report of subsurface exploration burn and rescue …

3620 Pelham Road, PMB #292 Phone: 864-329-0013

Greenville, SC 29615-5044 FAX: 864-329-0014

REPORT OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION

Burn and Rescue Facility Spartanburg County Emergency Services Academy

Duncan, SC GeoTrack Project No. 16-3979

Prepared For:

Davis & Floyd, Inc. 1319 Highway 72/221 East

Greenwood, SC 29649

Attention: Mr. Brent Robertson, P.E.

June 8, 2016

3620 Pelham Road, PMB #292 Phone: 864-329-0013 Greenville, SC 29615-5044 FAX: 864-329-0014

Page 1

June 8, 2016

Davis & Floyd, Inc. 1319 Highway 72/221 East Greenwood, SC 29649 Attention: Mr. Brent Robertson, P.E. ([email protected]) Re: Report of Subsurface Exploration Burn and Rescue Facility Spartanburg County Emergency Services Academy Duncan, South Carolina GeoTrack Project No. 16-3979 Ladies and Gentlemen: GeoTrack Technologies, Inc. has completed a subsurface exploration for the referenced project. Our services were performed in general accordance with GeoTrack Proposal No. P16-3979, dated May 13, 2016, as authorized by Mr. Robertson. The purposes of the exploration were to evaluate the site soil conditions and provide geotechnically-related design and construction recommendations. This report presents our understanding of the project, the subsurface exploration performed, the results and our recommendations.

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS

The following is an outline of our exploration and findings. These recommendations are discussed in more detail in the report text.

• Four soil test borings (B-1 through B-4) were performed near the proposed building footprint. The boring locations were offset some due to the existing buildings. The approximate boring locations are shown on the Boring Location Plan in the Appendix.

• The borings encountered approximately 2 to 3 inches of topsoil at the ground surface.

• Residual soils were encountered in the borings immediately beneath the topsoil. The residual soils consist of very stiff to hard sandy silts and medium dense to very dense silty sands.

Report of Subsurface Exploration, Spartanburg Co. Emergency Services Academy GeoTrack Project No. 16-3979 Duncan, South Carolina June 8, 2016

Page 2

• Three of the four borings encountered partially weathered rock at variable depths of 8 to 38 feet below the existing ground surface. The partially weathered rock was sampled as very dense silty sand or sand with silt.

• Groundwater was not encountered in the borings at the time of drilling and is not expected to influence construction.

• Shallow spread footings or mat foundations are recommended for support of the proposed structure. We recommend that the foundations be designed to bear in the residual soils or properly compacted fill with an allowable net soil bearing pressure of up to 4,000 pounds per square foot (psf).

• Except for the topsoil, the on-site soils, typically sandy silts and silty sands, are assessed to be satisfactory for use as structural fill. Depending on prevailing weather conditions, some moisture adjustment (wetting or drying) will likely be required.

• Based on the soil conditions encountered, and our experience in the geological region, the site soil conditions are assessed to conform to IBC Seismic Site Class C.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The proposed Burn and Rescue Facility will consist of two structures connected with a stairwell at the Spartanburg County Emergency Services Academy in Duncan, South Carolina. The project will include demolition of an existing fire training building and tower. We have been provided preliminary building plans by Spartanburg County, dated September 28, 2015. The proposed three story, fire burn building will have plan dimensions of 42 feet by 30 feet. The five-story rescue building will have plan dimensions of 30 feet by 20 feet. The proposed walls will be 10 inches thick. We estimate maximum wall loads will be on the order of about 8 to 10 kips per lineal foot. We anticipate maximum cuts and fills will be on the order of about 1 to 2 feet.

SCOPE OF EXPLORATION

The subsurface exploration included a site reconnaissance, and four soil test borings near the approximate building footprint. The boring locations are shown on the Boring Location Plan in the Appendix. Ground surface elevations were estimated from Google Earth and are referenced on the Boring Records in the Appendix. Because of the methods used, the boring locations and elevations should be considered approximate.

The soil test borings were performed with a truck mounted CME 45 drill rig and were extended to depths of 20 to 40 feet below existing grades using hollow stem augers. Standard Penetration Tests were performed at selected depth intervals with a safety hammer to collect soil samples. A geotechnical engineer reviewed the data and visually classified the soil samples. The borings were checked for groundwater at the completion of drilling and then backfilled with soil cuttings.


