Soils and Foundation Report.pdf

SOILS AND FOUNDATION

REPORT NO. 02-09

PROJECT PRA-PIRO 15(1)

ROADWAY RECONSTRUCTION

LITTLE BEAVER ROAD

PICTURED ROCKS NATIONAL LAKESHORE

ALGER COUNTY, MICHIGAN

U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division 21400 Ridgetop Circle

Sterling, VA 20166

July 2009

TABLE OF CONTENTS

REPORT PAGE

INTRODUCTION

General

Project Description

Regional Geology

Existing Roadway Condition

PROCEDURES AND RESULTS

General

Sampling

Field Tests and Measurements

Data Summary

Laboratory Testing

Findings

DESIGN ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS

Design Alternatives

Reinforced Soil Slope (RSS)

Surface Course Aggregate

RECOMMENDATIONS

Reinforced Soil Slope (RSS)

Surface Course Aggregate

CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS

General Considerations

Reinforced Soil Slope (RSS)

DISCLAIMER/LIMITATIONS CLAUSE

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A – Figures APPENDIX B – Boring Location Plan APPENDIX C – Boring Logs APPENDIX D – Laboratory Data APPENDIX E – Design Calculations APPENDIX F – RSS Details APPENDIX G – Special Contract Requirements (SCRs) APPENDIX H – Representative Photographs

Note: Design changes subsequent to publication of this report and prior to the project’s advertisement will be documented by a memo inserted after the title page.

SOILS AND FOUNDATION

REPORT NO. 02-09

PROJECT PIRO 15(1)

ROADWAY RECONSTRUCTION

LITTLE BEAVER ROAD

PICTURED ROCKS NATIONAL LAKESHORE

ALGER COUNTY, MICHIGAN

INTRODUCTION

General

This report presents the results of our geotechnical subsurface investigation, design analyses, and recommendations for roadway reconstruction for Project PIRO 15(1). The project site is located on Little Beaver Road in the Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore, in Alger County, Michigan. The general site location is shown on Figure 1, “Site Location and Vicinity Map,” in Appendix A.

Project Description

The project is located about 5 miles north of Melstrand, Michigan, off County Road H-58.

Little Beaver Road is one of the primary public use access roads in Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore. Little Beaver Road is a former logging road that has been improved over the years by adding gravel to the existing roadway surface. The road is narrow and has frequent potholes and some washboarding.

Little Beaver Road is approximately 3.45 miles long. The gravel-surfaced roadway generally runs north from its intersection with H-58 in Alger County to its terminus at the Little Beaver Lake campsite. The existing roadway width varies from approximately 14 to 16 feet.

This project consists of re-establishing the roadway base, widening the road where required, improving the grade and drainage, and covering the existing roadway with new surface course aggregate. The project also includes the upgrade of Little Beaver Campground Road, the 6,000 sq. ft. trailhead parking area, and 1,000 sq. ft. trailer parking lot. A six (6) inch thick surface aggregate course consisting of Michigan 23-A is proposed for blading and surfacing the roadway. Roadway embankment widening between Stations 1010+25 and 1012+10 would require benching and filling already over-steepened existing fill slopes. The recommended engineering alternative for widening this area is a section of reinforced soil slopes (RSS).

Regional Geology

The 1982 Quaternary Geology of Michigan shows that the site is located near deposits of Lacustrine sand and gravel, Glacial Outwash sand and gravel and Postglacial Alluvium, and End Moraines of medium-textured till. Refer to Figure 2 in Appendix A for a Geologic Map of the project area. The Soil Survey of Alger County, Michigan (1929) shows that Little Beaver Road is located primarily on these three deposits: Au Train loamy sand, Hiawatha

Project: PRA-PIRO 15(1) Roadway Reconstruction-Little Beaver Road Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore Soils and Foundation Report Alger County, Michigan No. 02-09

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VA

loamy sand and Onota stony fine sandy loam. There are four other deposits that may be encountered to a lesser degree: Saugatuck sand, Shelldrake sand, Carbondale muck and Greenwood peat. Refer to Figure 3 in Appendix A for a “Soil Survey Map” of the project area.

Existing Roadway Condition

A visual roadway condition survey was conducted during the subsurface field investigation.

A list of observed conditions is shown in Table 1.

The aggregate surface for most of the length of the roadway at the time of the survey was in good condition. Several areas along the roadway were experiencing potholes and ruts. This can be corrected by establishing a proper crown or cross-slope so the roadway surface drains properly.

Washboarding was observed at four locations on Little Beaver Road. Washboarding is primarily caused by three factors: driving habits of people (such as accelerating or braking on steep hills), lack of moisture, and poor quality gravel. Incidents of washboarding observed at this site were on steep inclines, indicating that acceleration and braking action on these slopes is the primary factor.

Table 1. Pavement Distress Survey

Station

(ft) Offset

Approximate Maximum Rut

Depth

(in)

Distress Description

994+25 -- 1 Minor broad, flat rut

997+75 – 998+85

-- 2 Moderate potholes

1006+70 - 1009+00

Full width

Moderate to major washboarding

1018+10 - 1018+75

Left 4 Large rut

1021+45 - 1021+65

Left 2 Flat linear rut

1021+75 – 1021+90

Left 3 Potholes

1022+70 - 1022+85

-- 2 Rutting

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VA

Table 1, continued

Station

(ft) Offset

Approximate Maximum Rut Depth

(in)

Distress Description

1032+15 – 1032+35

-- 3 Potholes

1033+00 - 1033+25

-- 1 – 2 Several ruts

1044+80 -- 1 Minor linear rut

1050+25 – 1051+75

-- 1 Rutting

1074+25 – 1074+55

Full width

-- Washboarding

1103+50 - 1105+90

Full width

-- Washboarding

1105+90 - 1106+20

Full width

3 – 4 Major Washboarding

PROCEDURES AND RESULTS

General

The Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division’s (EFLHD) Subsurface Exploration Team conducted a subsurface investigation program at the project site from 21 through 23 June 2007. The subsurface investigation program consisted of drilling a total of twenty-four (24) borings within the project limits. Boring PB-1 was drilled in the parking area. RB-series borings were drilled along the roadway alignment. Borings were drilled in areas proposed for widening that require significant cut or fill slopes. Of these borings, SB-series borings were drilled on the fill slope side, and WB-series borings were drilled on the cut slope side, where retaining walls were being considered for widening the roadway. Borings were advanced to depth using hollow stem augers and a CME 850 rotary, track-mounted drill rig.

The location of each boring may be referenced on “Boring Location Plan and Profile” sheet in Appendix B.

