Geotechnical Construction , , Engineering Materials Testing , . REMEDIAL GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION on MIDWAY ROAD RECONSTRUCTION Beltline Road to Keller Springs Road Addison, Texas ALPHA Report No. 00988 l , , 􀁾􀀠, , . ALPHA TESTING/INC . .:. Environmental Engineering Consulting REMEDIAL GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION on MIDWAY ROAD RECONSTRUCTION Beltline Road to Keller Springs Road Addison, Texas ALPHA Report No. 00988 Prepared for: GBW ENGINEERS, INC. 1919 Shiloh Road, Suite 530, LB 27 Garland, Texas 75042 Attention: Mr. Bruce R. Grantham, P.E. April 2, 200 I Prepared By: ALPHA TESTING, INC. 2209 Wisconsin Road, Suite 100 Dallas, Texas 75229 . I 􀁉􀁾TESTING, INC. 2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100 Dallas, Texas 75229 972/620-8911 -972/263-4937 (Metro) FAX: 972/406-8023 April 2, 2001 GBW ENGINEERS, INC. 1919 Shiloh S. Road, Suite 530, LB 27 Garland, Texas 75042 Attention: Mr. Bruce R. Grantham, P.E. Re: Remedial Geoteclmical Exploration MIDWAY ROAD RECONSTRUCTION Beltline Road to Keller Springs Road Addison, Texas ALPHA Report No. 00988 Attaehed is the report of the remedial geoteclmical exploration performed for the project referenced above. This study has been authorized by Mr. Bruce Grantham, P.E. on December 28, 2000 and performed in accordance with ALPHA Proposal No. GT 7371 dated June 27,2000. This report contains results of field explorations and laboratory testing and an engineering interpre(&tion of these with respect to available project charaeteristics. The results and analyses have been used to develop recommendations for remedial design and reconstruction ofa segment ofMidway Road in Addison, Texas. ALPHA TESTING, INC. appreciates the opportunity to be of service on this project. If we can be of further assistance, such as providing materials testing services during construction, please contact our office. Sincerely yours, 􀁾􀁬􀁃􀀠Mana er of Engineering Services Jim L.Hillhouse, P.E. President DAL/JLHldal Copies: (3) Client Geo1echnlcal Engineering • Construclion Materials Testing • Environmental Engineering • ConsuJIing TABLE OF CONTENTS on MIDWAY ROAD RECONSTRUCTION Beltline Road to Keller Springs Road Addison, Texas ALPHA Report No. 00988 1.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE ...................................................... ..............................................1 2.0 PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS ......................................................................................2 3.0 FIELD EXPLORATION .....................................................................................................2 4.0 LABORATORY TESTS ........................................................................... ..........................3 5.0 GENERAL SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS .......................................................................3 6.0 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................... ..............................4 6.1 Pavement. ..................................................................................... .4 6.1.1 Pavement Subgrade Preparation ............................ .......................5 6.1.2 Pavement Section Options .........................................................5 6.1.3 Pavement Specifications ..... ;............................................... ........7 6.2 Drainage. .. . . .. ... ... ... .. . ... . .. ... ... .... ... .. ... .... .. ... .. .. .. ... ... .... .. ... . ..............11 7.0 GENERAL CONSTRUCTION PROCEDURES AND RECOMM.ENDATIONS..............8 7.1 Site Preparation and Grading ................................................................8 7.2 Fill Compaction ................................................ ...............................9 7.3 Groundwater. ...................................................................................1 0 : APPENDIX A-I Methods ofField Exploration General Location -Figure 1 Boring Location Plans -Figures 2 7 B-1 Methods of Laboratory Testing Mecb;anical Liine Stabilization Figure.l 0 Rebordof SubsUrfaoe Exploration Key to Soli Symbols and Classifications Moisture Density Relationship Figures 8 & 9 ",,", ALPHA Report No. 00988 1.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE The purpose of this remedial geotechnical exploration is to evaluate some of the physical and engineering properties of subsurface materials at the subject study area with respect to design and reconstruction of a segment of Midway Road in Addison, Texas. The field exploration has becn accomplished by securing subsurface samples (including concrete pavement) from widely spaced test borings performed along the study area. Engineering analyses have been performed from results of the field exploration and results of laboratory tests performed on representati ve samples. The analyses have been used to develop recommended pavement section options for the subject reconstructed roadway. Also included is an evaluation of the site with respect to potential construction problems and recommendations concerning earthwork and quality control testing during construction. This information can be used to verify subsurface conditions and to aid in ascertaining all construction phases meet project specifications. Recommendations provided in this report have been developed from information obtained in test borings depicting subsurface conditions only at the specific boring locations and at the particular time designated on the logs. Subsurface conditions at other locations may differ from those observed at the boring locations. The scope of work is not intended to fully define the variability of subsurface materials that may be present on the study area. The nature and extent of variations between borings may not become evident until construction. If significant variations then appear evident, our office should be contacted to re-evaluate our recommendations after performing on-site observations and tests, Professional services provided in this geotechnical exploration have been performed, findings obtained, and recommendations prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering principles and practices, The scope of services provided herein does not include an environmental assessment of the site or investigation for the presence or absence of hazardous materials in the soil, surface water or groundwater. ALPHA TESTING, INC, is not responsible for conclusions, opinions or recommendations made by others based on this data. Information contained in this report is intended for exclusive use of the Client (and their design representatives) and design of the specific pavement outlined in Seetion 2.0, Recommendations presented in this report should not be used for design of any other pavements except those specifically described in this report. Further, subsurface conditions can ehange with passage of time. Recommendations contained herein are not considered applicable for an extended period of time after the completion date of this report. It is recommended our offiee be contacted for a review of the contents of this report for construction commencing more than two (2) years after eompletion of this report. Reeommendations provided in this report are based on our understanding of information provided by the Client about characteristics of the project. If the Client notes any deviation from the facts about project charaeteristics, our office should be contacted immediately since this may 1 ALPHA Report No. 00988 materially alter the recommendations. Further, ALPHA TESTING, INC. is not responsible fur damages resulting from workmanship of designers or contractors and it is recommended that the owner retain qualified personnel to verify work is perfurmed in accordance with plans and specifications. 2.0 PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS It is proposed to reconstruct a segment of Midway Road loeated between Beltline Road and Keller Springs Road in Addison, Texas. A site plan illustrating the general outline of the study area is provided as Figure I, the Location Plan, in the Appendix of this report. At the time the field exploration was performed, the study area was developed with the existing concrete roadway. Present plans provide for reconstruction of the existing pavement The existing pavement has experienced some distress. The distress is generally in the form of depressed areas adjacent to the existing pavement joints and generally occur in the direction of traffic flow from the pavement joints. Joints in the pavement were noted to be unusually large (up to about \t2" wide) and in some areas it appears surface water is entering the pavement subgrade through these wide joints. At the north end of the study area (north of Borings 21 and 22; north-bound lane) in particular, water was actually noted emergi,ng .from the joints immediately after passage of large trucks. In general, trans,verse crac.kir!& 􀁷􀁾􀀮􀁮􀀺􀁯􀀧􀁾across the pavement panel near their midpoint in areas where significant pavement disttess'was noted. 3.0 FIELD EXPLORATION Subsurface conditions along the study area have been explored by drilling 22 test borings in general accordance with ASTM D 420 to a depth of 10 ft using standard rotary drilling equipment. The approximate location ofeach test boring is shown on the Boring Local;ion P_a:ns, Figures 2-7, enclosed in the Appendix of this report. Some borings were drilled 􀁩􀁱􀀢􀁉􀁩􀁪􀁾􀁴􀁴􀁥􀁳􀁓􀁥􀁣􀁴􀀠areas 􀁾􀁨􀁩􀁬􀁥􀀠others were 􀁾􀁩􀁉􀁬􀁥􀁤􀀠in 􀁮􀁯􀁮􀀭􀀿􀁩􀁳􀁴􀁲􀁾􀁳􀁥􀁤􀀠areas for 􀁾􀁯􀁭􀁰􀁡􀁲􀁩􀁳􀁯􀁮􀀮􀀠.Details 􀁾􀁾􀀠4.ilUwj;:lWd samphng operatIOns are bnefly summanzed 111 Methods ofField ExploratIOn, 􀁓􀁥􀁣􀁴􀁩􀁏􀁬􀁩􀁾􀁾􀀧􀀮􀀬􀁬􀁌􀁑􀁴􀀡􀀮􀀻􀀱􀁬􀁩􀁥􀀠Appendix."" ./. 