HomeMy WebLinkAboutRough Grade Compaction ' � '�� �' � � � J�.JU I I L.�.J/` I
.. �, ,, , ,. �
��- GEOLOGIC . �
� �� r� � ��� 1 � C ,
. r a � 5 r �, , ?� : V Ef�VICES � .I��� I
_ "�, j h�'2� � 4�' � +.
,�,F�' y�,y: 1 .. j .
` : y �f�e 4 t 2 ,� - I
� -'' f ` � '` 24692 Del Prado Avenue
Dana Fbini, CA 92629
(714) 496-8504
� 1 13 North Main Street
Lake Elsinore, CA 92330
(714)245-6020 �
1
i
�
�
ROUGH GRADE CONiPACTION REFORT
� for .
LQTS 1 THItOUGH 11. TRACT 24232 �
RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIF�ORr1IA �
� REQUESTED BY
� Mr. Duncan McArthur
U.S. Home Corporation
11545 W. Bernardo Court, Suite 304
� San Diego, CA 92127
CrvII, F.ivGnvEEx
�
C.M. Civil Engineering Associates
� 225 East Airport Drive
P.O. Box 6087
San Bernardino, California 92412 -
�
� �
�
�
Project No. 90057.2
� Report Date: January 11, 1991
�
' ' Trac� 24232, Riverside County _2_
P. N. 90057.2
2.0 I.ABORAT'ORY 'r �Tnv(;
2.1 Compaction Tests
A compaction test was conducted on a sample of the soil placed as campacted fill at the site. This test is
performed in the laboratory in accordance with ASTM Test Method D1557. A summary of the maximum
dry density and optimum moisture content of the fill soil is presented in Table 1.
2.2 Exp�ncinn Tndex Test
Expansion index tests in conformance with the Uniform Building Code Standard No. 29-2 have been
conducted on samples of soil considered to be representative of the soil within the influence of the proposed
structures. Test results indicate that the soils placed at the site have an expansion index ranging from 0 to
42• Based on this, the fill soil at the site are considered to have a low potenkial for expansion.
2.3 �oluble Sulfate Test .
�
Samples of soil exposed in the building pads were obtained for sulfate content testing. The soluble sulfate
content determination was conducted in conformance with the test method described as "Caiifornia 417A".
The test results indicate that the soils tested have soluble sulfate content of .014 percent.
� 3.0 ��GIC CONDITIONS
3.1 General
� Geologic conditions as exposed during grading were substantiall in conformance w'
our referenced report. The geologic units encountered are described below,, 1� �ose ant�cipated m
� 3.2 11 vi
� Recent alluvium consisting predominandy of a silty sand was encountered to a depth of approximately 2
feet. Recent alluvium determined to be unsuitable was removed and replaced as compacted fill.
' 3.3 Qld Alluvium (Ooal)
Well consolidated floodplain material (old alluvium) consisting of a well consolidated reddish brown sand
�� to silty sand with light brown sand lenses was encountered beneath the recently deposited alluvium. This
material was found to be suitable for both foundation and fill support.
� 3.4 GroundwatPr
No groundwater was observed in the gully bottom during grading, Subdrains within the gully bottom were
( not considered necessary.
3.5 Geologic H �ar�ic
I
No evidence of landslides or faults were encountered during grad
� SOUTH COAST GEOLO
GIC SERVICES, �N�.
. :'�f�'2 <..� �i,s s �37: IFrsS. ., r1it ..T!f.a:��i. ,.a.Sf+v .. . _� _.... . .._ .. -. ,_ . ._,_. ... .�t . . ._ _ . . . . . .
1.0 INTRODUCTION �
� 1.1 �eneral
� This report presents the results of our testing and observation during rough grading for Lots 1 through 11,
Tract 24232, Riverside County, California.
� The purpose of this report is to obtain rough grade release for Lots 1 through 11, Tract 24232, the
associated street areas, and the adjacent slopes within the development.
� Reference is made to our report and letters listed in Appendix "A".
1.2 Site Location and Description .
�
The site is bounded on the north and east by undeveloped property and to the south by a newly developed
single family residential subdivision. An existing Metropolitan Water District easement runs adjacent to
and parallel with the western property line. General site configuradon is indicated on Plate 1 endtled "
Density Test Location Map". �
1.3 �imitations
� In reviewing data, opinions, conclusions and recommendations presented in this report, it should be
recognized that our work dces not constitute a guarantee that the earthwork contractor has performed his
work in accordance with the project specifications. It is our opinion that we have exercised a degree of care
' equal to or greater than that presently maintained by other professionals in the field of geotechnical
engineering and have, to the best of our ability, performed sufficient observadons and testing to provide
a rational basis for our opinion that the earthwork was performed in accordance with the geotechnical
� provisions of the project specifications.
