Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutT15N R2W SEC 36 E2 Chugiak Recreation Center / unicipalitYof An r e April 5, 1983 h Expires 12-31-83 ~ilIiam Smitht Senior Vice President Skillin~, ~ard~ Re,ers, Ba~ksh±re~ Inc. 430 ~est 7t~ Avenue, Suite 210 Anchorage, Alaska ~9501 Subject: ~i Ea~e R~er/Chu~iak Recreation Center . (T15~ R2~ Section 36 ~½) POUCH 6-650 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99502-0650 (907) 264-4111 Orig: "~e'File: APf~ 0 ? ~)83 The plans submitted to this department have been approved. This letter will act as your permit and the provision of the permit will be the specifications you submitted on March 25, 1983o Please submit the as-builds when the project has been completed to this office. If there are any further questions, at 264-4720~ ~rely~~ Robert Co Pratt, R.S. Associate Environmental Specialist please call this office RCP/ljw GALEN GRANT & ASSOCp-XES 625 West 5th Avenue, Suite~ )' ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99501' (907) 279-9606 To WE ARE SENDING YOU [] Attached [] Under separate cover via the following items: [] Shop drawings [] Prints [] Plans [] Samples [] Specifications [] Copy of letter [] Change order COPIES DATE NO. DESCRIPTION (w_ / THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: [] For bpproval ,~For your use ~As requested [] For review and comment [] FOR BIDS DUE_ [] Approved as submitted [] Approved as noted [] Returned for corrections 19 [] Resubmit copies for approval [] Submit copies for distribution [] Return__corrected prints [] PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US COPY TO. POUCH 6-650 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99502-0650 {907) 264-41 ~ I ?ON¥ KNOWLES MA YOI{ OEPARTM[!NTOE HEAl.TH AND ENVIRONMENFALPROTECTION Perm±t #830202 April 5, 1983 gxpires/Z~Z-83 /I Skilling, Ward, Rogers, Backshire~ Itc. ,/~ t ~ 430 west 7th Avenue, Suite 210 : ' ~ ' / Anchorage, Alaska 99501 .~ Subject: Eagle River/Chugiak Recreation Center (T15N R2W Section 36 E½) The plans submitted to this department have been approved. This letter will act as your permit and the provision of the permit will be the specifications you submitted on March 25, 1983. Please submit the as-builds to this office. If there are any further questions, at 264-4720. Sincerely, Robert C. Pratt, R.S. Associate Environmental specialist RCP/ljw when the project has been completed pleas%e c~%~his ~ice I SKILLING WARD ROGERS BARKSHIRE INC. CONSULTING STRUCTURAL AND CIVIL ENGINI!ERS · 430 W. 7th AVE., SUITE 210, ANCHORAGE, AK 99501 · (907) 276-3633 ARTHUR] BARKSHIRE, PRESIDENT WILLIAMM SMITH, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT PATRICK W. MOORE, VICE PRESIDENT March 25, 1983 Municipality of Anchorage Health and Environmental Protection Department 825 L Street Anchorag% Alaska 99501 Attn: Mr. Bob Pratt Re: Eagle River/Chugiak Recreation Center Septic System Gentlemen: During grading operations on the above referenced project in the the vicinity of the proposed drain field for the septic system, conditions have been encountered which require redesign of the drain field. Our original design, submitted to your office on February 27 19837 for your review, followed by your approval on February 1% 1983, has been modified and are resubmitted herewith for your approval. Due to a higher water table than was anticipated~ we have redesigned the drain field based on a bed system7 rather than the deep trench system which was originally designed~ as we had discussed by telephone last Wednesday. The original set of calculations, supplemented with the additional design calculations7 are attached herewith. Also included are revised sketches FS-2, FS-3 and FS-¢ which show the necessary revisions to the contract documents for accomodating this proposed redesign. An early reply to our proposed redesign would be appreciated. Sincerely, Senior Vice-President dll Attachments ANCHORAGE SEATTLE SKILLING, HELLE, CHRISTtANSEN, RC~BERTSON, BARKSHIRE, INC, PROJECT ANCHORAGE, NEW YORK. SEATi LE LOCATION DES GN SHEET ' I I ~ o~oO ALLOWABLE RAT~ Of SEWAGE APPLICATION 6ALI~O~IS PER SOIJARE FOOT PER BAY I SK[LLING, HELLE, CHRISTIANSEN, ROBERTSON, BARKSH)RE, INC. _DESIGN SHEET LOCATION ~---~L '~ ARCHITECT ...... '~ - ~-"--' ~ ~ ' · ~ - I, SKILLING HELLE, CHRISTIANSEN, ROB~EHTSON, BARKSHIRE, INC. -= c°~, 0 ,/5 ~ © / / .I I~AC~FI L-C ~O~TH I L ~ '~/~/,'L;. I/ PO L.,,.; H 6-650 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99502-0650 (907) 264-4111 TON~ KNOWLES, MA YOR DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND ENVIRONh.4ENTAL PROTECTION February 14, 1983 William M. Smith Skilling, Helle, Christiansen, Robertson, 430 West 7th Avenue Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Barkshire, Inc. Subject: Eagle River/Chugiak Recreation Center This department has reviewed and approved the plans and specifications submitted for the subject project. Prior to contruction of this project, a permit will need to be issued by this depar~nent. The specifications for the permit will be that of the information you have submitted to this department. I~ there are any further questions, please call this office at 264-4720. Sincerely, Robert C. Pratt, R.S. Acting Program Manager RCP/ljw SOUTHCENTRAL REGIONAL OFFICE August 9, 1982 [] William M. Smith Skilling, Helle, Christiansen, Robertson, Barkshire, Inc. 430 West Seventh Avenue Anchorage, Alaska 99501 SECOND FL OOR ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99501 (907) 274-2533 P.O BOX 515 KODIAK, ALASKA 99615 (907) 486-3350 P.O. BOX 1207 SOLDQTNA; ALASKA 99669 (907) 262-52 I0 P 0 BOX 17O9 VALDEZ, ALASKA 99686 (907) 835 4698 P.O. BOX 1064 WASILLA, ALASKA 99687 (907) 37~5038 SUBJECT: Eagle River/Chugiak Recreation Center (8321-FA-048) & (8321-DA-023) Dear Mr. Smith: We have reviewed the plans and specifications for the subject project. The project is hereby approved for construction for the items with which this Department is concerned. This letter constitutes the permit required by A.S. 46.03.720(a) for approval of sewerage systems. Enclosed with this letter'is a "Certificate To Construct" for the drinking water system. ~he "Approval to Operate" section of the certificate must be completed by a representative of this Department prior to placing the system in operation. Sincerely, Environmental Engineer BEE/msm Enclosure 5621 Arctic Blvd., Suile B . I SHANNON & WILSON, INC. Geolechnical Consultants Anchorage, Alaska 