'f' " Soil and rock (shaly limestone) 􀀧􀁴􀁹􀁰􀁥􀁾􀀬􀁥􀁰􀀺􀁜􀀩􀁯􀁬􀁊􀀮􀁜􀀡􀀮􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀮􀁤􀀡􀁬􀁲􀁩􀁮􀁧􀀠the field exploration are 􀁰􀁲􀁥􀁾􀁮􀁴􀁥􀀴􀀠on Record of Subsurface 􀁅􀁸􀁰􀁾􀁾􀂣􀀡􀁬􀁾􀁾􀁮􀁪􀁾� �􀁾􀁾􀁩􀁗􀀹􀁍􀁍􀀡􀀴􀀬􀁾􀁭􀁾􀁥􀁁􀁰􀁰􀁥􀁮􀁤􀁩􀁸􀀠of th,isrepQrt.. T:be boring logs contain our Field 􀁔􀁥􀁣􀁊􀀺􀁬􀁢􀁪􀁣􀁩􀁬􀁦􀁴􀁬􀀨􀁓􀁬􀁩􀁤􀀬􀁾􀁜􀁾􀁦􀁩􀁧􀁦􀁩􀁬􀁾􀁬􀀨􀀺􀁩􀁩􀁬􀁾􀁲􀁐􀁴􀁥􀁴􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀁯􀁦􀀮 􀁣􀁯􀁮􀁤􀁩􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁨􀁳􀀠believed to e)cist between actual samples retrieved: TiWefoi¢:ihese boring logs contain both facl:uaJ aitd interpretive infol1nation. Lines delineating 􀁳􀁴􀁩􀁢􀁾􀁳􀁴􀁲􀁡􀁴􀁡􀀠o n the boring logs are approximate and the actual transition between strata may be gfaduitl, Fill materials have been encountered at some boring locations as will be discussed in Section 5.0. There may be fill in oth!lT, bori!lgsthlW noted'lr at other I09ations, but could not be readily 􀁩􀁤􀁥􀁮􀁾􀁩􀁦􀁩􀁥􀁤.. 􀁃􀁯􀁭􀁰􀁯􀁳􀁩􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀀧􀁾􀁦􀁩􀁾􀁬􀁴􀁲􀁦􀁩􀁬􀁾􀁩􀀡􀁍􀁳􀀺􀁾􀀢􀁨􀀬􀁬􀁾􀀺􀁲􀀢� �􀁾􀀮􀁜􀁾􀁾􀁥􀁤􀂷on samples retrieved from 6-inch mrutlmum diruneter 􀁢􀁯􀁩􀀧􀁤􀁬􀁏􀀧􀁾􀁳􀀺􀀠.􀁉􀁴􀀩􀀮􀁳􀀯􀁬􀁉􀁬􀀱􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁬􀁉􀁬􀀧􀁾􀂮􀀡􀀠\t;ljis fill was placed and c.ompacted 2 : J ALPHA Report No. 00988 during construction of the existing concrete roadway. However. since no records were made available of fill placement, compaction or uniformity, subsurface conditions immediately adjacent to test borings could be substantially different than conditions observed in test borings. 4.0 LABORATORY TESTS Selected samples of the subsurface materials have been tested in the laboratory to evaluate their engineering properties as a basis in providing recommendations for pavement design and earthwork construction. A brief description of testing procedures used in the laboratory can be found in Methods of Laboratory Testing, Section B·l of the Appendix. Individual test results are presented either on Record of Subsurface Exploration sheets or on summary data sheets also enclosed in the Appendix. 5.0 GENERAL SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS In general, the existing concrete pavement is underlain by soils derived from the Austin Chalk formation. Within the \ O-ft maximum depth explored during this study, subsurface materials consist generally of clay (CH) underlain by calcareous clay (CL) and deeper shaly limestone. In the southern and central portions of the study area (Borings 1-16), the existing pavement sectiongenerally consists of about 8 inches of Portland cement concrete overlying lime treated subgrade soils. Ht should be noted that lime treated subgrade soils were not encountered in all of these boring locations.) In the northern portion of the study area (Borings 17-22), the existing pavement section generally consists of 6.5 to 7 inches of Portland cement concrete overlying a clayey (CIYCL) subgrade. The letters in parenthesis represent the soils' classification according to the Unified Soil Classification System (ASTM D 2488), More detailed stratigraphic information is presented on the Record of Subsurface Exploration Sheets attached to this report. Most of the subsurface materials are relatively impermeable and are anticipated to have a slow response to water movement. Therefore, several days of observation will be required to evaluate actual groundwater levels within the depths explored. Also, the groundwater level at the study area is anticipated to fluctuate seasonally depending on the amount of rainfall, prevailing weather conditions and subsurface drainage characteristics. During field explorations, free groundwater has been noted in Borings \-4 on drilling tools and in open boreholes upon completion at depths of 4.5 to 8 ft. Free groundwater was not observed in the other borings during drilling or in the other open boreholes upon completion. In our opinion, the current groundwater level on the study area may be located below the bottom of the borings and water within the depths explored may be "perched" groundwater which has percolated downward through desiccation cracks in the clayey type soils. It is not uncommon to detect seasonal groundwater either from natural fractures within the clay matrix, near the soil/rock interface or from fractures in the rock, particularly after a wet season. If more detailed groundwater infurmation is required, monitoring wells or piezometers can be installed. 3 ALPHA Report No. 00988 Further details concerning subsurface materials and conditions encountered can be obtained from the Record ofSubsurface Exploration sheets provided in the Appendix of this report. 6.0 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS The following design recommendations have been developed on the basis of the previously described Project Characteristics (Section 2.0) and Subsurface Conditions (Section 5.0). If project criteria should change, our office should conduct a review to detennine if modifications to the recommendations are required. Further, it is recommended our office be provided with a copy of the tinal plans and specifications for review prior to construction. 6. J Pavement Clay or calcareous clay encountered near the eXlstll1g ground surface will prohably constitute the subgrade for the new pavement. Therefore, it is recommended these materials be improved prior to construction of pavement. Due to the wide spacing of the borings, division of the study area into areas with similar subgrade conditions was not possible. Delineation of areas with similar subgrade conditions, if required, should be performed during construction after the subgrade material has been exposed. The specific type of improvement procedures required in given pavement areas will be dependent upon the type of subgrade material present after final subgrade elevation has been achieved. Calculations used to detennine the required pavement thickness are based only on the physical and engineering properties of the materials and conventional thickness detennination procedures. Related civil design factors such as subgrade drainage, shoulder support, cross-sectional configurations, surface elevations, reinforcing steel, joint design and environmental factors will significantly affect the service life and must be included in preparation of the construction drawings and specifications, but were not included in the scope of this study. Normal periodic maintenance will be required for all pavement to achieve the design life of the pavement system. Please note, the recommended pavement section options provided below are considered the minimum· necessary to provide satisfactory performance based on the expected traffic loading. In some cases, City minimum standards for pavement section construction may exceed those provided below. TI1e following design information has been provided by the Client: • New pavement will consist of Portland-cement concrete and the design life is 30 years. • Daily traffic based on 1999 information for the study area is about 51,000 vehicles per day. 4 ALPHA Report No. 00988 • The projected daily traffic volume by Year 2020 will be up to about 60,000 vehicles per day. • It is anticipated the new pavement will be subject to significant truck traffic. • Truck traffic will be about 20 percent of the daily traffic volume. Therefore, the design traffic used for the new pavement is 15,1 18,000 18-kip equivalent axle load applications for a 30-year design life. 6.1 . I Pavement Subgrade Preparation Due to the relatively heavy truck traffic expected, it is recommended a non-erodable base material be provided immediately below the Portland-cement concrete pavement The non-erodable base material could consist of either a crushed limestone base material or a cement treated permeable base. The non-erodable base should be supported on an improved subgrade consisting of either are-compacted subgrade or a mechanicalty lime stabilized subgrade. It should be noted that a geotextile fabric (e.g., Marafi 180N or equivalent) should be provided between the improved subgrade soils and the cement treated permeable base to prevent fines from the improved soils from penetrating into the permeable base material. If a permeable base ,is !Ised, the subgrade must be carefully graded (Le., no birdbaths and minimum slope:of 1.5 . percent) to provide positive flow of percolated water through the pemie'able baSe to collection points at the extreme peiimeter of the pavement. Collected water at the perimeter of the pavement should be drained to an appropriate receptacle. I f the subgrade soils are mechanically lime stabilized, it is recommended lime stabilization procedures extend at least 1 it beyond the edge of the pavement to reduce effects of seasonal shrinking and swelling upon the extreme edges of pavement The soil-lime mixture should be compacted to at least 95 percent of standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698) and within the range of 0 to 4 percentage ppints above the mixture's optimum moisture content In all areas where hydrated linle is used to stabilize subgrade soil, routine Atterberg-limit tests should be 􀁰􀁥􀁲􀁦􀁯􀁲􀁭􀁾􀁤􀀠to verifY the resulting plasticity index of the soil-lime mixture is at/or below 15. Mechanical lime stabilization of the pavement