
~
~ `n
~ tiM^
~ ~--1
~ ~w^
~ ~--1
~ ~1
~ ~i~1
~ ~-`=n1
~ ti
~ ~--1
~ ~i-~-I
~ ~--1
~ N
~ ~
~ ~i-~-I ~i--~1
N
~1
~ I
-l
FY ~
/
~M ~
j
I~1 1`
~
IG1 ~
/
~'M ~
j
f-i ~
/
f~l 1'
~r
IL1 ~
j
f-1 1'
~r
IG'I ~
/
fY I'
~
1~'1 ~
/
f~l I~
F"1 ~
j
f-1 1~~
1~1 I'~~
1~'1
~
O
.J
~
~
~ •y 'y
~ o ~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~ h ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ('') ~ ~ Q~ ~ ~ ~ ~
wwa°.~ HI 11 F4
~
~
~
~
~
~ ~
~ ~
~
~
~
l~
o0
0
O
z
~
~ 1
~-+
N ,--~
N N
N M
N V
N vi
N ~O
N l~
N oo
N Q~
N O
M ...
M
M
Y
IH
~
' ~ N
rl
N ^
' O ~
~ ~
C
n
1
1
,
,
'
'
'
,
~~
'
'
'
'
,
u
'
'
v
N ~ v
N
' i m
N w
N ln
N
' m
~ m
~ m
N h
N m
0 r
~ N n m
N h
N `
N n W
N rn
~
~ ~
U .
.G
U i .~
U Tr
U .~
U i .t
U i S:
U .r
U .1:
U .~
U ~
U "i .r
V i .~
U .~
U i .r
U i .1~i
U
~' ~
A .~ .'~~ ' .~ .~ .~ .~ .~ ' ..~ . .~ .~ .~ ..~ '. .~ .~ ..~ '. .~
0
' a 0 0o W N N N N N N N N N o0 N N N
~ ~- . ~-- i .-. ~ ~-- i .-- i ~-. ~-- ~ .r ~-- i .-. ~ ~-. ~-- i .-- ' .- i ~-r ~--~
fi
N ~
~
~
~
N
~
N
~
N
~
~
~
~
~
N
~
N
~
Y
~
N
~
N
~
N
~
N
~
N~
N
~
N
~
t
0 ~
= v
O ~ v, v, rn n, vi m vi m v~ ~n u] rn +:+
m m ~n
~ R
~
~ ~Oi
/ O
~ O
~ ~Or
/ O
~ O
~ ~Or
/ O
~ ~Or ~O+ O
~ ~Or O
~ ~Or O
~
~ N
~ -
. --i --i F. -/. ~ i -/.
~ ~
~ .~
V ~"
J
~ .~ ~
~ .~ .~ .~ .~ G
Y .~ .~ ~
~ .~ .~ ~~ ~~
~ N
a ~ ~ Y V y Y V Y ~..~ V ~J V V
8
d o 0 0 0 o e o 0 0 0 0 0 o e o ~
~
N o
N 0
N 0
N 0
N 0
N 0
N 0
N 0
N 0
N 0
N 0
N 0
N 0
N 0
N 0
N
C .-. .-. .--~ ~--i ~--i .--~ .-~ ~--i .-~ ~--~ .-w ~--~ .--~ .--~ .~ .--i
10
C
m
^' ~
O
JJ
:~ Y ~ O
~ w V o~+
~ i3 Q~ ~
Q ~a=± v~ 4.n
O
~
~'
v
~ ~--~
V .--r
V h
V
~ h
V V1
V V1
V V1
V Vl
V V"~
V ~
~ V1
~--~ V1
V c+l
•-• V1
~/
v a
i a
i
~.
a;
~~
n-
~i N C ,
aw a
~w~
[a
~ M
~ o
d
Fa- a o
~ y
~
~
~o ~ ~
°' o ~' ^
a E, a^~ i
~ (j ~?t ~", ~ o O~ o G~ O~ rn O~ m r~ m 7 N ~o ,-. O ,-.
~ ~ O~~~ M N M N N N N M M M M N N M M M
~
~ a~.,. a
Q~w o
a ~
a ~
O
~ C~7y N~
Y ~ a~
a a~
p a/~~ a~
p a~
p a~
O a~ a~ a~ a~ a/~~ a~ a~ a~ a~ a~
10 N
'~
tN v~i r
SD
'"
~ ~+
~D
~
~
~ .
~11 P
~ p
bA P
~ p
~D YJ
~A p
~0 .O
~A p
~D r~
~ p
~p
£
~ a a
~' '"o
n on '"o
n oo en on ao ao ao '"o'"n w '"o~n on '"o~n en '"o~n
3
~ w z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z
~
O
J
T ~
~ a-
a ,, .o ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
O
~
y
~ ~
~
b
~ ~
1
V
~
b
~
b
~
~
~
~
~
b
~
~
~
b
~ 3
~ 3
~
a n
..1
V
~
~
~ 3
~ 3
~ 3
~
,
w W a,° ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , ~ ~
i
~
M
7
~n
~
~
z
M
M
M O
M l
M oo
M O~
M O
V' ,--~
cr N
~ M
~ 7
~ vl
~ ~O
~ l~
~ 00
~
Y
~
L'~
' 4°0
~„~ N
N ~
' O Z.
.ti ~
.ti ~
c
n
'
'
'
1
'
~
'
,
'
'
'
'
'
,
~'~
'
~ ~
N
q n w
N
. m
~
'
C m
N
s: rn
N
c m
N
:
~ m
N
r rn
N
i v
~
s i rn
N m
N ~n
N
. , . . . , . ..~ . . .q ~ : .r_;
•'ra .'~".. ." .~ .~ ' .~ .~ .~
-. "
.' .~ .'~ "
a .~ .'~ "
"
5
O A N N N N N N N N .
N N .
N .
.
N
~ ~-- i ..- ~ ~-- i .r ~-- i .-- ~ ~-- i ~-- ~ .r ~-- ~ .- . ~-.
~
C
U N
~ N
~ N
~ N
~ N
~ N
~ N
~ N
~ N
~ N
~ N
~ N
~
O N
~ Vi fA V~ VJ Vi M Vl Vl N Vi V I Vi
~
y~
~ ~
~ ~0I
Il 0
~ ~0I
~-I ~~1
~ ~01
~ 0
~ ~~
~ 1 ~~
~ 1 ~
~ yQj.y ~~1
~
(
y
~
~
~
~
~
~ -
i
~ --I
~
~ -
i
~ 1
--
~ I
~ F
~ -r
~
~
~ ~ (~''~i
• '~ .~ ~CI
.~ j .~ {c''1
. •~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~y ~ y « . ~
.y
~V ~Y ~f~ Y
~ ~
~
O O
O O
\ O
O
\
O
~
O
~
O O O ~ ~ ~
N N N N N N N N N N~ N N
. L .--~ .-w ~--i ~--i ~--i .--~ ~--i '. .-w ~--i ~--i ~--i
A
C
O N
:: ~ O
a.l ~ w V e^+
~
~ ~
~
C
~ •
d
~X "' y 4+
O y y~
'n
V
v'~
V
vl
V
h
V
vl
V
O
~
O
N
~
~
~
v~
V
~
V a a'"i Fi m
n
~ a ~«. p.,
Q ~ ~
A
i
C
W
J '
~
M V o
N ~„~
~ ~ ~
!= d
~ ^y
~ fa ~ Q~ y
~ F"
~ w
~
'a ~ ,
iC ~ v V
O ,~ b
'~
' [~ ~--~
M ~D
M 7
M V'
M V
M N
M .--~
M d'
~--~ 7
~--~ M
.-+ ~-.
~--~
~
~ V
~ Fy .
~
Py
~ ~ w o
~
O ~
C7
~'
a~°i N
~~ a>
:n
5 a~
a
~bb a~
.n
'E a~
a
'S a~
a
'bL a~
.n
'a a~
a
bn a~
p
' a~
o
' a>
p
' a~
:n
' a~
a
'
~ w 0 n u o 6b 6b Su bb bb
~
~
~ ~ o
~ a ':
o~n ':
c~n ;~
~n ~
~o ;~
o~o ':
~o ;~
~o ;~
ao ~
o~n ::
~n :~
o~o ~.
~o
~ 6 w z z z z z z z z z z z z
~
0
J ~
a ~ o =-
~
J ~
~ '~ 3 0 p3 3p 0 3p p3 3p 3 3 3 ~
N LL •' ~ .a ti-1 ~l ra F-1 ti-1 r-1 p
i-1 p
~-1 p
r-1 x
w Li a°
~
~
O~
O
--~
~
~
z
7
h .
h N
h M
Vl ~
h n
~ D
h [~
~1 oo
h O~
N O
b
aQ-~
1-~
wQ
ao o+
~ ~
U U
~ ~
0 0
v ~o
y y
A m
P~ 0.l
~ N
~
1
'
,
'
'
1
1
'
'
t
~
110231-055
January 11, 2005
TABLE 2
Minimum Conventional Foundation Design Recommendations
UBC Expansion Potential
Very Low to Low Medium
1-Story Footing Depth of Embedment 12" 18"
xterior and Interior xterior and lnterior
2-Story Footing Depth of Embedment 18" Exterior 18"
12" Interior Exterior and lnterior
Isolated Column Footings Exterior of „
Mnrimum Foundation 18 24"
Presoaking See Table 1
No. 3 rebar placed at No. 3 rebar placed at
mid-slab height
Minimum Slab Reinforcement
spaced 18 inches on ~d-slab heightspaced
Thiclmess
center, each way; 15 inches on center,
minimum slab each way; minimum
thiclmess 4 inches slab thiclrness 5 inches
Two inches of sand over a 10-mil vapor reducer
Underslab Treatment (Visqueen or equivalent) over an addirional two
inches of sand.
' Notes:
(1) Depth of interior or exterior footing to be measured from lowest adjacent finish grade. If
drainage swale flowline elevation is less than 5 feet laterally from footing, footing bottom
to be minimum 6 inches below swale flowline
' (2) Living azea slabs should be ried to the footings as directed by the struchual engineer.
(3) Garage slabs should be isolated from stem wall footings with a minimum 3/8" felt
' expansion joint.
(4) Underslab treatment sand should have a Sand Equivalent of 30 or greater (e.g. washed
concrete sand).
,
,
LJ
' 2'~
'
1
'
'
1
'
,
'
'
'
'
110231-055
]anuary 11, 2005
TABLE 3
Minimum Post-Tensioned Foundation Design Recommendations
Expansion Potential (UBC 18-2)
D
i
C
it
i
es
gn
r
er
a Very Low Low Medium High
EI= 0.20 EI= 21-50 EI= 51-90 EI = 91-130
Edge Moisture Center Lift: 5.5 feet
Variation, e,,, Edge Lift: 3.0 feet
Differential Center Lift: 1.25 inches 2.0 inches 2.4 inches 4.5 inches
Swell, y,,, Edge Lift: 0.4 inches 0.4 inches 0.8 inches 1.3 inches
Modulus of Subgrade Reacrion (k) 150 psi/in 125 psi/in 125 psi/in 100 psi/in
Plasticity Index Non Plastic 15 25 35
Minimum Perimeter Footing
Embedment Depth 12 inches 12 inches 18 inches 24 inches
Underslab Treatment Two inches of sand over a 10-mil vapor reducer (Visqueen
or uivalent over an additional two inches of sand.
Presoaking See Table 1
(1) llCptri OI extenor Ioohng to be measured t[om lowest adjacent finish grade or drainage swale
' flowline elevation (less than 5 feet laterally from footing, per code).
(2) Living area slabs should be tied to the footings as directed by the structural engineer.
(3) Detailing of expansion crack control joints for PT slabs per structural engineer.
' (4) Underslab treatrnent sand should have a Sand Equivalent of 30 or greater (e.g. washed concrete
sand).
' (5) Potential total and differential settlement should be included cumulatively with differenfial swell
pazameters.
" Plasticity index to be provided upon request if a ribbed UBC type (Section 1815) slab is preferred.
