36C25619R0071-0002006.pdf

January 10, 2019

Mr. Scott Woods

Scott C. Woods & Associates, P.A.

112 Lone Wolf Drive

Madison, Mississippi 39110

Project No. 180603

Geotechnical Investigation

Proposed Elevated Water Storage Tank

VA Hospital

Jackson, Mississippi

Dear Mr. Woods:

Submitted here is the report of our geotechnical investigation for the above-captioned project. This investigation by your execution of our contract agreement on November 15, 2018 and was generally performed in accordance with our Proposal No. 18001P-205R dated November

14, 2018.

We appreciate the opportunity to be of service. If you should have any questions concerning this report, please do not hesitate to call us.

Very truly yours, BURNS COOLEY DENNIS, INC.

Amber Templeton Reeb, P.E.

Marcos V. F. Rodrigues, P.E.

MR/ATR/khb

Copies Submitted: (2)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Project Description

1.2 Purposes

2.0 FIELD EXPLORATION

2.1 General

2.2 Drilling Methods and Groundwater Observations

2.3 Sampling Methods

2.4 Field Classification, Sample Preservation and Borehole Abandonment

3.0 LABORATORY TESTING

3.1 General

3.2 Strength Tests

3.3 Classification Tests

3.4 Water Content Tests

4.0 GENERAL SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

4.1 General

4.2 Soil Stratification

4.3 Groundwater

5.0 DISCUSSION

5.1 General

5.2 Foundation Design Recommendations

5.3 Seismic Design

5.4 Site Preparation, Earthwork and Other Construction Considerations

6.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS

FIGURES

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Project Description

Plans are underway for the construction of a new 24-ft diameter elevated water storage tank on the north side of the VA Hospital in Jackson, Mississippi. The proposed elevated water tank will have a storage capacity of 300,000 gallons. Construction details have not been developed at this time. Details regarding grading plans are not available; however, we anticipate only nominal cutting and/or filling will be required to construct a level pad and to provide drainage away from the tank. Visual observations indicate that the proposed construction area is relatively level. The proposed construction area is within an asphalt-paved parking area.

1.2 Purposes

The specific purposes of this investigation were:

1) to make exploratory soil borings within the area planned for construction of the elevated water storage tank;

2) to verify field classifications and to evaluate pertinent physical properties of the soils encountered in the borings by visual examination of the soil samples in the laboratory and routine tests performed on the samples; and

3) after analysis of the soil boring and laboratory test data, to provide recommendations for design and construction of a foundation system to support the elevated water storage tank.

2.0 FIELD EXPLORATION

2.1 General

Subsurface soil conditions within the planned construction area for the elevated water storage tank were explored by means of three borings made at 120-degree intervals around the perimeter of the tank column circle. The borings were located in the field by means of visual sighting and taped measurements from existing site features using distances scaled from a site plan we were furnished. The approximate locations of the borings are shown on Figure 1 of this report.

All soils were classified in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System.

A synopsis of the Unified Soil Classification System is presented on Figure 2 along with symbols and terminology typically utilized on graphical soil boring logs. Logs of the soil borings are presented on Figures 3, 4 and 5. The graphical logs illustrate the types of soil and stratification encountered with depth below the existing ground surface at the individual boring locations.

Approximate GPS coordinates for the boring locations as determined using a hand-held device are shown in the “Comments” section at the bottom of the graphical boring logs.

2.2 Drilling Methods and Groundwater Observations

Borings 1 and 2 were made to an exploration depth of 20 ft, and Boring 3 was made to a depth of 50 ft. The borehole for Boring 3 was initially advanced to a depth of 13 ft by dry augering and then was extended to completion using rotary wash drilling procedures. Borings 1 and 2 were advanced full depth by dry augering. Observations were made continuously during auger drilling to detect free water entering the open boreholes. Notes pertaining to groundwater observations made during auger drilling are included at the bottom right corner of the graphic boring logs.

2.3 Sampling Methods

Relatively undisturbed samples of the soils encountered in the borings were obtained by pushing a 3-in. OD Shelby tube sampler approximately 1.5 ft to 2 ft into the soil. The Shelby tube samples were obtained within the depth intervals illustrated as shaded portions of the "Samples" column of the graphic boring logs. Disturbed samples of the soils encountered in the borings were obtained by driving a standard 2-in. OD split-spoon sampler 18 in. into the soil with a 140-lb hammer falling freely a distance of 30 in. The depths at which the split-spoon samples were taken are illustrated as crossed rectangular symbols under the "Samples" column of the graphic logs.

