heritage parc - stage 7 site classification...excavation of 22 test pits (tp701 to tp722) using a 20...

GEOTECHNICAL I LABORATORY I EARTHWORKS I QUARRY I CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL TESTING

Heritage Parc - Stage 7 Site Classification

Grand Parade, Rutherford

NEW15P-0051H-AB 28 November 2018

Qualtest Laboratory (NSW) Pty Ltd ABN: 98 153 268 89 8 Ironbark Close Warabrook NSW 2304 T: (02) 4968 4468 F: (02)4960 9775 W: www.qualtest.com.au NEW15P-0051H-AB

28 November 2018

Heritage Parc Pty Ltd

C/- McCloy Group

Suite 2, Ground Floor, 317 Hunter Street

NEWCASTLE NSW 2300

Attention: Harry Thomson

Dear Harry

RE: PROPOSED SUBDIVISION – HERITAGE PARC STAGE 7

GRAND PARADE, RUTHERFORD

SITE CLASSIFICATION

Please find enclosed our geotechnical report for Stage 7 (Lots 113 to 132) of the Heritage Parc

residential subdivision to be located at Grand Parade, Rutherford.

The report includes recommendations for Site Classification in accordance with AS2870-2011,

“Residential Slabs and Footings”.

If you have any questions regarding this report, please do not hesitate to contact Shannon

Kelly or the undersigned.

For and on behalf of Qualtest Laboratory (NSW) Pty Ltd

Jason Lee

Principal Geotechnical Engineer

PROPOSED SUBDIVISION – HERITAGE PARC, STAGE 7

28 November 2018 i NEW15P-0051H-AB

Table of Contents:

1.0 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 1

2.0 Desktop Study .............................................................................................................. 1

3.0 Field Work ...................................................................................................................... 1

4.0 Site Description ............................................................................................................ 2

4.1 Site Regrade Works ......................................................................................................2

4.2 Surface Conditions ......................................................................................................3

4.3 Subsurface Conditions ................................................................................................5

5.0 Laboratory Testing ...................................................................................................... 9

6.0 Site Classification to AS2870-2011 ......................................................................... 10

7.0 Limitations .................................................................................................................... 11

Attachments:

Figure AB1: Site Plan and Approximate Test Locations

Appendix A: Results of Field Investigations

Appendix B: Results of Laboratory Testing

Appendix C: CSIRO Sheet BTF 18


28 November 2018 1 NEW15P-0051H-AB

1.0 Introduction

Qualtest Laboratory NSW Pty Ltd (Qualtest) is pleased to present this report on behalf of

Heritage Parc Pty Ltd, for Stage 7 of the residential subdivision located at Grand Parade,

Rutherford.

Based on the brief and Sales Plan provided by the client, Stage 7 is understood to comprise of

20 residential allotments (Lots 113 to 132), as shown on Figure AB1.

The scope of work for the geotechnical investigation included providing Site Classification in

accordance with AS2870-2011, “Residential Slabs and Footings”, following completion of site

regrade works which included controlled filling of Lots 117, 119 to 125 and 128 to 132 with site

won fill (these lots were previously referenced as Lots 705, 707 to 713 and 716 to 720).

This report presents the results of the field work investigations and laboratory testing and

provides recommendations for the scope outlined above.

2.0 Desktop Study

The scope of work has included a review of the following reports.

Report on Geotechnical Investigation, ‘Stages 5-8 Heritage Parc, Rutherford (Cardno

Geotech Solutions Report Reference: CGS2432-002.1, 19 November 2014);

Level 1 Site Regrade Assessment report, ‘Proposed Subdivision, Heritage Parc Stage 7,

(Qualtest Laboratory NSW Report Reference: NEW18P-0132-AA, dated 28 November 2018).

This report includes selected results from the previous reports referenced above, to supplement

information collected during the current investigations where applicable. Due to regrade

works carried out subsequent to the investigation by Cardno, soil profiles are likely to have

changed from those shown on their engineering logs.

3.0 Field Work

The field work investigations were carried out carried on 29 October and 15 November 2018,

and comprised of:

DBYD search of proposed test locations was undertaken to check proposed test locations

for the presence of underground services;

Site walkover to make observations of surface features at the property and in the

immediate surrounding area;

Excavation of 22 test pits (TP701 to TP722) using a 20 tonne excavator equipped with a

600mm wide bucket, a 4.5 tonne excavator equipped with a 300mm wide bucket, and an

8.5 tonne backhoe equipped with a 450mm wide bucket. Test pits were terminated at

depths of between 0.70m and 2.40m;

Undisturbed samples (U50 tubes) and small bag samples were taken for subsequent

laboratory testing; and,

Test pits were backfilled with the excavation spoil and compacted using the excavator

bucket and tracks or backhoe bucket and tyres.

Investigations were carried out by an experienced Geotechnical Engineer from Qualtest who

located the test pits, carried out the testing and sampling, produced field logs of the test pits,

and made observations of the site surface conditions.



Engineering logs of the test pits are presented in Appendix A.

Approximate test pit locations are shown on the attached Figure AB1. Test pits were located in

the field by handheld GPS and relative to existing site features including topographic features,

lot boundaries, existing developments and trees.

4.0 Site Description

4.1 Site Regrade Works

Table 1 provides a summary of lot numbers as outlined above from the Civil Construction plans

during site regrade works (i.e. Lots 701 to 720), referenced to the new lot numbering adopted

as shown on Figure AB1, which is based on the Sales Plan provided (i.e. Lots 113 to 132).

TABLE 1 – LOT NUMBERS REFERENCED

Lot Numbers Lot Numbers Lot Numbers Lot Numbers

Sales

Plan

Const.

Plan

Sales

Plan

Const.

Plan

Sales

Plan

Const.

Plan

Sales

Plan

Const.

Plan

113 701 118 706 123 711 128 716

114 702 119 707 124 712 129 717

115 703 120 708 125 713 130 718

116 704 121 709 126 714 131 719

117 705 122 710 127 715 132 720

Site re-grading works were conducted between 28 June 2018 and 16 November 2018. The re-

grading works consisted of the cutting and filling of proposed residential lots within Stage 7

(Lots 701 to 720).

Prior to filling, re-grade areas were stripped of all topsoil and unsuitable material to expose

suitable natural residual foundation profile. Re-grade works then consisted of filling with

approved fill to finish design levels.

Bulk earthworks filling within Lot 705, 707 to 713 and 716 to 720 was performed using existing site

fill, won from excavations cut from around the site.

The fill material could generally be described as a Sandy CLAY, medium to high plasticity,

brown/red in colour, fine to medium grained sand, which was blended with Silty SAND

(Colluvium) and Extremely Weathered (EW) Siltstone, won from Lot 805 within Stage 8 of the

development.

The depth of fill placed during the bulk earthworks stage ranged between approximately 1.0m

at the northern end of Lot 720, to approximately 4.0m within the southern corner of Lot 716.

Approximate filling depths for all other lots ranged between 0.1m and 1.5m to bring to surfaces

to design finish levels.

Any unsuitable or deleterious material within the fill was removed by hand or mechanical

means prior to final compaction of the material.



Details of the site regrading works are presented in the ‘Level 1 Site Re-Grade Assessment

Report’, Qualtest Report Reference: NEW18P-0132-AA, dated 28 November 2018.

As the geotechnical testing authority engaged for the project, Qualtest state that the filling

performed on Lots 117, 119 to 125 and 128 to 132 as per the Sales Plan, ( or Lots 705, 707 to 713

and 716 to 720 as per the Civil Construction Plans) was carried out to Level 1 criteria as defined

in Clause 8.2 – Section 8, of AS3798-2007, ‘Guidelines on Earthworks for Commercial and

Residential Developments’.

The recommendations of this report are based on the understanding that any existing lot

re-grade works are limited to the controlled earthworks works supervised by Qualtest, and

placement of low reactivity topsoil material such that total topsoil depths do not exceed 0.4m.

Qualtest should be informed without delay if additional earthworks are known to have been

carried out.

At the time of the field investigations, Topsoil Fill to depths varying from 0.50m to 0.55m was

encountered on Lot 117 (formerly Lot 705) overlying the controlled fill. It is understood that final

trimming and levelling of this lot will result in Topsoil Fill depths of less than 0.4m.

4.2 Surface Conditions

The site of Stage 7 is located at Grand Parade and Newfield Street at Rutherford, as shown on

Figure AB1. The site is generally bounded by existing residential allotments to the east, by

Stage 6 to the north, by Stony Creek to the west, and to the south by undeveloped land which

is currently being developed for proposed Stage 8.

The site is situated in an area of gently undulating topography, on the slopes of a broad hill

formation which rises to the east. The Stage 7 area was not vegetated at the time of the site

investigation, and subdivision construction works in the area were generally nearing

completion. Trafficability was good at the time of the site investigation, with sealed pavement

access provided from the north by Grand Parade and Tournament Street.

The site is typically cleared undeveloped lots, covered with a thin layer of mulch in most areas.

Concrete block retaining walls are located on several of the lot boundaries. Lot 705 contained

a fill stockpile on 29 October 2018, which had been mostly removed by 15 November 2018,

with Topsoil Fill depths of 0.50m to 0.55m remaining overlying the controlled fill. It is understood

that final trimming and levelling of this lot will result in Topsoil Fill depths of less than 0.4m.

On the day of the investigation, the site was judged to be reasonably well drained primarily by

way of surface runoff down slope.

Photographs of the site taken on the day of the site investigations are shown below.

Photograph 1: From near western boundary of

Lot 720, facing southeast.

Photograph 2: From near western boundary of

Lot 720, facing south.

http://www.saiglobal.com/online/Script/Details.asp?DocN=AS0733780962AT

http://www.saiglobal.com/online/Script/Details.asp?DocN=AS0733780962AT



Photograph 3: From near eastern boundary of

Lot 720, facing southeast.


Lot 720, facing south.

Photograph 5: From northern boundary of Lot

701, facing south.

Photograph 6: From northern boundary of Lot

701, facing west.

Photograph 7: From southern boundary of Lot

703, facing northwest.

Photograph 8: From southern boundary of Lot

703, facing west.

Photograph 9: From near south-western corner

of Lot 704, facing southeast.

Photograph 10: From south-western corner of

Lot 704, facing southwest.



Photograph 11: From eastern boundary of Lot

711, facing west.

Photograph 12: From eastern boundary of Lot

711, facing north.

Photograph 13: From near eastern boundary

of Lot 708, facing southwest.


Lot 708, facing northwest.

4.3 Subsurface Conditions

Reference to the 1:100,000 Newcastle Coalfield Regional Geology Sheet indicates the site to

be underlain by the Rutherford Formation belonging to the early Permian Aged Dalwood

Group, characterised by Siltstone, Marl and minor Sandstone rock types.

Table 1 presents a summary of the typical soil types encountered at test pit locations during the

field investigation, divided into representative geotechnical units.

Table 2 contains a summary of the distribution of the above geotechnical units at the test pit

locations.

No groundwater levels or inflows were encountered in the test pits during the limited time that

they remained open on the days of the field investigations.

It should be noted that groundwater conditions can vary due to rainfall and other influences

including regional groundwater flow, temperature, permeability, recharge areas, surface

condition, and subsoil drainage.



TABLE 1 – SUMMARY OF GEOTECHNICAL UNITS AND SOIL TYPES

Unit Soil Type Description

1A FILL - TOPSOIL

Silty SAND – fine to coarse grained (mostly fine to medium grained),

pale grey-brown, fines of low plasticity, trace fine to medium grained

rounded gravel, root affected.

1B FILL -

CONTROLLED

Gravelly Sandy CLAY / Clayey Gravelly SAND / Clayey SAND – low to

medium plasticity, pale brown, fine to coarse grained sand, fine to

coarse grained angular to sub-angular gravel, with some cobbles up

to ~200mm in diameter.

Sandy CLAY / Gravelly Sandy CLAY – medium plasticity and medium

to high plasticity, grey-brown to dark brown, fine to coarse grained

(mostly fine to medium grained) sand, fine to coarse grained angular

to sub-angular gravel.

Silty Sandy GRAVEL – fine to medium grained sub-angular, brown,

fine to coarse grained, fines of low plasticity.

2 TOPSOIL Silty SAND – fine to medium grained, grey-brown, fines of low

plasticity, root affected.

