geotechnical engineering report - hampton

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT Commerce Drive Extension Hampton, Virginia

Schnabel Reference No. 16C13001

February 22, 2016

Prepared For: Johnson, Mirmiran & Thompson, Inc.

February 22, 2016

Mr. Christopher R. Swartz, EIT

Johnson, Mirmiran & Thompson, Inc.

272 Bendix Road, Suite 260

Virginia Beach, VA 23452

Subject: Commerce Drive Extension, Geotechnical Engineering Report

Hampton, Virginia (Schnabel No. 16C13001)

Dear Mr. Swartz:

SCHNABEL ENGINEERING, LLC (Schnabel)is pleased to submit our geotechnical engineering report for

this project. This study was performed in general accordance with our proposal dated June 25, 2016, as

authorized by Johnson, Mirmiran, and Thompson, Inc. (JMT) on July 20, 2015.

SCOPE OF SERVICES

Our proposal dated June 25, 2015 defines the scope of services for this project. The scope of services

includes subsurface exploration, field engineering, soil laboratory testing, and a geotechnical engineering

report. Our scope was modified on January 14, 2016 to reflect the removal of the BMPs from the project.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The proposed project consists of extending existing Commerce Drive from the intersection with

Convention Drive for approximately 0.22 miles to Mercury Boulevard in Hampton, Virginia. Commerce

Drive will extend through the existing commercial parking lots and medians to Mercury Boulevard,

approximately 0.11 miles west of the intersection of Mercury Boulevard and Coliseum Drive.

The proposed roadway will consist of 11-ft wide through lanes in two directions, parallel parking spaces

along the roadway, curb and gutters, a 4 ft wide grass strip, and a 5 ft wide sidewalk along both sides of

the roadway. Access to and from Commerce Drive to Mercury Boulevard will only be from the eastbound

lanes. No additional signal work is anticipated for the project.

The project site generally consists of commercial buildings and hotels with associated parking lots and

driveways. The existing site is generally level around EL 12 to 14, and is generally asphalt covered with

landscaped medians. A Site Vicinity Map is included as Figure 1. Project details were provided by JMT.

Johnston, Mirmiran & Thompson, Inc.

Commerce Drive Extension

February 22, 2016 Page 2 Schnabel Engineering, LLC

Project 16C13001 ©2016 All Rights Reserved

REGIONAL GEOLOGY

We reviewed existing geologic data and information in our files. Based on this review, the geologic

stratigraphy consists of Quaternary Age coastal plain deposits of the Tabb Formation.

SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING PROGRAM

We performed a subsurface exploration and field testing program to identify the subsurface stratigraphy

underlying the site and to evaluate the geotechnical properties of the materials encountered. This

program included test borings. Exploration methods used are discussed below. The appendices contain

the results of our exploration.

Subsurface Exploration Methods

Schnabel’s subcontractor, Ayers and Ayers, Inc., drilled seven test borings under our observation on

January 21, 2016. The Standard Penetration Test (SPT) was performed at selected depths in the

borings. Appendix A includes specific observations, remarks and logs for the borings; classification

criteria; drilling methods; and sampling protocols. Figure 2, included at the end of this report, indicates

the approximate test boring locations. We will retain soil samples up to 45 days beyond the issuance of

this report, unless you request other disposition.

Soil Laboratory Testing

Our laboratory performed tests on selected samples collected during the subsurface exploration. The

testing aided in the classification of materials encountered in the subsurface exploration and provided

data for use in the development of recommendations for earthwork and pavements. The results of the

laboratory tests are included in Appendix B and are summarized in the Subsurface Conditions section of

this report. Selected test results are also shown on the boring logs in Appendix A.

We performed index testing on samples collected as part of the exploration to provide soil classifications

and to provide parameters for use with published correlations with soil properties. Index testing included

performing natural moisture content, Atterberg Limit and gradation tests on jar and bulk samples of on-

site soils. We performed Standard Proctor compaction and CBR testing to evaluate compaction

characteristics and soil parameters for pavement design. Testing was performed on two samples

collected during our subsurface exploration.

SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

Generalized Subsurface Stratigraphy

We characterized the following generalized subsurface stratigraphy based on the subsurface exploration

and laboratory test data included in the appendices.

Surficial Materials

Five of the borings were drilled through the existing asphalt pavement. Asphalt pavements varied in

thickness from 3 to 7 inches and were underlain by about 2 to 4.5 inches of dense-graded aggregate.





Two of the borings were drilled in grass medians and about 2 inches of topsoil was encountered at these

locations

Existing Fill

Soils that contained evidence of disturbance and/or debris were encountered in each of the borings to

depths of about 2 to 8.5 ft below grade. These soils are sometimes very similar in nature to the native in-

situ soils and generally consisted of silty sand and clayey sand with intervals of poorly-graded sand and

sandy lean clay. Small amounts of asphalt, gravel and crushed stone were found in samples

representing this stratum. Standard Penetration Test (SPT) N-Values varied from 5 to 36 blows per foot

(bpf), and averaged about 15 bpf within the stratum.

We performed laboratory testing on three jar samples and two bulk samples representing this stratum.

The samples had fines contents of 21.3 to 42.2 percent. Two of the samples were non-plastic, and the

other three samples had Liquid Limit values of 27 to 31, and Plasticity Index Values of 8 to 16. The

natural moisture contents of samples from this stratum varied from 7.3 to 13.2 percent.

We performed two Standard Proctor compaction tests and two California Bearing Ratio (CBR) tests on

soil samples representing this stratum to evaluate compaction characteristics and to provide soil

parameters for pavement design. The test results are presented in the table below.

Table 1: Standard Proctor and CBR Testing Summary

Boring

No.

Depth

Interval Classification

Maximum

Dry Density

(pcf)

Optimum

Moisture

Content (%)

CBR

Value

CBR

Percent

Swell

16BH-003 0.5 – 5 ft Clayey sand FILL, SC 119.3 10.0 8.6 0.3

16BH-005 0.2 – 5 ft Silty sand FILL, SM 127.0 9.5 20.1 0.0

Tabb Formation

Soils of the Tabb Formation were observed below the existing fill in each of the borings. These soils

generally consisted of poorly-graded sand (SP) and poorly-graded sand with silt (SP-SM). In three

borings, a layer of elastic silt (MH) was observed below the poorly graded sand. Standard Penetration

Test (SPT) N-Values varied from 1 to 17 blows per foot (bpf), and averaged about 8.5 bpf within the

stratum. The natural moisture contents of samples from this stratum varied from 1.7 to 26.0 percent.

Groundwater

We observed groundwater in six of the seven borings at depths of about 8 to 9.7 ft below grade,

approximate EL 3.3 to 6. The test boring logs in Appendix A include groundwater observations obtained

during our subsurface exploration. We did not obtain long-term water level readings since the test

borings were backfilled upon completion for safety.

The groundwater levels on the logs indicate our estimate of the hydrostatic water table at the time of our

subsurface exploration. The final design should anticipate the fluctuation of the hydrostatic water table

depending on variations in precipitation, surface runoff, pumping, tidal action, evaporation, leaking

utilities, stream levels, and similar factors.





GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS

We based our geotechnical engineering analysis on the information developed from our subsurface

exploration and soil laboratory testing, along with the project development plans and site plans furnished

to our office. The following sections of the report provide our detailed recommendations.

Site Grading and Earthwork

Earthwork operations on this site should be performed according to current VDOT specifications and

standards. Additional details are provided below.