99502 Telephone 1907) 279-0632 May 24, ]982 A-100 Galen Grant & Associates 625 West 5th Avenue Anchorage, Alaska 99501 ATTN: Mr. Art Kjos EAGLE RIVER/CHUGIAK RECREATION CENTER, PERMEABILITY OF OUTWASH MATERIAL FOR DRAIN FIELD DESIGN Gentlemen: This letter is in response to a request from Bill Smith of SHCR Barkshire for permeability data to assist him in the design of a drainfield for the above project. We understand that a drainfield is to be placed near or slightly northwest of boring B-6, shown on Figure I in our report. Boring B-6 encountered 2.5 feet of near surface organic material overlying relatively permeable well-graded outwash gravelly sands. The drainfield will likely be placed in these outwash materials. Based on the attached calculation, we estimate that the coefficient of permeability of the outwash material is about 0.6 x 10-2 centimeters per second. This corre- sponds to an average percolation rate of about 0.26 gallons per square foot per minute. However, before using these values, we recon~end that you check with the State Department of Social and Health Services as they often restrict the maximum percolation rate to avoid polution of the groundwater. If you have any questions or require further data, please call us. Sincerely, SHANNON & WILSON, INC. Fred R. Brown Manager FRB:ga Enclosure: Drainfield Calculations cc: SHCRB, Bill Smith " -2. ~ t SKILLING, HELLE, CHRISTIANSEN, RO.~ERTSON, BARKSHIRE, INC. ANCHORAGE, NEW YORK, 7OO N011¥)11~I¥ ~9¥~]S ~0 ~1¥~t ]lilY,OilY E SKILl lNG, HELLE, ClffR~STIANSEN, R©~ERTSON, BARKSHIRE, INC. PROJECT SEARLE LOCATION .DESIGN, SHEET / S~ILL~NG WARD ROGERS BARKSHIRE INC. 430 WEST SEVENTH AVENUE, SUITE 210 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99501 907~276-3633 Municipality of Anchorage Health & Environmental Protection Department 825 L Street, Anchorage, Alaska Feb rua r_y~2, 1983 Mr. Bob Pratt R£ Eaqle River/Chuqiak Recreation Center GENTLEMEN: WE ARE SENDING YOU I~ Attached [] Under separate cover via [] Shop drawings [] Prints [] Plans [Z] Copy of letter [] Change order E] [] Samples the following items: [] Specifications COPIES DATE NO DESCR!PTION 1 Plans 1 Soils Report 1 Copy Letter from D.E.C. 1 Letter from Shannon & Wilson - Permeability of Soil 1 Septic Tank & Drainfield Calculations THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: [] For approval (5] For your use [] As requested [~ For review and comment [] Prints returned after loan to us REMARKS ~'7~- ~'-¢'~ [] No exceptions taken [] Make corrections noted [] Revise and resubmit [] Resubmit__copies [] Rejected-see remarks [] Return corrected prints COPY TO Geotechnical Report Proposed Ice Arena and Road Eagle River/Chugiak Recreation Center Eagle River, Alaska Galen Grant and Associates 625 West 5th Avenue Anchorage, Alaska May 1982 SHANNON & WILSON, ~NC. A-lO0 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 2. SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3. SUBSURFACE EXPLORATIONS 4. LABORATORY TESTING 5. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 5.1 Subsurface Soils 5.2 Groundwater 6. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE ICE ARENA 6.1 Allowable Bearing Pressures 6.2 Estimated Settlements 6.3 Floor Slab Support 6.4 Skating Surface 6.5 Lateral Earth Pressures 6.6 Backfill Materials and Compaction 6.7 Excavation Slope 7. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ENTRY ROAD AND PARKING AREA 7.1 Road 7.2 Parking 8. LIMITATIONS Page 1 2 3 5 7 7 8 9 9 9 lO 11 12 13 13 15 15 16 17 Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Appendix A Appendix B LIST OF FIGURES Site Plan Profile A'-A' Profile B-B' Road and Parking Log Detail APPENDICES Boring Logs Laboratory Testing 1. INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of the field explorations and geo- technical engineering studies for a proposed ice arena and entry road to be located in the center of the undeveloped Eagle River/Chugiak Recrea- tion Center site near Eagle River, Alaska. The purpose of the fiel~ explorations was to determine the soil and groundwater conditions in the proposed areas being developed. To accomplish this, nine borings were drilled at the site, five near the proposed road alignment and parking lot, and four in the planned building area. Laboratory tests were performed on selected samples to further define the engineering charac- teristics of the subsurface soils. Engineering studies were then performed to develop criteria for the design of the building foundations and subgrade support of the roadway and parking lot. Included in this report are: subsurface conditions; studies. A description of the site and project; a description of the exploration procedures; interpretation of the subsurface and conclusions and recommendations from our engineering This study was conducted in accordance with our proposal letter dated April 17, 1982. Verbal authorization to proceed with this work was given on April 12, 1982, during a meeting in your office on April 12, 1982. The agreement letter signed by Mr. Art Kjos of Galen Grant & Associates was r~ceived on April 25, 1982. ~ ~ A-IO0-O1 2. SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed site for the Eagle River/Chugiak Recreation Center is located about one half mile north of Eagle River on the southeast side of the Old Glenn Highway. It is situated within the east half of Section 36 T15N, R2W SM and lies on three sides of the Fire Lake Sub- division now under development. The approximate location of the pro- posed recreation center, relative to the highway and Fire Lake Sub- division, is shown on Figure 1. The 135 acre site is located on a gently to moderately steep west facing slope. The difference in elevation across the property being developed is about 130 feet. In the extreme southeast corner of the property (not shown on Figure l) the' ground surface rises abruptly and steeply an additional 300 feet. Locally the site chosen for the ice arena (Figure l) is among the flatter portions of the slope. The entire site is largely undeveloped and heavily wooded with birch and spruce trees. We understand that the ice arena, as shown on Figure l, will be about 192 feet by 209 feet in plan and will have relatively long (130 foot) span trusses which may result in 60 to 90 kip column loads. Columns outside the skating area are anticipated to be spaced on about 30 root centers. We further understand that the structure will be set into the hillside on the site and that locally 12 to 15 foot deep excavations are anticipated. The foundation level for this structure is tentatively planned at about elevation 404 feet. A 300+ car parking lot is planned southeast of the arena at the location shown on Figure 1. We anticipate that the lot will be asphalt paved and situated mostly in cut although locally some filling may be necessary. Access to the arena and parking area requires construction of an entry road from the Old Glenn Highway. The planned road, shown on Figure 1, traverses the slope reaching the arena on a relatively gentle grade. We anticipate that this road will be paved with asphalt. 