Preliminary Soils Investigation 111004

SOIL EXPLORATION COMPANY, INC.
Soil Engineering, Environmental Engineering, Materials Testing, Geology

October 4, 2011 Project No. 11104-01 TO: Collins & Associates Engineering, Inc. PMB 225 2621 Green River Rd., Suite 105 Corona, CA 92882 Brian Collins, PE Preliminary Soil Investigation and Double Ring Infiltrometer Test Report, Proposed Matts Car Wash, SEC of Foothill Boulevard and Cactus Avenue (APN 0130-013-06, -07, -08 and Portion of -09), City of Rialto, California
ATTENTION: SUBJECT:
Introduction In accordance with owners authorization, this report presents the results of preliminary soil investigation and double ring infiltrometer test for retention basin for the subject site (see Figure 1, Site Location Map). The accompanying report presents a summary of our findings, conclusions, recommendations and limitations of our work for construction of the proposed site improvements. Scope of Work Review soils, seismic, geologic, groundwater data and maps in our files. Perform exploration of the site by means of backhoe excavations at readily accessible locations. Field engineer for logging of the excavations, sampling of select soils, observation of excavation resistance, caving conditions and water seepage (if any). Perform basic laboratory testing on select soil samples, expected to include moisture, density, sieve analysis, sand equivalent and expansion potential. Perform digitized search of known faults within a 50 mile radius of the site. Determine California Building Code (CBC) 2010 seismic parameters for the site. Consult with design civil engineer. Perform one double ring infiltrometer test. Prepare a report of our findings, conclusions and recommendations for site preparation, including overexcavation/removal depth, allowable bearing value, foundation/slab-on-grade depth/thickness recommendations, excavation characteristics, lateral static/seismic earth pressures for retaining walls design, general grading specifications, California Building Code (2010) seismic design coefficients and infiltration rate (inches/hour) at retention area.
Existing Site Condition The subject flat site is located on the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Cactus Avenue in the City of Rialto, San Bernardino County, California. Foothill Boulevard is a paved road with curbs and a sidewalk on the northwest side of the site. Cactus Avenue is paved road with no curbs, gutters or sidewalks. The southeast corner of the site is bordered with chain link fence. A paved alley and a block wall are located on the southwest side of the site. Two houses (655 and 667 W. Foothill Blvd.) are present on the northeast portion of the site, one with a basement. At the time of our investigation, scattered trees and debris were noted on the site.
7535 Jurupa Ave., Unit C Riverside, CA 92504 Tel: (951) 688-7200 Fax: (951) 688-7100 soilexpl@yahoo.com www.soilexp.com
Matts Car Wash Project No. 11104-01 SEC Foothill Blvd. and Cactus Ave. October 4, 2011 Rialto, California ________________________________________________________________________________________________
The approximate locations of some of the above features are shown on the Exploratory Trench and Infiltration Test Location Map (Plate 1). Proposed Development Based on the plan provided, we understand that the site will be developed for a car wash with office and associated improvements. The structure will be wood frame. The structural loads are anticipated to be fairly light, on the order of no more than 2 kips/ft and 10 kips for continuous and column footings, respectively. The existing structures will be demolished and debris removed from the site. Based on the flat site topography, minor cut and/or fill grading and no cut or fill slopes may be proposed. Subsurface Exploration Three exploratory trenches were excavated at the site on October 3, 2011, utilizing a Case 580L backhoe equipped with 24-inch bucket. The trenches were excavated to a maximum depth of 12 feet below ground surface. The exploratory excavations revealed the site soils primarily consist of light brown, fine to medium grained silty sand and fine to coarse grained silty sand with gravel (USCS SM), underlain with light brown, fine to coarse grained sand with gravel (USCS SP) in Trenches T1 and T3. The upper 1.5 and 4 feet of soils in Trench T1 and T3 appear to be fill. The site soils were dry and medium dense. Cobbles and boulders to 15 inches in size were noted in the exploratory excavations. Detailed descriptions of the materials are presented in form of Geotechnical Trench Logs in Appendix B. Based on available data, the site area is underlain primarily by young alluvial fan deposits. Based on referenced CDMG, Special Report 113 (Plate 5B), the thickness of alluvium at the site is on the order of 600 feet. Laboratory Testing Laboratory tests were performed for selected soil samples. The tests consisted primarily of natural moisture contents, sieve analysis and sand equivalent. Laboratory test results are presented in Appendix C. Some of the results are also shown on Geotechnical Trench Logs in Appendix B. Groundwater Groundwater was not encountered in our exploratory trenches to a depth of 12 feet below ground surface. Groundwater study is not within the scope of this work. Based on referenced Carson & Matti map and