Appendix_E_-_GDR_Laboratory_Testing_-_CIEE.pdf

FUGRO ATLANTIC

GEOTECHNICAL DATA REPORT LABORATORY

TESTING PROGRAM

CRANEY ISLAND EASTWARD EXPANSION

Prepared for:

CRANEY ISLAND DESIGN PARTNERS, LLC

April 2008 Fugro Project No. 3582.002

April 11, 2008 Project No. 3582.002

Craney Island Design Partners, LLC 350 World Trade Center Norfolk, Virginia 23510

Attention: Mike Crist, Vice President

Subject: Geotechnical Data Report, Laboratory Testing Program, Craney Island Eastward Expansion

Dear Mr. Crist, Fugro Atlantic (Fugro) has recently completed an extensive marine field exploration program in the Craney Island Eastward Expansion area. This report is part of an ongoing effort, which is generally split between land and marine site investigations. The suite of reporting from the respective site investigations generally consist of field, data, and site characterization reports prepared under separate covers. This report is part of the marine site investigation, and summarizes the results of the geotechnical laboratory testing program, which was conducted on samples recovered from the marine drilling program. One other geotechnical data report is presented under separate cover. The Marine Exploration Geotechnical Data Report (Fugro, 2008) presents the results of the seabed testing program conducted during the first phase of operations, together with the results of the marine drilling and in situ testing program of the second phase of operations.

The marine geotechnical field program was conducted in support of the proposed expansion of the Craney Island Dredge Material Management Area and the future development of a container terminal on the expansion area, which is a joint local-federal project being pursued by the local Virginia Port Authority and the federal United States Army Corps of Engineers. The investigation was performed in general accordance with the scope of work developed in meetings among the following members of the Craney Island Design Partners:

Moffat & Nichol, Fugro, and S&ME (formerly known as Virginia Geotechnical Services).

The Craney Island Eastward Expansion Laboratory Testing Program was initiated on board Fugro's Skate 2D drilling platform, where visual classifications, wet density determinations, and strength tests (including torvane tests, pocket penetrometer tests, and miniature vane tests) were performed. Additional testing was performed at a temporary laboratory that was established adjacent to the crew change area on Craney Island. These tests included moisture contents, unconsolidated-undrained triaxial tests, Atterberg limit determinations, and grain size analyses. Selected samples were sent to Fugro's Houston and Corpus Christi laboratories and S&ME's Richmond laboratory for advanced testing. This Geotechnical Data Report documents the results of the above described laboratory testing program. It also provides the methods, equipment, and procedures used for the program.

FUGRO AT NTIC

A division of Fugro West, Inc. and member of the Fugro group of companies with offices throughout the world.

World Trade Cente

LA

r

101 West Main Street, Suite 350 Norfolk, Virginia 23510

Tel: (757) 625-3350 Fax: (757) 628-8244

Craney Island Design Partners, LLC April 11, 2008 (Project No. 3582.002)

It has been a pleasure working with you through this phase of the project. We look forward to receiving your comments regarding this report, as well as the opportunity to provide continued support as the project progresses.

Sincerely, FUGRO ATLANTIC

Matthew Q. Pollard, P.E. Kevin R. Smith, P.G.

Project Engineer Project Geologist

Report Approved for Release:

Thomas W. McNeilan, P.E., G.E.

Vice President

Copies Submitted: (4) Addressee and Pdf

M:\WP\2008\3582.002\RPT4-11-08\RPT4-11-08_R1.DOC 2

rcypher MPollard

CONTENTS

Page

1.0 INTRODUCTION

2.0 LABORATORY TESTING PROGRAM OVERVIEW

2.1 Field Laboratory Testing

2.2 Off-site laboratory testing

2.3 Sample Quality

3.0 LABORATORY TESTING METHODS

3.1 Classification Tests

3.2 Chemical tests

3.3 Shear Strength Tests

3.3.1 Torvane Test

3.3.2 Miniature Vane Test

3.3.3 Unconsolidated-Undrained Triaxial Compression Test

3.3.4 Consolidated-Undrained Triaxial Compression Test

3.3.5 Consolidated-Undrained Triaxial Extension Test

3.3.6 Direct Simple Shear Test

3.4 Consolidation Tests

3.4.1 Incremental Consolidation Test

3.4.2 Constant-Rate-of-Strain (CRS) Consolidation Test

3.5 Discussion of Test Results

3.5.1 Data Incorporated in Soil Model

4.0 REFERENCES

TABLES

1 Summary of Laboratory Tests 2 Sample Quality Summary 3 Summary of Corrosivity Test Results

FIGURES

Project Location Map Exploration Location Map Summary of Laboratory Test Results .................................................................3-1 through 3-32 Sample Tube Radiographs .................................................................................4-1 through 4-19 Grain Size Curves...............................................................................................5-1 through 5-16 Plasticity Charts ..................................................................................................6-1 through 6-25 UU Triaxial Test Results .......................................................................................7-1 through 7-6 CU Triaxial Test Results .....................................................................................8-1 through 8-15 Direct Shear Test Results .....................................................................................9-1 through 9-4 Consolidation Test Results .............................................................................10-1 through 10-43

CHART

Exploration Locations

M:\WP\2008\3582.002\RPT4-11-08\RPT4-11-08_R1.DOC i

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The marine field exploration program was conducted east of the existing Craney Island Dredge Material Management Area (CIDMMA), as shown on Figure 1-1. This area is the planned location of a large land reclamation project that is to be developed as an operating marine terminal. Samples for laboratory testing were obtained during the marine drilling program, which consisted of 16 marine borings conducted between August 11, 2007 and September 7, 2007. Exploration locations are shown on Figure 2 and Chart 1.

The Virginia Port Authority (VPA) and the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) are partnering in this land reclamation project. The following three publications (and brief summary of their contents) have either been prepared and submitted by Fugro for the Craney Island Eastward Expansion (CIEE) Project, or are currently in preparation:

1. Geotechnical Data Report (Fugro, 2008)

• Exploration logs (Boring, CPT, T-bar, Vane shear, Shear wave velocity)

2. Laboratory Data Report

• Laboratory and in situ testing results

3. Site Characterization Report (Fugro, in preparation).

• Soil properties and distribution

The first round of laboratory testing was conducted on board the Skate 2D drilling platform where visual classifications, wet density determinations, and strength tests (including torvane tests, pocket penetrometer tests, and miniature vane tests) were performed. Samples were then transferred to Craney Island for additional testing at a temporary laboratory established for the duration of the project. These tests included moisture contents, unconsolidated-undrained triaxial tests, Atterberg limit determinations, and grain size analyses.

Selected samples were later sent to Fugro's Houston and Corpus Christi laboratories and S&ME's Richmond laboratory for advanced testing.

2.0 LABORATORY TESTING PROGRAM OVERVIEW

The types and quantities of laboratory tests performed for this site characterization study are summarized on Table 1. Testing procedures were performed in general accordance with the ASTM Test Methods listed in the table.

The quantity of each laboratory test presented in the table includes both tests performed in the field and at Fugro's Houston and Corpus Christi laboratories and S&ME's Richmond laboratory. The results of the soil laboratory testing program are tabulated on the Summary of Laboratory Test Results provided on Figures 3-1 through 3-32. Laboratory test results were entered into specialized geotechnical engineering software for real-time updates to the Geographic Information System (GIS) project database.