Fill Subgrade Preparation

The contractor should remove existing pavements and curbs, and strip vegetation, topsoil and organic

matter from subgrades to receive compacted structural fill for pavement support as described in Section

301.02 of the 2007 VDOT Road and Bridge Specifications. Our subsurface exploration indicated topsoil

to depths of about 2 inches below the ground surface. However, stripping operations typically results in

some disturbance and contamination of near-surface soils, particularly during periods of wet weather.

Therefore, we recommend a topsoil stripping depth of 6 inches for project planning.

Before any fill placement or undercutting below design subgrade level, the QA/QC Engineer should

evaluate the soils for suitability based on observations of proofrolling with a loaded dump truck or scraper.

The contractor should excavate areas exhibiting excessive pumping, weaving, or rutting, and replace

these areas with additional compacted structural fill. The contractor should also proofroll final pavement

subgrades under the observation of the QA/QC Engineer to evaluate suitability of these subgrades.

Evaluation techniques may also include probing with a penetrometer, observing proofrolling, drilling hand

augers, observing test pits, or a combination of these methods.

Compacted structural fill subgrades should consist of suitable existing fill soils. Soft or loose near-surface

soils were not encountered during our limited subsurface exploration. However, unsuitable soils could be

encountered during construction in areas between borings and in areas where backfill over existing

utilities may not have been adequately compacted. If encountered, the contractor should undercut

unsuitable soils to expose suitable subgrade soils. This undercut should extend at least 2 ft horizontally

beyond the projected roadway dimensions.

The contractor could possibly recompact any soft or loose near-surface soils if the earthwork is performed

in the drier, warmer summer months. These soils may need some scarifying and drying for recompaction.

The contractor may also use the non-organic portions of material excavated as compacted structural fill

that meet the requirements for suitable fill. The use of these materials as compacted structural fill will

depend on the soil moisture content, and the contractor’s ability to limit contamination of these materials

with organic matter during stripping and undercutting.

We recommend evaluating undercut volumes by cross sectioning. Other methods of calculating volumes

of undercut, such as counting trucks, are less accurate and generally result in additional expense. If truck

counts are used, we recommend that the method of payment be in accordance with Section 109 of the

Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) Road and Bridge Specifications





Some existing structures may be present on the site. Therefore, grading activities may encounter buried

curbs and other associated debris. We recommend the complete removal of existing debris from within

the area of proposed pavement areas to at least 2 ft below the design pavement subgrade level.

Unsuitable Materials

The recommendations for unsuitable materials include materials considered for use:

Within 3 ft below the pavement or fill subgrade level,

Within 2 ft below the bedding material of minor structures,

Laterally within 2 ft of the outside edge of the pavement shoulders, and

Laterally within 2 ft of the limits of bedding material of minor structures.

Unsuitable materials are those within the areas described above that:

Classify as CH, MH, OH or OL in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System

(USCS),

Contain more than 5 percent by weight organic matter,

Exhibit a swell value greater than 5 percent as determined from the California Bearing Ratio

(CBR) test using VTM-8,

Exhibit strength, consolidation, durability of rock or any other characteristics that are deemed

unsuitable by the QA/QC Geotechnical Engineer,

Are denoted in the Contract Documents as unsuitable.

In addition to the materials described above, the following materials are also be considered unsuitable:

Materials within 3 ft of the pavement subgrade that exhibit a CBR value of less than 5.8 (design

CBR)

Saturated or very dry and/or loose or very soft soils that exhibit excessive pumping or rutting

under the weight of construction equipment. If these near-surface materials can be moisture

conditioned (mechanically or chemically) to an acceptable moisture content that allows adequate

compaction to meet project specifications, and classification testing indicates they are not

otherwise unsuitable, they shall be considered suitable.

Topsoil, peat, coal and carbonaceous shale.

Unsuitable material shall be disposed of and/or treated as discussed at no cost to the City. Excessively

soft or saturated soils are also considered unsuitable and must be removed or modified in place to

provide adequate support for embankments, pavements, structures or drainage items.

Some soils with high moisture content values were also encountered within about 6 ft of the ground

surface. However, the average N-value of these materials was about 14 bpf. Provided that soils at the

proposed subgrade level perform satisfactorily when they are proofrolled, the materials with high moisture

contents may be left in place.

Materials unsuitable for use on this project should be disposed of at an approved disposal area or landfill

licensed to receive such material unless the materials can be adequately treated in place through pre-





approved methods of chemical and/or mechanically stabilization to satisfy the design. Unsuitable

materials shall be disposed of off-site and/or treated in place.

Compacted Structural Fill

Compacted structural fill should consist of material classifying CL, ML, SC, SM, SP, SW, GC, GM, GP, or

GW per ASTM D2487. Compacted structural fill should be placed in maximum eight-inch thick horizontal,

loose lifts and should be compacted according to current VDOT specifications.

The contractor should bench compacted structural fill subgrades steeper than 4H:1V to allow placement

of horizontal lifts. Compacted structural fill should extend laterally at least 2 ft beyond the pavement

limits, and then slope as needed to meet existing grades.

Successful reuse of the excavated, on-site soils as compacted structural fill will depend on their natural

moisture contents during excavation. Natural moisture content values of the existing fill and natural soils

varied from about 4 percent below to about 3 percent above optimum for the soil types tested. Therefore,

we anticipate moisture conditioning of portions of the on-site soils to achieve the recommended

compaction.

Backfill placed in excavations, trenches, and other areas that large compaction equipment cannot access

should be placed in maximum 6-inch thick lifts. Backfill should meet the material, placement and

compaction requirements outlined above.

Pavements

The contractor should prepare pavement subgrades and place compacted structural fill for pavement

support as previously described in the Earthwork and Grading Section of this report. Dense-graded

aggregate placed as pavement base course should be compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum

Standard Proctor dry density per VTM-1.

We developed the recommended pavement sections according to the VDOT Vaswani design method for

flexible pavements based on a design CBR value of 5.8. This design CBR value represents two-thirds of

the lowest laboratory value. A resiliency factor of 2.5 was also used in this design method.

Our pavement design was based on a Year 1 traffic volume of 3,500 vehicles per day with 1% heavy

truck traffic and a growth rate of 0.5%. The design period was 20 years. Our analysis considers that

proper grading will be maintained to provide runoff from the pavement surface and beyond the limits of

paved areas. We recommend the following pavement section:

Asphalt Concrete Surface Course, VDOT SM-9.5A = 1.5 inches

Asphalt Concrete Base Course, VDOT BM-25.0 = 4.0 inches

Dense-Graded Aggregate Subbase Course, VDOT 21B = 8.0 inches

Since traffic data indicates more than 1,000 vehicles per day, UD-4 pavement edge drains should be

provided along both sides of the roadway. Underdrains should be daylighted or connected to a storm

sewer.





Adequate control of surface drainage will be a very important consideration for the overall performance of

this pavement design. The area surrounding pavements should be graded to direct surface water away

from paved areas. Utility excavations within pavement areas should be backfilled with compacted

structural fill.

CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS

Site Grading and Earthwork

The test boring data indicates the approximate depth of topsoil based on our visual identification

procedures. The depth of stripping necessary to provide a suitable base for placement and compaction

of earthwork or for pavement subgrade preparation may include topsoil and other softer surficial layers

with or without organic matter. The depth of required stripping should be determined by the excavation

contractor prior to construction using test pits, probes, or other means that the contractor wishes to

employ, and this determination should be the excavation contractor's responsibility.

The on-site soils are susceptible to moisture changes, will be easily disturbed, and will be difficult to

compact under wet weather conditions. Drying and reworking of the soils are likely to be difficult during

wetter winter months. We recommend that the earthwork phases of this project be performed during the

warmer, drier times of the year to limit the potential for disturbance of on-site soils.

Traffic on stripped or undercut subgrades should be limited to reduce disturbance of underlying soils.