CDMG Special Report 113 (Plate 4B), groundwater in the area of the site may be expected at a depth of 300 feet below ground surface. The data also shows that a groundwater barrier is located southwest of the site. Seismicity/Faulting A computer search of known Quarternary major faults within 50 miles of the site is presented in Appendix D. The computer search was performed by EQFAULT (Version 3.00) software. It is probable that not all active or potentially active faults in the region have been identified. Furthermore, seismic potential of the smaller and less notable faults is not sufficiently developed for assignment of maximum earthquake magnitudes and associated levels of ground shaking that might occur at the site due to these faults. Secondary Seismic Hazards Liquefaction Liquefaction occurs when loose saturated cohesionless soils, such as poorly graded fine sands, are subject to ground shaking during an earthquake of large magnitude. Liquefaction potential in general is greatest when the water table is less than 30 feet below ground surface. Because depth to groundwater is anticipated to be on the order of 300 feet, the potential for liquefaction at the site is very low.
Soil Exploration Co., Inc.
Page 2
Matts Car Wash Project No. 11104-01 SEC Foothill Blvd. and Cactus Ave. October 4, 2011 Rialto, California ________________________________________________________________________________________________ Ground Rupture The surface fault rupture occurs along traces of active or potentially active faults. The site is not located within any State of California fault hazard zone and no active or potentially active faults are known to exist at the site. The potential for surface fault rupture at the site is therefore considered low. Tsunamis/Seiches/Flooding The elevation and inland location of the site and absence of upstream dams or other nearby large bodies of water precludes these earthquake induced hazards to the site. Landsliding/Lateral Spreading Considering the flat topography, the absence of significant slopes in the vicinity of the site, the potential for landsliding and lateral spreading is considered low. Seismically Induced Settlement Seismically induced settlement generally occurs within areas of loose cohesionless soils with relatively low density. The possibility of seismically induced settlement within underlying loose sandy site soils during a moderate earthquake shaking exists and cannot be precluded.
Conclusions
All undocumented fills, old foundations, buried abandoned structures, buried utility/irrigation lines and any deleterious materials, etc. would require removal from the proposed site area. Overexcavation and recompaction of surficial soils should be anticipated to provide adequate and uniform support for the proposed structures and pavement. All earth materials encountered during our subsurface exploration can be excavated with heavy duty grading equipment in good working condition. The onsite soils, exclusive of oversize materials (larger than 3 inches), can be used as compacted fill for structural areas and utility trench backfill. Based on observations and soil classifications, the expansion potential of the near-surface sandy soils at the site is expected to be very low (EI<20). The use of shallow spread footings foundations appears feasible for the proposed light weight building construction. The site is located approximately 2.3 miles from the San Jacinto-San Bernardino Fault. The site is located in a region of generally high seismicity, as is all of Southern California. During its design life, the site is expected to experience moderate to strong ground motions from earthquakes on regional and/or nearby causative faults. There is a 10% probability in 50 and 100 years that ground acceleration at the site will exceed 0.85g and 0.95g, respectively. Based on San Bernardino County Land Use Plan, General Plan, Geologic Hazards Overlays, the site is not located within area of landslide or liquefaction susceptibility (see Figure 3). The flooding potential of the site should be verified by design civil engineer and considered in planning, design and construction. No groundwater and/or seepage were encountered during our subsurface work. However, the potential for rain or irrigation water locally seeping through from adjacent/higher areas cannot be precluded.
Page 3
Recommendations
Site Preparation and Grading All grading should be performed in accordance with our General Earthwork and Grading Specifications presented in Appendix E, except as modified within the text of this report. All debris, abandoned utility lines, underground structures, old foundations, weeds, vegetable matter, deleterious materials, etc. should be hauled offsite. Cavities created during site clearance should be backfilled in a controlled manner. Subsequent to site clearance and debris removal, building areas extending at least 5 feet beyond the building lines in plan (including canopies, exterior walls, etc.) should be overexcavated to remove near surface dry/loose sandy soils. Based on our exploration, we anticipate removals to extend to at least 4 feet below ground surface or proposed grades, whichever is greater. Deeper removals cannot be precluded. Deleterious material, cobbles and boulders, etc. should be completely removed if encountered in bottom of the grading