1.4 Scove of Work �
� The u se of the work rformed at the site as described in this report was to provide level building pad �
P � Pe
and associated streets and to direct site drainage to an approved location. Essentially, grading consisted of
' removal and recompacdon of the existing unsuitable soil and cut/fill operations to establish plan design
grades.
� The scope of our work included the following:
*Limited laboratory testing;
� *Observation during site preparadon, excavation and subsurface preparation prior to placement of
fill; - � . � ,�, � , -.
*Geologic observation of cut slopes; �
' *Geologic observadon of fill key and bench excavations;
*Observation and field density testing during placement of fill at the site; and,
� "`Preparation of this report.
The following sections present specific details of the above items.
� .
� SOUTH COAST GEOLOGIC SERVICES, �NC.
Tract 24232, Riverside County -3-
P. N. 90p57.2
4,0 SITE GRADIN
� 4.1 n r
Observation and testing during excavation and placement of fill within that portion of the site as described
in this report was conducted between November 1 l, 1988 and October 11, 1990. Field density test results .
are presented in Table 2.
Approximate locations where densit tests were taken are indicated on Plate 1 entided "Densit Test
Y y
Location Map". Plate 1 is based on the "Rough Grading Plan" dated April 1989 by CM Engineering
Associates. Addidonal information was added based on our field observations. Plate 1 should be considered
approximate.
4.2 �ite PreFaration
The site was cleared of organic material and debris. Prior to placement of new fill, unsuitable soil was
removed over that portion of the site to receive fill. Removals averaged approximately 3 feet in depth.
Once excavation was complete, the exposed surface was observed and determined to be suitable for support
of fill and the proposed structures. The exposed surface was scarified, moisture conditioned as necessary,
and compacted. '
4.3 Test Procedures
Test Procedure ASTM D 1556 (6-inch sand cone) and ASTM D2922/D3017 (nuclear) were the methods used �
for fieid density testing of compacted fill placed at the site. The results of these field density tests were
compared to the maximum dry density determined by Test Procedure ASTM D1557.
� 4.4 Comvacted Fill
4.4.1 General
� On-site soil was used as compacted fill and consisted rimaril of li ht brown fine to coarse rained silt
P Y g g Y
sand. Fill materials were placed in horizontal lifts approximately 8 inches in loose thickness. Materials
were moisture conditioned as necessary and mechanically compacted to at least 90 percent relative
compaction, based on the maximum dry density determined by Test Procedure ASTM D1557. When field
density tests produced failing results, the approximate limits of substandard soil were established.
� Additional compactive effort was then added and the area retested. Compaction was achieved primarily by
wheel rolling with rubber equipment. The maximum depth of fill is approximately 28 feet, located within
Lot 1. Field density test results are tabulated in Table 2.
� 4.4.2 Fill Slo
P�
Fill slo s were constructed at a radient of a roximatel 2:1
� Pe g pp y (horizontal:vertical) and attain a maximum
height of 30 feet along the western portion of Lot 1 and northern portion of Lot 11. In preparation for fill
� slope construction in areas where the nature topography was 5:1 (horizontal:vertical) or steeper, fill keys
�
� SOUTH COAST GEOLOGIC SERVICES, �N�.
Tract 24232, Riverside County -4-
� P. N. 90057.2
typically 15 feet wide, two (2) feet deep at the tce and three (3) feet deep at the heel were excavated at the �
� tce of slope. The approximate locations of fill keys are indicated on Plate 1. Fill was benched into firm ;
natural material during placement. !
4.5 Qverexcavated Areas
Lots 6 and 7 exposed cut/fill transitions within the anticipated building area. The cut portion of these lots �
� was overexcavated to a depth of at least 4 feet to provide more uniform foundation support. Overexcavation
limits are indicated on the "Density Test Location Map" (Plate 1). ,
4.6 Cut Slopes
Cut slopes at a gradient of 2:1 (horizontal:vertical) were constructed in old alluvium and attain a maximum
height of approzimately 32 feet on the east side of Lot No. 3. The cut slopes as observed were considered
to be stable against deep seated instability, although the potential for erosion exists, especially where the
� more granular materials are exposed. ;
4.7 I�ensi Test Results I
� Density tests were performed during fill placement for the construction of the roadway embankment
intersecting the Municipal Water District easement indicated on Plate 1. Removal of pre-existing soil within
the easement prior to fill placement was limited due to inplace water mainlines and restrictions imposed by
� the Municipal Water District.