Also, using lightweight, track-mounted dozer equipment for stripping will limit the disturbance of

underlying soils, and may reduce the undercut volume needed. The contractor should provide site

drainage to maintain subgrades free of water and to avoid saturation and disturbance of the subgrade

soils before placing compacted structural fill, pavement base course or moisture barrier material. This will

be important during all phases of the construction work. The contractor should be responsible for

reworking of subgrades and compacted structural fill that were initially considered suitable but were later

disturbed by equipment and/or weather.

Based on our observations, groundwater will likely be encountered if utility work extends about 8 ft below

existing grades. The Contractor will likely need to provide temporary dewatering such as trenching and/or

pumping from sumps to control the surface and/or groundwater.

Engineering Services During Construction

The engineering recommendations provided in this report are based on the information obtained from the

subsurface exploration and laboratory testing. However, conditions on the site may vary between the

discrete locations observed at the time of our subsurface exploration. The nature and extent of variations

between borings may not become evident until during construction.

To account for this variability, the QA/QC Engineer should contact us if conditions are different than we

have considered during the development of the geotechnical engineering recommendations summarized

herein.





General Specification Recommendations

This report may be made available to prospective bidders for informational purposes. We recommend

that the project specifications contain the following statement:

Schnabel Engineering, LLC, has prepared this geotechnical engineering report for this project.

This report is for informational purposes only and is not part of the contract documents. The

opinions expressed represent the Geotechnical Engineer’s interpretation of the subsurface

conditions, tests, and the results of analyses performed. Should the data contained in this report

not be adequate for the Contractor's purposes, the Contractor may make, before bidding,

independent exploration, tests and analyses. This report may be examined by bidders at the

office of the Owner, or copies may be obtained from the Owner at nominal charge.

Additional data and reports prepared by others that could have an impact upon the Contractor's bid

should also be made available to prospective bidders for informational purposes.

LIMITATIONS

We based the analyses and recommendations submitted in this report on the information revealed by our

exploration. We attempted to provide for normal contingencies, but the possibility remains that

unexpected conditions may be encountered during construction.

This report has been prepared to aid in the evaluation of this site and to assist in the design of the project.

It is intended for use concerning this specific project. We based our recommendations on information on

the site and proposed construction as described in this report. Substantial changes in traffic data,

locations, or grades should be brought to our attention so we can modify our recommendations as

needed. We would appreciate an opportunity to review the plans and specifications as they pertain to the

recommendations contained in this report, and to submit our comments to you based on this review.

We have endeavored to complete the services identified herein in a manner consistent with that level of

care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing in the same locality

and under similar conditions as this project. No other representation, express or implied, is included or

intended, and no warranty or guarantee is included or intended in this report, or other instrument of

service.





We appreciate the opportunity to be of service for this project. Please call us if you have any questions

regarding this report.

Sincerely,

SCHNABEL ENGINEERING, LLC

Michelle E. Bolding, PE

Senior Engineer

Edward G. Drahos, PE

Senior Reviewer

MEB:EGD

Figures

Appendix A: Subsurface Exploration Data

Appendix B: Soil Laboratory Test Data

Appendix C: Calculations



February 22, 2016 Schnabel Engineering, LLC


FIGURES

Figure 1: Site Vicinity Map

Figure 2: Boring Location Plan

³2/1

1/201

6 Th

is Ma

p was

Crea

ted In

Schn

abel

Engin

eerin

gs Si

te Vic

inity

Map A

pplica

tion

NOT TO SCALE

arcgis

COMMERCE DRIVE EXTENSION

PROJECT NO. 16C13001

SITE VICINITYMAP

FIGURE 1

HAMPTON, VIRGINIA

Sources: Esri, HERE, DeLorme, USGS, Intermap, increment P Corp., NRCAN, Esri Japan,METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri (Thailand), MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, andthe GIS User CommunitySource: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS,

_̂

© Schnabel Engineering, 2016. All Rights Reserved.

16BH-007

16BH-006

16BH-005

16BH-004/4A/4B

16BH-003

16BH-002

16BH-001

2

LEGEND

APPROXIMATE BORING LOCATION

00 60' 120'

SCALE: 1"=60'

COMMERCE DRIVE EXTENSION

HAMPTON, VIRGINIA

Base Plan Provided by JMT on 01/18/2016.

BORING LOCATION PLAN

16C13001

M. SNARR

M. BOLDING FEB 2016

Figure Name:

Project Number:

Done:

Reviewed:

Figure Number:

Date:

G:\2

011 - 2020\2016\R

ichm

ond\16C

13001

C

om

me

rce

D

r E

xt, H

am

pton\03

-S

E P

rod

ucts\08-C

AD

\16C

13001

B

LP

.dw

g, 2/12

/20

16 11:57:21 A

M





APPENDIX A

SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION DATA

Subsurface Exploration Procedures

General Notes for Subsurface Exploration Logs

VDOT Unified Soil Classification System

Boring Logs, 16BH-001 through 16BH-007





SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION PROCEDURES

Test Borings – Hollow Stem Augers

The borings are advanced by turning a continuous flight auger with a center opening of 2¼ or 3¼ inches.

A plug device blocks off the center opening while augers are advanced. Cuttings are brought to the

surface by the auger flights. Sampling is performed through the center opening in the hollow stem auger,

by standard methods, after removal of the plug. Usually, no water is introduced into the boring using this

procedure.

Standard Penetration Test Results

The numbers in the Sampling Data column of the boring logs represent Standard Penetration Test (SPT)

results. Each number represents the blows needed to drive a 2-inch O.D., 1⅜-inch I.D. split-spoon

sampler 6 inches, using a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches. The sampler is typically driven a total of

18 or 24 inches. The first 6 inches are considered a seating interval. The total of the number of blows for

the second and third 6-inch intervals is the SPT “N value.” The SPT is performed according to ASTM

D1586.

Soil Classification Criteria

The group symbols on the logs represent the Unified Soil Classification System Group Symbols (ASTM

D2487) based on visual observation and limited laboratory testing of the samples. Criteria for visual

identification of soil samples are included in this appendix. Some variation can be expected between

samples visually classified and samples classified in the laboratory.

Residual soils are derived through the in-place physical and chemical weathering of the underlying rock.

Disintegrated rock is defined as residual material with SPT N values between 60 blows per foot and

refusal. Refusal is defined as an N value of 50 blows for a penetration of one inch or less.

Pocket Penetrometer Results

The values following “PP=” in the sampling data column of the logs represent pocket penetrometer

readings. Pocket penetrometer readings provide an estimate of the unconfined compressive strength of

fine-grained soils.

Boring, Hand Auger and Test Pit Locations and Elevations

Boring locations were staked by Schnabel personnel using sub-meter GPS equipment. Approximate

boring locations are shown on Figure 2. Ground surface elevations at the boring locations were obtained

from the site topographic plan and are indicated on the boring logs. Locations and elevations should be

considered no more accurate than the methods used to determine them.

GENERAL NOTES FOR

SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOGS

1. Numbers in the Standard Penetration Test Hammer Blows column of the logs indicate blows required to drive a 2-

inch O.D., 1⅜-inch I.D. sampling spoon 6 inches using a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches. The Standard

Penetration Test (SPT) N value is the number of blows required to drive the sampler 12 inches, after a 6-inch

seating interval. The Standard Penetration Test is performed in general accordance with ASTM D1586.

2. Visual classification of soil is in accordance with terminology set forth in Chapter 3 of the Materials Manual of

Instruction (MOI). The ASTM D2487 group symbols (e.g., CL) included in the Field Description of Strata column

are based on visual observations. Some variation can be expected between samples visually classified and

samples classified in the laboratory. Descriptions of materials tested in the laboratory were typically revised to

indicate the material classification based on the results of the laboratory testing.