Standard penetration test (SPT) blow counts resulting from split-spoon sampling are recorded under the "Blows Per Ft" column of the graphic logs. The Shelby tube and/or split-spoon samples were obtained at approximate 3-ft to 5-ft intervals of depth. Disturbed auger cutting samples were taken in the borings near the ground surface in the borings. The depths at which the auger cutting samples were taken are illustrated as small I-shaped symbols under the "Samples" column of the graphic boring logs.

2.4 Field Classification, Sample Preservation and Borehole Abandonment

All soils encountered during drilling were examined and classified in the field by a geotechnical engineering technician. The undisturbed Shelby tube samples were extruded from the sampling tube in the field. An approximate 6-in. long portion of each Shelby tube sample was sealed with melted paraffin in a cylindrical cardboard container to prevent moisture loss and structural disturbance. An additional portion of the Shelby tube samples, representative portions of the split-spoon samples and the auger cutting samples were sealed in jars to provide material for visual examination and testing in the laboratory. Unless other disposition is requested, we routinely discard soil samples after about six months of storage. In accordance with Mississippi

Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) regulations, the 50-ft deep borehole for Boring 3 was filled with cement-bentonite grout after completion of drilling and sampling. The remaining boreholes were plugged with soil cuttings.

3.0 LABORATORY TESTING

3.1 General

All of the soil samples were examined in the laboratory and tests were performed on the samples to assist in evaluating the strengths, classifications, and volume change properties of the soils encountered. The types of laboratory tests performed are described in the following paragraphs.

3.2 Strength Tests

The undrained shear strength characteristics of the fine-grained soils encountered in the borings were investigated by means of unconfined compression tests performed on selected undisturbed Shelby tube samples. The results of the unconfined compression tests in terms of cohesion are plotted as small open circles in the data section of the graphic logs. The water content and dry density were also determined for each unconfined compression test specimen. The water contents are plotted as small shaded circles in the data section of the graphic logs. The dry densities are tabulated to the nearest lb per cu ft under the “Dry Density” column of the logs.

3.3 Classification Tests

The classifications and volume change properties of the fine-grained soils encountered in the borings were investigated by means of Atterberg liquid and plastic limit tests performed on selected representative samples. The results of the liquid and plastic limit tests are plotted as small crosses interconnected by dashed lines in the data section of the graphic boring logs. In accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System, fine-grained soils are classified as either clays or silts of low or high plasticity based on the results of Atterberg limit tests. The numerical difference between the liquid limit and plastic limit is defined as the plasticity index (PI). The magnitudes of the liquid limit and plasticity index and the proximity of the natural water content to the plastic limit are indicators of the potential for a fine-grained soil to shrink or swell upon changes in moisture content or to consolidate under loading. The proximity of the natural water content to the plastic limit is also an indicator of soil strength.

The classifications of soils containing some sand were investigated by means of minus No.

200 sieve tests performed on selected samples. The percentages of fines resulting from the minus

No. 200 sieve tests are tabulated at the appropriate depths under the “% Passing No. 200 Sieve” column of the graphic boring logs.

3.4 Water Content Tests

Water content tests were performed on all samples to corroborate field classifications and to extend the usefulness of the strength, plasticity and field SPT blow count data. The results of the water content tests are plotted as small shaded circles in the data section of the graphic boring logs. The water content data have been interconnected on the logs to illustrate a continuous profile with depth.

4.0 GENERAL SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

4.1 General

A general description of subsurface soil and groundwater conditions revealed by the borings made for this investigation is provided in the following paragraphs. The graphical logs shown on Figures 3, 4 and 5 should be referred to for specific soil and groundwater conditions encountered at each boring location. Stick logs of the borings are shown in profile on Figure 6 to aid in visualizing subsurface soil conditions. Tabulated adjacent to the stick logs are Atterberg liquid and plastic limits, water contents, dry densities, cohesions, percentages of fines passing No.

200 sieve and field SPT blow counts.

4.2 Soil Stratification

The ground surface at Borings 1, 2 and 3 was found to be underlain by silty sand (SM) fill materials to a depth of about 2 ft below the surface. Clay (CH) fill materials were encountered within the approximate depth intervals of 2 ft to 6.5 ft at Boring 1 and 2 ft to 3.5 ft at Boring 2.