� Density tests performed within the compacted fill are not intended as a geotechnical evaluadon of the
suitability of the underlying or adjacent ground for the support of fill and proposed improvements. Density
test results are presented in Table 2.
� 5.0 DISCUSSION
� A portion of the compacted fill underlying Lot No. 8 was placed during grading for southerly adjacent Tract
No. 23220. Results of density tests performed within this fill are included in our Referenced Report No.
2.
� The findings and recommendations in this report are based upon the referenced report and letters, the
requirements of the County of Riverside, and our observations and testing during grading. Fill as described
� in this report is intended to support the proposed development as described in the referenced report.
Development other than anricipated will require further analysis.
� 6.0 �OMMENDATIONS
6.1 �g�
� Recommendations resented in the referenced eotechnical re rt is considered a of this rt. The
P 8 Po P� �
site should be developed in conformance with the requirements of the governing agency and the
� recommendations presented herein and the referenced report. Footing trench spoils should not be cast or
spread across slab or pavement areas without being compacted to the same compaction specifications as
� SOUTH COAST GEOLOGIC SERVICES, �N�.
Tract 24232, Riverside County _5_
P. N. 90p57.2
primary fill. Backfill retumed to footing trench excavadons to restore grades after the construcdon of -
� footings� walls etc., should also be mechanically compacted to the same compacdon
spacificadon requirements in order to minimize the potendal for edge cracldng of slabs. Subgrades below
slab and pavement areas should be "proof compacted" to an unyielding condition just prior to any base
� placement.
6.2 Trench Bac�ll
� Utilit trenches shoul
Y d be placed outside of a 1:1 plane extending downward from the base of structural
footings except where passing under the footing. The backfill in the pipe trench should be compacted to
� reduce the potential for future settlement. Utility trenches should be backfilled with fill placed in lifts not
exceeding g inches in uncompacted thickness. If on-site soil is used, the material should be compacted to
at least 90 percent reladve compacdon by mechanical means only. Imported sand may also be used for '
i backfilling trenches over the level portion of the site provided it is com ted to at least 90 �
pac percent relative
compaction. If imported sand is used, sufficient water should be added during the trench backfilling
operations to prevent the soil from "bulldng" during compacdon.
� It has been .
our expenence that sand, where used for trench backfill, is most effect�vely placed as a
� sand/water slurry pumped into place followed by vibratory densificadon. A 10:1 soil:cement mix should
be used where trench backfill is to be done on sloping terrain (steeper than 5:1). Udlity lines placed in
sloping terrain should be anchored to minimize the potential for movement:
' Utility trenches, drain and irrigadon line trenches, etc. located within the influence of structures vement
or any hardscape should be backfilled with fill placed in lifts not exceeding 8 inches in uncompacted
thiclrness or as the type of compaction equipment wanants. Bacl�ill should be compacted to at least 90 �
� percent relative compaction by mechanical means only. Trench backfill within landscape areas should be
compacted suitably for the intended use. All trenches should be observed, and/or tested by a representadve
� of SCGS, Inc.
6.3 �oundat�
( 6.3.1 General �
( No informadon regarding structural loading was available to us at the time of this report. Once specific
_ structural plans aze available for the proposed residential structures they should be reviewed by our office
for addidonal recommendations.
� _.
The following design value recommendations are based on values presented in the Uniform Building Code
and are presented for preliminary design only. Laboratory testing can be pe�ormed if requested, which
may justify the use of higher design values. The applicability of the following recommendations should be
confinned by the soil engineer in the field during site preparation for construction.
6.3.2 Structural Footings
For the purpose of this report it is assumed that 1 and 2 story structures will be built and supported on
conventional continuous footings extending into firm alluvium or compacted fill. Footings supporting 1
floor and a roof (2 story structure with slab on grade) should be at least 12 inches dcep and 12 inches wide.
� SOUTH COAST GEOLOGIC SERVICES, �N�.