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VA

Sampling

The boreholes were drilled to depths ranging from 5.0 to 32.0 ft below the existing ground surface. Borings were advanced using 3¾-in. (inside diameter) hollow stem augers. Standard Penetration Testing (SPT) was performed using a 2¼-in. (outside diameter) split-spoon sampler in accordance with AASHTO 7200-87 and AASHTO T206-87. SPT soil samples were typically recovered continuously in the upper 5 to 6 feet and at 5-foot intervals thereafter. Samples were obtained by driving the split-spoon sampler a distance of 24-in., or until auger refusal, into the undisturbed soil under the impact of a 140-lb. automatic hammer free-falling 30 inches. The number of hammer blows required to advance the split-spoon sampler the middle foot of the 24-in. sample interval is designated as the “Standard Penetration Resistance” or N-value. Auger refusal is defined by 50 blows per 1-inch of penetration of the split-spoon sampler. The number of blows required to advance the sampler through each 6-in. interval was recorded on field boring logs. Representative portions of split-spoon samples were preserved in glass jars for laboratory testing. The sampling sequence and associated jar samples for each boring are presented on its appropriate Boring Log in Appendix C.

Water levels, if present, were measured in the boring logs at the time and under the conditions stated on boring logs.

Field Tests and Measurements

The EFLHD geotechnical crew performed the following field tests and took measurements during the course of the subsurface exploration. A field description by color and texture was made for each recovered sample. The boring locations were determined by measuring from features present on-site and by GPS. Boring elevations were determined from plan topography. The approximate location of borings is as shown on the Boring Location Plan and Profile sheet in Appendix B.

Data Summary

The results of field tests and measurements were recorded on the driller’s logs and appropriate data sheet in the field. These data sheets and logs contain information concerning the boring methods; samples attempted and recovered; indications of the presence of various material such as gravel, pebbles, organic matter, etc.; and observations of groundwater. They also contain interpretations by the exploration foreman of the subsurface conditions based on the performance of the equipment and cuttings brought to the surface by the drilling tools.

Therefore, the field data represents both factual and interpretative information.

The boring logs in Appendix C of this report represent a compilation of field laboratory data and description of the soil samples by a geotechnical engineer. These records occasionally do not include all data recorded on driller’s logs and field data sheets, but do include all information considered relevant to the design and preparation of this report.

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VA

Groundwater level readings were made in the boreholes at the times and under the conditions stated on the boring logs. Fluctuations in groundwater level due to seasonal variations, rainfall, temperature, and other factors not evident at the time measurements were made should be expected.

Laboratory Testing

A laboratory testing program was conducted on representative soil samples recovered during the subsurface explorations. The primary purpose of the testing program was to aid in classification and evaluation of the engineering properties of soil and rock present at the site.

Laboratory tests included particle size analysis (AASHTO T-88). All tests were conducted in accordance with applicable ASTM/AASHTO standard test methods. The results of the laboratory testing program are presented in Appendix D and summarized below in Table 2.

Table 2. Summary of Laboratory Test Results

Moisture Content

Liquid Limit(1)

Plastic Limit(2) Fines Boring

No.

Sample

No.

Sample Depth

(ft) (%) (%) (%) (%)

Classification

TP-1 J-1 7.5-8.0 -- ND NP 1.7 A-3

WB-2 J-3 5.0-7.0 -- ND NP 0.8 A-3

WB-4 J-4 10.0-12.0 -- ND NP 0.4 A-3

SB-2 J-4 9.0-11.0 -- ND NP 0.7 A-3

SB-5 J-3 4.0-6.0 -- ND NP 0.7 A-3

RB-10 J-1 1.0-3.0 -- ND NP 0.7 A-3

(1) ND = Not determined (2) NP = Non-plastic

Findings

Descriptions of the soil conditions encountered during the subsurface explorations conducted at the site are provided below in order of increasing depth below the ground surface. The stratification lines designating the interfaces between soil types on the boring logs in Appendix C represent approximate boundaries. The transition between materials may be gradual. It should be noted that one or more of the units may be absent at specific locations.

As indicated in Table 2, all samples tested were determined to be non-plastic.

TOPSOIL – Topsoil was encountered at the ground surface in boring SB-6 and as buried topsoil at depths from 3 to 4 feet in borings SB-1 through SB-6. Topsoil is typically

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VA

described as dark brown to black medium to fine sand, little silt, some roots and organic matter. The measured thickness of the encountered topsoil varied from 0.1 to 0.4 feet.

FILL – Fill encountered in the borings was classified as either existing “Surface Course” aggregate or other “Fill”.

Surface Course - The existing aggregate surface course is characterized as gray to gray-brown sandy gravel, trace silt. SPT N-values recorded within this stratum ranged between 6 and 24 blows per foot (bpf), indicating loose to medium dense soil conditions. The soils in this stratum were typically moist. The existing surface course was encountered from the surface to depths of 0.1 to 1.1 feet.

Fill – Fill at the site consisted of red-brown to dark brown medium to fine sand to coarse sand, little silt. This material was likely excavated from the cut side of the existing roadway and leveled as embankment on the fill side during construction of the existing roadway. SPT N-values recorded within this stratum ranged between 3 and 6 blows per foot (bpf), indicating very loose to loose soil conditions. The soils in this stratum were typically moist. Fill was encountered below the surface course to depths of 3.0 to 4.0 feet.

SAND – The sand layer was observed beneath the fill. The sand layer is characterized as gray-brown and black sand, with trace to little gravel and trace silt [A-3]. Sandy gravel was encountered in boring RB-6. Layers of brown silt to gray clayey silt were encountered within the sand stratum in some borings. The sand layer was encountered from beneath the fill to the bottom of the explorations. N-values recorded within this stratum typically ranged between 1 and 21 blows per foot (bpf), indicating very loose to medium dense soil conditions.

The results of laboratory testing completed on soil samples recovered within the sand layer are summarized in Table 2 and presented in Appendix D. All samples tested were determined to be non-plastic.

Groundwater was encountered in five borings (SB-1, SB-3, SB-4, SB-5 and SB-6) at depths ranging between 8.4 and 27.1 feet bgs, corresponding to El. 786.6 and El. 812.9.

DESIGN ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS

Design Alternatives

Three design alternatives were considered for retaining the steepened embankment between Stations 1010+25 and 1012+10. The alternatives were evaluated on the basis of cost, constructability, zone of disturbance and aesthetics, in order to determine the most suitable alternative. The following wall types were considered for this project:

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VA

1. Gabion basket wall system;

2. Mechanically Stabilized Earth (MSE) wall with stone facing; and

3. Geosynthetic Reinforced Soil Slope (RSS) with vegetated facing.

Alternative 3 is recommended because it provides an economical, durable and aesthetically-pleasing slope stabilization.

This slope stabilization alternative consists of excavating into the existing embankment and constructing a geosynthetic reinforced soil slope along the eastern edge of the roadway. The facing will consist of a wrapped geogrid retaining a permanent erosion control blanket, topsoil and seed to provide a natural-looking vegetated face. This treatment can be used where roadway widening would cause encroachment of a traditional embankment into the wetland area, or where the embankment fill would extend for longer distances than are desirable for the project.