2 3. SUBSURFACE EXPLORATIONS Subsurface explorations consisted of drilling nine borings at the locations shown on Figure 1. The five borings, designated B-1 through B-5, along the roadway were advanced to depths of about 16 feet each to evaluate subgrade materials. The remaining four borings, B-6 through B-9, were drilled in the building area and extended to depths ranging from 21 to 31.5 feet. Drilling equipment for this work consisted of a CME-75 drill mounted on a FN-160 Nodwell which is a rubber tracked vehicle. Each hole was drilled using a 3-3/8-inch I.D. hollow stem continuous flight auger. The drilling work was subcontracted to Inter- state Exploration, Inc. from Anchorage, Alaska. Sampling of the soil was generally accomplished at 2½-foot intervals in the upper 20 feet and at 5-foot intervals thereafter using a 2½-inch I.D. split-spoon sampler driven 18 inches into the soil at the bottom of the boring using a 340 pound hammer freely falling 30 inches per blow onto the drill rods. The number of blows required to drive the sampler the last 12 inches is termed the penetration resistance. The pene- tration resistance gives an indication of the density of non-frozen coarse grained soils and the consistency of non-frozen fine grained soils. The penetration resistance is shown on the Vboring logs in Appendix A, Figures A-1 through A-9. All samples were placed in airtight plastic bags and taken to our Fairbanks laboratory for detailed examination and physical testing, as necessary. Our geologist was present at the site to locate the borings, observe the exploration work, obtain samples, and prepare descriptive logs of all borings. Descriptive logs of the nine borings are presented in Appen- dix A, Figures A-1 through A-9. The first three borings (B-1 through B-3) had been located by surveyors prior to the start of the exploration work. We located the remaining six borings by taping from existing survey points and using a compass to maintain alignment. The locations for these last six holes are approxi- mate. We recommend that surveyors be retained to verify these locations if more precise locations are necessary. Surface elevations, shown on the logs and in the profiles (Figures 2 and 3), were determined by plotting their locations on the Site Plan (Figure l) and extrapolating surface elevations on a topographic map of the site to the boring locations. These elevations are approximate and the elevation datum of the countour map is unknown. The depth to water was measured when encountered during drilling. Water was encountered in Borings B-6 through B-9 as shown on the boring logs, Figures A-6 through A-9. Water was not encountered in Borings B-1 through B-5. Access to the boring locations was difficult because of the thick growth of trees on the property. Chain saws were used in the area being developed to reach the drill locations with the track mounted rig. 4 A-lO0-O1 4. LABORATORY TESTING Laboratory tests were performed on selected soil samples to classify and determine those engineering characteristics needed for foundation design. The laboratory program was formulated with emphasis on deter- mining the material's classification, gradation and compaction charac- teristics. This information is used primarily for evaluating excavated material for use as structural fill. Selected samples were classified visually in the laboratory to confirm the field classifications. From this information and the field logs, the boring logs in Appendix A were prepared. Detailed sample classi- fications are presented in Appendix B, Table B-1. Natural water contents of selected samples were determined. The results are plotted on the boring logs in Appendix A and are also tabulated in Table B-1 Appendix B. Gradation tests were performed on three selected samples, primarily to determine the general distribution of the granular particles and the percent of material passing the No. 200 sieve. These tests were con- ducted in accordance with procedures described in ASTM: D 422-63. The results of these tests are summarized in Figure B-1. To further eval- uate the material's average gradation characteristics, four additional composite samples from borings in the ice arena area were tested. In these tests, material considered typical of the outwash unit in the upper 15 feet were selectively mixed together to form an average com- posite material that might represent fill material borrowed from the ice arena area. The very silty samples were omitted as were silt chunks in the samples used. The average gradation was then determined. The results, shown in Figure B-2, indicate that selectively the outwash is well graded and has about 5 to lO percent fines. The 2-inch maximum size may be a result of the maximum size of the sampler and not the maximum size of the gravels in the deposit. 5 ~ A-IO0-O1 A Modified Proctor compaction test was performed on soils from the ice arena area best suited for possible use as structural fill. To obtain enough soil for this test, a composite sample was made up from samples taken in the proposed building area. This test was conducted in accor- dance with the Modified Proctor (ASTM D 1557-70) compaction procedure. The results of these tests are presented in Figure B-3. The gradation curves typical for this composite sample are shown on Figure B-2. 6 5. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 5.1 Subsurface Soils The subsurface conditions encountered along the proposed roadway and in the ice arena building area are described in detail on the boring logs, Appendix A, and more generally in the profiles, Figures 2 and 3. In descending order, the three major soil zones encountered include 1) topsoil and peat; 2) outwash materials; and 3) glacial till materials. The borings encot:ntered a peat and topsoil zone throughout most of the property. The peat and organic silts encountered were soft and rela- tively spongy. Based on our brief reconnaissance of the property, it appears as if the organics are thickest in relatively flat areas where drainage is poor. Boring B-5 encountered about 2 feet of seasonal frost. Frozen ground was not encountered in any of the other borings. Underlying the layer of organics in our borings at the higher elevations is a relatively thick layer of slightly silty sand and gravel or gravel- ly sand which has the physical appearance o~ a glacial outwash material and will be calleJ outwash hereafter. It is typically brown in color, medium to very dense and is siltier near the surface. Based on surface exposures this material contains numerous cobbles and boulders, some potentially very 'large. From our observation of the samples, it also contains occasional thin silt or gravel layers or zones. The outwash materials were encountered in all six borings drilled above elevation 375 and were generally absent in the three borings drilled below that elevation as shown on the profiles, Figures 2 and 3. If the bottom contact of this unit is near flat lying the outwash deposit should generally be bel.ow the surface organic soils in the general areas shown on Figure 1. This simplified projection of boring data may assist you in preliminary planning for other nearby facilities, however, it must be verified prior to design, because only limited data are available indicating that the condition may exist. i, I, The water content of the outwash deposit excluding frozen samples ranges between about 3 to 15 percent, but more typically is around 5 to 8 percent. From the gradation tests, shown in Appendix B, the outwash is well graded granular material, containing about 5 to l0 percent fines. The samples revealed silty or silt areas or zones which appear to be limited in extent. In our opinion, if the silt and silty soil is selectively removed and the materials suitably compacted, it may be used as fill for support of future roads or parking lots. The lower soil zone encountered in the three borings extending below an elevation of about 375 feet is a gravelly sandy Silt or silty sand with a glacial till texture and is called till hereafter. It is gray in color, medium to very dense, relatively impermeable and has an average water content of about 7 to 15 percent below the frozen zone. Based on the laboratory results in Appendix B, this material contains about 35 percent silt, 35 percent sand, and 30 percent gravel. 5.2 Groundwater During drilling, groundwater was observed in Borings B-6, 7, 8, and 9 at depths of approximately 12, 14, 21, and 13 feet, respectively. Using the estimated boring elevations~ the water was found at elevations of 390, 390, 390, and 398 feet, respectively. The higher elevation in Boring B-9 may reflect a perched water condition on a thin silt seam. Three of the borings encountered water well below the proposed floor level of about 404 feet, however, Boring B-9 encountered water at slightly below the proposed footing location. A-IO0-O1 6. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE ICE ARENA Our subsurface explorations revealed that the site planned for the ice arena is generally underlain by dense gravely sands (outwash materials), which can support the planned building loads using a shallow footing foundation. The following sections provide design criteria including allowable bearing pressures, and lateral earth pressures together with recommendations for preparation and support of floor slabs and providing drainage. 6.1 Allowable Bearing Pressures Based on the generally dense nature of the soils encountered in the borings in the building area, we recommend that an allowable bearing pressure of 4000 pounds per square foot be used for the design of spread footings. This value, in our opinion, may be increased by one third for seismic loading. The recommended bearing value assumes that all foot- ings for the arena will extend through any organics, topsoils, or peats and be founded within natural dense granular materials. Dense materials were encountered within a few feet of the existing ground surface in all borings in the building area. Minimum widths for spread footings should be 24 inches and continuous wall footings should be 18 inches. The base of the footings should be buried sufficiently, in accordance with local practice, to prevent structural damage resulting from frost action. The minimum recommended depth of burial for all exterior footings is 4 feet. For continuously heated areas interior footings need no embedment and can be placed directly beneath the floor slab. 6.2 Estimated Settlements The total settlements that will develop are dependent upon the actual loads that are applied. For the preliminary column loads described preyiously, we estimate total settlements of about 3/4 inch and differen- tial settlements about 1/2 of the total. These settlements will occur 9 A-IO0-O1 largely during construction, essentially as fast as the column and wall loads are applied. Long-term differential settlements of the building should be relatively small. 6.3 Floor Slab Support The lower floor slab for the building excluding the skating area, in our opinion, may be placed directly on grade on the dense native outwash materials below the surficial organic layer if they are to be continuous- ly heated. It may be desirable to use a thin working mat of clean granular material as a construction expedient. The outwash materials, excluding silt pockets or zones, are slightly frost susceptible possessing about 5 to lO percent fines and some moist zones. The siltier zones are highly frost susceptible. To minimize potential for heave in areas that are not to be continuously heated, we recommend that the subgrade below the slab be excavated to a depth of 2 feet below the floor and backfilled with non-frost susceptible (NFS) material. The 2 feet of compacted NFS material increases the distance between the freezing floor and the frost susceptible silt zones that may be present locally, thereby reducing their effect. Periferal footing subdrains should be installed to limit water due to leaks, or seepage from collecting beneath the floor slab thereby heave potential. Prior to placing the NFS material, the working mat, and/or the floor slab, we recommend that the exposed soils be proof-rolled to compact materials that may have become loosened or disturbed due to the excava- tion process. Disturbed or frost susceptible materials, particularly silt zones or pockets, are not desirable at this surface level. If observed, they should be removed to a depth of at least 12 inches, replaced with a free draining NFS material, and compacted to obtain a uniform firm surface with a density of at least 95% of the Modified Proctor maximum density. A geotechnical engineer should be retained to observe the exposed surface and determine that it has been suitably prepared. 