Post on 09-Feb-2018
REPORT OF GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION AND ENGINEERING ANALYSIS
RIVER TOWER RESTORATION RIVER TOWER PARK
TAMPA, FLORIDA
AREHNA PROJECT NO. B-13-002 February 22, 2013
Prepared For: Southwest Florida Water Management District 7601 US Highway 301 North Mail Code: TPA-2-NSR Tampa, Florida 33637-6759
Prepared By: AREHNA Engineering, Inc. 5012 West Lemon Street Tampa, Florida 33609
FIGURE 3 Geotechnical Report (2)
5012 W. Lemon Street, Tampa, Florida 33609 Ph 813.944.3464 │ Fax 813.944.4959
February 22, 2013 Ms. Stephanie T. Powers Southwest Florida Water Management District 7601 US Highway 301 North Mail Code: TPA-2-NSR Tampa, Florida 33637-6759 (813) 985-7481 Ext. 2213 (813) 987-6747 Fax stephanie.powers@watermatters.org Subject: Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Engineering Analysis River Tower Restoration (River Tower Park) Tampa, Florida AREHNA Project B-13-002 Dear Ms. Powers: AREHNA Engineering, Inc. (AREHNA) is pleased to submit this report of our geotechnical exploration and engineering analysis for the proposed project. Services were conducted in general accordance with AREHNA Proposal Prop-12-081 dated December 18, 2012. The purpose of our geotechnical study was to obtain information on the general subsurface conditions for the proposed drainage improvements. This report presents our understanding of the project, outlines our exploratory procedures, documents the field test data obtained and includes our recommendations for on-site soil suitability. AREHNA appreciates the opportunity to have assisted the Southwest Florida Water Management District on this project. Should you have any questions with regards to this report, or if we can be of any further assistance, please contact this office. Best Regards, AREHNA ENGINEERING, INC. FLORIDA BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION NO. 28410
Alex Rodriguez, E.I. Amanda S. Pereira, P.E. Geotechnical Engineer Senior Geotechnical Engineer Florida Registration 67784 Distribution: 3 – Addressee 1 – File
TABLE OF CONTENTS Page
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.............................................................................................................. 1 2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION AND SCOPE OF WORK .............................................................. 2
2.1 Site Description and Project Characteristics .................................................................... 2 2.2 Scope of Work ................................................................................................................. 2
3.0 FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING ........................................................ 3 3.1 Field Exploration ............................................................................................................. 3 3.2 Laboratory Testing ........................................................................................................... 3
4.0 LABORATORY TESTING ............................................................................................................ 4 5.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ...................................................................................................... 5
5.1 USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Data .................................................... 5 5.2 USGS Topographic Data ................................................................................................. 5 5.3 Subsurface Conditions ..................................................................................................... 5 5.4 Ground Water Conditions ................................................................................................ 6 5.5 Estimated Seasonal High Ground Water Level ............................................................... 6 5.6 On-Site Soil Suitability .................................................................................................... 7
6.0 LIMITATIONS ................................................................................................................................. 8
LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX A Project Site Location Map – Figure 1
Field Exploration Plan - Figure 2 USGS Topographic Survey – Figure 3 USDA Soil Survey Map - Figure 4
APPENDIX B Table 1 - Summary of GPS Coordinates
Generalized Subsurface Profile – Figure 5 Soil Boring Records
Key to Soil Classifications Symbols APPENDIX C
Field Procedures Laboratory Procedures Table 2 – Laboratory Results
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this geotechnical exploration was to obtain information regarding the general subsurface conditions at the site. The planned drainage improvements include the addition of a stormwater retention area located near the eastern portion of the site. The project site is located at the southeast quadrant of the intersection of East Bird Street and North Florida Avenue in Tampa, Florida. The borings performed at the site encountered sands generally increasing in fines content with depth (SP, SP-SC and SC) to the respective termination depths. Within the proposed pond area, borings B-02 and B-03 encountered clayey soils (SC and CH) at a depth of 4 feet. The ground water level was not discernible within the upper 6 to 8 feet of the sandy soils encountered within borings B-01 and B-04. The ground water level was also not noted within sandy soils in the upper 4 feet of borings B-02 and B-03, where clayey soils were encountered thereafter.
