Soils Report
~.,~
IJ AMERICAN
l ENGINEERING
TESTING, INC.
CONSULTANTS
. GEOTECHNICAL
. MATERIALS
. ENVIRONMENTAL.
REPORT OF ADDITIONAL SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
AND GEOTECHNICAL REVIEW
PROJECT:
REPORTED TO:
PHASE 2 PROGRAM - REDEVELOPMENT
LAKEVIEW HILL APARTMENT SITE
~SEN,NITNNESOTA
SIENNA CORPORATION
4940 VIKING DRNE, SUITE 608
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55435
ATTN: JOHN VOGELBACHER
DATE: JANUARY 20, 2006
AET JOB NO: 01-02624
INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of the additional subsurface exploration program and geotechnical
review we conducted for the referenced project. The scope of work is outlined in our December 7,
2006 proposal, which you accepted on that same day. The authorized scope includes the following:
· Five additional standard penetration test borings at the site to depths of21 I to 81 I.
· Basic soil laboratory testing (water content and Atterberg Limits).
· Review our previous geotechnical report #01-02624, dated November 11,2005.
· Geotechnical engineering analysis based on the above and preparation of this report.
The scope of work reported herein is intended for geotechnical purposes only. Our previous work
relating to 'environmental aspects was reported under separate cover.
PROJECT INFORMATION
Understood/assumed project information includes the following:
This document shall not be reproduced, except in full, without written approval of American Engineering Testing, Inc.
550 Cleveland Avenue North. St. Paul, MN 55114 . 651-659-9001 . Fax 651-659-1379
Duluth. Mankalo . Marshall. Rochester. Wausau . Rapid City . Pierre. Sioux Falls
AN AFFIRMATIVE ACTION AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
~
AET #01-02624 - Page 2 of 15
· The central portion ofthe site previously served as an apartment complex, with five separate
buildings. The locations of these existing buildings appear on attached Figure 1. These
buildings will be demolished to accommodate the new construction.
· The proposed building locations are provided on Figure 1. We understand the maximum
sized structure would likely be a three-story (above grade) wood-framed building, which may
include a below grade parking level.
· We understand you are planning a parking level floor at 891' and a main floor at 901' for the
building in the southwest corner of the site. Please contact us for further review if these
elevations are changed.
· For the purpose ofthis report, we assume column loads will not exceed 250 kips, and wall
loads will not exceed 8 kips per lineal foot.
· We assume a minimum factor of safety of 3 with respect to a shear failure of the spread
footing foundations and a factor of safety of about 2 with respect to pile failure.
· We assume total allowable foundation settlement may approach 1".
· We assume that differential foundation settlement of up to W' over a 30' length is tolerable.
The presented project information represents our understanding of the proposed construction. This
information is an integral part of our engineering review. It is important that you contact us ifthere are
changes from that described so that we can evaluate whether modifications to our recommendations are
appropriate.
SITE CONDITIONS
Soils
Logs of the test borings are attached. The logs contain information concerning soil layering, soil
classification, geologic description, and moisture. Relative density or consistency is also noted,
which is based on the standard penetration resistance (N-value).
The boring logs only indicate the subsurface conditions at the sampled locations and variations often occur
between and beyond borings.
· The site is underlain by glacially deposited till, mostly classified as sandy lean clay and
clayey sand, containing a little gravel. Coarse alluvial sand with silt and fine alluvial silt are
AET #01-02624 - Page 3 of 15
present below the till at Boring #8. The glacial till is often overlain by fill, which is a mixture
of sandy lean clays, clayey sand lean clays with sand and silty sands. Throughout much of the
site, the fill is no more than 2Yz' (and is usually less).
· The primary exception to the above is the low elevation area in the southwest portion of the
site. This area is represented by Borings #1,6, 7 and 8. At these test locations, the profile
consists of up to 12' offill overlying organic clay and boglimeto a depth ofI9'. Alluvial lean
clays and sands with silt then appear beneath this. Boring # 1 0 (located in a higher elevati~n
area) encountered 2' of fibric peat swamp deposit at the surface.
Water Level Measurements
The boreholes were probed for the presence of ground water, and water level measurements were
taken. The measurements are recorded on the boring logs. A discussion of the water level
measurement method is presented on the sheet entitled ''Exploration/Classification Methods."
· Water levels were measured at depths of about 4' to 14Yz' in three of the four borings located
in the low elevation southwest comer of the site. These borings did penetrate a sand layer,
allowing water to rise in the borehole. However, with the hollow stem auger in-place, it is
possible water had not yet fully stabilized. Therefore, it may be a little more shallow than that
shown.
· A water level was present at 4' below grade at Boring #10 where a shallow swamp layer has
developed at the ground surface. This level may represent perched water.
· At the remaining test locations, water did not enter the boreholes. The soils at these locations
are slow draining, and it would take extended water level monitoring to establish the true
water level condition at these locations.
Ground water levels usually fluctuate. Fluctuations occur due to varying seasonal and yearly rainfall and
snow melt, as well as other factors.
AET #01-02624 - Page 4 of 15
GEOTECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS
Review of Soil Properties
· The fill soils have variable N-values, and include some darker colored soils. These soils were
not placed with the intent of supporting structural load, and we consider them to be too weak
and compressible for structural support.
· The glacial till soils in the higher elevation portions of the site are mostly stiff to very s~ff.
These soils are considered suitable for footing and floor slab support. In a few cases, the
upper zone of the till has been weathered to a soft condition (N-values of 4 bpf). These
softened clays are weaker and more compressible, and should at least be removed from
beneath footings.
· The medium dense to very dense coarse alluvial and fine alluvial soils beneath the glacial till
should be suitable for footing and floor slab support.
· The organic clays and boglirne at Borings #1,6,7 and 10 are considered compressible under
increased load. Because they are organic, some secondary consolidation is likely occurring
due to the weight of the overlying fill and decomposition of the organics, even ifnew load is
not added. The upper portion of the inorganic clay beneath the organic deposit is soft. This
soil is also somewhat compressible.
· The layers of sand with silt and silty sand at Borings #1, 6, 7 and 8 are considered relatively
fast draining. Otherwise, the site soils are clays, which are slow draining. Therefore, water at
the site will tend to perch upon the clays rather than infiltrate.
· The clay soils at the site are considered moderately frost susceptible.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Site Gradine
· Excavation
- To prepare the building areas for structural support, we recommend the excavation of fill,
organic soils (organic clay, boglime or other organic soils) and soft alluvial clays (N-
AET #01-02624 - Page 5 of 15
values of 4 bpf or less). In addition, we recommend removal of glacial tills with an N-
value of 6 bpf or less and alluvial clays with N-values of 8 bpf or less from below the
local footing areas, if they are present within 3 vertical feet of final footing grade.
_ The above recommendations would then result in the following excavation depths!
elevations at the test boring locations:
UQrin~!'Jfumb~r;, \:b':~~~.c._.'~r~:~e~~~l.!.,.'!:o~
.. -... ..........
1 1~
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
,:Ai>proxima~~,,~l~vation of .. '.'
.. Exeavalwn'
857W
*2W-4' *904 - 902 W
I' 896'
*W-2' *908Vz' - 907'
W 905W
19' 862W
19' 859'
*6Yz' - 14' *870W - 863'
*1' - 4' *905W-902W
9' 894W
*Required excavation depth depends onfinalfooting grade. IfsoiIs within depth range shown
is within 3 vertical feet of a footing, then the soils should be excavated.
- Utilities and other below grade improvements likely exist at the site, associated with the
past apartment development. These elements and all associated backfill should also be
removed where present within a building footprint.
- The deep excavation in the area of Borings #1, 6 and 7 will extend lower than the
measured water level. We recommend the excavation be positively dewatered to allow
observation and evaluation of the soils in the excavation bottom, and to facilitate filling
operations. Excavating below water is associated with risk (see attached sheet
"ExcavationlRefilling Below Water"), and we recommend avoiding this approach.
- Excavation bottoms extending below foundation grades (where applicable) should be
oversized at a 1: 1 ratio from the outside edges of the foundations (i.e., 1: I oversize).
AET #01-02624 - Page 6 of 15
.
- Because variations can. occur between test locations, we recommend that the final
excavation bottom be observed and evaluated by an AET geotechnical engineer/technician
prior to filling.
· Acceptable Fill Types
- It is preferable that granular soils be used as engineered fill below the buildings, such as
sandy soils with less than 12% by weight passing the #200 sieve (sands or sands with silt).
However, if this proves to be too costly, it is possible to use on-site soils with caution if
properly prepared and compacted.
- If on-site soils are to be used for new engineered fill, it is very important that the new fill
placed meet the minimum specified compaction level throughout the entire thickness of
the fill profile. Since most of the soils are clayey in nature, it will be very important that
the soils be placed and compacted at a water content near the "optimum water content"
condition. For clayey fill placed below foundations, we recommend the fill have a water
content within 2% (either wet or dry) of the "optimum water content" condition defined
by the Standard Proctor. This would likely require moisture conditioning of at least a
portion of the on-site soils.
- To control settlement, the thickness of clay fill placed below footings should not exceed
10'. Where the fill thickness below footing grade will exceed 10', we recommend the
lower portion of the fill profile consist of sands (described above).
- If standing water/wet conditions are present in the excavation bottom, we recommend the
lower lift( s) of fill be sands with less than 5% by weight passing the #200 sieve and less
than 40% by weight passing the #40 sieve.
- Lift thicknesses should be thin enough such that the entire thickness of the lift attains the
minimum specified compaction level.
Minimum Fill Compaction Levels (per the Standard Proctor maximum dry density defined
in AS1M:D698).
- Below 3000 psfFootings - 98%
- Below Concrete Floor Slabs - 95%
- Below Bituminous Pavements - 100% in upper 3' zone, 95% below the upper 3' zone.
AET #01-02624 - Page 7 of 15
. Additional Grading Comments
- See the attached sheet entitled "Excavation and Refilling for Structural Support."
- Compaction and moisture control with clayey soils placed below foundations should be
performed under full-time observation and testing. As noted earlier, clayey fill placed
below foundation elements should maintain a water content within 2% of the "optimum.
water content" condition.
