Geotechnical_Engineering_Report_2014-Jun-25.pdf

Geotechnical Engineering Report

Smithsonian UHC Improvements Fairfax County

Chantilly, Virginia

June 25, 2014

19955 Highland Vista Drive, Suite 170 Ashburn, VA 20147 Phone 703 726 8030 ● www.geoconcepts-eng.com

19955 Highland Vista Dr., Suite 170 Ashburn, Virginia 20147

(703) 726-8030 www.geoconcepts-eng.com

June 25, 2014

Mr. Drew Wolfred, EIT Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

11400 Commerce Park Drive, Suite 400 Reston, Virginia 20191

Subject: Geotechnical Engineering Report, Smithsonian UHC Improvements, Chantilly, Fairfax County, Virginia (GeoConcepts Project No. 14077)

Dear Mr. Wolfred:

GeoConcepts Engineering, Inc. (GeoConcepts) is pleased to present the following geotechnical engineering report prepared for Smithsonian UHC Improvements in Chantilly, Virginia.

We appreciate the opportunity to serve as your geotechnical consultant on this project. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or want to meet to discuss the findings and recommendations contained in the report.

Sincerely, GEOCONCEPTS ENGINEERING, INC.

Chris L. McIntyre, PE Project Manager cmcintyre@geoconcepts-eng.com

Table of Contents

1.0 Scope of Services

2.0 Site Description and Proposed Construction

3.0 Subsurface Conditions

3.1 Geology

3.2 Stratification

3.3 Groundwater

3.4 Soil Laboratory Test Results

4.0 Engineering Analysis

4.1 Pavements

4.2 Earthwork

4.3 Infiltration Analysis

4.3.1 Infiltration Test Results

4.3.2 Classification Test Results

4.3.3 Recommended Design Infiltration Rate

5.0 General Limitations

Figure 1: Site Vicinity Map

Appendix A: Subsurface Investigation Appendix B: Soil Laboratory Test Results

1.0 Scope of Services

This geotechnical engineering report presents the results of the field investigation, soil laboratory testing, and engineering analysis of the geotechnical data. This report specifically addresses the following:

• An evaluation of subsurface conditions along the proposed roadway realignment.

• An assessment of subgrade conditions for support of flexible and rigid pavements, including an estimated design California Bearing Ratio (CBR) value based on soil laboratory classification (CBR) test results.

• Earthwork recommendations for construction of loadbearing fills, including an assessment of on-site soils to be excavated for re-use as fill.

• Recommendations regarding the feasibility of using stormwater management by infiltration, including estimated infiltration rates based on field tests and published correlations with soil classifications.

Services not specifically identified in the contract for this project are not included in the scope of services.

2.0 Site Description and Proposed Construction

The Parking Revenue Control System (PRCS) site is located at the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum at the Udvar-Hazy Center along Air and Space Museum Parkway in Chantilly, Fairfax County, Virginia. Currently, the PRCS consists of a gatehouse and entry gates, with two entry lanes on the north side as well as three entry lanes on the south side. In addition, there are two free flow exit lanes and an employee parking area on the south side of the gatehouse.

Based on information provided to us, the proposed construction consists of improvements to the PRCS including upgrades to the existing entry gates and roadway improvements. We understand that the proposed plans include the realignment of the entry lanes prior to the gatehouse as well as the realignment of the entry access lane. Proposed plans also include the addition of one exit lane on the south side of the gatehouse and new visitor parking located on the west side of the gatehouse. In addition, we understand that the proposed construction includes two stormwater management areas.

Copyright Google Maps, 2014

June 25, 2014 14077 Page 1

3.0 Subsurface Conditions

Subsurface conditions were investigated by drilling two test borings in the proposed roadway realignment area, and two test borings in the proposed stormwater management areas with four offset infiltration test borings. Three asphalt pavement cores were obtained from the existing entry and exit lanes. Test boring logs and a boring location plan are presented in Appendix A of this report.

3.1 Geology

The site lies within the Piedmont Physiographic Province of Virginia. The Piedmont is bordered to the east by the Coastal Plain Physiographic Province and to the west by the Blue Ridge Physiographic Province and contains several fault bordered basins. Bedrock in the Piedmont typically consists of highly weathered metamorphic and igneous bedrock. Surface topography in the Piedmont is the result of millions of years of erosion. In some places, terrace deposits associated with the nearby Potomac River cap Piedmont strata.