3. The values in the Pocket Penetrometer column represent pocket penetrometer readings. Pocket penetrometer

readings provide an estimate of the unconfined compressive strength of fine-grained soils.

4. Estimated water levels indicated on the logs are only estimates from available data and may vary with precipitation,

porosity of the soil, site topography, and other factors.

5. The logs and related information depict subsurface conditions only at the specific locations and at the particular

time when drilled or excavated. Soil conditions at other locations may differ from conditions occurring at these

locations. Also, the passage of time may result in a change in the subsurface soil and water level conditions at the

subsurface exploration location.

6. The stratification lines shown on the logs represent the approximate boundary between soil and rock types as

obtained from the subsurface exploration. The transition lines appear on the logs as a finite boundary between two

material types, but the transition between soil and rock materials may be finite or gradual. These transition lines

are shown about half way between samples, as required by Chapter 3 of the Materials MOI, but some variation may

also be expected vertically between samples taken.

7. The soil profile, water level observations and penetration resistances presented on these logs have been made with

reasonable care and accuracy and must be considered only an approximate representation of subsurface

conditions to be encountered at the particular location.

8. A list of material and sample symbols are included on the following pages.

UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION AND SYMBOL CHART LABORATORY CLASSIFICATION CRITERIA

PLASTICITY CHART

COARSE-GRAINED SOILS

FINE-GRAINED SOILS

(more than 50% of material is larger than No. 200 sieve size.)

(50% or more of material is smaller than No. 200 sieve size.)

Well-graded gravels, gravel-sandmixtures, little or no fines

greater than 4;

greater than 4;

between 1 and 3

between 1 and 3

=

=

=

=

Clean Gravels (Less than 5% fines)

C

C

C

C

D

D

D

D

D

D

D

D

D

D

u

u

c

c

60

60

30

30

x

x

10

10

10

10

60

60

Clean Sands (Less than 5% fines)

Above "A" line with P.I. between4 and 7 are borderline casesrequiring use of dual symbols

Limits plotting in shaded zonewith P.I. between 4 and 7 areborderline cases requiring useof dual symbols.

Determine percentages of sand and gravel from grain-size curve. Dependingon percentage of fines (fraction smaller than No. 200 sieve size),coarse-grained soils are classified as follows:

Less than 5 percentMore than 12 percent5 to 12 percent

GW, GP, SW, SPGM, GC, SM, SC

Borderline cases requiring dual symbols

Gravels with fines (More than 12% fines)

Sands with fines (More than 12% fines)

Well-graded sands, gravelly sands,little or no fines

Silty gravels, gravel-sand-silt mixturesAtterberg limits below "A"line or P.I. less than 4

Atterberg limits below "A"line or P.I. less than 4

Atterberg limits above "A"line with P.I. greater than 7

Atterberg limits above "A"line with P.I. greater than 7

Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures

Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rockflour, silty of clayey fine sands or clayeysilts with slight plasticity

Inorganic clays of low to mediumplasticity, gravelly clays, sandy clays,silty clays, lean clays

Inorganic silts, micaceous ordiatomaceous fine sandy or silty soils,elastic silts

Peat and other highly organic soils

Poorly-graded gravels, gravel-sandmixtures, little or no fines Not meeting all gradation requirements for GW

Not meeting all gradation requirements for GWPoorly graded sands, gravelly sands,little or no fines

Clayey gravels, gravel-sand-claymixtures

Clayey sands, sand-clay mixtures

Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fatclays

Organic silts and organic silty clays oflow plasticity

Organic clays of medium to highplasticity, organic silts

60

50

40

30

20

10

00 10 20 30 40 50

LIQUID LIMIT (LL) (%)

CL

CL+ML

CH

PL

AS

TIC

ITY

IND

EX

(P

I) (

%)

60 70 80 90 100

GW GW

GRAVELS

SANDS

SILTSAND

CLAYS

SILTSAND

CLAYS

HIGHLYORGANIC

SOILS

More than 50%of coarse

fraction largerthan No. 4sieve size

50% or moreof coarse

fraction smallerthan No. 4sieve size

Liquid limitless than

50%

Liquid limit50%

or greater

SW SW

GM GM

SM SM

ML

MH

PT

GP GP

SPSP

GC GC

SC SC

CL

CH

OL

OH

MH&OH

A LINE:PI = 0.73(LL-20)

ML&OL

UNIFIED SOILCLASSIFICATION SYSTEM

CH -

Fat Clay

CL -

Lean Clay

FL -Fill

GC - Clayey

Gravel

GM - Silty

Gravel

GP - Poorly-

graded Gravel

GW - Well-

Graded Gravel

ML - Silt

SC -

Clayey Sand

CL-ML

GC-GM

SW - Well-

Graded Sand

SM - Silty

Sand

SP - Poorly-

Graded Sand

Pavement/Soils

ASPH-

ASPHALT PVT

CONC-

CONCRETE PVT

GP-GC

GP-GM

GW-GC

GW-GM

SP-SC

SP-SM

SW-SC

SW-SM

AND -

Andesite

BST -

Basalt

CAV -

Cavity

DBS -

Diabase

DRT -

Diorite

GBR -

Gabbro

GGE -

Gouge SPT

Core

Grab

No

Recovery

Other

SLS -

Siltstone

SST-SHL -

Interbedded

Sandstone/Shale

MYL -

Mylonite

PHY -

Phyllite

RHY -

Rhyolite

SCH -

Schist

SedimentaryRocks

MetamorphicRocks

SamplingIgneousRocks

MATERIAL AND SAMPLESYMBOLS LIST

GNS -

Gneiss

Auger

Undisturbed

CGL -

Conglomorate

COL -

Coal

GWK -

Graywacke

LST -

Limestone

SHL -

Shale

SST -

Sandstone

CLST - Cherty

Limestone

SLT -

Slate

GRD -

Granodiorite

GRN

Granite

POR -

Porphyry

SE -

Shell Bed

UCY -

Underclay

SST-SLS -

Interbedded

Sandstone/Siltstone

MH -

Elastic Silt

MH/CH

MH/ML

MH/SM

ML/CL

ML/GM

ML/SM

GM/GP

GM/ML

GM/SM

HWR

Highly Weathered

Rock

MST

Mudstone

BRC -

Breccia

Misc.

SHDS

Shaly Dolostone

CHK

Chalk

SHLS-Shaly

Limestone

MSH

Silty Shale

Page 1of 2

SSHL

Sandy Shale

Vane

Pavement/SoilsSedimentary

RocksMetamorphic

RocksSampling

IgneousRocks

MATERIAL AND SAMPLESYMBOLS LIST

TOPS-

TOPSOIL CH/CL CH/MH CH/SC

CL/ML CL/SC CL/CHCRA

Crushed Aggregate

GC/SC

GP/GW

GP/SPGW/GP ML/MH

OH

Organic

OH/OL

OL

OrganicOL/OHPT

Peat

SC/CH

SC/CL

SC/GC SC-SM

BLD-Boulder

Bed

CHT

Charnocktite

DLS

Dolostone

LST-DLS-

Interbedded

Limestone/Dolostone

MSLS

Metasiltstone

MSST

Metasandstone

QZT -

Quartzite

MBST

Metabasalt

SPS

Soapstone

MBL

Marble

Page 2 of 2

SP/SW SM/GM SM/MH

SM/ML SM/SC SP/GP SW/SP

CHRT

9.1

7.3

1.7

22 8 22.8

0.0 / 12.07-INCHES ASPHALT

0.58 / 11.424.5-INCHES DENSE GRADED AGGREGATE

0.96 / 11.04Fill, brown-gray, fine to coarse, CLAYEY SAND FILL, tracegravel, contains crushed aggregate, very stiff, moist (SC)

2.0 / 10.0Orange-brown, fine to coarse, SILTY SAND FILL, containsgravel, medium dense, moist (SM)

4.0 / 8.0Tabb Formation, light brown, fine to medium, POORLYGRADED SAND, trace silt, medium dense, moist (SP)

SAME, fine to coarse, loose, wet below 7 ft

SAME, gray, fine to medium, medium dense below 8.5 ft

Bottom of Boring at 10 ft.