Buildin2: Foundations
· Type
- Conventional spread foundations.
· Depth
- 42" minimum. below grade for perimeter footings bordering heated building space.
- 60" minimum. below grade footings where the building is not heated.
- Convenient depth below the slab for interior footings placed within heated building
spaces.
. Allowable Bearing Capacity
- 3,000 psf
- The recommended allowable bearing capacity is generally based on the assumption that
clayey fill will be used beneath foundations. Higher bearing pressures should be possible
for foundation elements extending into the stiff till deposits, or if sand fill is used. Weare
available to review increased allowable bearing pressures with you, as the project plans
develop and foundation grades and loads are known.
Alternate for Ground Improvement With Geopiers
Due to the significant depth of correction needed in the southwest comer of the site (area of Boring
#1,6, 7 and 8), you may wish to consider an alternate means of ground improvement to support
spread foundations. The building in this area could be supported upon the existing soil which is
reinforced by rammed aggregate pier (Geopier) elements. The piers are constructed by augering 24"
to 36" diameter holes to specified depths and backfilling the holes with thin lifts of compacted
AET #01-02624 - Page 8 of 15
aggregate. Compaction densities the aggregate and increases lateral stress in the soil matrix. The
system serves to reduce settlement by replacing the poor quality soils with a stiffer composite soil
matrix.
Geopiers are a proprietary foundation installation. The actual design in this area would be performed
by Geopier Foundation Company, Midwest (GFCM), based on the data provided in this report. The
local contact for GFCM is Charles Allgood. Mr. Allgood may be contacted at (763) 416-2136.
GFCM can take the available soils data and the proposed foundation plan and design the
improvement system. The specific allowable bearing capacity for design would be determined by
GFCM.
If an aggregate pier-enhanced foundation system is selected, we recommend that the following issues
be considered prior to construction.
. Specifications for aggregate pier foundation systems should be prepared by GFCM.
. One demonstration pier should be installed with the Contractor's standard procedures and
then load-tested to determine the modulus. The load testing setup and procedures should be
selected by the Geopier Contractor and submitted for review to the project geotechnical
engineers. The demonstration pier should be installed at the foundation grade level.
. All the Geopier element installation operations should be conducted under the observation of
the geotechnical engineer's representative. This observation is conducted to reduce the
potential for short Geopier element installations and excessive aggregate lift thicknesses.
Alternate For a Pile-Supported Buildine
Due to the significant depth of correction needed in the southwest comer of the site (area of Borings
# I, 6, 7 and 8), you may wish to consider supporting the proposed building and lower floor slab on
piles. We recommend a 12" a.D. heavy wall pipe pile. The pipe pile should have a minimum wall
thickness of 0.250" and a minimum yield strength of 45 ksi. The piles should be equipped with a flat
AET #01-02624 - Page 9 of 15
plate welded to the pile tip. After driving the pile, we recommend the pipe pile be filled with
concrete having a minimum compressive strength of 3,000 psi at 28 days.
Due to the significant grade increase in at least the western portion of the southwest building, and
also the presence of compressible fill, swamp deposits, and softer alluvial/till soils, the piles will be
subjected to negative load (down drag). Based on the available soil boring information, we
recommend reserving 25 tons per pile for potential negative load.
To attain a 75-ton (50 ton building load plus 25-ton negative load) working load capacity, the piles
should be driven to the dense coarse alluvial soils. Based on the soils encountered at the only deep
boring (Boring #8), we estimate pile tip elevations of about 820' to 825'. The piles will attain their
capacity in a combination of skin friction and end bearing.
To attain a 75-ton per pile working load capacity, we recommend the piles be driven with a hammer
having a manufacturer's rated energy in the range of 25,000 to 40,000 ft-Ibs.
The above pile recommendations are based on attaining a factor of safety of about 2 against pile
failure. We judge that total and differential foundation settlement should not exceed Y2".
Floor Slabs
See the attached sheet entitled "Floor Slab MoistureNapor Protection."
If the proposed building is supported on a pile foundation, the floor slabs (including garage) should
also be supported structurally on pile.
Buildin2 Backfillin2
. For basement areas, see the attached sheet entitled "Basement/Retaining Wall Backfill and
Water Control" and "Basement Wall Backfill Detai1." Since most of the site soils are
relatively slow draining material, the water control issues on this sheet are very important.
AET #01-02624 - Page 10 of 15
. For non-basement areas, see the attached sheet entitled ''Freezing Weather Effects on
Building Construction."
Exterior Parkin!! LotlDrivewavs
. We refer you to the attached standard sheets entitled "DefInitions Relating to Pavement
Construction" and "Bituminous Pavement Sub grade Preparation and Design" for defInitions
and general details.
. Prior to subgra.de preparation, we recommend stripping surficial organics and topsoil layers.
We then recommend the excavation of unstable clayey soils or poorly compacted fill, as
judged by test rolling. It should be possible to limit the subcut to no more than 3' below top
of sub grade.
. If the subgrade exposes the stiffer, competent tills, it is less likely that subcutting will be
needed for stability purposes. If instability is present within the till, it would likely be
associated with spotty zones due to trapped water. Unstable zones should be subcut and
replaced, or scarifIed, dried and recompacted until stability is gained.
. New fIll placed in paved areas should be compacted according to the SpecifIed Density
Method outlined in Mn/DOT Specification 21 05 .3F 1. This requires a minimum compaction
level of 100% of the Standard Proctor density (AS1M:D698). Water content range
requirements are also specified, which generally maintains the water content at or below the
"optimum water content" condition.
. In slow draining and frost susceptible soils, it is typically preferred to use a sand subbase as
the upper zone of subgrade. This can improve pavement performance by providing increased
~rainage for the aggregate base layer and moderating frost heaves and spring thaw
weakening. If you elect to place a sand subbase, thickness transitions should preferably be
maintained at 10:1 (H:V).
. The sand subbase material should at least meet the requirements of Select Granular Borrow
(per MnlDOT Specification 3149.2B2).
. The final sub grade prior to aggregate base placement (or prior to subbase placement if
placed) should be test rolled to explore for potential unstable areas. Soils which excessively
AET #01-02624 - Page 11 of 15
deflect under the test roll process should be scarified, dried, and recompacted, or subcut and
replaced.
. We estimate an R-value of 20 for the predominant sandy lean clays at this site. If a I' thick
sand subbase is included in the design, the composite sub grade (subbase over sandy lean
clays) are judged to have an equivalent R-value of35.
. Note that fill placed for pavements over the organic soils will cause consolidation of the
organic layer, and surface subsidence will result. This surface settlement will be differential
in comparison to the building. We anticipate this differential movement may potentially
approach I' with time. A portion of the settlement will occur during construction, although
noticeable post-construction settlement may still occur. If you are unwilling to accept this,
please contact us for additional review. Note that correction of this issue would be costly or
time consuming (surcharging and/or lightweight fill placement needed).
Pavement Thickness Desil!n
. The pavement design depends on both the sub grade approach used and the type of traffic
expected. Below, we are providing designs for the sub grade approach using no subbase, and
the use of a I' thick subbase over the native site soils. From a traffic standpoint, we are
providing both light duty and heavy duty designs. The light duty design is intended for
automobile/passenger truck/van usage only, and not heavier truck traffic. The heavy duty
design would be used for pavements which will experience truck traffic such as garbage
trucks, moving vans, etc.
Material.
'NaJhi;~'Son$iil1~~de, :..:
:d20" .
Heavy
Du
1)-'2" 2"
. Ligbt Duty
Bituminous Wear
Bituminous Non-Wear
112"
2"
1 )-'2"
2"
112"
2"
Class 5 Aggregate Base
Select Granular Borrow
7"
7"
5"
5"
12"
12"
AET #01-02624 - Page 12 of 15
Utilities in Compressible Soil Areas
. As noted before, where fill is placed over organic/compressible soils, the ground is expected
to settle. Utilities placed over consolidating soils would then also settle. The utility design
should take this into account.
. If the utilities can not be designed to accommodate potential settlements, ground
improvement or other alternate means of support would then be needed. We are available for
additional review on this issue if needed.
. If possible, utilities should be located away from the organic soil areas.
CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS
Excavation Oversizine and Sideslopine
.
Excavations should maintain minimum sidesloping unless they are retained or grouted.
Sideslopes should be maintained in accordance with OSHA Regulations (Standards - 29
CPR), Part 1926, Subpart P, "Excavations" (found on www.osha.gov).
.
Observation and Testine
. On-site observation by a Geotechnical EngineerrrecbIDcian is highly recommended during
grading and construction to evaluate potential changes in soil conditions.
. Soil density testing should be performed on fill placed in order to document recommended
compaction levels have been satisfied.
. For fill placed below foundation areas, we recommend the compaction monitoring be
performed on a full-time basis. Moisture control will be very important if on-site clayey soils
are used.
. If the proposed building is supported on pile, we recommend the Pile Driving Analyzer™ be
utilized to establish the driving criteria for the piles. ill addition, we recommend the
installation of the piles be observed on a full-time basis by a representative of an independent
testing laboratory.
AET #01-02624 - Page 14 of 15
STANDARD OF CARE
Our services for your project have been conducted to those standards considered normal for services
of this type at this time and location. Other than this, no warranty, either express or implied, is
intended.
CLOSURE
To protect you, AET, and the public, we authorize use of opinions and recommendatiollli in this report
only by you and your project team for this specific project. Contact us if other uses are intended. Even
though this report is not intended to provide sufficient infonnation to accurately determine quantities and
locations of particular materials, we recommend that your potential contractors be advised of the report
availability.
If you have any questions regarding the work reported herein, or if we can be of further service to
you, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Report Prepared by:
Report Reviewed by:
American Engineering Testing, Ine.
American Engineering Testing, Ine.