Specifically, according to local geologic maps, the site is mapped in the Newark Supergroup of the Triassic geologic period. Based on our subsurface investigation, the sediments and strata correspond favorably to the geologic publications.

The natural soils are residual materials derived from the physical and chemical weathering of the underlying bedrock. Stratum B1 materials consist of the sandy soils with increasing rock fragments with depth, and Stratum B2 consists of disintegrated rock.

3.2 Stratification

The subsurface materials encountered have been stratified for purposes of our discussions herein. These stratum designations do not imply that the materials encountered are continuous across the site. Stratum designations have been established to characterize similar subsurface conditions based on material gradations and parent geology. Per GeoConcepts’ convention, Stratum A is reserved for existing fill soils.

Accordingly, Stratum A was not used in this report. The subsurface materials encountered in the test borings completed at the site have been assigned to the following strata:

Stratum B1 (Residual Sandstone) firm to compact, clayey GRAVEL (GC) with sand and clayey SAND (SC) with gravel, moist, red-brown

Stratum B2 (Residual Sandstone) very compact, DISINTEGRATED ROCK, moist, red-brown

Three asphalt pavement cores were obtained from the existing entry and exit lanes. The approximate core locations are shown on the boring location plan in Appendix A, and the measured pavement layer thicknesses are also presented in Appendix A.

The two letter designations included in the strata descriptions presented above and on the test boring logs represent the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) group symbol and group name for the samples based on laboratory testing per ASTM D-2487 and visual classifications per ASTM D-2488. It should be noted that visual classifications per ASTM D-2488 may not match classifications determined by laboratory testing per ASTM D-2487.

3.3 Groundwater

Groundwater level observations were made in the field during drilling of the test borings. Groundwater was not encountered during drilling of the test borings. The groundwater observations presented herein are considered to be an indication of the groundwater levels at the dates and times indicated. Accordingly, the groundwater information presented herein should be used with caution. Also, fluctuations in

June 25, 2014 14077 Page 2 groundwater levels should be expected with seasons of the year, construction activity, changes to surface grades, precipitation, or other similar factors.

3.4 Soil Laboratory Test Results

Selected soil samples obtained from the field investigation were tested for grain size distribution, Atterberg limits, compaction characteristics using standard effort, California Bearing Ratio (CBR), and natural moisture contents. A summary of soil laboratory test results is presented below, and the results of natural moisture content tests are presented on the test boring logs in Appendix A.

Test Boring

No.

Depth (ft)

Sample Type Stratum Description of Soil

Specimen

Sieve Results

Atterberg Limits Natural

Moisture Content

Remarks Percent Retained #4 Sieve

Percent Passing #200 Sieve

LL PL PI

SWM-1 0-2.0 Jar B1 CLAYEY GRAVEL with sand (GC) 55.8 18.1 34 19 15 6.1 --

SWM-2 2.0-4.0 Jar B1 CLAYEY GRAVEL with sand (GC) 51.5 21.9 32 21 11 8.0 --

B-1 0-5.0 Bulk B1 CLAYEY SAND (SC) with gravel 24.2 39.1 31 19 12 4.9 CBR = 4.9%

B-2 0-5.0 Bulk B1 CLAYEY SAND (SC) with gravel 23.0 47.0 31 18 13 7.2 CBR = 3.7%

Notes:

1. Soil tests are in accordance with applicable ASTM standards

2. Soil classification symbols are in accordance with Unified Soil Classification System

3. Visual identification of samples is in accordance with ASTM D-2488

4. Key to abbreviations: LL = liquid limit; PL = plastic limit; PI = plasticity index; NP = nonplastic; N/T = not tested

4.0 Engineering Analysis

Recommendations regarding pavements, earthwork, and stormwater management by infiltration are presented herein.

4.1 Pavements

Pavement subgrades are expected to consist of natural soils or new compacted fill. These materials are generally considered suitable for support of the planned roadways and parking areas. Based on the California Bearing Ratio (CBR) test results for the materials expected at pavement subgrades, a preliminary design CBR value of 3 is recommended for pavement design purposes. The design CBR value of 3 represents the average of the two CBR test results reduced by two-thirds. If fill placed at the site is generated from off-site borrow areas, the actual CBR value for the pavement subgrades may be significantly different from the preliminary value presented herein. Therefore, CBR tests should be performed on the in-place subgrade after rough grading and installation of utilities within roadways. Final pavement sections should be based on CBR tests taken on subgrade soils at the time of construction.

