Laserfiche WebLink
r L <br />M95105MT <br />3/17/95 <br />Page Three <br />relationship test results in greater density. Therefore greater <br />compaction energy could easily result in an in-place compacted <br />density much grater than the maximum density defined by the <br />moisture content-dry density relationship test. We understand that <br />the compaction equipment used was a Caterpillar S15B with an <br />operating weight of about 44,000 pounds. This type of compaction <br />equipment is capable of compaction energy much greater than the <br />compaction energy used for the laboratory test. <br />It should be noted that our density tests are performed long <br />after the material is placed and compacted. This time lag between <br />the placement and compaction of the material and the density tests <br />would allow for drying of the material without significant change <br />in the in-place dry density. The in-place moisture content of the <br />material tested could be much less than the moisture content of the <br />material at the time of compaction. Therefore the moisture content <br />test performed at the time of our density tests may not be a good <br />indication of the moisture content at the time of compaction and <br />should not be used as a basis for determining the compaction <br />moisture content. <br />Lambert nna ~,~,gociate,~ <br />CONSULTING GEOTEC MNIUL ENGIM EE H$ •ND <br />MATE R~~L TESTING <br />