2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION AND SCOPE OF WORK
2.1 Site Description and Project Characteristics The project site is currently under consideration for the placement of a stormwater retention area near the southeast portion of the park. The site currently consists of an open grassy field with a few large trees scattered throughout. Several large trees and some shrubbery line the east and south sides of the project area. The south side of the project area is also bordered by the Hillsborough River. The site appears to drain from north to south, towards the river. 2.2 Scope of Work The purpose of our geotechnical study was to obtain information on the general subsurface conditions of the soils surrounding and underlying the proposed stormwater retention area. The subsurface materials encountered were then evaluated with respect to the available project characteristics. The following services were performed to achieve the above-outlined objectives:
Requested utility location services from Sunshine State One-Call.
Coordinated site access and marked boring locations as approved by Ms. Stephanie Powers (SWFWMD) and Mr. Tom Reis (Scheda) during an on-site meeting.
Performed four Standard Penetration Test (SPT) borings utilizing a track-mounted rig in the area of the proposed pond and near structure S-3A. Samples were collected and Standard Penetration Test resistances were recorded at approximate intervals of two feet for the top ten feet and at approximate intervals of five feet thereafter.
Visually classified and stratified soil samples in the laboratory using the Unified Soil Classification System and conducted a laboratory testing program consisting of natural moisture content, Atterberg limits and grain size analysis on representative samples, as deemed necessary.
Reported the results of the field exploration, lab testing, and engineering analysis. The results of the subsurface exploration are presented in this written report, signed and sealed by a professional engineer specializing in geotechnical engineering.
3.0 FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING
3.1 Field Exploration
The SPT borings were performed with the use of a Power Drill Rig using Bentonite “Mud” drilling procedures. Samples were collected and Standard Penetration Test resistances were measured at approximate intervals of two feet for the top ten feet and at approximate intervals of five feet thereafter. The soil sampling was performed in general accordance with ASTM Test Designation D-1586, entitled “Penetration Test and Split-Barrel Sampling of Soils.” Representative portions of these soil samples were sealed in glass jars, labeled and transferred for appropriate testing and classification. The soil boring records and key to classification are attached in Appendix B of this report. The locations of the borings were confirmed by SWFWMD. 3.2 Laboratory Testing
The soil samples were transported to AREHNA’s soil laboratory and were classified by the Geotechnical Engineer using the USCS in general accordance with the ASTM Test Designation D-2488. Laboratory tests included grain size analysis, natural moisture content, and Atterberg limits. The test results are presented in Table 2, Appendix C.
4.0 LABORATORY TESTING
Laboratory tests were performed on representative soil samples in order to classify the soil and to evaluate its engineering properties. Laboratory testing, performed in general accordance with ASTM Standards, included Atterberg limits, moisture content and single sieve (#200) grain size. Laboratory test results are presented below, and hare also included as Table 2 in Appendix C.
Boring No. Sample Depth (feet) Percent Moisture
Content Percent Finer (-200 sieve) Liquid Limit
Plasticity Index
B-01 8.0 – 8.5 30.4 30.7 36 18
B-02 4.0 – 6.0 28.8 38.3 63 40
B-02 6.0 – 8.0 32.9 43.7 69 47
B-02 18.5 – 20.0 67.0 97.6 189 116
B-03 4.0 – 6.0 33.0 56.8 81 58
B-03 8.0 – 10.0 40.5 39.2 72 52
B-04 8.0 – 10.0 23.1 48.6 50 30
Our Laboratory Procedures are presented in Appendix C.