4.2 Earthwork

Fill may be required for site grading. Unsuitable existing fill, soft or loose natural soils, organic material, and rubble should be stripped to approved subgrades as determined by the geotechnical engineer. Topsoil depths presented on the test boring logs should not be considered as stripping depths, as these depths may vary widely across the site. Stripping depths will probably extend to greater depths than the topsoil depths indicated herein due to the presence of minor amounts of organics, roots, and other surficial materials that will require removal as a part of the stripping operations. In addition, seasonal soil moisture variations can affect stripping depths. In general, less stripping may occur during summer months when drier weather conditions can be expected. The depth of required stripping should be determined prior to construction by the excavation contractor using test pits, probes, or other means that the contractor wishes to employ, and this determination should be the responsibility of the excavation contractor. All subgrades

June 25, 2014 14077 Page 3 should be proofrolled with a minimum 20 ton, loaded dump truck or suitable rubber tire construction equipment approved by the geotechnical engineer, prior to the placement of new fill.

Fill material should be placed in lifts not exceeding 8 inches loose thickness, with fill materials compacted by hand operated tampers or light compaction equipment placed in maximum 4-inch thick loose lifts. Fill should be compacted at +/- 2% of the optimum moisture content to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density per VTM-1. The upper 6 inches of pavement subgrades should be compacted to at least 100 percent of the maximum dry density per the same standard.

Materials used for compacted fill for support of pavements should consist of soils classifying SC, SM, SP, SW, GC, GM, GP, or GW per ASTM D-2487, with a maximum dry density greater than 105 pcf. It is expected that the majority of soils excavated will be suitable for re-use as fill based on classification. However, drying of excavated soils by spreading and aerating may be necessary to obtain proper compaction. This may not be practical during the wet period of the year. Accordingly, earthwork operations should be planned for early Spring through late Fall, when drier weather conditions can be expected. Individual borrow areas, both from on-site and off-site sources, should be sampled and tested to verify classification of materials prior to their use as fill.

Fill materials should not be placed on frozen or frost-heaved soils, and/or soils that have been recently subjected to precipitation. All frozen or frost-heaved soils should be removed prior to continuation of fill operations. Borrow fill materials should not contain frozen materials at the time of placement.

Compaction equipment that is compatible with the soil type used for fill should be selected. Theoretically, any equipment type can be used as long as the required density is achieved; however, sheepsfoot roller equipment are best suited for fine-grained soils and vibratory smooth drum rollers are best suited for granular soils. Ideally, a smooth drum roller should be used for sealing the surface soils at the end of the day or prior to upcoming rain events. In addition, compaction equipment used adjacent to walls below grade should be selected so as to not impose undesirable surcharge on walls. All areas receiving fill should be graded to facilitate positive drainage of any water associated with precipitation and surface run-off.

After completion of compacted fill operations in pavement areas, construction of asphalt should begin immediately, or the finished subgrade should be protected from exposure to inclement weather conditions.

Exposure to precipitation and freeze/thaw cycles will cause the finished subgrade to soften and become excessively disturbed. If development plans require that finished subgrades remain exposed to weather conditions after completion of fill operations, additional fill should be placed above finished grades to protect the newly placed fill. Alternatively, a budget should be established for reworking of the upper 1 to 2 feet of previously placed compacted fill.

4.3 Infiltration Analysis

Two methods were used to estimate infiltration capabilities on the subject site: in-situ infiltration testing and published correlations with soil classifications. Details regarding the in-situ infiltration and classification test techniques, the estimated infiltration rates from the individual methods, and the recommended design infiltration rate for the site soils are presented herein.

