REP36419

• Permit No: C1980007
• IBM Index Class Name: Report
• Doc Date: 7/9/1981
• Doc Name: Geotechnical Site Evaluation for Proposed Surface Facilities
• From: Chen and Associates
• Permit Index Doc Type: STABILITY REPORT
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

~,

LJ

1

1
-lz-
we recommend the following shet:r strength parameters:
Soil Type
Sl. sandy clay (natural)
S1. sandy clay (natural)
S1. Sandy clay (remolded)
Silty to clayey sand and
silt (natural)
Silty to clayey sand
silt (remolded)
TABLE A
Soil Conditions
Unconsolidated, undrained
Consolidated, undrained
Consolidated, undcained
Consolidated, drained
Cohesion
(d (ksf)
5° 2.5
34° 0.25
29° 0.5
33° 0.1
Consolidated, drained 30° 0.1
The above values essentially represent effective stress para-
meters. Total stress parameters for the clays can be obtained from
triaxial shear tests presented on Figs. 11 and 12. Differentiation
between total and effective conditions cannot be accurately made for
the direct shear testing procedures.
Earthcork: We recommend all embankment fill material consisting of
on-site clays and silty to sandy soils be compacted to at least 958 of
standard Proctor density (ASTM D-698) at.a moisture content 28 below
to 78 above optimum rtuisture. This degree of con action has been
utilized to derive shear strength parameters. The predominant embank-
ment constituent should have a percent passing the U200 sieve in
excess of 358 and maximum size of 6 ind~es. It may be possible for
large equipment to ~.ork rock fragmented soils to meet these specifica-
lions. However, the contractor should be prepared to selectively
place or stockpile unsuitable material as required. Due to the drier
condition of the deeper clays, some difficulties in obtaining optimum
rtuisture may be experienced. 'getting of the borrow area prior to
cutting may be helpful. bb borrow should be removed from below the