Laboratory test results are presented:

M:\WP\2008\3582.002\RPT4-11-08\RPT4-11-08_R1.DOC 1

M:\WP\2008\3582.002\RPT4-11-08\RPT4-11-08_R1.DOC 2

• Herein this report. This report contains a summary of the laboratory tests conducted and test results.

• On individual boring logs included in the "Marine Geotechnical Data Report" (Fugro, 2008).

C raney Island D esign P artners, LLC

A pril 11, 2008 (P roject N

o. 3582.002) Table 1. Summary of Laboratory Tests

M :\W

P\2008\3582.002\R

PT4-11-08\R

PT4-11-08

R

1.D O

Total Number of Tests Per Marine Boring Laboratory Tests

B-1 B-2 B-3 B-4 B-5 B-6 B-7 B-8 B-9 B-10 B-11 B-12 B-13 B-14 B-15 B-16

Totals

Atterberg Limits (ASTM D 4318) 12 10 12 16 18 5 6 11 7 10 8 6 8 14 8 11 162 Moisture Content (ASTM D 2216) 10 9 12 12 12 9 7 10 8 5 7 8 7 24 9 17 166

Total and Dry Density 20 18 31 31 33 16 22 19 22 53 25 25 22 32 30 18 417

Percent Passing #200 Sieve (ASTM D 1140) 15 21 17 20 25 12 25 8 22 27 9 25 29 30 25 22 312

Sieve (ASTM D 422) 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 - - 2 2 2 4 - 1 1 24

Sieve + Hydrometer (ASTM D 422) 1 1 - - - 2 2 2 2 - - 3 - 4 - 2 19

Hydrometer (ASTM D 422) 3 3 7 6 6 - 3 3 3 3 1 - - 2 1 2 43

Organic Content (ASTM D 2974) 4 3 6 4 2 1 2 5 4 2 2 - - 2 2 3 84

Specific Gravity (ASTM D 854) 1 - 4 3 2 - 1 1 - 2 - 2 - 1 - 2 38

Torvane 11 9 11 18 16 11 8 9 13 23 20 12 14 28 23 11 237 Pocket Penetrometer 4 3 1 8 13 4 4 5 5 12 5 3 6 26 5 4 108

Undisturbed 18 18 17 22 18 12 10 14 13 27 17 10 16 31 23 17 283 Minivane (ASTM D 4648) Residual 7 6 7 8 10 1 4 3 3 5 2 - 3 3 3 4 69

Undisturbed 4 3 - - 2 3 3 4 3 - 2 3 3 - - 2 32 Residual 3 2 - - 2 2 2 2 3 - 2 2 3 - - 2 25

Remote Vane

(ASTM D 2573)

Remolded 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 Direct Simple Shear (ASTM D 3080) - - - - - - - - - 1 - - - 1 - 1 3

Undisturbed 8 7 11 19 11 7 5 9 10 19 13 11 9 20 21 9 189 UU Triaxial (ASTM D 2850) Remolded - - 1 - - - - - - 1 2 - - - - - 4

Compression - 1 - - 1 - - 1 1 - 1 - - - - - 5 CU Triaxial (ASTM D 4767) Extension - 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2

Incremental 3 4 6 3 4 - 1 3 2 - - 2 - 1 - 3 32 Consolidation (ASTM D 2434/4186) Constant Rate of Strain - - 2 2 - - 1 - - 2 - - - - - - 7

Corrosion Analysis (pH only) 2 3 3 2 2 - 1 1(1) 1 - - (2) 2 1 1 2(2) 21(5)

Sample Radiograph 2 3 2 3 2 - 1 2 1 - - - - - - 2 18

2.1 FIELD LABORATORY TESTING

Conducting geotechnical testing immediately upon sample retrieval is a routine component of Fugro's marine drilling operations. The "real time" character of onboard testing has the following advantages:

• Reduces aging effects on samples;

• Reduces sample disturbance that may be incurred during sample transit to laboratory;

• Allows quality control of the sample logging procedure by comparing sample visual descriptions with actual test data;

• Allows comparison of laboratory test data with in situ data measured with the cone penetration and vane shear tests;

• Allows preparation of field boring logs with actual laboratory test data rather than just sample lithologies;

• Allows comparison of the engineering properties of sediments with those of adjacent borings in real time;

• Allows quality assurance of test assignments for the more sophisticated and time-intensive consolidation and consolidated triaxial tests; and

• Allows field engineers to modify the drilling and sampling program in the field to optimize exploration program results.

After recovering a sample, the shift engineer typically extruded the sample from the sampler, examined it carefully, and classified the recovered material. Representative portions of each sample were packed in plastic bags (disturbed samples) or wrapped in plastic wrap and aluminum foil and sealed in plastic quart containers ("undisturbed" samples). Eighteen "Save" tubes were sealed with wax, spacers, and stored in a temperature-controlled room until shipped to an off-site laboratory. For a description of the drilling and sampling procedures, refer to Fugro's Marine Exploration Geotechnical Data Report (Fugro, 2008).

The onboard laboratory testing program included the following tests:

• Visual classification of all samples;

• Wet densities of all intact samples;

• Miniature vane shear strength tests of all suitable fine-grained samples; and

• Shear strength estimates of all suitable fine-grained samples using torvanes and pocket penetrometers.

For the marine drilling program, a temporary field laboratory was established adjacent to the crew change area on Craney Island. Laboratory equipment was provided by Fugro McClelland Marine Geosciences (FMMG), as well as Fugro West (FWI). Samples were transferred at crew changes (twice daily) from the Skate 2D drilling platform to the field laboratory, where laboratory assignments would be made and testing would proceed concurrent with the drilling program. The field laboratory testing program included the following tests:

M:\WP\2008\3582.002\RPT4-11-08\RPT4-11-08_R1.DOC 4

• Moisture content,

• Grain size determinations (percent passing the No. 200 sieve),

• Atterberg limit determinations of selected fine-grained samples, and

• Unconsolidated-undrained (UU) triaxial compression tests on selected fine-grained, cohesive samples.

2.2 OFF-SITE LABORATORY TESTING

Selected samples were sent to Fugro's Houston and Corpus Christi laboratories and S&ME's Richmond laboratory. Selected fine-grained samples were saved in the sample tubes with expandable packers and further sealed with wax. These "save" tubes were transported to Fugro's Houston laboratory for advanced testing. The off-site laboratory testing program included the following tests:

• Moisture content,

• Sieve and/or hydrometer analysis,

• Atterberg limits,

• Specific gravity,

• Organic content testing,

• Incremental and Controlled-Rate-of Strain (CRS) Consolidation tests,

• Consolidated Undrained Direct Shear tests,

• Consolidated Undrained (CU) Triaxial Strength tests, and

• Chemical tests; including pH, Resistivity, and Chloride and Sulfate Content.

2.3 SAMPLE QUALITY

Overall, the field program resulted in 18 save tube samples and over 400 quart samples.

