W912QR24R0048_FIO_Vol6_ProjGIR_9bof16_C1b-0000.pdf

Solicitation For Rough River Dam Safety Modification Project Phase II - New Outlet Works and Cutoff Wall

P2: 145870

Design-Bid-Build

Geotechnical Information Report (GIR) (9b of 16) Appendix C1b

For Information Only

23 September 2024

W912QR24R0048

ARIMS: 1200

Disposition: Permanent

W912QR24R0048_FIO_Vol6_ProjGIR_9bof16_C1b-0000

C-973

C-974

C-975

C-976

C-977

C-978

C-979

C-980

C-981

C-982

C-983

C-984

C-985

C-986

C-987

C-988

C-989

C-990

C-991

C-992

C-993

C-994

C-995

C-996

C-997

C-998

C-999

C-1000

C-1001

C-1002

C-1003

C-1004

C-1005

C-1006

C-1007

C-1008

C-1009

C-1010

C-1011

C-1012

C-1013

C-1014

C-1015

C-1016

C-1017

C-1018

C-1019

C-1020

C-1021

C-1022

C-1023

C-1024

C-1025

C-1026

C-1027

C-1028

C-1029

C-1030

C-1031

C-1032

C-1033

C-1034

C-1035

C-1036

C-1037

C-1038

C-1039

C-1040

C-1041

C-1042

C-1043

C-1044

C-1045

C-1046

C-1047

C-1048

C-1049

C-1050

C-1051

C-1052

C-1053

C-1054

C-1055

C-1056

C-1057

C-1058

C-1059

C-1060

C-1061

C-1062

C-1063

C-1064

C-1065

C-1066

C-1067

C-1068

C-1069

C-1070

C-1071

C-1072

C-1073

C-1074

C-1075

C-1076

C-1077

C-1078

C-1079

C-1080

C-1081

C-1082

C-1083

C-1084

C-1085

C-1086

C-1087

C-1088

C-1089

C-1090

C-1091

C-1092

C-1093

C-1094

C-1095

C-1096

C-1097

C-1098

C-1099

C-1100

C-1101

C-1102

C-1103

C-1104

C-1105

C-1106

C-1107

C-1108

C-1109

C-1110

C-1111

C-1112

C-1113

C-1114

C-1115

C-1116

C-1117

C-1118

C-1119

C-1120

C-1121

C-1122

C-1123

C-1124

C-1125

C-1126

C-1127

C-1128

C-1129

C-1130

C-1131

C-1132

C-1133

C-1134

C-1135

C-1136

C-1137

C-1138

C-1139

C-1140

C-1141

C-1142

C-1143

C-1144

C-1145

Appendix C1b– Laboratory Test Results (Soil)

1996 Phase I Special Study

2002 Sinkhole Evaluation

2003 DSAP Evaluation

2007 DSAP Construction PZ Replacement Cutoff Wall

2007 Special Study 700 Series

2007 Aquatrack Geophysical Investigation

2012 Subsurface Characterization Report

2013 Report of Geotechnical Exploration

2015 Instrumentation Upgrade

2016‐17 Phase 1B Grouting and Geotechnical Exploration

2017 Instrumentation Upgrade

2019 Geotechnical Exploration

2021 Analysis of Native Valley Soils

C-1146

Project: Prepared By: Date:

Subject: Checked By: Date:

Status:

Summary of Laboratory Test Data

Wet Dry

AD-1702 49.5-51 SPT 27 15 12

AD-1702 51-52.5 SPT

AD-1702 52.5-54 SPT 33 19 14

AD-1702 52.5-54 SPT 32 20 12

AD-1702 54.0-54.8 SPT 31 18 13

AD-1702 55.5-56.6 SPT 41 16 25

AD-1702 55.5-56.6 SPT 35 17 18

AD-1702 56.6-57 SPT 33 19 14

AD-1702 57.2-58.5 SPT

AD-1702 58.5-59.0 SPT NP NP NP

AD-1702 59-60 SPT 33 16 17

AD-1702 59-60 SPT 24 14 15

AD-1709 58.5-72 SPT CS

AD-1709 49.5'-51.0' SPT 34 19 15

AD-1709 51.0'-52.5' SPT 32 16 16

AD-1709 54.0'-55.5' SPT 33 14 19

AD-1709 55.5'-57.0' SPT 31 14 17

AD-1709 58.5'-60.0' SPT NP NP NP

AD-1709 61.5'-63.0' SPT NP NP NP

AD-1709 63.0'-64.5' SPT NP NP NP

AD-1709 67.5'-69.0' SPT NP NP NP

AD-1709 70.5'-72.0' SPT - - -

AD-1709 104.5'-106.0' SPT 36 15 21

AD-1709 109.0'-110.5' SPT 29 18 11

AD-1709 110.5'-111.5' SPT 30 18 12

AD-1709 112.0'-112.7' SPT 31 19 12

AD-1709 115.0'-116.5' SPT 39 18 21

AD-1709 116.5-117.8 SPT

AD-1709 117.8-118 SPT

AD-1709 122.7'-123.9' SPT 42 22 20

AD-1710 106-107.5 SPT 38 16 22

AD-1711 107.5-108.1 SPT

AD-1712 44.5'-46.0' SPT 33 18 15

AD-1712 44.5-46 SPT 34 18 16

AD-1712 46.0'-46.9' SPT 34 15 19

AD-1712 47.5-49 SPT

AD-1712 49.7'-50.5' SPT NP NP NP

AD-1712 50.9'-52.0' SPT NP NP NP

AD-1712 108.1-109 SPT

AD-1713 20.5-22 SPT

AD-1713 22-23.5 SPT 36 19 17

AD-1713 23.5-25 SPT

AD-1713 25-26.5 SPT 35 24 11

AD-1713 26.5-27.3 SPT

AD-1713 109-110.5 SPT

AD-1714 1.8-1.3 SPT NP NP NP

AD-1714 4.0-5.5 SPT NP NP NP

AD-1714 110.5-111.5 SPT

AD-1715 111.5-112 SPT

AD-1716 112-112.7 SPT

AD-1717 112.7-113.5 SPT

AD-1718 113.5-115 SPT 37 17 20

AD-1719 115-116.5 SPT

A-1715 3.0-5.0 A-1717 1.0-4.0 A-1718 2.0-5.0 A-1715 5.0-10.0 A-1716 5.0-7.0 A-1717 10.0-14.0

* Graphical presentations of results of Atterberg Limits, Grain Size, Proctor, CBR, Consolidation, Triaxial, and/or other tests follow this summary.

** Sample types: SPT = Split-Spoon Sample (ASTM D1586); UD = Undisturbed Sample (ASTM D1587); Bulk = Bulk/Bag Sample; CS = composite sample

8.6

9.0 6.1

89.2 87.0 84.5 76.1

94.6

89.1 79.6 71.4 69.4

9.2 SP-SM

CL

CL

CL

CL

78.6 CL

12.7 SM

88.5 CL

CL

22.1

88.5 CL

2.70

BULK CS 44 17 27 71.9 CL 2.70

21.2

18.6

9.2

85.5

79.2

CL 2.70

13.9

Final

Max. Dry Density (pcf)

Opt. Moisture Content (%)

Compaction Tests

19.1

18.3

19.9

23.8

18.0

CL

92.8

CL 2.70

2.70

2.70

2.70

Unit Weight (pcf)Test

Loc.

Depth (feet)

Natural Moisture

Content (%)

Atterberg Limits

LL PL

Samp.

Type

Specific Gravity

2.70

Unconfined Compressive Strength (psf)

% Finer than No. 200 Sieve

USCS

Classification

15.6

PI

61.3

CBR

CL

SP-SM

SP-SM

SP-SM

CL

CL

FY 17 Instrumentation

CL

Rough River Dam Nick Hudson 03/10/20 Summary of Laboratory Test Data Jeremy Hudson 03/10/20

76.2 CL

SM

CL

CL

7.9

77.0

CL

78.3 CL 2.70

81.6

2.70

2.70

2.70

2.70

2.70

120.7 11.3

111.6 15.5

BULK CS 32 16 16 49.6 CL 2.70

17.5 77.4

81.0

27.8 14.2

23.0

CL

CL

CL

SM

SM

CL

CL

CL

17.8

23.5

25.8

18.2

24.5 15.1

84.4

82.5

16.7

27.0

28.1

17.8

14.1

16.2

16.7 16.8 16.3 19.0

Version 04152005 Page 1 of 1 2017 Summary of Laboratory Test Data.xlsx: Summary

Reviewed By: Date:

Approved By: Date:

Statistical Analysis of Moisture Content

15.6 17.5 21.2 23.5

17.8 19.1 16.7 27.0

18.3 17.8 25.8

19.9 14.1 28.1

23.8 16.2 23.0

18.0 16.7

16.8 16.3 19.0 18.6 18.2 24.5 15.1

14 % 20 % 4 % 28 % 18 % 15

- Cohesive Foundation Overburden - Embankment - Low Plasticity Oveerburden

- Cohesionless Foundation Overburden - Drain

Maximum Median Variance Minimum Average Standard Deviation

Loc.