'
i~
t
1
/~
'
'
~
'
~
'
'
,
'
I '
,
'
'
'
'
~
,
1
'
110231-055
January il, 2005
TABLE 4
Lateral Earth Pressuresl'4
For Ve Low to Low Ex ansive Soil Backfill
Equivalent Fluid Weight (pc~
Coaditions
Level BackfillZ 2:1 Slope Backlill
Active 45 (7
At-Rest 65 95
Passive3 300 125 (Sloping Down)
~Assumes drained condition (See Figure 1)
ZAssames a level condition behind and in front of wall foundation of project.
3Maximum passive pressure = 4000 psf, level conditions.
°Assumes use of very low to low expansive soil (EI= 0-50).
Zti
, 110231-055
January il, 2005
, APPENDDCA
, Rafawnrog
I,eighton and Associates, Inc., 2004a, Supplemental Geotechnical Investigation and Plan Review,
, Tract No. 31276, Single Family Detached Home Site, Harveston, Temecula,
California, Project No. 110231-054, dated September 17, 2004.
' Leighton and Associates, Inc., 2004b, Geotechnical Review of Post-Tensioned Foundation Plans
and Response to Review Comments, Ashville at Harveston, Tract 31276,
' I.ot 12, Single Family Detached Homes, Greystone Homes, City of
Temecula, California, Project No. 110231-054, dated November 2, 2004.
' Leighton and Associates, Inc., 2004c, Addendum No. 1 to Supplemental Geotechnical Evaluation
and Plan Review, Tract 31276, Single Family Detached Home Site,
Harveston, Temecula, California, Project No. 110231-054, dated October
' 28, 2004.
Leighton and Associates, Inc., 2004d, Geotechnical Review of Post-Tensioned Foundation Plans,
' Ashville at Harveston, Tract 29639-1, Lot 12, Single Family Detached
Homes, Greystone Homes, City of Temecula, California, Pmject No.
110231-054, dated October 29, 2004.
, Leighton & Associates, Inc., 2003, As-Graded Report of Mass Grading for Tract 29639-1,
Harveston, City of Temecula, California, by, Project No. 110231-006, dated
' February 5, 2003.
Leighton and Associates, 2001, Supplemental Geotechnical Investiga6on and Geotechnical
, Review of 100-Scale Mass Grading Plan, Tentative Tract No. 29639,
Harveston, Temecula, California, LDOI-058GR, Project No. 110231-003,
dated August 15, 2001.
, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, 1986a, Soil mechanics design manual 7.01, Change 1:
U.S. Nary, September.
' Naval Faciliries Enaneering Command, 1986b, Foundations and earth structures, design manual
7.02, Changes 1: U.S. Nary, September.
' RBF Consulting 2004, Preliminary Rough Grading and Erosion Control Plan, Tract No. 31276 in
the City of Temecula, California, Sheets 1 through 4, Stamped November 2,
' 2004.
.'
l~"
, ~
A-1
, Leighton
,
,
,
,
'
'
,
,
'
,
,
'
'
'
'
,
'
'
'
110231-055
]anuary il, 2005
APPENDIX B
Exolanation of Summarv of Field Densitv Tests
A: Retest of previously failing compaction test.
B: Second retest of previously failing compaction test.
Compaction tests taken during mass grading of site unless indicated by:
FG: Compaction tests taken on rough finish grade.
SF: Compaction tests taken on slope face.
Test Location: Indicated by lot nuxnber.
Test Method: Compacfion test by Nuclear Gage (ASTM 2922) unless indicated by
S: Sand Cone Method (ASTM 1556).
Test Elevation: Approximate elevation above mean sea level.
B-1
2°~
+~
~
VI
N
W
~
N
Z
W
~
~
J
W
LL
~
O
~~/
4~
a
~
~
~
~
..
~
e
d
a
e~
vo
~- a
d u
'a'7 4
Ae
zv
,.
~~
= c,
d0
~.
~
w q
/-. ~
4i
Y
~ ~
~~
0
ca =
Y
Aw
d
~H
W
N 7
F "'
w
a rn a a a a rn rn a rn rn a a a rn a a rn a rn a a rn a a rn rn rn a rn a o~,
~~~~~~ooooo~~~~~~~~~~~~~,~~~~~~~~
a~~~~~oooooaa~a~~~a~~aa~~~~~~~aa
M T h t+1 h Vt N T V1 V1 .+ .-~ 00 N o0 '. l~ O Nt N~O .-~ M oo ~O O~ N O~ O v1 0o N
O~ oo Oi o0 i~ 00 00 0o a0 O~ O~ a0 Ih o0 0o C o0 O~ O. G o0 00 O~ oo l~ l~ a0 00 00 l~ i~ a0
~n v1 Vt O O O Vl h Vt vt V1 O O Vl v~ Vt Vt vt v~ vt y) y~ v~ y~ O O O O O O vl V'f
~ M M.-~ G O O O C 1~ l~ .-~ .+ C C O C G C.-~
.-M. ~ ..M. .-M. ..~+ ..Mi .-M. ..~. ..M. .-M. .~i .-N. .-N. ..M. ..M. ..~i ..M. ~ ..M+ .-M. .-~. .M. .-M. .~i ..M. .-~. .Mi .-~. .M.~ ..t~li .-~i .M..
~+ ~D Vl ~D O M v~ O l~ N~O N~n ~O ~n 7~O O M O~ [~ V~ l~ vl vl 7.--~ M O~ O h~O
O O~ O.+ N O~ ~ p~ M M a0 ~.-~ N O N .+ ~ Qi .-. O a0 ~ O O O O~ ~ O
.~r ..-i .-Ni .~-~ .~-i .-~i .r .-~ .--~ .N-i ~ .r .r .N-i .Ni ..fJi .-~i .~-~ .-Ni .~-~ .~ .-r ..(Vr ~ .r ..-~ .Nr .-N+ .N-i .--i .r .-~r
7~ 7 O~ O~ N.r .-. .r T Qi ~ 7 7 V' 7 7 V'7 7 7 ~.-M. .-M. .M» ..M. ..M. M 7 R
N N N v~ V1 7 N N N N N ~-+ ~--~ N N N N N N N N N N N '+ N N
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
~ I
ha .r N cn R Vl ~O h OO Q~ ~.. .Ni .-M. .,7+ vi ~O ~ 00 O~ O.-. N M 7 vt ~O l~ 00 O~ O.-. N
^ ^-~ N N N tV N N N N N N M M M
0
0
~
0
.~
F 0 U U U U U U U U V U U V U U U U V V U U U U U V U U U V U U V U
~r v v v v v v v v vy~ v v a v a v~ a v~ v~~ v v
M« O O ~ O O ~ O O~ O O~ O O O O O ~ O O
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O O O O ~ O ~ O O
N N N N N N N N N N N N
~N Q N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
.N-~ ..tVi .-~. ti ..tVi .-N. .~-~ ..tV-i .-cV. .fV-i .tV-i .-(V. N tV .-~i .N-~ .N. .~-i ..tVi .-N. .~-~ ..N.i .-N. ~ ..cV. .N. .~r .-~. .~-~ .N-i ..Ni ..tVi
~. ..
~ N M 7 v~ ~D l~ 00 O~ O^.-N. .M+ ~ V~ ~O ~ 00 O~ O.-. N M 7 vt ~O t~ 00 T O~(V
^ ^' ~--~ N N N N N N N N N N M M t+i
' Hz
M
W
O
~
m
a
W
J
J
~
2
N ~
Na~z
o z ~z
~ J ~ J
y O
a d «
~ ~ ~
Z 2 J
I"~
V y~I
V Y
d
' d
' d C ^n
o o o d ~'
~ ~ ~_
a a ac~
,
'
,
I~
'
,
'
~J
'
'
'
1
,
'
LJ
,
'
'
'
~~
~
4
A
8
a
ao
vo
~~ M
;~ N M M N1 N M M N C' 7 Vl 7 h 7 7 N M N t~) ~ N M N M N t~t M
Y~ Q~ O~ O~ O~ O~ O~ Oi O~ Q~ O+ 01 O~ O~ O~ O~ O~ O~ O~ O~ O~ O~ T Q~ O~ T 01 O~ O~ O~ O~ O~ O~
R
a~ O
av
.- ~,~,~,~,~,~~,~,oooooooooo~~~,~,~,~~,~,~~,ooo~
e
`O rnrndrnrnrnc;a;aa;a~oooooooaao~dao~o;o;rno~,~..a°`
d
~e
=~ d' O vl ~O O~ a0 7 O N 1~ [~ ~O M O~ V N h N... ~D G~ 00 M Vt l~ ef O.-r O~ ~O 7 fV
~ ~ a0 T oo lh l~ l~ oo O~ O~ 00 aG O~ O~ O~ C C T O~ o0 00 l~ oG O~ O~ ao 01 G O oo O~ O~ 00
~' W
C
~n v? v~ v~ v~ ~n v~ v~ o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0~n v~ ~~ v, ~n v, v, v~ v, o 0 o v~
aN ..;~~~N
+.~' ~ .-M. .-M-r .-Mi ..~ti ~ .-M. ..M. .Mi .-~i .~. .M-~ ..N-i ..N-i .-N. N ..fVi ..N. N .M-. ..~i ~ .M-. ~ .~. .-M. ..Mr ~ .-M. ..Nw ..cJ. .-~i ~
,~ .~-~ ~ .~ .~-r
d~p ~n R O~ h O N oo V~ 00 tn ... 00 ~O V' N O l~ ~n ~O O~ 1~ ~O l~ .-. O O a0 N N O [~ 7
Q w O~--~ O~ O N N O N~--~ O N-+ N.-. .-. O G~ .-+ N M~--~ N O O o0 ~~ tn
V .-N. .N. .N-~ ..cV. .-N. .-N. ..cVr ..N-~ .-N. .-N. ..N. ..lV. .-N. .-N» ~ .N. .-N. .~+ ~ .N. .,N+ ~ .-N. .N.. ~ .-N. ..tV.
Q ^+ .-~ .--i .r .--~
d
'
~
~
N N N N N N N N
~
7 V 7 V~ V
N N
~ Fy it v
~
l V
1
~
N N N N N N N N N N N ~D
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O M N.-~ O M
~ V
~.
~-
~ ~
y >
F .
~ ..
.
. N
W ~
a
~
0
a
~+f 7 vl ~D l~ oo O~ O N<+1 ~n ~D l~ 00 Q. O.. N~+t 7 v1 ~O h o0 Q. O~ M vl O~
M c~1 M M M M ~+1 ~ 7 7 7 ~ V R 7 d' 7 V1 V'1 h Vl V1 Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl ~O N N M
~
W
~
Z
W
~
~
J
W
LL
~
O
~
Q
G
~
y
G
F
~
~
a° ~, w
'~ J
x ~
x
~
~~ o z Wz
¢
~WW
° w ww
~ J H J
y
F+C (~ [x~
UUUUUUVUUUUUUUUUUUUUUVUUUUUUVUUV
d
~ vvva vvaavvavvavvvvav vvvvvv v~
~ o 0 0 0~ o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0~ o 0 0 0 0 o g o
~ ~ ~ ~ d
a
ai o
:
.`
ii ++
F A ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N l~ h l~ h
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N fV N N N N N N N N N N N N
~
C
G .
~
fJ
(V
fJ
fV
tV
N
fJ
N
N
fJ
fV
~
~
N
tJ
N
N
~
N
N
(V
N
~
(V
N
~
~
~
N
N
N
~ 1~
i
..
i ..
i ..
i .-
i .
-~ ..
i ..
i
.-
i .
r ..
i ..
i .-
i .
-~ ..
i .-
i .-
i .
r ..
+ .
-~ ..
-i
-~ ..
.
i .-
i .-
i .
-~ .
-i ..
i .
i .-
~- 2 Z J
M 7 Vl ~O 1~ 00 O~ O~--~ N M vt ~O [~ 00 O~ O~ N M 7 v1 ~p l~ 00 Q~ O~-+ N M
M M M tn M M M 7 V' 7 V~ d' C V' 7 7 vt vt vi vl v~ v1 Vi Vl vi Vl ~D ~D ~O ~O ~ V
G) V
G/ V~+
G/ C
Fz 'o o 'o~
a a a c~
~'
` ' a
,
'i N
I~ ~
~
' N
~ N
~ ~
, z
~_
~w
~ D 4
rn a rn a rn rn rn rn
~ ~
a, o
' - a ~~~,~,~,~,
~,
e oa
~;aaa
a
4
'- o .,
~
~ ~
d
a
' °' T~
O w O~ [~ O O~n O T N
.