The clay (CH) fill materials are classified as stiff with respect to consistency and are considered to have moderate strength and moderate compressibility. The silty sand (SM) fill materials are characterized as medium dense and are considered to have moderate strength and low compressibility. The silty sand (SM) fill materials have no potential for shrinking and swelling. The clay (CH) fill materials are considered to be expansive with high shrink/swell potential.

Apparent natural silty clays (CL) were encountered within the approximate depth intervals of 6.5 ft to 11 ft at Boring 1, 6 ft to 12 ft at Boring 2 and 6 ft to 10 ft at Boring 3. Sandy clays (CL) were encountered within the approximate depth intervals of 3.5 ft to 6 ft at Boring 2 and 2 ft to 6 ft at Boring 3. The silty clays (CL) and sandy clays (CL) are classified as stiff and very stiff with respect to consistency and are considered to have moderate to high strength and low to moderate compressibility. The silty clays (CL) and sandy clays (CL) are considered to have low shrink/swell potential.

Slightly sandy clays (CH) were encountered within the approximate depth interval of 12 ft to 14.5 ft at Boring 2. The slightly sandy clays (CH) are classified as very stiff with respect to consistency and are considered to have high strength and low compressibility. The slightly sandy clays (CH) are considered to be expansive with moderate shrink/swell potential.

Weathered Yazoo clays (CH) were encountered at depths of 11 ft, 14.5 ft and 10 ft at

Borings 1, 2 and 3, respectively. The weathered Yazoo clays (CH) are classified as very stiff and hard with respect to consistency and are considered to have high strength and low compressibility.

The weathered Yazoo clays (CH) are considered to be expansive with very high shrink/swell potential. The weathered Yazoo clays (CH) extended to a depth of about 38 ft at Boring 3 and to the 20-ft termination depth of Borings 1 and 2.

Unweathered blue Yazoo clays (CH) were encountered from a depth of about 38 ft to the

50-ft termination depth of Boring 3. The unweathered Yazoo clays (CH) are classified as hard with respect to consistency and are considered to have high strength and low compressibility. The unweathered Yazoo clays (CH) are highly expansive.

4.3 Groundwater

Free water was not encountered during auger drilling for Borings 1, 2 and 3. Groundwater conditions at the site will be influenced by rainfall, surface drainage, and by the rise and fall of water levels in any nearby ditches, creeks, ponds or other bodies of water. Groundwater conditions at the site can also be influenced by man-made changes. Surficial soils can become saturated and weak to relatively shallow depths during periods of prolonged and heavy rainfall.

5.0 DISCUSSION

5.1 General

Subsurface soils encountered within the 50-ft maximum exploration depth of the borings made for this investigation include silty sand (SM) and clay (CH) fill materials and natural soils consisting of silty clays (CL), sandy clays (CL) and clays (CH) underlain by clays (CH) the Yazoo formation. The subsurface soils encountered in the borings are considered to have moderate to high strength and low to moderate compressibility. The silty sand (SM) fill materials have no potential for shrinking and swelling. The clay (CH) fill materials are considered to be expansive with high shrink/swell potential. The slightly sandy clays (CH) are considered to be expansive with moderate shrink/swell potential. The silty clays (CL) and sandy clays (CL) are considered to have low shrink/swell potential. The Yazoo clays (CH) are highly expansive with very high shrink/swell potential.

The proposed 300,000-gallon elevated water storage tank is considered to produce moderate-high column loads transmitted to the foundations. From a geotechnical standpoint, bearing capacity and settlement are considered to be the primary considerations relative to foundation design and performance. A foundation system should be utilized for the tank that will accommodate the anticipated structural loads and also minimize future differential vertical movements resulting from settlement due to compression/consolidation of the subsurface soils.

The foundation must also have the capability of resisting uplift forces that will occur when the tank is empty and subjected to the maximum wind loading. For the subsurface soil conditions revealed by the borings, it is our opinion that the elevated water storage tank can be supported by a shallow foundation system consisting of spread footings. If the footing dimensions are large relative to the spacing of the tank columns, a mat foundation can be utilized.

Details of our recommendations for foundation design and construction, and site preparation and earthwork construction are included in the following subsections of this report.