5.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
5.1 USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Data A review of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) survey for Hillsborough County, attached as Figure 4 in Appendix A, indicates that the soils in the vicinity of the project site consists of Urban land (mapping unit 56). The NRCS published profiles typically reports soils extending to 80 inches below the ground surface. Excerpts from the published Soil Survey are provided below for reference. Characteristics of Urban land [56]: This map unit consists of miscellaneous areas that are covered by concrete, asphalt, buildings, or other impervious surfaces that obscure or alter the soils so that identification is not feasible. The slope is predominantly less that 2 percent, but it ranges from less that 2 percent to 5 percent. In areas mapped as Urban land, 85 percent or more of the surface is covered by streets, parking lots, buildings and other structures. In moderately built-up areas, these structures cover 50 to 85 percent of the surface. Present land use precludes the use of this miscellaneous area for cultivated crops, pasture, or commercial trees. Open areas generally are used for lawns, parks, playgrounds, cemeteries, or open spaces. Based on the borings performed, the shallow soils below grade generally consist of sandy soils (SP, SP-SC). 5.2 USGS Topographic Data The topographic survey map published by the United States Geological Survey was reviewed for ground surface features at the proposed project locations (Figure 3, Appendix A). Based on this review, the natural ground surface elevations at the project site slope downward to the south from approximately +20 to less than +10 feet National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 (NGVD).
5.3 Subsurface Conditions The following soil conditions highlight the general subsurface stratification. The Soil Test Boring Records in Appendix B should be consulted for a detailed description of the subsurface conditions encountered at the boring location. When reviewing the boring record, it should be understood that soil conditions may vary between and away from the boring locations. Borings B-01, B-02 and B-03 were positioned within the area of the proposed stormwater retention area, located near the southeast corner of the park. Boring B-04 was placed adjacent to structure S-3A, located near the northeast corner of the project site. The coordinates for each boring are included as Table 1 in Appendix B.
Boring B-01 encountered sands generally increasing in fines content with depth (SP, SP-SC and SC) to the termination depth of 8.5 feet, where the boring encountered a drill bit refusal on rock.
Boring B-02 encountered slightly clayey fine sand (SP-SC) and clayey fine sand (SC), underlain by
a layer of very soft limestone (WLS) between approximately 8 and 13 feet. Clayey soils (CL-ML and CH) were then penetrated, with limestone (LS) encountered between 23 feet and the termination depth of 25 feet.
Boring B-03 encountered 4 feet of fine sand (SP) underlain by high plasticity clay (CH) to a depth
of 8 feet. Clayey fine sand (SC) was then penetrated, followed by the limestone (LS) formation between approximately 13 feet and the termination depth of 14 feet.
Boring B-04 encountered 6 feet of fine sand (SP), followed by clayey fine sand (SC). Between
approximately 18 feet and the termination depth of 19 feet, a no-recovery zone along with a drill bit refusal, likely on limestone, was encountered.
A page defining the terms and classification symbols used in the boring profiles is included in Appendix B of this report. 5.4 Ground Water Conditions
The ground water level was not encountered within the upper sandy soil stratums of the SPT borings performed. The sandy soils extended to an approximate depth of 4 to 8 feet, where soil strata containing an increased percent fines content (SC and CH) were encountered. Where the more cohesive soils were encountered, the borings were advanced using mud-rotary methods, which precludes the determination of the depth of the water level once mud is introduced in the borehole. It should be noted that the borings were completed in February, which historically follows a dry period where lower ground water levels are normally recorded. Due to the presence of the clayey soils, the groundwater level may be a temporary perched condition in some areas, during the wetter times to the year. Fluctuation in ground water levels should also be expected due to seasonal climatic changes, construction activity, rainfall variations, surface water runoff, tidal fluctuations and other site-specific factors. Since ground water level variations are anticipated, design drawings and specifications should accommodate such possibilities and construction planning should be based on the assumption that variations will occur. 5.5 Estimated Seasonal High Ground Water Level
Based on the mapping performed by the USDA, soils information obtained from the site and our experience in the area, we estimate that the seasonal high ground water level is approximately 2 to 3 feet below grade, with higher levels after severe storm events.