~f)~
teven D. Koenes, PE
Principal Engineer
MNReg. #13180
(651) 659-1304
~o~}:~-
Vice President, Geotechnical Division
MN Reg. #15928
(651) 659-1305
Attachments:
Excavation and Refilling for Structural Support
Excavation/Refilling Below Water
Floor Slab MoistureN apor Protection
Basement/Retaining Wall Backfill and Water Control
Basement Wall Backfill Detail
Freezing Weather Effects on Building Construction
Definitions Relating to Pavement Construction
Bituminous Pavement Sub grade Preparation and Design
Figure 1 - Boring Locations
Logs of Previous Test Borings (#1-5)
AET #01-02624 - Page 15 of 15
Logs of Additional Test Borings (#6-10)
Exploration/Classification Methods
Boring Log Notes
Unified Soil Classification System
EXCAVATION AND REFILLING FOR STRUCTURAL'SUPPORT
EXCAVATION
Excavations for strucroral snpport at soil boring locations should be taken to depths recommended in the geotechnical
report. Since conditions can vary. recommended excavation depths between and beyond the boring locations should
be evaluated by geotechnical field personneL If ground water is present. the excavation should be dewatered to avoid
the risk of unobservable poor soils being left in-place. Excavation base soils may become disturbed due to construction
traffic. ground water or other reasons. Such. soils should be subcut to underlying undisturbed soils. Where the
excavation base slopes steeper than 4:1. the excavation bottom should be benched across the slope parallel to the
excavation contour.
Soil stresses under footings spread out with depth. Therefore. the excavation bottom and subsequent fill system should
be laterally oversized beyond footing edges to support the footing stresses. A lateral oversize equal to the depth of fill
below the footing (i.e.. 1: 1 oversize) is usually recommended. The lateral oversize is usually increased to 1.5: 1 where
compressible organic soils .are expoSed on the excavation sides. Variations in oversize requirements may be
recommended in the geotechnical report or can be evaluated by the geotechnical field personnel.
Unless the excavation is retained. the backslopes should be maintained in accordance with OSHA Regulations
(Standards - 29 CPR). Part 1926. SubpartP. "Excavations" (found on www.osha.e:ov). Even with the required OSHA
sloping, ground water can induce sideslope raveling or running which could require that flatter slopes or other
approaches be used.
FILLING
Filling should proceed only after the excavation bottom has been approved by the geotechnical engineer/technician.
Approved fill material should be unifonnly compacted in thin lifts to the compaCtion levels specified in the U
geotechnical report. The lift thickness should be thin enough to achieve specified compaction through the full lift
thickness with the compaction equipment utilized. Typical thicknesses are 6" to 9" for clays and 12" to 1S8 for sands.
Fme grained soils are moisture sensitive and are often wet (water content exceeds the "optimum moisture content"
defined by a Proctor test). In this case. the soils should be scarified and dried to achieve a water content suitable for
compaction. This drying process can be time consuming, labor intensive, and requires favorable weather.
Select fill material may be needed where the excavation bottom is sensitive to disturbance or where standing water
is present. Sands (SP) which are medium to coarse grained are preferred. and can be compacted in thicker lift
thicknesses than finer grained soils.
Filling operations for sttuctural support should be closely monitored for fill type and compaction by a geotechnical
technician. Monitoring should be on a full-time basis in cases where vertical fill placement is rapid: during freezing
weather conditions; where ground water is present; or where sensitive bottom conditions are presenL
EXCA V ATIONIREFILLING DURING FREEZING TEMPERATURES
Soils that freeze will heave and lose density. Upon thawing. these soils will not regain their original strength and
density. The extent of heave and density loss depends on the soil type and moisture condition; and is most pronounced
in clays and silts. Foundations, slabs. and other improvements should be protected from frost intrusion during freezing
weather. For earthwork during freezing weather. the areas to be filled should be stripped of frozen soil, snow and
ice prior to new fill p1acemenL In addition, new fill should not be allowed to freeze during or after placemenL For
this reason, it may be preferable to do earthwork operations in small plan areas so grade can be quickly attained
instead of large areas where much frost stripping may be needed.
AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC.
OlREPOll(210l}
EXCA V ATIONIREFlLLING BELOW WATER
GENERAL
When excavation of poor soils below water is needed to allow plll('~P.1It of engineered fill for structural support,
special considerations are needed. Excavation and refilling below water involves the risk of trapping compressible or
otherwise unsuitable materials within or below the new fill system. Because the ma.tcrials covered by the advancing
fill soils cannot be seen, any dislodged materials or deeper localized pockets of compresSIble soils can be missed by
the excavating equipment.
To reduce the risk of trapping compresSIble soils within or below the fill, our primary recomml'!l1d~tion is to dewater
below the excavation bottom to allow excavation and refilling in a non-standing water condition. A drawdown of the
water table results in increased loadings on underlying soils. This may cause settlemems of surrounding property
located within the area of the drawdown.
Excavation and refilling below water without dewatering can be done although is not preferred. If you elect to use
this approach (likely for economic reasons), the owner should be made aware of the risks, and be willing to accept
these risks.
RISK REDUCTION PROCEDURES
While the risks associated with excavation and refilling below water cannot be elim;nm-n, there are a number of
procedures which can be used to reduce the risk of settlement. These include the following:
. A subsurface exploration program should be performed prior to any excavation. The program will provide
information on required bottom of excavation depths, and provide information regarding the classification
of acceptable soils anticipated in the excavation bottoms.
. The excavation work shouid be performed with a backhoe or drag line, and the operator should be
experienced with this type of excavation operation. "Over.excavation" into the competent natural soils and
additional lateral oversizing can aid in reducing the risks.
. An experienced geotpt-hnu.-S! engineer/technician should be retained to provide full-time observations during
the excavate/refill operations. Although the engineer/teclmician may not be able to fally verify that all
materials were removed (because the standing water precludes full observation), the engineer/teclmician can
aid in judging when competent soils are being reached and penetrated.
. F..nginP.f'!l"ed fill placed below water, and to an elevation of at least2' above the water level, should consist
of a clean, mostly medium grained sand (less than 5 % by weight passing the #11YJ sieve .and less than 40%
by weight passing the #40 sieve).
. The fill should be pushed into the excavation such that the fill mass impartll a sideways and downward
.scouring" action to advance the fill along the excavation bottom. The scouring action would tend to push
remnant pieces of unsuitable material ahead of the filling process where a backhoe can periodically remove
the unsuitable materials.
. Once the fill has been placed, the resultant fillInatural soil profile can be explored by either test holes or
borings (depending on the conditions). Increasing thenumber of test holes and/or borings can increase the
confidence level that the procedure has been successful.
OlREP012(2l01)
AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESI'ING, INC.
FLOOR SLAB MOISTUREIV APOR PROTECTION
Floor slab design relative to moisture/vapor protection should consider the type and location of two elements, a granular
layer and a vapor membrane (vapor retarder, water resistant barrier or vapor barrier). In the following sections, the pros
and cons of the possible options regarding these f'lf'm~l: will be presented, such that you and your specifier can make
an engineering decision based on 1he benefits and costs of the choices.
GRANULAR LAYER
In American Concrete Institute (ACI) 302.1-96, a Wbase materialw is recommended, rather than the conventional cleaner
Wsand cushionW material. The manual m::lml'llinl: that clean sand (common wcushionw sand) is difficult to compact and
mllintllm until concrete placement is complete. ACI recommends a clean, fiDe graded material (with at least 10% to 30 %
of particles passing a # 100 sieve) which is not conl'llminatP-d with clay, silt or organic material. We refer you to ACl302.1-
96 for additional ~ regarding the requirements for the base material.
In cases where potential static water levels or significant perched water sources appear near or above the floor slab, an
underfloor drainage system may be needed wherein a draintile system is placed within a thicker clean sand or gravel layer .
Such a syStem should be properly engineered depending on subgrade soil types- and ratelhead of water inflow.
VAPOR MEMBRANE
The need for a vapor ~ depends on whether the floor slab will have a vapor sensitive covering, will have vapor
sensitive items stored on the slab, or if the space above the slab will be a humidity controlled area. If the project does not
have this vapor sensitivity or moisture conttol need. placement of a vapor membrane may not be necessary . Your decision
will then relate to whether to use the ACI base materlalor a COIIVeDtionaI sand cushion laYer. However. if any of the above
sensitivity issues apply, placement of a vapor membrane is recommended.. Some floor covering systems (adhesives and
flooring materials) require a vapor membrane to mllinl'llm a specified riJax1mnm slab moisturCcoittcnt as a condition of their
warranty.
VAPOR MEMBRANEtGRANULAR LAYER PLACEMENT
A number ofisSues should be considered. wheJi deciding whether to place the vapor membrane above or below the grauu1ar
layer. The benefits ofp1acing the slab on a granular layer, with the vapor membrane placed below the gnmn1ai'layer, iDclude
reduction of the following:
. ShbcurJing during the curing and dIyiilg process.
. l11De of bleeding, which allows for quicker fiml:hing.
. Vapor membrane puDCtDring.
. Surface blistering or ~lmn1nllrion caused by an extended bleeding period.
. Cracking caused by plastic or dIying shrinkage.
The benefits of placing the vapor membrane over the granular layer include the following:
. The moisture emission rate is achieved faster.
. Eliminlltes a potential water reservoir within the granular layer above the membrane.
. Provides a wslip SUIfacew, 1hereby reducing slab resttaiDt and the associated random cracking.
If a membrane is to be used in conjunction with a granular layer, the approach recommended depends on slab usage and the
constroction schedule. The vapor membrane should be placed above the grmm1ar layer when:
. Vapor sensitive floor covering systems are used or vapor sensitive items will be directly placed on the slab.
. The area will be humidity controlled, but the slab will be placed before the building is enclosed and sealed from
rain.
. Required by a floor eovering manufacturer's system warranty.
The vapor membrane should be placed below the gmmlar layer when:
. Used in humidity controlled areas (without vapor sensitive coverings/stored items), with the roof membrane in place,
and the building enclosed to the point where plcC;ipitation will not imrude into the slab area. Consideration should
be given to slight sloping of the membrane to edges where draintile or other disposal methods can alleviate potential
water sources, such as pipe or roof leaks, foondation wall damp proofing failure, fire sprinkler system activation,
etc.
There may be cases where membrane placement may have a detrimental effect on the subgrade support system (e.g.,
expansive soils). In these cases, your decision will need to weigh the cost of subgrade options and the performance risks.