4.3.1 Infiltration Test Results

In-situ infiltration tests are performed in the field to observe the rate at which water will permeate the soil under saturated conditions. Two test borings were drilled in the area of planned infiltration. Test borings were initially drilled to depths of 10 feet each, and allowed to remain open for a period of approximately 24 hours to allow any groundwater levels within the boreholes to stabilize. Two offset infiltration test holes per test boring were drilled to planned infiltration invert elevations. Four-inch diameter PVC casing was set to the bottom of the test holes. The purpose of the casing is to prevent caving of test hole sidewalls. After setting the PVC casing, the borehole was filled with water to saturate the bottom subsoils. The following day, the test hole was refilled with water and the water level in each test hole was recorded every hour for a 4-hour period. Using this procedure, the average change in the water level over the 4-hour period is

June 25, 2014 14077 Page 4 considered the infiltration rate. Based on the results of the in-situ infiltration tests, estimated infiltration rates have been assigned for the site soils, as presented in the table herein:

Test Boring No. Approximate Test Depth (feet)

Estimated Infiltration Rate (inches/hour)

SWM-1A 5.0 0

SWM-1B 5.0 0.15

SWM-2A 5.0 0.3

SWM-2B 5.0 0.6

4.3.2 Classification Test Results

The classification test method is performed with grain-size sieve analyses including hydrometer testing on samples obtained from corresponding proposed infiltration depths, to determine the USDA soil texture classifications. Published correlations between USDA classifications and infiltration rates were used to provide estimated hydraulic conductivity values. Published correlations between USDA classifications and infiltration rates were used to estimate infiltration rates as presented herein.

Test Boring No.

Approximate Test Depth (feet)

USDA Soil Texture Classification

Estimated Infiltration Rate (inches/hour)

SWM-1 5.0-6.0 Loam 0.52

SWM-2 5.0-6.0 Loam 0.52

4.3.3 Recommended Design Infiltration Rate

Based on the results of the in-situ infiltration tests and soil laboratory classification tests, we recommend that a design infiltration rate of 0.26 inches/hour be used for design of infiltration structures. It should be noted that the recommended design infiltration rate presented herein is intended for use in design.

However, during construction, observations of the subgrade conditions should be made to confirm that the subgrade soils are consistent with the soils analyzed in this report.

5.0 General Limitations

Recommendations contained in this report are based upon the data obtained from the relatively limited number of test borings. This report does not reflect conditions that may occur between the points investigated, or between sampling intervals in test borings. The nature and extent of variations between test borings and sampling intervals may not become evident until the course of construction. Therefore, it is essential that on-site observations of subgrade conditions be performed during the construction period to determine if re-evaluation of the recommendations in this report must be made. It is critical to the successful completion of this project that GeoConcepts be retained during construction to observe the implementation of the recommendations provided herein.

This report has been prepared to aid in the evaluation of the site and to assist your office and the design professionals in the design of this project. It is intended for use with regard to the specific project as described herein. Changes in proposed construction, grading plans, etc. should be brought to our attention so that we may determine any effect on the recommendations presented herein.

June 25, 2014 14077 Page 5

An allowance should be established for additional costs that may be required for foundation and earthwork construction as recommended in this report. Additional costs may be incurred for various reasons including wet fill materials, soft subgrade conditions, unexpected groundwater problems, rock excavation, etc.

This report should be made available to bidders prior to submitting their proposals to supply them with facts relative to the subsurface conditions revealed by our investigation and the results of analyses and studies that have been performed for this project. In addition, this report should be given to the successful contractor and subcontractors for their information only.

We recommend the project specifications contain the following statement: “A geotechnical engineering report has been prepared for this project by GeoConcepts Engineering, Inc. This report is for informational purposes only and should not be considered part of the contract documents. The opinions expressed in this report are those of the geotechnical engineer and represent their interpretation of the subsoil conditions, tests and results of analyses that they performed. Should the data contained in this report not be adequate for the contractor’s purposes, the contractor may make their own investigations, tests and analyses prior to bidding.”

This report was prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices. No warranties, expressed or implied, are made as to the professional services included in this report.

We appreciate the opportunity to be of service for this project. Please contact the undersigned if you require clarification of any aspect of this report.

Sincerely, GEOCONCEPTS ENGINEERING, INC.

Chris L. McIntyre, PE Project Manager

Paul E. Burkart, PE Principal

LB/CM/PEB/shm N:\PROJECTS\Active 14 Projects\14077, Smithsonian UHL Improvements\Final\Smithsonian-UHC Improvements Geotechnical Engineering Report.docx

June 25, 2014 14077 Page 6

Appendix A Subsurface Investigation Subsurface Investigation Procedures (1 page)

Identification of Soil (1 page)

Test Boring Notes (1 page)

Test Boring Logs (4 pages)

Pavement Core Photographs (3 pages)

Boring Location Plan, Figure 2 (1 page)

Subsurface Investigation Procedures

1. Test Borings – Hollow Stem Augers The borings are advanced by turning an auger with a center opening of 2-¼ inches. A plug device blocks off the center opening while augers are advanced. Cuttings are brought to the surface by the auger flights.