3 ALLUVIUM

CLAY – medium to high plasticity, dark grey with some red-brown,

with some fine to medium grained sand.

Possibly Residual Soil in places.

4 RESIDUAL SOIL

Sandy CLAY / CLAY – medium to high plasticity, pale grey and red-

brown to pale orange-brown, fine to medium grained sand.

Grading into / pockets of extremely weathered rock in places.

5

EXTREMELY

WEATHERED

ROCK with soil

properties

SANDSTONE; breaks down into Sandy CLAY /Clayey SAND – medium

to high plasticity, red-brown and orange-brown with some grey, fine

to medium grained sand. Pockets of Highly Weathered SANDSTONE.

Silty SNDSTONE; breaks down into Clayey SAND – fine to coarse

grained (mostly fine to medium grained), pale grey and pale

orange-brown, fines of medium plasticity.

6

HIGHLY

WEATHERED

ROCK

Silty SANDSTONE – fine to medium grained, dark grey and dark

orange-brown, estimated medium strength.

SANDSTONE – fine to medium grained, pale grey and pale orange-

brown, estimated very low strength.



TABLE 2 – SUMMARY OF GEOTECHNICAL UNITS ENCOUNTERED AT EACH TEST PIT LOCATION

Location Unit 1A

FILL - Topsoil

Unit 1B

FILL - Controlled

Unit 2

Topsoil

Unit 3

Alluvium

Unit 4

Residual Soil

Unit 5

Extremely

Weathered

Rock

Unit 6

Highly

Weathered

Rock

Depth in metres (m)

Current Investigation (November 2018)

TP701 - 0.00 - 0.90 - 0.90 - 2.00 - - -

TP702 - 0.00 - 1.60 - 1.60 - 2.20 - - -

TP703 - 0.00 - 2.10 - 2.10 - 2.40 - - -

TP704 - 0.00 - 2.40 - - - - -

TP705 - 0.00 - 2.10 - - - - -

TP706 - - - - 0.00 - 2.00 - -

TP707 0.00 - 0.10 0.10 - 0.35 - - 0.35 - 1.45 1.45 - 2.20 -

TP708 0.00 - 0.05 0.05 - 0.50 - - 0.50 - 1.50 1.50 - 2.25 -

TP709 0.00 - 0.05 0.05 - 0.80 - - 0.80 - 1.25 1.25 - 2.10 -

TP710 - 0.00 - 0.80 - - 0.80 - 1.50 1.50 - 1.65 1.65 - 1.80^

TP711 - 0.00 - 1.45 - - 1.45 - 2.35 2.35 - 2.40 -

TP712 - 0.00 - 1.00 - - 1.00 - 1.80 1.80 - 1.90 1.90 - 2.00

TP713 - 0.00 - 0.70 - - 0.70 - 1.00 1.00 - 1.20 1.20 - 1.30^

TP714 - - 0.00 - 0.40 - 0.40 - 2.00 - -

TP715 - - - - 0.00 - 0.70 0.70 - 0.90 0.90 - 0.95*

TP716 - - 0.00 - 0.10 - 0.10 - 1.20 1.20 - 1.90^ -



Location Unit 1A

FILL - Topsoil

Unit 1B

FILL - Controlled

Unit 2

Topsoil

Unit 3

Alluvium

Unit 4

Residual Soil

Unit 5

Extremely

Weathered

Rock

Unit 6

Highly

Weathered

Rock

Depth in metres (m)

TP717 - - 0.00 - 0.05 - 0.05 - 0.80 0.80 - 1.20^ -

TP718 - - 0.00 - 0.05 - 0.05 - 1.60 1.60^ -

TP719 - - 0.00 - 0.10 - 0.10 - 2.10 - -

TP720 0.00 - 0.40 0.40 - 0.80 - - 0.80 - 2.10 - -

TP721 0.00 - 0.50 0.50 - 0.90 - - 0.90 - 2.30 - -

TP722 0.00 - 0.55 - - - 0.55 - 0.70 - -

Previous Investigation (Cardno, November 2014)

TP008 - - 0.00 - 0.25 - 0.25 - 1.30 - 1.30*

TP009 - - 0.00 - 0.20 - 0.20 - 1.10 - 1.10*

TP010 - - 0.00 - 0.20 - 0.20 - 1.00 - 1.00*

TP015 - - 0.00 - 0.15 - 0.15 - 1.50 - -

TP016 - - 0.00 - 0.30 - 0.30 - 2.00 - -

TP017 - - 0.00 - 0.22 - 0.22 - 1.50 - -

NOTES: * = Practical refusal of 8.5 tonne backhoe.

^ = Very slow progress of 4 tonne / 20 tonne excavator. (Refer to Logs)



5.0 Laboratory Testing

Samples collected during the current field investigations were returned to our NATA accredited

Warabrook Laboratory for testing which comprised of:

(17 no.) Shrink / Swell tests; and,

(4 no.) Atterberg Limits tests.

Qualtest also carried out three Shrink / Swell tests on undisturbed samples (U50 tubes) taken on

9 July 2018 during the filling of Lots 128 to 132, when the filling had been completed to

approximately 0.6m below finished levels.

Results of the laboratory testing are presented in Appendix B, with a summary of the

Shrink/Swell and Atterberg Limits test results presented in Table 3 and Table 4, including

laboratory test results from the previous investigations where applicable.

TABLE 3 – SUMMARY OF SHRINK / SWELL TESTING RESULTS

Location Depth (m) Material Description Iss (%)

Current Investigation (Qualtest, December 2018)

TP702 0.70 – 0.90 FILL: (CI) Sandy CLAY 0.3



TP705 1.35 – 1.65 FILL: (CL) Gravelly Sandy CLAY 0.4

TP706 0.05 – 0.25 Residual: (CH) Sandy CLAY 1.0






TP713 0.10 – 0.35 FILL: (CH) Sandy CLAY 2.0

TP714 0.70 – 0.95 Residual: (CI) Sandy CLAY 0.9




TP720 0.50 – 0.70 FILL: (CH) Sandy CLAY 3.6


Previous Sampling During Construction (Qualtest, July 2018)

TP01 0.60 – 0.80 FILL: (CL) Gravelly Sandy CLAY 0.5





Location Depth (m) Material Description Iss (%)

Previous Investigation (Cardno, CGS2432-002.1, November 2014)

TP010 0.30 – 0.70 Sandy CLAY 0.4

TP016 1.00 – 1.40 Silty Sandy CLAY 2.5

The results of laboratory shrink / swell tests indicate that the residual clays at the site range from

slightly to highly reactive.

TABLE 4 – SUMMARY OF ATTERBERG LIMITS TESTING RESULTS

Location

Depth (m) Material Description Liquid Limit

(%)

Plasticity

Index

(%)

Linear

Shrinkage

(%)

TP701 0.60 – 0.95 FILL: (CL) Sandy CLAY 27 16 4.5

TP712 0.50 – 0.85 FILL: (CI) Sandy CLAY 31 19 6.0

TP715 0.50 – 0.70 Residual: (CI) Sandy CLAY 30 18 5.0

TP718 0.50 – 0.70 Residual: (CH) Sandy CLAY 40 28 9.0

6.0 Site Classification to AS2870-2011

Based on the results of the field work and laboratory testing, residential lots located within the

subdivision of Heritage Parc Stage 7 are classified in their current condition in accordance with

AS2870-2011 ’Residential Slabs and Footings’, as shown in Table 5.

TABLE 5 – SITE CLASSIFICATION TO AS2870-2011

Lot Numbers Site Classification Estimated Characteristic

Free Surface Movement

118, 119 and 120 H1 40mm to 60 mm

113 to 117, and 121 to 132 H2 60mm to 75mm

Characteristic free surface movements have been estimated for lots in their existing condition

as shown in Table 5. The effects of changes to the soil profile by additional cutting and filling

and the effects of past and future trees should be considered in selection of the design value

for differential movement.

If site re-grading works involving cutting or filling are performed after the date of this assessment

the classification may change and further advice should be sought.

Footings for the proposed development should be designed and constructed in accordance

with the requirements of AS2870-2011.

The classification presented above assumes that:

All footings are founded in controlled fill (if applicable) or in the residual clayey soils or rock

below all non-controlled fill, topsoil material and root zones, and fill under slab panels meets

the requirements of AS2870-2011, in particular, the root zone must be removed prior to the

placement of fill materials beneath slabs.



The performance expectations set out in Appendix B of AS2870-2011 are acceptable, and

that site foundation maintenance is undertaken to avoid extremes of wetting and drying.

Footings are to be founded outside of or below all zones of influence resulting from existing

or future service trenches.

The constructional and architectural requirements for reactive clay sites set out in AS2870-

2011 are followed.

Adherence to the detailing requirement outlined in Section 5 of AS2870-2011 ‘Residential

Slabs and Footings’ is essential, in particular Section 5.6, ‘Additional requirements for Classes

M, H1, H2 and E sites’ including architectural restrictions, plumbing and drainage

requirements.

Site maintenance complies with the provisions of CSIRO Sheet BTF 18, “Foundation

Maintenance and Footing Performance: A Homeowner’s Guide”, a copy of which is

attached in Appendix C.

All structural elements on all lots regardless of their site classification should be supported on

footings founded beneath all uncontrolled fill, layers of inadequate bearing capacity,

soft/loose, or other potentially deleterious material.

If any areas of uncontrolled fill of depths greater than 0.4m are encountered during

construction, footings should be designed in accordance with engineering principles for

Class ‘P’ sites.

7.0 Limitations

The findings presented in the report and used as the basis for recommendations presented

herein were obtained using normal, industry accepted geotechnical design practices and

standards. To our knowledge, they represent a reasonable interpretation of the general

conditions of the site.

The extent of testing associated with this assessment is limited to discrete test locations. It

should be noted that subsurface conditions between and away from the test locations may be

different to those observed during the field work and used as the basis of the

recommendations contained in this report.

If subsurface conditions encountered during construction differ from those given in this report,

further advice should be sought without delay.

Data and opinions contained within the report may not be used in other contexts or for any

other purposes without prior review and agreement by Qualtest. If this report is reproduced, it

must be in full.

If you have any further questions regarding this report, please do not hesitate to contact

Shannon Kelly or the undersigned.

For and on behalf of Qualtest Laboratory (NSW) Pty Ltd.

Jason Lee

Principal Geotechnical Engineer

FIGURE AB1:

Site Plan and Approximate Test Locations

Client: HERITAGE PARC PTY LTD Drawing No: FIGURE AB1

Project: HERITAGE PARC, STAGE 7 Project No: NEW5P-0051H

Location: GRAND PARADE, RUTHERFORD Scale: N.T.S.

Title: SITE PLAN AND APPROXIMATE TEST LOCATIONS Date: 27/11/2018

TP701

TP702

TP703

TP704

TP705

TP706

TP707 TP708 TP709 TP710 TP711 TP712 TP713

TP714

TP715

TP716

TP717

TP718

TP719

TP720

TP721

TP015

TP016

TP017

TP008

TP009

TP010

TP722

Approximate Test Pit Location (Qualtest, November 2018) Approximate Test Pit Location (Cardno, November 2014)

LEGEND:

3

N

Based on Sales Plan by McCloy (Ref. No. 180627 18247-SALES, Rev. 3)

APPENDIX A:

Results of Field Investigations

H

H

VSt

H

0.30m

0.60m

0.90m

2.00m

FILL - CONTROLLED

ALLUVIUM / POSSIBLERESIDUAL

E

CL

CI

CL

CH

M <

wP

M ~

wP

M <

wP

M >

wP

U50

0.95m

0.60m

FILL: Gravelly Sandy CLAY / Clayey Gravelly SAND- low to medium plasticity, pale brown, fine to coarsegrained sand, fine to coarse grained angular tosub-angular gravel, with some cobbles up to~200mm in diameter.

FILL: Sandy CLAY - medium plasticity, brown to darkbrown, fine to medium grained sand.

FILL: Gravelly Sandy CLAY - low to mediumplasticity, brown, fine to coarse grained sand, fine tocoarse grained (mostly fine to medium grained)angular to sub-angular gravel.

CLAY - medium to high plasticity, dark grey withsome red-brown, with some fine to medium grainedsand.

Trace fine to medium grained rounded gravel.