The quart specimens were selected as the best material from the extruded samples and were typically of good quality. The save tube samples were X-rayed to evaluate the quality and amount of samples available for testing. The X-ray slides were then examined, and the individual samples were categorized into the length of each tube that fit into the following categories:

• Very Good - Sample is excellent and entire length is available for testing;

• Good - Sample shows minor discontinuities but the entire length is suitable for testing;

• Fair - Larger discontinuities were observed in the samples but approximately 60 to 75 percent of the length of the sample is suitable for testing; or

• Poor - Sample unsuitable for testing

In addition to qualifying save tube samples, the X-ray slides were used to identify and locate inclusions (e.g. sand pockets, shell fragments, organic debris, etc.), voids from gas pockets, disturbed sections, and select the optimal section of the sample for testing prior to extrusion. A summary table and the X-ray radiograph images are provided on Figures 4-1

M:\WP\2008\3582.002\RPT4-11-08\RPT4-11-08_R1.DOC 5

through 4-19. A summary of the save-tube sample length available for testing and the relative percentages is presented in Table 2.

Table 2. Sample Quality Summary

Very Good Good Fair Poor

Sample Length (cm) 268 135 55 0

Percentage of Total 59 29 12 0

3.0 LABORATORY TESTING METHODS

The laboratory testing procedures used for this project generally conformed to the applicable ASTM standards referenced in Table 1 and the following descriptions.

3.1 CLASSIFICATION TESTS

The method of classifying soils according to their engineering properties used in this study was ASTM Standard Test Method D 2487, which is based on the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). The classification tests performed for this project include tests for moisture content, unit weight, grain size distribution, Atterberg limits, and organic content.

The results of these tests are tabulated in the Summary of Laboratory Test Results (Figures 3-1 through 3-32).

Moisture Content. Tests for moisture content and unit weight of the soils were performed in general accordance with ASTM Standard Test Method D 2937. Wet densities of soil samples, where possible, were measured in the field by weighing soil samples of known volumes immediately after extrusion. Moisture content measurements for the above tests were from samples dried in an oven maintained at approximately 230oF (110oC).

Organic Content. Organic content tests were performed in general accordance with ASTM Standard Test Method D 2794 by weighing a specimen previously dried back at 110oC before and after being placed in a 440oC muffle furnace. Specific gravity of soils tests were performed in general accordance with ASTM Standard Test Method D 854, using the moist preparation method.

Grain Size Distribution. The gradation characteristics of selected samples were estimated in general accordance with the sieve and hydrometer analysis procedures of ASTM Standard Test Method D422 and D1140. In general, sieve analyses (for sizes greater than the No. 200 sieve) were performed on primarily coarse-grained samples (sand or gravel) and hydrometer analyses were performed on primarily fine-grained samples (silt and clay). Many coarse-grained samples were tested for only percent fines, the percent passing the No. 200 sieve. Grain size distribution curves are provided on Figures 5-1 through 5-16. Fines content are presented on Figures 3-1 through 3-32.

M:\WP\2008\3582.002\RPT4-11-08\RPT4-11-08_R1.DOC 6

Atterberg Limits. Plastic and liquid limits, collectively termed the Atterberg limits, were determined for selected fine-grained soil samples and were performed in general accordance with ASTM Standard Test Method D 4318. The wet preparation method was used. Selected samples also had companion oven-dried liquid limits tests run to determine if those specimens classified as "organic" per USCS. Plasticity charts are presented on Figures 6-1 through 6-25.

3.2 CHEMICAL TESTS

Four tests were performed on selected soil samples to assess the soils' corrosion potential: pH, resistivity, chloride content, and sulfate content.

The pH test was performed in general accordance with ASTM G 51, and was measured directly using a combination electrode with a temperature-compensating probe.

The resistivity of the soil was measured using the procedure outlined in ASTM G 57, "Resistivity of Soil using the Wenner Four-Electrode Method." A stiff slurry of the sample is made by adding sufficient water to bring the sample to saturation. The sample is placed into the 4-point resistivity box and a voltage is impressed between the outer electrodes causing a current to flow, and the voltage drop between the inner electrodes is measured. Using the factors of the resistivity box, the resistivity is calculated in units of ohm-centimeters.

For the sulfate and chloride determination, the soil is ground down until it passes a #10 sieve. Ten grams of soil and 90 milliliters of deionized water are added to a flask and mixed on a stirrer for 30 minutes. The sample is then covered and heated to 95°C on a heating plate for 4 hours, stirring every 30 minutes. The sample is cooled and a centrifuge is used to separate the water from the soil. The extracted water is vacuum filtered through a 0.45μm filter. The extract sample is then ready for analysis. For chloride ion concentration, the extract is titrated with mercuric nitrate solution to end point and the chloride is calculated. For sulfate concentration, the sulfate ion in the extract is converted to a barium sulfate suspension. The resulting turbidity is determined by a spectrophotometer and compared to a standard curve to determine the sulfate concentration. Concentrations are reported in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg). The results of these tests are summarized below.

M:\WP\2008\3582.002\RPT4-11-08\RPT4-11-08_R1.DOC 7

Table 3. Corrosivity Test Results

Boring Designation

Depth below river bottom (ft)

Material Type Measured pH

Resistivity (ohm-cm)

Chlorides (mg/kg)

Sulfates (mg/kg)

B-1 55.8 Fat CLAY (CH) 6.4 140 7498 2075

B-1 75.5 Fat CLAY (CH) 6.5 160 7300 900 B-2 6.6 Fat CLAY (CH) 6.6 110 9290 3750 B-2 59.1 Fat CLAY (CH) 6.3 160 4000 1550 B-2 78.7 Fat CLAY (CH) 6 200 4100 625 B-3 49.2 Fat CLAY (CH) 6.3 120 2700 3500 B-3 88.6 Fat CLAY (CH) 6.5 160 4130 1114 B-3 115.8 SAND (SP-SC) with clay 7.6 270 1160 120 B-4 13.7 Fat CLAY with sand (CH) 7.9 110 21180 5400 B-4 40.4 Fat CLAY (CH) 6.5 130 4930 2700 B-5 28.5 Fat CLAY (CH) 6.8 120 4445 1500 B-5 54.7 Fat CLAY (CH) 6.8 180 4699 900 B-7 23.0 Fat CLAY (CH) 6.9 160 6240 1900 B-8 20.5 Fat CLAY (CH) 5.0 - - - B-8 38.0 Sandy Fat CLAY (CH) 7.4 160 3700 1700 B-8 66.0 Fat CLAY (CH) 5.9 170 6240 1650 B-9 16.4 Fat CLAY (CH) 7.1 110 9300 2500 B-12 26.7 Fat CLAY (CH) 5.3 - - - B-12 40.2 Fat CLAY (CH) 5.6 - - - B-13 78.7 Poorly-graded SAND (SP) 6.2 260 1155 825 B-14 50.9 Sandy CLAY (CL) 6.4 210 2000 1650 B-15 96.4 SAND (SP-SM) with silt 5.3 220 2500 700 B-16 16.4 Fat CLAY (CH) 7.1 120 9250 1900 B-16 33.3 Fat CLAY (CH) 5.1 - - - B-16 79.7 Elastic SILT (MH) 5.4 - - - B-16 116.8 Fat CLAY (CH) 6.6 290 1100 3250

3.3 SHEAR STRENGTH TESTS

Four procedures were used in the laboratory testing program to determine the undrained shear strengths of fine-grained, cohesive soils under various conditions. Undisturbed shear strengths of fine-grained soil samples were determined in the field with a motorized miniature vane (MV) device while the samples were still in the sample tubes. Estimates of shear strength were also made in the field using a Torvane device. UU triaxial compression testing was conducted in the field laboratory and the Houston laboratory. CU triaxial tests were conducted in both the Houston laboratory and S&ME's laboratory. In-situ shear strength tests (remote vane) were also conducted during the marine site investigation program and the uncorrected values are reported in the Marine Exploration Data Report (Fugro, 2008). The uncorrected results of these tests are reported on the Summary of Laboratory Test Results (Figures 3-1 through 3-32). The four shear strength test procedures are described in the sections below.