Reinforced Soil Slope (RSS)

The proposed slope repair consists of constructing the RSS with maximum slope face of 2V:1H. The RSS will be founded on the naturally deposited sand observed during the subsurface investigation.

The geometry of the critical slope section was obtained from the drawings provided by Highway Design and design for the critical section was prepared based on a 9 ft high slope with a face batter of 2V:1H. A uniform surcharge of 250 psf was used at the crest of the slope within the traveled way. The design parameters shown in Table 3 were used for analysis.

The computer program ReSSA (2.0) was used to analyze and complete the design of the RSS with regards to external, internal and compound stability. External stability calculations were completed for global and translational stability only. The external failure modes of local bearing failure (i.e. lateral squeeze, settlement) are not a concern of the project based upon the type of foundation soils and the competency of the RSS bearing stratum.

Table 3 - Summary of Material Properties Used in RSS Stability Analysis

Material Cohesion (psf) Friction Angle

(degree) Moist Unit Weight

(psf)

Reinforced Fill 0 34 125

Existing Fill 0 31 120

Compacted Foundation Soil

- Medium to Fine Sand

0 32 122

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VA

The minimum factor of safety required for each failure mode evaluated is summarized below in Table 4. Geogrid reduction factors and geogrid-soil interaction parameters applied to the geogrid reinforcement are included in the ReSSA analyses results provided in Appendix E.

The reinforcement utilized in this design was geogrid reinforcement with minimum long-term design strength (LTDS) of 2,000 lb/ft based on GRI-GG4 in sand and gravel. The vertical spacing of the geogrid used in the analysis is 1.5 feet. The geogrid design embedment lengths from bottom to top are: 8 feet, 10 feet, 12 feet, 14 feet and 14 feet.

Table 4. Factors of Safety

Failure Mode Min. Factor of Safety

Internal Stability 1.3

Reinforcement Pullout 1.5

Global Stability 1.3

Sliding Stability 1.3

Local Bearing Failure N/A

Settlement N/A

Surface Course Aggregate

The surface course aggregate was designed using AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures (1993), Chapter 4 – Low Volume Road Design. Trial base thicknesses of 5 and 6 inches were selected and analyzed. Projected 18-kip ESAL traffic was estimated based on design AADT. A serviceability criterion of 1.5 was used, as well as rutting criteria of 1.5 inches. Since the existing roadway is a surface course and the underlying subgrade is a medium to fine sand, the condition of the existing roadbed was considered fair for purposes of this design. The design also assumed that conversion of a portion of the base to subbase was not necessary due to the nature and quality of the subgrade soils.

The results of the calculation indicate that 6 inches of surface course aggregate are sufficient for a 7 year design life of the roadway. Refer to Appendix E for surface course aggregate design calculations.

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VA

RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on the results of our analyses we recommend constructing RSS embankments where required to widen the roadway and placing 6 inches of surface course aggregate throughout the project. Our recommendations are detailed below:

Reinforced Soil Slope (RSS)

Install a geogrid-reinforced soil slope as shown on the detail in Appendix F.

Construct the face of the slope on a constant batter, at 2(V):1(H) or flatter.

Provide geogrid reinforcement with a minimum of 2,000 lb/ft. LTDS.

Create a vegetated face by wrapping geogrid over a Type 5 permanent erosion control mat, which will retain a 1-foot thick layer of topsoil and seed. This facing will aid in promoting vegetation growth and minimize the sloughing of soil from the face of the slope. See Appendix F for a typical detail.

Place geogrid reinforcement is to be placed at vertical spacing of 1.5 feet with minimum embedment lengths, from bottom to top: 8 feet, 10 feet, 12 feet, 14 feet and 14 feet.

Fill within the RSS volume should consist of select granular backfill in accordance with FP-03 Standard Specifications Section 704.10, as amended by Special Contract Requirements (See Appendix G). Based on laboratory testing and boring log descriptions, excavated on-site material is suitable for re-use within the reinforced volume.

Step reinforcement within the slope as necessary to maintain horizontal layers.

Surface Course Aggregate

After subgrade preparation, place and compact 6 inches of surface aggregate course or alternatively Michigan DOT Surface Course, Class 23A, Subsection 902.06, revised to have a plasticity index between 4 and 12.

For widened and realigned sections, place and compact an additional 6 inches of Subbase Course Aggregate, Type A, below the surface course aggregate.

Alternatively, Michigan DOT Subbase, Granular Material Class II may be used, revised to a maximum particle size of 2.5 inches.

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VA

CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS

The proposed construction consists of widening the roadway using RSS where embankment slopes steeper than 2H:1V are required. Based on the subsurface field investigations and design analysis results, construction recommendations are as follows:

General Considerations

Backfill Material: Backfill material for the RSS should consist of select granular backfill material, revised per the SCR in Appendix G. The gradation is revised to allow up to 75 percent passing No. 40 sieve. Backfill material should be placed and compacted in lifts not to exceed 12 inches, per Section 204 of the FP-03 Specifications. The portion of on-site excavated material that meets the revised select granular backfill specification may be used as backfill material. Based on the results of the laboratory testing, it is anticipated that large quantities of the on-site excavated material will meet the revised select granular backfill requirements.

Erosion protection: Areas of the existing cut slopes consist of un-vegetated sandy soil that should be stabilized with a keyed riprap slope. The keyed riprap slope should consist of Class 4 riprap and Type IV-C geotextile and should be placed at a maximum slope of 1H:1V or flatter.

Reinforced Soil Slope (RSS)

Excavation for RSS: The excavated on-site material consists predominantly of sand.

Therefore, it is recommended that the cut at the back of the excavated slope for construction of the RSS be established at a maximum slope of 1.5H:1V or flatter. This is in order to avoid slope failure and sloughing. If subsurface conditions encountered during construction are different, steeper temporary slopes up to 1V:1H may be achievable. All excavations should be made in accordance with applicable OSHA requirements.

Geogrid Handling and Placement: Geogrid reinforcement material should be in accordance with Section 714 as amended and included in Appendix G. The geogrid should come packaged in a sheathing or container suitable to protect the geogrid from damage due to ultraviolet light and abrasion during storage and handling. The geogrid should not be removed from the sheathing or container until the time of placement within the reinforced slope. The geogrid should be free from defects, tears, punctures, flaws, deterioration, or other damage.

Place geogrid reinforcement in horizontal layers and in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations. The principle strength direction for the geogrid should be placed perpendicular to the face of the RSS. Place geogrid in accordance with Section 272 and EFLHD Detail 255, as amended and included in Appendix G.

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VA

Vegetation on the Slope Face: To aid vegetation growth it is recommended that a topsoil and seed mix be placed for the first 1-foot behind the face of the wrapped geogrid reinforcement and be encapsulated with a Type 5 erosion control mat. The erosion control mat will keep the topsoil in the slope and facilitate turf establishment.