�
Tract 24232, Riverside County -6- ;
P. N. 90057.2 - �
�
Footings supporting 2 floors and a roof should be at least 18 inches deep and 15 inches wide measured
� below lowest adjacent grade ac.ceptable to the soil engineer. Foodngs on or within 10 feet of top of slopes
should be deepened to have a horizontal projection of at least 10 feet from the lowest outside edge of the
footing to the slope face. �
� 6.3.3 Bearing Capacity
� Continuous footings having a depth and width of at least 12 inches in properly compacted fill or firm
alluvium may be designed for an allowable bearing capacity of 1500 psf. This value may be increased by
300 psf for each 1 foot of increased width and/or depth to a maacimum of 4500 psf. The project structural
� engineer is responsible for foundadon design and reinforcement. The weight of the footing below lowest •
adjacent grade can be neglected. The allowable foundation pressure may be increased up to one-third the
� given value for earthquakes or other temporary forces.
Footings adjacent to retammg walls or other footings should be deepened below a 45 degree plane extended
� from the base of the adjacent footing or wall.
;
6.3.4 Lateral Loads
� Lateral loads for footings and slabs on compacted fill or firm alluvium may be designed for using a ,
combination of lateral sliding resistance along the bottom of slabs and passive earth pressure against the �
� sides of foodngs. Lateral sliding resistance may be determined by multiplying the dead load by a coefficient
of friction of 0.25. Passive earth pressure is zero at the ground surface and increases with depth in level �
terrain at the rate of 150 psf per foot of depth to a maximum of 2250 psf for firm alluvium and compacted I
� fill. i
Lateral bearing and lateral sliding resistance may be combined.
� 6.3.5 Prewettin� of Slab Areas
� Laboratory test results indicate that the soil which currently mantles the site has a low potendal for
expansion. The slab areas should be thoroughly moistened immediately prior to placing the moisture
barrier.
( 6.3.6 Moisture Barrier
I A moisture barrier is preferred under all floor slabs; however, at a minimum it should be [;aced under all
floor areas that are expected to be covere� by moisture sensitive materials. Barriers should overlay 2 inches
of clean sand and should consist of a plasdc film (6 mil polyvinyl chloride, minimum). The barrier should
be covered with a minimum of 1 inch of clean sand. Sand overlying the barrier should be lighdy moistened
just prior to placing the concrete. The sand should provide a suitable working surface and aid in the cure
of the concrete. All joints of the barrier should be sealed or overlapped at least 12 inches. Care should
be taken not to damage the barrier during construction.
i
SOUTH COAST GEOLOGIC SERVICES, �N�. - �
� ' � '
- Tract 24232, Riverside County -7-
� P. N. 90057.2
6.4 RetaininE Wailc
� 6.4.1 General
� The following retaining wall recommendations are presented for preliminary use only. Plans for retaining
walls (including location) must be submitted to SCGS, Inc. for review and addidon recommendadons prior
to final design.
� 6.4.2 Wall Pressure
� Non-rigid retaining walls up to six (6) feet in height, which retain, drained backfill sloping at a gradient
of 2:1 (horizontal:vertical) or less should be designed for an equivalent fluid pressure of 43 pcf (minimum).
� A vertical component equal to one-third of the horizontal force may be assumed at the plane of applicadon
of the force. The depth of the retained earth shall be the vertical distance below the ground surface
measured at the wall face for stem design or measured at the heel of the foodng for overturning and sliding.
� Surchar es on walls due to footin s abov 4
g g e a 5 degree plane extended up from the base of the wall foot�ng
I should be added to the wall pressure indicated above. Automobile loads may be assumed to be equivalent
to 12 inches of soil.
6.4.3 Wall Foundation
Wall footings should be extended into firm compacted fill or firm alluvium and may be designed for an
allowable bearing capacity as described in section 6.3.3. Where retaining wall foundations transition from
fill to firm alluvium the wall designer should be consulted to determine whether additional reinforcement
or cold joints are necessary to reduce the potential for wall distress due to differendal settlement.
6.4.4 Lateral Resistance
Lateral resistance presented in this section is taken primarily from Reference No. 2. Lateral sliding
resistance in compacted fill or firm alluvium may be determined by multiplying the dead load by a
coefficient of friction of 0.25. Passive earth pressure should be assumed to be zero at the firm compacted
fill or firm alluvial surface and may be assumed to increase with depth in bearing strata at the rate of 150
psf per foot of depth to a maximum of 2250 psf. Lateral bearing and lateral sliding resistance may be
combined.