M:\WP\2008\3582.002\RPT4-11-08\RPT4-11-08_R1.DOC 8

3.3.1 Torvane Test

In the Torvane test, a small hand-operated device (consisting of a metal disc with thin, radial vanes projecting from one face) was pressed against the flat surface of the soil until the vanes were fully embedded. The device was then rotated through a torsion spring until the soil was sheared. The device was calibrated to indicate the undrained shear strength of the soil directly from the rotation of the torsion spring. Torvane tests were conducted prior to the miniature vane test to provide a strength estimate and ensure that the ideal spring and blade combination would be used during the miniature vane test.

3.3.2 Miniature Vane Test

MV tests were performed in general accordance with ASTM D 4648. In performing the MV test, a small, four-bladed vane was inserted into an undisturbed fine-grained specimen.

Torque was applied to the vane through a calibrated spring activated by a motorized pulley and belt system that caused the vane to rotate slowly until soil shear failure occurred. The undisturbed shear strength of the soil was computed from the torque transmitted by the calibrated spring by multiplying the net rotation in degrees by the spring calibration factor. The maximum undrained shear strength that could be measured with Fugro's MV device was approximately 3.5 kips per square foot (ksf).

Residual shear strengths of very soft to soft (shear strength less than 0.4 ksf) clay soils were also measured in approximately one-third of the MV tests by allowing the vane to continue rotating after the initial soil shear failure had occurred. The tests were terminated when the vane had rotated an additional 180 degrees after failure. The residual shear strength, which represents the soil shear strength at large strain, was computed by multiplying the net rotation in degrees by the spring calibration factor.

3.3.3 Unconsolidated-Undrained Triaxial Compression Test

The UU tests were performed in general accordance with ASTM D 2850. In this type of strength test, undisturbed test specimens were enclosed in a thin rubber membrane and subjected to a confining pressure equal to the computed effective overburden pressure, up to a limiting pressure of 130 pounds per square inch. The test specimen was not allowed to consolidate under the influence of this confining pressure prior to testing. The test specimen was then loaded axially to failure at a constant rate of strain without permitting drainage from the specimen. The undrained shear strength of the fine-grained soil was computed as one-half the maximum observed deviator stress, or the deviator stress at 15 percent strain, whichever came first.

Undisturbed and remolded shear strengths, in addition to values of ε50 determined by this type of test, are tabulated on the Summary of Unconsolidated Undrained Triaxial Test Results provided on Figures 7-1 through 7-6.

M:\WP\2008\3582.002\RPT4-11-08\RPT4-11-08_R1.DOC 9

A total of 179 standard UU tests were performed. In addition, four UU tests with remold, and two UU samples run at three separate inclinations (six tests total) were performed as described below:

• Four specimens were further tested by re-molding the sample after completing the initial test to near the original moisture content and density, and running the test again, to measure the soil sensitivity, or the ratio of the undisturbed versus disturbed strength of the soil.

• Two "save" tubes were selected, one at Boring B-3 and one from Boring B-4, to have three sub-samples trimmed to 0, 30, and 45 degrees from vertical. UU tests then were run on each of these trimmed undisturbed samples. These sub-samples samples were trimmed to a nominal diameter of 1.4 inches, as opposed to 2.8 inches for standard test specimens. The results of these samples are presented on Figure 7-6.

3.3.4 Consolidated-Undrained Triaxial Compression Test

CU triaxial tests were performed as part of the laboratory testing program. The aim of these tests was to estimate the static strength parameters of fine-grained soils and their variation with failure mode and overconsolidation ratio (OCR).

Five isotropically consolidated undrained triaxial compression tests were performed on samples of Upper Norfolk clay. A summary of these tests that includes the test parameters is presented on Figure 8-1. The purpose of these tests was to assess the effect of confining pressure on the undrained shear strength and also to establish the undrained effective friction angle of the material. The confining stresses were chosen to simulate the range of loading under the fill by developing a relationship between the undrained shear strength and the effective overburden pressure. Shear strength parameters derived in this way can be used to model the strength gain with consolidation of the Upper Norfolk clay in the stability analyses for containment structures. Results of these tests are presented on Figures 8-2 through 8-15).

CU triaxial tests were performed in general accordance with ASTM D 4767. The tests were performed on samples recovered from either the "save" tubes or undisturbed quart samples. Multiple sub-specimens were prepared for each of the two to three confining pressures comprising one test. In two cases, the sample provided enough material for two sub-specimens instead of the more common three. The specimens were trimmed down to a nominal diameter of 2.0 inches, and a height to maintain a height-to diameter ratio between 2.0 and 2.5. Each trimmed specimen was then carefully fitted with saturated filter paper strips placed around the perimeter of the specimen, porous disks on the top and bottom of the specimen, and then placed in a rubber membrane. Each sample is placed into a triaxial compression chamber, back-pressure saturated, and then the desired confining pressure, or consolidation stress, is applied to the chamber.

M:\WP\2008\3582.002\RPT4-11-08\RPT4-11-08_R1.DOC 10

During the consolidation phase, the top and bottom of the specimen is allowed to drain.

Both the height of the specimen, and the volume of water entering or leaving the specimen is measured over time to verify that primary consolidation has been achieved.

When the consolidation phase is complete, the specimen is sheared by axial loading applied at a controlled rate of strain. The axial load is monitored by a load cell, and deformation is measured by a Linear Variable Differential Transformer. The sample is not allowed to drain during the axial loading phase of the test. Instead, the increase in water (pore) pressure is measured, while allowing as little water as possible to drain. The load and deformation readings were continuously recorded.

The above procedures were performed for each of the two or three confining pressures.

Plots of stress versus strain, volumetric strain versus axial strain, and Mohr diagrams for the individual tests, are presented as Figures 8-2 through 8-11.

3.3.5 Consolidated-Undrained Triaxial Extension Test

Two multi-stage isotropically CU triaxial extension tests were performed on samples of Upper Norfolk Fat Clay. These samples were consolidated to 2 to 2.7 times the estimated in situ mean effective stress, and sheared to failure in extension. The in situ mean effective stresses were calculated using the estimated in situ vertical effective stresses and the lateral earth pressure coefficient using the following equation:

v o o K '

21' σσ ×

The values of Ko required for the above relation were estimated using the empirical correlation developed by Mayne and Kulhawy (1982).

During the loading phase of the test, the axial stress is maintained, while the confining pressure of the sample is increased at a constant rate, which is the opposite of the compression test. For the first two stages of the test, the sample is taken to a failure strain between 3 and 5 percent. The third and final stage the sample was consolidated to between 5 to 10 times the estimated in situ mean effective stress sheared to failure at 15 percent strain.

The objective of these tests was to estimate the undrained shear strength of the shallow sediments under passive failure conditions, such as would exist on the exit portion of a potential failure surface underneath a dike. The results of these tests are presented on Figures 8-12 through 8-15.