5.2 Foundation Design Recommendations

The foundation system for the elevated water storage tank should be designed to safely transmit the compressive column loads into the underlying soils. Foundation elements to support the water tank must also have the capability of resisting uplift forces which will occur when the tank is empty and subjected to the maximum wind loading. We recommend that the elevated water storage tank be supported by a system of spread footings brought to bear at a depth not less than 5 ft below the existing ground surface, or 5 ft below finished grade, whichever results in the lower bearing elevation. If the footing dimensions are large relative to the spacing of the tank columns, a mat foundation can be utilized.

We recommend that the footings be proportioned for critical loading conditions using a net allowable soil bearing pressure of 4,000 lbs per sq ft. This allowable soil bearing pressure should provide a safety factor of 3.0 against ultimate shear failure in the underlying foundation soils. The allowable soil bearing pressure can be increased by 33 percent when considering transient earthquake loads if the applicable design codes being utilized by the designer do not conflict. The footings will experience some immediate settlements upon initial loading within the foundation soils. Long term post-construction settlements will also occur as the foundation soils consolidate under the tank loading. For the soils encountered in the borings, it is estimated that differential settlements between adjacent footings will be less than about 1 in. and that the total settlements

(including initial settlements) will be less than 2 in.

The stability of the water tank against overturning should be checked for the condition when the tank is empty and subjected to the maximum wind loading. The uplift capacity of each footing should be computed as the weight of the concrete plus the weight of the backfill immediately above the footing base. The weight of the backfill soils should be computed using a total density of 115 lbs per cu ft. The unit weight of the concrete should be taken as 150 lbs per cu

ft. If necessary, the size of the base or the bearing depth of the footing should be increased to provide an uplift capacity which will result in an adequate safety factor against overturning as determined by the designer.

The sliding stability of the foundation elements can also be checked during footing design.

Representative soil parameters to assume during the analysis include active and passive pressure coefficients for clayey soils of Ka=0.4 and Kp=2.5, respectively. A coefficient of sliding between footing and soil can be assumed as 0.40 in the analysis. These parameters are ultimate values and do not include a factor of safety.

5.3 Seismic Design

The site of the proposed elevated water tank in Jackson, Mississippi, lies within a relatively low activity seismic zone. The AWWA D100-11 design standards have adopted the ASCE 7 seismic design criteria in which a Site Class determination is made for the upper 100 ft of the soil column at the site. Based on the design standards presented in the AWWA (ASCE 7) document and given the subsurface soils encountered at the site during our study and our general knowledge of the site geology, we recommend utilizing a Site Class D for determining earthquake-related loading.

5.4 Site Preparation, Earthwork and Other Construction Considerations

As an initial step of site preparation within the planned construction area, existing pavement, underground utilities or pipes, and any other subsurface obstructions that might interfere with earthwork and foundation construction should be removed and/or relocated. Next, stripping should be performed to a sufficient depth throughout the construction area to remove all organic and noticeably weak surficial soils. The site should be sloped to provide positive drainage away from the planned footing excavations. We recommend any fill slopes be no steeper than

3H:1V extending down to natural grade.

At the time of our investigation, the surficial soils were found to be relatively strong and stable. However, it should be noted that the surficial soils are susceptible to pumping under wet conditions. If the earthwork is performed during a relatively wet season of the year, excavation will likely be required to remove unstable soils. The construction techniques and types of equipment utilized and site drainage provided during construction will have a great effect on the performance of these soils throughout the project. The routing of heavy rubber-tired equipment should be controlled to minimize, as much as possible, traffic over the site. All traffic should be discouraged during periods of inclement weather. If pumping is initiated in the surficial soils, as a construction expedient the pumping can be counteracted by treating these materials with hydrated lime or Portland cement. The soil treatment could consist of the addition of 4 to 6 percent by dry weight of soil of hydrated lime or Portland cement. Generally, hydrated lime should be utilized for soils having a plasticity index (PI) greater than about 10, and Portland cement should be utilized on lower plasticity soils.

After stripping, footing excavations can be performed. The footing excavation should be observed prior to concrete placement. Increases in compressibility and reductions in shear strength can result if water is allowed to pond in the footing excavation. It is very important that footing excavations be protected during construction against the intrusion of storm waters. Drainage should be maintained away from the footing excavations during construction, and the footing excavations should remain open for the shortest possible duration to minimize the potential for wetting of the bearing soils. Soils in the bottom of the excavations which are weakened during construction by water or any other activity should be removed and replaced with compacted backfill, or otherwise improved as accepted by the project engineer.