subgrade soil will not prevent nonnal seasonal movement.oCtIle underlying 􀁵􀁮􀁴􀁲􀁾􀁴􀁥􀁤􀀠materials. Normal maintenance of pavement should be expected over the pavement design life. 6.1.2 Pavement Sections Options California Bearing Ratio (CBR) tests performed on composite samples from the test borings 􀁩􀁮􀁾􀁩􀁣􀁡􀁴􀁥􀀠the CBR value for the existing clay subgrade soils will be about J where$.f!1.e CaR value for the· same material after mechanical lime 5 ; : ":', ALPHA Report No. 00988 stabilization would increase to about 20. Using the above values and assuming nonnal traffic for a 30-year project life, the following pavement sections are recommended ifload transfer between joints is through aggregate interlock: Compacted Subgrade 11.5 inches Portland-cement concrete 6 inches crushed limestone base material 6 inches compacted sub grade OR 10.5 inches Portland-cement concrete 6 inches cement treated permeable base 6 inches compacted subgrade Lime Stabilized Subgrade II inches Portland-cement concrete 6 inches crushed limestone base material 6 inches lime stabilized subgrade OR 10 inches Portland-cement concrete 6 inches cement treated permeable base 6 inches lime stabilized subgrade If dowels are provided for load tiansfer at the joints in the new pavement, the following pavement section options are provided: Compacted Sub grade 10 inches Portland-cement concrete 6 inches crushed limestone base material 6 inches compacted subgrade OR 9 inches Portland-cement concrete 6 inches cement treated permeable base 6 inches compacted subgrade 6 . maxirnurii., , . '. " 0',P:'@jum ALPHA Report No. 00988 Lime Stabilized Subgrade 9.5 inches Portiand-cement concrete 6 inches crushed limestone base material 6 inches lime stabilized -subgrade OR 9 inches Portland-cement concrete 6 inches cement treated permeable base 6 inches lime stabilized subgrade 6.1.3 Pavement Specifications Pavement should be specified, constructed and tested to meet the following requirements: I. Portland-Cement Concrete: Texas SDHPT Item 360. SpecifY a Ipinimum flexural strength of 650 Ibs per sq inch at 28 days. Concrete should be designed with 5 :!: I 􀁾􀁮􀁾􀀻􀀡􀀱􀁾􀁾􀁾air. . . ,'-􀁉􀀧􀁾􀀠, 2. Crushed 􀁌􀁩􀁭􀁥􀁳􀁴􀁯􀁮􀁥􀁂􀁾􀀩􀀦􀁾􀁲􀁩􀁡􀁊􀀺􀁴􀁥􀁸􀁡􀁳􀀠SDHPT Item 247, Type A or B, Grade 2 or better. Th:e riiiferial should be compacted to a' minimum 95 percent of standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698) and within three percentage points ofthe material's optimum moisture content. 3. Cement Treated Permeable Base Material: Cement treated permeable base should have a minimum hydraulic conductivity of 3,000 feet per day compaction. Permeable base material shall consist of coarse 􀁡􀁧􀁬􀁀􀁬􀁾􀁾􀀠no fine aggregate (sand, etc.) and shall be treated with 6 􀁰􀁥􀁉􀀧􀁯􀁥􀀡􀀱􀁪􀁾􀀧􀀩􀀺􀁬􀁾􀀠cement by dry weight of the aggregate. The material should a minimum 95' percent .' of statldard Proctor (ASTM D 􀀵􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀬􀀠􀁡􀁮􀁤􀁙􀁬􀀧􀁩􀁴􀁢􀀬􀁩􀁉􀁬􀀮􀁾􀂷􀁐􀀭􀁾􀁾􀁦􀀺􀁥􀀬􀁉􀁬􀁾􀁧􀁾􀀠points of the' moistwe.cQrittlnt:; 􀀺􀀱􀀧􀀱􀀢􀁥􀀺􀁭􀁾􀁩􀁪􀁴􀁳􀁵􀁰􀁰􀁾􀁩􀂢􀁩􀀧􀁳􀁨􀁡 􀁬􀁬􀀠submit an acceptilbieg'iix 􀁤􀀴􀀧􀀩􀁾􀁬􀁧􀁮􀀠for 􀁡􀁰􀁰􀁲􀁥􀁦􀁾􀁩􀀮􀀺􀂷􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁽􀀺􀀢􀀻􀀺􀁩􀀢􀀠'. •. . 4. Lime 􀁳􀁾􀁾􀁩􀁬􀁷􀁦􀁤􀂷􀀬􀀮􀁳􀁵􀁢􀁩􀁩􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀺􀁔􀁥􀁫􀁡􀀤􀁓􀁄􀀮􀁗􀁔􀀧􀀠It!,lm 260. An estinj.at'ed 3 and 8 percent of hydrated lime (by dry sl:li! weight) should be applied t6 existing calcareous clay and clay soils, respectively, which have been scarified to a depth of 6 inches. The actual amOlmt oflime required should be confirmed by additional laboratory tests prior to construction. ( , ',''.. ':1< . 7 ALPHA Report No. 00988 a. The soil-lime mixture should be compacted to at least 95 percent of standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698) and within the range of 0 to 4 percentage points above optimum moisture. The moisture content of the subgrade should be maintained until the pavement surface is placed. b. In all areas where hydrated lime is utilized to stabilize the subgrade soil, routine Atterberg-Iimit tests should be performed prior to completion of construction to assure the resulting plasticity index of the soil-lime mixture will be at/or below 15. Gradation, Atterberg-limits and density tests should be performed at a frequency of I test per 5000 sq ft of pavement. 5. Re-compacted Subgrade: On-site materials should be scarified to a depth of at least 6 inches and re-compacted to at least 95 percent of standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698) and within the range of I percentage point below to 3 percentage points above the material's optimum moisture content. The moisture content of the subgrade should be maintained until the pavement surface is placed. Density tests should be performed at a frequency of I test per 5000 sq ft of pavement. 7.0 GENERAL CONSTRUCTION PROCEDURES AND RECOMMENDATIONS Variations in subsurface conditions could be encountered during construction. To permit correlation between test boring data and actual subsurface conditions encountered during construction, it is recommended a registered Geotechnical Engineer be retained to observe construction procedures and materials. Some construction problems, particularly degree or magnitude, cannot be anticipated until the course of construction. The recommendations offered in the following paragraphs are intended, not to limit or preclude other conceivable solutions, but rather to provide our observations based on our experience and understanding of the project characteristics and subsurface conditions encountered in the borings. 7.1 Site Preparation and Grading All areas supporting pavement should be properly prepared. After completion of the necessary stripping, clearing, and excavating and prior to placing any required fill, the exposed subgrade should be carefully inspected by probing and testing. Any undesirable material (organic material, wet, soft, or loose soil) still in place should be removed. 8 ALPHA Report No. 00988 The exposed sub grade should be further inspected by proof-rolling with a heavy pneumatic tired roller, loaded dump truck or similar equipment weighing approximately 10 tons to check for pockets of soft or loose material hidden beneath a thin crust of possibly better soil. Proof-rolling procedures should be observed by the project geotechnical engineer or his representative. Any unsuitable materials exposed should be removed and replaced with well-eompacted material as outlined in Section 7.2. Slope stability analysis of embankments (natural or constructed) was not within the scope of this study. Trench excavations should be braced or cut at stable slopes in accordance with Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) requirements, Title 29, Items 1926.650-1926.653 and other applicable building codes. 7.2 Fill Compaction Calcareous or sandy materials with a plasticity index below 25 should be compacted to a dry density of at least 95 percent of standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698) and within the range of I percentage point below to 3 percentage points above the material's optimum moisture content. Clay soils with a plasticity index equal to or greater than 25 should be compacted to a dry density between 95 and 100 percent of standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698). The compacted moisture content of the clays during placement should he within the range of 0 to 4 percentage points above optimum. Clay fill should be processed and the largest particle or clod should be less than 6 inches prior to compaction. Limestone or other rock-like materials used as random fill should be compacted to at least 95 percent ofstandard Proctor maximum dry density. The !A)mpacted moisture content of limestone or other rock·like materials used as random fill is not considered crucial to proper performance. However, if the material's moisture content during placement is within 3 percentage points of optimum, the eompactive effort required to achieve the minimum compaction criteria criteria may be minimized. Individual rock pieces larger tlum 6 inches in dimension should not be used as fill. However, if rock fill is utilized within 1 ft below the bottom of the pavement, the maximum allowable size of individual rock pieces should be reduced to 3 inches. 