OlREP013(21Ol)
AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC.
BASEMENTIRETAlNING WALL BACKFILL AND WATER CONTROL
DRAINAGE
Below grade basements should include a perimeter backfill drainage system on the exterior side of the wall. The
exception may be where basements lie within free draining sands where water will not perch in the backfill. Drainage
systems should consist of perforated or slotted PVC drainage pipes located at the bottom of the backfill trench, lower
than the interior floor grade. The drain pipe should be surrounded by properly graded filter rock. A filter fabric should
then envelope the filter rock. The drain pipe should be connected to a suitable means of disposal, such as a sump basket
or a gravity outfall. A storm sewer gravity outfall would be preferred over exterior daylighting, as the latter may freeze
during winter. For non-building, exterior retaining walls, weep holes at the base of the wall can be substituted for a
drain pipe.
BACKFILLING
Prior to backfilling, damp/water proofing should be applied on perimeter basement walls. The backfill materials placed
against basement walls will exert lateral loadings. To reduce this loading by allowing for drainage, we recommend using
free draining sands for baclcfill. The zone of sand backfill should extend outward from the wall at least 2', and then
upward and outward from the wall at a 300 or greater angle from vertical. As a minimum, the sands should contain no
greater than 12% by weight passing the 11200 sieve, which would include (SP) and (SP-SM) soils. The sand backfill
should be placed in lifts and compacted with portable compaction equipment. This compaction should be to the specified
levels if slabs or pavements are placed above. Where slab/pavements are not above, we recommend capping the sand
backfill with a layer of clayey soil to minimi7.e surface water infiltration. Positive surface drainage away from the
building should also be maintained. If surface capping or positive surface drainage cannot be maintained, then the trench
should be filled with more permeable soils, such as the Fme Filter or Coarse Filter Aggregates defined in MnDOT
Specification 3149. You should recognize that if the backfill soils are not properly compacted, settlements may occur
which may affect surface drainage away from the building.
Backfilling with silty or clayey soil is possible but not preferred. These soils can build-up water which increases lateral
pressures and results in wet wall conditions and possible water infiltration into the basement. If you elect to place silty
or clayey soils as backfill, we recommend you place a prefabricated drainage composite against the wall which is
hydraulically connected to a drainage pipe at the base of the backfill trench. High plasticity clays should be avoided as
backfill due to their swelling potential.
LATERAL PRESSURES
Lateral earth pressures on below grade walls vary, depending on backfill soil classification, backfill compaction and
slope of the backfill surface. Static or dynamic surcharge loads near the wall will also increase lateral wall pressure.
For design, we recommend the following ultimate lateral earth pressure values (given in equivalent fluid pressure values)
for a drained soil compacted to 95 % of the Standard Proctor density and a level ground surface.
Soil Type
Sands (SP or SP-SM)
Silty Sands (SM)
Fine Grained Soils (SC, CL or ML)
Equivalent F1uid Density
Active (pet) At-Rest (pet)
35
45
70
50
65
90
Basement walls are normally restrained at the top which restricts movement. In this case, the design lateral pressures
should be the "at-rest" pressure situation. Retaining walls which are free to rotate or deflect should be designed using
the active case. Lateral earth pressures will be significantly higher than that shown if the backfill soils are not drained
and become saturated.
AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC.
o lREPO 14(710 I)
Basement Wall BackfIll Detail
...... ..... ............... ................... ..............
.0. ................................... ....................
.. .... ..... ............................ ............... ....
.. .... ........................................ .................
.. ........................... ............................
....................... ......................................
................... .................... ...................
.. .... ................, ................................ ....
...... .................... ............ ...................
... ....................... ............. ..................
...... .................... ...........................
Native Soils
........... .............................................
:.:.:.: .:. :.: .:.:.:.:. :.:.:.f.r:~~.~~~*g:~~~~ 11): .:.: .:.: .:.:.:.:- :.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.'
............................ ...........................
. .... ...... ..........................................
. ..................... .... ..................... .......
...... ..............................................
. .....................................................
............................. .......................
. .................. ..................................
...... ...............................................
............................................. ... ...
.:.:-:.:.:~~J,1:~~~~.:-:-:-:.:.:-:.:.:.:.:.:.:-:.:.:-:.:.:.:.:-:.:-:-:-:.:.:.:.:.
. ......................................... .....
....... ........................ ................
300 or Greater
.................................................
...................................~........
. .......................... ...................
. .... .... ................. ..................
................ ....................... .....
..... .................................. ....
...........................................
I~
~I
2' Minimum
Notes: (1) With clay cap or other equivalent water penetration barrier and with positive drainage,
the sand should contain no greater than 12% by weight passing the #200 sieve. Without
the surface barrier or positive drainage, more permeable soils should be used, such as
the Fine Filter Aggregate deimed in MnlDOT Specification 3149.
(2) Coarse Filter Aggregate (MnlDOT Specification 3149) wrapped with Type I Nonwoven
geotextile (MnlDOT Specification 3733)
OtREPOt4A (10/05)
AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESIlNG, INC.
FREEZING WEATHER EFFECTS ON BUILDING CONSTRUCTION
GENERAL
Because water expands upon freezing and soils contain water, soils which are allowed to freeze will heave and
lose density. Upon thawing, these soils will not regain their original strength and density. The extent of heave
and density/ strength loss depends on the soil type and moisture condition. Heave is greater in soils with higher
percentages of fines (silts/clays). High silt content soils are most Susceptible. due to their high capillary rise
potential which can create ice lenses. Fine grained soils generally heave about 1/4" to 3/8" for each foot of
frost penetration. This can translate to 1" to 2" of total frost heave. This total amount can be significantly
greater if ice lensing occurs.
DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
Oayey and silty soils can be used as perimeter backfill, although the effect of their poor drainage and frost
properties should be considered. Basement areas will have special drainage and lateral load requirements which
are not discussed here. Frost heave may be critical in doorway areas. Stoops or sidewalks adjacent to doorways
could be designed as structural slabs supported on frost footings with void spaces below. With this design,
movements may then occur between the structnral slab and the adjacent on-grade slabs. Non-frost suscepn'ble
sands (with less than 12% passing a #200 sieve) can be used below such areas. Depending on the function of
surrounding areas, the sand layer may need a thickneSs transition away from the area where movement is
critical. WIth sand placement over slower draining soils, subsurface drainage would be needed for the sand
layer. . High density extruded insulation could be used within the sand to reduce frost penetration, thereby
reducing the sand thickness needed. We caution that insulation placed near the surface can increase the potential
for ice glazing of the surface.
The possible effects of adfreezing should be considered if clayey or silty soils are used as backfill. Adfreezing
occurs when backfill adheres to tough surfaced foundation walls and lifts the wall as it freezes and heaves. This
occurrence is most common with masonry block walls, unheated or poorly heated building situations and clay
backfill. The potential is also increased where backfill soils are poorly compacted and become saturated. The
risk of adfreezing can be decreased by placing a low friction separating layer between the wall and backfill.
Adfreezing can occur on exterior piers (such as deck, fence or other similar pier footings), even if a smooth
surface is provided. This is more likely in poor drainage situations where soils become saturated. Additional
footing embedment and/or widened footings below the frost zones (which includes tensile reinforcement) can
be used to resist uplift forces. Specific designs would require individual analysis.
CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS
Foundations. slabs and other improvements which may be affected by frost movements should be insulated from
frost penetration during freezing weather. Iffilling takes place during freezing weather, all frozen soils, snow
and ice should be stripped from areas to be filled prior to new fill placement. The new fill should not be allowed
to freeze during transit. placement or compaction. This should be considered in the project schedUling,
budgeting and quantity estimatiJtg. It is usually beneficial to perform cold weather earthwork operations in small
areas where grade can be attained quickly rather than working larger areas where a greater amount of frost
stripping may be needed. If slab subgrade areas freeze, we recommend the subgrade be thawed prior to floor
slab placement. The frost action may also require reworking and recompaction of the thawed subgrade.
OlREPOlS(2/01)
AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC.
DEFINITIONS RELATING TO PA VEM&~ CONSTRUCTION
TOP OF SUBGRADE
Grade which contacts the botIDm of the aggregate base layer.
SAND SUBBASE
Uniform thickness sand layer placed as the top of subgrade which is intended to improve the frost and drainage
characteristics of the pavement system by better draining excess water in the base/subbase, by reducing and
"bridging" frost heaving and by reducing spring thaw weakening effects.
CRITICAL SUBGRADE ZONE
The subgrade portion beneath and within three vertical feet of the top of subgrade. A sand subbase, if placed,
would be considered the upper portion of the critical subgmde zone.
SELECT GRANULAR BORROW
Soils meeting MnlDOT Specification 3149.2B2, which refers to granuiar sOils containing less than 12% by weight
passing the If100 sieve.
MODIFIED SELECT GRANULAR BORROW
Clean, medium grained sands which contain less than 5 % by weight passing the #200 sieve and less than 40% by
weight passing the #40 sieve.
GEOl'&TlLE STABn.IZATION FABRIC
Geotextile meeting Type V requirements defined in MnIDOT Specification 3733. When using fabric, installation
should also meet the requirements outlined in MnIDOT Specification 3733. .
COMPAcnON SUBCUT
Constmction of a uniform thickness subcut below a dCsigaated grade to provide uniformity and compaction within
the subcut zone. Replacement fill can be the materials subcut. although the reused soils should be blended to a
uniform soil coMition and recompacted per the SpecifiedDensity Method (MnIDOT Specification 2105.3FI).
TFSf ROLL
A means of evaluating the near-surface stability of subgrade soils (usually non-gramI1ar). Suitability is determined
by the depth of rutting or deflection caused by passage of heavy rubber-tired construction equipment, such as a
loaded dump truck. over the test area. Yielding of less than I n is considered acceptable, although. engineering
judgment may be applied depending on equipment used, soil conditions present and/or pavement performance
expectations.
UNSl'ABLE son.s
Those soils which excessively rut or deflect under a test roll. Unstable soils typically have a water content
e~ittg the .optimum water mntent" defined ~ the Standard Proctor (ASTM:D698).