6.4.5 Wall Backfill
The wall backfill should consist of predominantly granular material and should be drained. A conrinuous
layer of well graded gravel (as specified on Figure 1), 12 inches in width minimum should be placed along
the intersection of backfill and surface of the backcut. This gravel blanket should extend to within two (2) .
feet of the ground surface. More cohesive on-site soil should be used as a cap over the gravel blanket to
reduce the potential for surface water infiltra�on. Weepholes should consist of unmortared joints in block
walls or one (1) inch diameter round holes in poured walls. The openings should be at least six (6) inches
SOUTH COAST GEOLOGIC SERVICES, �N�.
v
�
Tract 24232, Riverside County -8-
� P. N. 90057.2
above finished grade to prevent surface water from flowing back into the holes. Provisions should be made
' to collect the water from the weepholes and conduct it via a non-erosive device to an approved location
away from slopes and walkway areas.
� Walls to remain dry may be drained by placing a perforated pipe, holes down, in the gravel and grading
the pipe to daylight (2 percent gradient, minimum). Figure 1 depicts a typical retaining wall backdrain
system. The pipe should be lower than the top of the floor slab (where appropriate) and should be graded
� to drain towards an approved location. The back of the wall should be waterproofed.
Wall backfill should be compacted to a density of at least 90 percent of maximum density using light
� compaction equipment only. A paved drainage ditch should be placed along the top of walls where runoff
is anticipated and should conduct the water to an approved location.
' Gravel and pipe placement should be observed by a representative of SCGS, Inc. prior to placement of
backfill. �
I 6.5 �oncrete
� A soluble sulfate content determination was .performed on a selected soil sample considered to represent
su�cial soils at the site to evaluate the potential for reaction with concrete. The concentration of soluble
sulfate in the on-site soil samples was determined to be less than 0.015 percent. Concrete in contact with
I site soil should be proportioned using design designation "A" listed on Table 3.
6.6 �ndscaninQ
I Newly constructed slopes or existing slopes where vegetation is not sufficient or has been damaged due to
construction should be planted as soon as possible with a deep rooting ground cover requiring a minimum
' of irrigation. Burrowing rodents should be actively discouraged. Slope surfaces should be maintained at
a relatively constant moisture content. Periodic checks of slope condidons should be made to search for
and correct potential surficial instability.
Time, weather, plants, animals, and man himself have an adverse affect on natural and man-made slopes.
Shallow slope failures can occur in time. If the slopes are properly maintained it is our opinion that they
will remain stable.
6.7 Iarainaee
The finished surface at the site should be graded so that water will drain away from retaining walls,
structures and slopes. Ponding of water should not be permitted. Drainage from adjacent slopes should
be directed away from the proposed structures to an approved location. Planters adjacent to foundations
should be sealed and drainage diverted via a non-erosive device to an approved location. Placement of
planters, walkways, drive areas, etc., should not be allowed to create depressed areas near foundations.
6.8 Hardscane and Flatwork Areas '
In order to minimiu concrete distress� hardscape should be reinforced and � cold joints provided as
recommended by the project structural engineer. All hardscape should be placed on a firm base.
SOUTH COAST GEOLOGIC SERVICES, �N�. ,
� � ' '
Tract 24232, Riverside County -9-
' P. N. 90057.2
7.0 CONCLUSIONS
' It is our opinion, that the earthwork observed and tested as described in this report has been completed in
substantial conformance with the geotechnical provisions of the project specifications and our
� recommendations and has not adversely affected the stability or the suitability of the site. Based on
information presented in the listed references and on observations and testing described herein, it is our
opinion that compacted fill placed as described in this report should perform adequately for the intended
� use provide� the recommendations presented in this report and the listed references are considered for final
structural design and construction.
I SOUTH COAST GEOLOGIC SERVICFS, Inc.
�
��; �`{�� -
( �J�
( Robert Ponce de Leon
Field Technician
I
I
i s
I J� �.�.�` --�� �-, / , �;`�- � � C�. f �.
� �. . .. -� _ ,S '
i.�;;' , a
�� -°-1
,, � '
� Mel Todd 'r La lle �, m.
,��
Manager, Field Services E� ' '=
� /92 ��
iV r9 �f' C� V� � � 4
° F ca��fo����
SOUTH COAST GEOLOGIC SERVICES, �N�.
� • • • #
Tract 24232, Riverside County -10-
� P. N. 90057.2 ,
i'
APPENDIX A � i
' List of References
� 1. Geotechnical Report for a Proposed Subdivision Consisting of 11 Single Family Homes within the
4.91 Acre Parcel described as Tentative Tract 24232 Located Southeasterly of the intersection of
Nicolas Road and Calle Medusa, Riverside County, California.
' Report by: South Coast Geologic Services, Inc.