9 I ' .' APPENDIX : 􀁾􀀮􀀠, ; ,! , ALPHA Report No. 00988 A-I METHODS OF FIELD EXPLORATION Using standard rotary drilling equipment, a total of 22 test borings have been performed for this geotechnical exploration at the approximate locations shown on the Boring Location Plans, Figures 2-7. The test boring locations have been staked by either pacing or taping and estimating right angles from landmarks which could be identified in the field and as shown on the site plans provided during this study. The location of test borings shown on the Boring Location Plan is considered accurate only to the degree implied by the method used to locate the borings. The surface elevations provided on the Record of Subsurface Exploration sheets have been obtained by plotting the boring locations on the site plans and interpolating the surface elevation. Surface elevations given on the boring logs are approximate. Relatively undisturbed samples of the cohesive subsurface materials have been obtained by hydraulically pressing 3-inch O.D. thin-wall sampling tubes into thc underlying soils at selected depths (ASTM D 1587). These samples have becn removed from the sampling tubes in the field and examined visually. One representative portion of each sample has been sealed in a plastic bag for use in future visual examinations and possible testing in the laboratory. Modified Texas Cone Penetration (TCP) tests have also been completed in the field to determine the apparent in-place strength characteristics of the rock type materials. A 3-inch diameter steel cone driven by a 170-pound hammer dropped 24 inches is the basis for Texas State Department of Highways and Public Transportation strength correlations. In this case, ALPHA TESTING, INC. has modified the procedure allowing the use of a 140-pound hammer dropping 30-inches for completion of the field test. Depending on the resistance (strength) of the materials, either the number of blows of the hammer required to provide 12 inches of penetration, or the inches of penetration of the cone due to 100 blows of the hammer are recorded on the field logs and are shown on the Record of Subsurface Exploration sheets as TCP (reference: Texas State Department of Highways and Public Transportation, Bridge Design Manual), using the modified procedure. Logs of all borings have been included in the Appendix of this report. The logs showy,isuai descriptions of all soil and rock (shaly limestone) strata encountered using the Unified Soil Classification System. Sampling information, pertinent field data, ,and field observations are also included. Soil and rock samples not consumed by testing will be retained in our laboratory for at least 30 days and then discarded unless the Client requests otherwise. i 􀀢􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀡􀀩􀁦􀀱􀀨􀀠􀁾􀀠Ii 􀁩􀁒􀀱􀁾􀀠􀁾􀁉􀁉􀁗􀀭􀁉􀀠[J Study Area GBW Engineers, Inc. , General Location Garland, TexasJ􀁾􀀠Figure 1 􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁍􀁾􀁩􀁤􀁾􀁗􀀭􀁡􀁾􀁙􀁾􀁒􀁾􀁏􀁾􀁡􀁤􀁾􀁒􀁾􀁥􀁥􀁾􀁯􀁾􀁮􀁾􀁍􀁾� �􀀭􀁵􀁮􀀭􀁩􀁾􀁯􀁮􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀮􀀠􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁉􀀠Addison, TeXIS r 00988 4/02101 l I 􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀠I I i 􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀫􀀱􀀠􀁾􀁉􀀠w ///I ItI ,/f; ) /, 3NIl B-S. I.. 􀁈􀁊􀀱􀀧􀁖􀁾􀀠"" 􀁾􀀠I I i>,I I,I Ile '' I I ,l 􀁵􀀭􀁾􀀠I 􀁾􀁥• 􀁾􀀠N o 20 40 Graphic Scale In Ft. Texas Boring Location Plan Figure 2 00988 4/02101 ----& -I I I " " " , , L, I ii: I , " , I I [I II I'll Ii i 􀁾􀀩II I \-F [t I 􀁌􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠i ffI I ,,, : /;I I 0 /, ,I I II II/II/I I r I I: '1/," ,",,, , • I V' II I, I' II I: 􀁾􀁈􀀧􀀠N :. ..􀁾􀀧􀁗􀀠..!o. ST. LOt. .; 0 20 40 Rt Graphic Scale In Ft. Inc. Location Figure 3 00988 4/02/01 GBW Addison, Texas N o 20 40 00988 4/02/01 \ " , j \ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 􀁾􀀠, I, .' .􀁾􀀠, I ; 􀁾􀀠" I••• - !;ilRock Core Dia. in. e Inspector -'" 􀀺􀁩􀁾􀀡􀁾􀁾􀀠;; .2 we CHi> "-Hn :!rown very stiff CLAY(CH) with 0 . I some sand and gravel. -8 11 of concrete at surface. 1ST-1 I=2' -------------2 Reddish Brown very stiff = CLAY (CH/CL) with some sandi : 2 ; ST calcareous nodules and gravel. -hard :2 I -3 I , -stiff below 5 ... 3 ST 4 : 4 ST -: = 5 ST -------6'--------6 Tan firm CALCAREOUS CLAY(CL) with some silty sand and 6 i ST limestone gravel. -stiff 6'-7 1 • 7 ST 8 : 􀁟􀁾􀁓􀁔.. : i -::.. 9 ST 10 BOTTOM OF TEST BORING AT 10 I. .. -12 .. SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS 􀁾􀀠0. 􀁾􀀠t:: 􀁾•f0 0.'g 0 W '5 w ; i i " ·ii• 1£ i 􀁾􀀠"'E E .E0. £ C >.Q>U t. 0 !O t) ,,= '0 c_ ". :g"P,l::!• u: 􀁯􀀮􀁾􀀠C 􀀺􀁬􀁕􀀻􀁾􀀠;§£g 0." -'" 0. 5f££-c . U-w5 􀁧􀀧􀁾􀀠.􀀺􀀻􀀩􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁧􀁾􀀵􀀠"'. :; II H I!oc >. co. .0 " ......:O"'fo.fe'" 􀁾􀁡􀀮􀁡􀀮􀀠2.2 39 LL=76 PL=27 PI=49 4.5+ 26 2.7 26 LL=53 PL=20 J:>I=33 2.2 25 1.7 24 1.0 29 LL=33 J:>L=15 P1=18 0.7 27 0.5 29 0.5 46 i I BORING METHOD S5 • STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HSA • HOLLOW STEM AUGERSAT COMPLETION 5 FT.ST . SHELBY TUBE CFA CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS CA . CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER AFTER HRs.. FT. DC • DRIVEN CASINGS TCP· TEXAS CONE PENETRATION TEST MD ·MUD DRILLINGWATER ON RODS 8 FT. ALPHA TESTING. INC. RECORD OF2209 Wisconsin St" Suite 1 00 Dallas, Texas 75229 (972) 620-8911 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Client GBW ENGINEERS, INC. Architect/Engineer ___________________ Project Name ___...􀁾􀁄􀁗􀁁􀁙􀀠ROAD RECONSTRUCTION Project location ADDISON, TEXAS DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION Date Started 1-21-01 HammerWt. Ih. Date Completed 1-21-01 Hammer Drop in. Drill Foreman __.. EDI 􀁟􀁾􀀠Spoon Sample 00 in. •> lnspector Rock Core Dis, in. 􀁾􀀠3 0Boeing Method CFA Shelby Tube 00 in. 0 N ci I z '"SOIL CLASSIFICATION .S I 􀁾􀀠:; !:l 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠SURFACE ELEVATION :> 􀁾􀁡􀀠c>-'" ! "'>􀁾􀁣􀁩􀀠• 􀁾􀁾􀀠•a:<>u 618± >-w " Brown hard CLAY (cli) with some o -sand and gravel. = -= -7.75" of concrete at surface. -= 1ST1 = = -= 2' -------------f--2 Reddish Brown and Tan very stiff CLAY (CH!CL) with some 2 ; ST sand. calcareous nodules and I-gravel. -hard 2 f -3 I. = I : -stiff below 5' . = 3 1 ST 􀀮􀁾􀀠4 I 4 : ST 5' ---------􀁾􀀠-------= 5 ST -= 6Tan firm CALCAREOUS CLAY (CL)-with some silty sand and : : limestone gravel. = 6 1ST --very stiff 5' -6 I. I-stiff 6' -7 I. -. .7 • ·ST -= I 8 : il': '8 ST = : i -: : 9 ST BOTTOM OF TEST BORING AT 10' . 10 : : ---:l; ..:r, .... 􀁾􀀧.. ,'. ; SAMPLeR TYPE " • '$; ! " 􀁾􀀠00 ijS 􀁾􀀠" 􀁲􀀭􀁾􀀠c= 'iii0>􀀮􀁾􀀠l'i t:􀁾􀀮•c 􀁾􀀠&: 􀁾􀀠>c 􀀮􀁾􀀠l 􀁾􀀠i , I = ! i 􀀮􀁾• *•Q. E *E .E0 0 cu ii. '" ,... 􀁾􀀠u'" In, H􀁾􀀮􀀠􀁾􀀮􀁾􀀮􀁧􀀠fi 0 cr.iI :HLa: ., II ft jito:: 4.5+ 33 LL=68 PL=37 PI=31 4.5+ 26 3.5 22 2.5 20 2.2 21 . 1.2 24 0.5 29 0.5 30 0.5 32 HSA 􀁵􀁾􀁩􀀭􀀻􀂷􀁈􀁾􀀻􀁓􀀻􀀻􀁅􀁎􀁩􀁁􀁕􀁇􀁅􀁒􀁓􀀠CFA • CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS DC -DRIVEN CASINGS MO -MUD DRILLING Boring No. _______-'B=-2"--____􀁾􀀠 Job No. 00988 Drawn By _______􀀭􀀭􀀧􀁁􀁍􀁾_______ Approved By _______􀁾􀀢􀀧􀁟􀁟______ TEST DATA 55 -STANDARD PENETRATION TEST 5 FT.ST -SHELBY TUBE CA • CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER AFTER HRs.. FT. TCP-TEXAS CONE PENETRATION TEST WATER ON RODS 8 FT. ALPHA TESTING. INC. RECORD OF 2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100 Dallas, Texas 75229 (972) 620-8911 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Client GSW ..ENGINEERS. INC. ____ Boring No. _______-::-::::-::':-______􀁾􀀠;"chi teat/Engineer _____________............=____ Job No, ________0::.0::.9=8=.8______ Project Name ___... 􀁍􀁉􀁄􀁗􀁾􀁙􀀠R()AD RECONSTRUCTION Drawn By AM Project Location ADDISON, TEXAS Approved By _______-"='-______ DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION TEST DATA ---: --= -----:: : --= : --Date Started 1-21-01 Hammer Wt. lb•.--_...-'" 􀁾Date Completed 1-21-01 Hammer Drop in. " Spoon Sample 00 __... in. 􀁾􀁾􀀠Drill Foreman EDI 􀁾􀀠00 -...􀀭􀁾... .._--> -iii Inspector ._.... Rock Core Dia. in. •• 􀁾􀁾'" ...􀁾􀀭_.. 􀀮􀁾􀀠"3 0Boring Method CFA Shelby Tube OD in. c 􀁯􀁾􀀠N 0'" .􀁾􀀠£: ,; 􀁾􀀮􀀲􀀠z iii1il '" 0' SOIL CLASSIFICATION 􀀮􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀭.. 􀁾􀀠" 􀁾􀁩􀁦::l! •.. 􀁾􀀧􀁏:> w 􀁾SURFACE ELEVATION r'" :t:w 􀁾􀀠10 􀁵􀁾􀀠"'r 􀁴􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀠'" ..." 􀁾􀀠.'0:E. :Eo. 􀁾􀀠·0"'''' .." ".618± rW wu ",0 "',. 􀁾􀁴􀀵",0 Cu> "'Z "'t-Brown hard Lime Treated ° -CLAY (CH) with some sand and : calcareous nodules and gravel. -=-8 11 of concrete at surface. 1 ST ----2 _ : 2 ST 3' ------_._------Brown very stiff CLAY (CH) with : some sand, calcareous nodules -3 i ST and gravel. --reddish brown below 4' . 4 I-stiff below 5' . -: 4 • ST-i : 5 1ST 6' : f------------,.. -6 _ ITan firm CALCAREOUS CLAY (CL) with some silty sand and -6 • ST -limestone gravel. -i --stiff 6 I -7 I • -7 i ST -8 _ i : 8 ST i ! -i 9 • ST BOTTOM OF TEST BORING AT 10 1 • 10 ! -• ! i Ii 12 SAMP!.ER TYPE GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS SS • STANDARD PENETRA TION TEST ,I I '" ! " 'iii"•t: '" 􀁾􀀠t-0 0 t; 0 '"i 􀁾􀀠0 '" I i 􀁾􀀠"•" t x1i 1> •;Jl 􀀺􀁾􀁾􀁾E E E0 g eU 􀀮􀁾􀀠.... u·'.::!􀁾􀀠. !!l'0 u: c_ 􀁾􀀭􀀧􀀠0 􀁾􀀮􀁾􀀮􀁧0 0'" 0 􀁾􀂣􀁧􀀠... " .",U "roW • 'I! c . :':Ht£i:5 g't.; 􀀽􀀾􀁾􀀠􀁾􀁾􀀮􀀠II II 11􀁧􀁾􀀵􀀠􀁾􀁯􀀠> • 00 􀁾􀀮􀀠􀁾􀀠􀀺􀀺􀁬􀁾􀁮􀀺"''''t-"'... 0';' 4.5+ 36 LL=57 PL=36 PI=21 4.0 31 2.7 30 3.2 22 1.7 22 loS 25 0.5 26 0.7 32 0.5 35 ! , i I BORING METHOD HSA -HOLLOW STEM AUGERSAT COMPLETION 5.5 FT.ST . SHELBY TUBE CFA • CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS CA -CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER AFTER DC • DRIVEN CASINGS HRS. FT. TCP· TEXAS CONE PENETRATION TEST MD ·MUD DRILLINGWATER ON RODS 8 FT. ALPHA TESTING, INC. RECORD OF2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100 Dallas, Texas 75229 (972) 620·8911 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Baring No. ________B=-,,4_____Client GBW ENGINEERS, INC. _________________________ 􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭Jab No. __________ 00988Architect/Engineer Drawn By ________...:AM""'_______Project Name MIDWAY ROAD RECONSTRUCTION Approved By _______􀁾􀁄􀀧􀀡􀀡􀁁􀁌􀁾_____􀁾Project Location __... .. ADDISONI TEXAS TEST DATADRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION Date Started 1-21-01 Hammer Wt. lb•. _ ... ;tDate Completed 1-21-0_1_ Hammer Drop in. "Drill Foreman EDI Spoon Sample OD in. • _l > 00 Rock Core Dia, in. • 􀁾􀁯􀀻􀀠Inspector Vi 􀁾􀀧􀁩_ •••______M __________ 0 Boring Method CFA Shelby Tube 00 3 in. !'i g.!.._.; :;;;c: ·0 I z 􀁾􀀮􀁾􀀠'" 􀁾􀀢SOIL CLASSIFICATION .s 􀀢􀀭􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠w 􀁾􀁊􀁦:;; 0 ..._----"0", i ;:, w wSURFACE ELEVATION it Iw 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠1" 􀁵􀁾􀀠... 􀁾􀀠.. ..w • "'0 115 :;;. :;;o. 