10 A-IO0-O1 Once a firm base is obtained, the NSF fill placed and compacted beneath the floor slab. barrier should maintain a dry lower floor. or the working mat may be This together with a vapor Subdrains beneath a heated floor slab are not needed, ~n our opinion, because the outwash materials are believed to be pervious enough and dry enough at depth such that surface water around the building will perco- late re!atively quickly to greater depths. As a precaution against water collecting beneath heated floors due to leaks, we recommend that the NSF blanket or working mat beneath the floor slab be hydraulically connected to the subdrainage system around the ice rink. To minimize ponding during extended periods of rainfall, rapid snowmelt, or ground thawing, we recommend that in non-peved areas, the ground surface around the building be gently sloped away from the building to facilitate drainage. 6.4 Skating Surface The majority of the materials encountered were fairly clean and three out of the four borings encountered water at a depth of about 14 feet below the proposed surface elevation. Locally, however, the soils encountered were very frost susceptible and in one boring the water level was within 6 feet of the floor elevation. The mean annual ground temperature is probably between 35 and 45°F. In our opinion, a continu- ously frozen ice rink could push the freezing fron~ down close to or below the water table which may cause severe frost heaving problems with differential movement on the order of several inches. We foresee three potential design schemes: Allow frost heaving and relevel the skating surface and adjacent facilities when required. Excavate all of the frost susceptible material above the water table and replace it with non-frost susceptible material. II j 3. Add heat to the ground beneath the ice to keep it from freezing. In our opinion, it would not be prudent to use the first alternative unless the structure immediately surrounding the ice were flexible enough to withstand several inches of differential movement and the maintenance involved in leveling the skating surface were acceptable. Although the second alternative is viable from an engineering stand- point, it is undesirable from a construction and cost standpoint and additional information would have to be gathered about the water con- ditions. We do not recommend this option without further study. In our opinion, it would be prudent to add heat to the soils beneath the ice to prevent the ground from freezing. This is usually do~e in Alaska by placing a layer of insulation below the cooling coils and then recycling the waste heat from the refrigeration units through heating coils below the insulation. Design of this system is beyond the scope of this report, however, we have done this in the past and would be pleased to assist you further with this design if you so desire. 6.5 Lateral Earth Pressures Walls below ground should be designed to resist lateral earth pressures.~ The magnitude of the pressure is dependent on the method of backfill placement, the type of backfill material, drainage provisions, and whether the wall is permitted to deflect after or during placement of backfill. The recommended pressures given below are based on a granular backfill placed as described in Section 6.6. If the walls are allowed to deflect laterally at the top an amount equal to about O.OO1 times the height of the wall, an active earth pressure condition under static loading would prevail and an equivalent fluid weight of 35 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) is recommended for design of walls. For rigid walls that are restrained from deflecting at the top, an at-rest earth pressure condition would prevail and an equivalent fluid weight of 55 pcf is recommended. These pressures assume that the material within 18" behind the wall is free draining and hydraulically 12 ~ A-lO0-01 connected to the periferal footing drain. It also assumes that sur- charge loads from street traffic and entryways into the parking levels are added to the wall 'pressures determined from the equivalent fluid weights. 6.6 Backfill Materials and Compaction Backfill materials may be required to raise the grade for floor slab and pavement support or as fill behind walls. The on site outwash materials selectively have about 5 to 10 percent fines and a moisture content of about 5 to 8%, which is within a few percent of optimum (about 6 per- cent). Some silty pockets or zones were encountered in the borings. The cleaner materials, in our opinion, would be suitable for backfill. Mixing of the cleaner soils with-the silt zones should be avoided as they will be frost susceptible and difficult to compact without drying. If on site soils (outwash materials) are used as backfill beneath floor slabs and pavements or behind walls, they should be placed in maximum 8 inch loose lifts and compacted to at least 95 percent Modified Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D-1557, Method C). In non-pavement areas about 90 percent compaction would be sufficient, in our opinion. Materials within 3 feet of retaining ~alls should be compacted with hand operated equipment weighing not over 300 pounds to limit the horizontal stress built up against the wall. 6.7 Excavation Slope Maximum excavation slopes of about 12 to 15 feet will be necessary in order to set the building into the hillside. Temporary excavation slopes will probably be needed to maintain a stable excavation. If temporary slopes are planned we recommend for planning purposes, that slopes no steeper than 1 vertical on 1 horizontal be assumed. At this slope, some raveling erosion, and slumping may occur, however, in our opinion, these instabilities would be local and generally limited to shallow surface materials, rather than deep seated failures. 