87

47

67

87

100

PAGE 1 OF 1

16BH-001

16BH-001

FIELD DESCRIPTION OF STRATA

GROUND WATER

PAGE 1 OF 1

OFFSET:LONGITUDE: 76.390092° WCOORD. DATUM: NAD 83

REMARKS: Rig Type: CME-55 (Truck).

Copyright 2016, Commonwealth of Virginia

SP

T_

LO

GB

:VD

OT

TE

MP

LA

TE

.GP

J:8

.30

.00

4:0

12

51

2:2

/22

/16

LAB DATA

MO

IST

UR

E C

ON

TE

NT

(%

)

PLA

ST

ICIT

Y IN

DE

X

PILL

LIQ

UID

LIM

IT

FIN

ES

CO

NT

EN

T -

#200 (

%)

SO

IL R

EC

OV

ER

Y (

%)

CO

RE

RE

CO

VE

RY

(%

)FIRST ENCOUNTERED AT 8.0 ft DEPTH

NO LONG TERM MEASUREMENTS TAKEN

DIP °

R O C K

SA

MP

LE

LE

GE

ND

S O I L

PROJECT #:

LOCATION:

STRUCTURE:

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft)

10

8

6

4

2

DE

PT

H (

ft)

SA

MP

LE

IN

TE

RV

AL

RO

CK

QU

ALIT

YD

ES

IGN

AT

ION

ST

AN

DA

RD

PE

NE

TR

AT

ION

TE

ST

HA

MM

ER

BLO

WS

FIELD DATA

ST

RA

TA

LE

GE

ND

JO

INT

S

ST

RA

TA

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

5.5

6.0

6.5

7.0

7.5

8.0

8.5

9.0

9.5

10.0

STATION:LATITUDE: 37.040670° NSURFACE ELEVATION: 12.0 ft

16C13001


ROADWAY

Date(s) Drilled: 01/21/2016 - 01/21/2016

Drilling Method(s): 2-1/4" I.D. Hollow Stem Auger

SPT Method: Safety Hammer (140 lb)

Other Test(s): Not Applicable

Driller: Ayers & Ayers, Inc.

Logger: R. Rountree

22

8

5

3

4

9

6

6

4

5

12

6

6

3

5

0.5

2

3.5

4

5.5

7

8.5

10

10.0

10.5

13.2

0.0 / 13.02-INCHES ROOTMAT AND TOPSOIL

0.2 / 12.8Fill, orange-brown, fine to coarse, SILTY SAND FILL, mediumdense, moist (SM)

2.0 / 11.0Orange-brown, fine to medium, POORLY GRADED SAND WITHSILT FILL, loose, moist (SP-SM)

4.0 / 9.0Brown-gray, fine to coarse, SILTY SAND FILL, medium dense,moist (SM)

6.0 / 7.0Orange-brown, fine to medium, POORLY GRADED SAND WITHSILT FILL, medium dense, moist (SP-SM)

8.5 / 4.5Tabb Formation, brown, fine to coarse, POORLY GRADED SANDWITH SILT, contains roots, very loose, wet (SP-SM)


87

87

80

53

80

PAGE 1 OF 1

16BH-002

16BH-002


GROUND WATER

PAGE 1 OF 1




SP

T_

LO

G:V

DO

T T

EM

PL

AT

E.G

PJ:8

.30

.00

4:0

12

51

2:2

/22

/16

LAB DATA

MO

IST

UR

E C

ON

TE

NT

(%

)

PLA

ST

ICIT

Y IN

DE

X

PILL

LIQ

UID

LIM

IT

SO

IL R

EC

OV

ER

Y (

%)

CO

RE

RE

CO

VE

RY

(%



DIP °

R O C K

SA

MP

LE

LE

GE

ND

S O I L

PROJECT #:

LOCATION:

STRUCTURE:

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft)

12

10

8

6

4

DE

PT

H (

ft)

SA

MP

LE

IN

TE

RV

AL

RO

CK

QU

ALIT

YD

ES

IGN

AT

ION

ST

AN

DA

RD

PE

NE

TR

AT

ION

TE

ST

HA

MM

ER

BLO

WS

FIELD DATA

ST

RA

TA

LE

GE

ND

JO

INT

S

ST

RA

TA

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

5.5

6.0

6.5

7.0

7.5

8.0

8.5

9.0

9.5

10.0


16C13001


ROADWAY

Date(s) Drilled: 01/21/2016 - 01/21/2016





Logger: R. Rountree

7

3

2

12

2

6

3

3

11

2

7

2

8

4

1

1.5

2

3.5

4

5.5

7

8.5

10

3.75

2

1.75

12.9

0.0 / 13.03.5-INCHES ASPHALT

0.28 / 12.723-INCHES DENSE GRADED AGGREGATE

0.51 / 12.49Fill, dark gray, CLAYEY SAND FILL, trace gravel, containsroot fragments, very stiff, moist (SC)

SAME, orange-gray, contains quartz fragments, stiff below 4 ft

6.0 / 7.0Tabb Formation, brown and gray, fine to medium, POORLYGRADED SAND, trace silt, contains organic lenses, mediumdense, moist (SP)

9.5 / 3.5Gray, ELASTIC SILT, trace sand, contains organics, firm, wet(MH)


87

100

87

87

100

PAGE 1 OF 1

16BH-003

16BH-003


GROUND WATER

PAGE 1 OF 1




SP

T_

LO

GA

:VD

OT

TE

MP

LA

TE

.GP

J:8

.30

.00

4:0

12

51

2:2

/22

/16

PK

T. P

EN

ET

RO

ME

TE

R (

tsf)

LAB DATA

MO

IST

UR

E C

ON

TE

NT

(%

)

PLA

ST

ICIT

Y IN

DE

X

PILL

LIQ

UID

LIM

IT

SO

IL R

EC

OV

ER

Y (

%)

CO

RE

RE

CO

VE

RY

(%

)

FIRST ENCOUNTERED AT 9.7 ft DEPTH


DIP °

R O C K

SA

MP

LE

LE

GE

ND

S O I L

PROJECT #:

LOCATION:

STRUCTURE:

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft)

12

10

8

6

4

DE

PT

H (

ft)

SA

MP

LE

IN

TE

RV

AL

RO

CK

QU

ALIT

YD

ES

IGN

AT

ION

ST

AN

DA

RD

PE

NE

TR

AT

ION

TE

ST

HA

MM

ER

BLO

WS

FIELD DATA

ST

RA

TA

LE

GE

ND

JO

INT

S

ST

RA

TA

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

5.5

6.0

6.5

7.0

7.5

8.0

8.5

9.0

9.5

10.0


16C13001


ROADWAY

Date(s) Drilled: 01/21/2016 - 01/21/2016





Logger: R. Rountree

11

8

4

5

3

9

7

4

7

3

12

9

5

10

4

0.5

2

3.5

4

5.5

7

8.5

10

12.9

10.5



0.57 / 13.43Fill, gray-brown, fine to coarse, SILTY SAND FILL, trace gravel,contains crushed stone and brick, dense, moist (SM)

SAME, contains lean clay layers, loose below 2 ft

Bottom of Boring at 4.5 ft.