ORGANIC SOn.s
Soils which have sufficient organic content such that engineering properties/stability are affected. These soils are
usually black to dark brown in color.
01REP019 (01105)
AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC.
.
BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SUBGRADE PREPARATION AND DESIGN
GENERAL
Bituminous pavcmcnlS are considered layered "flexible" systems. Dynamic wheel loads transmit high local stresses
through the bituminouslbase onto the subgrade. Because of this, the upper portion of the subgrade requires high
strength/stability to reduce deflection and fatigue of the bituminouslbase system. The wheel load intensity dissipates
through the sobgrade such that the high level of soil stability is usually DOt needed below about 2' to 4' (dcpc:nding
on the anticipated traffic and underlying soil conditions). This is the primary reason for specifying a highei- level of
compaction within the upper subgrade mne versus the lower portion. Mod.erat.c compaction is usually desired below
the upper critical mae, primarily to avoid settlememslsags of the roadway. However, if the soils preseut below the
upper 3' subgrade mne are unstable, attempts to properly compact the upper 3' mne to the 100$ level may be
difficult or not possible. Therefore, control of moisture just below the 3' level may be needed to provide a non-
yielding base upon which to compact the upper subgrade soils.
Long-term. pavcmcut pcrfomumcc is dependent on the soil subgrnde drainage and frost characteristics. Poor to
moderate draining soils tend to be susceptible to frost heave and subsequcm weak'P.fting upon thaw. 'Ibis condition can
result in irregular frost movements and "popouts, " as wen as an accelerated softening of the subgrade. Frost problems
become more pronounced when the subgrade is layered with soils of varying permeability. In this situation, the free.
draining soils provide a pathway and reservoir for water infiltration which exaggerates the movements. The placement
of a well draiDcd sand subbase layer as the top of sabgrade can minimi7P- trapped water, smooth frost movemcuts and
sigJ'Hicant1y rednce subgradc softening. In wet, layered and/or poor drainage situations, the long-term perfonn.ance
gain should be sigriificant. H a sand subbase is placed, we recommemi it be a "Select Granular Borrow" which meets
MnlDOT Speciiication 3149.2B2.
PREPARATION
Subgrade preparation should include st:rippin.g surficial vegetation and organic soils. Where the exposed soils are
within the upper "critical" sabgrade mne (generally 2~' deep for "auto only" areas and 3' deep for -m:avy duty"
areas), they should be evaluated for stability. Excavation equipment may make such areas obvious due to deflection
and ruttiDg pattcrDS. Fmal evaluation of soils within the critical sabgrade mne should be done by test rolling with
heavy rnbber-tired construction eqoipmcnt. such as a loaded dump truck. Soils which rut or deflect 1 " or more under
the test roU should be corrected by either snbcntting and rep~t; or by scarificati.on, drying, and recompaction.
Reworked soils and new fill should. be compacted per the "Specified Density Method" outlined in MnIDOT
Specification 21OS.3Fl (a minimnTl1 of 100% of Standard Proctor density in the upper 3' sabgrade zone, and a
mnnmnm of9S% below this).
Subgrade preparation schednIing can be an important consideration. Fall and Spring seasons usually have unfavorable
weather for soil drying. Stabilizing non-sand subgrades during these seasons may be difficult. and attempts often result
in C01DfbumisiDg the pavement quality. Where construction scheduling requires sabgrade preparation during these
times, the use of a sand subbase becomes even more beneficial for constmctability reasons.
SUBGRADE DRAINAGE
If a sand subbase layer is used, it should be provided with a means of subsurface drainage to prevent water build-up.
This can be in the form of draintile lines which dispose into storm sewer systemS, or outlets into ditches. Where sand
subbase layers include sufficient sloping, and water can migrate to lower areas, draintile lines can be limited to finger
drains at the catch basins. Even if a sand layer is not placed, strategically placed draintile lines can aid in improving
pavement performance. This would be most important in areas where adjacent non-paVed areas slope towards the
P,~ement. Perimeter edge drains can aid in intercepting water which may infiltrate below the pavement.
OLREPOI6(02/01)
AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC.
1]' AMERICAN
1 ENGINEERING SUBSURFACE BORING LOG
TESTING, INC.
AET JOB NO: 01-02624 LOG OF BORING NO. 1 (P. 1 of 1)
PROJECT: Lakeview Hill Redevelopment; Chanhassen, MN
DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: 876.7 GEOLOG Y SAMPLE REC FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS
IN N MC
FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION TYPE IN. WC DEN LL PL 0-#20
2 SS 22
2
3 FILL, mostly sandy lean clay, a little gravel, FILL 8 SS 22
4 trace roots, light brown and gray
5 21 SS 18
6
7
8 18 SS 18
9
10 9 SS 18 38
11 ORGANIC CLAY, black, fJl1l1, laminations of SLOPEW ASH
OR FINE
12 sand (OUOH) ALLUVIUM
\3 8 SS 22 37
14
15
7 SS 22 49
16
17 62
18 2 SS 22 40
19 25
20
SAND WITH SILT, a little gravel, medium to 12 SS 18
21
22 fme grained, brownish gray, waterbearing,
medium dense, lenses and laminations of silty
23 sand SP-S .
24 LEAN CLAY, gray, stiff, laminations of
25 waterbearing sand (CL)
26 Il SS 22
27 END OF BORING
0-25' 3.25" HSA
DATE
10/24/05
TIME
3:20
WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS
SAMPLED CASING CA VE.IN DRILLING
DEPTII DEPTII DEPTII FLUID LEVEL
27.0 24.5 24.0
DEPTH: DRILLING MErnOD
COMPLETED: 10/24/05
DR: GL LG: GD Rig: 3C
06/04
NOTE: REFER TO
rt~ THE ATIACHED
12.5 SHEETS FOR AN
EXPLANATION OF
TERMINOLOGY ON
nus LOG
n.AMERICAN
ri.J ENGINEERING
JESTING, INC.
SUBSURFACE BORING LOG
AET JOB NO: 01-02624 LOG OF BORING NO. 2 (P. 1 of 1)
PROJECT: Lakeview Hill Redevelopment; Chanhassen. MN
DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: 906.8 GEOLOGY SAMPLE REC FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS
IN N MC TYPE IN.
FEET MA TERlAL DESCRIPTION WC DEN LL PL [",#20
I FILL, mostly lean clay with sand, trace roots, FILL 5 SS 22
dark brown and brown
2
3 SANDY LEAN CLAY, a little gravel, light 4 SS 18 26
4 brown, soft, laminations of wet sand (CL)
5 LEAN CLA Y WITH SAND, a little gravel, light S5 18 26
6 brown mottled, stiff: laminations of silt (CL)
7 SANDY LEAN CLAY, a little gravel, light
8 grayish brown mottled, very sti~ laminations of 18 55 18
9 sand (CL)
TILL
10 S5 18
II SANDY LEAN CLAY, a little gravel, light
12 brownish gray mottled, very stiff(CL)
13 SS 1&
14
15 15 55 18
16 END OF BORING
0-14Y.'
3.25" HSA
DATE
TIME
WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS
SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN DRILLING WATER
DEPTIi DEPTH DEPTIi FLUID LEVEL LEVEL
DEPTIi:
DRILLING METIiOD
10/24/05
4:20
16.0
14.5
16.0
None
NOTE: REFER TO
mE ATIACHED
SHEETS FOR AN
EXPLANATION OF
TERMINOLOGY ON
TIllS LOG
COMPLETED: 10/24/05
DR: GL LG: GD Rig: 3C
06104
n'AMERICAN
rll ENGINEERING
TESTING, INC.
AET JOB NO: 01-02624
SUBSURFACE BORING LOG
LOG OF BORING NO.
3 (p.1 of1)
PROJECT: Lakeview Hill Redevelopment; Chanhassen. MN
DEPTIi SURF ACE ELEV AnON: 897.0 GEOLOGY SAMPLE REC flEW It LABORATORY TESTS
IN N MC TYPE IN.
FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION WC DEN LL PL 1.-#20
FILL, mixture of lean clay with sand and sandy
lean clay, a little gravel, trace roots, dark brown 9 M SS 1&
2 and li ht brown
3 11 M SS 1&
4 SANDY LEAN CLA Y, a little gravel, light
5 brownish gray mottled, stiff(CL} 19 M SS 22
6
7 25 M SS 22
8
9 SANDY LEAN CLAY, a little gravel, light 21 M SS 22
10 brownish gray mottled, stiff: laminations of sand
11 (CL) 23 M SS 22
12 SANDY LEAN CLA Y, grayish brown, stiff
13 (CL) 25 M SS 8
14 SANDY LEAN CLA Y, a little gravel, light
IS brownish gray mottled, very stiff: laminations of 22 M SS 22
16 sand CL
END OF BORING
DEPTH:
DRILLING METHOD
0-14W
3.25" HSA
DATE
TIME
10/24/05
11:45
COMPLETED: 10124/05
DR: GL LG: GD Rig: 3C
06/04
WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS
SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN DRILLING WATER
DEPTH DEPTH DEPTH FLUID LEVEL LEVEL
16.0 14.0 15.8 None
NOTE: REFER TO
THE ATTACHED
SHEETS FOR AN
EXPLANATION OF
TERMINOLOGY ON
TInS LOG
1], Alv1ERICAN
1 ENGINEERING
TESTING, INC.
SUBSURFACE BORING LOG
AET JOB NO: 01-02624 LOG OF BORING NO, . 4 (p. 10ft)
PROJECT: Lakeview Hill Redevelopment; Chanhassen. MN
DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: 908.9 GEOLOGY SAMPLE REC FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS
IN N MC TYPE IN.
FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION WC DEN LL PL 0-#20
SANDY LEAN CLAY, a little gravel, trace
roots, grayish brown and brown mottled, soft, 4 M 55 22
2 laminations of sand CL
3 11 M 55 18
4 SANDY LEAN CLAY, a little gravel, trace
roots, grayish brown mottled, stiff(CL)
5 12 M 55 18
6
7 SANDY LEAN CLAY, a little gravel, light
8 brownish gray, very stiff, laminations of sand 16 M 55 18
(CL)
9
10 20 M 55 18
11 SANDY LEAN CLAY, a little gravel, light
12 brownish gray, very stiff, laminations of sand
13 (CL) 22 M 55 18
14
15 18 M 55 18
16 END OF BORING
DEPTIi: DRILLING METIlOD
0-14W 3.25" HSA
DATE
TIME
10/24105
1:55
COMPLETED: 10/24105
DR: GL LG: GD Rig: 3C
06/04
WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS
SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN DRILLING
DEPTIi DEPTII DEPTH FLUID LEVEL
16.0 14.5 16.0
NOTE: REFER TO
WATER
LEVEL TIIE ATIACHED
None SHEETS fOR AN
EXPLANATION Of
TERMINOLOGY ON
TIllS LOG
ril' AMERICAN
l ENGINEERING
TESTING, INC.
SUBSURFACE BORING LOG
AET JOB NO: 01-02624 LOG OF BORING NO. 5 (p. 1 ofl)
PROJECT: Lakeview Hill Redevelopment; Chanhassen. MN
DEP111 SURFACE ELEVATION: 905.9 GEOLOGY SAMPLE REC FIELD &. LABORATORY TESTS
IN N MC TYPE IN.
FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION WC DEN LL PL 0-#20
FILL, mostly sandy lean clay, a little grave~ FILL
trace roots, brownish gray and light brownish 10 M SS 22
2
3 15 M SS 16
4
5 20 M SS 18
6
7
8 SANDY LEAN CLA Y, a little gravel, light TILL 27 M SS 18
9 brownish gray mottled, stiff to very sti~
laminations ofsand (CL)
10 17 M SS 18
11
12
13 17 M SS 18
14
15 19 M SS 18
16 END OF BORING
DEPTH: DRILLING METIlOD
0-14W 3.25" HSA
DATE
TIME
10/24/05
1:00
COMPLETED: 10/24/05
DR: GL LG: GD Rig: 3C
06/04
WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS
SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN DRILLING WATER
DEP111 DEPTH DEPTII FLUID LEVEL LEVEL
NOTE: REFER TO
TIlE A TIACHED
SHEETS FOR AN
EXPLANATION OF
TERMINOLOGY ON
TIllS LOG
J6.0
14.5
15.8
None
11. AMERICAN
1 ENGINEERING
TESTING, INC.
SUBSURFACE BORING LOG
AET JOB NO:
PROJECT:
01-02624 LOG OF BORING NO.
Lakeview Hill Redevelopment; Chanhassen. MN
881.6
DEPTII
IN
FEET
SURFACE ELEVATION:
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
FILL, mixture of sandy lean clay and silty sand,
a little gravel, trace roots, light brownish gray,
gray and dark brown
ORGANIC CLAY, trace roots, black, moist,
firm (CL/OL)
LEAN CLAY WIlli SAND, gray and brown
mottled, fIrm (CL)
SIL 1Y SAND, a little gravel, fme to medium
grained, brown, wet, very loose (SM)
LEAN CLAY, brownish gray, stiff, laminations
of wet silty sand (CL)
CLAYEY SAND, a little gravel, gray, stiff,
lenses and laminations of wet silty sand
(SCISM)
END OF BORING
DEPlli: DRILLING MElliOD
0-29Yz' 3.25" HSA
DATE
12/29/05
12/29/05
2:30
3:05
TIME
COMPLETED: 12/29/05
DR: LB LG: GD Rig: 27C
06/04
GEOLOGY
FILL
SWAMP
DEPOSIT OR
FINE
ALLUVIUM
6 (p.1 of 1)
FIELD &, LABORATORY TESTS
N MC SAMPLE REC
TYPE IN. WC DEN LL PL 0-#20
5
6
6
9
5
8
4
8
13
15
SS 14
SS
14
COARSE
ALLUVIUM
FINE
ALLUVIUM
TILL
SS
16
SS 18
SS
16
27
SS
18
SS
18
SS 18
SS 18 36
SS
18
28
SS 18
SS
18
WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS
SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN DRILLING WATER
DEPTH DEPTH DEPTH FLUID LEVEL LEVEL
16.0 14.5 15.1 14.7
31.0 29.5 30.1 26.7
52 23
NOTE: REFER TO
THE ATTACHED
SHEETS FOR AN
EXPLANATION OF
TERMINOLOGY ON
nnSLOG
rJ" AMERICAN
1 ENGINEER.I:NG
TESTING, INC.
AET JOB NO:
PROJECT:
DEPTIl
IN
FEET
01-02624
SUBSURFACE BORING LOG
LOG OF BORING NO.
Lakeview Hill Redevelopment; Chanhassen. MN
SURFACE ELEVATION: 878.0 GEOLOGY
N MC
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
I - FILL, mostly sandy lean clay, trace roots, dark
brown and light grayish brown
2-
3 - FILL, mostly sandy lean clay, a little gravel, light
grayish brown
4
5-
6 - FILL, mixture of clayey sand and sandy lean
7 _ clay, a little gravel, brownish gray and grayish
brown
8-
9-
10 -
11 - FILL, mixture of lean clay and organic clay,
trace roots, gray and black
12
13-
ORGANIC CLAY, black, stiff to finn,
14 - laminations of silty sand (OUCL)
15 -
16 -
17 LEAN CLAY, slightly organic, trace shells and
18 - roots, light gray mottled, laminations of bog lime
19 (CUOL")
20 - SAND WITH SILT, medium to fine grained,
gray, waterbearing, laminations of wet silty sand
21 - (SP-SM)
22
23 -
SILT, gray, wet, loose, laminations of silty sand
24 - (ML)
25 -
26 - LEAN CLAY, gray, fIrm, laminations of silt
hJCLl
27 -
SAMPLE REC FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS
TYPE IN. WC DEN LL PL '1...4/20
X SS 18
-'
X SS 14
R
~
'I SS 18
H
4 M
10 M
8 M
FILL
14 M X SS 11
B
4 M X SS 14
yB
M X SS 18 28
~
M X SS 18 33
~
M X SS 18 43
~
W X SS 14
9
SWAMP
DEPOSIT OR
FINE
ALLUVIUM 5
FINE 4
ALLUVIUM
: : COARSE
. . 11
: : ALLUVIUM
:
:
FINE
ALLUVIUM
7 WIMX SS 18
28 -
CLAYEY SAND, a little gravel, gray, very stiff, TILL
29 - laminations of water bearing sand (SCISM)
30 -
31
END OF BORING
DEPTIl:
DRILLING METHOD
0-29W
DATE
TIME
3.25" HSA
12/29/05
12/29/05
12:35
1:20
COMPLETED: 12/29/05
DR: LB LG: GD Rig: 27C
06/04
18 lMIW X 'SS 18
WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS
SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN DRILLING WATER
DEPTH DEPTIl DEPTH FLUID LEVEL LEVEL
13.5
31.0
13.4
30.5
12.0
29.5
7 (p.1orl)
12.2
24.6
NOTE: REFER TO
THE ATTACHED
SHEETS FOR AN
EXPLANATION OF
TERMINOLOGY ON
THIS LOG
n. AMERICAN
ril ENGINEERING
TESTING, INC.
DEPTH
IN
FEET
0-29W
29Y.-79W
SUBSURFACE BORING LOG
AET JOB NO:
PROJECT:
01-02624 LOG OF BORING NO.
Lakeview Hill Redevelopment; Chanhassen~ MN
877.3
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
SURF ACE ELEVATION:
MA TERlAL DESCRIPTION
FILL, mixture of sand with silt and clayey sand,
a little gravel, pieces of bituminous, trace roots,
brown and black
FILL, mixture of clayey sand and sandy lean
clay, a little gravel, brown and light brownish
FILL, mixture of lean clay with sand and clayey
sand, trace roots, light gray and brown
CLAYEY SAND, trace roots, grayish brown,
firm (SC)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, light brown and light
gray mottled, firm (CL)
LEAN CLAY, light gray and light brown
mottled, fIrm (CL)
SANDY LEAN CLAY, a little gravel, gray and
brown mottled to brown and gray mottled, firm
to stiff (CL)
CLAYEY SAND, a little gravel, brownish gray,
stiff (SC/CL)
CLAYEY SAND, a little gravel, gray mottled,
stiff (SC)
CLAYEY SAND, a little gravel, gray, stiff to
very stiff(SC/CL)
DEPTH:
DRll..LING METHOD
3.25" HSA
RD wlDM
DATE
TIME
12130/05
10:25
B
COMPLETED: 12130/05
DR: LB LG: GD Ri: 27C
06/04
GEOLOGY
FILL
WEATHERE
ffiL
8 (p.l of3)
REC FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS
N MC SAMPLE
TYPE IN. WC DEN LL PL .-#20
9
8
6 M
7 M
5 M
FINE
ALLUVIUM 7 M
ffiL
7 M
9 M
11 M
12 M
15 M
M
M
SS
18
WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS
SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN DRll..LING WATER
DEPTH DEPTH DEPTH FLUID LEVEL LEVEL
31.0
29.5
31.0
SS
18
SS
18
SS
18
SS
18 38
SS
18 33
SS
18
SS 18
SS
18
S8
18
88
18
None
NOTE: REFER TO
THE ATTACHED
SHEETS FOR AN
EXPLANATION OF
TERMINOLOGY ON
TIllS LOG
n- AMERICAN
rl.J ENGINEERING
TESTING, INC.
AET JOB NO: 01-02624
SUBSURFACE BORING LOG
Lakeview Hill Redevelopment; Chanhassen. MN
LOG OF BORING NO.
8 (p. 2 of3)
PROJECT:
DEPTII
IN
FEET
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
GEOLOGY
SAMPLE REC FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS
N MC TYPE IN. WC DEN LL PL 0-#2
33
34
35 19 M SS 18
36 CLAYEY SAND, a little gravel, gray, stiff to Tll..L
37 very stiff(SC/CL)
38
39
40 26 M SS 18
41
42
43
44
45 20 M SS 18
46
47
48
49 .'