APPENDIX A

Figures

FIGURE 1

SITE LOCATION AND VICINITY MAP

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VIRGINIA

STATEREG

PIRO 15(1)MI

TOTAL

SHEETS

3MW

SHEET

NO.

PROJECT

Project: PIRO 15(1)

End moraines of medium textured till

Lacustrine sand and gravel

Glacial outwash sand and gravel and postglacial alluvium

Shorelines

Automated from:

Quaternary Geology of Michigan, 1982

Michigan Department of Natural Resources July, 1999

TOTAL

SHEETS

3MI

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VIRGINIA 2

SHEET

NO.

PROJECTFIGURE 2

GEOLOGIC MAP

STATEREG

PIRO 15(1)MW

HIAWATHA LOAMY SAND - Soil on the higher and more strongly rolling and hilly hardwood land. The deeper underlying material consists mainly of sand, but in a few places pockets of gravel and boulders and layeres of clay occur at a slight depth.

AU TRAIN LOAMY SAND - Thick rust brown or yellow slightly cemented layer of sand or hardpan beginning at a depth between 6 and 12 inches.

ONOTA STONY FINE SANDY LOAM - Thin stony sandy soil overlying sandstone bedrock.

SHELLDRAKE SAND - Occurs as low ridges and level strips of beach and lake-bed sand lying directly Soil Survey of Alger County, Michigan, 1929 along the shore of Lake Superior US Department of Agriculture

Bureau of Chemistry and Soils

TOTAL

SHEETS

3MI

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VIRGINIA 3

SHEET

NO.

PROJECTFIGURE 3

SOIL SURVEY MAP

STATEREG

PIRO 15(1)MW

APPENDIX B

Boring Location Plan

...\CADD\D1-PIRO15(1) geotech.dgn 6/5/2009 3:20:43 PM

...\CADD\D1-PIRO15(1) geotech.dgn 6/5/2009 3:24:05 PM

...\CADD\D1-PIRO15(1) geotech.dgn 6/8/2009 8:04:34 AM

...\CADD\D1-PIRO15(1) geotech.dgn 6/8/2009 7:29:17 AM

...\CADD\D1-PIRO15(1) geotech.dgn 6/8/2009 7:31:41 AM

...\CADD\D1-PIRO15(1) geotech.dgn 6/8/2009 7:34:36 AM

APPENDIX C

Boring Logs

H:\BLAWRENCE\Project Engineering Help\Field Forms\Boring Log_Soil Description Standard.doc

SOIL BORING GENERAL NOTES

Drilling and Sampling Symbols

SS: Split Spoon - 1 3/8” I.D., 2” O.D., except where noted ST: Shelby Tube - 2” O.D., except where noted PA: Power Auger Sample

Water levels indicated on the boring logs are the levels measured in the boring at the times indicated. In pervious soils, the indicated elevations are considered reliable ground water levels. In impervious soils, the accurate determination of ground water elevations is not possible, even after several days, and additional evidence on ground water elevations must be sought.

VISUAL METHODS FOR SOILS CLASSIFICATION

Component Distinguishing Features

Boulders Larger than 12” (300 mm)

Cobbles 3” to 12” (75 mm to 12 mm)

Gravel Larger than No. 4 sieve and smaller than a 3” sieve, described with any of the following terms (or any combination):

Coarse 3” to 3/4” (75 mm to 19 mm) sieve Medium 3/4” to 3/8” (19 mm to 9.5 mm) sieve Fine 3/8” to No. 4 (9.5 mm to 4.75 mm) sieve

Sand The finest sand grains are just visible to the naked eye, while the largest would pass a No. 4

(4.75mm) sieve (pinhead size). Described with any of the following terms (or any combination):

Coarse No. 4 to No. 10 (4.75 mm to 2.0 mm) sieve Medium No. 10 to No. 40 (2.0 mm to 0.42 mm) sieve Fine No. 40 to No. 200 (0.42 mm to 0.075 mm) sieve

Silt 1. Lumps are easily crumbled when are-dried.

2. Feels gritty between the teeth.

3. A moist pat when shaken in the palm of the hand will appear shiny and wet. When squeezed it will appear dry and dull.

Clay 1. Lumps are comparatively hard when air-dried.

2. Threads (1/8” diameter) of considerable length will support their own weight when held by one end.

3. A moist pat will appear the same whether shaken in the palm of the hand or squeezed.

Order of Description

1. Soil Density (or consistency) – see table below

2. Color

3. Major Grain Size – Composes more than 50% of the sample

4. Modifying Term – “and” : 40% to 50% of the minor grain size

“some” : 30% to 40% “little” : 10% to 30%

“trace” : 10% or less

5. Minor Grain Size(s)

6. Other (plasticity, etc.)

H:\BLAWRENCE\Project Engineering Help\Field Forms\Boring Log_Soil Description Standard.doc

7. Moisture Content (by field test) – “dry” : Absence of moisture, dusty, dry to the touch “moist” : Damp but no visible water

“wet” : Visible free water, usually soil is below water table

8. General Classification – Fill, Residual Soil, Weathered Rock

SOIL DENSITY (OR CONSISTENCY) TABLE

Coarse-Grained Soil (Gravel, Sand) Fine-Grained Soil (Clay, Silt)

Apparent Density SPT (# blows / ft) Consistency SPT (# blows / ft)

Very loose 0-4 Very soft 0-2 Loose 5-10 Soft 3-4

Medium dense 11-30 Medium stiff 5-8 Dense 31-50 Stiff 9-15

Very dense >50 Very stiff 16-30 Hard >30

Examples:

1. Dense to very dense, brown to light brown, SILTY SAND, some gravel [A-7-6(10)]

(Moist)

-FILL-

Criteria for Describing Soil Structure

Description Criteria

Bed A sedimentary layer bounded by depositional surfaces.

Blocky A characteristic in which cohesive soil can be broken down into small angular lumps which resist further breakdown.

Bonded Attached or adhering.

Fissured Broken along definite planes of fracture.

Foliated Planar arrangement of textural or structural features.

Frequent More than one per foot of thickness.

Homogeneous Same color and appearance throughout.

Interbedded Alternating soil layers of different composition.

Laminae A very thin cohesive layer.

Layer A general term for material lying essentially parallel to the surfaces against which it was formed.

Lens A lenticular deposit, larger than a pocket.

Occasional One or less per foot of thickness.

Parting A very thin granular layer.

Pocket Small erratic deposits less than 12” in thickness.

Seam A thin layer separating two distinctive layers of different composition or greater magnitude.

Stratified Alternating layers of varying material or color.

Stratum A stratigraphic unit.

Varve A cyclic sedimentary couplet consisting of a coarser and a finer layer representing the variation in depositional energy resulting from the annual freeze-thaw cycle typically found in glaciolacustrine environments.