5.6 On-Site Soil Suitability The borings indicate that the majority of the soils encountered in the upper 4 to 6 feet should be generally suitable for fill. Classification indicates the majority of the upper 4 to 6 feet of the soils at this site consist of coarse grained material classified as SP and SP-SC, based on the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). Materials excavated from the pond area below a depth of 4 feet may not be favorable for use as structural fill in the vicinity of borings B-02 and B-03. Suitable structural fill materials should consist of fine to medium sand with less than 12 percent passing the No. 200 sieve, and be free of rubble, organics, clay, debris and other unsuitable material.
6.0 LIMITATIONS
The analysis and recommendations submitted in this report are based upon the data obtained from the soil borings performed at the locations indicated. Regardless of the thoroughness of a geotechnical exploration, there is always a possibility that conditions may be different from those at specific boring locations and that conditions will not be as anticipated by the designers or contractors. In addition, the construction process itself may alter soil conditions. AREHNA is not responsible for the conclusions, opinions or recommendations made by others based on the data presented in this report.
APPENDIX A
� Project Site Location Map – Figure 1
� Field Exploration Plan - Figure 2
� USGS Topographic Survey – Figure 3
� USDA Soil Survey - Figure 4
Client: SWFWMDProject No.: B-13-002Date: February 19, 2013 Checked By: ASPDrawn By: DAR FIGURE5012 West Lemon Street, Tampa, FL 33609
Phone 813.944.3464 ■ Fax 813.944.4959
River Tower Restoration
Tampa, Florida
1111
PROJECT SITE
LOCATION MAP
Project Site Location
B-01
B-02River Tower
Restoration Parcel
B-03
B-04
East Bird Street
Client: SWFWMDProject No.: B-13-002Date: February 19, 2013 Checked By: ASPDrawn By: DAR FIGURE5012 West Lemon Street, Tampa, FL 33609
Phone 813.944.3464 ■ Fax 813.944.4959
River Tower Restoration
Tampa, Florida
2222
B-# Standard Penetration Test Boring
LEGEND
FIELD EXPLORATION
LOCATION MAP
Client: SWFWMDProject No.: B-13-002Date: February 19, 2013 Checked By: ASPDrawn By: DAR FIGURE5012 West Lemon Street, Tampa, FL 33609
Phone 813.944.3464 ■ Fax 813.944.4959
River Tower Restoration
Tampa, Florida
3333
USGS TOPOGRAPHIC
MAP
Project Site Location
Source: USGS Topographic Map, Tampa, FL
Client: SWFWMDProject No.: B-13-002Date: February 19, 2013 Checked By: ASPDrawn By: DAR FIGURE5012 West Lemon Street, Tampa, FL 33609
Phone 813.944.3464 ■ Fax 813.944.4959
River Tower Restoration
Tampa, Florida
4444
USDA SOIL
SURVEY MAP
Soil Mapping Unit
56 – Urban land
Source: USDA NRCS Soil Survey, Hillsborough County, FL
Project Site Location
APPENDIX B
� Table 1 – Summary of GPS Coordinates
� Generalized Subsurface Profile – Figure 5
� Soil Boring Records
� Key to Soil Classifications Symbols
TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF GPS COORDINATES
River Tower Restoration
River Tower Park, Tampa, Florida
AREHNA Project No. B-13-002
Boring No. Latitude Longitude