0
~ 'w o
O
oG O~ Oi C O, O
' c
,' y ~~ viv,~nv,~n~noo
N N
V N
~
h
`
f
- >
' ~
t N
t
N 1
I
.t~1i
~n
-M
M
~
tn
N
N
I
^
v' +
y .
i ..
.
i .-
i
..
i .-
. .-
i
W A~o
a ~no~ooaov
..o
t '..~ W
q'w ,
~ ^ Ht vl N ~O ^
~
~~ ~~~
~ H
.,
' _ d
Z Ul F ~O ~D ~D ~O ~O ~O N N
0 ...r ~-+ .~ O o ~ ~" C
' Y
` vv'va'v v..
.-. .-. ~"
o ~
Q ~
J Fw a
W a a
' ~
LL ;
LL a ~ °` '^
v v
O
'
~ °
°
° °
°
a o
o
o
o
~+~++
~^~a
' ..
~ ~~~«
~ FFFFF
e
.~ ~~~~~
~ ~
N ~
t a
z W
-1
~ J
' ~~-aw~~z~"z
aaa
`~
a
W
~~ u
-~ Q g
W
~~~~ ~ a
~
~
~o~~a~dQ ~
o Z ~W
~ W~ ~~~WW
y ~ J {- J
F [~.
~ U U
U U U U
O V
' o~ o o~ o 0 o at ~
Y~ ~ N N N N N N N N E E a
F A ~
..fVr ..(Vi
-N+
Nr
-Ni
~-~
~
~ ~ ~
' .
.
.
.
.
.~ .
r Z Z J
vt ~O 1~ 00 T O tV ~r
(.1
U }~
V~+
~D~o~D~Det~t~~ N C! Gf C
~O ~O ~O d 1
Z
' F z ~
a a a c>
' 110231-055
January 11, 2005
,
APPENDDCC
' Laboratorv Testing Procedures and Test Results
, Exnansion Index Tests: The expansion potential of selected materials was evaluated by the
Expansion Index Test, ASTM test method D4829 ar U.B.C. Standard No. 18-2. Specimens are
molded under a given compacrive energy to approximately the oprimum moisture content and
, approximately 50 percent saturafion or approximately 90 percent relative compaction. The
prepared 1-inch thick by 4-inch diameter specimens aze loaded to an equivalent 144 psf surcharge.
and aze inundated with tap water until volumetric equilibrium is reached. The results of these tests
, aze presented in the table below and in the soil characteristics table herewith Appendix C.
Soluble Sulfates: The soluble sulfate contents of selected samples were determined by standard
' geochemical methods, Califomia Test Method 317. The results of these tests aze presented in the
table soil chazacteristics table herewith Appendix C:
Sample
Location Sam le Descri tion
P P Expansion
Index Water Soluble
Sulfate (SOa),
%byWeight Sulfate
Ex osure*
p
Lot 1 Brown lean SILT, ML 41 0.0180 Negligible
Lot 2 Brown silty clayey SAND, SGSM 25 0.0180 Negligible
Lot 3 Brown silty SAND, SM 11 0.0210 Negligible
Lot 4 Brown silty SAND, SM 0 0.0240 Negligible
Lot 5 Brown silty SAND, SM 8 OA150 Negligible
Lot 6 Brown silty SAND, SM 5 <0.0150 Negligible
Lot 7 Brown silty SAND, SM 4 <0.0150 Negligible
~t g Brown silty clayey SAND, SC-SM 32 0.0270 Negligible
Lot 9 Brown silty clayey SAND, SGSM 17 0.0180 Negligible
Lot 10 Olive brown silty SAND, SM 3 0.0180 Negligible
I.ot 11 Olive brown silty SAND, SM 7 <p,0150 Negligible
Lot 12 Olive brown silty SAND, SM 0 0.0600 Negligible
o-1 3~/
'
1
'
'
'
,
'
'
,
,
,
'
,
LJ
'
'
lJ
,
iiozsi-oss
January il, 2005
Sample
Location
Sample Description Ex ansion
p
Index Water Soluble
Sulfate (SOa),
a~o by Weight
Sulfate
Exposure*
Lot 13 Brown silty clayey SAND, SC-SM 24 <0.0150 Negligible
Lot 14 Brown silty clayey SAND, SC-SM 25 <0.0150 Negligible
Lot 15 Brown clayey SAND, SC 42 0.0165 Negligible
Lot 16 Olive brown clayey SAND, SC 21 0.0180 Negligible
Lot 17 Olive brown clayey SAND, SC 30 0.0150' Negligible
Lot 18 Brown clayey silty SAND, SGSM 32 0.0150 Negligible
Lot 19 Brown clayey silty SAND, SC-SM 27 <0.0150 Negligible
Lot 20 Brown clayey silty SAND, SC-SM 34 0.0375 Negligible
Lot 21 Brown clayey silty SAND, SC-SM 2g <0.0150 Negligible
Lot 22 Brown clayey silty SAND, SC-SM 39 <0.0150 Negligible
I,ot 23 Brown silty SAND, SM 35 <0.0150 Negligible
Lot 24 Brown silty SAND, SM 17 <OA150 Negligible
Lot 25 Brown clayey silty SAND, SC-SM 37 <0.0150 Negligible:
Lot 26 Brown silty SAND, SM 15 <0.0150 Negligible
Lot 27 Brown clayey silty SAND, SC-SM 32 <0.0150 Negligible
I.ot 28 Brown clayey silty SAND, SGSM 56 <OA150 Negligible
L,ot 29 Brown clayey silty SAND, SC-SM 57 <0.0150 Negligible
Lot 30 Brown clayey silty SAND, SC-SM 50 <OA150 Negligible
I.ot 31 Brown clayey silty SAND, SC-SM 44 <0.0150 Negligible
Lot 32 Brown clayey silty SAND, SGSM 49 <0.0150 Negligible
Lot 33 Brown clayey silty SAND, SC-SM 67 <0.0150 Negligible
Lot 34 Brown clayey silty SAND, SC-SM 62 <0.0150 Negligible
Lot 35 Brown clayey silty SAND, SC-SM 52 <0.0150 Negligible
Lot 36 Brown clayey silty SAND, SC-SM 35 <0.0150 Negligible
C-2
~
110231-055
January 11, 2005
Sample
Location Sample Description Expansion
Index Water Soluble
Sulfate (SOn),
o~a by Weight Sulfate
Exposure*
Lot 37 Brown clayey silty SAND, SC-SM 22 <0.0150 Negligible
Lot 38 Brown silty clayey SAND, SC-SM 23 <0.0150 Negligible
Lot 39 Brown lean SILT, ML 41 <0.0150 Negligible
Lot 40 Brown lean SILT, ML 35 <0.0150 Negligible
I,ot 41 Brown clayey silty SAND, SGSM 24 <0.0150 Negligible
Lot 42 Brown clayey silty SAND, SC-SM 33 <0.0150 Negligible
Lot 43 Bmwn silty SAND, SM 17 0.0165 Negligible
Lot 44 Brown clayey silty SAND, SC-SM 29 <0.0150 Negligible
I,ot 45 Brown clayey SAND, SC 52 <0.0150 Negligible
Lot 46 Brown clayey SAND, SC 33 <0.0150 Negligible
Lot 47 Brown clayey silty SAND, SC-SM 20 <0.0150 Negligible
Lot 48 Brown clayey silty SAND, SGSM 24 <0.0150 Negligible
L,ot 49 Brown clayey silty SAND, SC-SM 24 <0.0150 Negligible
Lot 50 Brown silty SAND, SM 15 <0.0150 Negligible
Lot 51 Brown clayey SAND, SC 38 <OA150 Negligible
Lot 52 Brown clayey silty SAND, SC-SM 22 <0.0150 Negligible
Lot 53 Brown clayey silty SAND, SC-SM 19 <0.0150 Nagligible
L.ot 54 Brown ciayey silty SAND, SGSM 25 <0.0150 Negligible
Lot 55 Brown clayey silty SAND, SGSM 35 <OA150 Negligible
Lot 56 Brown silty SAND, SM 17 <0.0150 Negligible
I.ot 57 Brown silty SAND, SM 11 0.0165 Negligible
Lot 58 Brown clayey silty SAND, SC-SM 20 <0.0150 Negligible
Lot 59 Brown silty SAND, SM 11 <0.0150 Negligible
Lot 60 Brown clayey silty SAND, SC-SM 20 <0.0150 Negligible
' na~cu un ine iyyi emnon ot me UmYOrm liulldtng Code, Table No. 19-A-4, prepazed by
the International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO).
1 /
' C-3 3°~
110231-055
January 11, 2005
Comnaction Chazacteristics: The maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of typical
materials were determined in accordance with ASTM Test Method D1557. The results of these
tests aze presented in the table below:
Soil
Type
Sample Descripfion Mu~imum
Dry
Density
(pC~ Optimum
Moisture
Content
(%)
Expansion
Index
Expansion
Potential
6 Brown clayey silty SAND 132.5 9.5 29 ~~,
13 Red brown clayey SAND 130.0 8,5 30 ~~,
19 Light olive tan silty SAND 127.0 9.5 17 Very Low
21 Olive brown clayey SAND 130.5 10.0 61 Medium
23 Light olive bmwn silty clayey
SAND 127A 11.0 33 Low
24 Brown silty SAND 131.5 9.5 27 Low
42 Pale brown silty SAND 131.0 9.5 9 Very Low
43 Brown silty SAND 129.0 10.0 10 Very Low
56 Brown silty SAND 131.0 9.0 0 Very Low
59 Brown clayey SAND 133.0 8.5 20 Very Low
NID-1 Olive brown sandy lean SILT 122.0 14 - _
C-4 ~.(
Jt,
~i
~ Leighfon andAssociates, inc.
Project Name:
Project No. :
Boring No.:
Sample No. :
Sample Description:
EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
ASTM D 4829
HARVESTON / ASHVILLE Tesled By: RGO Date: 12/20/04
110231-055 Checked By: PRC Date: 12/23/04
Depth (8.)
E-1 Location: LOT 1
BROWN LEAN S~LT
Dry Wt. of Soi~ + Cant. (gm.) I 2869:0= I
Wt. of Container No. (gm.) 0.0
Dry Wt. of Soil (gm.) 2669.0
Weight Soil Retained on #4 Sieve 62,Q :i
~
~ ~
Percent Passing # 4 97.7
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test
S ecimen Diameter in. 4.01 4.01
S ecimen Hei ht in. 1.0000 1.0416
Wt. Com . Soil + Mold m. 616.0 85p:2 '
Wt. of Mold m. 207.2 207.2
S ecific Gravi (Assumed 2.70 2.70
ContainerNO. ' E-7~
~ ~ E-7~~~
Wet Wt. of Soi~ + Cont. m. 313.2 650.2
D Wt. of Soif + Cont. m. 288.7 375.4
Wt. of Container m. 13.2 207.2
Moisture Content °/a 8.9 18.0
Wet Densit 123.3 133.5
D Densi c 113.2 113.1
Void Ratio 0.489 0.551
Total Porosi 0.328 0.355
Pore Volume cc 68.0 76.6
De ree of Saturation % S meas 49.2 88.3
SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate < 0.0002 in./h.
Date Time Pressure
(psi) Elapsed Time
(min.) Dial Readings
(in.)
12/20/04 ,1023
~ 1.0 0 1.0000
12/20/04 10:33 1.0 10 ;;~~~ 0:9996,'
Add Distilled Water to the Specimen
12121/04 7:30
~ 1.0 1257 0:5416
12/21/04 8:30 1.0 1317 0.5416
Expansion Index (EI meas) _ ((Final Rdg - Initial Rdg) / Initial Thick.) x 1000 42.Q
Expansion Index ( EI )so = EI meas -(50 -S meas)x((65+EI meas) /(220-S meas)) 41
Rev.OB-04
/~
~ leighion and Associates, Inc,
EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
ASTM D 4829
Project Name: HARVESTON / ASHVILLE
Project No. : 110231-055
Boring No.:
Sample No. : E-2
Sample Description: SC-SM, BROWN SILTY CLAYEY SAND
Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (gmJ 2703:0
Wt. of Container No. (gm.) OA
Dry Wt. of Soil (gm.) 2703.0
Weight Soil Retained on #4 Sieve 57.0
Percent Passing # 4 97.9
Tested By: RGO Date: 12/20/04
Checked By: PRC Date: 12/23/04
Depth (ft.)