􀁾􀀠·cx.618± I-W «0 «>􀁾􀁕􀁩",0 0", "''' "'... o. : Brown hard CLAY (CH) with some o -I sand and calcareous nodules and = gravel. gravel. -i ST--7.75 11 of concrete at surface. -1--I ---2 I = 2 1 ST-=3 ' -----------------.iReddish Brown and Tan very -stiff CLAY (CH/CL) with some 3 . ST silty sand, calcareous nodules I-and gravel. -hard 3 1 -4 I. 4 -stiff below 5' . -i ST--4: -i -: = 5 ST =-6'---C" ..-----------6 -Tan firm CALCAREOUS CLAY (CL)-with some silty sand and = 6 ST limestone gravel. --:: = : 7 ST -8 = i : 8 ST -:: 9 ST i : 10 BOTTOM OF TEST BORING AT 10' . 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠.. --! ---I--1 -i I -1 -i -1 􀁾􀀠12 ""1 "'" " :; !:: 􀁾•I􀁾􀀠,'" 􀁾􀀠! I i • 􀀮􀁾-􀁾􀁾􀀠'" #.E E .c00 II .1l 10 􀁾􀂷􀁾􀀺􀁩Cl 􀁾1il i c'"' 11;...... 􀁾􀀧􀀢􀀠, 0 􀁾􀀭􀁳􀁧􀀠"-u ICl ,,0.!!! §:;; I 􀁾􀀠:':Hi:£ C "'_oco 􀁾􀀮􀀠.g 􀁾􀀠II !l Uoec 00 ",. . .c_o 00 􀁾􀀮􀀠'11; ::ia:a::::>"'... ..... OD 4.5+ 31 4.0 33 4.0 25 3.2 20 3.2 23 0.7 26 0.7 29 0.5 30 0.5 28 I I SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS BORING METHOD S5 -STANDARD PENETRATION TEST ST . SHELBY TUBE AT COMPLETION 4.5 FT. HSA • HOLLOW STEM AUGERS CFA -CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS CA -CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER AFTER HRs.. FT, DC -DRIVEN CASINGS TCP-TEXAS CONE PENETRATION TEST WATER ON RODS 7 FT. MD ·MUD DRILLING ALPHA TESTING, INC. RECORD OF 2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100 Dallas. Texas 75229 (972) 620-8911 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Client _______􀁾􀁇􀁾􀁂􀀺􀀡􀀡􀁗􀀢􀁟􀀧􀁅􀀢􀀧􀁎􀀢􀀧􀁇􀁾􀁬􀀺􀀺􀀡􀀺􀀻􀁎􀁅􀁾􀁅􀀢􀀧􀁒􀀽� �􀀮􀀧􀁟􀀮􀁟􀀢􀀧􀁉􀀢􀀧􀁎􀀢􀀧􀁃􀀢􀀧􀀮_______ Baring No. Architect/Engineer Job No. _______-'0"'0=9,,8,,8________ Prolect Name mDWAY ROAD RECONSTRUCTION Drawn By AM Project locatron ADDISON, TEXAS Approved By _______-=D"'AL"'-_______ DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION TEST DATA Date Started 1-21-01 Hammer Wt. lb•. i Oate Completed 1-21-01 Hammer Drop in. 􀁾􀀠• Drill Foreman EDI Spoon Sample OD in. • 􀁾􀁾􀀠> 00 Rock Core Dia. tn. Jj -m Inspector ___ 􀁾􀁩..􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭-3 8Boring Method CFA Shelby Tube 00 in. o·0 ....N 􀀮􀁾􀀮􀂧􀀠I .; : z 1Ol;' m 􀁯􀁾􀀠SOIL CLASSIFICATION 0 􀁴􀁦􀁾-.i -•• li • co. 0. °u" 􀁾􀀠wSURFACE ELEVATION 􀁾􀀠E 􀀧􀀺􀀺􀁾.... 0: o:w "'>t;;l .. 0.", •-w wu ",0 􀀻􀁊􀁩􀁾􀀠'.Q"'''' 0", "'Z .... '" 􀁾􀀠Brown hard Lime Treated o -CLAY(CH} with some sand and : -= calcareous nodules. -= -= 􀁾􀀸􀀱􀀱􀀠of concrete at surface. 1 ST . : 2' -􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭-------f..-2 I Dark Brown very stiff CLAY (CH) with some sand. = ....:: -brown with calcareous nodules below 4' . -:: 2 , ST = -tannish brown below 8' . = I 􀁾􀀠4 ._. -:: 3 ST = = : = -i -6 = ---4ST -:: 8 _ : : -= -= 5 ST : --BOTTOM OF TEST BORING AT 10 10' . , -= i --. 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀮􀀠';,>,;:<. " 12 -. .. .-"". I u. ! ";;; 0 to ti•.... 0 .9 1:>, "' " "' i: J 􀀮􀁾􀀠! ! • 􀁾l' 0. if.Ii E l'g E<.J 􀀮􀁾􀀠".. 􀁾􀀠o-'!:: U .t >:" '0'-(.)• os: tj'z.u. 0 􀁾􀁾􀀠"-" 􀀭􀁾􀀠".§g u :;a:a:lii!QBC • 0"'. ,,'" 􀁾􀀠II II II 􀁣􀁾􀁡􀀠o§ ! 􀁾􀀮􀀠::lii!c::::,,">I? ... 0.0 4.5+ 37 LL=56 PL=35 PI=21 3.0 40 3.2 29 3.2 28 3.0 28 SANllllEif-ivPE· GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS BORING METHOD SS -STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HSA -HOLLOW STEM AUGERSAT COMPLETION DRY FT.ST . SHELBY TUBE CFA • CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS CA • CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER AFTER HRs.. FT. DC -DRIVEN CASINGS TCP-TEXAS CONE PENETRATION TEST MD ·MUD DRILLINGWATER ON RODS NONE FT. ALPHA TESTING. INC. RECORD OF2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100 Dallas, Texas 75229 (972) 620-8911 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Client _ ...􀁟􀁾..___􀁾􀁇􀀬􀀾􀀻􀀺􀀸􀀡􀀡􀁗􀁾􀁅􀁾􀁎􀀡􀁏􀁇􀁾􀁉􀁾􀁎􀁅􀁾􀁅􀀡􀀡􀀡􀁒􀁾􀁓� �􀀮􀀡􀀮􀀮􀀮􀁟􀁉􀀺􀀡􀀺􀀻􀁎􀁾􀁃􀁾􀀮_______ Boring No. ________"':8"'-"'6___ Architect/Engineer _________________.____ Job No. 00988 Project Name ____􀀭􀀢􀀧􀁍􀀢􀀧􀁉􀀢􀀧􀁄􀀺􀁣􀁗􀁣􀀺􀀺􀁁􀀢􀀧􀁙􀀢􀀭􀀧􀁒􀀢􀁏 􀀢􀀧􀁁􀁄􀀽􀁟􀁒􀁅􀀽􀀮􀀺􀀺􀁃􀀮􀀺􀀺􀁏􀀽􀁎􀀢􀀧􀁓􀀢􀀧􀁔􀀢􀀧􀁒􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁕􀀢􀀧􀁃􀁔􀀽􀁉􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁏􀁾􀁎􀀧􀁟􀁟􀁟􀁟􀀠Drawn By AM Project Location ______--"ADDISON, TEXAS Approved By _______....:=D"'AL""-_____ DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION TEST DATA -􀁾􀀠.:: : --:: : .:: 􀁾􀀠= -:: : -= --Date Started 1-21-01 Hammer Wt. Ibs. Date Completed 1-21-01 Hammer Drop in. !l: 􀁾􀀠Drill Foreman EDI Spoon Sample 00 in. • " 􀁾􀀠00 􀀢􀁾􀀠-iii-Inspector Rock Core Dia. in, m 􀁾􀁾--_...3 0Boring Method CPA Shelby Tube 00 in. c c· N 01SOIL CLASSIFICATION SURFACE ELEVATION 617± Brown very Dense SAND (SP) with some gravel and clay. -8 II of concrete at surface. -------------Brown very stiff CLAY (CH) with some sand. -tannish brown with calcareous nodules and gravel below -tannish brown below 8' . BOTTOM OF TEST BORING AT 4' . 10 I. i : i ci "c I 􀁾.9: z 􀁾􀁾􀀠0> ki.!::.£ 􀁯􀀮􀁾• ! • w_ ;;; 􀁾􀀠c"a. 0.":> W W E 􀀼􀀮􀀾􀁾􀁾􀀠􀁾I-I J:W "􀀬􀁾􀁾':1􀁉􀀭􀁾􀀠w .'0A..: ;;;. E ·cao,,x.I-W wu ",0 􀀺􀀨􀁪􀁩􀁾􀀠• w_ 000 Ow mz .. 1-00 o -: .:: 1 ST 13 -2' ---2 _ :: -= 2 ST :: --4 --:: -= 3 ST = -6 _ ----4 ST ----i 8 :: :: -j 5 ST --, i10 ! -I 12 ! I 􀁾􀀠c. 􀁾􀀠t; ""c 0."0 j(1) 'S m , I I • ! .>•• 􀁾􀀠e ;;c. iI'E E .E0 0 , 0> E ><.> ".. 􀀮􀁾􀀠!! :g'r§.c1ii c_ I :;;. c 􀁾􀀠􀀮􀁾􀀠."," 0 ;)11;10; 􀁾􀁾􀀠"-" <.> ga:;£c ._m 􀀺􀀻􀀮􀁾􀀠B'oeQ, w_ 􀁾􀀮􀀠• II II􀁧􀁾􀂧􀀠i 85 .' "" :;;! 􀁾􀁾􀀭:>(1)10.10.0 􀁾􀁯􀀮􀁡􀀮􀀠-30 1.2 2.' 80 34 LL=80 PL=30 PI=50 3.7 26 3.0 24 LL=66 PL=24 PI=42 2.2 29 i , 􀁓􀁁􀁍􀁉􀀧􀁾􀁅􀁒􀀠TYPE GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS BORING METHOD 5S • STANDARD PENETRATION TEST ST -SHELBY TUBE AT COMPLETION DRY FT. HSA -HOLLOW STEM AUGERS CFA -CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS CA -CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER AFTER HRS.. FT. DC -DRIVEN CASINGS TCP· TEXAS CONE PENETRATION TEST WATER ON RODS NONE FT. MD -MUD DRILLING --------------------ALPHA TESTING, INC. RECORD OF 2209 Wisconsin St .. Suite 100 Dallas, Texas 75229 (972) 620-8911 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Client _______􀁾􀁇􀀧􀀡􀀡􀁂􀁾􀁗􀀢􀁟􀀧􀁅􀁾􀁎􀁾􀁇􀀢􀁉􀀽􀀧􀁎􀁅􀁾 􀁅􀀡􀀺􀀡􀁒􀁾􀁓􀁌􀀧􀀭􀀧􀀢􀁉􀁾􀁎􀁾􀁃􀁣􀀺􀀮_______ Baring No, Architect/Engineer Jab No, _______-'0"'0"'9"'8"'8"-_______ Project Name MIDWAY ROAD RECONSTRtlCTION Drawn By ________􀁾􀁁􀁍􀁾____􀁾􀀠 Project Location _,___􀁾􀁾__ ,ADDISON. TEXAS Approved By ________"DAL='-, TEST DATA Date Started 1-21-01 Hammer Wt. ;t•Date Completed 1-21-01 Hammer Drop 􀀢􀁾􀀠Drill Foreman EDI Spoon Sample OD ,.> 􀁾􀀠00 0 􀁾􀁥􀀠􀁾􀀠'"Inspector Rock Core Dia. '" 1-1;; Boring Method CFA Shelby Tube OD 3 0 􀂧􀁾􀀠'iiiN 'P c :nci 􀁾􀀮􀀲􀀠!::• in .. .. iZ 􀁑􀀩􀁾􀀠'. C" c ,.."•SOIL CLASSIFICATION '" 􀀦􀀺􀁾􀀠.g E . i, 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀦􀀠C ro co. 0 "-0" 'gSURFACE ELEVATION 11 •􀁾􀀠'" 􀁾􀀠'S619± "U '" oBrown very stiff CLAY(CH) with some sand and gravel. = -8 . .25" of concrete at surface. 26ST 2.5-2' 2 -Dark Brown very stiff CLAY{CH) = with some sand, calcareous _. nodules and a trace of gravel. -brown below 6 f • ST 27 -tannish brown below 8'. 3.7 4-= . ST 3.2 28 6 . . 􀁾􀀠-4, ST 3.0 24 -. --1 _ : . -2 . : ...: 3 I8'--.. 8 .: : !, .--Tan weathered SRALY LIMESTONE. -5 -. " ,:': lQQ.TCP 53.3 11 10BOTTOM OF TEST BORING AT 10'. ',' " 􀁾􀀧􀀠.', L-􀁾􀁾􀂷.'. DRY 􀁲􀀻􀁾􀁾􀁳-.􀁳􀀭􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀺􀁢􀀭􀀺􀀭􀁾􀁅􀁒􀀭􀁒􀀭􀁏􀁔􀀭􀀺􀀭􀁾􀀭􀁅􀀭􀁔􀀭􀁒􀀭􀁁􀀭􀁔􀀭􀁉􀁏􀀭􀁎􀀭􀁔􀀭􀁅􀀭􀁓􀀭􀁔􀀭􀀭􀀮􀁌􀀮􀀮..... T·· ..􀀧􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁔􀁬􀁮􀁎􀀠HSA • 􀀢􀀧􀁏􀁌􀁾􀁏􀁗stEM'tIl.·UGERSss ST . SHELBY TUBE <>_ .• CFA-C 􀀱􀁉􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁇􀁈􀁴􀀧􀁁􀁕􀁇􀁅􀁒􀁓􀀠CA . CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER AFTER HRs.. FT. DC . "nlvtl' C. TCp· TEXAS CONE PENETRATION TEST WATER ON RODS NONE FT. MO ·MUD DRILLING ALPHA TESTING. INC. RECORD OF2209 Wisconsin St.. Suite 100 Dallas. Texas 75229 (972) 620·8911 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Client ______􀀭􀀽􀁇􀁾􀁂􀀧􀀡􀀧􀁗􀀧􀁟􀀢􀁅􀁎􀀽􀁇􀁾􀁉􀁾􀁎􀁅􀀡􀁅􀀡􀀡􀁅􀀡􀀡􀀡􀁒􀁾􀁓􀀢􀀮� �􀁟􀁟􀀧􀁉􀁾􀁎􀁾􀁃􀀢􀁟􀀧􀁟􀀮_______ Boring No, B-8 ___ Architect/Engineer Job No. _______--'0"'0"'9"'8"'8"-____ Project Name MIDWAY ROAD RECONSTRUCTION Drawn By ________-'AM=_____ Project Location _ ..__..___􀀭􀀧􀁁􀁄􀀽􀁄􀁾􀁉􀀮􀀡􀀢􀁓􀀢􀁏􀁎􀀽􀀮􀁟􀀽􀁔􀀭􀀢􀁅􀀢􀀧􀁘􀁁􀀢􀀢􀀧􀁓􀀧􀁟􀁟______ Approved By ____..___􀁾􀁄􀀢􀁁􀁌􀁾___ TEST DATADRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION Date Started l-2l-0l Hammer Wt, l40 Ibs.----􀁾Date Completed l-2l-0l Hammer Drop 30 in, -" Drill Foreman EDI Spoon Sample 00 in. • "00 . > -Ql Inspector ____. Rock Core Dia. in. J5 􀁾􀁾􀀠3 0 Boring Method CFA Shelby Tube 00 in. ! 0 CO '" ol'';:' c: ci t!gII . z i 􀀭􀁾om '" C' SOIL CLASSIFICATION i 􀀬􀁾􀀠􀀦􀁾􀀠0 􀁾􀁾􀀠::; • w Iw .. 8"SURFACE ELEVATION " -' -' Ii􀁾􀁾􀀠J:W 0I􀁾􀁷􀀠.m f--' 􀁾􀀧􀁬􀀱"'.. ..« :::. :E Q,.. 􀁾619± tii!l W(J 4:0 <>􀀱􀀲􀁾0<1> f.J)Z (Ill-Brown hard Lime Treated o -1 STCLAY (CH) with some sand and : 1 : 2'r gravel. -8 . 5 11 of concrete at 1--􀁜􀁳􀁾􀁾􀁾􀁣􀀼􀀡􀀺􀀮􀀺􀀠______ I -::: 'ST----2 Dark Brown very stiff CLAY (CH) -with sand laminations. --with limestone seams below 6' . 53 • ST -: 4 1ST 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀧􀀭---------.􀁾􀀠--! Tan weathered SHALY LIMESTONE. i i -5 TCP 1QQ 10 _ 3" BOTTOM OF TEST BORING AT lO' . : ...:: ---l5􀁾􀀠: -::: --20 -:; = j ....:: j : 25 -i -' --1 .J ii :I I 30 i-i , , 􀁓􀁁􀁍􀁾􀁌􀁅􀁡􀀠TYPE SS . STANDARD PENETRATION TEST ST • SHELBY TUBE CA . CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER TCP· TEXAS CONE PENETRAnON TEST 'is. f . 0 !􀁾􀀠.. 􀁾􀀠c i 􀀮􀁾􀀠0 '" :a '" i i • 􀀮􀁾􀀠! 0 􀁾􀀠x0 " 1> • '" 􀀧􀁾􀀧􀁅􀁾E E :E0 g i 􀀭􀁾􀀠E .S:.:J >U i 0 ...J o:!;::o . i .:: c_ s:' E 􀁾􀀮􀁴􀀻􀀮􀁧􀁯􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀵􀀱􀀡􀀡􀀠􀁩􀁾􀀠-" 0 ".0'2 " (J :::1fl:£:;.i! 􀁾oc. l! II II°e c 0< .'􀂧􀀶􀁩􀁾􀀠􀀦􀀺􀀮􀁾􀀠," 􀁾􀀠! 􀁾􀁾􀀭􀁯􀁾􀀠..."