Report date: April 24, 1989
� 2. Rough Grade Compacdon Report for Lots 1 through 29, Tract 23220, Riverside County, California.
Report by: South Coast Geologic Services, Inc.
Report date: October 10, 1989.
�
�
�
�
SOUTH COAST GEOLOGIC SERVICES, �N�
�
I
� •
I
' TABLE t _
' MAXIMlk1 DENSITY VALUE
(ASTM D1557)
ppt;� Maximim
I Curve Soil Moisture Dry
No Description Content (X) Densitv Cacf)
1 Light brown silty SAND 8.0 131.0
� � i
TABLE 2
� SUMMARY Of F1ELD DENSITY TEST RESULTS
Te�t Elevation Test Canpection Field Dry Field Relative Teat
o Date (fU Lxstion Curve Densitv Moisture C ction Tvc�iil
� 1 11-08-88 1253 L-9 1 119.6 8.6 91.3 SC
2 11-08-88 1257 L-9 1 118.7 9.1 90.6 SC
3 11-08-88 1255 L-9 1 121.0 8.4. 92.4 SC
4 11-08-88 1256 L-9 1 118.9 8.0 90.8 SC i
S 11-09-88 1258 L-9 1 119.5 8.2 91.2 SC
I 6 11-09-88 1259 L-9 1 120.6 9.4 92.1 SC
7 11-09-88 1260 C. KATERINE 1 119.1 8.4 90.9 SC
8 11-09-88 1257 L-9 1 118.9 8.1 90.7 SC I
9 11-09-88 1260 L-9 1 120.3 9.9 91.8 SC �
I 10 ii-09-88 1260 L-9 1 118.5 9.4 90.5 SC
11 11-10-88 1261 L.q 1 118.6 8.7 90.5 SC I
12 11-10-88 1262 L-10 1 120.7 9.5 92.1 SC �
13 11-10-88 1258 L-9 1 119.4 9.1 91.1 SC ;
14 12-OS-88 1261 l.9 1 118.9 8.8 90.8 SC �
( 15 12-OS-88 1264 E. OF L-9 1 120.2 9.9 91.8 SC
16 12-05-90 1264 L-9 1 118.1 8.8 90.2 SC
17 12-05-88 1268 L-9 1 114.2 9.4 87.2 SC
17A 12-06-88 1268 L-9 1 118.3 9.5 90.3 SC
18 12-OS-90 1267 L-9 1 119.9 8.T 91.5 SC
I 19 12-06-88 1269 C. KATERINE 1 120.7 8.6 92.1 SC
20 12-06-88 1269 C. KATERINE 1 119.7 9.1 91.4 SC
2t 12-06-88 1271 C. IUITERINE 1 122.3 8.4 93.4 SC
22 12-06-90 12T3 L-9 1 118.7 7.9 90.6 SC
I 23 12-07-90 1275 l-9 1 119.7 8.1 91.4 SC
24 12-07-88 1276 l.9 1 122.6 9.7 93.6 SC
25 i2-07-88 1277 L-10 1 119.8 8.7 91.5 SC
26 12-07-88 1275 L-10 ' 1 119.3 8.4 91.1 SC
( 27 12-OT-88 1273 L-5 1 119.7 9.1_ 91.4 SC
28 12-08-88 1256 1-11 1 121.0 8.7 92.4 SC
29 12-08-88 1258 L•11 1 121.0 9.4 92.4 SC
30 12-08-88 1260 L-11 1 119.7 8.1 91.4 SC
31 12-08-88 1262 L-11 1 120.4 8.4 91.9 SC
I 32 12-09-88 1274 L-10 1 120.2 9.1 91.8 SC
33 12-09-88 1276 L-10 1 118.6 7.7 90.5 SC
34 12-09-88 1264 L-11 1 121.6 9.3 92.8 SC
35 12-09-88 1266 L-11 1 119.5 8.9 91.2 SC
I 36 12-09-88 1268 L-10 1 121.8 9.2 93.0 SC .
37 12-10-88 1270 L-11 1 119.5 9.5 91.2 SC
38 12-10-88 12T2 1-11 1 t22.1 T.8 93.2 SC
39 12-10-88 1274 L-11 1 123.0 9.1 93.9 SC
40 12-12-88 1275 1-11 1 119.8 8.1 91.5 SC
I 41 12-12-88 1276 L-11 1 122.4 8.9 93.0 SC
42 12-12-88 1276 L-11 1 119.4 7.9 91.1 SC
63 12-12•88 1278 L-10 1 122.4 8.3 93.4 SC
�►4 12-12-88 1278 C. KATERINE 1 119.5 8.1 91.2 SC
I Project No. 90057.2
Calle Medusa - Trect 24232
Riverside County, Callfornia
I
� SOUTH COAST GEOLOGIC SERVICES, �N�.