Location: LOT 2
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test
S ecimen Diameter in. 4.01 4.01
S ecimen Hei ht in. 1.0000 1.0302
W[. Com . Soil + Mold m. 600.3 .642:1
Wt. of Mald m. 209.8 209.8
Specific Gravi Assumed) 2.70 2.70
Container No. ~-8 E:8";
Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. m. 312.8 642.1
D Wt. of Soil + Cont. m. 289.3 359.9
Wt. of Container m. 12.8 209.8
Moisture Content % 8.5 20.1
Wet Densi c 117.8 130.2
D Densit c 108.6 108.4
Void Ratio 0.553 0.600
Total Porosi 0.356 0.375
Pore Volume cc 73.7 79.9
De ree of Saturation °/a S meas 41.5 90.6
SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate < 0.0002 in./h.
Date Time Pressure
(psi) Elapsed Time
(min.) Dial Readings
(in.)
12/20/04 10:33' 1.0 0 1.0000
12/20104 10:43 1.0 10 A:50~.1.
Add Distilled Water to the Specimen
12/21/04 7:30 1.0 1247 0.5~02 s
12/21/04 8:30 1.0 1307 0.5302
Expansion Index (EI meas) _ ((Final Rdg - Initial Rdg) / Initial Thick.) x 1000 29.1
Expansion Index ( EI )~ = EI meas -(50 -S meas)x((65+EI meas) /(220-S meas)) 25
Rev. oaoq
~
' Leighfon and Associates, Inc.
Project Name:
Project No. :
Boring No.:
Sample No. :
Sample Description:
EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
ASTM D 4829
HARVESTON / ASHVILLE Tested By: RGO
110231-055 Checked By: PRC
Depth (ft.)
E-3 Location: LOT 3
BROWN SILTY SAND
Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont (gm.) _. _ ...
23~9 Dt
Wt. of Container No. (gm.) 0.0
Dry Wt. of Soil (gm.) 2319.0
Weight Soil Retained on #4 Sieve 67,9' '
Percent Passing # 4 97.1
Date: 12/20/04
Date: 12/23/04
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test ARer Test
S ecimen Diameter in. 4.01 4.01
S ecimen Hei ht in. 1.0000 1.0111
Wt. Com . Soil + Mold m. 589.1 620,6.
Wt. of Mold m. 183.2 183.2
S ecific Gravi Assumed 2.70 2.70
Container No. ~E-9 E-9
Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. m. 312.8 620.6
D Wt. of Soil + Cont. m. 288.0 372.4
Wt. of Container m. 12.8 183.2
Moisture Content % 9.0 17.5
Wet Densil c 122.4 131.8
D Densi c 112.3 112.2
Void Ratio 0.501 0.517
Total Porosi 0.334 0.341 -
Pore Volume cc 69.1 71.4
De ree of Saturation °/a S meas 48.5 91.1
SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate < 0.0002 in./h.
Date Time
Pressure
(psi)
Elapsed Time
(min.)
Dial Readings
(in.)
12/20/04 10;$4~, " . 1.0 0 1.0000
12/20/04 11:04 1.0 10 0.,4997 ' ?_
Add Distilled Water to the Specimen
12/21/04 7:30 1.0 1226 Y1.51i11~
12/21/04 830 1.0 1286 0.5111
Expansion Index (EI meas) _ ((Final Rdg - Initial Rdg) / Initial Thick.) x 1000 11.4
Expansion Index ( EI )~ = EI meas -(50 -S meas)x((65+EI meas) /(220-S meas)) 11
Rev.08 OC
V '
~
Leighton and Associates, Inc.
EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
ASTM D 4829
Project Name: LENNAR / ASHVILLE II Tested By: AJP Date: 12/29/04
Project No. : 110231-055 Checked By: PRC Date: 1/3/05
Boring No.: Depth (ft.)
Sample No. : E-42 Location: LOT 5
Sample Description: SM, BROWN SILTY SAND
D
ry Wf. of Soil + Cont. (gmJ _ _.
2267.0
Wt. of Container No. (gm.) 0.0
Dry Wt. of Soil (gm.) 2267.0
Weight Soii Retained on #4 Sieve •7,9iD i
Percent Passing # 4 96.5
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test
S ecimen Diameter in. 4.01 4.01
S ecimen Hei ht in. 1.0000 1.0072
Wt. Com . Soil + Mold m. 589.8 ~ 610.1,. j
Wt. of Mold m. 183.3 183.3
S ecific Gravi (Assumed) 2.70 2.70
Container No. .
' E=19
E-19
Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. m. 312.8 670.1
D Wt. of Soil + Cont. m. 286.5 370.9
Wt. of Container m. 12.8 183.3
Moisture Content % 9.6 15.1
Wet Densit c 122.6 128.6
D Densit c 111.9 111.7
Void Ratio 0.507 0.518
Total Porosi 0.336 0.341
Pore Volume cc 69.6 71.1
De ree of Saturation % S meas 51.1 78.6
SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate < 0.0002 in./h.
Date Time Pressure
(psi) Elapsed Time
(min.) Dial Readings
(in.)
12/29/04 1;430 1.0 0 0.5000
12/29/04 14:40 1.0 10 0:500D,
Add Distilled Water to the Specimen
12/30/04 Z:33 1.0 1013 ~ ,0:50T2
12/30/04 8:33 1.0 t073 0.5072
Expansion Index (EI meas) _ ((Final Rdg - Initial Rdg) / Initial Thick.) x 1000 7,2
Expansion Index ( EI )so = EI meas -(50 -S meas)x((65+EI meas) /(220.S meas)) $
Rev.08-04
IV\
~ Leighfon antl Associates, II1C. EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
ASTM D 4829
Project Name: LENNAR / ASHVILLE II Tested By: AJP Date: 12/29/04
Project No.: 110237-055 Checked By: PRC Date: 1/3/05
Boring No.: Depth (ft.)
Sample No. : E-41 Location: LOT 6
Sample Description: SM, BROWN SILTY SAND
Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (gm.) 2188t0 ~
Wt. of Container No. (gm.) 0.0
Dry Wt. of Soil (gm.) 2188.0
Weight Soil Retained on #4 Sieve J 9;0 '
~
Percent Passing # 4 99.1
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test
S ecimen Diameter in. 4.01 4.01
S ecimen Hei ht in. 1.0000 1.0056
Wt. Com . Soil + Mold m. 600.2 628:3" ~
VYt. of Mold m. 202.4 202.4
S ecific Gravi Assumed) 2.70 2.70
Container No. f-1.8' ~-18!
~
Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. m. 312.7 628.3
D Wt. of Soil + Cont. m. 2872 364.0
Wt. of Container ( m. 12.7 202.4
Moisture Content % 9.3 17.0
Wet Densit c 120.0 128.3
D Densit c 109.8 109.6
Void Ratio 0.536 0.544
Total Porosit 0.349 0.352
Pore Volume cc 722 73.4
De ree of Saturation % S meas 46.9 84.4
SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate < 0.0002 in./h.
Date Time Pressure
(psi) Elapsed Time
(min.) Dial Readings
(in.)
12/29/04 14:20 '
~~ 1.0 0 0.5000
12/29/04 14:30 1.0 10 '0:4996 '
Add Distilled Water to the Specimen
12/30/04 7:34
~
~ 1.0 1024 0.5~56
12/30/04 8:34 1.0 1084 0.5056
Expansion Index (EI meas) _ ((Final Rdg - Initial Rdg) / Initial Thick.) x 1000 6.Q
Expansion Index ( EI )50 = EI meas -(50 -S meas)x((65+EI meas) /(220-S meas)) 5
Rev OB-00
• c
~ Leighton and Associates, Inc.
EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
ASTM D 4829
Project Name: LENNAR / ASHVILLE II Tested By: AJP
Project No. : 110231-055 Checked By: PRC
Boring No.: Depth (ft.)
Sample No. : E~0 Location: LOT 7
Sample Description: SM, BROWN SILTY SAND
Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (gm.) i 2000.0 -'
Wt. of Container No. (gm.) 0.0~
Dry Wt. of Soil (gm.) 2000.0
Weight Soil Retained on #4 Sieve , p:p, I r
Percent Passing # 4 100.0
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test
S ecimen Diameter in.) 4.01 4.01
S ecimen Hei ht in. 1.0000 1.0070
Wt.Com .Soil+Mold m. 583.3 $2~;~!
Wt. of Mold. m. 190.4 ~gp.q
S ecific Gravi Assumed) z.~p y.~p
Container No. E-17 E-17 !
Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. m. 312.8 621.1
D Wt. of Soil + Cont. m. 289.3 362.1
Wt. of Container ( m. 12.8 190.4
Moisture Content % 8.5 18.9
Wet Densit c 118.5 129.8
D Densi 109.2 109.1
Void Ratio 0.543 0.554
Total Porosi 0.352 0.357
Pore Volume cc 72.9 74.3
De ree of Saturation % S meas 42.2 92.3
SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate < 0.0002 in.lh.
Date Time Pressure
(psi) Elapsed Time
(min.) Dial Readings
(i~.)
12/29/04 1,4;1U 1.0 0 0.5000
12/29/04 14:20 1.0 10
OF4998
Add Distilled Water to the Specimen
12/30/04 7;3~, ,'. 1.0 1034 0,50Z0 °
12/30/04 8:34 1.0 1094 0.5070
Expansion Index (EI meas) _ ((Final Rdg - Initial Rdg) / Initial Thick.) x 1000 7,2
Expansion Index ( EI )50 = EI meas -(50 -S meas)x((65+EI meas) !(220-S meas)) Q
Rev.08-04
Date: 12/29/04
Date: i!3/05
~r
~ Leighton and Associates, Inc.
EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
ASTM D 4829
Project Name: LENNARlASHVILLE II Tested By: AJP Date: 12l30/04
Project No. : 110231-055 Checked By: PRC Date: t/3/05
Boring No.: Depth (ft.)
Sample No. : E39 Location: LOT 8
Sample Description: SC-SM, BROWN SILTY CLAYEY SAND
Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (gm.) 20(3U.0 ,'
Wt. of Container No. (gm.) 0.0
Dry Wt. of Soil (gm.) 2000.0
Weight Soil Retained on #4 Sieve O.D'
Percent Passing # 4 100.0
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test
S ecimen Diameter in. 4.01 4.01
S ecimen Hei ht in. 1.0000 1.0332
Wt. Com . Soil + Mold m. 562.4 ;-. ~ SOg;g~
Wt. of Mold m. 17g,q ~7g q
S ecific Gravi Assumed 2.70 2.70
Contalner No. E-16 ; E-16'
Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. m. 312.7 606.8
D Wt. of Soil + Cont. m. 283.0 345.9
Wt. of Container m. 12.7 178.4
Moisture Content % 11.0 23.8
Wet Densi c 115.8 129.1
D Densi 104.4 104.2
Void Ratio 0.616 0.669
Total Porosi 0.381 0.401
Pore Volume cc 7g,g 85,7
De ree of Saturation % S meas 48.3 96.2
SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate < 0.0002 in./h.
Date Time Pressure
(psi) Elapsed Time
(min.) Dial Readings
(in.)
12/30/04 7:28 ~ 1.0 0 0.5000
12l30/04 738 1.0 10 Q':~OOD
Add Distilled Water to the Specimen
1/3/05 820 1.0 5802 0.5332
1!3/05 9:20 1.0 5862 0.5332
Expansion Index (EI meas) _ ((Final Rdg - Initial Rdg) / Initial Thick.) x 1000 33.2
Expansion Index ( EI )50 = EI meas -(50 -S meas)x((65+EI meas) I(220-S meas)) $Z
Rev.O&04
~
~
Leighton and Associates, Inc.
EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
ASTM D 4829
Project Name: LENNAR / ASHVILLE II Tested By: AJP Date: 12/29/04
Project No. : 110231-055 Checked By: PRC Date: 1/3/OS
Bo~ng No.: Depth (ft.)
Sample No. : E-38 Location: LOT 9
Sample Description: SC-SM, BROWN SILTY CLAYEY SAND
Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont (gm.) 2542.0 ?