100

87

100

PAGE 1 OF 1

16BH-004

16BH-004


GROUND WATER

PAGE 1 OF 1


REMARKS: Rig Type: CME-55 (Truck).Refusal on obstruction at 4.5 ft.


SP

T_

LO

G:V

DO

T T

EM

PL

AT

E.G

PJ:8

.30

.00

4:0

12

51

2:2

/22

/16

LAB DATA

MO

IST

UR

E C

ON

TE

NT

(%

)

PLA

ST

ICIT

Y IN

DE

X

PILL

LIQ

UID

LIM

IT

SO

IL R

EC

OV

ER

Y (

%)

CO

RE

RE

CO

VE

RY

(%

)NOT ENCOUNTERED DURING DRILLING


DIP °

R O C K

SA

MP

LE

LE

GE

ND

S O I L

PROJECT #:

LOCATION:

STRUCTURE:

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft)

12

10

DE

PT

H (

ft)

SA

MP

LE

IN

TE

RV

AL

RO

CK

QU

ALIT

YD

ES

IGN

AT

ION

ST

AN

DA

RD

PE

NE

TR

AT

ION

TE

ST

HA

MM

ER

BLO

WS

FIELD DATA

ST

RA

TA

LE

GE

ND

JO

INT

S

ST

RA

TA

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5


16C13001


ROADWAY

Date(s) Drilled: 01/21/2016 - 01/21/2016





Logger: R. Rountree

24

4

3

21

4

50/0

15

5

0.5

2

3.5

4

4.5

Auger probe to 4.5 feet. See Boring 16BH-004 for stratumdescription.

Bottom of Boring at 4.5 ft.

PAGE 1 OF 1

16BH-004A

16BH-004A


GROUND WATER

PAGE 1 OF 1


REMARKS: Rig Type: CME-55 (Truck).Boring located about 5 ft southeast of 16BH-004.Refusal on obstruction at 4.5 ft.


SP

T_

LO

G:V

DO

T T

EM

PL

AT

E.G

PJ:8

.30

.00

4:0

12

51

2:2

/22

/16

LAB DATA

MO

IST

UR

E C

ON

TE

NT

(%

)

PLA

ST

ICIT

Y IN

DE

X

PILL

LIQ

UID

LIM

IT

SO

IL R

EC

OV

ER

Y (

%)

CO

RE

RE

CO

VE

RY

(%

)NOT ENCOUNTERED DURING DRILLING


DIP °

R O C K

SA

MP

LE

LE

GE

ND

S O I L

PROJECT #:

LOCATION:

STRUCTURE:

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft)

12

10

DE

PT

H (

ft)

SA

MP

LE

IN

TE

RV

AL

RO

CK

QU

ALIT

YD

ES

IGN

AT

ION

ST

AN

DA

RD

PE

NE

TR

AT

ION

TE

ST

HA

MM

ER

BLO

WS

FIELD DATA

ST

RA

TA

LE

GE

ND

JO

INT

S

ST

RA

TA

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5


16C13001


ROADWAY

Date(s) Drilled: 01/21/2016 - 01/21/2016





Logger: R. Rountree

0.0 / 14.0Auger probe to 7 feet. See Boring 16BH-004 for stratumdescription.

7.0 / 7.0Tabb Formation, Light orange-brown, fine to medium, POORLYGRADED SAND, trace silt, medium dense, moist (SP)

SAME, wet below 9 ft


87

100

PAGE 1 OF 1

16BH-004B

16BH-004B


GROUND WATER

PAGE 1 OF 1


REMARKS: Rig Type: CME-55 (Truck).Boring located about 10 ft east of 16BH-004.


SP

T_

LO

G:V

DO

T T

EM

PL

AT

E.G

PJ:8

.30

.00

4:0

12

51

2:2

/22

/16

LAB DATA

MO

IST

UR

E C

ON

TE

NT

(%

)

PLA

ST

ICIT

Y IN

DE

X

PILL

LIQ

UID

LIM

IT

SO

IL R

EC

OV

ER

Y (

%)

CO

RE

RE

CO

VE

RY

(%



DIP °

R O C K

SA

MP

LE

LE

GE

ND

S O I L

PROJECT #:

LOCATION:

STRUCTURE:

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft)

12

10

8

6

4

DE

PT

H (

ft)

SA

MP

LE

IN

TE

RV

AL

RO

CK

QU

ALIT

YD

ES

IGN

AT

ION

ST

AN

DA

RD

PE

NE

TR

AT

ION

TE

ST

HA

MM

ER

BLO

WS

FIELD DATA

ST

RA

TA

LE

GE

ND

JO

INT

S

ST

RA

TA

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

5.5

6.0

6.5

7.0

7.5

8.0

8.5

9.0

9.5

10.0


16C13001


ROADWAY

Date(s) Drilled: 01/21/2016 - 01/21/2016





Logger: R. Rountree

3

5

6

5

7

6

7

8.5

10

7.9

19.2

0.0 / 14.02-INCHES ROOTMAT AND TOPSOIL

0.2 / 13.8Fill, orange-brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND FILL, trace gravel,contains crushed aggregate, medium dense, moist (SM)

SAME, loose below 4 ft

7.0 / 7.0Tabb Formation, gray-brown, fine to medium, POORLY GRADEDSAND, trace silt, very loose, wet (SP)


100

87

67

20

27

PAGE 1 OF 1

16BH-005

16BH-005


GROUND WATER

PAGE 1 OF 1




SP

T_

LO

G:V

DO

T T

EM

PL

AT

E.G

PJ:8

.30

.00

4:0

12

51

2:2

/22

/16

LAB DATA

MO

IST

UR

E C

ON

TE

NT

(%

)

PLA

ST

ICIT

Y IN

DE

X

PILL

LIQ

UID

LIM

IT

SO

IL R

EC

OV

ER

Y (

%)

CO

RE

RE

CO

VE

RY

(%



DIP °

R O C K

SA

MP

LE

LE

GE

ND

S O I L

PROJECT #:

LOCATION:

STRUCTURE:

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft)

12

10

8

6

4

DE

PT

H (

ft)

SA

MP

LE

IN

TE

RV

AL

RO

CK

QU

ALIT

YD

ES

IGN

AT

ION

ST

AN

DA

RD

PE

NE

TR

AT

ION

TE

ST

HA

MM

ER

BLO

WS

FIELD DATA

ST

RA

TA

LE

GE

ND

JO

INT

S

ST

RA

TA

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

5.5

6.0

6.5

7.0

7.5

8.0

8.5

9.0

9.5

10.0


16C13001


ROADWAY

Date(s) Drilled: 01/21/2016 - 01/21/2016





Logger: R. Rountree

4

5

3

1

1

5

6

4

2

0

11

6

4

1

0

1.5

2

3.5

4

5.5

7

8.5

10

1.75

8.6

8.7

7.7



0.63 / 13.37Fill, dark gray, fine to coarse, CLAYEY SAND FILL, tracegravel, contains crushed aggregate, medium dense, moist(SM)

4.0 / 10.0Light brown, fine to coarse, POORLY GRADED SAND FILL,trace silt, medium dense, moist (SP)

6.0 / 8.0Tabb Formation, light brown, fine to medium, POORLYGRADED SAND, trace silt, medium dense, moist (SP)

SAME, light gray, wet below 8 ft

9.5 / 4.5Blue-gray, ELASTIC SILT WITH SAND, trace organic matter,firm, moist (MH)