0
TABLE 2
SUMMARI' Of FIEID DENSITY TEST RESUITS
Test Etevation Test Canpection Fietd D�y Fiald Relative Test
No. Dete (ft) Laation Curve Densitv Moisture Caroection TYpe( U
45• 11-15-89 1234 C. KATERINE 1 115.8 5.0 87.9 SC
45A" 11-15-89 1234 C. KATERINE 1 122.4 7.5 93.4 SC
46' 11-15-89 1236 C. KATERINE 1 120.0 6.3 91.6 SC
47 11-16-89 1234 L-1 1 117.9 4.9 90.0 SC
48• 11-16-89 1232 C. KATER(NE 1 119.4 7.7 91.1 SC
49 11-16-89 1235 L-1 1 118.2 8.1 90.2 SC
50* 11-16-89 1238 C. KATERINE 1 119.7 7.4 91.4 SC
51 11-16-89 1237 l-1 1 119.8 7.8 91.9 SC
52 11-16-89 1239 L-1 1 120.9 8.1 92.3 SC
53 11-16-89 1241 L-1 1 119.3 7.4 91.0 SC
54 11-16-90 1243 C. KATERINE 1 121.0 6.9 92.< SC
55 11-16-89 1246 l-1 1 119.9 T.6 91.5 SC
56 11-17-89 1247 C. KATERINE 1 122.3 8.4 93.6 SC
57 11-17-89 12i8 L-1 1 120.2 6.8 91.8 SC
58 11-17-89 1250 l-1 1 121.7 6.2 92.9 SC
59 11-17-89 1276 l-T 1 121.3 8.6 92.6 SC
60 11-17-89 1249 C. KATERiNE 1 119.3 7.5 91.1 SC
61 11-17-89 1274 L-6 1 119.5 7.1 91.2 SC
62 11-18-89 1251 L-11 1 119.5 7.4 91.2 SC
63 11-18-89 1253 L-11 1 121.6 7.6 92.8 SC
64 11-18-89 1255 L-11 1 120.8 7.5 92.2 SC
65 11-18-89 1259 L-11 1 121,0 8.6 92.4 SC
66 11-18-89 1257 L-11 1 122.3 7.9 93.4 SC
67 11-18-89 1252 L-1 1 122.6 8.4 93.6 SC
68 11-18-89 1261 1-11 1 119.5 7.4 91.2 SC
69 11-20-89 1263 L-11 1 119.6 8.1 91.3 SC
70 11-20-89 1265 1-11 1 120.3 6.8 91.8 SC
71 11-20-89 1267 L-11 1 124.1 8.4 94.7 SC
72 11-20-89 1254 L-1 1 121.4 8.1 92.7 SC
73 11-20-89 1269 . L-11 1 127.8 8.0 93.T SC
74 11-20-89 1271 L-11 1 120.0 6.8 91.6 SC
T5 11-20-89 12T3 L•11 1 120.2 6.3 91.8 SC
76 11-20-89 1256 L-1 1 122.6 8.1 93.6 SC
77 11-21-89 1258 L•1 1 120.2 6.2 91.8 SC
78 11-21-89 1259 L-i 1 123.1 7.1 94.0 SC
T9 11-27-89 1260 L-1 1 122.4 9.2 93.4 SC
80 71-28-89 1270 l- 1 118.3 8.0 90.3 SC
81 11•28-89 1272 1-10 1 121.7 7.8 92.9 SC
82 11-28-89 1269 L-11 1 122.3 8.4 93.4 SC
83 11-29-89 1251 l-1 1 120.3 7.8 91.8 SC
84 11-29-89 1249 L-1 1 121.8 8.0 93.0 SC
85 10-08-90 12T9.5 L-7 1 122.1 3.8 93.2 N
86 10-08-90 1278 L-6 1 118.5 4.6 90.4 N
87 10-08-90 1279.5 l-5 1 119.0 6.0 90.8 N
88 10-08-90 12T9 L-8 1 118.6 3.1 90.6 M
89 10-11-90 1266 L-2 1 128.6 8.3 98.8 SC
90 10-11-90 1261.5 L-1 1 122.0 7.6 93.2 M
91 10-11-90 1278 L-10 1 122.1 3.8 93.2 SC �
92 10-11-90 1275.5 L-11 1 125.7 5.7 %.0 M
--- L-LOT
SC • SAND CONE TEST METH00 ASTM D1556
NG - NUCLEAR GAGE TEST METH00 ASTM 02922/D3017
* - DENSITY TEST RESUITS ONL1'
Project No. 90057.2
• Calle Medusa - Trect 24232
� Riveroide Canty, California
� SOUTH COAST GEOLOGIC SERVICES, �N�.