Boring No.:

Boring Location:

T yp eDensity, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions, Moisture

Vane Shear hrs

Inspector:

Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore, Alger County, Michigan

B O

R

IN

G L

O G

P

IR

O

(1

G

P J

F H

W A

_V A

.G D

T

7/

/0

SAMPLE

Operator:

Weather:

PB-1

Standard Penetration Test Data Liquid Limit

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

R ec

1.5

Loose, brown coarse to medium SAND, some gravel (moist)

Gray-brown, sandy GRAVEL, trace silt (moist)

-SURFACE COURSE-

3-4-5-10

3-3-3-31.5

5.0

0.4

J-2

J-1

D ep th S ca le ft)

Rock Core Diam:

Boring Method:

Hole Diameter:

Completed:

Bottom of Boring @ 5.0 ft.

PIRO 15(1)

La ye r D ep th ft)

At Completion:

Groundwater Depth:

(Blows / ft)

Encountered at:

Sample Types:

N o.

Penetrometer Rock CoreSPT

Project Location:

Water Content %

E le va tio n (f ee t)

Project Name:

1- Groundwater was not encountered during or after completion of drilling.

2- Boring backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion.

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Sheet: 1 of 1

Station 1096+16, 101' Left

Plastic Limit

After

30 in. Sunny

Auger Cuttings

G ra p h ic L o g

Remarks:

B lo w s p e r in

UD

Boring Began:

R. Kingsley / D. Hutchins B. Lawrence

6/21/07

N/A

6/21/07

Surface Elevation:

Hammer Wt. & Type:

Hammer Drop:

712.0 ft

140 lbs/Auto

HSA

8.0 in.

BORING LOG

Caved at:

707.0 5

711.6

Boring Location:

T yp eDensity, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions, Moisture

Vane Shear hrs

Inspector:

Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore, Alger County, Michigan

B O

R

IN

G L

O

(1

G

P J

F H

W A

_V A

.G

/0

SAMPLE

Operator:

Weather:

RB-1

Standard Penetration Test Data Liquid Limit

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

R ec

1.5

Loose, light brown, medium to fine SAND, trace gravel (moist)

Gray sandy GRAVEL, trace silt (moist)

-SURFACE COURSE-

3-4-4-5

10-5-5-51.5

5.0

0.3

J-2

J-1

D ep th S ca le ft)

Rock Core Diam:

Boring Method:

Hole Diameter:

Completed:

Bottom of Boring @ 5.0 ft

PIRO 15(1)

La ye r D ep th ft)

At Completion:

Groundwater Depth:

(Blows / ft)

Encountered at:

Sample Types:

N o.

Penetrometer Rock CoreSPT

Project Location:

Water Content %

E le va tio n (f ee t)

Project Name:

1- Groundwater was not encountered during or after completion of drilling.

2- Boring backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion.

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Sheet: 1 of 1

Station 960+65, 3' Left

Plastic Limit

After

30 in. Sunny

Auger Cuttings

G ra p h ic L o g

Remarks:

B lo w s p e r in

UD

Boring Began:

R. Kingsley / D. Hutchins B. Lawrence

6/21/07

N/A

6/21/07

Surface Elevation:

Hammer Wt. & Type:

Hammer Drop:

912.0 ft

140 lbs/Auto

HSA

8.0 in.

BORING LOG

Caved at:

907.0 5

911.8

Boring Location:

T yp eDensity, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions, Moisture

Rock Core Diam:

Boring Method:

Hole Diameter:

Vane Shear

Liquid Limit

SAMPLE

R ec

Inspector:

Operator:

B O

R

IN

G L

O

(1

G

P J

F H

W A

_V A

.G

/0

Weather:

Standard Penetration Test Data

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

RB-2

3-3-4-6

2-3-4-4

0.8

2.0

Completed:

Gray, sandy GRAVEL, trace silt (moist)

-SURFACE COURSE-

5.0

3.0 2.7

0.3

J-2

J-1

D ep th S ca le ft)

La ye r D ep th ft)

At Completion:

Groundwater Depth:

(Blows / ft)

Bottom of Boring @ 5.0 ft.

Loose, light to dark brown medium to fine SAND, little gravel (moist)

Loose, red-brown medium to fine SAND, little gravel (subrounded) (moist)

Loose, red-brown fine SAND, trace gravel, trace roots (moist)

B. Lawrence

N o.

Penetrometer Rock CoreSPT

Encountered at:

Water Content %

E le va tio n (f ee t)

Project Name:

Sunny R. Kingsley / D. Hutchins

1- Groundwater was not encountered during or after completion of drilling.

2- Boring backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion.

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Sheet: 1 of 1

Station 970+87, 6' Left

Plastic Limit

Sample Types:

Project Location:

After

6/21/07

UDAuger Cuttings Remarks:

B lo w s p e r in hrs

Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore, Alger County, Michigan

PIRO 15(1)

G ra p h ic

L o g

N/A

HSA

6/21/07Boring Began:Surface Elevation:

Hammer Drop:

Caved at:

BORING LOG

Hammer Wt. & Type:

30 in.

60 80

140 lbs/Auto 8.0 in.

912.0 ft

909.0 909.3

907.0

911.8

La ye r D ep th ft)

Boring Location:

T yp eDensity, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions, Moisture

Vane Shear

Rock Core Diam:

Boring Method:

Hole Diameter:

Completed:

R ec

Inspector:

Operator:

Weather:

B O

R

IN

G L

O

(1

G

P J

F H

W A

_V A

.G

/0

Standard Penetration Test Data

Boring No.:

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

D ep th S ca le ft)

2-5-5-6

5-6-5-7

5.0 4.7

2.6

1.5

0.3

J-2

J-1

At Completion:

Groundwater Depth:

(Blows / ft)

RB-3

Bottom of Boring @ 5.0 ft.

Medium dense, brown coarse to fine SAND, little gravel (angular) (moist)

Medium dense, light brown coarse to medium SAND, trace gravel (rounded) (moist)

Medium dense, brown to dark brown medium to fine SAND, occasional roots (moist)

Medium dense, brown medium to fine SAND, trace gravel (moist)

Gray sandy GRAVEL, trace silt (moist)

-SURFACE COURSE-

Liquid Limit

N o.

Penetrometer Rock CoreSPT

6/21/07

SAMPLE

E le va tio n (f ee t)

Project Name:

Sunny R. Kingsley / D. Hutchins

B. Lawrence

Water Content %

1- Groundwater was not encountered during or after completion of drilling.

2- Boring backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion.