B-01 28.02117 -82.456825
B-02 28.02143 -82.456755
B-03 28.02184 -82.457001
B-04 28.02226 -82.456586
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
BORING
TERMINATED
8.5 ft
SP
SP-SC
SC
N= 22
N= 19
N= 100+
BORING
TERMINATED
25 ft
SP-SC
SC
WLS
CL-ML
CH
LS
N= 9
N= 8
N= 2
N= 9
N= 100+
N= 100+
BORING
TERMINATED
14 ft
SP
CH
SC
WLS
N= 16
N= 10
N= 10
N= 100+
BORING
TERMINATED
19 ft
SP
SC
SC
N= 13
N= 38
N= 8
N= 7
N= 100+
Drawn By: VAF
Checked By: AR
Poorly-graded SandPoorly-graded Sand withClay
Clayey Sand
Weathered Limestone Low Plasticity Silty Clay High Plasticity Clay
Limestone
River Tower Rest.Tampa, FL
Soil Classification Key
GENERALIZED SUBSURFACE PROFILEFigure 5
Date: 2/20/2013 Prepared forSouthwest Florida Water Management District
Project No.: B-13-002
De
pth
(ft)
5012 W. Lemon StreetTampa, FL 33609
B-012/7/2013
B-022/7/2013
B-032/7/2013
B-042/7/2013
>>
AU
AU
SPT
SPT
SPT
29-8-11-15
14-9-8-11
6-12-10-10
7-10-9-11
50/4"
Medium dense brown fine SAND (SP)
Medium dense tan slightly clayey fine SAND (SP-SC) with some shellfragments
Very dense gray and brown clayey fine SAND (SC) with rock fragments50 blows for 4-inches @ 8 feetRefusal on rock and chert fragments
Bottom of borehole at 8.5 feet.
19
17
22
19
100+
Remarks:
Ground Water Level:Groundwater not encountered in top 8 feet
Date Drilled: 2/7/13
Drilled By: AREHNA
Method: ASTM D-1586, Standard Penetration Test Boring
FINES CONTENT (%)
20 40 60 80
FINES CONTENT (%)
20 40 60 80
20 40 60 80
PL LLMC
FINES CONTENT (%)
20 40 60 80
WA
TE
R L
EV
EL SPT N VALUE
20 40 60 80D
EP
TH
(ft)
0
SA
MP
LE
TY
PE
SP
T B
LO
WC
OU
NT
S
GR
AP
HIC
LO
G
SOIL DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS
N-V
AL
UE
Drawn By: VAF
Checked By: AR
SOIL BORING LOG
PAGE 1 OF 1
BoringB-01
Date: 2/20/2013
TAMPA, FL
AREHNA Project No.: B-13-002AREHNA Project No.: B-13-002
Southwest Florida Water Management District
RIVER TOWER REST.
>>
>>
AU
AU
SPT
SPT
SPT
SPT
SPT
SPT
19-14-14-13
14-7-8-8
3-4-5-5
3-4-4-4
2-3-6
50/4"
10-23-50/4"
Medium dense tan slightly clayey fine SAND (SP-SC)
Loose gray clayey fine SAND (SC)
Very soft weathered LIMESTONE (WLS) with clayWOH for 12-inches @ 8 feet
Stiff gray silty CLAY (CL-ML) with some limestone
Hard green and gray high plasticity CLAY (CH) with traces of chert andlimestone50 blows for 4-inches @ 18.5 feet
Hard LIMESTONE (LS)
50 blows for 4-inches @ 24.5 feet
Bottom of borehole at 25.0 feet.
28
15
9
8
2
9
100+
100+
Remarks:
Ground Water Level:Groundwater not encountered in top 4 feet
Date Drilled: 2/7/13
Drilled By: AREHNA
Method: ASTM D-1586, Standard Penetration Test Boring
FINES CONTENT (%)
20 40 60 80
FINES CONTENT (%)
20 40 60 80
20 40 60 80
PL LLMC
FINES CONTENT (%)
20 40 60 80
WA
TE
R L
EV
EL SPT N VALUE
20 40 60 80D
EP
TH
(ft)
0
10
20
SA
MP
LE
TY
PE
SP
T B
LO
WC
OU
NT
S
GR
AP
HIC
LO
G
SOIL DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS
N-V
AL
UE
Drawn By: VAF
Checked By: AR
SOIL BORING LOG
PAGE 1 OF 1
BoringB-02
Date: 2/20/2013
TAMPA, FL
AREHNA Project No.: B-13-002AREHNA Project No.: B-13-002
Southwest Florida Water Management District
RIVER TOWER REST.