Wt. of Container No. (gm.) 0.0
Dry Wt. of Soil (gm.) 2542.0
Weight Soil Retained on #4 Sieve 21.0
Percent Passing # 4 99.2
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test
S ecimen Diameter in. 4.01 4.01
S ecimen Hei ht in. 1.0000 1.0167
Wt. Com . SoiI+Mold m. 604.8 '838,7'~: : i~
Wt. of Mold m. 198.9 198.9
S ecific Gravi Assumed 2.70 2.70
Container No. .._... _.. ,
.. _.__. ..
! E-15
~ ...... ._._ ._..
.. . . ._... . ._...
E 15:
~~
Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. m. 312.8 6387
D Wt. of Soil + Cont. m. 287.3 371.4
Wt. of Container ( m. 12.8 19g,g
Moisture Content % 9.3 18.4
Wet Densit c 122.4. 132.5
D Densit 112.0 111.9
Void Ratio 0.505 0.530
Total Porosi 0.336 0.346
Pore Volume cc 69.5 72.9
De ree of Saturation % S meas 49.7 93.9
SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate < 0.0002 in./h.
Date Time Pressure
(psi) Eiapsed Time
(min.) Dial Readings
(in.)
12/29/04 73.54 1.0 0 0.5000
12/29/04 14:00 1.0 10 Q€4995 ~
Add Distilled Water to the Specimen
12/30/04 Z:34 1.0 1054 0.51fi7
12l30/04 7:44 1.0 1064 0.5167
Expansion Index (EI meas) _ ((Final Rdg - Initial Rdg) / Initial Thick.) x 1000 ~ 7,2
Expansion Index ( EI )so = EI meas -(50 -S meas)x((65+EI meas) /(220-5 meas)) ~ 7
Rav. 00-04
~~
~ Leighton and Associates, Inc.
EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
ASTM D 4829
Project Name: LENNAR / ASHVILLE II Tested By: AJP
Project No. : 110231-055 Checked By: PRC
Boring No.: Depth (ft.)
Sample No. : E-37 Location: LOT 10
Sample Description: SM, OLIVE BROWN SILTY SAND
Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont (gm.)
Wt. of Container No. (gm.) : 2722.0 '-
. __ .
0.0
Dry Wt. of Soil (gm.) 2722.0
Weight Soil Retained on #4 Sieve 22,p ,
Percent Passing # 4 992
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test
S ecimen Diameter in. 4.01 4.01
S ecimen Hei ht in. 1.0000 1.0052
Wt. Com . Soii + Mold m. 591.8 ,627,t5'
~
Wt. of Mold m. 200.9 200.9
S ecific Gravi Assumed 2.70 2.70
Container No. '. E-1'4 E-14
Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. m. 312.7 627.5
D Wt. of Soil + Cont. m. 287.7 358.3
Wt. of Container m.) 12.7 200.9
Moisture Content % ~ g.~ ~g.~
Wet Densit c 117.9 128.5
D Densit 108.1 107.9
Void Ratio 0.560 0.568
Total Porosi 0.359 0.362
Pore Volume cc 74.3 75.4
De ree of Saturation % S meas 43.9 90.6
SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate < 0.0002 in.lh.
Date Time Pressure
(psi) Elapsed Time
(min.) Diat Readings
(in.)
12/29/04 13;35 1.0 0 0.5000
12/29/04 13:45 1.0 10 0=4997 .'
Add Distilled Water to the Specimen
12/30/04 ,7;35 1.0 1070 " 0:5.052
:
12/30/04 8:35 1.0 1130 _ __. _
0.5052
Expansion Index (EI meas) _ ((Final Rdg - Initial Rdg) / Initial Thick.) x 1000 5.5
Expansion Index ( EI )~ = EI meas -(50 -S meas)x((65+EI meas) /(220-S meas)) $
Rev.O&01
Date: 12/29/04
Date: 1/3/05
~~
~ Leighton and Associates, inc.
EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
ASTM D 4829
Project Name: LENNAR / ASHVILLE II Tested By: AJP Date: 12/29/04
Project No. : 110231-055 Checked By: PRC Date: 1/3/05
Boring No.: Depth (ft.)
Sampie No. : E36 Location: LOT 11
Sample Description: SM, OLIVE BROWN SILTY SAND
Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (gm.) ' 2423:0 -
Wt. of Container No. (gm.) 0 0
Dry Wt, of Soil (gm.) 2423.0
Weight Soil Retained on #4 Sieve :1 Q.0
Y
Percent Passing # 4 99.6
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test
S ecimen Diameter in. 4.01 4.01
S ecimen Hei ht in. 1,0000 1.0067
Wt. Com . Soil + Moid m. 595.6 :826:4"
Wt. of Mold m. 191.5 191.5
S ecific Gravi Assumed) 2.70 2.70
Container No. ~'_ E-13 - ,E-1~3.; '
Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. m. 312.8 626.0
D Wt. of Soil + Cont. m. 287.0 369.4
Wt. of Container m.) 12.8 191.5
Moisture Content % 9.4 17,g
Wet Densi c 121.9 130.9
D Densi c 111.4 111.3
Void Ratio 0.513 0.523
Totai Porosi 0.339 0.343
Pore Volume cc 70.2 71.6
De ree of Saturation % S meas 49.5 91.0
SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate < 0.0002 in./h.
Date Time Pressure
(psi) Elapsed Time
(min.) Dial Readings
(in.)
12l29/04 . .1~25~~": • -
G ~ .~
~~ 1.0 0 0.5000
12/29/04 13:35 1.0 10 ` ' 0:4996,, , ; .~
Add Distilled Water to the Specimen
12/30/04 .7:31 1.0 1076 0.5067
12/30(04 831 1.0 1136 0.5067
Expansion Index (EI meas) _ ((Final Rdg - Initial Rdg) / Initial Thick.) x 1000 ~, ~
Expansion Index ( EI )~ = EI meas -(50 -S meas)x((65+EI meas) /(220-S meas)) ~
Rav.O&04
~~
~ Leighton and Associates, Inc.
ProjectName: LENNAR/ASHVILLEII
Project No.: 110231-055
Boring No.:
Sample No. : E-35
Sample Description: SM, OLIVE BROWN SILTY SAND
EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
ASTM D 4829
Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (gm.) . 2333:0
Wt. of Container No. (gm.) 0.0
Dry Wt. of Soil (gm.) 2333.0
Weight Soil Retained on #4 Sieve , 20'0= •
Percent Passing # 4 99.1
Tested By: AJP Date: 12/29/04
Checked By: PRC Date: 1/3/05
Depth (ft.)
Location: LOT 12
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test
S ecimen Diameter in. 4.01 4.01
S ecimen Hei ht in. 1.0000 0.9964
Wt. Com . Soil + Mold m. 587.3 •`$23=5
Wt. of Mold m. 207.3 207.3
S ecific Gravi Assumed 2.70 2.70
Container No. ~-12~ E 12':
Wet Wt. of Soii + Cont. m. 312.7 623.5
D Wf. of Soil + Cont. m. 286.7 347.0
Wt. of Container m. 12.7 207.3
Moisture Content % 9.5 19.9
Wet Densi c 114.6 125.4
D Densi 104.7 104.5
Void Ralio 0.610 0.605
Total Porosi 0.379 0.377
Pore Volume cc 78.5 77.7
De ree of Saturation % S meas 42.0 89.0
SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate < 0.0002 in./h.
Date Time Pressure
(psi) Elapsed Time
(min.) Dial Readings
(in.)
12/29/04 7.i:55 1.0 0 0.5000
12/29/04 12:05 1.0 10 °0:4996-' ,
~
Add Distilled Water to the Specimen
12/30/04 7:32 1.0 1167 OA$64
12/30/04 8:32 1.0 1227 0.4964
Expansion Index (EI meas) _ ((Final Rdg - Initial Rdg) / Initial Thick.) x 1000 Q.Q
Expansion Index ( EI )so = EI meas -(50 -S meas)x((65+EI meas) /(220-S meas)) Q
Rev.O&04
~~
~ Leighton and Associates, Inc.
EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
ASTM D 4829
Project Name: LENNAR / ASHVILLE II Tested By: AJP Date: 12/29/04
Project No. : 110231-055 Checked By: PRC Date: 1/3/05
Boring No.: Depth (ft.)
Sample No. : E-34 Location: LOT 13
Sample Description: SC-SM, OLIVE BROWN SILTY CLAYEY SAND
--_
Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont (gmJ .
` 200Q~ '
Wt. of Container No. (gm.) 0.0
Dry Wt. of Soil (gm.) 2000.0
Weight Soil Retained on #4 Sieve ~a•0
Percent Passing # 4 100.0
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test
S ecimen Diameter in. 4.01 4.01
S ecimen Hei ht in. 1.0000 1.0193
W[. Com . Soii + Mold m. 593.3 ~827:1 `
Wt. of Mold m. 190.2 1902
S ecific Gravi Assumed 2.70 2.70
Container No. ' E 1`1 E li:
Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. m. 312.8 627.1
D Wt. of Soil + Cont. m. 281.1 360.6
Wt. of Container m. 12•8 190.2
Moisture Content % 11.8 212
Wet Densit 121.6 131.6
D Densit c 108.8 108.6
Void Ratio 0.550 0.580
Total Porosi 0.355 0.367
Pore Volume cc 73.5 77.5
De ree of Saturation % S meas 57.9 98.6
SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate < 0.0002 in./h.
Date Time Pressure
(psi) Elapsed Time
(min.) Dial Readings
(in.)
12/29/04 11:49 1.0 0 0.5000
12/29l04 11:59 1.0 10 ~ 0:4998 , ~„ r„
Add Distilled Water to the Specimen
12/30/04 °7'.33: 1.0 1174 0:51,83;, ,
12/30/04 833 1.0 1234 0.5193
Expansion Index (EI meas) _ ((Final Rdg - Initiai Rdg) / Initial Thick.) x 1000 19.5
Expansion Index ( EI )~ = EI meas -(50 -S meas)x((65+EI meas) /(220-S meas)) 2[~
Rav. OB04
~~
~ Leighton and Associates, Inc.
EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
ASTM D 4829
Project Name: LENNAR / ASHVILLE il Tested By: AJP Date: 12/29/04
Project No. : t 10231-055 Checked By: PRC Date: 1/3/05
Boring No.: Depth (ft.)
Sample No. : E-33 Location: LOT 14
Sample Description: SC-SM, OLIVE BROWN SILTY CLAYEY SAND
Dry Wt. af Soil + Cont. (gm.) __'
2000.0
Wt. of Container No. (gmJ 0.0
Dry Wt. of Soil (gm.) 2000.0
Weight Soil Retained on #4 Sieve 0.0 `
Percent Passing # 4 t00A
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test
S ecimen Diameter in. 4.01 4.01
S ecimen Hei ht in. 1.0000 1.0262
Wt. Com . Soil + Mold m. 584.6 623:9^ t
~
Wt. of Mold m. 188.8 188.8
S ecific Gravi Assumed) 2.70 2.70
Container No. !~ E-10 E-10.:::
Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. m. 312.7 623.9
D Wt. of Soil + Cont. m.) 2872 362.1
Wt. of Container m. 12.7 tgg.g
Moisture Content % 9.3 20.2
Wet Densit c 119.4 131.1
D Densit c 109.2 109.1
Void Ratio 0.543 0.584
Total Porosi 0.352 0.369
Pore Volume cc 72,9 7g,3
De ree of Saturation % S meas 46.2 93.2
SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate < 0.0002 in.lh.
Date Time Pressure
(psi) Elapsed Time
(min.) Dial Readings
(in.)
12/29/04 11:39. ~~ ~ 1.0 0 0.5000
12/29/04 11:49 1.0 10 ~ i, 0."4997= , '
, .;
Add Distilled Water to the Specimen
12/30l04 j d0. °
, ..~: 1.0 1191 qi~262
. ~, ~ . .~
12/30/04 8:40 1.0 1251 0.5262
Expansion Index (EI meas) _ ((Final Rdg - Initial Rdg) / Initial Thick.) x 1000 26.5
Expansion Index ( EI )~ = EI meas -(50 -S meas)x((65+EI meas) /(220-S meas)) 25
Re~. osaa
/
'
1
'
, '
'
~
1
'
'
'
'
,
'
,
'
,
'
'
'
, Leighton and Associates, Inc.