Hole Terminated at 2.00 m

HP >600

HP >600

HP 480

HP >600

HP >600

HP >600

HP >600

HP 350

HP 220

HP 270

HP 500

HP 530

Not

Enc

ount

ered

Field Test

PID Photoionisation detector reading (ppm)DCP(x-y) Dynamic penetrometer test (test depth interval shown)

HP Hand Penetrometer test (UCS kPa)

Material description and profile information

UCS (kPa)D DryM MoistW WetWp Plastic LimitWL Liquid Limit

Field Tests

Notes, Samples and Tests

Structure and additionalobservations

ME

TH

OD

CLA

SS

IFIC

AT

ION

SY

MB

OL

Tes

t T

ype

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

DIT

ION

CO

NS

IST

EN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

Water

WA

TE

R

Gradational ortransitional strataDefinitive or distictstrata change

Strata Changes

RL(m)

GR

AP

HIC

LOGDEPTH

(m)

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

SAMPLES

Water Level

(Date and time shown)

Water Inflow

Water Outflow

VS Very SoftS SoftF FirmSt Stiff

VSt Very StiffH HardFb Friable

U50 50mm Diameter tube sampleCBR Bulk sample for CBR testing

E Environmental sample(Glass jar, sealed and chilled on site)

ASS Acid Sulfate Soil Sample(Plastic bag, air expelled, chilled)

B Bulk Sample

Consistency Moisture Condition

V Very Loose Density Index <15%L Loose Density Index 15 - 35%MD Medium Dense Density Index 35 - 65%D Dense Density Index 65 - 85%VD Very Dense Density Index 85 - 100%

Density

LEGEND:

Res

ult

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION: Soil type, plasticity/particlecharacteristics,colour,minor components

Drilling and Sampling

<2525 - 5050 - 100100 - 200200 - 400>400

QT

LIB

1.1

.GLB

Log

NO

N-C

OR

ED

BO

RE

HO

LE -

TE

ST

PIT

TE

MP

LAT

E L

OG

S S

HE

ET

.GP

J <

<D

raw

ingF

ile>

> 2

7-11

-201

8 17

:14

10.

0.00

0 D

atge

l Lab

and

In S

itu T

ool

CLIENT: HERITAGE PARC PTY LTD C/- MCCLOY GROUP

PROJECT: HERITAGE PARC - STAGE 7

LOCATION: GRAND PARADE, RUTHERFORD

ENGINEERING LOG - TEST PIT

EQUIPMENT TYPE: 20 TONNE EXCAVATOR

TEST PIT LENGTH: 2.0 m WIDTH: 0.6 m

TEST PIT NO: TP701PAGE: 1 OF 1

JOB NO: NEW15P-0051H

LOGGED BY: BB

DATE: 29-10-18

SURFACE RL:

DATUM:

H

VSt -H

St -VSt

0.55m

1.00m

1.60m

2.20m

FILL - CONTROLLED

ALLUVIUM

E

SC

CI

CH

CH

M >

wP

D - M

U50

0.90m

0.70m

FILL: Clayey Gravelly SAND - fine to coarsegrained, pale brown, low to medium plasticity, fine tocoarse grained angular to sub-angular gravel, withsome cobbles up to ~200mm in diameter.

FILL: Sandy CLAY - medium plasticity, dark brown,fine to medium grained sand, trace fine to mediumgrained sub-angular gravel.

FILL: Sandy CLAY - medium to high plasticity,grey-brown with some red-brown, fine to mediumgrained sand, trace fine to medium grainedsub-angular gravel.

CLAY - high plasticity, grey and pale orange-brown,with some fine to medium grained (mostly finegrained) sand.


HP 480

HP 530

HP 350

HP 330

HP 450

HP 280

HP 220

HP 150

HP 250

HP 170

Not

Enc

ount

ered

Field Test





Field Tests



ME

TH

OD

CLA

SS

IFIC

AT

ION

SY

MB

OL

Tes

t T

ype

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

DIT

ION

CO

NS

IST

EN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

Water

WA

TE

R


Strata Changes

RL(m)

GR

AP

HIC

LOGDEPTH

(m)

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

SAMPLES

Water Level


Water Inflow

Water Outflow






B Bulk Sample



Density

LEGEND:

Res

ult



<2525 - 5050 - 100100 - 200200 - 400>400

QT

LIB

1.1

.GLB

Log

NO

N-C

OR

ED

BO

RE

HO

LE -

TE

ST

PIT

TE

MP

LAT

E L

OG

S S

HE

ET

.GP

J <

<D

raw

ingF

ile>

> 2

7-11

-201

8 17

:15

10.

0.00

0 D

atge

l Lab

and

In S

itu T

ool









LOGGED BY: BB

DATE: 29-10-18

SURFACE RL:

DATUM:

H

VSt

St

VSt

St

0.35m

2.10m

2.40m

FILL - CONTROLLED

ALLUVIUM

E

CL

CI

CH

M <

wP

M >

wP

U501.60m

1.45m

FILL: Gravelly Sandy CLAY - low to mediumplasticity, pale brown, fine to coarse grained sand,fine to coarse grained angular to sub-angular gravel,with some cobbles up to ~200mm in diameter.

FILL: Sandy CLAY - medium plasticity, dark brown,fine to medium grained sand, trace fine to mediumgrained sub-angular gravel.

CLAY - medium to high plasticity, grey with somepale orange-brown, fine to medium grained (mostlyfine grained) sand.


HP >600

HP >600

HP 350

HP 280

HP 180

HP 150

HP 130

HP 190

HP 330

HP 280

HP 180

HP 150

Not

Enc

ount

ered

Field Test





Field Tests



ME

TH

OD

CLA

SS

IFIC

AT

ION

SY

MB

OL

Tes

t T

ype

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

DIT

ION

CO

NS

IST

EN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

Water

WA

TE

R


Strata Changes

RL(m)

GR

AP

HIC

LOGDEPTH

(m)

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

SAMPLES

Water Level


Water Inflow

Water Outflow






B Bulk Sample



Density

LEGEND:

Res

ult



<2525 - 5050 - 100100 - 200200 - 400>400

QT

LIB

1.1

.GLB

Log

NO

N-C

OR

ED

BO

RE

HO

LE -

TE

ST

PIT

TE

MP

LAT

E L

OG

S S

HE

ET

.GP

J <

<D

raw

ingF

ile>

> 2

7-11

-201

8 17

:15

10.

0.00

0 D

atge

l Lab

and

In S

itu T

ool









LOGGED BY: BB

DATE: 29-10-18

SURFACE RL:

DATUM:

H

VSt

St -VSt

0.15m

0.50m

1.05m

2.40m

FILL - CONTROLLED

E

SM

CL

CI

CI

M <

wP

M >

wP

D - M

U50

0.85m

0.65m

FILL: Silty Gravelly SAND - fine to coarse grained,brown, fine to coarse grained sub-angular (mostlyfine to medium grained) gravel, fines of low plasticity.

FILL: Gravelly Sandy CLAY - low to mediumplasticity, pale brown, fine to coarse grained sand,fine to coarse grained angular to sub-angular gravel,with some cobbles up to ~200mm in diameter.

FILL: Sandy CLAY - medium plasticity, brown tored-brown, fine to medium grained sand.

FILL: Sandy CLAY - medium plasticity, brown togrey-brown, fine to coarse grained (mostly fine tomedium grained) sand, with pockets of fine tomedium grained sub-rounded to sub-angular gravel.


HP >600

HP >600

HP 330

HP 280

HP 150

HP 250

HP 230

HP 300

Not

Enc

ount

ered

Field Test





Field Tests



ME

TH

OD

CLA

SS

IFIC

AT

ION

SY

MB

OL

Tes

t T

ype

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

DIT

ION

CO

NS

IST

EN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

Water

WA

TE

R


Strata Changes

RL(m)

GR

AP

HIC

LOGDEPTH

(m)

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

SAMPLES

Water Level


Water Inflow

Water Outflow






B Bulk Sample



Density

LEGEND:

Res

ult



<2525 - 5050 - 100100 - 200200 - 400>400

QT

LIB

1.1

.GLB

Log

NO

N-C

OR

ED

BO

RE

HO

LE -

TE

ST

PIT

TE

MP

LAT

E L

OG

S S

HE

ET

.GP

J <

<D

raw

ingF

ile>

> 2

7-11

-201

8 17

:15

10.

0.00

0 D

atge

l Lab

and

In S

itu T

ool









LOGGED BY: BB

DATE: 29-10-18

SURFACE RL:

DATUM:

VSt

St -VSt

VSt -H

VSt

0.25m

0.80m

1.35m

1.80m

2.10m

FILL - CONTROLLED

FILL - CONTROLLED /POSSIBLE SLOPE WASH

E

CH

GC

CI

CL

CL

M >

wP

M ~

wP

M <

wP

D - M

U500.20m

U50

1.65m

0.05m

1.35m

FILL: Sandy CLAY - medium to high plasticity, greyand red-brown, fine to medium grained sand.

Clayey Gravelly SAND / Clayey Sandy GRAVEL -fine to coarse grained, pale brown, fine to coarsegrained angular to sub-angular gravel, fines of low tomedium plasticity.

FILL: Sandy CLAY - medium plasticity, darkgrey-brown, fine to medium grained sand.

FILL: Gravelly Sandy CLAY - low to mediumplasticity, grey-brown, fine to coarse grained sand,fine to coarse grained angular to sub-angular gravel,with some cobbles up to ~200mnm in diameter.

FILL: Sandy CLAY - low to medium plasticity, palebrown to brown, fine to medium grained (mostly finegrained) sand.


HP 230

HP 310

HP 180

HP 280

HP 450

HP 520

HP 380

HP 310

Not

Enc

ount

ered

Field Test





Field Tests



ME

TH

OD

CLA

SS

IFIC

AT

ION

SY

MB

OL

Tes

t T

ype

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

DIT

ION

CO

NS

IST

EN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

Water

WA

TE

R


Strata Changes

RL(m)

GR

AP

HIC

LOGDEPTH

(m)

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

SAMPLES

Water Level


Water Inflow

Water Outflow






B Bulk Sample



Density

LEGEND:

Res

ult



<2525 - 5050 - 100100 - 200200 - 400>400

QT

LIB

1.1

.GLB

Log

NO

N-C

OR

ED

BO

RE

HO

LE -

TE

ST

PIT

TE

MP

LAT

E L

OG

S S

HE

ET

.GP

J <

<D

raw

ingF

ile>

> 2

7-11

-201

8 17

:15

10.

0.00

0 D

atge

l Lab

and

In S

itu T

ool









LOGGED BY: BB

DATE: 29-10-18

SURFACE RL:

DATUM:

VSt

H

2.00m

RESIDUAL SOIL

E CH

M >

wP

M ~

wP

U50

0.25m

0.05m Sandy CLAY - medium to high plasticity, pale greyand red-brown to pale orange-brown, fine to mediumgrained sand.

Pockets of Extremely Weathered Sandstone with soilproperties; breaks down into Sandy CLAY.


HP 330

HP 380

HP 350

HP >600

HP >600

HP >600

HP >600

Not

Enc

ount

ered

Field Test





Field Tests



ME

TH

OD

CLA

SS

IFIC

AT

ION

SY

MB

OL

Tes

t T

ype

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

DIT

ION

CO

NS

IST

EN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

Water

WA

TE

R


Strata Changes

RL(m)

GR

AP

HIC

LOGDEPTH

(m)

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

SAMPLES

Water Level


Water Inflow

Water Outflow






B Bulk Sample



Density

LEGEND:

Res

ult



<2525 - 5050 - 100100 - 200200 - 400>400

QT

LIB

1.1

.GLB

Log

NO

N-C

OR

ED

BO

RE

HO

LE -

TE

ST

PIT

TE

MP

LAT

E L

OG

S S

HE

ET

.GP

J <

<D

raw

ingF

ile>

> 2

7-11

-201

8 17

:15

10.

0.00

0 D

atge

l Lab

and

In S

itu T

ool









LOGGED BY: BB

DATE: 29-10-18

SURFACE RL:

DATUM:

St

H

0.10m

0.35m

1.45m

2.20m

FILL - TOPSOIL

FILL - CONTROLLED

RESIDUAL SOIL

EXTREMELY WEATHEREDROCK

E

SM

CI

CH

CH

M >

wP

M ~

wP

M <

wP

D

U50

0.65m

0.40m

FILL-TOPSOIL: Silty SAND - fine to coarse grained(mostly fine to medium grained), pale grey-brown,fines of low plasticity, trace fine to medium grainedrounded gravel, root affected.