areas. After the required removals, the bottom of the overexcavation should be scarified to a depth of at least 6 inches, mixed, watered and recompacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D1557-09, prior to placement of engineered fills. Because the soils are sandy, heavy vibratory equipment may provide best compaction results. Any loose soils exposed in the bottom of the excavations should be removed and recompacted. In addition to the above, all footings, including walls and canopies, should be underlain by at least 3 feet of compacted fill. Deeper removals to provide thicker compacted fill mat, compaction to a higher relative density, and/or the use of cast-in-drilled holes caissons may be necessary for heavier structures. Pavement, truck ramps and sidewalk areas should be scarifed to a depth of at least 18 inches, watered as necessary, and compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction. The areas of pylon/sign foundations should be cleared form all vegetation and roots prior to construction. If loose soils are encountered in bottom of footing excavations, these soils should be removed and replaced with lean concrete or the footings deepened as necessary. Compacted Fills/Imported Soils Any soil to be placed as fill, whether presently onsite or import, should be approved by the soil engineer or his representative prior to their placement. All onsite soils to be used as fill should be cleansed of any roots or other deleterious materials. Cobbles larger than 3 inches in diameter should not be placed in the vicinity of foundations and utility lines. All fills should be placed in 6 to 8 inch loose lifts, thoroughly watered to near optimum moisture content, mixed and compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction. This is relative to the maximum dry density determined by ASTM 1557-09 Test Method. Any imported soils should be sandy (preferably (USCS SM or SW and very low in expansion potential, EI<20) and approved by the soil engineer. The soil engineer or his representative should observe the placement of fill and take sufficient tests to verify the moisture content and the uniformity and degree of compaction obtained. Foundation Design Based on the above site preparation recommendations, very low expansion potential of soils and anticipated loads, an allowable bearing pressure of 2000 psf is recommended for the design of footings. This bearing pressure has been established based on the assumption that the continous footings will be embedded at least 18-inches below lowest adjacent firm grade and into the compacted fill mat, and measure at least 18-inches in width. The column footings should be at least 24 inches in width and embedded at least 24 inches below lowest adjacent firm grade. A one-third increase in bearing value may be used when considering short term wind or seismic loads.
Page 4
Continuous footings should be reinforced with at least two No. 5 bars at the top and two at the bottom. Please note foundation design is under the purview of structural design engineer and structural considerations may have other more stringent requirements. Settlement Because of the granular near surface soils, settlements are expected to occur almost immediately as the loads are applied with little or no settlement thereafter. Total long-term settlement between similarly loaded adjacent foundation systems should not exceed one inch. The structures should be designed to tolerate a differential settlement on the order of 1/2 to 3/4-inch in 30 feet. Concrete Slabs-On-Grade Concrete floor slabs should be at least 4 inches thick (structural conditions may govern). Slabs to receive flooring should be underlain by a 10-mil Visqueen moisture barrier overlain by 2-inch layer of clean, rolled sand and underlain by additional 2 inches of rolled sand. Slabs subject to vehicular traffic or storage should be at least 6 inches thick and should be underlain with at least 2 inches of clean sand. Appropriate recommendations should be made by the project architect if crack sensitive floor covering is placed directly on the concrete slab. All floor slabs should be reinforced with at least No. 3 rebar at 18-inches on center each way. Care should be taken by the contractor to insure that reinforcement is placed at slab mid-height. The use of concrete spacers to raise reinforcement of slabs is highly recommended. However, floor slab thickness and reinforcement should be evaluated by the structural engineer and designed in compliance with applicable codes for the proposed loading. Where slabs will support special loads, such as equipment, etc., the structural engineer should consider these conditions. A modulus of subgrade reaction (k) value of 150 pci may be used in the design. All concrete flatwork, including slabs subgrade, should be verified to contain 1.2 times the soil optimum moisture content to a depth of 12 inches prior to placement of slab building materials. Moisture content should be tested in the field by the soil engineer. Concrete Joints The joints spacing for concrete slabs should be determined by the project architect. Joints should be laid out top form approximately square panels (equal transverse and longitudinal joint spacing). Rectangular panels, with the long dimension no more than one-and-one-half times the short, may be used when