-.. -23 LL=46 PL=29 3.7 29 PI=17 2.7 28 2.7 26 9 . --: ---::: ----...:: ---...:: : -GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS BORING METHOD HSA • HOLLOW STEM AUGERSAT COMPLETION DRY FT. CFA . CONTINUOUS FlIGHi AUGERS AFTER HRs.. FT. DC • DRIVEN CASINGS MD -MUD DRILLING WATER ON RODS NONE FT. J' ALPHA TESTING, INC. RECORD OF .,;. 2209 Wisconsin St.. Suite 100"h. Dalias, Texas 75229 , (972) 620-8911 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION B-9 Architect/Engineer ____________________ Job No. 00988 Project Name ____􀀮􀂣􀁍􀀡􀀺􀀡􀁉􀀡􀀺􀀮􀀡􀁄􀁗􀁾􀁁􀀢􀀧􀁙􀁾􀁒􀁾􀁏􀁥􀀮􀀺􀁁􀁄􀁾􀁟􀀧􀁒􀁾􀁅􀁾􀁃􀁾􀁏􀁾􀁎􀁾􀁓􀀮􀀽􀁔􀁾􀁒􀀢􀀺􀁕􀀢􀀢􀁃􀀺􀀮􀀡􀁔􀁏􀀡􀀡􀁉􀀢􀁏􀀧􀀡􀀧􀁎􀀧􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭Drawn By __􀁾􀀠_____-'AM=________ Client GBW ENGINEERS, 􀁉􀁎􀁾􀁟􀀠___ Boring No, Project Location ADDISON, TEXAS Approved By DAL TEST DATADRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION Date Started 1-21-01 Hammer Wt. Ibs, i ",Iin. 􀁾􀀠,Date Comp!eted 1-21-01 Hammer Drop "Drill Foreman EDI Spoon Sample OD in. 􀁾􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠Co> 􀁾􀁡􀀻􀀠Inspector Rock Core Dis. in. 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀁩i 0 Bonng Method CFA Shelby Tube OD in. 0 􀁣􀁾􀀠N 01----: .::. ----: -= ---= : .::. ----: -SOIL CLASSIFICATION I SURFACE ELEVATION 618± Dark Brown stiff Lime Treated CLAY (CH) with some sand. calcareous nodules and gravel. -8 11 of concrete at surface --------􀁾􀀠----Dark Brown very stiff CLAY(CH) with sand laminations and a trace of calcareous nodules. BOTTOM OF TEST BORING AT 10 1 • d 􀀮􀁾􀀠I:; l!!,9 z .:. ! 0> 􀁩􀁾􀀠􀀮􀁾􀀠.. 􀁾􀀠• 􀁾􀀮􀀠lE • co.: w W 0. 􀁯􀁾" u.I-x :rw 􀁾􀀠-' c "''"' 􀀧􀀢􀀧􀁾􀀠.. 􀁾􀀡􀁬􀀧􀀠• 􀀮􀁾lE, 0' ·ca: 0. .. '" ; 􀀮􀁾,",W wu «0 <> 0"'0 0", "'Z "''"' o. 1-'" 0 -1 ST 2' -􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀠2 _ I: --2 ! ST ---i-4 : !: -= 3 1 ST : -6 _ · -.::. 4 i ST : l: 8-= ---5 · ST -! --: 10 _ 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠-' . -::' I · : !12 -! I 􀁾􀀠0 il 0' to "•I-c '£ i ,'" '5 '" I I I !􀁾􀀠:••• 􀁾􀀠xe 􀁾􀀠0 􀁾􀀠if. 􀂷􀁾􀁦􀁾E E .E0' j; .§:J ;.U .jf C 􀁾􀀬􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀠u: .-I! 􀁣􀁾􀀠3:e• 􀀮􀁾􀀠o§ 􀁾􀁉􀀡􀁲􀀠0.0-'" 0 0'.u -'"' •.l:1􀁾􀀮􀀠lit 􀁾􀁾􀀭""''"' 0'" 􀁾.... 0.9 1.2 79 37 LL=55 PL=32 PI=23 2.2 33 2,2 35 2,2 31 2.2 31 . : I SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS BORING METHOD S5 . 5TANDARD PENETRATION TEST HSA • HOLLOW STEM AUGERSAT COMPLETION DRY FT,sr . SHELBY TUBE CFA . CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS CA • CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER AFTER HRS., FT. DC • DRIVEN CASINGS rep, TEXAS CONE PENETRATION TEST MD ·MUD DR ILUNGWATER ON ROOS NONE FT, ALPHA TESTING, INC. RECORD OF2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100 Dallas, Texas 75229 (972) 620-8911 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Client _____G"'B"'W"-"'E"'N"'G"'I"'NE"""E"'R""S'-',-'I"N"C"'.'--_______ Boring No. B-10 Architect/Engineer Job No. _______--'0"'0"'9::.8"-8"-___ Project Name MIDWAY ROAD RECONSTRUCTION Drawn By _____􀁾􀀬__.!AM=_______􀁾􀀠Project Location ADDI:SON, TEXAS Approved By ________D"'AL='-___􀁾􀀠DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION TEST DATA Date Started 1-21-01 Hammer Wt. lb•. iflDate Completed 1-21-01 Hammer Drop in. 􀀢􀁾􀀠D.iII Foreman EDI Spoon Sample OD in. 􀁾􀀠00> 􀁾􀁩􀁩􀀵􀀠Rock Core Dia, In. "Inspector in 􀁡􀁾􀁾􀁾.. 0Boring Method CFA Shelby Tube 00 3 in. 􀁾􀀠c"01SOIL CLASSIFICATION _ .. SURFACE ELEVATION 618± Brown hard Lime Treated CLAY (CH) with some sand, calcareous nodules and gravel. -8" of concrete at surface r􀁜􀀮􀀭􀁾􀁩􀀻􀀧􀁨􀁟􀁬􀀡􀁭􀁾􀀠􀀡􀁏􀁟􀁬􀁝􀀧􀁉􀀺􀀧􀁾􀀠_____ Dark Brown very stiff 􀁃􀁌􀁁􀁙􀀨􀁃􀁾􀀩􀀠 with sand laminations. ,stiff with limestone gravel below 8' BOTTOM OF TEST BORlNG AT i' i' :,' c u ... lOT. J ';:; I.: .; ·0 z 􀁾􀁮􀁾􀀠'" c" c 􀁾􀀭., 􀁯􀀮􀁾• ••:; .. co... 0"::> w w 􀁵􀁾:;::1: :x:w 􀁾􀀠J C 􀁉􀀭􀁾􀀠.. ..w • """,Ii: 0.« ::;. ::; .. 􀁾􀀠• C «0 􀀻􀀱􀁩􀁾􀀠􀁾􀁥I-W wu • i",0 0(1) V>Z Q. 1-(1) o 􀁾􀀠= 1 ST 3' -􀁤􀁾􀀠2 , ST , , i i -5-:: 3 1ST 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠4 1ST -􀁾􀀠= 5 ST 10 _ --15 -:: = 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠20 -:: : -= = =25 􀁾􀀠--:: , : 30 " GROUNOWATEfl OBSERVATIONS AT COMPLETION DRY FT. AFTER HRs., FT. WATER ON RODS NONE FT. I 􀁾􀀠0. 􀁾􀀠c :; !!! c 0 􀀮􀁾􀀠u, '" $ I I i I • 􀀮􀁾• 􀁾􀀠X 􀁾􀀠" 0. .. ;II. 􀂷􀁾􀂷􀁅􀁾E E l'0 􀁾􀀠§ .5:i;.U .!l' 􀁾􀀠-• ,'2.g:g'i it itt ". c 􀁾􀂣􀁧􀀠"0 ,,," 0. , .. u :3£as;􀁾􀁾􀀠:5gc "'_ ; ! DC. 􀁾􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀬􀀠II U II􀁵􀁾􀁣􀀠􀁾􀀮􀀺􀀺c_o. ,. JJ_ ::>"'1o£ 􀁾􀀢􀁑􀀮􀀠4.5+ 38 LL=53 PL=38 2.5 35 PI=17 3.0 36 LL=83 PL=31 2.0 29 PI=52 1.5 33 I I I -: 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠-􀁾􀀠, 􀁾􀀠--.: : 􀁾􀀠---.: : 􀁾􀀠, '.,' ",' "'.' " " ; ; 􀀤􀁁􀁩􀁩􀁬􀁴􀁐􀀬􀁾􀀡􀀻􀁬􀁩[TYP.E ' BORING METHOD 5S', 5TANI)AlIOJ'ENETRATION TEST HSA -HO'LLOW STEM AUGERS ST • SHELBy':rUB,E CFA ' CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS CA CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER DC -DRIVEN CASINGS TCP-TEXAS CONE PENETRATION TEST MD -MUD DRILLING ALPHA TESTING, INC. RECORD OF 2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100 Dallas, Texas 75229 (972) 620-8911 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Client _______􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀺􀁇􀀧􀀡􀀧􀁂􀀢􀀧􀁗􀀧􀀡􀀮􀀮􀀮􀁣􀁅􀁎􀁾􀁇􀁾􀁉􀁎􀁅􀁾􀁃􀀡􀀡􀁅􀁃􀀡� �􀀡􀁒􀀢􀀧􀁓􀀢􀁟􀀬􀁟􀀢􀁉􀀢􀀧􀁎􀁃􀀡􀀺􀀮􀀺􀀮􀀧􀁟______ Boring No. _____..__􀀭􀀮􀀮􀀺􀀡􀁾􀀢􀁟􀀽􀁟_____... __ ArchitectfEngineer __________ Job No. 00988 Project Name ___􀁾􀁄􀁗􀁁􀁙􀀮􀁒􀁏􀁁􀁄􀀠RECONSTRUCTIO N Drawn By AM Project Location __ ADDISON, TEXAS Approved By _______􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀡􀀼􀁄􀁾􀁁􀁌􀀺􀁌______􀁾􀀠TEST DATADRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION =: --:: : --:: : ...:: 􀁾􀀠: ...:: : 􀁾􀀠-: -: Date Started 1.-21.-01. Hammer Wt. lb•. Date Completed 􀀱􀀮􀀭􀀲􀁬􀀬􀁾􀁟􀀠Hammer Drop in. 􀁾􀀠0 Drill Foreman EDI Spoon Sample OD in. m "3 > 00 Rock Core Dia. in. ID 􀁾􀂧Inspector in ...3 8 f-t; Boring Method CFA Shelby Tube 00 in. o·of-N 􀀧􀁾􀀭􀁾ci. z .:0 􀁾􀀠c_ SOIL CLASSIFICATION i c m•• 􀁮􀀮􀁾• mm li Il: en.'", 0", SURFACE ElEVATION " W E ! w_ f-;X: J:w 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠.{!"'.... 􀁦􀀭􀁾􀀠.. Q.", ID li· lin. 􀁾􀀠·ca:n. ..« x • 632± f-f-W "''-' «0 "',. 􀀮􀁾􀀠",0 0", Z "'f.. ... '" Dark Brown stiff CLAY (CH) with o -some sand. -8" of concrete at surface -l, ST 2' -----------------2 _ : Dark Brown very stiff CLAY (CH) ...:: 2 ST-with some sand and a trace of calcareous nodules and gravel. 40 ..::: 3 ST : 6 -:: 4 ST =8' ----------------8 Tan and Gray hard CALCAREOUS CLAY (CL) with some silty sand . and gravel. !. -5 , ST i , 10 BOTTOM OF TEST BORING AT 10 I. -:: -, 12 I 􀁓􀁁􀁍􀁐􀁾􀁅􀁒􀀠TYPE GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS 􀁾􀀠0. " " t:; 􀁾􀀠m f0 .2 E 0 '"."'" . ! I m .> " 􀁾􀀠􀁾ID Ii iI'E E .c0 g E'-' .'" 􀁾.. • E 􀁾􀀮􀁾􀀺􀁧'" u:: 􀁣􀁾􀀠'iJ:"• ou. ,§£g n.co ,,,0 ",.",0 􀀺􀀺􀀺􀁊􀁦􀁳􀀺􀀮􀁾􀁾􀀧􀀢􀀠o ' I 􀁾is 􀁾􀀭􀀻􀁮􀀠0::>,Q"'. : iii II II IIomc 00 >'C'::'o 00 -$ ,'iJ: 􀁾􀁾􀀭::>"'f..f0_ -,n.Q. 1.7 34 2.5 n 3.0 32 2.5 38 4.5+ 18 ! , I BORING METHOD 5S -STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HSA -HOLLOW STEM AUGERSAT COMPLETION DRY FT.ST • SHELBY TUBE CFA -CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS CA -CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER DC -DRIVEN CASINGS AFTER HRS, FT. TCP· TEXAS CONE PENETRATION TEST MD -MUD DRILLING WATER ON RODS NONE FT. J' I, ALPHA TESTING, INC. RECORD OF2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100 "". Dallas, Texas 75229 (972) 620-8911 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Client _ ...􀁟􀁾... ___􀁇􀀢􀀢􀁂􀁾􀁗􀀡􀀡􀀭􀀡􀀬􀀡􀁉􀀡􀁾􀁎􀀢􀀬􀁇􀁣􀀺􀀺􀁉􀁾� �􀀡􀀡􀁾􀁉􀀡􀁾􀀺􀁒􀀺􀀻􀀻􀁓􀁾􀀮􀀭􀀭􀀬􀁉􀀢􀀬􀁎􀁾􀁃􀀢􀀬􀀮􀀬􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭Boring No. 􀁂􀀭􀁾􀀲􀀠 Architect/Engineer ___________________----Job No. ________"'0"'0.'!.9.28.28___􀁾____􀁾􀀠 Project Name MIDWAY ROAD RECONSTRUCTION Drawn By ________􀀭􀀧􀁁􀁍􀁾________ Project location ADDISON, TEXAS Approved By _______-=DAL='-_____ DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION TEST DATA = --= = ..:. --= ---: ..:. = --Date Started 􀁾􀀭􀀲􀁾􀀭􀀰􀁾􀀠Hammer Wt. lb•. Date Completed 􀁾􀀭􀀲􀀱􀀭􀀰􀀱􀀠Hammer Drop in. Ii: 􀁾􀀠Dnll Foreman EDI Spoon Sample OD in. m ' 􀁾􀀠QQ Inspector Rock Core Dia. in. 􀁾􀀠tim 􀁾􀁾􀀠0Soring Method CFA Shelby Tube OD 3 in. lil 􀁣􀁾􀀠0 .... d "j t:: I 􀁾􀀢􀁩z en c' SOIL CLASSIFICATION c : 􀁴􀁦􀁾" 􀁾􀀠".:E • co. o. 8"E:::'J w !!lSURFACE ELEVATION 􀁾􀁾􀀠:rw 􀁾􀀠E •!i;g 0. "-w " wu ':0. :E. ::i.. e ·c 632± .... w ,,0 <<1i1: If 􀁾􀀡􀀺􀀡􀀠",0 "(I) wZ .... '" Dark Brown stiff Lime Treated 0 =CLAY (CH) with some sand. -S" of concrete at surface -􀁾􀀠ST -------------Dark Brown very stiff CLAY(CH) 2';--2 _ with sand laminations. = -stiff 2! -4! . ..:. 2 ST = -4 ! -3 ST = -6 -= 4 ! ST 􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭-------_7,:,5":' =Tannish Brown very stiff -CALCAREOUS CLAY (CL) with some 8 􀀮􀁾􀀠silty and and gravel. 􀁾􀀠( = -= 5 i ST -, -BOTTOM OF TEST BORING AT 􀁾􀁏􀀧􀀠. I 􀁾􀁏􀀠--; {; 􀁾􀀻􀀮􀀺􀁩􀀬􀀲􀀺􀂷􀁩􀀢􀀠" 􀁾􀀺􀀠:",':',', :." SAMPLER TYPE . y,,,.,',,'.,. . ,-, ..,'. .'􀁇􀁒􀁑􀀬􀁾􀁎􀁊􀀩􀁗􀁾􀁔􀁅􀁩􀁉􀀠OBSERVATIONS u. 0􀁾􀀠: 0 t: 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠c .2 1l 􀁾􀀠"' 􀁾􀀠'" : i I i m 􀀢􀁾􀀠0 ;;Ii .. '"E E .E.3 g ! .12' E ,. o . m 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀧􀁾􀀺􀁧u .:0 Ii..: :i:" c .3􀁾􀀭􀁓􀁊􀁦􀀠"-cr , ,,cr· w 􀁾􀀢􀀧􀀠c . 􀀺􀀻􀁪􀁑􀀺􀁾c "'_ 0􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀧􀁊􀁾􀀠j􀀸􀁾􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀮􀀠>'" 􀁾􀀠II n Sa.=! 8:5 ,w :i: ::::lc:a:...... OD 0.6 1.2 78 40 LL=60 PL=23 PI=37 1.7 35 2.0 34 LL=46 PL=29 PI=17 -2.0 34 3.0 22 LL=38 PL=18 􀁐􀁉􀁾􀀲􀀰􀀠I BORING METHOD. 