Project Name: LENNAR / ASHVILLE I
Project No. : 110231-055
Boring No.:
Sample No. : E-32
Sample Description: SC, BROWN CLAYEY
Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont (gm.) 2000.0 "
Wt. of Container No. (gm.) 0.0
Dry Wt. of Soil (gm.) 2000.0
Weigh4 Soil Retained on #4 Sieve D:O.. '
Percent Passing # 4 100A
EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
ASTM D 4829
Tested By: AJP
Checked By: PRC
Deplh (ft.)_
Location: LOT
Date: 12/29/04
Date: 1 /3/05
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test
S ecimen Diameter in.) 4.01 4.01
S ecimen Hei ht in. 1.0000 1.0413
Wt. Com . Soil + Mold m. 605.0 843:6.1 .
Wt. of Mold m. 208.8 208.8
S ecific Gravi Assumed 2.70 2.70
Container Na ; ~-g ~_g. q
Wel Wt. of Soil + Cont. m. 312.8 643.6
D Wt. of Soil + Cont. m. 264.0 3582
Wt. of Container ( m. 12.8 208.8
Moisture Content % 10.6 21.4
Wet Densit 119.5 131.0
D Densi c 108.1 107.9
Void Ratio 0.560 0.625
Total Porosi 0.359 0.384
Pore Volume cc 74.3 82.9
De ree of Saturation % S meas 51.1 92.4
SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate < 0.0002 in./h.
Date Time Pressure
(psi) Elapsed Time
(min.) Dial Readings
(in.)
12/29/04 11~28"~
~ 1.0 0 0.5000
12/29/04 11:38 1.0 10 0.500~ , +
Add Distilled Water to the Specimen
12/30/04 '7-s30`~ 1.0 1192 03~413
12/30/04 8:30 1.0 1252 0.5413
Expansion Index (EI meas) _ ((Final Rdg - Initial Rdg)/ Initial Thick.) x 1000 41.3
Expansion Index ( EI )so = EI meas -(50 -S meas)x((65+EI meas) /(220-S meas)) 42
Rav.O&o4
~~
'
1
'
'
~
'
'
'
,
'
,
'
'
'
t
,
'
'
~
~ Leighton and Associates, Inc.
EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
ASTM D 4829
Project Name: LENNAR! ASHVILLE II Tested By: AJP Date: 12/29/04
Project No. : 110231-055 Checked By: PRC Date: 1/3/05
Boring No.: Depth (fl.)
Sample No. : E-31 Location: LOT 16
Sample Description: SC, OLIVE BROWN CLAYEY SAND
DryWt.ofSoil+Cont. (gmJ 20DD.0'
Wt. of Container No. (gm.) 0.0
Dry Wt. of Soil (gm.) 2000.0
Weight Soil Retained on #4 Sieve 0,0
Percent Passing # 4 100.0
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test
S ecimen Diameter in. 4.01 4.01
S ecimen Hei ht in. 1.0000 1A219
Wt. Com . Soil + Mold m. 5787 815}7
Wt: of Mold m. 181.2 1g1.2
S ecific Gravi Assumed 2.70 2.70
Container No. i= ~-8 E-8
Wet Wt. af Soil + Cont. m. 312.9 615.7
D Wt. of Soil + Cont. m. 287.1 363.3
Wt. of Container ( m.) 12.9 181.2
Moisture Conte~t % 9.4 19.6
Wet Densit c 119.9 130.9
D Densi c 109.6 109.5
Void Ratio 0.538 0.572
Total Porosi 0.350 0.364
Pore Volume cc 72.4 77.0
De ree of Saturation % S meas 47.2 92.5
SPECIMEN INUNDATION in disiilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate < 0.0002 in.lh.
Date Time Pressure
(psi) Elapsed Time
(min.) Dial Readings
(in.)
12l29/04 11:22 1.0 0 0.5000
12/29/04 1132 1.0 10 0.4999 ;
Add Distilled Water to the Specimen
12/30/04 7;30 °
_ 1.0 1198 ~ Q:~219
12/30/04 8:30 1.0 1258 0.5219
Expansion Index (EI meas) _ ((Final Rdg - Initial Rdg) / Initial Thick.) x 1000 22_0
Expansion Index ( EI )~ = EI meas -(50 -S meas)x((65+EI meas) /(220-S meas)) 2~
Rev. OB-04
5v
, Leighton and Associates, Inc.
EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
ASTM D 4829
Project Name: LENNAR / ASHVILLE II Tested By: AJP Date: 12/29/04
Project No. : 110231-055 Checked By: PRC Date: 1/3/05
Boring No.: Depth (ft.)
Sample No. : E-30 Location: LOT 17
Sample Description: SC, OLIVE BROWN CLAYEY SAND
Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont (gm.) 2332:0 ':
Wt. of Container No. (gm.) OA
Dry Wt. of Soil (gm.) 2332.0
Weight Soil Retained on #4 Sieve "1 D:0 ~
Percent Passing # 4 99.6
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test
Specimen Diameter in. 4.01 4.01
S ecimen Hei ht in. 1.0000 1.0320
Wt. Com . Soil + Mold m. 581.3 . 8'1.5A~ '~~
Wt. of Mold m. 181.5 181.5
Specific Gravi Assumed) 2.70 2.70
Container No. :: ~=7 E 7.:_
Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. m. 312.8 615.0
D Wt. of Soil + Conf. m. 289.3 368.5
Wt. of Container ( m.) 12.8 181.5
MoisWre Content % 8.5 17.6
Wet Densit c 120.6 130.6
D Densi pc 111.2 111.0
Void Ratio 0.517 0.565
Total Porosi 0.341 0.361
Pore Volume cc 70.5 77.1
De ree of Saturation % S meas 44.4 84.3
SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate < 0.0002 in./h.
Date Time Pressure
(psi) Eiapsed Time
(min.) Dial Readings
(in.)
12/29/04 .7:1:15
~ 1.0 0 0.5000
12/29/04 1125 1.0 10 ~ 0.4993
Add Distilled Water to the Specimen
12/30/04 ~:30 1.0 1205 0;53~0
12/30/04 8:30 1.0 1265 0.5320
Expansion Index (EI meas) _ ((Final Rdg - Initial Rdg) / Initial Thick.) x 1000 32,7
Expansion Index ( EI )~ = EI meas -(50 -S meas)x((65+EI meas) /(220-S meas)) $Q
Rav. 0&09
~3
5
'
'
'
~ ,
1
,
,
'
1
,
'
'
'
,
~
,
'
'
'
~ Leighton and Associates, Inc.
EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
ASTM D 4829
Project Name: HARVESTON / ASHVILLE Tested By: RGO Date: 12/22/04
Project No. : 110231-055 Checked By: PRC Date: 12/23/04
Boring No.: Depth (ft.)
Sample No. : E-29 Location: LOT 18
Sample Description: SC-SM, BROWN CLAYEY SILTY SAND
Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (gm.) 28D0.0.,;'
Wt. of Container No. (gm.) 0.0
Dry Wt. of Soil (gm.) 2800.0
Weight Soif Retained on #4 Sieve 35fp',' ';
Percent Passing # 4 98.8
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test
S ecimen Diameter (in. 4.01 4.01
S ecimen Hei ht in. 1.0000 1.0307
Wt. Com . Soil + Mold m. 603.3 , "' :847.0.- '~'
Wt. of Mold m. 191.6 191.6
5 ecific Gravi (Assumed 2 70 2.70
Container No. $ ~ '! E 15 ~ ~=~16~= ,
Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. m. 313.2 647.0
D Wt. of Soil + Cont. m. 2872 376.0
Wt. of Container m. 132 191.6
Moisture Content % 9.5 21.1
Wet Densit 124.2 137.2
D Densit c 113.4 113.3
Void Ratio 0.486 0.532
Total Porosi 0.327 0.347
Pore Volume cc 67.7 74.1
De ree of Saturation °/a S meas 52.7 100.0
SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expa~sion rate < 0.0002 in./h.
Date Time Pressure
(psi) Elapsed Time
(min.) Dial Readings
(in.)
12/22/04 }422 1.0 0 0.5000
12/22/04 1432 1.0 10 ~ 0:5003.
Add Distilled Water to the Specimen
12/23/04 8:19 1.0 1067 =0:5307 ~ ;
12/23/04 9:19 1.0 1t27 0.5307
Expansion Index (EI meas) _ ((Final Rdg - Initial Rdg) / Initial Thick.) x 1000 30.4
Expansion Index ( EI )So = EI meas -(50 -S meas)x((65+EI meas) /(220-S meas)) $2
aev. oeoa
~
'
'
'
, '
~
'
1
1
,
1
t
'
'
'
,
,
'
1
'
~
Leighton and Associafes, Inc.
EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
ASTM D 4829
Project Name: HARVESTON / ASHVILLE Tested By: RGO
Project No. : 110231-055 Checked 8y: PRC
Boring No.: Depth (ft.)
Sample No. : E-28 Location: LOT 19
Sample Description: SC-SM, BROWN CLAYEY SILTY SAND
Dry Wt. of Soii + Cont. (gm.) ' 3D33:D, ~
Wt. of Container No. (gm.) y y
0.0
Dry Wt. of Soil (gm.) 3033.0
Weight Soil Retained on fl4 Sieve 2q:q:
Percent Passing # 4 gg,p
Date: 12/22/04
Date: 12/23/04
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test
S ecimen Diameter in. 4.01 4.01
S ecimen Hei ht in. 1.0000 1 0315
Wt. Com . Soif + Mold m. 572.1 ,~~6~~ 41
. ,, . ,
,
=~...
,
Wt. af Mold ( m. 188.8 .
.
.
1gg.g
S ecific Gravi Assumed 2.70 2.70
Container No. ! .E-15 , . E=15':
Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. m. 313.2 629.4
D Wt. af Soil + Cont. m. 287.2 350.0
Wt. of Container ( m. 73.2 188.8
Moisture Content (% 9.5 25.9
Wet Densi 115.6 132.7
D Densit c 105.6 105.5
Void Ratio 0.597 0.647
Total Porosi 0.374 0.393
Pore Voiume cc 77.3 83.9
De ree of Saturation °/a S meas 43.0 100.0
SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate < 0.0002 in./h.
Date Time Pressure
(psi) Elapsed Time
(min.) Dial Readings
(in.)
12/22/04 :1di09` ~ 1.0 0 0.5000
12/22/04 14:19 1.0 10 I °,0.50~2, :'
Add Distil~ed Water to the Specimen
12/23/04 $i17 1.0 1078 0.53Y5.
12/23/04 9:17 1.0 1138 0.5315
Expansion Index (EI meas) _ ((Final Rdg - Initiai Rdg) / Initial Thick.) x 1000 31.3
Expansion Index ( EI )~ = EI meas -(50 -S meas)x((65+EI meas) /(220-S meas)) 27
Rev.O&09
~
'
I '
,
'
,
'
,
'
t
'
'
,
'
,
'
1
'
'
'
~
~ Leighlon and Associates, Inc,
EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
ASTM D 4829
Project Name: HARVESTON / ASHVILLE Tested By: RGO Date: 12/22/04
Project No. : 110231-055 Checked By: PRC Date: 12/23/04
Boring No.: Depth (ft.)
Sample No. : E-27 Location: LOT 20
Sample Description: SC-SM, BROWN CLAYEY SILTY SAND
Dry Wt, of Soil + Cont. (gm.) ' 2400.0;.,;
Wt. of Container No. (gm.) 0.0
Dry Wt. af Soil (gm.) 2000.0
Weight Soil Retained on #4 Sieve ~0~0`'. '
Percent Passing # 4 100.0
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test
S ecimen Diameter (in. 4.01 4.01
S ecimen Hei ht in. 1.0000 1 0366
Wt. Com . Soil + Mold m. 587.2 ' ` ' „ 641:8' , . , ;
Wt. of Motd m. 190.3 190.3
S ecific Gravi Assumed 2.7p 2.7p
Container No. P~ E ,1k ~ ~r~iy'
Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. m. 312.9 gq~.g
D Wt. of Soil + Cont. m. 286.9 362.5
Wt. of Container m. 12.9 190.3
Moisture Content % 9.5 24.6
Wel Densi 119.7 136.0
D Densi c 109.3 109.2
Void Ratio 0.542 0.598
Total Porosi 0.357 0.374
Pore Volume cc 72.7 80.3
De ree of Saturation % S meas 47.3 100.0
SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate < 0.0002 in./h.