square panels are not feasible. The depth of longitudinal and transverse joints should be one-fourth the depth of the slab thickness. Joint layout should be adjusted so that the joints will line up with the corners of structures, small foundations and other built-in structures. Acute angles or small pieces of slab curves as a result of joints layout should not be permitted Concrete Curing Fresh concrete should be cured by protecting it against loss of moisture, rapid temperature change and mechanical injury for at least 3 days after placement. Moist curing, waterproof paper, white polyethylene sheeting, white liquid membrane compound, or a combination thereof may be used. After finishing operations have been completed, the entire surface of the newly place concrete should be covered by whatever curing medium is applicable to local conditions and approved by the engineer. The edges of concrete slabs exposed by the removal of forms should be protected immediately to provide these surfaces with continuous curing treatment equal to the method selected for curing the slab surfaces. The contractor should have at hand, and ready to install before actual placement begins, the equipment needed for adequate curing of the concrete.
Page 5
Lateral Earth Pressures/Walls Below Grade The following lateral equivalent fluid earth pressures and soil parameters in conjunction with the above allowable bearing value of 2000 psf may be used for sign pylon foundation and the design of retaining walls with free draining level compacted backfills. Wall backfills should be compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction. We recommend that drainage for retaining walls should be provided in accordance with Plate 2 of this report. Active Earth Pressure (Pa) At Rest Pressure (P0) Passive Earth Pressure (Pp) Horizontal Coefficient of Friction () Unit Soil Weight (t) 35 pcf (EFP), drained, unbraced yielding walls 50 pcf (EFP), drained, braced non-yielding (part of building walls) 250 pcf (EFP), drained, maximum of 2500 psf (fill or firm native soil) 0.35 120 pcf
Soil resistance developed against lateral structural movement can be obtained from the passive pressure and friction coefficient indicated above. For the calculation of passive resistance to lateral loads, the upper 12 inches of material in areas not protected by concrete flatwork or pavement should not be considered. These values may be increased by one-third when considering loads of short duration, including wind or seismic loads. The total resistance may be taken as the sum of the friction and passive resistance provided that the passive portion does not exceed two-thirds of the total resistance. Resistance to Lateral Loads-Sign Pylon Isolated poles for the sign may be designed using a lateral bearing value of 200 psf/foot of depth below natural grade per CBC (2010). Depth of embedment is a function of the allowable lateral soil bearing pressure and the applied lateral forces and may be designed in accordance with the CBC. Cement Type/Soluble Sulfates Concrete in direct contact with soil or water that contains a high concentration of soluble sulfate can be subjected to chemical deterioration commonly known as sulfate attack. We anticipate that the onsite surficial, sandy soils can be characterized as very low in sulfate attack on concrete. We suggest that soil samples should be tested for water soluble sulfates subsequent to grading. If critical, metal pipes may be protected in accordance with recommendations by a corrosion engineer. In accordance with the Cement Industry Technical Committee of California (CITCC) guidelines, Type II cement is recommended for all concrete work in contact with earth materials. The use of low slump mechanically vibrated concrete (not exceeding 4 inches at the time of placement) is also recommended. Seismic Consideration The site is located approximately 2.3 miles from the San Jacinto-San Bernardino Fault. Moderate to strong ground shaking can be expected at the site and there is a 10 percent probability in 50 and 100 years that ground acceleration at the site will exceed 0.85 g and 0.95g, respectively. The site soil profile is class D. The structural engineer should consider city/county local codes, current building code, the latest requirements of the Structural Engineers Association, California Building Code (CBC 2010), seismic data presented in this report (Appendix D), and any other pertinent data in selecting seismic design parameters.
Page 6
Groundwater No groundwater and/or seepage were encountered during our subsurface work. The potential for rain or irrigation water locally seeping through from adjacent areas cannot be precluded. Our experience indicates that surface or near-surface groundwater conditions can develop in areas where groundwater conditions did not exist prior to site development, especially in areas where a substantial increase in surface water infiltration results from landscape irrigation. In addition, changes in local or regional water and management patterns, or both, can significantly raise the water table or create zones of perched water. We therefore recommend that landscape irrigation be kept to the minimum necessary to maintain plant vigor and any leaking pipes/sprinklers, etc. should be promptly repaired. The depth to the groundwater may fluctuate with seasonal