If the soils exposed within footing excavations are unstable, we recommend that chemical stabilization be performed to limit the amount of overexcavation required. The chemically stabilized soils will be drier and stronger than the underlying soils and will act as a temporary seal to limit the intrusion of surface water. Alternately, a mudmat could be placed in the bottom of the excavation to create a stable work surface and protect the bottom of the excavation prior to setting reinforcement and pouring concrete.

After footing construction has been completed, compacted backfill materials should be placed in the footing excavations. Imported soil used as backfill should consist of silty or sandy clays (CL) with a liquid limit less than 45 and a plasticity index within the range of 10 to 24. The onsite silty clays (CL) and sandy clays (CL) soils excavated to construct the foundations can be used as backfill provided they are nonorganic and not too wet or dry. We generally do not recommend the use of clays (CH) as backfill. However, clays (CH) could be used as backfill over the footings provided pavements or structural features that could be adversely affected by shrinking and swelling of the clays (CH) will not be constructed over the backfill.

The backfill materials should be spread in maximum 5-in. thick loose lifts and compacted with hand-operated or backhoe-mounted mechanical tampers to not less than 95 percent of standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698). General site fill placed with large compaction equipment can be compacted from 9-in. thick loose lifts. The moisture content of the backfill materials should be within 3 percentage points of the optimum water content as determined by standard Proctor compaction tests. Stability must be evident during compaction of each lift before any subsequent lifts of backfill material are added.

It should be noted that foundation excavations made through on-site non-plastic silty sands

(SM) could slough. The contractor should be made aware of this issue.

Moisture/density tests should be performed frequently in the compacted fill and backfill to check for compliance with the recommendations provided herein. We also recommend that the compacted backfill be mounded above surrounding grades to promote quick runoff of storm water away from the footings in all directions.

Free water was not encountered during auger drilling for the borings; however, we recommend construction plans include provisions for possible groundwater seepage while excavating for site foundations and utility lines. The means and methods required to deal with groundwater entering the excavations should be the sole responsibility of the contractor.

6.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS

The analyses, conclusions and recommendations discussed in this report are based on conditions as they existed at the time of our field investigation and further on the assumption that the exploratory borings are representative of subsurface conditions within the construction area for the elevated water storage tank. It should be noted that actual subsurface conditions between and beyond the borings might differ from those encountered at the boring locations. If subsurface conditions are encountered during construction that vary from those discussed in this report, Burns

Cooley Dennis, Inc. should be notified immediately in order that we may evaluate the effects, if any, on earthwork, and foundation design and construction.

Burns Cooley Dennis, Inc. should be retained for a general review of final design drawings and specifications. It is advised that we be retained to observe foundation and earthwork construction for the project in order to help confirm that our recommendations are valid or to modify them accordingly. Burns Cooley Dennis, Inc. cannot assume responsibility or liability for the adequacy of recommendations if we do not observe construction.

This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Scott C. Woods & Associates, P.A.

for specific application to the geotechnical-related aspects of design and construction for the new

300,000-gallon elevated water storage tank at the VA Hospital in Jackson, Mississippi. The only warranty made by us in connection with the services provided is we have used that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised under similar conditions by reputable members of our profession practicing in the same or similar locality. No other warranty, express or implied, is made or intended.

FIGURES

B-1

B-3

B-2

JOB NO.

SCALE:

180603

AS SHOWN

FIGURE 1

PROPOSED ELEVATED WATER TANK

VA HOSPITAL

JACKSON, MISSISSIPPI

BURNS COOLEY DENNIS, INC.

551 SUNNYBROOK ROAD

RIDGELAND, MISSISSIPPI 39157

Approximate Boring Locations

0 30 60 120

SCALE: 1" = 60'

AutoCAD SHX Text S

AutoCAD SHX Text N

AutoCAD SHX Text W

AutoCAD SHX Text E

Medium dense tan silty fine to coarse sand (SM), slightly clayey with gravel

(FILL)

Stiff tan and light gray clay (CH) with trace of gravel and sand seams

(FILL)

Stiff tan and light gray silty clay (CL)

Very stiff tan and light gray clay (CH), slickensided

(WEATHERED YAZOO)

LOCATION: See Figure 1

SURFACE EL: ft

6" Short-flight augerTYPE:

LOG OF BORING NO. 1

VA HOSPITAL

PROPOSED ELEVATED WATER TANK

JACKSON, MISSISSIPPI

1 432

FIGURE 3

- UU

WATER

CONTENT %

N O

S

IE

V

E

L B

S /C

U F

T

/9

/2

:3

:2

P

M

LIQUID

LIMIT

PLASTIC

S A

M P

L E

S

DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL

LIMIT

- UC

B L O

W S

P E

R F

T

S Y

M B

O L

D R

Y D

E N

S

IT

Y

D E

P T

H ft

Cohesion, kips/sq ft

P

A S

S

IN

G

12/15/18

COMMENTS: No free water encountered during auger drilling.