WOH-WOH-2-9
>>
AU
AU
SPT
SPT
SPT
SPT
3-5-9-16
20-17-12-9
7-8-8-7
9-4-6-4
5-5-5-3
50/1"
Medium dense tan and brown fine SAND (SP)
Stiff to very stiff tan and green sandy high plasticity CLAY (CH)
Loose tan clayey fine SAND (SC) with weathered limestone fragments
Very hard weathered LIMESTONE (WLS) with some clay50 blows for 1-inch @ 13.5 feet
Bottom of borehole at 14.0 feet.
14
29
16
10
10
100+
Remarks:
Ground Water Level:Groundwater not encountered in top 4 feet
Date Drilled: 2/7/13
Drilled By: AREHNA
Method: ASTM D-1586, Standard Penetration Test Boring
FINES CONTENT (%)
20 40 60 80
FINES CONTENT (%)
20 40 60 80
20 40 60 80
PL LLMC
FINES CONTENT (%)
20 40 60 80
WA
TE
R L
EV
EL SPT N VALUE
20 40 60 80D
EP
TH
(ft)
0
10
SA
MP
LE
TY
PE
SP
T B
LO
WC
OU
NT
S
GR
AP
HIC
LO
G
SOIL DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS
N-V
AL
UE
Drawn By: VAF
Checked By: AR
SOIL BORING LOG
PAGE 1 OF 1
BoringB-03
Date: 2/20/2013
TAMPA, FL
AREHNA Project No.: B-13-002AREHNA Project No.: B-13-002
Southwest Florida Water Management District
RIVER TOWER REST.
>>
AU
AU
SPT
SPT
SPT
SPT
SPT
3-4-4-8
5-7-5-5
5-5-8-13
18-20-18-13
7-6-2-3
2-3-4
50/0"
Loose to medium dense gray and brown fine SAND (SP)
Dense tan and gray indurated clayey fine SAND (SC)
Loose tan and gray clayey fine SAND (SC)
No recovery50 blows for 0-inches @ 18.5 feet
Bottom of borehole at 19.0 feet.
8
12
13
38
8
7
100+
Remarks:
Ground Water Level:Groundwater not encountered in top 6 feet
Date Drilled: 2/7/13
Drilled By: AREHNA
Method: ASTM D-1586, Standard Penetration Test Boring
FINES CONTENT (%)
20 40 60 80
FINES CONTENT (%)
20 40 60 80
20 40 60 80
PL LLMC
FINES CONTENT (%)
20 40 60 80
WA
TE
R L
EV
EL SPT N VALUE
20 40 60 80D
EP
TH
(ft)
0
10
SA
MP
LE
TY
PE
SP
T B
LO
WC
OU
NT
S
GR
AP
HIC
LO
G
SOIL DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS
N-V
AL
UE
Drawn By: VAF
Checked By: AR
SOIL BORING LOG
PAGE 1 OF 1
BoringB-04
Date: 2/20/2013
TAMPA, FL
AREHNA Project No.: B-13-002AREHNA Project No.: B-13-002
Southwest Florida Water Management District
RIVER TOWER REST.
CLIENT Southwest Florida Water Management District
PROJECT NUMBER B-13-002
PROJECT NAME River Tower Rest.