5S STANDARD PENETRATION TEST ST SHELBY TUBE CA • CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER AT COMPLETION DRY FT. AFTER HRs.. FT. HSA • HOLLOW STEM AUGI'RS CFA • CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS DC • DRIVEN CASINGS TCP· TEXAS CONE PENETRATION TEST WATER ON RODS NON!! FT. M D ·MUD DRILLING ALPHA TESTING, INC. RECORD OF2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100 Dallas, Texas 76229 (972) 620-8911 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Cnent _______"'G"'B"'W"-'E"'N"'G"I"'NE""'E""'R"'sL,-'"I"'N"'C:.;._______ Boring No. B-13 Architect/Engineer Job No. ________=="'-_____ Project Name ____􀀢􀀧􀀢􀁍􀀢􀀧􀀡􀀢􀀧􀁄􀀧􀀭􀀧􀁗􀁾􀁁􀀽􀁙􀁾􀁒􀁏􀁁􀁄􀀠RECONSTRUCTION Drawn By ________="-________ Project Location ____... __􀀭􀀭􀀢􀁁􀁄􀀢􀀢􀀭􀀢􀁄􀁾􀁉􀁯􀀻􀁓􀁾􀁏􀀡􀀬􀀻􀁎􀀡􀀢􀀬􀀧􀀭􀀧􀁔􀁾􀁅􀁾􀁘􀁁􀁾􀁓􀀻􀀾􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀮______ Approved By .._______--"'''''''-______ DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION TEST DATA Date Started 1-21-01 Hammer Wt. 140 Ibs. 1£!Date Completed 1-21-01 Hammer Drop 30 in, • !Drill Foreman EDI Spoon Sample OD In. -􀁾􀁾􀀠00> -ffi Inspector Rock Core Dia. in. 􀀮􀁾􀀠w_ cn 􀁾􀁾􀀠0 Boring Method CPA Shelby Tube 00 3 in. c o· '" of􀀮􀁾􀀠150 z ,)::;.:;:•• rn 0SOIL CLASSIFICATION 0 􀁾􀁾••• 􀁩􀀡􀁾::! •"0"i"" w wSURFACE ELEVATION 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠l' u_i"';:] • 􀁾􀁾􀀠a. o.w 􀁾􀀠."0.'" ::!. ::!o. 􀁾􀀠·0x.633± f-W wu ..0 "',.. 􀁾􀁑􀀱",a 0'" "'z "'fa. Dark Brown stiff Lime Treated o -CLAY (CH) with some sand. =_8f! of concrete at surface. -=-: 1 ST = = --=􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀠2'--2 Dark Brown stiff CLAY(CH) with sand laminations_ -: -= 2 ST = = = -= 4 ---3 : ST i6' -: -----._-..• _-----f--6 = Tan and Gray hard CALCAREOUS = CLAY (CL) with limestone seams. =..::. -4ST : 8' --------------r--8 I ! -Tan weathered SHALY LIMESTONE. :: 5 TCP l.Q.Q. -= I" -BOTTOM OF TEST BORING AT 10' . 10 = ,-: -: -: -' : : i i -. I-. 12 -.. 􀁾􀀠"'ii 􀁾􀀠t; 0 f0 􀀮􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠en '0 en I 􀁾􀀠􀀮􀁾•• a􀁾􀀠0 '"E 􀁾􀀠1:0 EU .!l' "li. f!. 􀁾􀀠0'" '0 Ii! 0_ 􀁾􀁾􀀮􀁧0 􀁾􀁾􀀠-" 0..£.r:: a 0." U "roW 􀀱􀀺􀁾􀀠§g :::in: a:-cno-j00. 􀁾􀀮􀀠,,-' II II IIoec: co0_0 􀀦􀀮􀁾􀀠􀁾􀁗􀀠􀁾􀁾􀀭""'laD 􀁾􀁯􀀮􀀬􀀬􀀭1.1 1.2 70 42 LL=79 PL=38 Pl=41 1.5 35 1.5 34 4.5+ 24 18 I i i BORING METHOD HSA -HOLLOW STEM AUGERS CFA • CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS DC -DRIVEN CASINGS MD -MUD DRILLING SAMPI.Ef1 TYPE GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS SS . STANOARD PENETRATION TEST AT COMPLETION DRY FT.ST • SHELBY TUBE CA • CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER AFTER HRs.. FT. TCP· TEXAS CONE PENETRATION TEST WATER ON RODS NONE FT. ALPHA TESTING, INC. RECORD OF2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100 Dailas, Texas 75229 (972) 620·8911 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Client _____􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀢􀁇􀁣􀀡􀀺􀁂􀁾􀁗􀀡􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀡􀁅􀀡􀀻􀀾􀁎􀁾􀁇􀁾􀁉􀀢􀀧􀁎􀁅􀁾􀁅􀀡􀁥􀁒􀁾 􀁓􀁾􀀬􀀧􀁟􀁟􀁟􀀧􀁉􀁾􀁎􀀧􀀡􀁃􀀢􀁟􀀧􀁟􀀮_______ Boring No. B-14 Architect/Engineer Job No. 00988 Project Name MIDWAY ROAD RECONSTRUCTION Drawn By _________"'AM""________ Project Location ADDISON, TEXAS Approved By DAL DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION TEST DATA .. .. ..:: =.. -.. .. =-:: =..:: --.. .: : ...:: -: --:: : ..:: . .. . --Date Started 1-21-01 Hammer Wt. 140 Ibs. Date Completed 1-21 01 Hammer Drop 30 in. J:.. Orm Foreman EDI Spoon Sample 00 in. • ' 􀁾􀀠00..._> 􀁾􀁩􀁩􀁩􀀠Inspector Rock Core Dia, in. 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀭... 􀁾􀀠aBonog Method CFA Shelby Tube 00 3 in, a 􀂧􀁾N "cci 􀁾􀀮􀁧z .m '" c'SOIL CLASSIFICATION ! 0􀀮􀁾􀀠"-1'• ••:2 • co. 􀁾.. .."0'0;;) 􀁾􀀠wSURFACE ELEVATION ":I: :l:w 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀁾<>Q. w􀁾􀁉􀁩􀀺􀀠􀀬􀀬􀁾0.< :2. :2<>􀁾􀀠·0 􀁾􀀺􀁊634± "w wu <{o 􀁾􀁾􀀠•",0 0", "''' <>"'" Dark Brown very stiff Lime o .. Treated CLAY (CH) with some =sand. 8" of concrete at ..::surface. 1 ST -2' -􀁾􀀠-------------I---2 ..Dark Brown very stiff CLAY (CH) : with sand laminations. .. i -brown below 4' . =-:: 2 ST =-4 .. !I-------5' ..::-------1---3 , STTan weathered SHALY LIMESTONE. =: 6 -8: : 100 : : 4 TCP 1.511 BOTTOM OF TEST BORING AT 10 I • ! 10 _ :i i -· · · 12 -I SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS SS -STANDARD PENETRATION TEST I i a 􀁾􀀠'" i5 t:: 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠C .2 U, '" Ii '0 '" : • i> 􀀮􀁾􀀠w 􀁾􀀠X•ii •'# 􀀮􀁴􀀡􀀮􀁾􀀠-gE E 􀁾0 g 5-u l' 􀁾􀀭􀁉􀀠'l; '0 o . 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀧􀁍􀀺􀁧u: c_ ". c• 􀀮􀁾􀀠-'" 0.€"5g 􀀧􀀺􀁾􀀠u 􀁾.. ;§g :::i1i:£c rn_ 􀁾gc. 0xo ,'"' 􀁾􀀠II II II􀁣􀀺􀁾􀁣􀀠00 􀀺􀀻􀀩􀁾􀀮􀀺􀀿􀀠􀁾􀁾 􀀠,. 􀁾􀁾􀀭on 􀁾.. <>2.0 36 2.2 30 2.2 30 18 : I i I BORING METHOD HSA . HOLLOW STEM AUGERSAT COMPLETION DRY FT.ST . SHELBY TUBE CFA· CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS CA -CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER AFTER HRs.. FT. DC .. DRIVEN CASINGS TCP· TEXAS CONE PENETRATION TEST MD -MUD DRILLINGWATER ON RODS NONE FT. ALPHA TESTING, INC. 2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100 Dallas, Texas 75229 {972l 620-8911 RECORD OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Client _______􀀮􀀮􀀺􀀺􀁇􀀧􀀭􀀧􀁂􀀢􀀭􀁗􀁾􀁅􀁎􀀽􀁇􀀢􀀧􀁉􀀧􀀢􀁎􀁅􀀽􀁅􀀢􀀧􀁒􀀢􀁓􀀢􀀧� �􀀧􀁟􀀬..=IN=C"._______ Boring No. B-15 Architect/Engineer Job No. 00988 Project Name MIDWAY ROAD RECONSTRUCTION Drawn By ________.::AH=_____􀁾􀀮􀀠Project location ADDISON', TEXAS Approved By DAL DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION TEST DATA --:.: =...: -: -:: --...: --...: ----:: Date Started 1-21-01 Hammer Wt. Ibo. IDate Completed 1-21-01 Hammer Drop in. 􀁾􀀠Drill Foreman ED! Spoon Sample DO in. • -􀁾􀀠00> 􀁾􀁭Inspector Rock Core Dia. in. • "u; 􀁾􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀢􀀢􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭.....--.-3 <> •Boring Method CPA Shelby Tube OD in. 0 o· " >'" of􀁾: ';;;' c (;Q e2 to • li x I i'i •z I 􀁾􀁾􀀠" ..." 􀁾􀀠. : ::EtL 􀁾􀀠IDe 8 0 • .!! I! II " 11x. C) 00 ,,0 C;,; •635± f-W "'0 ,,0 I 􀀬􀀬􀁾􀀠If. 􀁾􀁩􀁩􀁩􀀠c:;;,o 􀁉􀁴􀀮􀁾􀀠:;:: :jin:",0 0", ",z !I) w u' 􀁩􀁾􀀠::cw 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠C m 􀁉􀀭􀁾􀀠""w • "'0: ,,-« ::i, lI.. 􀁾􀀠me XroI-W wu 􀁾􀂣􀀠􀁾􀁾􀀠.f {!t;;"''' ""' o -= --= 1 ST -2 ---= , 2 • ST : I -4 _ ----3 ST-, = I-6'f-6 _ I -I i ---i -4· 􀁾􀀠ST -i 8'-8 : --= S ST i 10 . -, i , 12 ! i u. "1i 􀁾􀀠"•l-C ,2 U til :s •[ 􀁾􀀠, 10 *1 •􀀮􀀻􀀮􀁾􀁾E E l'0 e ,9' E' 􀀬􀀻􀁾􀀾U 1;, • 􀁾􀁩􀀠􀁾􀀠-'0 c_ 'iJ;. 􀁾􀀮􀁾􀀺􀁧• u. .'"􀂧􀀭􀀵􀁾􀀠"-a -" 0 am""2 • u 􀀻􀀻􀀻􀁦􀂣􀁾\;: 􀁾􀁾􀀭"-IoE 􀁾􀁑􀀮􀁑􀀮􀀠4.5+ 3S LL=65 PL=36 PI=29 1.7 33 2.2 31 LL=83 PL=30 PI=53 2.2 32 1.5 22 ! I i I i SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER OIlSERVATIONS BORING METHOD SS . STANDARD PENETRATION TEST ST . SHELBY TUBE AT COMPLETION DRY FT. HSA • HOLLOW STEM AUGERS CFA • CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS CA . CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER AFTER HRS., FT. DC • DRIVEN CASINGS TCP· TEXAS CONE PENETRATION TEST WATER ON RODS NONE FT, MD ·MUD DRILLING ALPHA TESTING. INC. RECORD OF 2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100 Dallas, Texas 75229 (972) 620-8911 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Client _______􀀭􀀧􀁇􀀢􀀢􀁂􀁾􀀠ENGINEERS, rNC. Boring No. Architect/Engineer ____________________ Job No. 00988 Project Name 􀁾..___..."'M"I"D"w:"'A"'Y'_'RO=AD=_'RE=C"'O"'N=_"S=-TR=I1:::CT=I"'O"'N'----Drawn By ________..:AM=____ Project Location ADDISON, TEXAS Approved By ________D"'AL"""'--____ DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION TEST DATA : -,---, -: --= ----= = 􀁾􀀠-:: = 􀁾􀀠: ----􀁾􀀠Date Starte<:l 1-21-01 Hammer Wt. 140 lb•. Date Completed 1-21-01 Hammer Drop 30 in. .;;:• Drill Foreman EDI Spoon Sample 00 in. 􀁾􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠00 ...-----> : -iii tnspector Rock Core Dia. in, ill 􀁾􀀢􀁩0 iBoring Method CFA Shelby Tube 00 3 in. 0 c· N 0>.; 'g § iZ'iZ a 􀁣􀁾􀀠SOIL CLASSIFICATION c 􀁴􀁦􀁾."• 􀁾􀀦􀀧l! m ::> W w .. 0"SURfACE ELEVATION E 0,1-:1: J:W 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀮􀁧􀁾􀁬􀁩􀀺􀀠􀁉􀀭􀁾􀀠"-w •n.< :!i. :!in. 􀁾􀀠XC 644± "'w W() <0 ;H: &' 􀁾􀂣􀁬<1)0 0., "'Z Dark Brown very stiff CLAY (CH) 0 : : with calcareous deposit: and : !some sand -poss. fill -6.5!l of concret.e at surface. 􀁾􀀠1 ST 2 I 2 ; ST 3 ' -􀁾􀀭􀀭----------f-Tannish Brown and Gray very :stiff CALCAREOUS CLAY (CL/CH) 3 ST-with clay-zones. -hard with limestone seams 4 below 4' . 4 ST 5'------------Tan weathered SHALY LIMESTONE. 6-:: : -f---------8' --,'--8: : Tan weathered SRALY LIMESTONE. : 5 TCP !Q.Q. BOTTOM OF TEST BORING AT 10 t. : 1" 10 : --:: I,' .. ,I>' '." .;..,. . 􀁬􀀲􀀻􀀮􀀻􀀬􀁾I';li\:.,·,· , " I,." .. , : "" 􀁾􀀠'iii 0 t:; 􀁾􀀠c .9 1l ! , '" 'S '" i , I ,I ! : 􀁾••• m 􀁾􀀠x 􀁾􀀠a. ;j< 􀀮􀁾􀀮􀁾􀀭􀁧!l E .Ee 􀀮􀁾􀀠1" 􀁾􀀺􀀺􀁩􀀻􀀧0 ;; • -I Q''!;:!" ..: c": l:..: c 􀁾􀀭􀁴􀀻􀀮􀁧."" 􀀮􀁾􀀠􀁾􀁍􀀠n.a 'E""': 8 am" ;:jii:s:1;;1!!oc ::>a ioOc t'g ",'" II 8 II t::t:o 􀁾􀀢􀀠􀁾􀁾􀀭::>",1f1. ... 0"' 􀁾.... 2.0 27 LL=B5 PL=30 PI=55 2.7 38 2.5 27 4.5+ 15 . 15 : I SAMPLElI TYPE 􀁇􀁉􀁬􀁏􀁜􀀻􀁩􀁉􀀧􀂥􀁄􀁗􀁁􀁦 􀁅􀁉􀁉􀁏􀁩􀁊􀁓􀁾􀁩􀁩􀁶􀁁􀁦􀁉􀁏􀁎􀀤􀀠Bliili' IVIImIOD . )". , .'SS . STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HSA " HOlLiffw STEM AUG.ERSAT COMPLETION DRY FT.ST -SHELBY TUBE CFA CFA -CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS CA -CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER AfTER HRS. FT. DC -DRIVEN CASINGS rcp-TEXAS CONE PENETRATION TEST MD -MUD DRIlliNGWATER ON RODS NONE FT. ALPHA TESTING, INC. RECORD OF2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100 Dallas, Texas 75229 (972) 620·8911 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Client __________________________________ JobNo. 00988Architect/Engineer Protect Name 􀁾..__􀁾...􀁊􀀮􀁍􀁊􀀺􀁾􀁄􀀧􀀺􀀢􀁗􀀧􀀡􀀺􀁁􀁾􀁙􀁾􀁒􀀡􀀧􀀺􀁏􀁾􀁁􀁄􀀺􀀡􀀡􀀺􀀡􀀺􀀧􀀧􀀭􀀧􀀧􀁒􀁅􀁾􀁃􀀺􀀻􀀺􀁏􀁾􀁎􀀡􀀮􀀻􀁓􀀧􀀧􀀧􀁔􀁒􀀺􀀮􀀡􀀧􀀺􀀮􀀡􀁕􀁃􀁾􀁔􀀡􀀺􀀮􀀺􀁊􀀺􀁾􀁏􀁾􀁎􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭Drawn By All: Project Location ADDJ:SON, TEXAS Approved By ._______"'D"'AL""'_______ DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION TEST DATA GBW ENGJ:NEElis, INc...'