FILL: Sandy CLAY - medium plasticity, pale brown tobrown, fine to medium grained sand.

Sandy CLAY - medium to high plasticity, red-brownwith some orange-brown to pale orange-brown andgrey, fine to medium grained sand.With some roots.

Extremely Weathered Sandstone with soil properties;breaks down into Sandy CLAY - medium to highplasticity, red-brown and orange-brown with somegrey, fine to medium grained sand.


HP 130

HP 450

HP >600

HP >600

HP >600

HP >600

Not

Enc

ount

ered

Field Test





Field Tests



ME

TH

OD

CLA

SS

IFIC

AT

ION

SY

MB

OL

Tes

t T

ype

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

DIT

ION

CO

NS

IST

EN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

Water

WA

TE

R


Strata Changes

RL(m)

GR

AP

HIC

LOGDEPTH

(m)

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

SAMPLES

Water Level


Water Inflow

Water Outflow






B Bulk Sample



Density

LEGEND:

Res

ult



<2525 - 5050 - 100100 - 200200 - 400>400

QT

LIB

1.1

.GLB

Log

NO

N-C

OR

ED

BO

RE

HO

LE -

TE

ST

PIT

TE

MP

LAT

E L

OG

S S

HE

ET

.GP

J <

<D

raw

ingF

ile>

> 2

7-11

-201

8 17

:15

10.

0.00

0 D

atge

l Lab

and

In S

itu T

ool









LOGGED BY: BB

DATE: 29-10-18

SURFACE RL:

DATUM:

VSt -H

H

0.05m

0.50m

1.50m

2.25m

FILL - TOPSOILFILL - CONTROLLED

RESIDUAL SOIL


E

SM

CI

CH

CH

M ~

wP

M <

wP

D

U50

1.25m

1.00m

FILL-TOPSOIL: Silty SAND - fine to coarse grained(mostly fine to medium grained), pale grey-brown,fines of low plasticity, with some fine to mediumgrained rounded to sub-angular gravel, root affected.

FILL: Gravelly Sandy CLAY - medium plasticity,brown to grey, fine to coarse grained sand, fine tomedium grained angular to sub-angular gravel.

Sandy CLAY - medium to high plasticity, red-brownwith some grey and orange-brown, fine to mediumgrained sand.

Extremely Weathered Sandstone with soil properties;breaks down into Sandy CLAY - medium to highplasticity, red-brown with some grey andorange-brown, fine to medium grained sand.


HP 480

HP >600

HP 380

HP 490

HP >600

HP >600

HP >600

HP >600

Not

Enc

ount

ered

Field Test





Field Tests



ME

TH

OD

CLA

SS

IFIC

AT

ION

SY

MB

OL

Tes

t T

ype

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

DIT

ION

CO

NS

IST

EN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

Water

WA

TE

R


Strata Changes

RL(m)

GR

AP

HIC

LOGDEPTH

(m)

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

SAMPLES

Water Level


Water Inflow

Water Outflow






B Bulk Sample



Density

LEGEND:

Res

ult



<2525 - 5050 - 100100 - 200200 - 400>400

QT

LIB

1.1

.GLB

Log

NO

N-C

OR

ED

BO

RE

HO

LE -

TE

ST

PIT

TE

MP

LAT

E L

OG

S S

HE

ET

.GP

J <

<D

raw

ingF

ile>

> 2

7-11

-201

8 17

:15

10.

0.00

0 D

atge

l Lab

and

In S

itu T

ool









LOGGED BY: BB

DATE: 29-10-18

SURFACE RL:

DATUM:

H

0.05m

0.80m

1.25m

2.10m

FILL - TOPSOILFILL - CONTROLLED

RESIDUAL SOIL


E

SM

CI

CI

CI

M ~

wP

M <

wP

D

U50

0.45m

0.10mFILL-TOPSOIL: Silty SAND - fine to coarse grained(mostly fine to medium grained), grey-brown, fines oflow plasticity, with some fine to medium grainedangular to sub-rounded gravel, root affected.

FILL: Sandy CLAY - medium plasticity, grey-brown,fine to coarse grained sand, with some fine tomedium grained angular to sub-angular gravel.

Sandy CLAY - medium plasticity, red-brown andorange-brown with some grey, fine to mediumgrained sand.

Extremely Weathered Sandstone; breaks down intoSandy CLAY / Clayey SAND - medium plasticity,red-brown and orange-brown with some grey, fine tomedium grained sand. Pockets of highly weatheredSANDSTONE.


HP >600

HP >600

HP >600

HP >600

HP >600

HP >600

HP >600

Not

Enc

ount

ered

Field Test





Field Tests



ME

TH

OD

CLA

SS

IFIC

AT

ION

SY

MB

OL

Tes

t T

ype

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

DIT

ION

CO

NS

IST

EN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

Water

WA

TE

R


Strata Changes

RL(m)

GR

AP

HIC

LOGDEPTH

(m)

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

SAMPLES

Water Level


Water Inflow

Water Outflow






B Bulk Sample



Density

LEGEND:

Res

ult



<2525 - 5050 - 100100 - 200200 - 400>400

QT

LIB

1.1

.GLB

Log

NO

N-C

OR

ED

BO

RE

HO

LE -

TE

ST

PIT

TE

MP

LAT

E L

OG

S S

HE

ET

.GP

J <

<D

raw

ingF

ile>

> 2

7-11

-201

8 17

:15

10.

0.00

0 D

atge

l Lab

and

In S

itu T

ool









LOGGED BY: BB

DATE: 29-10-18

SURFACE RL:

DATUM:

H

VSt

H

0.30m

0.35m

0.80m

1.50m

1.65m

1.80m

FILL - CONTROLLED

RESIDUAL SOIL


HIGHLY TO MODERATELYWEATHERED ROCK

E

SC

GP

CI

CI

SC

M <

wP

M ~

wP

M <

wP

D - M

D

D

U501.05m

0.90m

FILL: Gravelly Clayey SAND - fine to coarse grained,pale grey-brown, fine to coarse grained angular tosub-angular gravel, fines of low plasticity, tracecobbles of up to ~200mm in diameter.

FILL: GRAVEL - medium grained angular, blue-greyto grey.

FILL: Sandy CLAY - medium plasticity, brown to darkbrown, fine to coarse grained (mostly fine to mediumgrained) sand, with some fine to medium grainedangular to sub-angular gravel.Becoming brown to orange-brown with some grey.Becoming grey to grey-brown.

Sandy CLAY - medium plasticity, red-brown and paleorange-brown to orange-brown, fine to mediumgrained sand, with some roots.

Becoming pale grey and pale orange-brown, withsome Extremely to Highly Weathered pockets.

Extremely Weathered Silty Sandstone with soilproperties; breaks down into Clayey SAND - fine tocoarse grained (mostly fine to medium grained), palegrey and pale orange-brown, fines of mediumplasticity.

Silty SANDSTONE - fine to medium grained, darkgrey and dark orange-brown, estimated mediumstrength.

Hole Terminated at 1.80 mVery slow progress

HP >600

HP 500

HP 330

HP 350

HP 290

HP >600

HP >600

HP >600

Not

Enc

ount

ered

Field Test





Field Tests



ME

TH

OD

CLA

SS

IFIC

AT

ION

SY

MB

OL

Tes

t T

ype

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

DIT

ION

CO

NS

IST

EN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

Water

WA

TE

R


Strata Changes

RL(m)

GR

AP

HIC

LOGDEPTH

(m)

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

SAMPLES

Water Level


Water Inflow

Water Outflow






B Bulk Sample



Density

LEGEND:

Res

ult



<2525 - 5050 - 100100 - 200200 - 400>400

QT

LIB

1.1

.GLB

Log

NO

N-C

OR

ED

BO

RE

HO

LE -

TE

ST

PIT

TE

MP

LAT

E L

OG

S S

HE

ET

.GP

J <

<D

raw

ingF

ile>

> 2

7-11

-201

8 17

:15

10.

0.00

0 D

atge

l Lab

and

In S

itu T

ool









LOGGED BY: BB

DATE: 29-10-18

SURFACE RL:

DATUM:

H

St

H

0.80m

1.00m

1.30m

1.45m

2.35m

2.40m

FILL - CONTROLLED

RESIDUAL SOIL


E

CI

CL

CI

SC

CH

CH

M <

wP

M >

wP

M <

wP

M

U50

1.75m

1.45m

FILL: Gravelly Sandy CLAY - medium plasticity,brown to dark brown, fine to coarse grained sand,fine to coarse grained angular to sub-angular gravel,trace cobbles of up to ~200mm in diameter.

FILL: Gravelly Sandy CLAY - low to mediumplasticity, pale orange-brown, fine to coarse grained(mostly fine to medium grained) sand, fine to mediumgrained rounded to sub-angular gravel.

FILL: Sandy CLAY - medium plasticity, grey withsome red-brown, fine to medium grained sand.

FILL: Clayey SAND - fine to coarse grained (fine tomedium grained), pale brown, fines of mediumplasticity.

Sandy CLAY - medium to high plasticity, red-brownto orange-brown with some grey to pale grey, fine tomedium grained sand (mostly fine grained).

Extremely Weathered Sandstone with soil properties;breaks down into Sandy CLAY - medium to highplasticity, red-brown to orange-brown with some greyto pale grey, fine to medium grained sand (mostlyfine grained). Some pockets of highly weatheredSANDSTONE.


HP >600

HP >600

HP >600

HP >600

HP 130

HP >600

HP >600

Not

Enc

ount

ered

Field Test





Field Tests



ME

TH

OD

CLA

SS

IFIC

AT

ION

SY

MB

OL

Tes

t T

ype

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

DIT

ION

CO

NS

IST

EN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

Water

WA

TE

R


Strata Changes

RL(m)

GR

AP

HIC

LOGDEPTH

(m)

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

SAMPLES

Water Level


Water Inflow

Water Outflow






B Bulk Sample



Density

LEGEND:

Res

ult



<2525 - 5050 - 100100 - 200200 - 400>400

QT

LIB

1.1

.GLB

Log

NO

N-C

OR

ED

BO

RE

HO

LE -

TE

ST

PIT

TE

MP

LAT

E L

OG

S S

HE

ET

.GP

J <

<D

raw

ingF

ile>

> 2

7-11

-201

8 17

:15

10.

0.00

0 D

atge

l Lab

and

In S

itu T

ool









LOGGED BY: BB

DATE: 29-10-18

SURFACE RL:

DATUM:

H

0.40m

0.60m

1.00m

1.80m

1.90m

2.00m

FILL - CONTROLLED

RESIDUAL SOIL /POSSIBLE FILL

EXTREMELY WEATHEREDROCKHIGHLY WEATHEREDROCK

E

CI

CI

CI

CH

SC

M <

wP

D

U50

0.85m

0.50m

FILL: Gravelly Sandy CLAY - medium plasticity,grey-brown with some red-brown, fine to coarsegrained sand, fine to coarse grained angular tosub-angular gravel.

FILL: Sandy CLAY - medium plasticity, grey withsome red-brown and pale orange-brown, fine tocoarse grained (mostly fine to medium grained)sand, trace fine to medium grained angular tosub-angular gravel, trace sticks.

FILL: Sandy CLAY / Clayey SAND - mediumplasticity, brown, fine to coarse grained (mostly fineto medium grained) sand, trace fine to mediumgrained sub-angular gravel.

Sandy CLAY - medium to high plasticity, grey andred-brown, fine to medium grained sand.

Becoming pale grey and pale orange-brown toorange-brown.

Extremely Weathered Silty Sandstone with soilproperties; breaks down into Clayey SAND - fine tomedium grained, pale grey, fines of mediumplasticity.

Silty SANDSTONE - fine to medium grained, palegrey with some pale orange-brown, estimated lowstrength.