PROJECT LOCATION Tampa, FL
SAMPLER SYMBOLSLITHOLOGIC SYMBOLS
(Unified Soil Classification System)
KEY TO SYMBOLS
Hand Auger
Standard PenetrationTest
Standard Penetration Resistances
SP: Poorly-graded Sand
SP-SC: Poorly-graded Sand with Clay
SC: Clayey Sand
WLS: Weathered Limestone
CL-ML: Low Plasticity Silty Clay
CH: High Plasticity Clay
LS: Limestone
ABBREVIATIONS SOIL BOUNDARY CLASSIFICATIONS
Coarse
Cobbles
ConsistenceyNo. of Blows0 - 23 - 45 - 8
16 - 30
Very SoftSoftFirmStiff
Very Stiff
ConsistenceyNo. of Blows10 - 2021 - 50
51 - 50/3"
Soft
WOR = Weight of Rod
Water Level at Time Drilling,or as Shown
Water Level After 24 Hours,or as Shown
SILT or CLAY
GRAVEL
Greater than 30 Hard
MediumHard
Very Hard
LIMESTONE
Greater than 50/3"
LIMESTONE
WOH = Weight of Hammer
SAND
Fine Fine CoarseMedium
FINEGRAINED
SOILS
#40Sieve
COARSE GRAINED SOILS
3-inch 12-inch3/4-inch#4Sieve
# 200Sieve
#10Sieve
Ground Water Level Measurements
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
LL
PI
W
DD
NP
-200
PP
LIQUID LIMIT (%)
PLASTICITY INDEX (%)
MOISTURE CONTENT (%)
DRY DENSITY (PCF)
NON PLASTIC
PERCENT PASSING NO. 200 SIEVE
POCKET PENETROMETER (TSF)
Boulders
0 - 45 - 1011 - 30
31 - 50Greater than 50
Very LooseLoose
Medium Dense
Dense
Relative Density
Very Dense
SAND &
GRAVEL
No. of Blows
9 - 15
SILT &
CLAY
APPENDIX C
� Field Procedures
� Laboratory Procedures
� Table 2 - Laboratory Test Results
FIELD PROCEDURES Standard Penetration Test (SPT) Borings The SPT borings are performed in general accordance with ASTM D-1586, "Penetration Test and Split-Barrel Sampling of Soils." A rotary drilling process is used and bentonite drilling fluid is circulated in the boreholes to stabilize the sides and flush the cuttings. At regular intervals, the drilling tools are removed and soil samples are obtained with a standard 2-feet long, 2-inch diameter split-tube sampler. The sampler is first seated 6 inches and then driven an additional foot with blows of a 140-pound automatically tripped hammer falling 30 inches. The number of hammer blows required to drive the sampler the final foot is designated the "Penetration Resistance." The penetration resistance, when properly interpreted, is an index to the soil strength and density.
LABORATORY PROCEDURES
Water Content
The water content is the ratio, expressed as a percentage, of the weight of water in a given mass of soil to the
weight of the solid particles. This test is conducted in general accordance with FM 1-T265.
Atterberg Limits (Plasticity)
A soil's Plasticity Index (PI) is the numerical difference between the Liquid Limit (LL) and the Plastic limit (PL).
The LL is the moisture content at which the soil will flow as a heavy viscous fluid and is determined in general
accordance with ASTM D-4318. The PL is the moisture content at which the soil begins to crumble when rolled
into a small thread and is also determined in general accordance with FM 1-T 90.
Fines Content
In this test, the sample is dried and then washed over a No. 200 mesh sieve. The percentage of soil by weight
passing the sieve is the percentage of fines or portion of the sample in the silt and clay size range. This test is
conducted in general accordance with ASTM D-1140.
TABLE 2 SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
River Tower Restoration
River Tower Park, Tampa, Florida
AREHNA Project No.: B-13-002
Boring No. Sample Depth (feet) Percent Moisture
Content Percent Finer (-200 sieve) Liquid Limit
Plasticity Index
B-01 8.0 – 8.5 30.4 30.7 36 18
B-02 4.0 – 6.0 28.8 38.3 63 40
B-02 6.0 – 8.0 32.9 43.7 69 47
B-02 18.5 - 20.0 67.0 97.6 189 116
B-03 4.0 – 6.0 33.0 56.8 81 58
B-03 8.0 – 10.0 40.5 39.2 72 52
B-04 8.0 – 10.0 23.1 48.6 50 30