--_______ Boring No. _______-=B=---=1,,8=__ Date Started 1-21-01 Hammer Wt. 140 lb•. Date Completed .___:1,-21-0 1___ Hammer Drop 30 in. 􀁾􀀠Drill Foreman EDI Spoon Sample 00 In. " 􀀭􀁾􀀠00 > -iii Inspector Rock Core Ola. in. 􀀮􀁾􀀠􀁾􀁾--". (I) i3 8Boring Method CFA Shelby Tube 00 in. c· " 01ri "ig I 􀁾􀀮􀁾􀀠! z '" c-SOIL CLASSIFICATION .􀀮􀁾􀀠.. " • .i :lE 􀁾􀀠c""=> w w 0", SURFACE elEVATION 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠EO 􀁵􀁾1-:>: :r:w a. "-w<:1􀁉􀀭􀁾􀀠• 0", "'0"-<:lE. :lEoe DC 􀁾􀁪􀀻􀁬644± I-W wu 􀀻􀀱􀁩􀁾􀀠<:>•(1)0 Oen ."'10. .... <1> -Dark Brown very stiff CLAY (CH) 0 : ! with some sand and calcareous 1 i ST .. .., -nodules -pass. fill --6. II of concrete at:. 􀁾􀁵􀂣􀁦􀁡􀁣􀁾􀀮􀁟􀀠􀁾􀀠3' -: 2 ST ------'STTan and Gray hard CALCAREOUS -3 CLAY (CL/CH) with limestone 5' -4 : ST -:: seams. --/' -5 :----------Tan weathered SHALY LIMESTONE. : i 􀁾􀀠--8' ...: r --------1--: Gray BRALY LIMESTONE. 5 TCP :)&0. 10 l" BOTTOM OF TEST BORING AT 10 I. : ...:: ...: :-: -15--:: -= --20 -:: : -...::--:--:--2S -::.., -, --􀁾􀀠-l -' .....; j --: .., i30 .., 􀁾􀀠0. m " to o 􀁾􀀠c 0g (I) 􀁾􀀠0 en i i ••••• 􀁾􀀠•" E. • " If. ·'!!'e '2E E .E0 0 s:.:::J ;." " .!l' C ......I 􀀨􀀩􀀧􀁾􀀠􀁾􀁾􀀠• i •'" .: ;J:. c 􀁾􀀮􀁴􀀻􀀮􀁾• 􀀮􀁾􀀠􀁾􀁾􀀠! "-.,. -" , 0 gfi:£°c . ,U 􀁾􀁾􀀠􀀺􀀺􀀻􀁾o 0 􀁾ge a oc 11 I! II> . ::dn .... 00 all ;J: 􀀻􀀺􀁪􀁾􀁯􀀺0.13.2 32 LL='73 PL=27 3.2 38 􀁐􀁉􀁾􀀴􀀶􀀠4.5+ 19 4.5+ 14 l4 I I SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS BORING METHOD SS • STANDARD PENETRATION TEST ST • SHELBY TUBE AT COMPLETION DRY FT. HSA -HOLLOW STEM STEM AUGERS CFA . CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS CA • CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER AFTER HRS. FT. DC -DRIVEN CASINGS TCP· TEXAS CONE PENETRATION TEST WATER ON RODS NONE FT. MD ·MUD DRILLING ALPHA TESTING, INC. RECORD OF 2209 Wisconsin St" Suite 1 00 Dallas, Texas 75229 (972) 620-8911 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Chent ______􀁇􀁾􀁂􀁾􀁗􀀧􀁟􀀡􀁅􀁎􀁾􀁇􀀢􀀧􀁉􀀢􀀧􀁎􀁅􀁾􀁾􀁅􀀺􀀡􀀧􀁒􀀢􀀧􀁓􀀧􀁟􀀧􀀬􀁟� �􀁉􀁾􀁎􀀺􀀺􀀡􀀧􀁃􀀽􀀮___􀁾􀀮____ Boring No. B-B ArchItect/Engineer Job No. 00988 Project Name MIDWAY ROAD RECONSTRUCTION Drawn By ___ Project Location ADDI SONI TEXAS Approved By DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION TEST DATA -:: : --: .::. : --::: : --. -----::: -Date Started 1-21-01 Hammer Wt. 140 Ibs. IDate Completed 1-21-01 Hammer Drop 30 in. ;\: "Drill Foreman EDI Spoon Sample 00 in. 􀁾􀀠􀀮􀁾􀀠.----. > 00 􀁾􀀠􀁩􀁾Inspector Rock Core Dia. in. in 0 􀁦􀀭􀁾􀀠Boring Method CFA Shelby Tube OD 3 in. c em N of-ci 􀀧􀁾􀀮􀁧􀀠! Z Om '" e c SOIL CLASSIFICATION 0􀀮􀁾􀀠a. l' " m· ::; • eO. a. 0"w w SURFACE ELEVATION :::> 􀁾􀀠-' " u.f-:r; :!Ow 􀀱􀁡􀁾"ff--'a. o.w w ""'0.-<::;. ::; .. E 􀁾􀀡644± I-W wu ,,0 ",. •(1)0 0(1.1 (f>Z "'fa. f-U> Brown and Tan hard CLAY (CH) 0 with calcareous deposit, gravel and some sand. -pass. fill --6.5'\ of concrete at surface. -1 ST -2 : 1ST-2 -4' -------.--------4 Tan and Gray hard CALCAREOUS :CLAY (CL) with limestone seams. : 3 ST ---6' ---------------􀀶􀁾􀀠Tan weathered SRALY LIMESTONE. ---..::. : ------8' : ---------8-::: -! Gray SRALY LIMESTONE. : -I TCPi 4 l..Q.Q. i 1.3lr 10 BOTTOM OF TEST BORING AT 10 I. -I 12 I 􀁾􀀠"'"•c 1;; 0f-e 0 􀀮􀁾􀀠0, if> ! '5 '" I : i : I I i m >..• . 􀁾e " 11'E E Z0 􀁾U ... c 􀁾􀀮􀁾􀀺􀁾Ii m 􀁾'0 e"; ;:.• 􀁾􀁾􀀠-'" 0 􀁾􀂣􀁧􀀠0." " ..'c . u .::Ji££-w􀀵􀁾􀁾􀀠w_ 􀀺􀀺􀀾􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁧􀁾􀁾􀀠",. til II II Hoe >. 00 ." ;: 􀁾􀁾􀀭=H" Ia.f,," -,o.a. 4.5+ 21 LL.73 PL·28 Pl=45 4.5+ 32 4.5+ 20 LL.48 PL=20 PI-28 13 ! Ii SAMPLER TYPE GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS BORING METHOD SS -STANDARD PENETRATION TEST ST SHELBY TUBE AT COMPLETION DRY FT. HSA HOLLOW STEM AUG.ERS CFA -CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS CA CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER AFTER HRS. FT. DC -DRIVEN CASINGS TCP· TEXAS CONE PENETRATION TEST WATER ON RODS NONE FT. MD -MUD DRILLING ALPHA TESTING, INC. RECORD OF2209 Wisconsin St., Suite 100 Dallas, Texas 75229 (972) 620·8911 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Client GBW BNGlNEERS, INC. ____ Boring No. ________􀀮􀀮􀀮􀀡􀁂􀀡􀀻􀀡􀀮􀀭􀀺􀀻􀀲􀁾􀁏� �___ Architect/Engineer ____-=-=-=-=__-=-=====____ Job No. ________--'Oc;O"9:!8,,S'-____ Prolect Name MIDWAY ROAD Rl!CONSTRO'CTION Drawn By AM Prolect Location ADDISON, TEXAS Approved By ______􀁾􀁄􀁁􀁌􀁾􀀧􀀭___... 􀁾􀁟􀁾􀀠 DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION TEST DATA Date Started 􀁾􀀭􀀲􀁾􀀭􀀰􀁾􀀠HammerWt. 􀁾􀀴􀀰􀀠lb•. Date Completed 􀁾􀀭􀀲􀁾􀀭􀀰􀁾􀀠Hammer Drop 30 in. .t• Drill Foreman EDI Spoon Sample 00 in. w 􀀭􀁾􀀠00 􀀮􀁾Rock Core Dia. in, 􀁾􀁦􀁦􀁩􀀠Inspector w 􀁾􀀭􀀺>-. 3 0Boring Method CFA Shelby Tube OD in. 0 􀀡􀀵􀁾N ---= : .:: . --: -= : .. -------: : --= 􀁾􀀠---: . --:: , ,,4 SOIL CLASSIFICATION SURFACE ELEVATION 643± Tannish Brown and Gray hard CALCAREOUS CLAY (CL) with limestone seams. -7.25 11 of concrete at surface. :------------Gray SHALY LIMESTONE. BOTTOM OF TEST BORING AT 10' . • ;. 􀁾􀀠'. -'.'. " " " "'t·-· " , .. ";;;; c: ci §.g ! I " ••'" e -.£ 􀀮􀁾.. 􀁾􀀠i 􀁾􀀠! 􀁾􀀠w::;; e" • w w "0"::> -' -J l' u" 􀁾􀁴􀀠:r:w ="i 􀁴􀁾􀀠Q. 'i1.. w W:::s . ' :::Sa.. 􀁾􀀠x'l! >-w wu 􀀺􀁨􀁾􀀡􀁾􀁲􀀺􀀠i!' .!l "'0 Ow .... '" o _ I---= 1 i ST : 2' : ;--2 _ , ! : --!-: I4 _ ! 100: 2 TCP, 1.3 11 -: 6-: -= : : 8-:: -􀁾􀀠.., --3 TCP 􀁾􀁯􀁯􀀠-1.311 .., 10 ---:: : 12 I i a 0. " Ii !:: I> ! !! e .g, 0, '" '5 '" !, ! i I • ! 􀀮􀁾•• :. 􀁾􀀠;;;0. *E E E0. 􀁾􀀠, 􀁾.0' 􀁯􀂷􀁾u w 􀁾􀀠'll ,l' 􀁩􀁾􀀠"", 􀁾􀀧􀁴􀁈􀁾e .§£g 􀁾􀀬􀁧􀀠􀁾􀀧􀀢􀀠0 ",."2 . <.) :;,0:.£C rn_ 􀀺􀁊􀁾􀀠! 􀁾􀀠i oc. 􀁾􀀮􀀠J II IIoWe oc ,..􀁣􀀺􀁾􀁣􀀠00 0,9 -'-'"'w .... .. r-i 5: I -J.... 4.5+ 􀁌􀁌􀁾􀀵􀀹􀀠􀁐􀁌􀁾􀀲􀀱􀀠􀁐􀁉 􀁾􀀳􀀸􀀠13 15 i --SAI\IIPi.·E1HYPE ' GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS BORING METHOD SS -STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HSA • HOLLOW STEM AUGERSAT COMPLETION DRY FT.ST -SHELBY TUBE CFA • CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS CA • CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER AFTER HRS.. FT. DC • DRIVEN CASINGS TCP· TEXAS CONE PENETRATION TEST MD ·MUD DRILLINGWATER ON RODS NONE FT, ALPHA TESTING, INC. RECORD OF2209 Wisconsin St" Suite 100 Dalias, Texas 75229 (972) 620-8911 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Client _______􀀭􀀧􀁇􀀢􀁂􀀢􀁗􀀧􀀭􀀧􀁅􀀢􀀧􀁎􀀧􀀭􀀧􀁇􀁾􀁉􀀡􀀺􀀮􀀡􀁎􀁅􀀽􀁅􀀡􀀺􀀡􀀺􀁒􀁾� �􀀽􀀬-=.INC""'-'-._______ Boring No. Architect/Engineer ________________ Job No. ________O=O=-9,,8,,8____􀁾___ Proiect Name ____-'"M"I"'D"'W"'A:.:Yc...=R:::O:.:AD=...:RB=C"'O"'N"'S::.T:cR:.:U::.C::.T =I.:::O"'N____ Drawn By ________...:AM=____... _.__ Project Location ADDISON, TEXAS Approved By DRILLING AND SAMPLING INFORMATION TEST DATA Date Started 1-21-01 Hammer Wt. 140 lb•. ,I .;;Date Completed 1-21-01 Hammer Drop 30 in. • 􀁾􀀠" 􀁾Drill Foreman EDI Spoon Sample 00 _ in. 00----... > i -iii 􀁾Inspector ..._-_.. Rock: Core Dia. in. 􀁾􀀠",􀁾􀀻􀀻􀀠􀁾0Boring Method CFA Shelby Tube 00 3 in. 0 􀁾.. 􀁾􀀠􀀵􀁾N .p c; ·0 􀁾􀀠! • • 􀁾ci 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀁾􀀠;;j 􀁾I 􀁣􀁾􀀠E Ea> " w 0 ,..S *ESOIL CLASSIFICATION l􀁾􀁾􀀠f.) 􀁾M•I w..E '"􀁷􀁾􀀠􀀧􀁴􀀮􀁬􀀮􀁾􀂷􀁅c '0 Ii 􀁣􀁾􀀠;:.c"0 C•li' ! a 'g. i"t;􀀮􀁾􀀠•"-0"w 'w "-a f.) 􀁾􀀠􀁵􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠'c-'"._ t;i'iiInspector Rock Cote Dia. in, ."'" 􀁾􀁾_.. 3 aBoring Method CFA Shelby Tube 00 in, a , c· '" 01ci i "f6 g ! z 􀁾􀀮􀁾􀀠'"SOIL CLASSIFICATION £ Wo , • "c• 􀁾􀁲􀁦:; 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠ij 0."SURFACE ELEVATION 􀁾􀁾􀀠􀂧􀁾􀀠u_C 􀁾􀁻􀀻􀀠􀁾􀀠. I 􀁾􀁾􀀠W e 􀁾􀁬􀀶643± «0 I w ."• "!:. •" lii if':; E E E 􀁾􀀠<3 0. 􀀮􀁾􀀠EL sc Jj i 3:..2 cw"_r 0t; 􀀨􀀩􀀧􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀧􀁺􀀻􀀮􀁾􀀠J' :!',,!!! 10 􀁾􀁑􀀬􀀮􀀮􀁯􀀮􀀺􀀺􀀠II It Il 􀁾􀁾􀁾.."􀁌􀁌􀁾􀀳􀀵􀀠PL=17 PI=18 SAMPLE:R·TYPE ,'. .. filSEi i.VATlONS SS " STANDARD PENETRATION TEST . . .... DRY FT. HSA 􀁾STEM AUG.ERS ST " SHELBY TUBE CFA CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS CA " CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER AFTER HRS. FT. DC DRIVEN CASINGS TCP-TEXAS CONE PENETRATION TEST MD -MUD DRIlliNGWAtER ON ROOS NONE FT. ALPHA rnsnNG, INC 􀁾􀀠2209WIsconsin St., Suite 100 􀁾􀀬􀀠 Dallas, 1!>xas 75229􀀬􀁾􀀠'f (972) 620-8911 KEY TO SOIL SynOOLS RHO CLRSSIFICRTIOHS THE ABBREV IAT IONS COMMONLY EMPLOYED ON EACH "RECORD OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATI ON" , ON THE FIGURES AND IN THE TEXT OF THE REPORT, ARE AS FOLLOWS: SOIL OR ROCK TYPES (SHOWN IN SYMBOLS COLUMN) 􀁾􀁄􀀻􀀮􀀺􀁾􀀺􀁾􀀽􀁾􀁾􀀠DDll [1] 􀁾􀀠rn 􀁾􀀠CLAY SILT SAND LIMESTONE SHALE ASPHALT/CONCRETE I. SOIL DESCRIPTION I II. RELATIVE PROPORTIONS (A) COHESIONLESS SOILS DESCRIPTIVE TERM PERCENT RELATI UE DEliS ITY N, BLOWS/FT TRACE 1 -10 LITTLE I 1 -·20 VERY LOOSE o TO 4 SOME 21 -35 LOOSE 5 TO 10 AND 35 -50 COMPACT II TO 30 DENSE 31 TO 50 VERY DENSE OVER 50 IV. PARTICLE SIZE IDENTIFICATION (B> COHESIUE SOILS BOULDERS: -8 INCH DIAMETER OR MORE COBBLES : -3 TO 8 INCH DIAMETERCONSISTENCY Qu, TSF GRAVEL : -CORRSE -3/4 TO 3 INCH -FINE -5.0 MM TO 3/4 INCHUERY SOFT LESS THAN .25 SAND -COARSE -2.0 MM TO 5.0 MMSOFT .25 TO .50 -MEDIUM -0.4 MM TO 2.0 MMFIRM .50 TO 1.00 -FINE -0.07 MM TO 0.4 MMSTIFF STIFF 1.00 TO 2.00 SILT -0.002 MM TO 0.07 MMVERY STIFF 2.00 TO 4.00 CLAY -0.002 MMHARD OVER 4.00 ill. PLASTICITY V. DRILLING AND SAMPLING SYMBOLS DEGREE OF PLASTICITY AU: AUGER SAMPLE PLASTICITY INDEX RC: ROCK CORE TCP: TEXAS CONE .PENETRATION TEST NONE TO SLIGHT 0 -4 SSe SPLIT-SPOON 1 3/S" 1.0. 2" O.D SLIGHT 5 -10 EXCEPT WHERE NOTED MEDIUM 1 I -30 ST: SHELBY TUBE = 3" O. D. EXCEPT HIGH TO VERY HIGH OUER 30 WHERE NOTED US: WASHED SAMPLE 􀀨􀁾􀁾.. HSA: HOLLOU STEM AUGERS CFA: CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGERS:t/... MD: MUD DRILLINGNOTE:' ALL SOILS CLASSIFIED ACCORDING TO . T1iEUNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (ASTM 0-24S7)