Sampling is performed through the center opening in the hollow stem auger, by standard methods, after removal of the plug. Usually, no water is introduced into the boring using this procedure.

2. Standard Penetration Tests Standard penetration tests are performed by driving a 2 inch O.D., 1-⅜ inch I.D. sampling spoon with a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches, according to ASTM D-1586. After an initial 6 inches penetration to assure the sampling spoon is in undisturbed material, the number of blows required to drive the sampler an additional 12 inches is generally taken as the N value. In the event 30 or more blows are required to drive the sampling spoon the initial 6 inch interval, the sampling spoon is driven to a total penetration resistance of 100 blows or 18 inches, whichever occurs first. The sampling operation is terminated after a total of 100 hammer blows and the depth of penetration is recorded.

3. Test Boring Stakeout The test boring stakeout was provided by GeoConcepts personnel using available site plans. The test boring ground surface elevations were provided by the project civil engineer.

Identification of Soil I. DEFINITION OF SOIL GROUP NAMES ASTM D-2487 Symbol Group Name

Coarse-Grained Soils More than 50% retained on No. 200 sieve

Gravels More than 50% of coarse fraction retained on No. 4 sieve

Clean Gravels Less than 5% fines

GW WELL GRADED GRAVEL

GP POORLY GRADED GRAVEL

Gravels with Fines More than 12% fines

GM silty GRAVEL GC clayey GRAVEL

Sands 50% or more of coarse fraction passes No. 4 sieve

Clean Sands Less than 5% fines

SW WELL GRADED SAND

SP POORLY GRADED SAND

Sands with fines More than 12% fines

SM silty SAND SC clayey SAND

Fine-Grained Soils 50% or more passes the No. 200 sieve

Silts and Clays Liquid Limit less than

Inorganic CL LEAN CLAY

ML SILT

Organic OL ORGANIC CLAY

ORGANIC SILT

Silts and Clays Liquid Limit 50 or more

Inorganic CH FAT CLAY

MH ELASTIC SILT

Organic OH ORGANIC CLAY

ORGANIC SILT

Highly Organic Soils Primarily organic matter, dark in color, and organic odor PT PEAT

II. DEFINITION OF MINOR COMPONENT PROPORTIONS

Minor Component Approximate Percentage of Fraction by Weight Gravelly, Sandy (adjective) 30% or more coarse grained Sand, Gravel (with) 15% to 29% coarse grained Silt, Clay (with) 5% to 12% fine grained

III. GLOSSARY OF MISCELLANEOUS TERMS

SYMBOLS Unified Soil Classification Symbols are shown above as group symbols. Use “A” Line Chart for laboratory identification. Dual symbols are used for borderline classification.

BOULDERS & COBBLES Boulders are considered pieces of rock larger than 12 inches, while cobbles range from 3 to 12 inches.

DISINTEGRATED ROCK Residual rock material with a standard penetration test (SPT) resistance between 60 blows per foot and refusal.

ROCK Rock material with a standard penetration test (SPT) resistance of 100 blows for 2 inches or 50 blows for 0 inches, or less penetration DECOMPOSED ROCK Residual rock material exhibiting rock-like properties that can be excavated by backhoe equipment.

Similar to Disintegrated Rock, but cannot be classified as such because SPT N-Values were not obtained.

ROCK FRAGMENTS Angular pieces of rock, distinguished from rounded transported gravel, which have separated from original vein or strata and are present in a soil matrix.

QUARTZ A hard silicate mineral often found in residual soils. Only used when describing residual soils.

CEMENTED SAND Usually localized rock-like deposits within a soil stratum composed of sand grains cemented by calcium carbonate, iron oxide, or other minerals. Commonly encountered in Coastal Plain sediments, primarily in the Potomac Group sands (Kps).

MICA A plate-like phyllosilicate mineral found in many rocks, and in residual or transported soil derived there from.

ORGANIC MATERIALS

(Excluding Peat)

Topsoil - Surface soils that support plant life and contain organic matter.

Lignite - Hard, brittle decomposed organic matter with low fixed carbon content (a low grade of coal).

FILL Man made deposit containing soil, rock, and other foreign matter.