87

80

80

87

100

PAGE 1 OF 1

16BH-006

16BH-006


GROUND WATER

PAGE 1 OF 1




SP

T_

LO

GA

:VD

OT

TE

MP

LA

TE

.GP

J:8

.30

.00

4:0

12

51

2:2

/22

/16

PK

T. P

EN

ET

RO

ME

TE

R (

tsf)

LAB DATA

MO

IST

UR

E C

ON

TE

NT

(%

)

PLA

ST

ICIT

Y IN

DE

X

PILL

LIQ

UID

LIM

IT

SO

IL R

EC

OV

ER

Y (

%)

CO

RE

RE

CO

VE

RY

(%

)

FIRST ENCOUNTERED AT 8.0 ft DEPTH


DIP °

R O C K

SA

MP

LE

LE

GE

ND

S O I L

PROJECT #:

LOCATION:

STRUCTURE:

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft)

12

10

8

6

4

DE

PT

H (

ft)

SA

MP

LE

IN

TE

RV

AL

RO

CK

QU

ALIT

YD

ES

IGN

AT

ION

ST

AN

DA

RD

PE

NE

TR

AT

ION

TE

ST

HA

MM

ER

BLO

WS

FIELD DATA

ST

RA

TA

LE

GE

ND

JO

INT

S

ST

RA

TA

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

5.5

6.0

6.5

7.0

7.5

8.0

8.5

9.0

9.5

10.0


16C13001


ROADWAY

Date(s) Drilled: 01/21/2016 - 01/21/2016





Logger: R. Rountree

31

7

6

3

3

12

6

6

6

2

13

9

7

5

3

0.5

2

3.5

4

5.5

7

8.5

9.5

10

2

1.5

8.6

9.1

10.2

26.0

NP NP 21.5

0.0 / 14.03-INCHES ASPHALT

0.25 / 13.752.5-INCHES DENSE GRADED AGGREGATE

0.42 / 13.58Fill, brown-gray, fine to coarse, SILTY SAND FILL,trace gravel, contains roots, medium dense, moist (SM)

4.0 / 10.0Tabb Formation, orange-brown, fine to coarse,POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT, contains roots,medium dense, moist (SP-SM)

6.0 / 8.0Light gray, ELASTIC SILT WITH SAND, trace organicmatter, stiff, moist (MH)

SAME, firm below 8.5 ft


80

87

87

100

100

PAGE 1 OF 1

16BH-007

16BH-007


GROUND WATER

PAGE 1 OF 1




SP

T_

LO

GA

B:V

DO

T T

EM

PL

AT

E.G

PJ:8

.30

.00

4:0

12

51

2:2

/22

/16

PK

T. P

EN

ET

RO

ME

TE

R (

tsf)

LAB DATA

MO

IST

UR

E C

ON

TE

NT

(%

)

PLA

ST

ICIT

Y IN

DE

X

PILL

LIQ

UID

LIM

IT

FIN

ES

CO

NT

EN

T -

#200 (

%)

SO

IL R

EC

OV

ER

Y (

%)

CO

RE

RE

CO

VE

RY

(%

)

NOT ENCOUNTERED DURING DRILLING


DIP °

R O C K

SA

MP

LE

LE

GE

ND

S O I L

PROJECT #:

LOCATION:

STRUCTURE:

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft)

12

10

8

6

4

DE

PT

H (

ft)

SA

MP

LE

IN

TE

RV

AL

RO

CK

QU

ALIT

YD

ES

IGN

AT

ION

ST

AN

DA

RD

PE

NE

TR

AT

ION

TE

ST

HA

MM

ER

BLO

WS

FIELD DATA

ST

RA

TA

LE

GE

ND

JO

INT

S

ST

RA

TA

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

5.5

6.0

6.5

7.0

7.5

8.0

8.5

9.0

9.5

10.0


16C13001


ROADWAY

Date(s) Drilled: 01/21/2016 - 01/21/2016





Logger: R. Rountree

10

5

7

3

3

5

7

5

5

4

6

8

5

6

4

0.5

2

3.5

4

5.5

7

8.5

10





APPENDIX B

SOIL LABORATORY TEST DATA

Summary of Laboratory Tests

Atterberg Limits

Gradation Curves

Proctor Laboratory Tests

California Bear Ratio (CBR) Tests

16BH-001

0.5 - 2.0

11.5 - 10.0

Jar

Gray and orange-brown, fine to coarse,CLAYEY SAND FILL, trace gravel (SC) 9.1 22 15 8 -- -- 58.9 22.8 -- -- -- --

16BH-003

0.5 - 5.0

12.5 - 8.0

Bulk

Brown, fine to coarse, CLAYEY SAND FILL,trace gravel, contains crushed stone (SC) [A-6] 12.0 27 15 12 3.3 92.0 77.6 39.3 119.3 10.0 8.6 0.3

16BH-003

2.0 - 3.5

11.0 - 9.5

Jar

Brown-gray, fine to coarse, CLAYEY SANDFILL, trace gravel (SC) 13.0 31 15 16 2.3 91.2 79.5 42.2 -- -- -- --

16BH-005

0.2 - 5.0

13.8 - 9.0

Bulk

Gray, fine to coarse, SILTY SAND FILL, fewgravel, contains crushed stone (SM) [A-2-4] 7.1 NP NP NP 5.9 87.1 65.5 21.3 127.0 9.5 20.1 0.0

16BH-007

0.5 - 2.0

13.5 - 12.0

Jar

Dark gray, fine to coarse, SILTY SAND FILL,trace gravel (SM) 8.6 NP NP NP -- -- 65.4 21.5 -- -- -- --

Sheet 1 of 1

BoringNo.

Summary Of Laboratory TestsAppendix B

Description of SoilSpecimen

Project Number: 16C13001

Notes: 1. Soil tests in general accordance with ASTM standards.2. Soil classifications are in general accordance with ASTM D2487(as applicable), based on testing indicated and visualclassification.3. Key to abbreviations: NP=Non-Plastic; -- indicates no test performed

Project:

Elevationft


Hampton, VA

SampleType

SampleDepth

ft

DY

NA

MIC

LA

B S

UM

MA

RY

1

6C

13

00

1 B

OR

ING

LO

GS

.GP

J

SC

HN

AB

EL

DA

TA

TE

MP

LA

TE

20

10

_0

2_

25

.GD

T

2/2

2/1

6

Maxim

um

Dry

Den

sit

y (

pcf)

Pla

sti

c L

imit

CB

R V

alu

e

% P

assin

gN

o. 40 S

ieve

Op

tim

um

Mo

istu

reC

on

ten

t (%

)

% P

assin

gN

o. 10 S

ieve

Liq

uid

Lim

it

% P

assin

gN

o. 200 S

ieve

Natu

ral

Mo

istu

re (

%)

Pla

sti

cit

y In

dex

% R

eta

ined

No

. 4 S

ieve

CB

R P

erc

en

t S

well

0

20

40

60

80

0 20 40 60 80 100

ML

CL

LIQUID LIMIT

16BH-001

16BH-003

16BH-003

FinesPIPL TestingLab

Gray and orange-brown, fine to coarse, CLAYEY SANDFILL, trace gravel (SC)

Brown, fine to coarse, CLAYEY SAND FILL, trace gravel,contains crushed stone (SC) [A-6]

Brown-gray, fine to coarse, CLAYEY SAND FILL, tracegravel (SC)