3.3.6 Direct Simple Shear Test

Three static direct simple shear tests were performed on samples of Lower Norfolk Formation. A summary of the test parameters and results are presented on Figures 9-1 through 9-4. The samples were initially consolidated beyond their estimated preconsolidation pressure to give an OCR of 1.0. The failure mode of the soil samples in the direct simple shear test is

M:\WP\2008\3582.002\RPT4-11-08\RPT4-11-08_R1.DOC 11

applicable to the near-horizontal portion of the potential failure surface beneath a containment structure.

3.4 CONSOLIDATION TESTS

Incremental and CRS consolidation testing was performed on selected samples at Fugro's Houston laboratory and incremental consolidation tests were performed at S&ME's Richmond laboratory. In situ pore pressure dissipation tests also were performed during the seabed testing program, to provide further indication of the consolidation and permeability characteristics of the soil. This data was presented in Fugro's "Geotechnical Data Report - Seabed Testing and Marine Drilling Programs", dated January 31, 2008.

The results of the laboratory consolidation tests are presented on Figures 10-1 through 10-43. The test procedures are described below.

3.4.1 Incremental Consolidation Test

Incremental consolidation tests were performed on selected high-quality, fine-grained samples to investigate the stress history of the soils at the boring location. The tests were performed in accordance with the recommendations of ASTM D 2435. Test specimens were taken from either quart samples or from "save" tubes. "SAVE" tubes are pushed samples that were sealed in the field. The quart specimens were selected as the best material from the extruded samples and were typically good quality. The "save" tubes were X-ray photographed to determine the least disturbed portion of the sample and then cut to allow the test specimen to be taken. The consolidation test specimens were then trimmed into 2.50-inch-inside-diameter stainless steel rings. The trimmed test specimen and ring were then placed in a specially designed cell where the base of the test specimen was sealed from the fluid (water) and the top of the test specimen was exposed to the fluid. A porous stone was placed on top of the test specimen and the loading ram was brought into contact with the porous stone. As the test specimen was compressed during loading, the pore fluid drained from the sample through the porous stone.

The test specimen setup was performed with the entire cell under water to ensure no air was trapped in the system that would affect the pore pressure response during loading.

After the cell was fully assembled, it was placed in a loading frame where the test specimen would be saturated before loading. Vertical loads were added in increments that usually doubled the previous load, yielding a load increment ratio of 2. Each load increment was held for a period, t90 (primary consolidation), that was determined by the logarithm of time method. The load was maintained for an extra 1 to 2 hours to ensure that primary consolidation had been achieved. The data readings were used to compute the vertical strain, vertical pressure, and coefficient of consolidation. Loading was continued until the effective stress applied was greater than the maximum past pressure applied to the test specimen, and the virgin compression portion of the consolidation curve was well defined. In most cases, the test specimen was unloaded and then reloaded. The test specimen was rebounded again at the end of the test to produce a second rebound curve.

M:\WP\2008\3582.002\RPT4-11-08\RPT4-11-08_R1.DOC 12

Four incremental odometer tests were performed to investigate the long-term "creep" behavior of the principal clay stratum. The extended duration consolidation tests lasted between 18 and 65 hours after the calculated end of primary consolidation. These tests were in addition to those conducted as part of the general laboratory testing for marine borings. The tests were performed on samples of Upper Norfolk Formation clay as it is that stratum that will contribute most to the settlement beneath any future land reclamation. Three tests were performed on vertical samples, and one was performed on a horizontally oriented sample.

The results of the tests on each sample are presented on figures with the plots of axial strain and coefficient of consolidation versus effective vertical stress presented before the individual extended duration stages. Secondary compression (creep) parameters have been derived from the slope of the void ratio versus log time curves following primary consolidation.

Two alternative definitions of creep parameter have been presented: cα is the slope of the secondary compression portion of the curve, defined by the following:

t ec logΔ Δ

=α , and cαε is the same slope divided by the specific volume at the end of primary consolidation given by:

eop e e c c α α .

The extended load stages in the Upper Norfolk clay were performed at a vertical effective stress between 4 and 8 ksf on the virgin consolidation part of the loading curve. This value was chosen as being representative of the stress that would be applied under the additional weight of fill material, and also ensured that the preconsolidation pressure had been exceeded.

3.4.2 Constant-Rate-of-Strain (CRS) Consolidation Test

CRS consolidation tests were performed in accordance with ASTM D4186. CRS consolidation test specimens were trimmed into 2.50-inch-ID-stainless steel rings. Test specimens were taken from "save" tubes using the same procedure used for the incremental consolidation test specimens. The trimmed test specimen and ring were placed in a specially designed cell. The base of the test specimen was sealed from fluid (water) and the top of the specimen was exposed to the fluid. A porous stone was placed on top of the test specimen and the loading ram was brought into contact with the porous stone. As the test specimen was compressed during loading, the pore fluid drained from the top of the sample through the porous stone. A pressure transducer was connected to the bottom of the specimen, through the test cell, to measure the excess pore pressure during loading.

After the cell had been fully assembled, it was placed in a loading frame where the test specimen was saturated after a small setting load had been applied (to prevent swelling). The

M:\WP\2008\3582.002\RPT4-11-08\RPT4-11-08_R1.DOC 13

rate-of-strain was selected to limit the ratio of maximum excess pore pressure to applied vertical pressure to less than about 15 percent (more commonly 10 percent). A limit of 10 to 15 percent was selected to obtain more reliable compressibility and rate of consolidation coefficients. The pore pressure ratio was continually monitored during the first stage of loading, and the rate of strain was automatically adjusted to keep the pore pressure ratio within the above limits.

Loading was continued until the applied effective stress was greater than the estimated maximum past pressure applied to the test specimen, and the virgin compression portion of the consolidation curve was well defined. The sample was loaded between 20- and 25-percent strain, and then rebounded to produce a rebound curve.

Individual test results are presented as curves of void ratio versus effective vertical pressure. Also plotted with those curves is the computed coefficient of consolidation at each effective vertical pressure.

3.5 DISCUSSION OF TEST RESULTS

A discussion of test results and pertinent soil parameters for each stratigraphic unit will be presented in the Site Characterization Report (Fugro, in preparation).

3.5.1 Data Incorporated in Soil Model

Pertinent results of all laboratory testing are included in the computerized database developed for the project. Within this database, the user can link the test result with exploration point identification data (such as boring number, location coordinates, river bottom elevation, etc.) and depth interval data (including sample number, specimen depth, etc.).

M:\WP\2008\3582.002\RPT4-11-08\RPT4-11-08_R1.DOC 14

4.0 REFERENCES

Fugro Atlantic (2008), "Geotechnical Data Report - Seabed Testing and Marine Drilling Programs", January 31, 2008.

PW Mayne and FH Kulhawy, "Ko-OCR Relationships in Soil", J. Geotech. Eng. Div. (ASCE), 108 (GT6), Jun 1982, 851-872.