PROBABLE FILL Soils which contain no visually detected foreign matter but which are suspect with regard to origin.

LAYERS ½ to 12 inch seam of minor soil component.

COLOR Two most predominant colors present should be described.

MOISTURE CONDITIONS Wet, moist, or dry to indicate visual appearance of specimen.

Test Boring Notes

1. Classification of soil is by visual inspection and is in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification

System.

2. Estimated groundwater levels are indicated on the logs. These are only estimates from available data and may vary with precipitation, porosity of soil, site topography, etc.

3. Sampling data presents standard penetrations for 6-inch intervals or as indicated with graphic representations adjacent to the sampling data.

4. The logs and related information depict subsurface conditions at the specific locations and at the particular time when drilled. Soil conditions at other locations may differ from conditions occurring at the test locations. Also, the passage of time may result in a change in the subsurface conditions at the test locations.

5. The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary between soil types as determined in the sampling operation. Some variation may be expected vertically between samples taken. The soil profile, groundwater level observations and penetration resistances presented on the logs have been made with reasonable care and accuracy and must be considered only an approximate representation of subsurface conditions to be encountered at the particular location.

6. Disintegrated rock is defined as residual earth material with a penetration resistance between 60 blows per foot and refusal. Spoon refusal at the surface of rock, boulders, or obstructions is defined as a penetration resistance of 100 blows for 2 inches penetration. Auger refusal is taken as the depth at which further penetration of the auger is not possible without risking significant damage to the drilling equipment.

306.4

304.0

297.1

B1

B2

Topsoil = 1 inch clayey SAND (SC) with gravel, moist, red-brown

DISINTEGRATED ROCK, moist, red-brown

Bottom of Boring at 9.4 ft

4+13+14+11

5+29+93

10+100/4

55+100/5

4.9

5.2

PROJECT NUMBER:

DATE STARTED:OWNER/CLIENT:

GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): DRILLING METHOD:

6/2/14

6/2/142.25" I.D. HSA

DRILLER:

DATE COMPLETED:

Kimley Horn and Associates, Inc.

14077

G. Wilson

306.5

SHEET 1 OF 1

ENCOUNTERED:

UPON COMPLETION:

LOCATION:

LOGGED BY:PROJECT:

GROUND WATER LEVELS:

REMARKS:

B-1

None

Dry

THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT APPROXIMATE BOUNDARIES. THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL.

SAMPLE TYPES:

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Split Spoon

DRILLING CONTRACTOR:

BORING NUMBER:

Smithsonian UHC Improvements

Chantilly, Virginia Northern Virginia Drilling, Inc.

K. Fordney

703-726-8030 703-726-8032 fax

19955 Highland Vista Drive, #170 Ashburn, Virginia 20147

B O

R E

H O

LE

/T

E S

T P

IT

L

O G

S .G

P J

G E

O C

O N

C E

P T

S .G

D T

/2

5/

ELEV. 298.5

ELEV.

(ft)

20 40 60 80

STANDARD

PENETRATION

TEST RESISTANCE

(BLOWS/FOOT)

S T

R A

T U

M

DEPTH

(ft) ftCAVED: 8.0

S P

T B

LO

W

C O

U N

T S

R E

C O

V E

R Y

(in

S A

M P

LE

T

Y P

E

M C

307.4

305.2

298.5

B1

B2

Topsoil = 3 inches clayey SAND (SC) with gravel, moist, red-brown

DISINTEGRATED ROCK, moist, red-brown

Bottom of Boring at 9.2 ft

2+2+3+5

4+31+75

31+100/6

68+100/2

7.2

PROJECT NUMBER:

DATE STARTED:OWNER/CLIENT:

GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): DRILLING METHOD:

6/2/14

6/2/142.25" I.D. HSA

DRILLER:

DATE COMPLETED:

Kimley Horn and Associates, Inc.

14077

G. Wilson

307.7

SHEET 1 OF 1

ENCOUNTERED:

UPON COMPLETION:

LOCATION:

LOGGED BY:PROJECT:

GROUND WATER LEVELS:

REMARKS:

B-2

None

Dry

THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT APPROXIMATE BOUNDARIES. THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL.

SAMPLE TYPES:

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Split Spoon

DRILLING CONTRACTOR:

BORING NUMBER:

Smithsonian UHC Improvements

Chantilly, Virginia Northern Virginia Drilling, Inc.