changes and from one year to the next. We have no way of predicting future groundwater levels or perched water due to increase in surface water infiltration from rainfall or from landscape irrigation. Subdrains, horizontal drains, toe drains, French drains, heel drains or other devices may be recommended in future for graded areas that exhibit nuisance water seepage conditions. Erosion Control/Drainage/Planter Areas The near surface sandy soils are subject to wind and water erosion. Positive drainage should be provided around the perimeter of all structures and all foundations toward streets or approved drainage devices to minimize water infiltrating into the underlying natural and engineered fill soils. In addition, finish subgrade adjacent to exterior footings should be sloped down and away to facilitate surface drainage. Roof drainage should be collected and directed away from foundations via non-erosive devices. Water, either natural or by irrigation, should not be permitted to pond or saturate the foundation soils. The developer should be made aware of the potential problems, which may result when drainage is altered. Ponded water, leaking irrigation systems, over-watering or other conditions which could lead to ground saturation should be avoided. Area drainage collection should be directed toward the approved drainage devices. Double Ring Infiltrometer Test One double ring infiltrometer test (I-1) was performed at the proposed retention basin site (see Plate 1). The test indicated a high infiltration rate of 38.6 inches/hour. A suitable safety factor should be applied to the rate in sizing the proposed retention basin. The test results and procedure are presented in Appendix F of this report. Cal/OSHA Classification/Temporary Excavations/Trench Excavations In general Cal/OSHA classification of onsite soils is Type C. Caving of the unsupported excavation can be expected in sandy soils. Temporary excavations greater than 5 feet in depth should be shored or sloped at 1.5:1 (horizontal:vertical) in accordance with Cal/OSHA requirements. Backfills in the utility trenches should be compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction. Onsite earth materials (excluding over 3-inch material) will be suitable for backfills. Onsite clean sandy materials with sand equivalent value of at least 30 may be utilized for the pipe zone. Placement of the trench backfill in lifts and compaction by mechanical effort should be anticipated.
Page 7
Tentative Pavement Design On the basis of laboratory classification and testing, we are of the opinion that the tentative new pavement design may be based on an R-value on the order of 40 (or better) corresponding to near surface soils. Considering this and based on typical traffic indices, the recommended pavement sections are outlined as follows: AREA Parking Driveways Heavy Traffic Loading TRAFFIC INDEX 4 6 7 ASPHALT CONCRETE (Inches) 3 3 3.5 AGGREGATE BASE (Inches) 4 6 8
The upper at least 18 inches of the subgrade soils below new pavements should be compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction. Class 2 base should conform to Section 26 of Caltrans Standard Specifications and should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density. Maximum dry densities should be determined by the Standard Test Method designated ASTM D1557-09. Final pavement design may be based on laboratory sand equivalent test results of representative soils upon completion of grading. Foundation Plans Review The recommendations provided in this report are based on subsurface conditions as interpreted from limited exploration of the site. Soil Exploration Co. should review the foundation plans and revise the conclusions and recommendations if necessary. Additional Observations and Testing/Quality Control Soil Exploration Company, Inc. should observe and/or test during the following stages of construction: During site clearance and removal of any obstructions. During all overexcavations, removal of soft/loose compressible soils, in-place processing of soils and all fill placement and compaction. During preparation, moisture conditioning, and compaction of subgrades/base for slabs-on-grade and pavement. During footing excavations and prior to placement of footings materials. During all trench and retaining wall backfills and compaction of curb, gutter, sidewalks subgrade. When any unusual conditions are encountered.
Materials Testing/Deputy Inspection Quality control and testing of concrete, steel, welding, masonry, and deputy inspections should also be performed by Soil Exploration Co., Inc. during construction. Final Report A final grading control report, including geotechnical data gathered, should be prepared when rough grading is completed. The report should include all laboratory test results, a map showing all removal depths, location and depth/elevation of field density tests, test methods and final foundation and pavement design recommendations.
Page 8