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Sheet: 1 of 1

Station 984+27, 8' Left

Plastic Limit

Sample Types:

Encountered at:

Project Location:

After

B lo w s p e r in

N/A

Auger Cuttings

G ra p h ic L o g

Remarks:

UD

hrs

Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore, Alger County, Michigan

PIRO 15(1)

HSA

6/21/07Boring Began:Surface Elevation:

Hammer Wt. & Type:

Caved at:

BORING LOG

916.0 ft

8.0 in.140 lbs/Auto

806020

30 in.Hammer Drop:

911.3

915.7

913.4

911.0

914.5

Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore, Alger County, Michigan

T yp eDensity, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions, Moisture

Vane Shear

Boring Location:

PIRO 15(1)

SAMPLE

B O

R

IN

G L

O

(1

G

P J

F H

W A

_V A

.G

/0

Operator:

Weather:

RB-4

Standard Penetration Test Data Liquid Limit

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Boring Method:

6-9-12-8

2-3-7-8Loose, dark brown to gray medium to fine SAND, little silt (moist)

1.5

Medium dense, brown medium to fine SAND, trace silt (moist)

5.0

2.0

0.2

J-2

J-1

2.0

R ec

Hole Diameter:

Completed:

D ep th S ca le ft)

La ye r D ep th ft)

Gray sandy GRAVEL, trace silt (moist)

-SURFACE COURSE-

Groundwater Depth:

Rock Core Diam:

(Blows / ft)

Bottom of Boring @ 5.0 ft.

At Completion:

Water Content %

Sample Types:

N o.

Penetrometer Rock CoreSPT

R. Kingsley / D. Hutchins After

Inspector:

E le va tio n (f ee t)

Project Name:

Sunny

1- Groundwater was not encountered during or after completion of drilling.

2- Boring backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion.

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Sheet: 1 of 1

Station 996+63, 9' Left

Plastic Limit

Encountered at:

Project Location:

G ra p h ic L o g

B. Lawrence

UDAuger Cuttings Remarks:

B lo w s p e r in hrs Hammer Drop:

6/21/07

N/A

HSA

6/21/07Boring Began:

Hammer Wt. & Type:

30 in.

Caved at:

924.0 ft

8.0 in.140 lbs/Auto

BORING LOG

Surface Elevation:

922.0

919.0 5

923.8

Boring Location:

T yp eDensity, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions, Moisture

Vane Shear hrs

Inspector:

Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore, Alger County, Michigan

B O

R

IN

G L

O

(1

G

P J

F H

W A

_V A

.G

/0

SAMPLE

Operator:

Weather:

RB-5

Standard Penetration Test Data Liquid Limit

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

R ec

1.8

Loose to medium dense, brown medium to fine SAND (moist)

Gray sandy GRAVEL, trace silt (moist)

-SURFACE COURSE-

4-5-7-7

2-3-3-51.6

5.0

0.1

J-2

J-1

D ep th S ca le ft)

Rock Core Diam:

Boring Method:

Hole Diameter:

Completed:

Bottom of Boring @ 5.0 ft.

PIRO 15(1)

La ye r D ep th ft)

At Completion:

Groundwater Depth:

(Blows / ft)

Encountered at:

Sample Types:

N o.

Penetrometer Rock CoreSPT

Project Location:

Water Content %

E le va tio n (f ee t)

Project Name:

1- Groundwater was not encountered during or after completion of drilling.

2- Boring backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion.

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Sheet: 1 of 1

Station 1041+07, 4' Left

Plastic Limit

After

30 in. Sunny

Auger Cuttings

G ra p h ic L o g

Remarks:

B lo w s p e r in

UD

Boring Began:

R. Kingsley / D. Hutchins B. Lawrence

6/21/07

N/A

6/21/07

Surface Elevation:

Hammer Wt. & Type:

Hammer Drop:

794.0 ft

140 lbs/Auto

HSA

8.0 in.

BORING LOG

Caved at:

789.0 5

793.9 yp e

Boring No.:

Boring Location:

PIRO 15(1)

Density, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions, Moisture

Vane Shear

RB-6

SAMPLE

R ec

B O

R

IN

G L

O

(1

G

P J

F H

W A

_V A

.G

/0

Operator:

Standard Penetration Test Data Liquid Limit

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Hole Diameter:

Weather:Rock Core Diam:

10-13-7-6

2-9-9-140.8

Gray sandy GRAVEL, trace silt (moist)

-SURFACE COURSE-

Medium dense, red-brown sandy GRAVEL (moist)

5.0 4.6

0.5

J-2

J-1

A-1

(Blows / ft)

Inspector:

Completed:

D ep th S ca le ft)

La ye r D ep th ft)

At Completion:

Boring Method:

Bottom of Boring at 5.0 ft.

Medium dense, light brown, fine sandy GRAVEL (moist)

-WEATHERED SANDSTONE-

Groundwater Depth:

Water Content %

Sample Types:

N o.

Penetrometer Rock CoreSPT

R. Kingsley / D. Hutchins After

Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore, Alger County, Michigan

E le va tio n (f ee t)

Project Name:

Sunny

1- Groundwater was not encountered during or after completion of drilling.

2- Boring backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion.

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Sheet: 1 of 1

Station 1054+47, 4' Left

Plastic Limit

Encountered at:

Project Location:

Remarks:

B. Lawrence

Auger Cuttings

G ra p h ic L o g

B lo w s p e r in hrs Hammer Wt. & Type:

6/21/07

N/A

HSA

6/21/07Boring Began:

UD

Surface Elevation:

30 in.Hammer Drop:

Caved at:

BORING LOG

792.0 ft

8.0 in.140 lbs/Auto

787.0 5

791.5

787.4

Boring Location:

T yp eDensity, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions, Moisture

Vane Shear hrs

Inspector:

Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore, Alger County, Michigan

B O

R

IN

G L

O

(1

G

P J

F H

W A

_V A

.G

/0

SAMPLE

Operator:

Weather:

RB-7

Standard Penetration Test Data Liquid Limit

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

R ec

1.5

Loose, brown to light brown fine SAND (moist)

Gray sandy GRAVEL, trace silt (moist)

-SURFACE COURSE-

2-2-3-3

4-4-3-21.5

5.0

0.5

J-2

J-1

D ep th S ca le ft)

Rock Core Diam:

Boring Method:

Hole Diameter:

Completed:

Bottom of Boring @ 5.0 ft.

PIRO 15(1)

La ye r D ep th ft)

At Completion:

Groundwater Depth:

(Blows / ft)

Encountered at:

Sample Types:

N o.

Penetrometer Rock CoreSPT

Project Location:

Water Content %

E le va tio n (f ee t)

Project Name:

1- Groundwater was not encountered during or after completion of drilling.

2- Boring backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion.

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Sheet: 1 of 1

Station 1065+92, 6' Left

Plastic Limit

After

30 in. Sunny

Auger Cuttings

G ra p h ic L o g

Remarks:

B lo w s p e r in

UD

Boring Began:

R. Kingsley / D. Hutchins B. Lawrence

6/21/07

N/A

6/21/07

Surface Elevation:

Hammer Wt. & Type:

Hammer Drop:

804.0 ft

140 lbs/Auto

HSA

8.0 in.