DATE:

GROUNDWATER DATA:BORING DEPTH: 20 ft GPS Coordinates N 32 o 19' 44.8"

W 90 o 10' 6.3"

Medium dense tan silty fine to coarse sand (SM), slightly clayey with gravel

(FILL)

Stiff tan and light gray clay (CH)

(FILL)

Very stiff tan and light gray sandy clay

(CL)

Very stiff tan and light gray silty clay

(CL)

Very stiff tan and light gray clay (CH), slightly sandy

Very stiff light gray and tan clay (CH), slickensided

(WEATHERED YAZOO)

64.2

LOCATION: See Figure 1

SURFACE EL: ft

6" Short-flight augerTYPE:

LOG OF BORING NO. 2

VA HOSPITAL

PROPOSED ELEVATED WATER TANK

JACKSON, MISSISSIPPI

1 432

FIGURE 4

- UU

WATER

CONTENT %

N O

S

IE

V

E

L B

S /C

U F

T

/2

:3

:2

P

M

LIQUID

LIMIT

PLASTIC

S A

M P

L E

S

DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL

LIMIT

- UC

B L O

W S

P E

R F

T

S Y

M B

O L

D R

Y D

E N

S

IT

Y

D E

P T

H ft

Cohesion, kips/sq ft

P

A S

S

IN

G

12/15/18

COMMENTS: No free water encountered during auger drilling.

DATE:

GROUNDWATER DATA:BORING DEPTH: 20 ft GPS Coordinates N 32 o 19' 45.1"

W 90 o 10' 6.1"

Medium dense tan silty fine to coarse sand (SM) with gravel

(FILL)

Stiff tan and light gray sandy clay (CL) with sand seams and trace of gravel Very stiff tan and light gray silty clay

(CL)

Very stiff light gray and tan clay (CH)

(WEATHERED YAZOO)

- slickensided to 28'

- with gypsum 28' - 30'

- hard below 32'

Hard blue clay (CH) with shell fragments

(UNWEATHERED YAZOO)

53.7

LOCATION: See Figure 1

SURFACE EL: ft

6" Short-flight auger to 13', then rotary wash to completion.TYPE:

LOG OF BORING NO. 3

VA HOSPITAL

PROPOSED ELEVATED WATER TANK

JACKSON, MISSISSIPPI

1 432

FIGURE 5

- UU

WATER

CONTENT %

N O

S

IE

V

E

L B

S /C

U F

T

/2

:3

:3

P

M

LIQUID

LIMIT

PLASTIC

S A

M P

L E

S

DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL

LIMIT

- UC

B L O

W S

P E

R F

T

S Y

M B

O L

D R

Y D

E N

S

IT

Y

D E

P T

H ft

Cohesion, kips/sq ft

P

A S

S

IN

G

12/15/18

COMMENTS: No free water encountered during auger drilling.

DATE:

GROUNDWATER DATA:BORING DEPTH: 50 ft Grouted borehole full depth after completion of drilling and sampling and sealed at surface with Quikrete plug.

GPS Coordinates N 32 o 19' 45.0"

W 90 o 10' 6.2"

6.13

1.84

LL PL W

C/NDD %-200

55 18

2.68

1.89

64.2

LL PL W

C/NDD %-200

1.01

2.62

6.13

53.7

LL PL W

C/NDD %-200

NOTE:

Date

G E

N E

R

IC

F E

N C

E

1/10/19 in the same column

C/N = Cohesion (ksf)/Penetration

DD = Dry Density (pcf)

W = Water Content

PL = Plastic Limit

LL = Liquid Limit

MS = Matric Suction (tsf)

Resistance, N (blows/ft)

%-200 = % Passing No. 200 Sieve 180603

SUBSURFACE SOIL PROFILE

D E

P T

H

I N

F

E E

T

See Figure 2 for boring log legend.

BURNS COOLEY DENNIS, INC.

FigureJob No.

LEGEND:

PROPOSED ELEVATED WATER TANK

VA HOSPITAL

JACKSON, MISSISSIPPI