HP >600

HP 550

HP >600

HP 480

HP >600

Not

Enc

ount

ered

Field Test





Field Tests



ME

TH

OD

CLA

SS

IFIC

AT

ION

SY

MB

OL

Tes

t T

ype

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

DIT

ION

CO

NS

IST

EN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

Water

WA

TE

R


Strata Changes

RL(m)

GR

AP

HIC

LOGDEPTH

(m)

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

SAMPLES

Water Level


Water Inflow

Water Outflow






B Bulk Sample



Density

LEGEND:

Res

ult



<2525 - 5050 - 100100 - 200200 - 400>400

QT

LIB

1.1

.GLB

Log

NO

N-C

OR

ED

BO

RE

HO

LE -

TE

ST

PIT

TE

MP

LAT

E L

OG

S S

HE

ET

.GP

J <

<D

raw

ingF

ile>

> 2

7-11

-201

8 17

:15

10.

0.00

0 D

atge

l Lab

and

In S

itu T

ool









LOGGED BY: BB

DATE: 29-10-18

SURFACE RL:

DATUM:

H

0.40m

0.70m

1.00m

1.20m

1.30m

FILL - CONTROLLED

RESIDUAL SOIL /POSSIBLE FILL


EXTREMELY TO HIGHLYWEATHERED ROCK

E

CH

CI

CI

CI

M <

wP

D

U50

0.35m

0.10mFILL: Sandy CLAY - medium to high plasticity, greyand red-brown, fine to medium grained sand, withsome sticks.

FILL: Gravelly Sandy CLAY - medium plasticity,brown, fine to coarse grained sand, fine to coarsegrained (mostly fine to medium grained) angular tosub-angular gravel.

Sandy CLAY - medium plasticity, grey with red-brownand orange-brown, fine to coarse grained (mostlyfine to medium grained) sand, trace pockets of fineto coarse grained angular to sub-angular gravel.

Extremely Weathered Silty Sandstone with soilproperties; breaks down into Sandy CLAY - mediumplasticity, pale grey to yellow-brown, fine to mediumgrained sand.

Silty SANDSTONE - fine to medium grained,red-brown to pale orange-brown, estimated low tomedium strength.


HP >600

HP >600

HP >600

HP 500

HP 430

HP 550

HP >600

Not

Enc

ount

ered

Field Test





Field Tests



ME

TH

OD

CLA

SS

IFIC

AT

ION

SY

MB

OL

Tes

t T

ype

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

DIT

ION

CO

NS

IST

EN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

Water

WA

TE

R


Strata Changes

RL(m)

GR

AP

HIC

LOGDEPTH

(m)

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

SAMPLES

Water Level


Water Inflow

Water Outflow






B Bulk Sample



Density

LEGEND:

Res

ult



<2525 - 5050 - 100100 - 200200 - 400>400

QT

LIB

1.1

.GLB

Log

NO

N-C

OR

ED

BO

RE

HO

LE -

TE

ST

PIT

TE

MP

LAT

E L

OG

S S

HE

ET

.GP

J <

<D

raw

ingF

ile>

> 2

7-11

-201

8 17

:15

10.

0.00

0 D

atge

l Lab

and

In S

itu T

ool









LOGGED BY: BB

DATE: 29-10-18

SURFACE RL:

DATUM:

H

0.40m

0.80m

2.00m

TOPSOIL

RESIDUAL SOIL

E

SM

CI

CI

M <

wP

D

U50

0.95m

0.70m

TOPSOIL: Silty SAND - fine to medium grained,grey-brown, fines of low plasticity, root affected.

Sandy CLAY - medium plasticity, red-brown withsome orange-brown, fine to medium grained sand,with some roots.

Sandy CLAY - medium plasticity, pale grey and paleorange-brown, fine to medium grained sand.

Band of Extremely Weathered Sandstone with soilproperties.


HP 500

HP 480

HP >600

HP >600

HP >600

HP 530

Not

Enc

ount

ered

Field Test





Field Tests



ME

TH

OD

CLA

SS

IFIC

AT

ION

SY

MB

OL

Tes

t T

ype

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

DIT

ION

CO

NS

IST

EN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

Water

WA

TE

R


Strata Changes

RL(m)

GR

AP

HIC

LOGDEPTH

(m)

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

SAMPLES

Water Level


Water Inflow

Water Outflow






B Bulk Sample



Density

LEGEND:

Res

ult



<2525 - 5050 - 100100 - 200200 - 400>400

QT

LIB

1.1

.GLB

Log

NO

N-C

OR

ED

BO

RE

HO

LE -

TE

ST

PIT

TE

MP

LAT

E L

OG

S S

HE

ET

.GP

J <

<D

raw

ingF

ile>

> 2

7-11

-201

8 17

:15

10.

0.00

0 D

atge

l Lab

and

In S

itu T

ool





EQUIPMENT TYPE: 8.5 TONNE BACKHOE




LOGGED BY: BB

DATE: 29-10-18

SURFACE RL:

DATUM:

H

0.25m

0.70m

0.90m

0.95m

RESIDUAL SOIL

RESIDUAL SOIL /EXTREMELY WEATHEREDROCK

EXTREMELY WEATHEREDROCK / RESIDUAL SOIL

EXTREMELY TO HIGHLYWEATHERED ROCK

E

CH

CI

CI

M <

wP

D

U50

0.70m

0.50m

Sandy CLAY - medium to high plasticity, red-brownand pale grey, fine to medium grained sand.

Sandy CLAY - medium plasticity, pale orange-brownand pale grey, fine to medium grained sand.

Extremely Weathered Sandstone with soil properties;breaks down into Sandy CLAY - medium plasticity,pale orange-brown and pale grey, fine to mediumgrained sand.

SANDSTONE - fine to medium grained, pale greyand pale orange-brown, estimated very low strength.

Hole Terminated at 0.95 mPractical Refusal

HP >600

HP >600

HP >600

HP >600

HP >600

Not

Enc

ount

ered

Field Test





Field Tests



ME

TH

OD

CLA

SS

IFIC

AT

ION

SY

MB

OL

Tes

t T

ype

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

DIT

ION

CO

NS

IST

EN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

Water

WA

TE

R


Strata Changes

RL(m)

GR

AP

HIC

LOGDEPTH

(m)

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

SAMPLES

Water Level


Water Inflow

Water Outflow






B Bulk Sample



Density

LEGEND:

Res

ult



<2525 - 5050 - 100100 - 200200 - 400>400

QT

LIB

1.1

.GLB

Log

NO

N-C

OR

ED

BO

RE

HO

LE -

TE

ST

PIT

TE

MP

LAT

E L

OG

S S

HE

ET

.GP

J <

<D

raw

ingF

ile>

> 2

7-11

-201

8 17

:15

10.

0.00

0 D

atge

l Lab

and

In S

itu T

ool









LOGGED BY: BB

DATE: 29-10-18

SURFACE RL:

DATUM:

St

VSt

H

VD

0.10m

1.20m

1.90m

TOPSOIL

RESIDUAL SOIL


E

SM

CH

SC

M >

wP

M <

wP

D

M

U50

0.40m

0.20m

TOPSOIL: Silty SAND - fine to medium grained, palebrown, fines of low plasticity, root affected.

Sandy CLAY - medium to high plasticity, paleorange-brown with some grey and red-brown, fine tomedium grained sand.

Extremely Weathered Silty Sandstone with soilproperties; breaks down into Clayey SAND - fine tomedium grained, grey with some red-brown andorange-brown, fines of low to medium plasticity.


HP 110

HP 280

HP 350

HP 330

HP 500

HP >600

HP 580

HP >600

Not

Enc

ount

ered

Field Test





Field Tests



ME

TH

OD

CLA

SS

IFIC

AT

ION

SY

MB

OL

Tes

t T

ype

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

DIT

ION

CO

NS

IST

EN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

Water

WA

TE

R


Strata Changes

RL(m)

GR

AP

HIC

LOGDEPTH

(m)

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

SAMPLES

Water Level


Water Inflow

Water Outflow






B Bulk Sample



Density

LEGEND:

Res

ult



<2525 - 5050 - 100100 - 200200 - 400>400

QT

LIB

1.1

.GLB

Log

NO

N-C

OR

ED

BO

RE

HO

LE -

TE

ST

PIT

TE

MP

LAT

E L

OG

S S

HE

ET

.GP

J <

<D

raw

ingF

ile>

> 2

7-11

-201

8 17

:15

10.

0.00

0 D

atge

l Lab

and

In S

itu T

ool









LOGGED BY: BB

DATE: 29-10-18

SURFACE RL:

DATUM:

H

0.05m

0.40m

0.80m

1.20m

TOPSOILRESIDUAL SOIL


E

SM

CH

CH

CH

M <

wP

D

U500.70m

0.55m

TOPSOIL: Silty SAND - fine to medium grained, palebrown, fines of low plasticity, with some fine tomedium grained rounded to sub-rounded gravel.

CLAY - medium to high plasticity, grey andred-brown, with some fine to medium grained sand.

Sandy CLAY - medium to high plasticity, grey andred-brown, fine to medium grained sand.

Extremely Weathered Silty Sandstone with soilproperties; breaks down into Sandy CLAY - mediumto high plasticity, dark grey with some paleorange-brown, fine to medium grained sand.


HP >600

HP >600

HP >600

HP >600

Not

Enc

ount

ered

Field Test





Field Tests



ME

TH

OD

CLA

SS

IFIC

AT

ION

SY

MB

OL

Tes

t T

ype

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

DIT

ION

CO

NS

IST

EN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

Water

WA

TE

R


Strata Changes

RL(m)

GR

AP

HIC

LOGDEPTH

(m)

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

SAMPLES

Water Level


Water Inflow

Water Outflow






B Bulk Sample



Density

LEGEND:

Res

ult



<2525 - 5050 - 100100 - 200200 - 400>400

QT

LIB

1.1

.GLB

Log

NO

N-C

OR

ED

BO

RE

HO

LE -

TE

ST

PIT

TE

MP

LAT

E L

OG

S S

HE

ET

.GP

J <

<D

raw

ingF

ile>

> 2

7-11

-201

8 17

:15

10.

0.00

0 D

atge

l Lab

and

In S

itu T

ool









LOGGED BY: BB

DATE: 29-10-18

SURFACE RL:

DATUM:

H

0.05m

0.20m

1.60m

TOPSOILRESIDUAL SOIL

E

SM

CH

CH

M <

wP

D

U50

0.70m

0.50m

TOPSOIL: Silty SAND - fine to medium grained,grey-brown, fines of low plasticity, root affected.

Sandy CLAY - medium to high plasticity, dark brown,fine to coarse grained (mostly fine to mediumgrained) sand, with some fine to medium grainedangular to sub-angular gravel.

Sandy CLAY - medium to high plasticity, grey withsome red-brown to pale orange-brown, fine tomedium grained sand.

Grading into Extremely Weathered Silty Sandstonewith soil properties.

Pockets of Extremely Weathered and HighlyWeathered Silty SANDSTONE.


HP >600

HP >600

HP >600

HP >600

HP >600

HP >600

HP >600

Not

Enc

ount

ered

Field Test





Field Tests



ME

TH

OD

CLA

SS

IFIC

AT

ION

SY

MB

OL

Tes

t T

ype

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

DIT

ION

CO

NS

IST

EN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

Water

WA

TE

R


Strata Changes

RL(m)

GR

AP

HIC

LOGDEPTH

(m)

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

SAMPLES

Water Level


Water Inflow

Water Outflow






B Bulk Sample



Density

LEGEND:

Res

ult



<2525 - 5050 - 100100 - 200200 - 400>400

QT

LIB

1.1

.GLB

Log

NO

N-C

OR

ED

BO

RE

HO

LE -

TE

ST

PIT

TE

MP

LAT

E L

OG

S S

HE

ET

.GP

J <

<D

raw

ingF

ile>

> 2

7-11

-201

8 17

:15

10.

0.00

0 D

atge

l Lab

and

In S

itu T

ool









LOGGED BY: BB

DATE: 29-10-18

SURFACE RL:

DATUM:

H

VSt

H

0.10m

2.10m

TOPSOIL

RESIDUAL SOIL

E

SM

CH

M <

wP

M >

wP

M <

wP

D - M

U50

0.70m

0.50m

TOPSOIL: Silty SAND - fine to coarse grained,grey-brown, fines of low plasticity, fine to mediumgrained sub-rounded to sub-angular gravel, rootaffected.

Sandy CLAY - medium to high plasticity, grey withsome orange-brown to red-brown, fine grained sand.