Limitation of Investigation Our investigation was performed using the degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable Geotechnical Engineers practicing in this or similar locations. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the conclusions and professional advice included in this report. The field and laboratory test data are believed representative of the project site; however, soil conditions can vary significantly. As in most projects, conditions revealed during grading may be at variance with preliminary findings. If this condition occurs, the possible variations must be evaluated by the Project Geotechnical Engineer and adjusted as required or alternate design recommended. This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner, or his representative, to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the architect and engineer for the project and incorporated into the plans, and the necessary steps are taken to see that the contractor and subcontractor carry out such recommendations in the field. This firm does not practice or consult in the field of safety engineering. We do not direct the contractor's operations, and we cannot be responsible for other than our own personnel on the site; therefore, the safety of others is the responsibility of the contractor. The contractor should notify the owner if he considers any of the recommended actions presented herein to be unsafe. The findings of this report are valid as of the present date. However, changes in the conditions of a property can occur with the passage of time, whether they be due to natural processes or the works of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in applicable or appropriate standards may occur, whether they result from legislation or the broadening of knowledge. If you should have any questions regarding this report, please do not hesitate to call our office. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. Very truly yours, Soil Exploration Co., Inc.
Gene K. Luu, PE 53417 Project Engineer Distribution: Attachments: [3] Addressee Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Plate 1 Plate 2 Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C Appendix D Appendix E Appendix F Site Location Map Geologic Map San Bernardino County General Plan Geologic Hazards Overlay Exploratory Trench Location Map Retaining Wall Backfill and Subdrain Detail References Exploratory Trench Logs Laboratory Test Results Deterministic and CBC (2010) Seismic Parameters General Earthwork and Grading Specifications Double Ring Infiltrometer Test Results
Page 9
REFERENCES
CDMG, San Bernardino County Planning Department, Southwestern San Bernardino County, Special Report 113, B Series, Dated 1974: Plate 1B, Generalized Geologic Map Plate 2B, Generalized Fault Map Plate 3B, Major Landslides and Generalized Relative Slope Stability Plate 4B, Generalized Depth to Groundwater Plate 5B, Generalized Map Showing Thickness of Alluvium
San Bernardino County Planning Department, San Bernardino Valley Planning Area: Map No. 3, Generalized Geologic Map Map No. 9, Generalized Map Showing Alluvium Thickness Map No. 10, Generalized Map Showing Depth to Groundwater
Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey, Contour Map Showing Minimum Depth to Ground Water, Upper Santa Ana River Valley, California 1973-1979, By Scott E. Carson and Jonathan C. Matti, Dated 1985. CDMG, Maps of Known Active Fault Near-Source Zones in California and Adjacent Portions of Nevada, Dated February 1998.
Appendix A
SUBJECT:
Double Ring Infiltrometer Test Results, Proposed Matts Car Wash, SEC of Foothill Boulevard and Cactus Avenue, City of Rialto, California
Introduction Per your authorization, we have performed one double ring infiltrometer test at the subject retention basin location (see Figure 1, Site Location Map). The test was performed within the retention basin area shown on the provided plan (see Exploratory Trench and Infiltration Test Location Map, Plate 1). Groundwater/Alluvium Depth Groundwater study is not within the scope of this work. However based on available data, the groundwater at the site should be on the order of 300 feet in depth. Based on available data, thickness of alluvium in the site area is on the order of 600 feet. Double Ring Infiltrometer Test (ASTM D-3385-09) A level area was prepared, at a depth of 4 feet, for the test location at the site. The outer and inner rings were driven to a depth of at least 2 inches into the ground. The test area was presoaked immediately prior to testing. Since water level drop was fast, water level measurements were taken at 10 minute intervals and were continued until a stabilized rate of drop was obtained. The drop in the center ring average stabilized rate, expressed in inches per hour, was considered the infiltration rate for the test location. The soils in our exploratory trench were classified as sand (USCS SP). The infiltration test data attached indicates a rate of 38.6 inches/hour (see Infiltration Test Data attached).
Appendix F
Appendix A
Appendix A

Preliminary Soils Investigation 111004

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Preliminary Soils Investigation 111004

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SOIL EXPLORATION COMPANY, INC.

Soil Engineering, Environmental Engineering, Materials Testing, Geology

Soil Exploration Co., Inc.

Soil Exploration Co., Inc.

Soil Exploration Co., Inc.

Soil Exploration Co., Inc.

Soil Exploration Co., Inc.

Soil Exploration Co., Inc.

Soil Exploration Co., Inc.

Soil Exploration Co., Inc.

Soil Exploration Co., Inc.

Soil Exploration Co., Inc.

Soil Exploration Co., Inc.

Soil Exploration Co., Inc.

You might also like