Date Time Pressure
(psi) Elapsed Time
(min.) Dial Readings
(in.)
12/22/04 ,;i359.~. :, 1.0 0 0.5000
12122/04 14:09 1.0 10 ~p°.5006
Add Distilled Water to the Specimen
12/23/04 '8:1,8
Y 1.0 1087 0.53€~i;
12/23/04 9:16 1.0 1147 0.5366
Expansion Index (EI meas) _ ((Final Rdg - Initial Rdg) / Initial Thick.) x 1000 36.0
Expansion Index ( EI )so = EI meas -(50 -S meas)x((65+EI meas) /(220-5 meas)) 34
Ra~ oaoa
~~
,
~i~
'
'
'
t
'
'
,
~
,
'
'
,
'
'
'
'
~
~
Leighfon and Associafes, I~c.
EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
ASTM D 4829
Project Name: HARVESTON / ASHVILLE Tested By: RGO Date: 12/20/04
Project No. : 110231-055 Checked By: PRC Date: 12/23/04
Boring No.: Depth (ft.)
Sample No. : E-26 Location: LOT 21
Sample Description: SC-SM, BROWN S~LTY CLAYEY SAND
Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont (gm.) ` 2835.0 '
Wt. of Container No. (gm.) 0.0
Dry Wt. of Soil (gm.) 2835.0
Weight Soil Retained on #4 Sieve ~ .; °28.p r~•'
Percent Passing # 4 99A
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test
S ecimen Diameter in. 4.01 4.01
S ecimen Hei ht in. 1.0000 1.0231
Wt. Com . Soil + Mald m. 616.0 8~}b:3-~~ ' ;~...
Wt. of Mold m. 1902 190.2
S ecific Gravi Assumed) 2.70 2.70
Container No. -:; E 20.s E 2'p`.%
Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. m. 312.9 648.3
D Wt. of Soil + Cont. m. 286.9 388.9
Wt. of Container ( m. 12.9 1902
Moisture Content % 9.5 17.8
Wet Densit c 128.4 138.0
D Densi c 117.3 117.1
Void Ratio 0.437 0.470
Total Porosi 0.304 0.320
Pore Volume cc 63.0 67.8
De ree of Saturation % S meas 58.7 100.0
SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate < 0.0002 in./h.
Date Time Pressure
(psi) Elapsed Time
(min.) Dial Readings
(in.)
12/20/04 „f4:30. ` 1.0 0 1.0000
12/20/04 14:40 1.0 10 Ot4995', '
Add Distilled Water to the Specimen
12/21/04 , ~7.30
. 1.0 1010 ~OS523'1;
: ...
. .
12/21/04 8:30 1.0 7070 _
0.5231
Expansion Index (EI meas) _ ((Final Rdg - Initial Rdg) / Inilial Thick.) x 1000 23.6
Expansion Index ( EI )50 = EI meas -(50 -S meas)x((65+EI meas) !(220-S meas)) 2$
Rev.O&OC
~1
~ Leighfon antl Associates, Inc,
EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
ASTM D 4829
Project Name: HARVESTON / ASHVILLE Tested By: RGO Date: 12/22/04
Project No. : 110231-055 Checked By: PRC Date: 12/23/04
Boring No.: Depth (ftJ
Sample No. : E-25 Location: LOT 22
Sample Description: SC-SM, BROWN CLAYEY SILTY SAND
Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (gmJ •3003;0 I
Wt. of Container No. (gm.) 0.0
Dry Wt. of Sail (gm.) 3003.0
Weight Soil Retained on #4 Sieve °~13:D ,: ~~
Percent Passing # 4 99.6
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test
S ecimen Diamefer in.) 4.01 4.01
S ecimen Hei ht in. 1.0000 1.0384
Wt. Com . Soii + Mold m. 606.4 8,541
Wt. of Mold ( m.) 198.9 198.9
S ecific Gravi Assumed 2.70 2.70
Container No. ~•13 E-13`
Wet Wt. of Sail + Cont. m. 312.8 654.1
D Wt. of Soil + Cont. m. 286.8 372.1
Wt. of Container ( mJ 12.8 198.9
Moisture Cantent % 9.5 22.3
Wet Densit c 122.9 137.1
D Densi c 112.3 112.1
Void Ratio 0.502 0.559
ToTal Porosi 0.334 0.359
Pore Volume cc 692 77.1
De ree of Saturation % S meas 51.1 100.0
SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate < 0.0002 in.lh.
Date Time Pressure
(psi) Elapsed Time
(min.) Dial Readings
(in.)
12/22/04 ,: 13:A9 .' 1.0 0 0.5000
12/22/04 13:59 1.0 70 °Oi50(l~.
Add Distilled Water to the Specimen
12/23/04 8:15 1.0 1096 U:5384 ,
12/23/04 9:15 1.0 1156 0.5384
Expansion Index (EI meas) _ ((Final Rdg - Initial Rdg) / Initial Thick.) x 1000 38.3
Expansion Index ( EI )so = EI meas -(50 -S meas)x((65+EI meas) /(220-S meas)) $J
Rev.O&04
~~
i~
, '
'
I '
'
,
'
'
'
,
,
,
'
,
'
1
'
,
'
~
Leighfon and Associates, Inc,
EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
ASTM D 4629
Project Name: HARVESTON / ASHVILLE Tested By: RGO Date: 12/22/04
Project No. : 110231-055 Checked By: PRC Date: 12/23/04
Boring No.: Depth (ft.)
Sample No. : E-24 Location: LOT 23
Sample Description: SC-SM, BROWN CLAYEY SILTY SAND
Dry Wt. of Soii + Cont. (gm.) 2486 0'.
Wt. of Container No. (gm.) 0.0
Dry Wt. of Soil (gm.) 2488.0
Weight Soii Retained on #4 Sieve 135:0 ^
Percent Passing # 4 94.6
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test
S ecimen Diameter in. 4.01 4.01
S ecimen Hei ht in. 1.0000 1.0329
Wt. Cam . Soil + Mold m. 617.6 854:2;
Wt. of Mold m. 203.1 203.1
S ecific Gravi Assumed 2.70 2.70
Container No. '- ~E-12" : E=12: ;
Wet Wt: of Soil + Cont. m. 312.9 6542
D Wt. of Soil + Cont. m. 286.9 378.5
Wt. of Container m. 12.9 203.1
Moisture Content % 9.5 192
Wet Densit 125.0 135.9
D Densit c 114.2 114.0
Void Ratio 0.476 0.525
Total Porosi 0.323 0.344
Pore Volume cc 66.8 73.6
De ree of Saturation % S meas 53.8 98.6
SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate < 0.0002 in./h.
Date Time Pressure
(psi) Elapsed Time
(min.) Dial Readings
(in.)
12/22/04 ;13:24. 1.0 0 0.5000
12/22l04 13:30 1.0 10 • ;0:4898
Add Distilled Water to the Specimen
12/23/04 ' "°813 ~
.. :::_- 1.0 1123 0.5326, ~
. _~v
12/23/04 9:13 1.0 1783 0.5329
Expansion Index (EI meas) _ ((Final Rdg - Initial Rdg) / Initial Thick.) x 1000 33. ~
Expansion Index ( EI )~ = EI meas -(50 -S meas)x((65+EI meas) /(220-S meas)) 35
Rev.O&W
~
~ Leighton and Associates, Inc,
Projed Name:
Project No. :
Boring No.:
Sample No. :
Sample Description:
EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
ASTM D 4829
HARVESTON / ASHVILLE Tested By: RGO
110231-055 Checked By: PRC
Depth (ft.)
F_93 Location: LOT 24
BROWN SILTY
Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (gm.) I 2477T:0 ,: ,
Wt. of Container No. (gm.) 0.0
Dry Wt. of Soil (gm.) 2477.0
Weight Soil Retained on #4 Sieve 25?:0 -
Percent Passing # 4 89.8
Date: 12l22/04
Date: 12/23/04
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test
S ecimen Diameter in. 4.01 4.01
S ecimen Hei ht in. 1.0000 1.0170
Wt. Com . Soil + Mold m.
582.4 __ _ _
61~6;5.
Wt. of Mold m. 181.3 181.3
S ecific Gravi Assumed 2.70 2.70
Container No. E-11 -E-1,• ; ~
Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. m. 372.9 616.5
D Wt. of Soil + Cont. m. 286.9 366.3
Wt. of Container m.) 12.9 181.3
Moisture Content % 9.5 18.8
Wet Densi c 121.0 131.1
D Densi c 110.5 110.4
Void Ratio 0.526 0.552
Total Porosi 0.345 0.356
Pore Volume cc 71.3 74.8
De ree of Saturation % 5 meas 46.8 92.1
SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate < 0.0002 in./h.
Date Time Pressure
(psi) Elapsed Time
(min.) Dial Readings
(in.)
12/22/04 _____ _
,1"0:1 ~a r.: ;•
1.0
0
0.5000
12/22/04 1025 1.0 10 0:4999 'I
Add Distilled Water to the Specimen
12/23/04 '$:.1A LO 1306 0.51.7p
12/23/04 9:11 1.0 1366 0.5170
Expansion Index (EI meas) _ ((Final Rdg - Initial Rdg) / Initial Thick.) x 1000 17.1
Expansion Index ( EI )~ = EI meas -(50 -S meas)x((65+EI meas) /(220-S meas)) ~ 7
Rev.OB-OC
OO
~ Leighfon and Associates, Inc.
Project Name:
Project No. :
Boring No.:
Sample No. :
Sample Description:
EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
ASTM D 4829
HARVESTON / ASHVILLE Tested By: RGO Date: 12/20/04
110231-0555 Checked By: PRC Date: 12/23/04
Depth (ft.)
E-22 Location: LOT 25
BROWN SILTY CLAYEY SAND
Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (gm.) 282D.0~ t
Wt. of Container No. (gm.) 0.0
Dry Wt. of Soil (gm.) 2820.0
Weight Soil Retained on #4 Sieve @a1i0. ':
Percent Passing # 4 97.8
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test
S ecimen Diameter in. 4.01 4.01
S ecimen Hei ht in. 1.0000 1.0375
Wt. Com . Soil + Mold m.
579.7 _ _ ._
„~639:Qx
Wt. of Mo~d m. 178.4 178.4
S ecific Gravi Assumed 2.70 2.70
Container No. e ~:,1,9. .. ' E:~19
Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. m. 313.2 634.0
D Wt. of Soil + Cant. m. 2872 366.5
Wt. of Container m. 13.2 178.4 ~
Moisture Content % 9.5 24.3
Wet Densit c 121.1 137.3
D Densit c 110.5 110.4
Void Ratio 0.525 0.582
Total Porosi 0.344 0.368
Pore Volume cc 71.3 79.0
De ree of Saturation % S meas 48.9 100.0
SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate ~ 0.0002 in./h.
Date Time Pressure
(psi) Elapsed Time
(min.) Dial Readings
(in.)
12/20/04 1,4,1,4 ' 1.0 0 1.0000
12/20/04 14:24 1.0 10 0:500,1.'
_, _
Add Distilled Water to the Specimen
12/21/04 ':73p , - 1.0 1026 0:5375
12/21/04 830 1.0 1086 0.5375
Expansion Index (EI meas) _ ((Final Rdg - Initial Rdg) / Initial Thick.) x 1000 37.4
Expansion Index ( EI )50 = EI meas -(50 -S meas)x((65+EI meas) /(220-S meas)) $7
ftev.0&04
~~
~ Leigh(on and Associates, Inc,
EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
ASTM D 4829
Project Name: HARVESTON / ASHVILLE Tested By: RGO Date: 12/22/04
Project No. : 110231-055 Checked By: PRC Date: 12/23/04
Boring No.: Depth (ft.)
Sample No. : E-21 Location: LOT 26
Sample Description: SM, BROWN SILTY SAND
Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (gm.) 2864i0 :
Wt. of Container No. (gm.) 0.0
Dry Wt. of Soil (gm.) 2864.0
Weight Soil Retained on #4 Sieve 80A
Percent Passing # 4 97.2
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test
S ecimen Diameter in.) 4.01 4.01
S ecimen Hei ht in. 1.0000 1.0091
Wt. Com . Soil + Mold m. 600.4 :.8`19:6
~ v
Wt. of Mold m. 202.4 202.4
S ecific Gravi Assumed 2.70 2.70
Container No. '. E;=1.0, E-10' .