Moisture Content %

AD-

AD-

AD-

AD-

All Materials

Rough River Dam Outlet Works Phase 2 Jeremy Hudson 11 Mar 2020 Rough River Dam, Green River Basin, Kentucky Nick Hudson 15 Mar 2020

C-1148

Reviewed By: Date:

Approved By: Date:

Statistical Analysis of Moisture Content

15.6 17.5 21.2

17.8 19.1

18.3 17.8

19.9 14.1

23.8 16.2

16.7 16.8 16.3 19.0 18.6 18.2

14.1 % 18.1 % 2.2 %

23.8 % 17.8 % 5.0

- Cohesive Foundation Overburden - Embankment - Low Plasticity Oveerburden

- Cohesionless Foundation Overburden - Drain

Maximum Median Variance Minimum Average Standard Deviation

Loc.

Moisture Content %

AD-

AD-

AD-

AD-

All Materials

Rough River Dam Outlet Works Phase 2 Jeremy Hudson 11 Mar 2020 Rough River Dam, Green River Basin, Kentucky Nick Hudson 15 Mar 2020

C-1149

Reviewed By: Date:

Approved By: Date:

Statistical Analysis of Moisture Content

23.5 27.0 25.8 28.1 23.0

18.0

24.5 15.1

15 % 23 % 4 % 28 % 24 % 20

- Cohesive Foundation Overburden - Embankment - Low Plasticity Oveerburden

- Cohesionless Foundation Overburden - Drain

Maximum Median Variance Minimum Average Standard Deviation

Loc.

Moisture Content %

AD-

AD-

AD-

AD-

All Materials

Rough River Dam Outlet Works Phase 2 Jeremy Hudson 11 Mar 2020 Rough River Dam, Green River Basin, Kentucky Nick Hudson 15 Mar 2020

C-1150

Moisture Content of Soil

ASTM D 2216

Project Name Rough River Dam Geotech Project Number 175557138 Tested By MR

Maximum Particle Size in Sample No. 10 No. 4 3/8'' 3/4'' 1 1/2'' 3''

Recommended Minimum Mass (g) 20 100 500 2,500 10,000 50,000 Test Method ASTM Material Type: Stratified, Laminated, Lensed, Homogeneous, Disturbed

Maximum Material Pass Min. Wet Soil & Dry Soil &

Date Material Particle Excluded Mass? Can Weight Can Weight CanWeight Moisture

Source Lab ID Tested Type Size Amount Size (Y/N) (g) (g) (g) Content (%)