Page 3

The boring results are summarized in the attached Boring Records. A more detailed description of our exploration procedures are also attached.

EXPLORATION RESULTS

SITE CONDITIONS

The Burn and Rescue Facility will be located within an oval-shaped site surrounded by an existing asphalt road within the Spartanburg County Emergency Services Academy. The pavement appears to be in good condition for its age, but is exhibiting some shrinkage cracks. The proposed site is currently occupied by the existing fire and burn buildings. The burn building is a two story brick structure that does not appear to be exhibiting any significant cracking. The second structure, a seven-story tower, is steel framed with metal siding. The burn building is surrounded by a concrete slab, and the remainder of the ground surface is covered with grass. The ground surface within the oval site generally slopes gently downward about 3 to 4 feet in elevation from the south to the north and about 2 feet across the proposed construction area.

SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

Surface Materials

The ground surface is covered with a combination of concrete pads and grass. The borings encountered about 2 to 3 inches of topsoil at the ground surface.

Residual Soils

Residual soils were encountered beneath the topsoil. Borings B-2 and B-4 were terminated in the residual soils at a depth of 20 feet. Residual soils are natural soils derived from the in-place weathering of the parent bedrock. The residual soils were classified as very stiff to hard sandy silts and medium dense to very dense silty sands with some mica. Standard penetration resistances in the residual soils ranged from 14 to 66 blows per foot (bpf).

Partially Weathered Rock and Auger Refusal

Borings B-1, B-2 and B-3 encountered partially weathered rock at depths of about 8 to 38 feet below the ground surface. In boring B-2, the partially weathered rock was encountered in layered form and transitioned back to residual soils at a depth of about 11 feet. Borings B-1 and B-3 were terminated in the partially weathered rock at the planned termination depths of 20 and 40 feet, respectively. Partially weathered rock is transitional material between residual soils and mass rock with penetration resistances in excess of 50 blows over 6 inches. The partially weathered rock was sampled as very dense silty sands and sands with silt. None of the borings encountered auger refusal above the planned termination depths.


Page 4

Groundwater

Groundwater was not encountered in the borings at the time of drilling. Groundwater levels vary seasonally, due to precipitation, nearby construction, long-term climatic fluctuations, and other activities, but are not expected to influence construction activities.

RECOMMENDATIONS

LIMITATIONS

Our conclusions and recommendations are based on the project described above and the data obtained from our field work. The recommendations are based on generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices in South Carolina at the time of the report. No other warranties are expressed or implied.

The borings performed at this site represent the subsurface conditions only at the exploration and test locations. Some variation in the subsurface conditions should be expected between boring locations due to natural variations and previous site development activities. Consequently, subsurface conditions may be encountered during construction that will require supplemental recommendations.

INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE SEISMIC PROVISIONS

Seismic Site Class

GeoTrack has reviewed the boring results to classify the site according to the 2012 International Building Code (IBC). Based on the boring results (the presence of high consistency residual soils and depths to partially weathered rock), and our experience in the area, we assess that the site conforms to IBC Site Class C. Based on the consistency of the soils and deep depth to groundwater, the potential for liquefaction is assessed to be very low.

Seismic Design Values

Section 1613.3 of the 2012 IBC provides procedures for determining the seismic spectral response coefficients. The coefficients are calculated based on the seismic site class and the mapped spectral response acceleration values provided by the United States Geological Survey. Based on the site class, an assumed Risk Category of II and the provided 0.2 second (SS) and 1 second (S1) spectral response accelerations, the site seismic design spectral response coefficients are shown in the following table.


Page 5

Table 1: Seismic Design Spectral Response Coefficients

Parameter Value

SDS 0.219g

SD1 0.120g

PGAM 0.163g

EARTHWORK

Site Preparation and Subgrade Evaluation

Following demolition of the existing buildings and removal of underground utility lines and foundations, we anticipate removal of the concrete pad that surrounds the existing burn building and some stripping of topsoil. Stripping of topsoil should average about 2 to 3 inches thick. Soils disturbed during demolition and stripping should be removed or compacted as described below.

After the site is prepared, a qualified geotechnical engineer should evaluate the exposed subgrade. The evaluation will help identify soft areas not identified during preparation, and should include proofrolling with a loaded dump truck or similar pneumatic tired vehicle. During the proofrolling, areas that excessively rut or deflect (pump) should be undercut to satisfactory soils or properly compacted.