M:\WP\2008\3582.002\RPT4-11-08\RPT4-11-08_R1.DOC 15

FIGURES

Portsmouth

Eastern Branch Elizabeth River

Southern Branc h Elizabet h River

§̈¦664

§̈¦64

§̈¦564

§̈¦264

§̈¦264

§̈¦464

£¤164

£¤168

Mo nit or Me rrim ac k Bri dg e T un ne l

Craney Island Dredge

Materials Management

Area

(CIDMMA)

Newport News Channel

Portsmouth

Norfolk

Newport News

Craney Island Eastward Expansion Area

Hampton Roads Bay

Chesapeake Bay

Willoughby Bay

Elizabeth River

Wes ter n B ran ch

Elizabeth River

Lafayette River

PROJECT LOCATION MAP

Craney Island Eastward Expansion

Portsmouth, Virginia

FIGURE 1

0 21 Miles

N:

\Pr oje cts

\C ran ey _Is lan d\3

2_

Cr an ey Isl an d\O utp uts

\35

-00 3_

Sit eC ha r\L ab ora tor y_

Da ta_

Re po rt\M

XD

\Fi g-0

1_ Pr j_L oc

_M ap

.m xd

, 0 6/2

0/0 8, ks pe nc er

9I 9I9I

9I 9I

9I

9I

9I

9I

9I

9I

9I 9I

9I

9I

9I

9I

9I

9I

9I !

NORTH

CONTAINMENT

AREA

CENTER

CONTAINMENT

AREA

SOUTH

CONTAINMENT

AREA

REHANDLING

BASINNORTH

CELL SOUTH

CELL

Extent of

Multibeam Survey

NAVIGATION CHANNEL

ACCESS CHANNEL AC

CESS

CHANNEL

NORFOLK

INTERNATIONAL

TERMINAL

-10

-20

-30 -40

-50

-55 -55

-30

-10

-10

-25

35 35

-55

-55

-35

-30

Existing Dredge

Pipe

Navy Fuel Lines

Extent of

Multibeam Survey

00B-9

T-4

-10 -12

-26 -22 -18

-16

-14

C-1 C-2 C-3

C-5 C-6 C-7

C-71

C-45

C-27

C-83C-81

C-17 C-20

C-62C-60

C-19

C-80C-78C-76C-74

C-47

C-79

C-57

C-29

C-84

C-59C-58

C-30C-28

C-46 C-48 C-49 C-51

C-34C-32C-31

C-77C-75C-73C-72

C-125

C-124

C-100

C-113C-112 C-101 C-102

C-103

C-116 C-115C-114

C-9C-4 C-8

C-97C-94

C-44

C-69

C-26C-25C-24

C-16C-15 C-14C-13C-12

C-93C-92C-91C-90

C-23

C-11 C-10

C-43

C-56

C-41C-38

C-54C-53

C-89C-86C-85 C-95 C-96 C-98 C-99

C-66C-64

C-39 C-40

C-70

C-42

C-55

C-68C-67C-65

C-36

C-18 C-21 C-22

C-82 C-87 C-88

C-70C-63C-61

C-50 C-52

C-37C-35C-33

C-123

C-32a

C-122

C-120

C-121

C-108

C-111C-110

C-106

C-104 C-107C-105 C-109

C-119C-118C-117

-10

-10

-10

-10

-10 -10

-10 -10

-35 -30

40 40 40 4045 40 40 40

-25

-10

-25

-10

-20

-20

-15

-15

-5

-25

-25

-20

-20

-15

-15

-10

-10

-10

10 10

35 35 3535 30

10 10 10

-5

-9

-9

Existing Dredge

Pipe

-10 -5 -10

-10

-55

-55

-50

-50 -45

-40

-40

-35

-30

-10

-15

-15

-20

-35

-35

-40

-30-25-10 -30-15 -20

-25

-35

-30-30

-25

-10-10

-15 -20

-20

-5 -5 -5 -5

-10

-5

-10

-5 -5

-20

-10

-10

-10

-15

-55

-55

-50-45-40 -35

-25

-20

83B-9

00C-9

00C-3

00B-7

00B-3 94C-17 94C-16

94C-15

83B-12

83B-11

83B-10

49B-82

48B-25

00C-30 00C-29 00C-28

00C-20 00C-19

00C-12 00C-11 00C-10

00DMT-3

89B-4

83B-8 83B-7 83B-6 83B-5

79B-4

79B-3

71B-1

55B-255B-1

00C-8 00C-7 00C-6

00C-2

00B-6

00B-2 94C-1994C-18 83B-8b

49B-83 48B-22

00C-27 00C-26 00C-25 00C-24

00C-18 00C-17 00C-16

92CP-16

00DMT-2

00C-21

83B-3 79B-1

68B-9

81B-1 49B-85

68B-8

55B-13 00B-4

68B-755B-12

55B-5

55B-1500C-13

55B-6

55B-1155B-14

55B-4

00B-8

83B-4 00B-1 00C-1

00C-5 00C-4

00C-15 00C-14

00C-23 00C-22

V-9 V-8V-7

V-2

V-1

V-12

V-4

V-5V-6

V-3

V-11V-10

T-1

T-2

T-6T-5

T-7

T-3

T-8 T-9

T-14 T-10

T-19 T-13

T-20

T-12

T-18

T-11

T-15 T-16 T-17

B-9

B-7

B-2

B-6

B-3

B-1

B-5

B-8

B-15 B-16

B-11

B-12

B-13 B-14B-10

B-4

FIGURE 2

EXPLORATION LOCATION MAP

Craney Island Eastward Expansion

Portsmouth, Virginia

0 1,000 2,000500 Feet

LEGEND

2007 CPT Location

Historical CPT Location

Historical Boring Location!

2007 Boring Location!

2007 T-Bar Location9I

2007 Vane Shear Test Location"

Proposed Dike Alignment Bathymetric/Topographic Contour, Re. MLLW, (feet) Contour interval: 5 ft Source: Provided by NXL Survey completed during July, August, and October 2007.

B-1

C-7

T-5

V-3

00B-6

00C-21

Existing Dredge Pipe

1:12,000

NOAA Pipeline Area 2007 Topography, Feet, MLLW

0 - 10

50 - 60

20 - 30 30 - 40 40 - 50

10 - 20

2007 Bathymetry, Feet, MLLW

Deeper than -50 -50 - -40 -40 - -30 -30 - -20 -20 - -10 -10 - 0

N:

\Pr oje cts

\C ran ey _Is lan d\3

2_

Cr an ey Isl an d\O utp uts

\35

-00 3_

Sit eC ha r\L ab ora tor y_

Da ta_

Re po rt\M

XD

\Fi g-0

2_ Ex plo rat ion _L oc ati on _M ap .m xd , 0

6/2 0/0

8, ks pe nc er

Fat CLAY (CH)

0.36

0.30 B-1 52.5 Fat CLAY (CH) V3 0.55 0.17

55.8

11A 83 100 77 46 140 6.4 7498 2075B-1

0.39

B-1 42.7 Fat CLAY (CH) 9B 99 55 79

B-1

6.2 0.56 B-1 46.9 Fat CLAY (CH) 10B 96 53 80

0.62 56 75 100 0.88 9.9 0.75

B-1 72.2

2.6

V4 Fat CLAY (CH)

0.21 B-1 75.5 Fat CLAY (CH) 14A 69 99 51

B-1

Fat CLAY (CH)

57.9 Fat CLAY (CH) 11B 78 0.50

B-1 62.4 Elastic SILT (MH)

13B 71 78 41 0.59 9.1 0.77

B-1 68.9 ü

12B

0.12

0.04 B-1 4.3 Fat CLAY (CH) 2C 103 B-1

Fat CLAY (CH)

92 47 94 B-1 9.8 Fat CLAY (CH) 4 95 85

7.6

0.010.5 Fat CLAY (CH) 1B 101 50 101 90 69

0.26

0.05

0.08

B-1 3.3 Fat CLAY (CH) 2A B-1 3.8 Fat CLAY (CH) 2B 104

Fat CLAY (CH) V2 0.39 0.09

B-1 32.2 Fat CLAY (CH) 7B

0.11

0.32 0.15 B-1 37.1 Fat CLAY (CH) 8B 97 54 79

V1

6.5

0.03 2.7 B-1 13.1 Fat CLAY (CH) 5 83 B-1

29.5

Fat CLAY (CH)

B-1 B-1 24.0 Fat CLAY (CH) 6A 93 52 77 0.28

19.7 pH

SO4

(mg/kg)Ω ·cm

FIG

U

R E

3-1

PI

M

IN

IV

A

N E

S u, k sf

Pea k

R E

M O

TE

V

A N

E S u, k sf

C U

T ria xi al

T es t?