HP >600

HP 410

HP 390

HP 310

HP 380

HP 480

HP >600

Not

Enc

ount

ered

Field Test





Field Tests



ME

TH

OD

CLA

SS

IFIC

AT

ION

SY

MB

OL

Tes

t T

ype

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

DIT

ION

CO

NS

IST

EN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

Water

WA

TE

R


Strata Changes

RL(m)

GR

AP

HIC

LOGDEPTH

(m)

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

SAMPLES

Water Level


Water Inflow

Water Outflow






B Bulk Sample



Density

LEGEND:

Res

ult



<2525 - 5050 - 100100 - 200200 - 400>400

QT

LIB

1.1

.GLB

Log

NO

N-C

OR

ED

BO

RE

HO

LE -

TE

ST

PIT

TE

MP

LAT

E L

OG

S S

HE

ET

.GP

J <

<D

raw

ingF

ile>

> 2

7-11

-201

8 17

:15

10.

0.00

0 D

atge

l Lab

and

In S

itu T

ool









LOGGED BY: BE

DATE: 15-11-18

SURFACE RL:

DATUM:

VSt

St

VSt -H

0.10m

0.40m

0.80m

2.10m

FILL - TOPSOIL

FILL - CONTROLLED

RESIDUAL SOIL

E

SM

SC

CH

CH

M <

wP

M >

wP

M <

wP

D - M

U50

0.70m

0.50m

FILL-TOPSOIL: Silty SAND - fine to coarse grained,grey, fines of low plasticity, trace fine grainedsub-rounded to sub-angular gravel, root affected.

FILL: TOPSOIL: Clayey SAND - fine to mediumgrained, dark brown, fines of low plasticity, trace fineto medium grained rounded to sub-angular gravel.

FILL: Sandy CLAY - medium to high plasticity, brownto red-brown and grey, fine to medium grained sand.

Sandy CLAY - medium to high plasticity,orange-brown to red-brown and grey, fine to mediumgrained sand.


HP 300

HP 290

HP 250

HP 190

HP 190

HP 220

HP 400

HP 480

HP >600

Not

Enc

ount

ered

Field Test





Field Tests



ME

TH

OD

CLA

SS

IFIC

AT

ION

SY

MB

OL

Tes

t T

ype

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

DIT

ION

CO

NS

IST

EN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

Water

WA

TE

R


Strata Changes

RL(m)

GR

AP

HIC

LOGDEPTH

(m)

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

SAMPLES

Water Level


Water Inflow

Water Outflow






B Bulk Sample



Density

LEGEND:

Res

ult



<2525 - 5050 - 100100 - 200200 - 400>400

QT

LIB

1.1

.GLB

Log

NO

N-C

OR

ED

BO

RE

HO

LE -

TE

ST

PIT

TE

MP

LAT

E L

OG

S S

HE

ET

.GP

J <

<D

raw

ingF

ile>

> 2

7-11

-201

8 17

:15

10.

0.00

0 D

atge

l Lab

and

In S

itu T

ool









LOGGED BY: BE

DATE: 15-11-18

SURFACE RL:

DATUM:

VSt

H

0.10m

0.50m

0.90m

2.30m

FILL - TOPSOIL

FILL - CONTROLLED

RESIDUAL SOIL

E

SM

SC

CI

CH

M >

wP

M <

wP

M

U50

1.10m

D

1.70m

0.90m

1.50m



FILL: Sandy CLAY - medium plasticity, red-brownwith sopme grey, fine to medium grained sand.



HP 280

HP 280

HP 320

HP 580

HP >600

HP >600

Not

Enc

ount

ered

Field Test





Field Tests



ME

TH

OD

CLA

SS

IFIC

AT

ION

SY

MB

OL

Tes

t T

ype

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

DIT

ION

CO

NS

IST

EN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

Water

WA

TE

R


Strata Changes

RL(m)

GR

AP

HIC

LOGDEPTH

(m)

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

SAMPLES

Water Level


Water Inflow

Water Outflow






B Bulk Sample



Density

LEGEND:

Res

ult



<2525 - 5050 - 100100 - 200200 - 400>400

QT

LIB

1.1

.GLB

Log

NO

N-C

OR

ED

BO

RE

HO

LE -

TE

ST

PIT

TE

MP

LAT

E L

OG

S S

HE

ET

.GP

J <

<D

raw

ingF

ile>

> 2

7-11

-201

8 17

:15

10.

0.00

0 D

atge

l Lab

and

In S

itu T

ool









LOGGED BY: BE

DATE: 15-11-18

SURFACE RL:

DATUM:

H

0.10m

0.55m

0.70m

FILL - TOPSOIL

RESIDUAL SOIL

E

SM

SC

CH

M <

wP

D - M





Not

Enc

ount

ered

Field Test





Field Tests



ME

TH

OD

CLA

SS

IFIC

AT

ION

SY

MB

OL

Tes

t T

ype

MO

IST

UR

EC

ON

DIT

ION

CO

NS

IST

EN

CY

DE

NS

ITY

Water

WA

TE

R


Strata Changes

RL(m)

GR

AP

HIC

LOGDEPTH

(m)

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

SAMPLES

Water Level


Water Inflow

Water Outflow






B Bulk Sample



Density

LEGEND:

Res

ult



<2525 - 5050 - 100100 - 200200 - 400>400

QT

LIB

1.1

.GLB

Log

NO

N-C

OR

ED

BO

RE

HO

LE -

TE

ST

PIT

TE

MP

LAT

E L

OG

S S

HE

ET

.GP

J <

<D

raw

ingF

ile>

> 2

7-11

-201

8 17

:15

10.

0.00

0 D

atge

l Lab

and

In S

itu T

ool









LOGGED BY: BE

DATE: 15-11-18

SURFACE RL:

DATUM:

APPENDIX B:

Results of Laboratory Testing

Sample DetailsSample ID: NEW18W-2102--S01 Client Sample ID: Lot 716Test Request No.: - Sampling Method: AS1289.1.2.1 cl 6.5Material: General Lot Fill Date Sampled: 9/07/2018Source: On-Site Insitu Date Submitted: 10/07/2018Specification: No SpecificationProject Location: Racecourse Road, RutherfordSample Location: TP01 (0.6m to 0.8m below FSL)Borehole Number: TP01Borehole Depth (m): 0.6 to 0.8 Below FSL

Shrink Test AS 1289.7.1.1Shrink on drying (%): 1.0Shrinkage Moisture Content (%): 15.0Est. inert material (%): 10.0Crumbling during shrinkage: NilCracking during shrinkage: Minor

Swell Test AS 1289.7.1.1Swell on Saturation (%): -0.4Moisture Content before (%): 14.4Moisture Content after (%): 17.3Est. Unc. Comp. Strength before (kPa): > 600Est. Unc. Comp. Strength after (kPa): 440Shrink Swell

Shrink Swell Index - Iss (%): 0.5

Accredited for compliance with ISO/IEC 17025 -TestingThe results of the tests, calibrations and/ormeasurements included in this document are traceableto Australian/national standards

16/07/2018

Shrink Swell Index ReportReport No: SSI:NEW18W-2102--S01

Issue No: 1

Client:

Date of Issue:NATA Accredited Laboratory Number: 18686Approved Signatory: Adam Dwyer(Senior Geotechnician)Project Name: Residential Subdivision - Heritage Parc Stage 7

F: 02 4960 9775

QUALTEST Laboratory (NSW) Pty Ltd (20708) T: 02 4968 4468E: [email protected]: www.qualtest.com.auABN: 98 153 268 896

8 Ironbark Close Warabrook NSW 2304

Project No.: NEW15P-0051HPrincipal:

C/- McCloy GroupSuite 1, Level 3, 426 King Street, Newcastle West NSW Heritage Parc Pty Ltd

Page 1 of 1Form No: 18932, Report No: SSI:NEW18W-2102--S01 © 2000-2018 QESTLab by SpectraQEST.com

Comments

Sample DetailsSample ID: NEW18W-2102--S02 Client Sample ID: Lot 717Test Request No.: - Sampling Method: AS1289.1.2.1 cl 6.5Material: General Lot Fill Date Sampled: 9/07/2018Source: On-Site Insitu Date Submitted: 10/07/2018Specification: No SpecificationProject Location: Racecourse Road, RutherfordSample Location: TP02 (0.6m to 0.8m below FSL)Borehole Number: TP02Borehole Depth (m): 0.6 to 0.8m Below FSL

Shrink Test AS 1289.7.1.1Shrink on drying (%): 1.9Shrinkage Moisture Content (%): 18.6Est. inert material (%): 2.0Crumbling during shrinkage: NilCracking during shrinkage: Moderate

Swell Test AS 1289.7.1.1Swell on Saturation (%): 1.9Moisture Content before (%): 18.6Moisture Content after (%): 24.1Est. Unc. Comp. Strength before (kPa): > 600Est. Unc. Comp. Strength after (kPa): 110Shrink Swell



17/07/2018


Issue No: 1

Client:


F: 02 4960 9775






Comments

Sample DetailsSample ID: NEW18W-2102--S03 Client Sample ID: Lot 718Test Request No.: - Sampling Method: AS1289.1.2.1 cl 6.5Material: General Lot Fill Date Sampled: 9/07/2018Source: On-Site Insitu Date Submitted: 10/07/2018Specification: No SpecificationProject Location: Racecourse Road, RutherfordSample Location: TP03 (0.6m to 0.8m below FSL)Borehole Number: TP03Borehole Depth (m): 0.6 to 0.8m Below FSL


Swell Test AS 1289.7.1.1Swell on Saturation (%): 0.1Moisture Content before (%): 13.9Moisture Content after (%): 16.7Est. Unc. Comp. Strength before (kPa): 520Est. Unc. Comp. Strength after (kPa): 280Shrink Swell



16/07/2018


Issue No: 1

Client:


F: 02 4960 9775






Comments

On SiteSource:Sandy ClayMaterial:

Sample DetailsNEW18W-3527--S01Sample ID:29/10/2018Date Sampled:

No SpecificationSpecification:Racecourse Road, RutherfordProject Location:TP701 - (0.6 - 0.95m)Sample Location:

AS1289.1.2.1 cl 6.5Sampling Method:

Test Results

1611

Four Point27

YesNoNo

2504.5

Dry SievedAir-dried

ResultSample History AS 1289.1.1

MethodDescription LimitsPreparation AS 1289.1.1 Linear Shrinkage (%) AS 1289.3.4.1Mould Length (mm)CrumblingCurlingCrackingLiquid Limit (%) AS 1289.3.1.1MethodPlastic Limit (%) AS 1289.3.2.1Plasticity Index (%) AS 1289.3.3.1

Accredited for compliance with ISO/IEC 17025-Testing.The results of the tests, calibrations and/or measurements included inthis document are traceable to Australian/national standards. Results provided relate only to the items tested or sampled.This report shall not be reproduced except in full.