PZ-87/AD-1702, 49.5'-51.0' 1 11/9/17 Hom No. 10 Yes 14.28 46.16 41.85 15.6 PZ-87/AD-1702, 51.0'-52.5' 2 11/9/17 Hom No. 10 Yes 14.46 52.04 46.35 17.8 PZ-87/AD-1702, 52.5'-54.0' 3 11/9/17 Hom No. 10 Yes 14.21 47.98 42.76 18.3 PZ-87/AD-1702, 55.5'-56.6' 7 11/9/17 Hom No. 10 Yes 14.29 45.57 40.38 19.9 PZ-87/AD-1702, 56.6'-57.0' 8 11/8/17 Hom No. 10 Yes 346.97 409.09 397.14 23.8 PZ-87/AD-1702, 59.0'-60.0' 12 11/8/17 Hom No. 10 Yes 14.10 74.24 65.05 18.0 PZ-80/AD-1709, 104.5'-106.0' 30 11/8/17 Len 3/8'' No 14.22 80.04 70.25 17.5 PZ-80/AD-1709, 106.0'-107.5' 31 11/8/17 Hom No. 10 No 14.37 36.87 33.26 19.1 PZ-80/AD-1709, 107.5'-108.1' 32 11/8/17 Len No. 10 Yes 14.03 48.89 43.61 17.8 PZ-80/AD-1709, 108.1'-109.0' 33 11/8/17 Hom No. 10 Yes 14.31 64.38 58.20 14.1 PZ-80/AD-1709, 109.0'-110.5' 34 11/8/17 Hom No. 10 Yes 14.19 48.51 43.72 16.2 PZ-80/AD-1709, 110.5'-111.5' 35 11/8/17 Hom No. 10 Yes 14.14 48.28 43.39 16.7 PZ-80/AD-1709, 111.5'-112.0' 36 11/8/17 Hom No. 10 Yes 14.32 47.75 42.94 16.8 PZ-80/AD-1709, 112.0'-112.7' 37 11/8/17 Hom No. 10 Yes 14.22 50.03 45.00 16.3 PZ-80/AD-1709, 112.7'-113.5' 38 11/8/17 Hom No. 10 Yes 14.12 43.14 38.51 19.0 PZ-80/AD-1709, 113.5'-115.0' 39 11/8/17 Hom 3/4'' 1 3/4'' No 14.04 78.33 68.25 18.6 PZ-80/AD-1709, 115.0'-116.5' 40 11/8/17 Hom No. 10 Yes 14.15 42.47 38.11 18.2 PZ-80/AD-1709, 116.5'-117.8' 41 11/8/17 Hom 1 1/2'' 1 1 1/2'' No 14.39 83.95 70.28 24.5 PZ-80/AD-1709, 117.8'-118.0', mostly rock 42 11/8/17 Dist 3/4'' 1 3/4'' No 14.47 67.85 60.86 15.1 PZ-90/AD-1712, 44.5'-46.0' 50 11/8/17 Hom No. 10 Yes 14.27 43.76 38.61 21.2 PZ-90/AD-1712, 46.0'-46.9' 51 11/8/17 Hom 3/4'' 1 3/4'' No 14.38 74.71 66.07 16.7 PZ-92/AD-1713, 20.5'-22.0' 59 11/8/17 Hom 3/4'' 1 3/4'' No 14.46 66.99 57.01 23.5 PZ-92/AD-1713, 22.0'-23.5' 60 11/8/17 Hom No. 10 Yes 14.26 55.26 46.54 27.0 PZ-92/AD-1713, 23.5'-25.0' 61 11/8/17 Hom No. 10 Yes 21.61 64.53 55.74 25.8 PZ-92/AD-1713, 25.0'-26.5' 62 11/8/17 Hom No. 10 Yes 21.94 59.07 50.93 28.1

Template: tmp_mc_input.xlsm Version: 20170216 Approved By: RJ

Stantec Consulting Services Inc.

Louisville, Kentucky

Reported By: RHB Report Date: 11/21/2017C-1151

Moisture Content of Soil

ASTM D 2216

Project Name Rough River Dam Geotech Project Number 175557138 Tested By MR

Maximum Particle Size in Sample No. 10 No. 4 3/8'' 3/4'' 1 1/2'' 3''

Recommended Minimum Mass (g) 20 100 500 2,500 10,000 50,000 Test Method ASTM Material Type: Stratified, Laminated, Lensed, Homogeneous, Disturbed

Maximum Material Pass Min. Wet Soil & Dry Soil &

Date Material Particle Excluded Mass? Can Weight Can Weight CanWeight Moisture

Source Lab ID Tested Type Size Amount Size (Y/N) (g) (g) (g) Content (%)

PZ-92/AD-1713, 26.5'-27.3' 63 11/8/17 Hom 3/8'' 1 3/8'' No 21.67 113.95 96.67 23.0

Template: tmp_mc_input.xlsm Version: 20170216 Approved By: RJ

Stantec Consulting Services Inc.

Louisville, Kentucky

Reported By: RHB Report Date: 11/21/2017C-1152

Reviewed By: Date:

Approved By: Date:

Statistical Analysis of Liquid Limit

12 22 16 17 14 20 11

11 % 17 % 4 % 25 % 17 % 20

- Cohesive Foundation Overburden - Embankment - Low Plasticity Oveerburden

- Cohesionless Foundation Overburden - Drain

Maximum Median Variance Minimum Average Standard Deviation

Loc.

Moisture Content %

AD-

AD-

AD-

AD-

All Materials

Rough River Dam Outlet Works Phase 2 Jeremy Hudson 11 Mar 2020 Rough River Dam, Green River Basin, Kentucky Nick Hudson 15 Mar 2020

C-1153

Reviewed By: Date:

Approved By: Date:

Statistical Analysis of Liquid Limit

12 22 16 14 20

12 % 18 % 5 % 25 % 16 % 23

- Cohesive Foundation Overburden - Embankment - Low Plasticity Oveerburden

- Cohesionless Foundation Overburden - Drain

Maximum Median Variance Minimum Average Standard Deviation

Loc.