13 A-IO0-O1 Actual temporary slopes should not be shown on the contract drawings, but should be made the responsibility of the contractor, since he is present on a day to day basis to observe site conditions and he has d~rect control over field operations. 14 7. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ENTRY ROAD AND PARKING AREAS Our subsurface explorations revealed that the roadway below about elevation-375- feet ~is underlain by till .materials while above this approximate elevation the soils are outwash materials. Both soils are dense and capable of supporting the roadway and parking lot provided the facilities are designed to prevent deterioration of the subgrade mater- ials during the seasonal thaw period. The following sections provide design criteria for the proposed roadway and parking lot. I, 7.1 Road Since the road passes over two basic material types, the design of the roadbed should accommodate both conditions. The organic layer is considered unsuitable as a subgrade material and should be removed. We recommend that the roadbed configuration generally conform to the dimensions and criteria specified on Figure 4. The glacial tills found below about elevation 375 feet are highly susceptible to deterioration if disturbed or wetted due to a high fines content. They therefore should be =handled with care and graded prefer- ably during local dry periods. If worked during wet periods they will likely become soft and spongy and difficult, if not impossible, to handle and compact. In these cases, disturbed materials should be wasted and replaced with clean materials. Either imported, clean, well-graded, sand and gravel or select outwash materials, as defined in Section 6.6, should be used locally to replace disturbed areas on the surface of the sub§rade. The 2.5 feet of compacted outwash material recommended over the till in Figure 4a is for frost protection. As indicated in Section 6.6, it may consist of select on site outwash material consisting of the cleaner more granular materials present. Silt zones within these on site materials should not be mixed within this unit as it will make it more frost susceptible. The 8-inch subbase is for additional frost protection of the asphalt topping. The subgrade and each 6 to 8 inch lift should be densely compacted to obtain an essentially unyielding surface. General compaction criteria for the subgrade material is provided in the note 2 on Figure 4. The outwash material found above an elevation of about 375 feet contains fewer fines and therefore is less susceptible to disturbance and frost effects. Prior to placing an 8 inch subbase on the outwash materials as shown on Figure 4b. We recommend that the exposed soils be proof rolled to compact materials that may have become loosened or disturbed due to the excavation process. Disturbed or frost susceptible materials, particularly silts, are not desirable at this level and should be removed, replaced with cleaner outwash materials, to a depth of at least 12 inches and compacted to obtain a uniform firm surface. If desired, we could assist you in evaluating the materials and compaction quality control during construction. In all cases, the subbase should be non-frost susceptible and well graded so that it can be easily compacted in the field to achieve at least 95 percent Modified Proctor maximum density (ASTM D-1557). As indicated in Figure 4, it should be a clean sand and gravel, a crushed new rock material or a blend of commercial rock products. To provide further frost protection we recommend that the road bed section be designed to discourage water flow toward the subgrade. We therefore would encourage, if possible, that ditch bottoms on upslope sides of the roadway be carried below the subbase. In areas underlain by glacial till the ditch should extend into the native glacial till materials. 7.2 Parking Based on the boring data, the parking lot will be founded largely on outwash materials. We therefore, recommend that the lot be designed using the criteria shown Figure 4b following those appropriate site preparation procedures given in the proceeding section. r ~ A-IO0-O1 8. LIMITATIONS The analyses, conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are based on site conditions as they presently exist and further assume that the exploratory borings are representative of the subsurface conditions throughout the site, i.e., the subsurface conditions every- where are not significantly different from those disclosed by the exploration. If, during construction, subsurface conditions different from those encountered in the exploratory holes are observed or appear to be present beneath excavations, we should be advised at once so that we can review these conditions and reconsider our recommendations where necessary. If there is a substantial lapse of time between the sub- mission of this report and the start of work at the site, or if con- ditions have changed due to natural causes or construction operations at or adjacent to the site, it is recommended that this report be reviewed to determine the applicability of the conclusions and recommendations considering the changed conditions and time lapse. If you desire we will review those portions of the plans and specifica- tions which pertain to earthwork and foundations to determine if they are consistent with our recommendations. If desired, we are also available ~o probe footing foundations to determine if actual conditions throughout the site are consistent with our recommended bearing value or to make other field measurements or observations, as necessary. We could also assist you in evaluating the outwash materials during site grading and fill placement. This report was prepared for the exclusive use of the owner and archi- tect and/or engineer in the design of the subject facility. It should be made available to prospective contractors and/or the contractor for information on factual data only and not as a warranty of subsurface conditions, such as those interpreted from the boring logs presented in discussions of subsurface conditions included in this report. Unanticipated soil conditions are commonly encountered and cannot be fully determined by merely taking soil samples or test borings. Such 17 unexpected conditions frequently require that additional expenditures be made to attain a properly constructed project. Therefore some contin- gency fund is recommended to accommodate such potential extra costs. SHANNON & WILSON, INC. Fred R. Brown, P.E. Associate Reviewed by , ~'. Thomas C. Kinney, Ph.D., P.E. Vice President FRB/TCK/mhh 18 42O 410 400 - 390- 380 370 ' Proposed Building B-8 Ground __~/-~7~'_-/'= Surface~ B_7~~, ~'--~ B - 5 ~ ---~'z_--/,-~" -- · - ~/~ - z ~//~ -~---///~ ~-----///~ Dense, slightly ~ silty, gravelly, ~ ~ fine to coarse ~ . ~ SAND; silty zOnes (Outwash) Very dense, gravelly sandy SILT. (Till) - 42O -410 - 400 . - 390 38O 37O SCALE: Horizontal l" = lO0' Vertical l" 20' LEGEND _~_ Water Level (Observed During Drilling) NOTE: 1) The profile is generalized from materials encountered in the boring and variations between the profile and actual condi- tions may exist. 