Fill Placement

After the site is stripped and evaluated, new structural fill may be placed in the construction areas, as needed, including beneath the buildings, in pavement areas, in utility trenches, etc. Structural fill should be compacted to at least 98 percent of the soil’s maximum dry density obtained from the Standard Proctor Compaction Test (ASTM D-698). To achieve the recommended compaction, the moisture content should generally be maintained within about three percent plus or minus of the optimum moisture content. The on-site, near-surface soils (excluding any topsoil and building debris) appear satisfactory for use as compacted fill. It may be necessary to adjust the moisture content to achieve sufficient compaction, as a result of natural soil moisture or weather conditions immediately before construction. If it is necessary to transport fill to the site, the fill should be free of organic matter and debris, and have a maximum particle size of 4 inches in maximum dimension. The soil should have a liquid limit of less than 50 and a plasticity index of less than 20. The fill should have a maximum dry density of at least 90 pounds per cubic foot as determined by the Standard Proctor Compaction Test (ASTM D-698). Our personnel should check the fill compaction during construction by performing periodic density tests. The test frequency can be selected by the geotechnical engineer based on the areas to be filled and the construction schedule.


Page 6

Slopes

Based on our experience with similar subsurface conditions, we recommend permanent cut and fill slopes no steeper than 2H:1V (horizontal to vertical). We further recommend that temporary slopes be inclined no steeper than about 1.5H:1V, depending on specific soil conditions in the excavations and OHSA requirements.

Excavation Difficulty

The borings encountered high consistency residual soils near the ground surface and partially weathered rock as shallow as 8 feet. Based on anticipated shallow excavation depths, significant excavation difficulty is not expected. However, a large tracked excavator (such as a Caterpillar 336FL or equivalent) may be required to excavate the high consistency soil zones and partially weathered rock, if encountered.

FOUNDATIONS

The site soil conditions are compatible with supporting the proposed new structure on spread footings or a mat foundation. We recommend that the foundations be designed for a maximum allowable net soil bearing pressure of 4,000 pounds per square foot (psf) in either residual soils or properly compacted structural fill. The wall footings should have a minimum width of at least 18 inches, regardless of the applied foundation pressure. The foundation bottoms should be at least 18 inches below minimum adjacent grade for protection from frost and landscaping activities. Based on the estimated loads and the boring results, we estimate maximum total settlements on the order of an inch and maximum differential settlement of a half inch. If a mat foundation is utilized, the mat should be designed for a modulus of subgrade reaction of 50 pounds per cubic inch.

The foundation excavations should be evaluated by our personnel during construction, to confirm that the soils are compatible with our recommendations. Any unsatisfactory soils should be removed from footings or floor slab areas before concrete placement. If encountered, the unsatisfactory soils should be selectively removed and replaced with either crushed (No. 57) stone, compacted structural fill, or concrete.

FLOOR SLABS

Like the foundations, the on-grade concrete floor slabs may be supported on either compacted structural fill or firm natural soils. Based on experience with the encountered soils, we recommend a design modulus of subgrade reaction of 150 pci for a concrete floor slab design. We recommend that the slabs be structurally isolated from the foundations to accommodate minor, routine differential settlements. A crushed stone layer under the slab is not necessary to provide structural support. However, crushed stone layers are less susceptible to weather disturbance than the natural soils, so a stone layer of at least 4 inches thick could be considered to minimize construction disturbance.


Page 7

PAVEMENT THICKNESS DESIGN

Pavement design recommendations are provided below based on our general experience with the area soils, the anticipated facility traffic, and the types of vehicles. The soils at the site will exhibit generally favorable long-term strength characteristics beneath completed pavements (as long as they are compacted properly and the pavement has adequate drainage). The exposed subgrade should be evaluated in a manner described in the Earthwork Section, before placing pavement. The soils encountered in the borings are assessed as moderate relative to pavement support characteristics. The soils can be expected to provide adequate pavement support when properly moisture-conditioned and compacted. The pavement design was analyzed based on an estimated California Bearing Ratio (CBR) of about 6 to 8. The estimated vehicular traffic includes approximately 10 to 15 fire trucks per week, and approximately 20 passenger vehicles per day. The recommendations below will result in theoretical pavement service life of roughly 15 to 20 years. Over the pavement life asphaltic pavements will require maintenance (surface rehabilitation or overlays) after no more than 12 to 15 years due to surface wear and asphalt weathering.