15/11/2018

Material Test ReportReport No: MAT:NEW18W-3527--S01

Issue No: 1

Client:

Date of Issue:NATA Accredited Laboratory Number: 18686Approved Signatory: Brent Cullen(Senior Geotechnician)Project Name: Residential Subdivision - Heritage Parc Stage 7

F: 02 4960 9775





Page 1 of 1© 2000-2018 QESTLab by SpectraQEST.comForm No: 18909, Report No: MAT:NEW18W-3527--S01

N/AComments

Sample DetailsSample ID: NEW18W-3527--S02 Client Sample ID: -Test Request No.: - Sampling Method: AS1289.1.2.1 cl 6.5Material: Sandy Clay Date Sampled: 29/10/2018Source: On Site Date Submitted: 31/10/2018Specification: No SpecificationProject Location: Racecourse Road, RutherfordSample Location: TP702 - (0.7 - 0.9m)Borehole Number: TP702Borehole Depth (m): 0.7 - 0.9

Shrink Test AS 1289.7.1.1Shrink on drying (%): 0.5Shrinkage Moisture Content (%): 17.5Est. inert material (%): 5%Crumbling during shrinkage: NilCracking during shrinkage: Major

Swell Test AS 1289.7.1.1Swell on Saturation (%): -0.6Moisture Content before (%): 17.6Moisture Content after (%): 18.1Est. Unc. Comp. Strength before (kPa): 520Est. Unc. Comp. Strength after (kPa): 260Shrink Swell



15/11/2018


Issue No: 1

Client:


F: 02 4960 9775






Comments






15/11/2018


Issue No: 1

Client:


F: 02 4960 9775






Comments


Shrink Test AS 1289.7.1.1Shrink on drying (%): 3.7Shrinkage Moisture Content (%): 20.1Est. inert material (%): 5.0Crumbling during shrinkage: NilCracking during shrinkage: Nil




19/11/2018


Issue No: 1

Client:


F: 02 4960 9775






Comments


Shrink Test AS 1289.7.1.1Shrink on drying (%): 0.8Shrinkage Moisture Content (%): 16.7Est. inert material (%): MinorCrumbling during shrinkage: NilCracking during shrinkage: Moderate




22/11/2018


Issue No: 1

Client:


F: 02 4960 9775






Comments






19/11/2018


Issue No: 1

Client:


F: 02 4960 9775






Comments


Shrink Test AS 1289.7.1.1Shrink on drying (%): 0.5Shrinkage Moisture Content (%): 12.8Est. inert material (%): 5%Crumbling during shrinkage: NilCracking during shrinkage: Minor

Swell Test AS 1289.7.1.1Swell on Saturation (%): 2.5Moisture Content before (%): 13.5Moisture Content after (%): 18.1Est. Unc. Comp. Strength before (kPa): >600Est. Unc. Comp. Strength after (kPa): 240Shrink Swell



22/11/2018


Issue No: 1

Client:


F: 02 4960 9775






Comments


Shrink Test AS 1289.7.1.1Shrink on drying (%): 0.5Shrinkage Moisture Content (%): 14.2Est. inert material (%): 5%Crumbling during shrinkage: NilCracking during shrinkage: Moderate




22/11/2018


Issue No: 1

Client:


F: 02 4960 9775






Comments



Swell Test AS 1289.7.1.1Swell on Saturation (%): -0.2Moisture Content before (%): 22.6Moisture Content after (%): 23.4Est. Unc. Comp. Strength before (kPa): >600Est. Unc. Comp. Strength after (kPa): 400Shrink Swell



19/11/2018


Issue No: 1

Client:


F: 02 4960 9775






Comments






22/11/2018


Issue No: 1

Client:


F: 02 4960 9775






Comments





Test Results

1912

Four Point31

YesNoNo

2506.0

Dry SievedAir-dried




15/11/2018


Issue No: 1

Client:


F: 02 4960 9775






N/AComments






15/11/2018


Issue No: 1

Client:


F: 02 4960 9775






Comments



Swell Test AS 1289.7.1.1Swell on Saturation (%): -0.9Moisture Content before (%): 18.7Moisture Content after (%): 19.7Est. Unc. Comp. Strength before (kPa): >600Est. Unc. Comp. Strength after (kPa): 320Shrink Swell



15/11/2018


Issue No: 1

Client:


F: 02 4960 9775






Comments





Test Results

1812

Four Point30

YesNoNo

2505.0

Dry SievedAir-dried




15/11/2018


Issue No: 1

Client:


F: 02 4960 9775






N/AComments






15/11/2018


Issue No: 1

Client:


F: 02 4960 9775






Comments


Shrink Test AS 1289.7.1.1Shrink on drying (%): 1.8Shrinkage Moisture Content (%): 15.9Est. inert material (%): NilCrumbling during shrinkage: NilCracking during shrinkage: Minor




15/11/2018


Issue No: 1

Client:


F: 02 4960 9775






Comments





Test Results

2812

Four Point40No

YesNo

2509.0

Dry SievedAir-dried




15/11/2018


Issue No: 1

Client:


F: 02 4960 9775






N/AComments

Sample DetailsSample ID: NEW18W-3738--S01 Client Sample ID: -Test Request No.: - Sampling Method: Sampled by ClientMaterial: Sandy CLAY Date Sampled: 15/11/2018Source: On-Site Date Submitted: 20/11/2018Specification: No SpecificationProject Location: Newfield Street, RutherfordSample Location: TP719 - 0.50 to 0.70mBorehole Number: TP719Borehole Depth (m): 0.5 - 0.7

Shrink Test AS 1289.7.1.1Shrink on drying (%): 2.7Shrinkage Moisture Content (%): 13.9Est. inert material (%): 0%Crumbling during shrinkage: NilCracking during shrinkage: Noderate




28/11/2018


Issue No: 1

Client:

Date of Issue:NATA Accredited Laboratory Number: 18686Approved Signatory: Dane Cullen(Senior Geotechnician)Project Name: Residential Subdivision - Heritage Parc Stage 7

F: 02 4960 9775






Comments


Shrink Test AS 1289.7.1.1Shrink on drying (%): 6.1Shrinkage Moisture Content (%): 26.5Est. inert material (%): NilCrumbling during shrinkage: NilCracking during shrinkage: Nil




26/11/2018


Issue No: 1

Client:


F: 02 4960 9775






Comments






26/11/2018


Issue No: 1

Client:


F: 02 4960 9775






Comments

APPENDIX C:

CSIRO Sheet BTF 18

Foundation Maintenance and Footing

Performance: A Homeowner’s Guide

Soil Types

The types of soils usually present under the topsoil in land zoned forresidential buildings can be split into two approximate groups –granular and clay. Quite often, foundation soil is a mixture of bothtypes. The general problems associated with soils having granularcontent are usually caused by erosion. Clay soils are subject tosaturation and swell/shrink problems.

Classifications for a given area can generally be obtained byapplication to the local authority, but these are sometimes unreliableand if there is doubt, a geotechnical report should be commissioned.As most buildings suffering movement problems are founded on claysoils, there is an emphasis on classification of soils according to theamount of swell and shrinkage they experience with variations ofwater content. The table below is Table 2.1 from AS 2870, theResidential Slab and Footing Code.

Causes of Movement

Settlement due to constructionThere are two types of settlement that occur as a result ofconstruction:• Immediate settlement occurs when a building is first placed on its

foundation soil, as a result of compaction of the soil under theweight of the structure. The cohesive quality of clay soil mitigatesagainst this, but granular (particularly sandy) soil is susceptible.

• Consolidation settlement is a feature of clay soil and may takeplace because of the expulsion of moisture from the soil or becauseof the soil’s lack of resistance to local compressive or shear stresses.This will usually take place during the first few months afterconstruction, but has been known to take many years inexceptional cases.

These problems are the province of the builder and should be takeninto consideration as part of the preparation of the site for construc-tion. Building Technology File 19 (BTF 19) deals with theseproblems.

ErosionAll soils are prone to erosion, but sandy soil is particularly susceptibleto being washed away. Even clay with a sand component of say 10%or more can suffer from erosion.

SaturationThis is particularly a problem in clay soils. Saturation creates a bog-like suspension of the soil that causes it to lose virtually all of itsbearing capacity. To a lesser degree, sand is affected by saturationbecause saturated sand may undergo a reduction in volume –particularly imported sand fill for bedding and blinding layers.However, this usually occurs as immediate settlement and shouldnormally be the province of the builder.

Seasonal swelling and shrinkage of soilAll clays react to the presence of water by slowly absorbing it, makingthe soil increase in volume (see table below). The degree of increasevaries considerably between different clays, as does the degree ofdecrease during the subsequent drying out caused by fair weatherperiods. Because of the low absorption and expulsion rate, thisphenomenon will not usually be noticeable unless there areprolonged rainy or dry periods, usually of weeks or months,depending on the land and soil characteristics.

The swelling of soil creates an upward force on the footings of thebuilding, and shrinkage creates subsidence that takes away thesupport needed by the footing to retain equilibrium.

Shear failureThis phenomenon occurs when the foundation soil does not havesufficient strength to support the weight of the footing. There aretwo major post-construction causes:• Significant load increase.• Reduction of lateral support of the soil under the footing due to

erosion or excavation.• In clay soil, shear failure can be caused by saturation of the soil

adjacent to or under the footing.

Buildings can and often do move. This movement can be up, down, lateral or rotational. The fundamental causeof movement in buildings can usually be related to one or more problems in the foundation soil. It is important forthe homeowner to identify the soil type in order to ascertain the measures that should be put in place in order toensure that problems in the foundation soil can be prevented, thus protecting against building movement.

This Building Technology File is designed to identify causes of soil-related building movement, and to suggestmethods of prevention of resultant cracking in buildings.

Foundation Maintenanceand Footing Performance:A Homeowner’s Guide

GENERAL DEFINITIONS OF SITE CLASSES

Class Foundation

A Most sand and rock sites with little or no ground movement from moisture changes

S Slightly reactive clay sites with only slight ground movement from moisture changes

M Moderately reactive clay or silt sites, which can experience moderate ground movement from moisture changes

H Highly reactive clay sites, which can experience high ground movement from moisture changes

E Extremely reactive sites, which can experience extreme ground movement from moisture changes

A to P Filled sites

P Sites which include soft soils, such as soft clay or silt or loose sands; landslip; mine subsidence; collapsing soils; soils subject to erosion; reactive sites subject to abnormal moisture conditions or sites which cannot be classified otherwise

BTF 18replaces

InformationSheet 10/91

Tree root growthTrees and shrubs that are allowed to grow in the vicinity of footingscan cause foundation soil movement in two ways:

• Roots that grow under footings may increase in cross-sectionalsize, exerting upward pressure on footings.

• Roots in the vicinity of footings will absorb much of the moisturein the foundation soil, causing shrinkage or subsidence.

Unevenness of Movement

The types of ground movement described above usually occurunevenly throughout the building’s foundation soil. Settlement dueto construction tends to be uneven because of:

• Differing compaction of foundation soil prior to construction.• Differing moisture content of foundation soil prior to construction.

Movement due to non-construction causes is usually more unevenstill. Erosion can undermine a footing that traverses the flow or cancreate the conditions for shear failure by eroding soil adjacent to afooting that runs in the same direction as the flow.

Saturation of clay foundation soil may occur where subfloor wallscreate a dam that makes water pond. It can also occur wherever thereis a source of water near footings in clay soil. This leads to a severereduction in the strength of the soil which may create local shearfailure.

Seasonal swelling and shrinkage of clay soil affects the perimeter ofthe building first, then gradually spreads to the interior. The swellingprocess will usually begin at the uphill extreme of the building, or onthe weather side where the land is flat. Swelling gradually reaches theinterior soil as absorption continues. Shrinkage usually begins wherethe sun’s heat is greatest.

Effects of Uneven Soil Movement on Structures

Erosion and saturationErosion removes the support from under footings, tending to createsubsidence of the part of the structure under which it occurs.Brickwork walls will resist the stress created by this removal ofsupport by bridging the gap or cantilevering until the bricks or themortar bedding fail. Older masonry has little resistance. Evidence offailure varies according to circumstances and symptoms may include:

• Step cracking in the mortar beds in the body of the wall orabove/below openings such as doors or windows.

• Vertical cracking in the bricks (usually but not necessarily in linewith the vertical beds or perpends).

Isolated piers affected by erosion or saturation of foundations willeventually lose contact with the bearers they support and may tilt orfall over. The floors that have lost this support will become bouncy,sometimes rattling ornaments etc.

Seasonal swelling/shrinkage in claySwelling foundation soil due to rainy periods first lifts the mostexposed extremities of the footing system, then the remainder of theperimeter footings while gradually permeating inside the buildingfootprint to lift internal footings. This swelling first tends to create adish effect, because the external footings are pushed higher than theinternal ones.

The first noticeable symptom may be that the floor appears slightlydished. This is often accompanied by some doors binding on thefloor or the door head, together with some cracking of cornicemitres. In buildings with timber flooring supported by bearers andjoists, the floor can be bouncy. Externally there may be visibledishing of the hip or ridge lines.

As the moisture absorption process completes its journey to theinnermost areas of the building, the internal footings will rise. If thespread of moisture is roughly even, it may be that the symptoms willtemporarily disappear, but it is more likely that swelling will beuneven, creating a difference rather than a disappearance insymptoms. In buildings with timber flooring supported by bearersand joists, the isolated piers will rise more easily than the stripfootings or piers under walls, creating noticeable doming of flooring.

As the weather pattern changes and the soil begins to dry out, theexternal footings will be first affected, beginning with the locationswhere the sun’s effect is strongest. This has the effect of lowering theexternal footings. The doming is accentuated and cracking reducesor disappears where it occurred because of dishing, but other cracksopen up. The roof lines may become convex.