Wet Wt. of Soil + Conl. m. 312.8 619.6
D Wt. of Soil + Cont. m. 278.8 352.8 ~
Wt. of Container m. 12.8 202.4
Moisture Content (% 12.8 18.2
Wet Densi 120.1 125.7
D Densit c 106.4 106.3
Void Ratio 0.584 0.598
Total Porosi 0.369 0.374
Pore Volume cc 76.3 782
De ree of Saturation % S meas 59.2 82.3
SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate < 0.0002 in.lh.
Date 7ime Pressure
(psi) Elapsed Time
(min.) Dial Readings
(in.)
12/22/04 ~211~ ~
~ 1.0 0 0.5000
12/22/04 1221 1.0 10 0:498A'.
Add Distilled Water to the Specimen
12/23/04 •;:8:08 1.0 1188 0.5091•
12/23/04 9:09 1.0 1248 0.5091
Expansion Index (EI meas) _ ((Final Rdg - Initial Rdg) / Inilial Thick.) x 1000 '~ ~.]
Expansion Index ( EI )SO = EI meas -(50 -S meas)x((65+EI meas) /(220-S meas)) 15
Rev.08-04
L~
,
,
,
'
~
,
1
'
1
'
'
,
,
1
,
,
'.
,
'
~ Leighfon and Associafes, Inc.
EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
ASTM D 4829
ProjectName: HARVESTONlASHVILIE TestedBy:RGO Date:12/22/04
Project No. : 110231-055 Checked By: PRC Date: 12/23/04
Boring No.: Depth (ft.)
Sample No. : E-20 Location: LOT 27
Sample Description: SC-SM, BROWN CLAYEY SILTY SAND
Dry Wt, of Soil + Cont. (gm.) 3246_0 ''
Wt. of Container No. (gm.) 0.0
Dry Wt. of Soil (gm.) 3246.0
Weight Soil Retained on #4 Sieve 29A k
Percent Passing # 4 99.1
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test
S ecimen Diameter in.). 4.01 4.01
S ecimen Hei ht in. 1.0000 1.0374
Wt. Com . Soil + Mold m. 575.9 690,4: ,
~
Wt. of Mold m. 202.6 202.6
S ecific Gravi Assumed 2.70 2.70
Container No. - yE=17 ~ - 'E_'17 ! ~
Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. m. 312.8 630.4
D Wt. of Soil + Cont. m. 286.8 340.9
Wt. of Container m. 12.8 202.6
Moisture Content % 9.5 25.5
Wet Densi 112.6 128.9
D Densi 102.8 102.7
Void Ratio 0.639 0.701
Total Porosity 0.390 0.412
Pore Volume cc 80.7 58.5
De ree of Saturation % S meas 40.1 98.2
SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate < 0.0002 in.lh.
Date Time Pressure
(psi) Elapsed Time
(min.) Dial Readings
(in.)
12/22/04 ~ 1538
. ..
~ ....- 1.0 0 0.5000
12/22/04 15:46 1.0 10 , .: .0.¢995~ '
Add Distilled Water to the Specimen
'12/23/04 , .8 07,
.• . .:~ 1.0 981 0:5374 `
._. . '
12/23l04 9:07 1.0 1041 0.5374
Expansion Index (EI meas) _ ((Final Rdg - Initial Rdg) / Initial Thick.) x 1000 37.9
Expansion Index ( EI )~ = EI meas -(50 -S meas)x((65+E1 meas) /(220-S meas)) $2
Rev.OB04
~~
~ Leighton and Associates, Inc.
EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
ASTM D 4829
Project Name: HARVESTON /ASHVILLE Tested By: RGO Date: 12/22/04
Project No. : 110231-055 Checked By: PRC Date: 12/23/04
Boring No.: Depth (ft.)
Sample No. : E-19 Location: LOT 28
Sample Description: SC-SM, BROWN CLAYEY SILTY SAND
Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (gm.) .. _._
3337 0]
Wt. of Container No. (gm.) 0.0
Dry Wt. of Soil (gm.) 3337.0
Weight Soil Retained on #4 Sieve Q.O-
Percent Passing # 4 100.0
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test
S ecimen Diameter in. 4.01 4.01
S ecimen Hei ht in. 1.0000 1.0635
Wt. Com . Soii + ~qold m. 557.0 619.5
Wt. of Mold m. 181.6 181.6
S ecific Gravi Assumed 2.70 2.70
Container No. E-9 ~-9 -
Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. m. 312.9 619.5
D Wt. of Soil + Cont. m. 286.9 342.8
Wt. of Container m. 12.9 181.6
Moisture Content % 9.5 27.7
Wet Densit ( c 1132 131.9
D Densit c 103.4 103.3
Void Ratio 0.630 0.734
Total Porosi 0.387 0.423
Pore Volume cc 80.0 93.2
De ree of Saturation % S meas 40.7 100.0
SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate < 0.0002 in.lh.
Date Time Pressure
(psi) Elapsed Time
(min.) Dial Readings
(in.)
12/22/04 15 ;~ 0=- 1.0 0 0.5000
12/22/04 15:20 1.0 10 •Oi500~ `
Add Distilled Water to the Specimen
12/23/04 'i8;06• 1.0 1006 0:5635'
12/23/04 9:06 1.0 1066 0.5635
Expansion Index (EI meas) _ ((Final Rdg - initial Rdg) / Initial Thick.) x 1000 62,$
Expansion Index ( EI )50 = EI meas -(50 -S meas)x((65+EI meas) /(220-S meas)) 56
Rev.08~04
H '
'
'
,
'
'
'
~
,
'
,
' ~i
,
r
,
'
1
,
r
'
, Leighton and Associates, Inc,
EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
ASTM D 4829
Project Name: HARVESTON / ASHVILLE Tested By: RGO Date: 12/20/04
Project No. : 110231-055 Checked By: PRC Date: 12/23/04
Boring No.: Depth (ft.)
Sample No. : E-18 Location: LOT 29
Sample Description: SC-SM, BROWN CLAYEY SILTY SAND
Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont (gm.) ' 2000:0 !
Wt. of Container No. (gm.) 0.0
Dry Wt. of Soil (gm.) 2000.0
Weight Soil Retained on #4 Sieve ? ~,UiD I :
Percent Passing # 4 100A
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test
S ecimen Diameter in. 4.01 4.01
S ecimen Hei ht in. 1.0000 1.0634
Wt. Com . Soil + Mold m. 565.0 .°$3q;gi
Wt. of Mold m. 190.4 190.4
S ecific Gravi Assumed) 2.70 2.70
ContainerNo. . E-2`9 E21r
Wet Wt. of Sail + Cont. m. 312.8 630.9
D Wt. of Soil + Cont. m. 286.8 342.1
Wt. of Container m.) 12.8 190.4
Moisture Content % 9.5 28.8
Wet Densi c 113.0 132.7
D Densi ( 103.2 103.1
Void Ratio 0.634 0.737
Total Porosi 0.388 0.424
Pore Volume cc 80.3 93.4
De ree of Saturation % S meas 40.5 100.0
SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate < 0.0002 in./h.
Date Time Pressure
(psi) Elapsed Time
(min.) Dial Readings
(in.)
12/20l04 :9;45 1.0 0 0.5000
12/20/04 9:55 1.0 10 0:4994'•
Add Distilled Water to the Specimen
12/21/04 7°36. 1.0 1301 0,5834
12/21/04 8:36 1.0 1361 0.5634
Expansion Index (EI meas) _ ((Final Rdg - Initial Rdg) / Initial Thick.) x 1000 st}.Q
Expansion index ( EI )~ = EI meas -(50 -S meas)x((65+EI meas) /(220-S meas)) 57
Rev.O&04
~ ~/)
W~
'
'
1
'
,
'
,
'
1
~
'
'
'
,
,
'
,
,
'
~ Leighton and Associates, Inc.
Project Name:
Project No. :
Boring No.:
Sample No. :
Sample Description:
HARVESTON/ASHVI
110231-055
E-17
BROWN CLAYEY SILTY
Dry Wl. of Soil + Cont (gm.) .3071.0
Wt. of Container No. (gm.) 0.0
Dry Wt. of Soil (gm.) 3071.0
Weight Soii Retained on #4 Sieve 36:q~ !~
Percent Passing # 4 98.8
EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
ASTM D 4829
Tested By: JMD
Checked By: PRC
Depth (R.)
Location: LOT 30
Date: 12/20/04
Date: 12/23/04
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test
S ecimen Diameter in. 4.01 4.01
S ecimen Hei ht in. 1.0000 1.0529
Wt. Com . Sail + Mold m. 5922 849.1
Wt. of Mold m. 203.1 203.1
S ecific Gravi Assumed 2 70 2.70
ContainerNo. i E 18,:-, u. ~E~iB'_ ,
Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. m. 312.9 649.1
D Wt. of Soil + Cont. m. 286.9 355.3
Wt. of Container ( m. 12.9 203.1
Moisture Content % 9.5 25.5
Wet Densit c 117.4 134.4
D Densit c 107.2 107.0
Void Ratio 0.573 0.656
Total Porosi 0.364 0.396
Pore Volume cc 75.4 86.3
De ree of Saturation % S meas 44.8 100.0
SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distiiled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate < 0.0002 in./h.
Date Time Pressure
(psi) Elapsed Time
(min.) Dial Readings
(in.)
12/20/04 +'9:05 ! i
.::.~
.:.- 1.0 0 0.5000
12/20/04 9:15 1.0 10 0:4998- , .
Add Distilled Water to the Specimen
12/21/04 ;7.33 1.0 1338 ~ O~S5~9 ~
12/21/04 8:33 1.0 1398 0.5529
Expansion Index (EI meas) _ ((Final Rdg - Initial Rdg) / Initial Thick.) x 1000 53.1
Expansion Index ( EI )5o = EI meas -(50 -S meas)x((65+EI meas) /(220-S meas)) $Q
Rev.O&04
~
/ Leighton and Associates, Inc.
EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS
ASTM D 4829
Project Name: HARVESTON /ASHVILLE Tested By: RGO Date: 12/20/04
Project No. : 110231-055 Checked By: PRC Date: 12/23/04
Boring No.: Depth (ft.)
Sample No. : E-16 Location: LOT 31
Sample Description: SC-SM, BROWN CLAYEY SILTY SAND
Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (gm.) ~000:0"''. '
Wt. of Container No. (gm.) 0.0
Dry Wl. of Soil (gm.) 2000.0
Weight Soil Retained on #4 Sieve "0 d`
Percent Passing # 4 700.0
MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test
S ecimen Diameter in. 4.01 4.01
S ecimen Hei ht in. 1.0000 1.0503
Wt. Com . Soil + Mold m.
583A ..
.~ ;,-:' ;'842?9 _...~;
Wt. of Mold ( m. 202.0 202.0
S ecific Gravi (ASSUmed 2.70 2.70
ContainerNo. '£tE-'~7= ,~ ' E-1~7~
Wel Wl. of Soil + Cont. m. 313.2 642.9
D Wt.of Soil + Cont. m. 2872 348.3
1Nt. of Container m. 132 202.0
Moisture Content % 9.5 26.6
Wet Densit c 115.0 132.8
D Densit 705.1 104.9
Void Ratio 0.605 0.685
Total Porosi 0.377 0.407
Pore Volume cc 78.0 88.4
De ree of Saturation % S meas 42.4 100.0
SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate < 0.0002 in./h.
Date Time Pressure
(psi) Elapsed Time
(min.) Dial Readings
(in.)
12/20/04 , y8 48 ,,~
a 1.0 0 0.5000
12/20/04 8:58 1.0 10 0,50~,3.. ~ '
Add Distilled Water to the Specimen
12/21/04 7.28 1.0 1350 '0:5503;
12/21/04 8:28 1.0 1410 0.5503
Expansion Index (EI meas) _ ((Final Rdg - Initial Rdg) / Initial Thick.) x 1000 49.0
Expansion Index ( EI )50 = EI meas -(50 -S meas)x((65+EI meas) /(220-S meas)) 44
aev. osoa
W~