D ire ct S he ar

T es t?

Res idu al

U U

TR

IA

X

IA

L ks f

C on so lid at io n Te st

R, S A

M P

LE

N

U M

B E

R

A

TT

E R

B E

R G

LI

M

IT

S

Res idu al

LO

C

A

TI

O N

O R

G A

N

IC

C O

N

TE

N T

U N

IT

W

E

IG

H T

W E

T pc f

M O

IS

TU

R E

C O

N

TE

N T

LL S

P

E C

IF

IC

G R

A V

IT

Y

Chlorides (mg/kg)U

N

IT

W E

IG

H

T D

R Y pc f

Craney Island Eastward Expansion Portsmouth, Virginia

CORROSIVITY TESTS

Pea kSu

Confining Stress

FI

N

E S

90.9

4.5 B-1 89.4 Elastic SILT (MH) 16A 97 51

B-1

0.89

Silty Fine SAND (SM) 16D 109 81 35 44 2.37+ B-1 96.1

B-1

7300 900 4.3 ü B-1 78.3 Fat CLAY (CH) 14B

0.88 0.80

83.8 Elastic SILT (MH) 15A 101 61 66 98 78 35

18B

14 0.93 B-1 102.1 Silty Fine SAND (SM) 18A 46 B-1

Lean CLAY (CL)

Fat CLAY (CH)

124 98 26

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

D E

P

TH

, f t

LA

B

SU

M

M A

R

Y TA

B

LE C

R A

N

EY PER

B O

R

IN

G_N :\P

R O

JE

C

TS

\C

R A

N E

Y

_IS

LA

N

D \3582_C

R A

N E

Y

IS

LA

N

D \E

X P

LO

R

A

TIO

N S

\G

IN

T\2007\M A

R

IN

E

\FA

07B .G

P J_ 6/22/08 02:23 P

M

SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS

103.2

C raney Island D esign P artners, LLC

P roject N

o. 3582.002

71 48 B-1 96.6 Lean CLAY (CL) 17B 106 70

0.75

23 2.69 ü

B-1 97.1 Fat CLAY (CH) 17C 102

17A

B-1 826332210813124B

159.3 3.42+ 4424ASilty Fine SAND (SM)158.8B-1

3.42+17

B-1

Clayey SAND (SC)

SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS

LA

B

SU

M

M A

R

Y TA

B

LE C

R A

N

EY PER

B O

R

IN

G_N :\P

R O

JE

C

TS

\C

R A

N E

Y

_IS

LA

N

D \3582_C

R A

N E

Y

IS

LA

N

D \E

X P

LO

R

A

TIO

N S

\G

IN

T\2007\M A

R

IN

E

\FA

07B .G

P J_ 6/22/08 02:23 P

M

2.0

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

332426ASilty Fine SAND (SM)179.3B-1

D E

P

TH

, f t

Well-graded SAND (SW) with gravel122.7B-1

72220Well-graded SAND (SW-SM) with silt and gravel

3.7

B-1

19Well-graded SAND (SW-SM) with silt and gravel

108.3B-1 1418CSilty Fine SAND (SM)103.6

114.8

12023CFat CLAY (CH)145.0B-1

3.42+173.6 21B

388611822BFat CLAY (CH)132.1B-1 48

CORROSIVITY TESTS

Craney Island Eastward Expansion Portsmouth, Virginia

Res idu al Confining

Stress Su

R E

M O

TE

V

A N

E S u, k sf

S A

M P

LE

N

U M

B E

R

LLU

N

IT

W

E

IG

H T

D R

Y pc f

FI

N

E S

S P

E C

IF

IC

G R

A V

IT

Y

Pea k

M O

IS

TU

R E

C O

N

TE

N T

U N

IT

W

E

IG

H T

W E

T pc f

O R

G A

N

IC

C O

N

TE

N T

LO

C

A

TI

O N

Chlorides (mg/kg)

A

TT

E R

B E

R G

LI

M

IT

S

C on so lid at io n Te st

PI

R, pH

SO4

(mg/kg)

U U

TR

IA

X

IA

L ks f

Pea k

Res idu al

D ire ct S he ar

T es t?

C raney Island D esign P artners, LLC

P roject N

o. 3582.002

C U

T ria xi al

T es t?

M

IN

IV

A

N E

S u, k sf

FIG

U

R E

3-2

·cmΩ

56.4

0.42 0.17 B-2 52.5 Fat CLAY (CH) 10 81

Fat CLAY (CH)

B-2

45.9

Fat CLAY (CH) V3 0.40 0.25 B-2 59.1 Fat CLAY (CH) 11

B-2

0.53

39.9

5.8 0.38 0.11 B-2 32.8 Fat CLAY (CH) 8 79

V2 B-2

Fat CLAY (CH) 9A 98 55 79 0.40 5.8 0.54 B-2

0.20

0.53 11 B-2 74.7 Elastic SILT (MH) 12D 76

0.67

B-2 77.8 Fat CLAY (CH) 62 37 B-2 78.7 Fat CLAY (CH)

73.2

39 0.56 160 6.3 4000 1550 1.6 ü

B-2

Fat CLAY (CH) 12A 98 57 71 B-2 74.2 Fat CLAY (CH) 12C ü

0.29

9290 3750 1.7 ü B-2 8.4 Fat CLAY (CH)

71 40 0.15 0.05

B-2 11.6 Fat CLAY (CH) 4A 98 3B

0.0 Fat CLAY (CH) 1 88 94

B-2 4.3 Fat CLAY (CH) 6.6

0.30

0.06 0.06 B-2 6.6 Fat CLAY (CH) 3A 97 99 64

23.0 Fat CLAY (CH) V1 0.29

B-2 27.2 Fat CLAY (CH) 7A

0.08

B-2 28.2 Fat CLAY (CH) 7C 98 52 90 100

0.12

0.10 B-2 15.3 Fat CLAY (CH) 5C 98 53 86

B-2

0.27 üB-2 18.2 Fat CLAY (CH) 6B 99 51 94 0.21 pH

SO4

(mg/kg)Ω ·cm

FIG

U

R E

3-3

PI

M

IN

IV

A

N E

S u, k sf

Pea k

R E

M O

TE

V

A N

E S u, k sf

C U

T ria xi al

T es t?

D ire ct S he ar

T es t?