50 SAND WITH SILT, fine to medium grained,
brown, waterbearing, dense (SP-SM) . " 38 W SS 18
51 . "
52 . "
53
54
, .
55 SAND WITH SILT, a little gravel, medium to . ." 37 W SS 18
':":' COARSE
56 fine grained, brown, water bearing, dense :':'::'. ALLUVIUM
57 (SP-SM) . .
58
59 . .
. "
60 36 W SS 16
.' .
61 ' .
62 . .
. .
63
64 SAND WITH SILT, fine to medium grained,
65 brown, waterbearing, dense (SP-SM)
42 W SS 18
66
67
68
SAND WITH SILT, fine grained, light grayish .,'
69 brown, waterbearing, very dense (SP-SM) ".'
06/04
Il-AMERICAN
1 ENGINEERING
TESTING, INC.
SUBSURFACE BORING LOG
AET JOB NO: 01-02624 LOG OF BORING NO, S (p. 30f3)
PROJECT: Lakeview Hill Redevelopment; Chanhassen, MN
DEPTH GEOLOGY SAMPLE REC FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS
IN N MC
FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION TYPE IN, WC DEN LL PL ~20
- 66 W X SS 18
: ' '.
71 - SAND WIm SILT, fine grained, light grayish :
72- brown, waterbearing, very dense (SP-SM) . .
. .
73 COARSE
74 - " ALLUVIUM
:
SAND WIlli SILT, fine grained, gray, .>....
75 - : ~ SS 18
waterbearing, medium dense (SP-SM) 29 W
76 -
"
77- ~
.'
78 :
79 - SILT, brownish gray, wet, medium dense FINE
80 - (MLICL-ML) ALLUVIUM lX
22 M SS 18
81 END OF BORING
06/04
n.AMERICAN
&.J ENGINEERING
JESTING, lNC.
SUBSURFACE BORING LOG
AET JOB NO: 01-02624 LOG OF BORING NO. 9 (p.1 oft)
PROJECT: Lakeview Hill Redevelopment; Chanhassen, MN
DEPlH SURFACE ELEVATION: 906.8 GEOLOGY SAMPLE REC FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS
IN N MC TYPE IN.
FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION WC DEN LL PL ~20
FILL, mostly lean clay with sand. trace roots, 5 M SS 12
dark brown and black
2 SANDY LEAN CLAY, trace roots, brownish
mottl firm CL
3 SANDY LEAN CLAY, trace roots, light 5 M SS 14
4 brownish gray mottled, firm (CL)
5 SANDY LEAN CLAY, light gray and light 14 M SS 18
6 brown mottled. stiff (CL)
7
8 16 M SS 18
SANDY LEAN CLAY, a little gravel, light
9 brownish gray, very stiff(CL)
10 22 M SS 18
11
12
13 27 M SS 18
14 CLAYEY SAND, a little gravel, gray, very stiff
to hard. lenses and laminations of sand with silt
15 at about 15' (SC) 37 M SS 18
16
17
18
19
20 19 M SS 18
21 END OF BORING
DEPTH:
DRILLING MElHOD
0-19Yz'
DATE
TIME
3.25" HSA
12/29/05 10:00
COMPLETED: 12/29/05
DR: LB LG: GD Ri: 27C
06/04
WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS
SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN DRILLING WATER
DEPlH DEPlH DEPlH FLUID LEVEL LEVEL
NOTE: REFER TO
THE ATTACHED
21.0
19.5
None SHEETS FOR AN
EXPLANA nON OF
TERMINOLOGY ON
lHlS LOG
21.0
1]> AMERICAN
1 ENGINEERING SUBSURFACE BORING LOG
TESTING, INC.
AET JOB NO: 01-02624 LOG OF BORING NO. 10 (p.l oft)
PROJECT: Lakeview Hill Redevelopment; Chanhassen. MN
DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: 903.7 GEOLOGY SAMPLE REC FIELD & LABQRATORY TESTS
IN N MC TYPE IN.
FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION WC DEN LL PL [",#2
FffiRIC PEAT, black (PT) M SS 3
2 SANDY LEAN CLA Y, a little gravel, trace
3 roots, light brownish gray mottled, very soft WH M SS 10 29
4 CL Y
5 6 M SS 12 28
6 SANDY LEAN CLAY, a little gravel, brownish
7 gray mottled, firm to very soft (CL)
8 WH M S8 24 25
9
10 CLAYEY SAND, a little gravel, brownish gray, 9 M SS 18
11 stiff (SC)
12
13 SANDY LEAN CLAY, gray, firm (CL) 8 M SS 18
14
IS 9 M SS 18
SANDY LEAN CLAY, a little gravel, gray,
16 stiff, lenses and laminations of sand (CL)
17
18
19 CLAYEY SAND, gray, very stiff (SC)
20 17 M S8 18
21 END OF BORING
DEPlH:
DRILLING METIIOD
0-19W
DATE
TIME
3.25"HSA
12/29/05
12/29/05
10:45
11:10
COMPLETED: 12/29/05
DR: LB LG: GO Ri: 27C
06/04
WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS
SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN DRILLING WATER
DEPlH DEPTH DEPlH FLUID LEVEL LEVEL
NOTE: REFER TO
THE ATTACHED
SHEETS FOR AN
EXPLANATION OF
TERMINOLOGY ON
TIllS LOG
11.0
21.0
9.5
9.6
4.0
11.0
4.2
~
EXPLORATION/CLASSIFICATION METHODS
SAMPLING METHODS
Split-Spoon Samples (SS) - Calibrated to N60 Values
Standard penetration (split-spoon) samp les were collected in general accordance with ASTM: D 1586 with one primary modification.
The ASTM test method consists of driving a 2" 0.0. split-barrel sampler into the in-situ soil with a 140-pound hammer dropped
from a height of 30". The sampler is driven a total of 18" into the soil. After an initial set of 6", the number of hammer blows to
drive the sampler the fmall2" is known as the standard penetration resistance or N-value. Our method uses a modified hanuner
weight, which is determined by measuring the system energy using a Pile Driving Analyzer (PDA) and an instrumented rod,
In the past. standard penetration N-value tests were performed using a rope and cathead for the lift and drop system. The energy
transferred to the split-spoon sampler was typically limited to about 60% of it's potential energy due to the friction inherent in this
system. This converted energy then provides what is known as an N60 blow count.
Most of todays drill rigs incorporate an automatic hammer lift and drop system, which has higher energy efficiency and
subsequently results in lower N-values than the traditional N60 values. By using the PDA energy measurement equipment, we are
able to determine actual energy generated by the drop hammer. With the various hammer systems available, we have found highly
variable energies ranging from 55% to over 100%. Therefore, .the intent of AET's hammer calibrations is to vary the hanuner
weight such that hammer energies lie within about 60% to 65% of the theoretical energy of a 140-pound weight falling 30". The
current ASTM procedure acknowledges the wide variation in N-values, stating that N-values of 100% or more have been observed.
Although we have not yet determined the statistical measurement uncertainty of our calibrated method to date, we can state that
the accuracy deviation of the N-values using this method are significantly better than the standard ASTM Method.
Disturbed Samples (DS)/Spin-up Samples (SU)
Sample types described as "DS" or "SUO on the boring logs are disturbed samples, which are taken from the flights of the auger.
Because the auger disturbs the samples, possible soil layering and contact depths should be considered approximate.
Sampling Limitations
Unless actually observed in a sample, contacts between soil layers are estimated based on the spacing of samples and the action of
drilling tools. Cobbles, boulders, and other large objects generally cannot be recovered from test borings, and they may be present
in the ground even if they are not noted on the boring logs.
CLASSIFICATION METHODS
Soil classifications shown on the boring logs are based on the Unified Soil Classification (USC) system. The USC system is
described in ASTM:D2487 and D2488. Where laboratory classification tests (sieve analysis or Atterberg Limits) have been
performed, accurate classifications per ASTM:D2487 are possible. Otherwise, soil classifications shown on the boring logs are
visual-manual judgments. Charts are attached which provide information on the USC system, the descriptive terminology, and the
symbols used on the boring logs.
The boring logs include descriptions of apparent geology. The geologic depositional origin of each soil layer is interpreted primarily
by observation of the soil samples, which can be limited. Observations of the surrounding topography, vegetation, and development
can sometimes aid this judgment.
WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS
The ground water level measurements are shown at the bottom of the boring logs. The following information appears under "Water
Level Measurements" on the logs:
· Date and Tune of measurement
· Sampled Depth: lowest depth of soil sampling at !he time of measurement
· Casing Depth: dep!h to bottom of casing or hollow-stem auger at time of measurement
Cave-in Depth: depth at which measuring 1lIpe stDpS in !he borehole
· Water Level: depth in the borehole where free water is CIICOwuered
· Drilling Fluid Level: same as Water Level. except that lhe liquid in the borehole is drilling fluid
The true location of the water table at the boring locations may be different than the water levels measured in the boreholes. This
is possible because there are several factors that can affect the water level measurements in the borehole. Some of these factors
include: permeability of each soil layer in prof1le, presence of perched water, amount of time between water level readings,
presence of drilling fluid, weather conditions, and use of borehole casing.
SAMPLE STORAGE
Unless notified to do otherwise, we routinely retain representative samples of the soils recovered from the borings for a period of
30 days.
OlREPOS1 C(9/03)
AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC.
i)
BORING LOG NOTES
DRILLING AND SAMPLING SYMBOLS
Symbol
Definition .
B,H,N:
CA:
CAS:
CC:
COT:
DC:
DM:
DR:
DS:
FA:
HA:
" HSA:
LG:
MC:
N (BPF):
NQ:
PQ:
RD:
REC:
REV:
SS:
SU
TW:
WASH:
WH:
WR:
94mm:
....
"V:
Size of flush-joint casing
Crew Assistant (initials)
Pipe casing, number indicates nominal diameter in
inches
Crew Chief (initials)
Clean-cut tube
Drive casing; number indicates diameter in inches
Drilling mud or bentonite slurry
Driller (initials)
Disturbed sample from auger flights
Flight auger; number indicates outside diameter in
inches
Hand auger; number indicates outside diameter
Hollow stem auger; number indicates inside diameter
in inches
Field logger (initials)
Column used to describe moisture condition of "
samples and for the ground water level symbols
Standard penetration resistance (N-value) in blows per
foot (see noteS)
NQ wireline core barrel
PQ wireline core barrel
Rotary drilling with fluid and roller or drag bit
In split-spoon (see notes) and thin-walled tube
sampling, the recovered length (in inches) of sample.