LLSpecimen

PLOTTED DATA REPRESENTS SOIL PASSING NO. 40 SIEVE

22

27

31

15

15

15

8

12

16

23

39

42

CL-ML MH

CH

Description

NN

NN

RICH

PLA

ST

ICIT

Y IN

DE

X

ATTERBERG LIMITS

0.5 ft

0.5 ft

2.0 ft

Project: Commerce Drive Extension

Hampton, VA

Contract: 16C13001

AT

TE

RB

ER

G_

LIM

ITS

1

6C

13

00

1 B

OR

ING

LO

GS

.GP

J

SC

HN

AB

EL

DA

TA

TE

MP

LA

TE

20

08

_0

4_

22

.GD

T

2/2

2/1

6

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

0.0010.010.1110100

4 3

GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS

PE

RC

EN

T F

INE

R B

Y W

EIG

HT

U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES

2001001406040

0.0

3.3

2.3

5.9

0.0

23 3/41.5

6

Gray and orange-brown, fine to coarse, CLAYEY SAND FILL,trace gravel (SC)

Brown, fine to coarse, CLAYEY SAND FILL, trace gravel,contains crushed stone (SC) [A-6]

Brown-gray, fine to coarse, CLAYEY SAND FILL, trace gravel(SC)

Gray, fine to coarse, SILTY SAND FILL, few gravel, containscrushed stone (SM) [A-2-4]

Dark gray, fine to coarse, SILTY SAND FILL, trace gravel (SM)

Specimen

--

--

--

--

--

LL

U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS

5030

GRADATION CURVES

1/23/8

PL PI Cc Cu

16BH-001

16BH-003

16BH-003

16BH-005

16BH-007

22

27

31

NP

NP

15

15

15

NP

NP

8

12

16

NP

NP

%Clay

16BH-001

16BH-003

16BH-003

16BH-005

16BH-007

%Silt%GravelSpecimen

Sample Description

D30

162014

%Sand

ASTM D422

ASTM D422

ASTM D1140

ASTM D422

ASTM D422

77.2

57.4

55.5

72.8

78.5

810

41

22.8

39.3

42.2

21.3

21.5

HYDROMETER

6

Test Method D10

--

--

--

--

--

0.11

--

--

0.17

0.1

D60

--

0.2

0.17

0.37

0.34

D100

0.425

25.4

4.75

19

0.425

NN

NN

RICH

NN

NN

Testing Lab

--

--

--

--

--

0.5 ft

0.5 ft

2.0 ft

0.2 ft

0.5 ft

0.5 ft

0.5 ft

2.0 ft

0.2 ft

0.5 ft


Hampton, VA

Contract: 16C13001

SIE

VE

5 S

HE

ET

1

6C

13

00

1 B

OR

ING

LO

GS

.GP

J

SC

HN

AB

EL

DA

TA

TE

MP

LA

TE

20

10

_0

2_

25

.GD

T

2/2

2/1

6 fine coarseCOBBLES SILT OR CLAY

medium fine

SANDGRAVEL

coarse

111.0

112.0

113.0

114.0

115.0

116.0

117.0

118.0

119.0

120.0

121.0

122.0

123.0

5 7 9 11 13 15 17

VTM1

Comments:Bulk sample obtained from auger cuttings over

the depth interval 0.5 to 5.0 feet

DR

Y D

EN

SIT

Y, pcf

MOISTURE DENSITY RELATIONSHIP

119.3

10.0

Test Methods:

Sample Description:

Opt. Moisture (%):

Max. Dry Density (pcf):

Assumed Specific Gravity:

Sample Source: 16BH-003, 0.5 ft

Brown, fine to coarse, CLAYEY SAND FILL,

trace gravel, contains crushed stone (SC)

[A-6]

2.65

2-5-16Date: DSReviewed By:

WATER CONTENT, %

Testing Lab: NN

Liquid Limit (LL): 27

Plasticity Index (PI): 12

% Passing # 200 Sieve: 39.3

% Retained #4 Sieve: 3.3


Hampton, VA

Contract: 16C13001

CO

MP

AC

TIO

N

16

C1

30

01

BO

RIN

G L

OG

S.G

PJ

SC

HN

AB

EL

DA

TA

TE

MP

LA

TE

20

08

_0

4_

22

.GD

T

2/2

2/1

6

118.0

119.0

120.0

121.0

122.0

123.0

124.0

125.0

126.0

127.0

128.0

129.0

130.0

4 6 8 10 12 14 16

VTM1

Comments:Bulk sample obtained from auger cuttings over

the depth interval 0.2 to 5.0 feet

DR

Y D

EN

SIT

Y, pcf

MOISTURE DENSITY RELATIONSHIP

127.0

9.5

Test Methods:

Sample Description:

Opt. Moisture (%):

Max. Dry Density (pcf):

Assumed Specific Gravity:

Sample Source: 16BH-005, 0.2 ft

Gray, fine to coarse, SILTY SAND FILL, few

gravel, contains crushed stone (SM) [A-2-4]

2.65

2/6/16Date:

WATER CONTENT, %

Testing Lab: NN

Liquid Limit (LL): NP

Plasticity Index (PI): NP




Hampton, VA

Contract: 16C13001

CO

MP

AC

TIO

N

16

C1

30

01

BO

RIN

G L

OG

S.G

PJ

SC

HN

AB

EL

DA

TA

TE

MP

LA

TE

20

08

_0

4_

22

.GD

T

2/2

2/1

6

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

550

600

650

700

750

800

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

8.6, Soaked

Dry Density Before Soaking (pcf):

Dry Density After Soaking (pcf):

Maximum Dry Density (pcf):

Moisture Content Before Soaking (%):

Moisture Content After Soaking (Avg) (%):

Sample Description:

PENETRATION (INCHES)

CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO TEST

Surcharge (psf):

CBR:

0.3

50

Optimum Moisture Content (%): 10

11.8

9.7

119.3

120.9

121.3

Swell (%):

ST

RE

SS

ON

PIS

TO

N (

psi)

Test Method:

Sample Depth:

16BH-003

VTM-8

Sample Source:

Brown, fine to coarse, CLAYEY SAND FILL,

trace gravel, contains crushed stone (SC)

[A-6]

0.5 ft Moisture Content Top Inch After Soak (%): 11.3

NNTesting Lab:


Hampton, VA

Contract: 16C13001

Liquid Limit (LL): 27

Plasticity Index (PI): 12



CB

R S

ING

LE

PO

INT

1

6C

13

00

1 B

OR

ING

LO

GS

.GP

J

SC

HN

AB

EL

DA

TA

TE

MP

LA

TE

20

08

_0

4_

22

.GD

T

2/2

2/1

6

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

550

600

650

700

750

800

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

20.1, Soaked

Dry Density Before Soaking (pcf):

Dry Density After Soaking (pcf):

Maximum Dry Density (pcf):

Moisture Content Before Soaking (%):

Moisture Content After Soaking (Avg) (%):

Sample Description:

PENETRATION (INCHES)

CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO TEST

Surcharge (psf):

CBR:

0.0

50

Optimum Moisture Content (%): 9.5

8.6

8.2

127

128.4

128.4

Swell (%):

ST

RE

SS

ON

PIS

TO

N (

psi)

Test Method:

Sample Depth:

16BH-005

VTM-8

Sample Source:

Gray, fine to coarse, SILTY SAND FILL, few

gravel, contains crushed stone (SM) [A-2-4]

0.2 ft Moisture Content Top Inch After Soak (%): 10.1

NNTesting Lab:


Hampton, VA

Contract: 16C13001

Liquid Limit (LL): NP

Plasticity Index (PI): NP



CB

R S

ING

LE

PO

INT

1

6C

13

00

1 B

OR

ING

LO

GS

.GP

J

SC

HN

AB

EL

DA

TA

TE

MP

LA

TE

20

08

_0

4_

22

.GD

T

2/2

2/1

6





APPENDIX C

CALCULATIONS

Pavement Design