BORING LOG

Caved at:

799.0 5

803.5

Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore, Alger County, Michigan

T yp eDensity, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions, Moisture

Vane Shear

Boring Location:

PIRO 15(1)

SAMPLE

R ec

B O

R

IN

G L

O

(1

G

P J

F H

W A

_V A

.G

/0

Inspector:

Weather:

RB-8

Standard Penetration Test Data Liquid Limit

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Boring Method:

50/4

10-50/4

Very dense, gray-brown, silty fine SAND, trace gravel (moist)

0.9

Very dense, gray coarse to medium SAND, trace silt (moist)

5.0

3.0

0.5

J-2

J-1

0.5

Hole Diameter:

Completed:

D ep th S ca le ft)

La ye r D ep th ft)

Gray sandy GRAVEL, trace silt (moist)

-SURFACE COURSE-

Groundwater Depth:

Rock Core Diam:

(Blows / ft)

Bottom of Boring @ 5.0 ft.

At Completion:

Water Content %

Sample Types:

N o.

Penetrometer Rock CoreSPT

R. Kingsley / D. Hutchins After

Operator:

E le va tio n (f ee t)

Project Name:

Sunny

1- Groundwater was not encountered during or after completion of drilling.

2- Boring backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion.

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Sheet: 1 of 1

Station 1085+08, 5' Left

Plastic Limit

Encountered at:

Project Location:

G ra p h ic L o g

B. Lawrence

UDAuger Cuttings Remarks:

B lo w s p e r in hrs

6/21/07

N/A

HSA

6/21/07Boring Began:Surface Elevation:

Hammer Drop: 30 in.

Caved at:

20 60

Hammer Wt. & Type:

BORING LOG

140 lbs/Auto 8.0 in.

730.0 ft

725.0

727.0

4"

410"

729.5

Boring Location:

T yp eDensity, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions, Moisture

Vane Shear hrs

Inspector:

Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore, Alger County, Michigan

B O

R

IN

G L

O

(1

G

P J

F H

W A

_V A

.G

/0

SAMPLE

Operator:

Weather:

RB-9

Standard Penetration Test Data Liquid Limit

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

R ec

0.5

Loose, light brown to red-brown coarse to fine SAND, little coarse gravel (moist)

Gray sandy GRAVEL, trace silt (moist)

-SURFACE COURSE-

3-3-4-3

3-4-4-31.2

5.0

0.3

J-2

J-1

D ep th S ca le ft)

Rock Core Diam:

Boring Method:

Hole Diameter:

Completed:

Bottom of Boring @ 5.0 ft.

PIRO 15(1)

La ye r D ep th ft)

At Completion:

Groundwater Depth:

(Blows / ft)

Encountered at:

Sample Types:

N o.

Penetrometer Rock CoreSPT

Project Location:

Water Content %

E le va tio n (f ee t)

Project Name:

1- Groundwater was not encountered during or after completion of drilling.

2- Boring backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion.

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Sheet: 1 of 1

Station 1099+70, 5' Left

Plastic Limit

After

30 in. Sunny

Auger Cuttings

G ra p h ic L o g

Remarks:

B lo w s p e r in

UD

Boring Began:

R. Kingsley / D. Hutchins B. Lawrence

6/21/07

N/A

6/21/07

Surface Elevation:

Hammer Wt. & Type:

Hammer Drop:

696.0 ft

140 lbs/Auto

HSA

8.0 in.

BORING LOG

Caved at:

691.0 5

695.7

Boring Location:

T yp eDensity, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions, Moisture

Vane Shear hrs

Inspector:

Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore, Alger County, Michigan

B O

R

IN

G L

O

(1

G

P J

F H

W A

_V A

.G

/0

SAMPLE

Operator:

Weather:

RB-10

Standard Penetration Test Data Liquid Limit

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

R ec

1.2

Medium dense, red-brown, medium to fine SAND, little gravel (moist)

[A-3]

Gray sandy GRAVEL, trace silt (moist)

-SURFACE COURSE-

6-4-4-6

4-5-6-61.8

5.0

0.9

J-2

J-1

D ep th S ca le ft)

Rock Core Diam:

Boring Method:

Hole Diameter:

Completed:

Bottom of Boring @ 5.0 ft.

PIRO 15(1)

La ye r D ep th ft)

At Completion:

Groundwater Depth:

(Blows / ft)

Encountered at:

Sample Types:

N o.

Penetrometer Rock CoreSPT

Project Location:

Water Content %

E le va tio n (f ee t)

Project Name:

1- Groundwater was not encountered during or after completion of drilling.

2- Boring backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion.

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Sheet: 1 of 1

Station 1033+35, 3' Left

Plastic Limit

After

30 in. Sunny

Auger Cuttings

G ra p h ic L o g

Remarks:

B lo w s p e r in

UD

Boring Began:

R. Kingsley / D. Hutchins B. Lawrence

6/22/07

N/A

6/22/07

Surface Elevation:

Hammer Wt. & Type:

Hammer Drop:

798.0 ft

140 lbs/Auto

HSA

8.0 in.

BORING LOG

Caved at:

793.0 5

797.1

Loose, brown FINE SAND, trace silt (wet)

Very loose, light brown medium SAND (wet)

Medium stiff, brown SILT, little fine sand (wet)

Loose, red-brown to light brown medium to fine SAND, trace gravel (moist)

Loose, light brown medium to fine SAND (moist)

Loose, red-brown medium to fine SAND, trace gravel, dark brown with roots (moist)

-BURIED TOPSOIL-

Loose, red-brown medium to fine SAND, trace gravel (moist)

-FILL-

Loose, gray sandy GRAVEL, trace silt (moist)

-SURFACE COURSE-

Loose, brown medium to fine SAND, little gravel (moist)

-FILL-

Completed:

T yp eDensity, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions, Moisture

Vane Shear

Rock Core Diam:

Hole Diameter:

D ep th S ca le ft)

B O

R

IN

G L

O

(1

G

P J

F H

W A

_V A

.G

/0

Groundwater Depth:

27.1 ft

(Blows / ft)

Boring Method:

J-6

18.5

16.0

13.5

4.0 3.5 3.4

1.0

J-7

J-5

J-4

J-3

J-2

J-1 0.2

1-0-1-0

1-2-1-1

1-4-4-4

2-3-3-3

2-2-3-3

2-3-3-3

3-4-3-2

La ye r D ep th ft)

2.0

1.7

1.1

1.7

1.6

1.9

1.6

N/A

Water Content %

E le va tio n (f ee t)

Project Name:

Sunny R. Kingsley / D. Hutchins8.0 in.At Completion:

SPT

Boring Location:

6/23/07Boring Began:Surface Elevation:

Hammer Wt. & Type:

Hammer Drop:

Caved at:

BORING LOG

840.0 ft B. Lawrence

1- Boring backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion.