Doming and dishing are also affected by weather in other ways. Inareas where warm, wet summers and cooler dry winters prevail,water migration tends to be toward the interior and doming will beaccentuated, whereas where summers are dry and winters are coldand wet, migration tends to be toward the exterior and theunderlying propensity is toward dishing.

Movement caused by tree rootsIn general, growing roots will exert an upward pressure on footings,whereas soil subject to drying because of tree or shrub roots will tendto remove support from under footings by inducing shrinkage.

Complications caused by the structure itselfMost forces that the soil causes to be exerted on structures arevertical – i.e. either up or down. However, because these forces areseldom spread evenly around the footings, and because the buildingresists uneven movement because of its rigidity, forces are exertedfrom one part of the building to another. The net result of all theseforces is usually rotational. This resultant force often complicates thediagnosis because the visible symptoms do not simply reflect theoriginal cause. A common symptom is binding of doors on thevertical member of the frame.

Effects on full masonry structuresBrickwork will resist cracking where it can. It will attempt to spanareas that lose support because of subsided foundations or raisedpoints. It is therefore usual to see cracking at weak points, such asopenings for windows or doors.

In the event of construction settlement, cracking will usually remainunchanged after the process of settlement has ceased.

With local shear or erosion, cracking will usually continue to developuntil the original cause has been remedied, or until the subsidencehas completely neutralised the affected portion of footing and thestructure has stabilised on other footings that remain effective.

In the case of swell/shrink effects, the brickwork will in some casesreturn to its original position after completion of a cycle, however itis more likely that the rotational effect will not be exactly reversed,and it is also usual that brickwork will settle in its new position andwill resist the forces trying to return it to its original position. Thismeans that in a case where swelling takes place after constructionand cracking occurs, the cracking is likely to at least partly remainafter the shrink segment of the cycle is complete. Thus, each timethe cycle is repeated, the likelihood is that the cracking will becomewider until the sections of brickwork become virtually independent.

With repeated cycles, once the cracking is established, if there is noother complication, it is normal for the incidence of cracking tostabilise, as the building has the articulation it needs to cope withthe problem. This is by no means always the case, however, andmonitoring of cracks in walls and floors should always be treatedseriously.

Upheaval caused by growth of tree roots under footings is not asimple vertical shear stress. There is a tendency for the root to alsoexert lateral forces that attempt to separate sections of brickworkafter initial cracking has occurred.

Trees can cause shrinkage and damage

The normal structural arrangement is that the inner leaf of brick-work in the external walls and at least some of the internal walls(depending on the roof type) comprise the load-bearing structure onwhich any upper floors, ceilings and the roof are supported. In thesecases, it is internally visible cracking that should be the main focusof attention, however there are a few examples of dwellings whoseexternal leaf of masonry plays some supporting role, so this shouldbe checked if there is any doubt. In any case, externally visiblecracking is important as a guide to stresses on the structure generally,and it should also be remembered that the external walls must becapable of supporting themselves.

Effects on framed structuresTimber or steel framed buildings are less likely to exhibit crackingdue to swell/shrink than masonry buildings because of theirflexibility. Also, the doming/dishing effects tend to be lower becauseof the lighter weight of walls. The main risks to framed buildings areencountered because of the isolated pier footings used under walls.Where erosion or saturation cause a footing to fall away, this candouble the span which a wall must bridge. This additional stress cancreate cracking in wall linings, particularly where there is a weakpoint in the structure caused by a door or window opening. It is,however, unlikely that framed structures will be so stressed as to sufferserious damage without first exhibiting some or all of the abovesymptoms for a considerable period. The same warning period shouldapply in the case of upheaval. It should be noted, however, that whereframed buildings are supported by strip footings there is only one leafof brickwork and therefore the externally visible walls are thesupporting structure for the building. In this case, the subfloormasonry walls can be expected to behave as full brickwork walls.

Effects on brick veneer structuresBecause the load-bearing structure of a brick veneer building is theframe that makes up the interior leaf of the external walls plusperhaps the internal walls, depending on the type of roof, thebuilding can be expected to behave as a framed structure, except thatthe external masonry will behave in a similar way to the external leafof a full masonry structure.

Water Service and Drainage

Where a water service pipe, a sewer or stormwater drainage pipe is inthe vicinity of a building, a water leak can cause erosion, swelling orsaturation of susceptible soil. Even a minuscule leak can be enoughto saturate a clay foundation. A leaking tap near a building can havethe same effect. In addition, trenches containing pipes can becomewatercourses even though backfilled, particularly where brokenrubble is used as fill. Water that runs along these trenches can beresponsible for serious erosion, interstrata seepage into subfloor areasand saturation.

Pipe leakage and trench water flows also encourage tree and shrubroots to the source of water, complicating and exacerbating theproblem.Poor roof plumbing can result in large volumes of rainwater beingconcentrated in a small area of soil:

• Incorrect falls in roof guttering may result in overflows, as maygutters blocked with leaves etc.

• Corroded guttering or downpipes can spill water to ground.• Downpipes not positively connected to a proper stormwater

collection system will direct a concentration of water to soil that isdirectly adjacent to footings, sometimes causing large-scaleproblems such as erosion, saturation and migration of water underthe building.

Seriousness of Cracking

In general, most cracking found in masonry walls is a cosmeticnuisance only and can be kept in repair or even ignored. The tablebelow is a reproduction of Table C1 of AS 2870.

AS 2870 also publishes figures relating to cracking in concrete floors,however because wall cracking will usually reach the critical pointsignificantly earlier than cracking in slabs, this table is notreproduced here.

Prevention/Cure

PlumbingWhere building movement is caused by water service, roof plumbing,sewer or stormwater failure, the remedy is to repair the problem. It is prudent, however, to consider also rerouting pipes away fromthe building where possible, and relocating taps to positions whereany leakage will not direct water to the building vicinity. Even wheregully traps are present, there is sometimes sufficient spill to createerosion or saturation, particularly in modern installations usingsmaller diameter PVC fixtures. Indeed, some gully traps are notsituated directly under the taps that are installed to charge them,with the result that water from the tap may enter the backfilledtrench that houses the sewer piping. If the trench has been poorlybackfilled, the water will either pond or flow along the bottom ofthe trench. As these trenches usually run alongside the footings andcan be at a similar depth, it is not hard to see how any water that isthus directed into a trench can easily affect the foundation’s ability tosupport footings or even gain entry to the subfloor area.

Ground drainageIn all soils there is the capacity for water to travel on the surface andbelow it. Surface water flows can be established by inspection duringand after heavy or prolonged rain. If necessary, a grated drain systemconnected to the stormwater collection system is usually an easysolution.

It is, however, sometimes necessary when attempting to preventwater migration that testing be carried out to establish watertableheight and subsoil water flows. This subject is referred to in BTF 19and may properly be regarded as an area for an expert consultant.

Protection of the building perimeterIt is essential to remember that the soil that affects footings extendswell beyond the actual building line. Watering of garden plants,shrubs and trees causes some of the most serious water problems.

For this reason, particularly where problems exist or are likely tooccur, it is recommended that an apron of paving be installedaround as much of the building perimeter as necessary. This paving

CLASSIFICATION OF DAMAGE WITH REFERENCE TO WALLS

Description of typical damage and required repair Approximate crack width Damagelimit (see Note 3) category

Hairline cracks <0.1 mm 0

Fine cracks which do not need repair <1 mm 1

Cracks noticeable but easily filled. Doors and windows stick slightly <5 mm 2

Cracks can be repaired and possibly a small amount of wall will need 5–15 mm (or a number of cracks 3to be replaced. Doors and windows stick. Service pipes can fracture. 3 mm or more in one group)Weathertightness often impaired

Extensive repair work involving breaking-out and replacing sections of walls, 15–25 mm but also depend 4especially over doors and windows. Window and door frames distort. Walls lean on number of cracksor bulge noticeably, some loss of bearing in beams. Service pipes disrupted

should extend outwards a minimum of 900 mm (more in highlyreactive soil) and should have a minimum fall away from thebuilding of 1:60. The finished paving should be no less than 100mm below brick vent bases.

It is prudent to relocate drainage pipes away from this paving, ifpossible, to avoid complications from future leakage. If this is notpractical, earthenware pipes should be replaced by PVC andbackfilling should be of the same soil type as the surrounding soiland compacted to the same density.

Except in areas where freezing of water is an issue, it is wise toremove taps in the building area and relocate them well away fromthe building – preferably not uphill from it (see BTF 19).

It may be desirable to install a grated drain at the outside edge of thepaving on the uphill side of the building. If subsoil drainage isneeded this can be installed under the surface drain.

CondensationIn buildings with a subfloor void such as where bearers and joistssupport flooring, insufficient ventilation creates ideal conditions forcondensation, particularly where there is little clearance between thefloor and the ground. Condensation adds to the moisture alreadypresent in the subfloor and significantly slows the process of dryingout. Installation of an adequate subfloor ventilation system, eithernatural or mechanical, is desirable.

Warning: Although this Building Technology File deals withcracking in buildings, it should be said that subfloor moisture canresult in the development of other problems, notably:

• Water that is transmitted into masonry, metal or timber buildingelements causes damage and/or decay to those elements.

• High subfloor humidity and moisture content create an idealenvironment for various pests, including termites and spiders.

• Where high moisture levels are transmitted to the flooring andwalls, an increase in the dust mite count can ensue within theliving areas. Dust mites, as well as dampness in general, can be ahealth hazard to inhabitants, particularly those who areabnormally susceptible to respiratory ailments.

The gardenThe ideal vegetation layout is to have lawn or plants that requireonly light watering immediately adjacent to the drainage or pavingedge, then more demanding plants, shrubs and trees spread out inthat order.

Overwatering due to misuse of automatic watering systems is acommon cause of saturation and water migration under footings. Ifit is necessary to use these systems, it is important to remove gardenbeds to a completely safe distance from buildings.

Existing treesWhere a tree is causing a problem of soil drying or there is theexistence or threat of upheaval of footings, if the offending roots aresubsidiary and their removal will not significantly damage the tree,they should be severed and a concrete or metal barrier placedvertically in the soil to prevent future root growth in the direction ofthe building. If it is not possible to remove the relevant rootswithout damage to the tree, an application to remove the tree shouldbe made to the local authority. A prudent plan is to transplant likelyoffenders before they become a problem.

Information on trees, plants and shrubsState departments overseeing agriculture can give informationregarding root patterns, volume of water needed and safe distancefrom buildings of most species. Botanic gardens are also sources ofinformation. For information on plant roots and drains, see BuildingTechnology File 17.

ExcavationExcavation around footings must be properly engineered. Soilsupporting footings can only be safely excavated at an angle thatallows the soil under the footing to remain stable. This angle iscalled the angle of repose (or friction) and varies significantlybetween soil types and conditions. Removal of soil within the angleof repose will cause subsidence.

Remediation

Where erosion has occurred that has washed away soil adjacent tofootings, soil of the same classification should be introduced andcompacted to the same density. Where footings have beenundermined, augmentation or other specialist work may be required.Remediation of footings and foundations is generally the realm of aspecialist consultant.

Where isolated footings rise and fall because of swell/shrink effect,the homeowner may be tempted to alleviate floor bounce by fillingthe gap that has appeared between the bearer and the pier withblocking. The danger here is that when the next swell segment of thecycle occurs, the extra blocking will push the floor up into anaccentuated dome and may also cause local shear failure in the soil.If it is necessary to use blocking, it should be by a pair of finewedges and monitoring should be carried out fortnightly.

This BTF was prepared by John Lewer FAIB, MIAMA, Partner,Construction Diagnosis.

The information in this and other issues in the series was derived from various sources and was believed to be correct when published.

The information is advisory. It is provided in good faith and not claimed to be an exhaustive treatment of the relevant subject.

Further professional advice needs to be obtained before taking any action based on the information provided.

Distributed by

CSIRO PUBL ISHING PO Box 1139, Collingwood 3066, AustraliaFreecall 1800 645 051 Tel (03) 9662 7666 Fax (03) 9662 7555 www.publish.csiro.au

Email: [email protected]

© CSIRO 2003. Unauthorised copying of this Building Technology file is prohibited

Gardens for a reactive site

heritage parc - stage 7 site classification...excavation of 22 test pits (tp701 to tp722) using a 20...

Documents