K. Fordney

703-726-8030 703-726-8032 fax

19955 Highland Vista Drive, #170 Ashburn, Virginia 20147

B O

R E

H O

LE

/T

E S

T P

IT

L

O G

S .G

P J

G E

O C

O N

C E

P T

S .G

D T

/2

5/

ELEV. 302.7

ELEV.

(ft)

20 40 60 80

STANDARD

PENETRATION

TEST RESISTANCE

(BLOWS/FOOT)

S T

R A

T U

M

DEPTH

(ft) ftCAVED: 5.0

S P

T B

LO

W

C O

U N

T S

R E

C O

V E

R Y

(in

S A

M P

LE

T

Y P

E

M C

304.7

302.7

294.7

B1

B2

Topsoil = 1 inch clayey GRAVEL (GC) with sand, moist, red-brown

DISINTEGRATED ROCK, moist, red-brown

Bottom of Boring at 10.0 ft

3+4+10+19

25+100/5

25+36+78+100/5

20+25+82

6.1

PROJECT NUMBER:

DATE STARTED:OWNER/CLIENT:

GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): DRILLING METHOD:

6/2/14

6/2/142.25" I.D. HSA

DRILLER:

DATE COMPLETED:

Kimley Horn and Associates, Inc.

14077

G. Wilson

304.7

SHEET 1 OF 1

ENCOUNTERED:

UPON COMPLETION:

LOCATION:

LOGGED BY:PROJECT:

GROUND WATER LEVELS:

REMARKS:

SWM-1

None

Dry

THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT APPROXIMATE BOUNDARIES. THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL.

SAMPLE TYPES:

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Split Spoon

DRILLING CONTRACTOR:

BORING NUMBER:

Smithsonian UHC Improvements

Chantilly, Virginia Northern Virginia Drilling, Inc.

K. Fordney

703-726-8030 703-726-8032 fax

19955 Highland Vista Drive, #170 Ashburn, Virginia 20147

B O

R E

H O

LE

/T

E S

T P

IT

L

O G

S .G

P J

G E

O C

O N

C E

P T

S .G

D T

/2

5/

ELEV. 299.7

ELEV.

(ft)

20 40 60 80

STANDARD

PENETRATION

TEST RESISTANCE

(BLOWS/FOOT)

S T

R A

T U

M

DEPTH

(ft) ftCAVED: 5.0

S P

T B

LO

W

C O

U N

T S

R E

C O

V E

R Y

(in

S A

M P

LE

T

Y P

E

M C

304.2

295.8

294.3

B1

B2

Topsoil = 1 inch clayey GRAVEL (GC) with sand, moist, red-brown without gravel below 4.0 ft.

DISINTEGRATED ROCK, moist, red-brown

Bottom of Boring at 10.0 ft

2+5+7+14

6+6+6+9

16+20+27+27

20+46+100/5

8.0

8.3

PROJECT NUMBER:

DATE STARTED:OWNER/CLIENT:

GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): DRILLING METHOD:

6/2/14

6/2/142.25" I.D. HSA

DRILLER:

DATE COMPLETED:

Kimley Horn and Associates, Inc.

14077

G. Wilson

304.3

SHEET 1 OF 1

ENCOUNTERED:

UPON COMPLETION:

LOCATION:

LOGGED BY:PROJECT:

GROUND WATER LEVELS:

REMARKS:

SWM-2

None

Dry

THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT APPROXIMATE BOUNDARIES. THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL.

SAMPLE TYPES:

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Split Spoon

DRILLING CONTRACTOR:

BORING NUMBER:

Smithsonian UHC Improvements

Chantilly, Virginia Northern Virginia Drilling, Inc.

K. Fordney

703-726-8030 703-726-8032 fax

19955 Highland Vista Drive, #170 Ashburn, Virginia 20147

B O

R E

H O

LE

/T

E S

T P

IT

L

O G

S .G

P J

G E

O C

O N

C E

P T

S .G

D T

/2

5/

ELEV. 299.3

ELEV.