2) See Figure 1 for locations of profile. East Eagle River Ice Arena Eagle River, Alaska PROFILE B-B' May 1982 A-OIO0-O1 & FIG. G£OTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS °o O0 o>-° o z o o Z O0 .[ ~>> ~ ..'~= yI °o ~0 ~oo ~ o° <2> wi APPENDIX A Boring Logs Figure No. A-1 A-2 A-3 A-4 A-5 A-6 A-7 A-8 A-9 APPENDIX A TABLE OF CONTENTS Log of Boring B-1 Log of Boring B-2 Log of Boring B-3 Log of Boring B-4 Log of Boring B-5 Log of Boring B-6 Log of Boring B-7 Log of Boring B-8 Log of Boring B-9 o. (= = (:)40 lb. woiiht, 30# drop) ~. m. ~ ,~r~Blowt plf foot Surface Elevation: ~325' ~ ~ ~ 20 50, dark brown, organic ,~.~.~. ~.5 1~ T5 ......... 5 ............... Slkl r~'~'~J~} ~ed~um dense to dense, bro~nish-~ray ~?r~r~ I ................. to ~reenish-~ray, ~ravelly, silty ~.~? 2 S~D to ~ravelly, sandy Slkl; ~ith scattered boulders. (llkk) r~k:~,~z~x 3 I ~ ..... /~z~ ~ 10 .................... ~ .................... X/~ 5 :~: .'~::::::::: ~.~ ~ :::::::::~:::::2::: ~//, ~ ~ ........ ~ ~ ...... 41 Bo~om of BorOn9 ~ ......... ~ ......... Completed 4/21/82 ~ 20 ........................ ~ ......................... 30 35 ................................. ~ ............................... LEGEND 10 20' o~oo~ ~ ~ Water content ~o&~ Gravel ~ Impervious seal Note: The strotificatiofl I~nes ~8present ~ ~ Water level the approximate boundaries between soil Frozen :('¥?'. Sand ~ Piezometer tip Ground :'":" Eagle River Ice Arena ~'~ ~ Thermocouple ;~/< Silt Eagle River, Alaska ~//// ~ 3~ O.D. split spoon sample ' ~ Clay ~ 3'O.D. thin-well sample * s,.,,, ,or ,,:o.,,d LOG OF BORING NO. Peat ~ LiquJ, ~i~i~ May 1982 A-OIO0 ?~./v OrBanic~water co.tent S~A~HOH & WILSON. ¥~/~/ Co, tent Plastic limit G[OTZC.NICAL COnSULtANTS FIG. A-1 /, SOIL DESCRIh ~'ON '~' ~ i ~ PENETRATION RESISTANCE ~-o :~ ~ = (3401b. weight, 30' drop) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~alows per foot Surface Elevation: ~34[' ~ ~ ~0 20 40 Soft, dark brown, organic SILT ~edium denso to vory dense gray to r~ I ....... [ ......... ~reenish-~ray, ~ravelly, sandy, Slkl ~/~ 5 (TILL) .~/~'//-// '~//-~ 4 ~ ......... ~ ......... ~ ......... ~ ...... 54. Bogtom of Boring ~ ......... ~ ......... Completed 4/21/8~ m ......... ~ ......... LEGEND I0 20 [~Boo~ ~% ~ater content  ~ ~ ~ater level the approximate boundaries between soil GroundFr°zen .~...:~(-:).?(~.. Sand ~ ~zo~,t.r t}~ Eagle R~ver Ice Arena //~/ ~ Thermocouple /~/~ Silt Eagle River, Alaska ~///~ ~ ~ O.D. spilt spoon sampl~ ~ Clay ~ 3'0.0. thin-wall sample * aample not recovered LOG OF BORING NO. B--2 Peat ~ [~,u~a ~it May 1982 A-OIO0 ~vj; Content plastic limit FIG. A-2 SOIL OESCRIP, ,,~N 0= m. ~ ~- ~l~Bloifs per foot Surface Elevation: --'362' Soft, dark brown, organic SILT /~/'~..~ 2.0 ......... i ......... Medium dense to very dense, brownish- '~'~" 2T gray to gray, gravelly, sandy SILT to silty SAND (TILL) x.,'~./3 Bottom of Boring w ......... .-' ......... Completed 4/21/82 z 20. - ............... ~ ............... 30 ...................... .~ ........................... LEGEND 10 20 o$o0~ · ~ Water content ':::'.:";. ~r-' types and the transition may be gradual. Frozen :': Sand Piezometer tip Ground .'.'."~.' ;5~'~' [] fhermocouple Eagle River Ice Arena ;~./, Silt Eagle River, Alaska ~//,~ Clay II 3# O.D. thin-wall sample * Sample not re¢overe, LOG OF BORING NO. B-5 I AttefPara limits; May 1982 A-OlO0 Peat I-~ Liquid limit ¢¢~',,'/¢ Organic~ Water content SHANNON & WILSON. INC. //¢~;¢/ Content plastic limit O[OTECHN[CAC CONSULTANTS FIG. A-3 =-~ - ~ ~ - PENETRATION RESISTANCE ~-o ~ ~ ~ (340 lb. weiaht, 30" drop) Surface Elevation: ~'393' ~' ,="" ~ 0~u 40 Soft, dark brown, organic SILT f/. x .......... !......... f~/~/' 2.0 :::::::::i:::---62''**'* qedium dense to dense, gray and :brown, slightly silty, gravelly, fine ~,..-,***-:..::.:::**:,. to coarse SAND ~ii 5 -. ~:*':*~:* ~:~!~i I '.... ' '.'.:.*~.:.**i .: ~ 3 · .... ! ....... ~'"':'~{ I E 112 ...:-.T..-yT-7.~..:--:-.-~ ..--. ~ 15 ............. --~ 16.5 m ......... -" ......... Bottom of Boring ~ ......... ~ ......... ~, ~, ~ u%m~'e*e-~ 4/2~/82 .~ :~0 ............... '; ......... 30 .................. .~ ...................... ~:::::::~i:::::~::: 10 20 LEGEND ~*~ Water content v ..t., ,.v., t,. a.n,o.,--t. Frozen '¥*-¥:*. Send r_=_] Piezometer tip Eagle River Ice Arena Ground i.:'::. ~9.~ [] Thermocouple Eagle River, Alaska ~//~ Silt ,//// T 3# O.D. split spoon sample  Clay 1'1' 3#0.D. thin-wall sample * S,mp,, ,et ,,~ov,r,O LOG OF BORING NO. B-q Il i ltterbsri limits: May 1982 A-OlO0 u &,],,,,.Peat ~Liquid limit Af...;~ Water content SHANNON & WILSON, INC. /,~,'~;¢,Content Plastic limit FIG. A-4 SOiL OESCRIP,..N -- ~ ~ PENETRATION RESISTANCE ~0 ~ X (340 lb, weight, 30" drop) Surface Elevation: ~399' = =~ MO 40 .... Soft, light gray to brown, organic '///~ 1, ::::::::: : SILT (Frozen)~,,::::.,z~'-'"'xxw'xxxx Medium dense to very dense, brown i~}}i 21 and gray, silty, gravelly, fine ~:~:.~:~ to coarse SAND with sandy SILT ~!;~ :::::::::iS:::::::: ]ayers ( O~I~ASN ) ~ui!:~ 3 ~::?ii 10 ........... ~i 5I ~ '::: ::::is::::: ~ 15 O.u m ......... i ...... ~ottom of Bor~n~ m ::::~2::2~::::2:::2 Completed 4/22/82 > :::::::::~::::::::: :::::::::~::::::::: 3~ ~ ........................... :::::::::~::::::::: 35 ........................ ~ ............................. LEGEND 10 20 o~oO~ Impervious seal 1% Water content ~ Gravel Note: The stratification Imnes represe.tI ~ eater level the approximate boundaries between soil Frozen :~'::':" Sand ~ Piezometer tip types and the transition may be 8raduam. Ground :":'?" Eagle River Ice Arena //~/ ~ Thermocouple ,~< Silt Eagle River, Alaska ~//// I 3' O.D. split spoon sample ~ Clay ~ 3'O.O. thin-well semple * s,.p~..o~ ,,o,,,,, LOG OF BORING Nfl. -5 J ltterbet8 limits: Peat ~Liquid limit May 1982 A-OIO0 tlr // O[gafliC eater Content SHANNON & WILSON, INC. ,~;~ Content Plastic limit tEOf[CNXlCiL CONSULTANTS FIG. A-5 ,. -- "- ~ ~ PENETRATIOK RESISTAHCE ~ ~ :~ (340 lb. weight, 30" d~op) ~ ~ ~ ~61ows ~ foot 3o[face Elevation: ~402' ~ ,~/~ ......... ~... ~oft, dark bro~n, orgon~c SILT ~J~h ~z/x ...... ~ 2.s ~ ......... ~ ...... ~ed~u~ dense ~o ver~ dense, b~o~n ~ ......... ~ ........ gravelly, ~n~ ~o co~e ~AN9 ~.~ 2'~ 5 ~''._LL''''~_L' L (OUTWASH) ~ ~::. ~ ? ..... ::::~: '::: ~ ~s ......... ~ ...... ,6. 6I ~ ......... ~ .........  ~ ......... ~ ......... ~?~ ~ ......... ~ ...... 50. ......... ...... .,, ~ ~T":"T'T"TT":~'T'T~TT'TT~'"T' ~1.0 ~ ......... ~ ......... Bottom of Boring ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Completed 4/23/82 ~ 25~ ....................... > ....................... 30 ....................... ~ .......................... 35 ~ .............................. ~ ........................... I0 LE~HO ~ ~; ~ate~ content ~o0~ Impervious seal ~o~ Gravel NOte: The stratification i,oes represent ~ ~ later level the approximate boundaries between soil ~ ~'~:;~j~' types and the transition may be gradual. Frozen ': '. Ground .~.:... Send ~ Piezometer tip Eagle ~ver Ice ~'~ ~ Thermocouple .~ Silt Eagle, River, Alaska ,//// ~ 3" O.D. split spoon sample  Clay ~ 3*O,D, thin-wall sample * s,.p,, no, ,,..,," LOG OF BORING NO. B-6 ~ Feat Liq.i~ li~it May 1982 A-OIO0 ~ '' Or~aflic ~~ater content SHANNON & ~ILSON, INC. ~ ~/~ G[OT[CHNICAk CONSULTANTS ///~/ Content ~astic limit fTC I SOIL DESCRII~,.,N :=--~~' ~ ~.~, PENETRATION RESISTANC£ ~-o ~ :~: (340 lb, weisht, 30# d~op) Surface Elevation: ~40d' ~ = ~0 40 SofC, dar~ b~own organic zone, /~// ~ ......... ~ ......... SILT, PEAT and WOOD ~.~ 2.0 ......... i ......... Medium SILT dense to dense, bro~, silty, gravelly, fine to coarse SAND with sandy layers 5 .~. (OUTWASH) I ......................... ................... ~244~¢: ~/23/8~ ~:~:[~ T 5 ................. 6 ~:::~:~I ~ ......... ~ ......... ~ . ~ :::::::::~::::::::: 29,0 ~ :::::::::~:::::::: Very dense, gray, gravelly, sandy, 'vga/' o 30 ........................ ~ .............................. ......... ~ ...... 53, SILT (TILL) '~Z~ 1 ......... ~ ......... ~xx~ 31.5 ......... ~ ......... Bottom of Boring ~' ......... ~ ......... Completed 4/23/82 ......... ~ ......... L~D lO 20 ~un~ '.'-~.' Eagle River Ice Arena ;bx~ ~ Eagle River, Alaska ///// ~ 3= O.D. split spoon sample  Clay ~ 3w O.D. thin-wall sample Peat ~ay 1982 A-0100 ~:~/~ Organic hie, content SHANNON & IILSON, INC. //v~(/ Content plastic limit GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTAN~S FIG. A-7 ~ ~ ~ ~ '&Slows per foot Surface Elevation: ~ 411' ~ ~ ~0 20 40 Soft, dark brown, orgnanic SILT /~Y ......... i ......... \ / I.O ......... ~ ......... Medium dense to very dense, brown l and gray, silty, gravelly, fine to coarse SAND i 10 ~ .................... ~ .................. ......... 6 ......... ~ ......... - T ......... i ...... 62 1 . 4/24/82 T c~ 25 ' ' ' I ~ 30 ...................... * ........................ ~ 31'.5 ~ ......... i ........ · Bottom of Boring Completed 4/24/82 LEGEND 20 40 IoSoO~ ~ · ~ Water content ~ Gravel ~ Impervious seal Note: The stratification lines Topresent ~ Water level the approximate boundaries between soil Frozen :':~'*'::'Sand Piezometef tip types and the transition may be gradual. Ground ".:'::'. Eagle River Ice Arena :~ [] Ther.ocouple ;~x< Silt Eagle River, Alaska · * s,~p,, .o, r,cov,,,d Lag OF BORING NO. B-§ Peat Jttefbera limito: May 1982 A~OIO0 &''/ Organic eater content eHANNON & WILSON, INC. ~¢/ Content plastic limit ;EOTECH#ICAL CONSULTANTS FIG. A-$ SOIL OESCRIF..~N =,.~-- ~ ~ PENETRAT,DN RESISTt, NCE m~. ~ :~ :~:(340 lb. weight, 30" drop) Surface Elevation: ,-'411' "~ ~ ~ 0 20 40 '~/*~'~:). 5 ......... ~ ......... ~$oft, brown, organic Sill / Medium dense to very dense, brownish- gray-to gray, silty, gravelly, fine ~:':'"':'"'": to coarse SAND, with occasional ~":.ii~}~ 5 .......... ~ .................... boulder or cobble (OUTWASH) :~ ,':.!:..':::~. :.....**:.:~::! 5 ~/24/82 ...J ..... i .... ~ .... I c~ 20 .............................. ~ ::::::::: ::::::::: I m :::::::::i::::::'82 9 ~a~::'~ T ::::::: :: i:::::: '65 30.5 30 ......................... ' ............................. Bottom of Boring ......... i ......... Completed 4/24/82 ......... i ......... :::::::::i::::::::: LEGEND I0 o$o0~ I ~; Water content ?~o~C'~ Grav91 :r impervious seal Note: The stratification lines represent ~°O~ ~ rater level the approximate boundaries between soil Grounder°zen '::~"'i:'..'.'::.. Sand ~ PJezo.eter tip :~'~ [] Thefmocouple Eagle River ;[ce Arena ,~,~ Silt Eagle River, Alaska · ~///~1' 3~'O.D, split spoon sample ~/,,~,~, Clay IT 3*O.D. thin-wall sampJe · aample not recovered LOG OF BORING NO. B-9 J ltterberg limit~: Peat I.~.~(- Liquid limit May 1982 A-OIO0 ¢¢,,,'/ Organic~ rater content SHANNON & llLSON, INC. FIG. A-g APPENDIX B Laboratory Test Results Table B-1 APPENDIX B TABLE OF CONTENTS Visual Classification Figure No. B-1 B-2 B-3 Grain Size Classification Grain Size Classification Compaction Test Z 0 0 (2> II i 1H91]~ L9 B]SBV09 1N)g a]d I.O 0 (CC) FIG. B-1 IH913~ X8 B3SB¥O0 IN30 B3d IHg13N 19 U3NIJ iN30 83d FIG. B-2 140 130 125 I20 115 105 I00 95 90 85 lO ?, IPACTTON TEST &HANNON & WILSON, INC, [] STANDARD AASHO (AASHO T-Og-57.ASTM D898-58T) PX1 MODIFIED AASHO (AASHO T180-57. ASIM OI55T-58T) [] OTHER PROJECT Eagle River Ice Arena JOB NUMBER A-OIO0 DATE , 5/5/82 SANPLE NUMBER B-5~ B-6, B-8, B-9 DEPTH TESTED BY KD.. CALCULATED 6Y KD CHECKED BY MAX. DRY DENSITY LBS/CU. FT. OPTIMUM W.C. S NATURAL W.C. S 145.1 $.7 10 18 5 HAMMER WT.,LBS DROP, IN. NO. LAYERS NO. BLOWS/LAYER DIA,, MOLD IN. HEIGHT MOLD IN~' 56 ~::: : ~ VOL., MOI~D CU2:FT,, 0.075 COMPACTI VE EFFORT-FT. LBS/CU. FT., 4200 6.0 4. 584 ~ SANPL ECL ASSI FI CATI ON Fines = 2.74 15 20 25 30 35 WATER CONTENT - PERCENT ( 0 0 o o / / °/ / / / / / / / / Z Cl w z2._>- J / / F ¢'? / / / ~ ~~ ~ / ? / / /// /// j/ / // / / Q= ? // / / n rY / / / / / / / / / / al L r ~-'l J / / f / / ,6 'N !,~.?)~??;~}~ 9096 6Zi~/Z06 ]-0966 e'~SelV ,,,,.,,:..,..,'"'"'" '"" 6U! UUeld e.,ln:l. Oe].,qo.,IV ,,.;,.,:,:..".%,,,, :.,,~ . . '".~" ~,,?~,,......e-"~:~'" SalelOOSS~ '~ lU'BJ9 U.ale.C) ~'~OT~'~' A/INnl. q!AlOg 'AVlgnHO / I:t:aAIl:l :a'-19V~] ) \ ,4,." / f 7 // / / / ?/ ~%$1:,!!, k ,, II, !//,, ! ' ' h: ,:: ' ]~e*~ab w ' ~' i ' ! [~11 h ! H iH [Iii4 I ~i i '~ ,~ II~I:H I i~:~rla ,~J4{¢ ~l U~lql~h , I T ~ , [ ~ ,~, N >¢ Z ~: ~ ZD z