Asphaltic Pavement Recommendations

The recommended asphaltic section thicknesses are presented in the following table for light duty (automobile parking areas) and heavy duty (fire truck routes).

Notes: 1. Prime and tack coats should be applied between layers as described in the SCDOT Specifications.

Table 2: Asphaltic Concrete Pavement Thickness Recommendations

Material Recommended

Thicknesses (in)

Recommended Full-Depth

Thicknesses (in)

SCDOT Specification

Section Light Duty Pavement Areas

Stabilized Aggregate or Macadam Base Course

6 N/A 305

Type C or D Asphaltic Concrete Surface Course

2 4 403

Heavy Duty Pavement Areas Stabilized Aggregate or Macadam Base Course

8 N/A 305

Type C or D Asphaltic Concrete Surface Course

3 6 403


Page 8

The asphalt pavements should be constructed in accordance with the South Carolina Department of Transportation (SCDOT) Standard Specifications for Highway Construction. The applicable section numbers for asphalt pavements are referenced in the table.

Asphaltic Pavement Construction Considerations

The soil subgrade should consist of firm natural soils or compacted structural fill. The soil subgrade should be compacted to at least 98 percent of the soil’s Standard Proctor maximum dry density. The soil subgrade should also be evaluated by proofrolling immediately before base course or initial asphalt placement. Any areas assessed to be unsatisfactory should be undercut to firm soils and replaced with structural fill or crushed stone.

Performance of the pavement system will depend on proper construction of each individual layer. The base course should be compacted to at least 98 percent of its modified Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D-1557). The compaction should be confirmed by performing field density tests at a rate of at least one test per 3,000 to 5,000 square feet of surface area.

Portland Cement Concrete Pavement Recommendations

The recommended Portland cement concrete section thicknesses are presented below for both heavy duty and light duty pavement areas: Heavy Duty Areas – 6 Inches Thick Light Duty Areas – 5 Inches Thick We recommend using unreinforced pavement, with adequate crack control and construction joints to maintain aggregate interlock and appropriate load-transfer, as discussed below. Temperature/shrinkage steel and/or welded wire mesh would be optional. All Portland cement concrete (PCC) should be entrained with five to seven percent air assuming the mix will have ¾ to 1-inch maximum size aggregate. The concrete should have a 28-day compressive strength of at least 4,000 pounds per square inch (psi) to achieve adequate flexural strength. Formed construction joints should be keyed or doweled to provide load transfer across the joint. Any keyed joints should be constructed in accordance with current PCA recommendations. Dowels should consist of A-36 steel at least 5/8 inches in diameter. The dowels should be at least 16 inches long and spaced 12 inches apart. The concrete should be properly cured to protect it against loss of moisture, rapid temperature changes, and mechanical injury during the first several days. We suggest an appropriate curing compound be applied after concrete has been finished. All pavement should be sloped to allow for positive drainage.


Page 9

Concrete Pavement Construction Considerations The soil subgrade should be prepared and compacted as recommended above. Crushed stone base course is not necessary for structural support, but may be advantageous to protect the soil subgrade from weather and construction disturbance. In addition to soil testing and evaluations, we recommend that the concrete placement be monitored for proper placement techniques, to discourage adding excessive water, and to mold compressive strength specimens.

CLOSING

GeoTrack Technologies, Inc. appreciates the opportunity to assist you during this phase of the project. Please call if there are any questions concerning this report, or when we can be of further assistance.

Respectfully submitted, GeoTrack Technologies, Inc.

Michael Edmondson, EIT Staff Engineer Kenneth W. Weinel, P.E. Senior Engineer South Carolina P.E. No. 15921

APPENDIX

Boring Location Plan Boring Records

Exploration Procedures

Ref: Google Maps

- Approximate Boring Location

GeoTrack Project No.: 16-3979

FIGURE 1. BORING LOCATION PLANEmergency Services Academy

Spartanburg CountyDuncan, South Carolina

362O Pelham Rd, PMB #292, Greenville, SC

B-2

B-3

B-4

B-1

SS-1

SS-2

SS-3

SS-4

SS-5

SS-6

12

26

16

25

20

30

0.3

5.0

8.0

11.0

17.0

20.0

18

27

20

22

35

50/4"

12

10

13

10

18

23

30

53

36

47

55

50/4"

1.0

3.5

6.0

8.5

13.5

18.5

Topsoil - 3 Inches

Residuum - Medium Dense to Very DenseRed and Yellowish Brown Silty Fine toCoarse Sand (Moist) (SM)