Res idu al

U U

TR

IA

X

IA

L ks f

C on so lid at io n Te st

R, S A

M P

LE

N

U M

B E

R

A

TT

E R

B E

R G

LI

M

IT

S

Res idu al

LO

C

A

TI

O N

O R

G A

N

IC

C O

N

TE

N T

U N

IT

W

E

IG

H T

W E

T pc f

M O

IS

TU

R E

C O

N

TE

N T

LL S

P

E C

IF

IC

G R

A V

IT

Y

Chlorides (mg/kg)U

N

IT

W E

IG

H

T D

R Y pc f

Craney Island Eastward Expansion Portsmouth, Virginia

CORROSIVITY TESTS

Pea kSu

Confining Stress

FI

N

E S

B-2

98 0.71 B-2 98.4 Fat CLAY (CH) 15 58

14B 1.12

Fat CLAY (CH)

105.0 Elastic SILT (MH) 16 102 64 59 91 67 25

ü

C raney Island D esign P artners, LLC

P roject N

o. 3582.002

53 30 0.80 200 6.0 4100 625 ü

111.5

B-2 87.1 Fat CLAY (CH) 14A 100 61 64 B-2 87.6

3.7

19C 117 85 38 65 40 13 17

B-2

0.96

Fat CLAY (CH) 132.9

38 97 3.42

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

D E

P

TH

, f t

LA

B

SU

M

M A

R

Y TA

B

LE C

R A

N

EY PER

B O

R

IN

G_N :\P

R O

JE

C

TS

\C

R A

N E

Y

_IS

LA

N

D \3582_C

R A

N E

Y

IS

LA

N

D \E

X P

LO

R

A

TIO

N S

\G

IN

T\2007\M A

R

IN

E

\FA

07B .G

P J_ 6/22/08 02:23 P

M

SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS

133.4

Fat CLAY (CH) 17A 66 93 B-2 112.3 Fine SAND (SP-SM) with silt 17B

19B

Fat CLAY (CH)

B-2 124.7 Medium SAND (SP) 18 11 5 B-2

B-2

Pea k

9512124Clayey Fine SAND (SC)178.0B-2 24 2712823Clayey Fine SAND (SC)168.1B-2

173.4

B-2

D ire ct S he ar

T es t?

C U

T ria xi al

T es t?

R E

M O

TE

V

A N

E S u, k sf

SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS

LA

B

SU

M

M A

R

Y TA

B

LE C

R A

N

EY PER

B O

R

IN

G_N :\P

R O

JE

C

TS

\C

R A

N E

Y

_IS

LA

N

D \3582_C

R A

N E

Y

IS

LA

N

D \E

X P

LO

R

A

TIO

N S

\G

IN

T\2007\M A

R

IN

E

\FA

07B .G

P J_ 6/22/08 02:23 P

M

D E

P

TH

, f t

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

146.4B-2 3.40502520CSandy Fat CLAY (CH)

B-2

0.702510212820BSandy Fat CLAY (CH)139.5 140.0

21C

U U

TR

IA

X

IA

L ks f

12622AClayey Fine SAND (SC)158.0B-2 3.37

Fat CLAY (CH) with sand

21B Fat CLAY (CH) with sand146.9B-2

172.53392

Pea k

Res idu al Chlorides (mg/kg)

Craney Island Eastward Expansion Portsmouth, Virginia

Res idu al Confining

Stress SuS

A M

P

LE

N U

M B

E R

A

TT

E R

B E

R G

LI

M

IT

S

CORROSIVITY TESTS

LLU

N

IT

W

E

IG

H T

D R

Y pc f

FI

N

E S

S P

E C

IF

IC

G R

A V

IT

Y

M O

IS

TU

R E

C O

N

TE

N T

U N

IT

W

E

IG

H T

W E

T pc f

O R

G A

N

IC

C O

N

TE

N T

LO

C

A

TI

O N

R, ·cmΩ

SO4

(mg/kg)pH C on so lid at io n Te st

PI

C raney Island D esign P artners, LLC

P roject N

o. 3582.002

FIG

U

R E

3-4

M

IN

IV

A

N E

S u, k sf

2.69

10B B-3 48.1 Fat CLAY (CH) 12A 99 81

37.5

3.1 B-3

B-3 48.2 Fat CLAY (CH) 72 44 B-3 48.5 Fat CLAY (CH)

B-3

Fat CLAY (CH) with sand

B-3 30.5 Fat CLAY (CH) with sand 9B 100 56 77

Fat CLAY (CH) with sand

0.09

B-3

37.0 Fat CLAY (CH) with sand 10A 96 54 78 0.30 0.12

0.34

B-3 B-3 57.3 Fat CLAY (CH) with sand 13B 94 52 81 0.85

0.60

62.3 Elastic SILT (MH) 14 83 85 45

B-3

B-3

8.3

6.3

49.2 Fat CLAY (CH) 12 79 100 67 41

2700 3500 2.7 ü B-3 56.8 Fat CLAY (CH) with sand 13A

0.64

0.30

15.1 Fat CLAY (CH) 4B 97 56 73 94

0.06

0.10

0.06 B-3 16.4 Fat CLAY (CH) with sand 5 62 B-3 20.9

1.5 Fat CLAY (CH) 1B 132 0.10 0.05

B-3 6.6

B-3

B-3 11.8 Fat CLAY (CH) 3B 89 42 110

Fat CLAY (CH)

B-3

B-3 24.0 Fat CLAY (CH) with sand 7C 111 63 76

Fat CLAY (CH) with sand

0.07 7B

26.2 Fat CLAY (CH) with sand 8 75

B-3 30.0 Fat CLAY (CH) with sand 9A

0.30

15A

56 79 B-3 21.5 Fat CLAY (CH) 6Ca 100

49 0.21 0.07 4.2 2.71

B-3 23.5 Fat CLAY (CH) with sand

6B

SO4

(mg/kg)Ω ·cm

FIG

U

R E

3-5

M

IN

IV

A

N E

S u, k sf

C on so lid at io n Te st

70.7

C U

T ria xi al

T es t?

D ire ct S he ar

T es t?

Res idu al

Pea k

U U

TR

IA

X

IA

L ks f pH R, PIS

A

M P

LE

N

U M

B E

R

A

TT

E R

B E

R G

LI

M

IT

S

Craney Island Eastward Expansion Portsmouth, Virginia

LO

C

A

TI

O N

O R

G A

N

IC

C O

N

TE

N T

U N

IT

W

E

IG

H T

W E

T pc f

M O

IS

TU

R E

C O

N

TE

N T

CORROSIVITY TESTS

S P

E C

IF

IC

G R

A V

IT

Y

FI

N

E S

LL

Chlorides (mg/kg)Pea kSu Confining

Stress Res idu al

U N

IT

W

E

IG

H T

D R

Y pc f

R E

M O

TE

V

A N

E S u, k sf

76 99 78 44 1.15 B-3 84.3

17B 16B

58 71 0.84 12 0.70 B-3 84.8 Fat CLAY (CH) with sand

Fat CLAY (CH) with sand

96 54 78 0.75 10 3.4

B-3 71.2

15B

87.2

55 76 0.51 10 0.66 B-3 76.7 Fat CLAY (CH)

Fat CLAY (CH) with sand

98 64 36 160 6.5 4130 1114 3.7

17C

Fat CLAY (CH)

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

D E

P

TH

, f t

LA

B

SU

M

M A

R

Y TA

B

LE C

R A