(ft)

20 40 60 80

STANDARD

PENETRATION

TEST RESISTANCE

(BLOWS/FOOT)

S T

R A

T U

M

DEPTH

(ft) ftCAVED: 5.0

S P

T B

LO

W

C O

U N

T S

R E

C O

V E

R Y

(in

S A

M P

LE

T

Y P

E

M C

Chantilly, Virginia

(Our Project No. 14077)

Core #

Total Asphalt

Thickness (inch)

Asphalt Thickness (inch) Subbase

Material Type

SM IM BM

PC-1 12.0 1.0 6.0 5.0 Crushed Stone

Asphalt

Thickness (inch)

Asphalt Thickness (inch) Subbase

Material Type

PC-2 10.5 2.0 6.5 2.0 Crushed Stone

Asphalt

Thickness (inch)

Asphalt Thickness (inch) Subbase

Material Type

PC-3 13.5 1.5 9.0 3.0 Crushed Stone

Appendix B Soil Laboratory Test Results Moisture Density Relationship Test Data (2 pages)

CBR Test Data (2 pages)

Project No.

Test Boring No.

Lab Order No.

Nat.

Moist.

Sp. G.

(Assumed)

LL PI

#200

USCS AASHTO

SC A-6

VTM-001

Tested by Reviewed by

TEST RESULTS After Correc.

9 Reddish brown

24.2

14077

B-01

3292-1 Date 6/19/2014

MOISTURE DENSITY RELATIONSHIP - VTM-001

Project Name

Depth (Feet)

Smithsonian UHC Improvements

0.0-5.0

Optimum Moisture Content (%)

Material

31 12

Before Correc.

CLAYEY SAND with gravel

Color

39.1

132Maximum Dry Density (pcf)

Classification

4.9 2.7

5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19

D ry

D en si ty pc f)

Water Content (%)

100% Saturation

19955 Highland Vista Dr., Suite 170 Ashburn, Virginia 20147

(703) 726-8030

Lab Order No.

Nat.

Moist.

Sp. G.

(Assumed)

LL PI

#200

USCS AASHTO

SC A-6

VTM-001

Tested by Reviewed by

TEST RESULTS After Correc.

10 Brown

23.0

14077

B-02

3292-2 Date 6/19/2014

MOISTURE DENSITY RELATIONSHIP - VTM-001

Project Name

Depth (Feet)

Smithsonian UHC Improvements

0.0-5.0

Optimum Moisture Content (%)

Material

31 13

Before Correc.

CLAYEY SAND with gravel

Color

47.0

131Maximum Dry Density (pcf)

Classification

7.2 2.7

5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19

D ry

D en si ty pc f)

Water Content (%)

100% Saturation

19955 Highland Vista Dr., Suite 170 Ashburn, Virginia 20147

Lab Order No.

131.8 No 0.000

8.9 No 10

2.0

129.2 15.2

4.9 4.6

Tested by: Reviewed by:

14077

LL

PI

CBR (%)

Date3292-1

Percent of Max. Density (%)

99.8

97.9

Soaked Dry Density (pcf) Moisture (%)

0.1 in.

0.2 in.

Color Reddish brown

Optimum Moisture (%)

Percentage of Max. Density (%)

CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO (CBR) TEST - VTM-008

Molded

Dry Density (pcf) Moisture (%)

B-01 Depth (Feet)

Surcharge (lbs) Max Swell (%)

Material Description

Max Density

Project Name

0.0-5.0

6/19/2014

Smithsonian UHC Improvements

CLAYEY SAND with gravel

SC

Linearity Correction

USCS

0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50

P en et ra ti on

R es is ta n ce ps i)

Penetration (in.)

19955 Highland Vista Dr., Suite 170 Ashburn, Virginia 20147

Lab Order No.

130.2 No 0.000

10.0 No 10

2.1

127.5 17.1

3.7 4.3

Tested by: Reviewed by:

14077

LL

PI

CBR (%)

Date3292-2

Percent of Max. Density (%)

99.4

97.4

Soaked Dry Density (pcf) Moisture (%)

0.1 in.

0.2 in.

Color Brown

Optimum Moisture (%)

Percentage of Max. Density (%)

CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO (CBR) TEST - VTM-008

Molded

Dry Density (pcf) Moisture (%)

B-02 Depth (Feet)

Surcharge (lbs) Max Swell (%)

Material Description

Max Density

Project Name

0.0-5.0

6/19/2014

Smithsonian UHC Improvements

CLAYEY SAND with gravel

SC

Linearity Correction

USCS

0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50

P en et ra ti on

R es is ta n ce ps i)

Penetration (in.)

19955 Highland Vista Dr., Suite 170 Ashburn, Virginia 20147