Dense Brown Silty Fine to Coarse Sandwith Gravel (SM)

Dense Red, Gray, and Black Silty Fine toMedium Sand (Moist) (SM)

Very Dense Red, Brown, and Gray SlightlyMicaceous Silty Fine Sand (Moist) (SM)

Partially Weathered Rock - Sampled asVery Dense Olive Brown and White SiltyFine to Medium Sand (Moist) (PWR)

Boring Terminated at 20 Feet

Rotary WashRock Core

Rock Core, 1-7/8"CuttingsContinuous Tube

RWRC

--

20 40

SAMPLER TYPE DRILLING METHODSSSTAWG

1st 6

in

2nd

6in

3rd

6in

Date Drilled: 5/20/16

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

802.5

800.0

797.5

795.0

792.5

790.0

787.5

785.0

782.5

N V

alue

Drilling Method: HSA Hammer Type: Safety

Notes:Metro Drilling - CME 45

Ele

vatio

n(ft

)

Sam

ple

Dep

th(ft

)

STD. PENETRATION TEST DATA(blows/ft)

Dep

th(ft

)

LEGEND

0.0

Water Level: Dry ATD

Boring Location: See Boring Location Plan

70

Spartanburg County Emergency Services AcademySpartanburg County, SCGeoTrack Project No. 16-3979

BORING No. B-1

BORING RECORDBORING RECORD

Ground Elevation: 805.0 ft

3620 Pelham Road, PMB #292Greenville, SC 29615(864) 329-0013

Boring Diameter: 6 in

Sam

ple

No.

/Typ

e

Gra

phic

Log

HSACFADC

---

Hollow Stem AugerContinuous Flight AugersDriving Casing

5 10

---

Split SpoonShelby TubeRock Core, 1-1/8"

NQCUCT

---B

OR

ING

RE

CO

RD

397

9 S

PA

RTA

NB

UR

G E

MS

AC

AD

EM

Y B

OR

ING

S.G

PJ

GE

OTR

AC

K.G

DT

06/

07/1

6

SS-1

SS-2

SS-3

SS-4

SS-5

SS-6

8

12

24

50/1"

10

6

0.2

5.0

8.0

11.0

20.0

8

11

30

14

13

6

12

20

18

8

6

16

23

54

50/1"

24

19

1.0

3.5

6.0

8.5

13.5

18.5

Topsoil - 2 Inches

Residuum - Medium Dense Gray, White,and Yellowish Red Silty Fine to CoarseSand (Moist) (SM)

Very Dense Dark Brown, White, and BlackSilty Fine to Coarse Sand (Moist) (SM)

Partially Weathered Rock - Sampled asVery Dense Dark Brown, White, and BlackFine to Medium Sand with Silt (Moist)(PWR)

Residuum - Medium Dense Gray Silty Fineto Medium Sand (Moist to Damp) (SM)




RWRC

--

20 40


1st 6

in

2nd

6in

3rd

6in



804.5

802.0

799.5

797.0

794.5

792.0

789.5

787.0

784.5

N V

alue



Ele

vatio

n(ft

)

Sam

ple

Dep

th(ft

)


Dep

th(ft

)

LEGEND

0.0



70


BORING No. B-2





Sam

ple

No.

/Typ

e

Gra

phic

Log

HSACFADC

---


5 10

---


NQCUCT

---B

OR

ING

RE

CO

RD

397

9 S

PA

RTA

NB

UR

G E

MS

AC

AD

EM

Y B

OR

ING

S.G

PJ

GE

OTR

AC

K.G

DT

06/

07/1

6

SS-1

SS-2

SS-3

SS-4

SS-5

SS-6

SS-7

15

15

10

15

12

24

15

0.3

6.0

17.0

21.0

16

18

17

18

17

42

21

9

9

7

7

6

10

12

31

33

27

33

29

66

36

1.0

3.5

6.0

8.5

13.5

18.5

23.5

Topsoil - 3 Inches

Residuum - Hard Dark Red Sandy Silt(Moist) (ML)

Medium Dense to Dense Yellowish Brown,White, Gray, and Red Silty Fine to CoarseSand (Moist) (SM)

Very Dense Dark Gray Silty Fine to CoarseSand with Trace Gravel (Moist) (SM)

Dense Gray Silty Fine to Coarse Sand(Moist) (SM)



Continued Next Page

RWRC

--

20 40


1st 6

in

2nd

6in

3rd

6in



804.5

802.0

799.5

797.0

794.5

792.0

789.5

787.0

784.5

N V

alue



Ele

vatio

n(ft

)

Sam

ple

Dep

th(ft

)


Dep

th(ft

)

LEGEND

0.0



70


BORING No. B-3





Sam

ple

No.