In rock coring, the length of core recovered
(expressed as percent of the total core run). Zero
indicates no sample recovered.
Revert drilling fluid
Standard split-spoon sampler (steel; 1%" is inside
diameter; 2" outside diameter); unless indicated
otherwise
Spin-up sample from hollow stem auger
Thin-walled tube; number indicates inside diameter
in inches
Sample of material obtained by screening returning
rotary drilling fluid or by which has collected inside
the borehole after "falling" through drilling fluid
Sampler advanced by static weight of drill rod and
hammer
Sampler advanced by sultic weight of drill rod
. 94 millimeter wireline core barrel
Water level directly measured in boring
Estimated water level based solely on sample
appearance
TEST SYMBOLS
Symbol
CONS:
DEN:
DST:
E:
HYD:
LL:
LP:
OC:
PERM:
PL:
Qp:
q,:
q..:
R:
RQD:
SA:
TRX:
VSR:
VSU:
WC:
%-200:
Definition
One-dimensional consolidation test
Dry density, pef
Direct shear test
Pressuremeter Modulus, tsf
Hydrometer analysis
Liquid Limit, %
Pressuremeter Limit Pressure, tsf
Organic Content, %
Coefficient of permeability (K) test; F - Field;
L - Laboratory
Plastic Limit, %
Pocket Penetrometer strength, tsf (approximate)
Static cone bearing pressure, tsf
Unconfmed compressive strength, psf
Electrical Resistivity, ohm-cms
Rock Quality Designation of Rock Core, in percent
(aggregate length of core pieces 4" or more in length
. as a percent of total core run)
Sieve analysis
Triaxial compression test
Vane shear strength, remoulded (field), psf
Vane"shear strength, widisturbed (field), psf
Water content, as percent of dry weight
Percent of material fmer than #200 sieve
SI'ANDARD PENETRATION TEST NOTES
(Calibrated Hammer Weight)
The standard penetration test consists of driving a split-spoon
sampler with a drop hammer (calibrated weight varies to provide
N60 values) and counting the number of blows applied in each of
three 6" increments of penetration. If the sampler is driven less
than 18" (usually in highly resistant material), permitted in
ASTM:D1586, the blows for each complete 6" increment and
for each partial increment is on the boring log. For partial
increments, the number of blows is shown to the nearest 0.1'
below the slash.
The length of sample recovered, as shown on the "REC"
column, may be greater than the distance indicated in the N
column. The disparity is because the N-value is recorded below
the initial 6" set (unless partial penetration defmed in
ASTM:D1586 is encountered) whereas the length of sample
recovered is for the entire sampler drive (which may even
extend more than 18").
o lREP052C(01/05)
AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC.
..
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM AMERICAN D
ASTM Designations: D 2487, D2488 ENGINEERING
TESTING, INC. -
Soil Classificatillll Notes
Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using LaboI'lllDly TestsA Group Group Nam? ABased on the rnalerial passing the 3-in
Svmbol ~S-mm)sir:ve.
Coarse-Gmined Gravels More Clean Gravels Cu~ and 1$:C$3~ GW Well graded gravel' If field sample contained CDbbles or
Soils More than 500/0 coarse Less than 50/. boulders, or both. add "'with cobbles or
than 50% fraction retained finesc Cu<4 andfor 1>cc>3~ GP Poorly graded gravel boulders, or both" to group name.
retlined 01\ on NO.4 sieve Ccilll.vels with 5 to 120/. fmcs require dual
No. 200 sieve Gravels with Fines classifY as ML or MH GM Silty gravel....... symbols:
Fines more GW-GM weu..graded gravel with silt
than 120/. fmes c Fines classifY as CL or CH GC Clayey graVCJ"'UK GW-GC well-graded gnsvel with clay
GP-GM poorly graded gIllvel with silt
Sands SO'Yo or Clean Sands Cte6 and I~c SW Welt-graded SiJDdI GP-GC poorly graded gmvel with tIay
mon: of coarse Less than 5% DSands with 5 to 120/0 fmes require dual
fraction passes fincsD Cu<6 or 1>Cc>3" SP poorly-gmdcd sand symbols:
NO.4 sieve SW-SM wel!-graded sand with silt
Sands with Fines classify as ML or MH SM Silty sand........ SW-SC wcll-graded sand with clay
Fines more SPASM poorly graded sand with silt
than 12% fines D Fioes classify as CL or CH SC C18veV sand--= SP-SC poorly graded salld with clay
Fine-Grained Silts and Clays inorganic PI> 7 and plots on or above CL Lean clay""'"'"
Soils 50"10 or Liquid limit less -A" line' CDJa)2
more passes than SO PI<4 orJIots below ML Sil~ Ecu '" 0..1D.0, Cc.
the No. 200 "A" lin OIOX 0..
sieve organic Liquid limiHnren dried <O.7S OL Organic ~
'Ifsoil contains ~IS% _ add "with
(see Plasticity Liquid limit - DOt dried Organic suP-Mo sand" to group name.
Chart below) Gxf fines c1assifY as CL-M!., use dual
Silts and Clays inorganic PI plots on or above" A" line CH Fat clay""'"'" ~bol GC-GM, or SC-SM
Liquid limit SO If fines arc organic. add -with organic
or more PI plots below "A" line MH Elastic silt"-'-'" fines" to group name.
Ilfsoil contains ~15% gravel, add "with
organic Liauid Iimit~ dried <O.7S OH Organic ~ f,"vel" to group name.
Liquid limit - not dried Organic si~Q If AttcIbcrg limits plot is hatched IUClI,
soils is a CL-ML silty clay.
Highly organic Primarily organic matter, dark PT Pelt" KIf soil contains IS to 290/. pIllS No. 200
soil in color, and organic in odor add "with sand" or "with gm vel",
whicheveris predominant.
I.tfsoil contains ~30% plus No. 200,
SIE'.E-.YSIS / " / predominantly SlIJId, add Ksandy" to
r--O'+-----I ~~~ ",' group name.
,..,,,,,.. eta.. MIf soil comains ~30"Ao plus No. 200,
-', il I I . !Ill / , ./'
~ -.......- l......./t' predominantly gravel. add -gravelly"
,II I I ........... ...u..Zl.5. ~ .~
.. ~ e ...".anClJ",Zlt to grOUJl name.
l! I I .
i .. .~ _...v_ / <:Fe ./ NpI~4 and plots on or above K A" line.
11 , , ~ v....U.....".f. / ./
o..,!iltn _"'"U!J..II ..- DpI<4 or plots belowKA" line.
0; 1/\ ! :lIl / V 'PI. plots on or above KA" line.
t- I ..~ ,.. ~ Dpl plots below "A" line.
/
1>0" :u..n 21 / 0/' /' -Fiber Content description shown below.
,.- OH "M!-
IN I ""
. .. '/
11'_ 0. -D.G7'5na 10 ,
I I 7 MLc jltOL
. 1lII . i
~ , , ,. ~ ~ GG
. . 10 11131 :lIl .. !Ill III 11> III III 1((1 110
PARl1Cl.E IlIZE II IIU.IIEl'ERlI UOlID LNl' (UJ
c.-e.-dr-. c..s!f..:'.-u Plasticity Chart
.ADomONAL TERMINOLOGY NOTES USED BY AET F()RSOIVIDENTIFICATIONAND DESCRIPTION, .. .
Grain S izc Gravel PercenlMes Consistency ofPllIStic Soils Relative Density of Non-Plastic Soils.
Imn Particle Size Imn.. Percent Imn N-Value. BPF Im!l N-Value BPF
Boulders Over 12" A UttIc Gravel 3% - 14% V cry Soft less than 2 Very Loose 0-4
Cobbles 3" to 12" With Gravel 15% - 29% Soft 2-4 Loose 5-10
Gravel #4 sieve to 3" Gravelly 30% - SO% Finn SoB Medium Dense 11-30
Sand t/200 to #4 sieve Stiff 9-15 Dense 31 -so
Fines (silt ol clay) Pass t/200 sieve Very Stiff 16-30 Very Dense Greater than SO
Hard Greater than 30
Moistun:lFroSl Condition Laverinl! Notes Fiber Coment of Peat OrI!anicIRoolS Descrintion (if no lab lCSISl
(MC Column) Laminations: Layers less than Fiber Content Soils are descnDcd as D1?anic. if soil is not peat
o (Dry): Absensc of moisture, dusty, dry to ~" thick of Term (Visual Estimate 1 and is judged to have sufficient organic fines
touch. differing material content to influence the soil properties. 5!iKMz
M (Moist): Damp, although free water not or color. Fibric Peat: Greater than 67",(, ~ used for borderline cases.
visible. Soil may still have a high Hemic Peat: 33-67%
water content (over -optimum"). Lenses: Pockets or layers Sapric Peat: Less than 33% With roots: Judged to have sufficient quantity
W (Wet! Free WIltCr visible intended to greater than~. of roots to influcnce the soil
WlI1Crbearing): describe non-plastic soils. thick of differing properties.
Waterbcaring usually relates to material or color. Trace roots: Small roots present. but not judged
sands and sand with silt to be in sufficient qtJSntity to
F (Frozen): Soil frozen significantly affect soil properties.
01 CLS021 (2104)
AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING. INC.
ern
~~
o
z
==
o
...,
5
~
o
~~
~tI)
:::;:~
15 z~ .a
~ ~
~ Q)
~ ~.~
o~:::;:
ga < =-
~...:l~
...:l '"
.... '"
::I:i3
c:;l!>'"
o~o
~~
tI)...:l
~
~
1.0
N
o
I
....
o
>
==
~
~
u
~
II.)
=
o
;:;
5
o
...
"0.0
=
"C
o
=
~
Q
tI)
~
~
~
:g
o
Z