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Sheet: 1 of 2

Station 1012+25, 4' Right

Plastic Limit

Project Location:

After

Encountered at:

Sample Types:

N o.

Penetrometer Rock Core

HSA

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore, Alger County, Michigan

PIRO 15(1)

SAMPLE

R ec

Inspector:

Operator:

Weather:

140 lbs/Auto

Boring No.:

Standard Penetration Test Data

6/23/07

SB-1

Liquid Limit

30 in.

UDAuger Cuttings hrs

G ra p h ic L o g

Remarks:

B lo w s p e r in

821.5

824.0

826.5

836.0 836.5 836.6

839.0 839.8

Density, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions, Moisture

Standard Penetration Test Data

Boring No.:

Boring Location:

R ec

B O

R

IN

G L

O

(1

G

P J

F H

W A

_V A

.G

/0

Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore, Alger County, Michigan

PIRO 15(1)

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION SAMPLE

Liquid Limit

Inspector:

Operator:

Weather:

SB-1

Vane Shear

0-0-1-2

Bottom of Boring @ 32.0 ft.

Soft, gray-brown CLAYEY SILT, little fine sand (wet)

Very loose, light brown medium SAND (wet) (Continued)

T yp e

1.8

32.0 31.8

J-8

Completed:

Rock Core Diam:

(Blows / ft)

Hole Diameter:27.1 ft

D ep th S ca le ft)

La ye r D ep th ft)

At Completion:

Groundwater Depth:

hrs

Boring Method:

Project Name:

Encountered at:

Sample Types:

N o.

Penetrometer Rock Core

After

Project Location:

Water Content %

B lo w s p e r in

E le va tio n (f ee t)

SPT

1- Boring backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion.

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Sheet: 2 of 2

Station 1012+25, 4' Right

Plastic Limit

UD

140 lbs/Auto

Auger Cuttings

G ra p h ic L o g

Remarks:

Boring Began:

Sunny R. Kingsley / D. Hutchins

B. Lawrence 6/23/07

N/A

HSA

30 in.

6/23/07

8.0 in.

Caved at:

840.0 ft

BORING LOG

Surface Elevation:

Hammer Drop:

Hammer Wt. & Type:

808.0 808.2

Completed:

ep th S ca le ft)

La ye r D ep th ft)

At Completion:

Groundwater Depth:

Boring Method:

Rock Core Diam:

Bottom of Boring @ 26.0 ft.

Loose to very loose, light brown medium to fine SAND, trace gravel (moist to wet at 19 ft.)

[A-3]

Note: Spoon bouncing on hard material at 26 feet.

(Blows / ft)

Hole Diameter:

Boring Location:

Very loose to loose, red-brown to dark brown medium to fine SAND, little silt (moist)

-FILL-

B O

R

IN

G L

O

(1

G

P J

F H

W A

_V A

.G

/0

T yp e

Vane Shear

Boring No.:

J-5

26.0

7.5

4.0 3.8

0.8

Very loose, red-brown coarse to fine SAND, little gravel (moist)

J-6

1.5J-4

J-3

J-2

J-1

J-7

2-1-0-1

Gray sandy GRAVEL, trace silt (moist)

-SURFACE COURSE-

1-1-7-12

1-2-2-3

2-1-2-1

1.5

2-2-2-1

0.8

5-5-3-2

1.3

1.4

Very loose to loose, red-brown to dark brown medium to fine SAND, little silt, trace roots at 3.8, seed husks at 3.9.

(moist)

-BURIED TOPSOIL-

2-3-4-4

Hammer Drop:

SPT

Water Content %

Penetrometer

Density, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions, Moisture

R. Kingsley / D. Hutchins B. Lawrence

6/22/07

N/A

HSA

6/22/07Boring Began:Surface Elevation:

Hammer Wt. & Type:

E le va tio n (f ee t)

1- Groundwater was not encountered during or after completion of drilling.

2- Boring backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion.

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Sheet: 1 of 1

Station 1026+44, 6' Right

Plastic Limit

Rock Core

Sunny

Project Location:

After

Encountered at:

Sample Types:

N o.

Remarks:

B lo w s p e r in hrs

Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore, Alger County, Michigan

G ra p h ic L o g

Project Name: PIRO 15(1)

SAMPLE

R ec

Inspector:

Operator:

Weather:

SB-2

Standard Penetration Test Data Liquid Limit

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Caved at:

809.0 ft

8.0 in.

15.4 ft

BORING LOG

140 lbs/Auto

806020

30 in.

UDAuger Cuttings

801.5

805.0 805.2

808.2

783.0

1.0

3-2-2-2

3-3-6-7

2-2-2-3

4-5-4-7

0-0-1-1

1.5 2-3-10-36

1.6

1.8

1.1

1.5

1.5

Soft, dark brown SILT, little fine sand, roots (moist)

-BURIED TOPSOIL-

Bottom of Boring @ 26.0 ft.

Very loose to medium dense, light brown coarse to fine SAND (wet)

Very loose, light brown medium to fine SAND, occasional seams (1/4" to 3/4") of coarse sand and gravel from 14.0 to 16.0 ft.

(moist)

1-2-2-2

Loose, red-brown medium to fine SAND, little silt, trace gravel, occasional roots

17.5

Medium dense, red-brown medium to fine SAND, trace gravel (moist)

-FILL-

B O

R

IN

G L

O

(1

G

P J

F H

W A

_V A

.G

/0

Loose, red-brown coarse to fine SAND, little gravel (moist)

Liquid Limit

PIRO 15(1)

SAMPLE

R ec

Inspector:

Operator:

Weather:

Standard Penetration Test Data

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

SB-3

Gray sandy GRAVEL, trace silt (moist)

-SURFACE COURSE-

7.5

4.0 3.3 3.0

0.6

J-7

J-6

J-5

J-4

J-3

Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore, Alger County, Michigan

J-1

B lo w s p e r in hrs

26.0

J-1

Surface Elevation:

6/22/07

N/A

HSA

6/22/07Boring Began:

R. Kingsley / D. Hutchins

Plastic Limit

Hammer Wt. & Type:

Hammer Drop:

Caved at:

BORING LOG

810.0 ft

8.0 in.140 lbs/Auto

Sample Types:

Water Content %

SPT Rock Core Penetrometer

E le va tio n (f ee t)

B. Lawrence

N o.

Project Name:

Encountered at:

After

Project Location:

Sunny

D ep th S ca le ft)

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

1- Boring backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion.

Rock Core Diam:

Boring Method:

Hole Diameter:

Completed:

Sheet: 1 of 1

La ye r D ep th ft)

At Completion:

Groundwater Depth:

18.4 ft

(Blows / ft)

Remarks:

30 in.

UDAuger Cuttings

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

G ra p h ic L o g

Boring No.:

Boring Location:

T yp eDensity, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions,…