�
i � : - .. .
�
�
TABLE 3
( B�OUJREMENTS FOR CONCRET'E EXPOSED TO SULFATE-CONTAINING SOLU'TIONS
Modified from 'Table No. 26-A-6. Uniform Building Code,' 1988 Edition
I
MORNAL LIGIITIEI6UT
� {EIGNT AG�tEGATE
WTER A6(itE6ATE OpiCJtETE
SOUBIE Maxiaun Minieium
SULfATE SULFATE Weter•Cement Ca�pre4atve
DESI6M SULfATE (S0�) !M 80[L (90�) IM CDEMT Ratio Strenpth,
DESt6MJ1TI0M E�E (X BY {�1611T) WTER, PPM TYPE (By Neipht�) fc'psi�
_ �i
A Neyli�ible 0.00-0.10 0-150 ---- ------ ---------
(0-015X)
e Moderate� 0.10-0.20 150-1500 Il,IP(MS), 0.50 3750 `,�
(015-.15X) �
IS(NS) �
I
C Severe 0.20-2.00 1500-10,000 V 0.45 4250 .�
(.15-1X) 4
t
D Very Over 2.00 Over 10,000 V plus 0.45 4250
Severe (1%) pozzolan�
'A lower water-cement ratio or h�gher strength may be required for watertightness or for
protection against corrosion of embedded items or freezing and thawing (Table No. 26-A-5).
2 Seawater.
3 Pozzolan that has bcen determined by test or service record to improved sulfate resistance
when used in concrete containing Type Vi cement.
Project No. 90057.2
Calle Medusa - Tract 24232 -
Riverside County, California ,
;
;
� SOUTH COAST GEOLOGIC SERVICES, �►vc. �!
�� - .
m
� , .' -
�
� �.
' 2 FOOT NATIVE
SOIL CAP
��
�
o �' • 'ti'.'-rt ' 3. 5
* _ ;d. .�;.i�. s:��.aab• z
i ou0,; �•�:�
� .: ol,�,�.;,.
1 :.c •.'qo• •4. e •
.., .
:�:• b :a:CZfla��
' � t' �Q �"�;�
(3RAVEL (FILTER MIX WHERE �:�R
� FILTER FABRIC 13 � NOT USED� � ����?tio'-.�, a;� f
.p ,.,, �.�� �
s�Q� �
I o��o�a',�Q'���o� FILTER FABRIC
'� :%(� (MIRIFI 140 OR
• �f :�� �P �a EQIVA
•.{ ' ¢b LENT)
� ~ .Q: '�� ,
. p � y ,��!�
.o • ;b �:� .
,r � •a�o �•.'��Q . �
�Qy•�p,i�;;; • � 0 �•
.;�.o� ���
�: . �?a (
o °��,�°�{�:°q�y.1
���! ��� �o
4' PERFORATED PIPE. HOIES DOWN, ;�64.°p:R • a•t'
TO BE PLAGED. LOWER THAN TOP OF ' °L • � d �
. Q'. �'' _
' �'� G! o 6 : � -
ADJACETV.T FLOOR SLAB . .d••D
� ,.• •�•:'o- o;, 6� (MINIMUM)
. ;.� b• .
.:.
, f
, s
1 2 �
(MINtMUM) -� , -
S
�.
� �Fi��R Mar�aia� TO IAEET FOLLOWING SPECIFI R E T A I N I N G W A L L' D E T A I L
CAT10N OR APPRO�/ED E�UNALENT: (CONFORMS TO
EMA $T'D.1323.�j9g6 EDIT�
stEVE S¢E PERCFt�rraGF PasstHC TRACT 24232
�• �ao
�< 9a�oo RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CA -
� �a�ao
N0. 4 25-40
N0. 8 t 8-33
( N0. 30 S-t S JANUARY 1991 �` `"'�
No.SO a� . FIGURE 1.-;; _;. .
Ha2oo 0-3 SOUTH COAST 6EOL061C SEAVICES �::::=:`
�:�,
_ ;.�_: �