/Typ

e

Gra

phic

Log

HSACFADC

---


5 10

---


NQCUCT

---B

OR

ING

RE

CO

RD

397

9 S

PA

RTA

NB

UR

G E

MS

AC

AD

EM

Y B

OR

ING

S.G

PJ

GE

OTR

AC

K.G

DT

06/

07/1

6

SS-8

SS-9

SS-10

7

6

50/5"

27.0

31.0

38.0

40.0

7

10

8

6

28

14

16

50/5"

28.5

33.5

38.5

Medium Dense Grayish Brown Silty FineSand (Damp) (SM)

Medium Dense Dark Yellowish Brown SiltyFine Sand (Moist) (SM)

Partially Weathered Rock - Sampled asVery Dense Dark Yellowish Brown, White,and Black Silty Fine to Coarse Sand (Moist)(PWR)




RWRC

--

20 40


1st 6

in

2nd

6in

3rd

6in



779.5

777.0

774.5

772.0

769.5

767.0

764.5

762.0

759.5

N V

alue



Ele

vatio

n(ft

)

Sam

ple

Dep

th(ft

)


Dep

th(ft

)

LEGEND



70


BORING No. B-3





Sam

ple

No.

/Typ

e

Gra

phic

Log

HSACFADC

---


5 10

---


NQCUCT

---B

OR

ING

RE

CO

RD

397

9 S

PA

RTA

NB

UR

G E

MS

AC

AD

EM

Y B

OR

ING

S.G

PJ

GE

OTR

AC

K.G

DT

06/

07/1

6

B-4

B-4

B-4

B-4

B-4

B-4

7

6

8

8

15

23

0.2

6.0

12.0

17.0

20.0

10

15

11

16

23

18

7

5

6

8

10

12

17

21

19

24

38

41

1.0

3.5

6.0

8.5

13.5

18.5

Topsoil - 2 Inches

Residuum - Very Stiff Dark Red Slightly toVery Micaceous Sandy Silt with TraceGravel (Moist) (ML)

Medium Dense Dark Reddish Brown, Whiteand Pink Micaceous Silty Fine to CoarseSand (Moist) (SM)

Dense Yellowish Brown and WhiteMicaceous Silty Fine to Medium Sand (SM)

Dense Gray and Light Yellowish BrownMicaceous Silty Fine to Coarse Sand (SM)




RWRC

--

20 40


1st 6

in

2nd

6in

3rd

6in



806.5

804.0

801.5

799.0

796.5

794.0

791.5

789.0

786.5

N V

alue



Ele

vatio

n(ft

)

Sam

ple

Dep

th(ft

)


Dep

th(ft

)

LEGEND

0.0



70


BORING No. B-4





Sam

ple

No.

/Typ

e

Gra

phic

Log

HSACFADC

---


5 10

---


NQCUCT

---B

OR

ING

RE

CO

RD

397

9 S

PA

RTA

NB

UR

G E

MS

AC

AD

EM

Y B

OR

ING

S.G

PJ

GE

OTR

AC

K.G

DT

06/

07/1

6

EXPLORATION PROCEDURES

Soil Test Borings: Soil sampling and penetration testing for this project were performed in accordance with ASTM D 1586. The borings were advanced using Hollow-stem, continuous flight augers (HSA). At standard intervals, soil samples were obtained with a standard 1.4-inch I.D., 2 inch O.D., split-tube sampler. The sampler was first seated six (6) inches to penetrate any loose cuttings, then driven an additional foot with blows of a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches. The number of hammer blows required to drive the sampler the final foot was recorded and is designated the "Standard Penetration Resistance" (N-Value). The Standard Penetration Resistance, when properly evaluated, is an index to soil consistency, strength, density, and ability to support foundations. Representative portions of each soil sample were placed in glass jars and taken to our laboratory. The samples were then visually classified by an engineer to supplement the driller's field classifications. Test Boring Records are attached indicating the soil descriptions and Standard Penetration Resistances.

report of subsurface exploration burn and rescue …

Documents