Moisture Content %

AD-

AD-

AD-

AD-

All Materials

Rough River Dam Outlet Works Phase 2 Jeremy Hudson 11 Mar 2020 Rough River Dam, Green River Basin, Kentucky Nick Hudson 15 Mar 2020

C-1154

Reviewed By: Date:

Approved By: Date:

Statistical Analysis of Liquid Limit

11 % 15 % 3 % 17 % 17 % 12

- Cohesive Foundation Overburden - Embankment - Low Plasticity Oveerburden

- Cohesionless Foundation Overburden - Drain

Maximum Median Variance Minimum Average Standard Deviation

Loc.

Moisture Content %

AD-

AD-

AD-

AD-

All Materials

Rough River Dam Outlet Works Phase 2 Jeremy Hudson 11 Mar 2020 Rough River Dam, Green River Basin, Kentucky Nick Hudson 15 Mar 2020

C-1155

Reviewed By: Date:

Approved By: Date:

Statistical Analysis of Liquid Limit

27 38 34 36 33 37 35

27 % 35 % 4 % 41 % 35 % 14

- Cohesive Foundation Overburden - Embankment - Low Plasticity Oveerburden

- Cohesionless Foundation Overburden - Drain

Maximum Median Variance Minimum Average Standard Deviation

Loc.

Moisture Content %

AD-

AD-

AD-

AD-

All Materials

Rough River Dam Outlet Works Phase 2 Jeremy Hudson 11 Mar 2020 Rough River Dam, Green River Basin, Kentucky Nick Hudson 15 Mar 2020

C-1156

Reviewed By: Date:

Approved By: Date:

Statistical Analysis of Liquid Limit

27 38 34 33 37

27 % 35 % 4 % 41 % 34 % 20

- Cohesive Foundation Overburden - Embankment - Low Plasticity Oveerburden

- Cohesionless Foundation Overburden - Drain

Maximum Median Variance Minimum Average Standard Deviation

Loc.

Moisture Content %

AD-

AD-

AD-

AD-

All Materials

Rough River Dam Outlet Works Phase 2 Jeremy Hudson 11 Mar 2020 Rough River Dam, Green River Basin, Kentucky Nick Hudson 15 Mar 2020

C-1157

Reviewed By: Date:

Approved By: Date:

Statistical Analysis of Liquid Limit

33 % 35 % 2 % 36 % 35 % 2

- Cohesive Foundation Overburden - Embankment - Low Plasticity Oveerburden

- Cohesionless Foundation Overburden - Drain

Maximum Median Variance Minimum Average Standard Deviation

Loc.

Moisture Content %

AD-

AD-

AD-

AD-

All Materials

Rough River Dam Outlet Works Phase 2 Jeremy Hudson 11 Mar 2020 Rough River Dam, Green River Basin, Kentucky Nick Hudson 15 Mar 2020

C-1158

Reviewed By: Date:

Approved By: Date:

Statistical Analysis of % passing #200 Sieve

61.3 9.2 78.3 84.4

58.5 81.6 13.9 82.5

79.2 76.2 92.8 7.9 77.0

8 % 62 % 31 % 93 % 77 % 940

- Cohesive Foundation Overburden - Embankment - Low Plasticity Oveerburden

- Cohesionless Foundation Overburden - Drain

Maximum Median Variance Minimum Average Standard Deviation

Loc.

Moisture Content %

AD-

AD-

AD-

AD-

All Materials

Rough River Dam Outlet Works Phase 2 Jeremy Hudson 11 Mar 2020 Rough River Dam, Green River Basin, Kentucky Nick Hudson 15 Mar 2020

C-1159

Reviewed By: Date:

Approved By: Date:

Statistical Analysis of % passing #200 Sieve

61.3 78.3

58.5 81.6

79.2 76.2 92.8

59 % 75 % 12 % 93 % 78 % 142

- Cohesive Foundation Overburden - Embankment - Low Plasticity Oveerburden

- Cohesionless Foundation Overburden - Drain

Maximum Median Variance Minimum Average Standard Deviation

Loc.

Moisture Content %

AD-

AD-

AD-

AD-

All Materials

Rough River Dam Outlet Works Phase 2 Jeremy Hudson 11 Mar 2020 Rough River Dam, Green River Basin, Kentucky Nick Hudson 15 Mar 2020

C-1160

Reviewed By: Date:

Approved By: Date:

Statistical Analysis of % passing #200 Sieve

84.4 82.5

77.0

77 % 81 % 4 % 84 % 83 % 15

- Cohesive Foundation Overburden - Embankment - Low Plasticity Oveerburden

- Cohesionless Foundation Overburden - Drain

Maximum Median Variance Minimum Average Standard Deviation

Loc.

Moisture Content %

AD-

AD-

AD-

AD-

All Materials

Rough River Dam Outlet Works Phase 2 Jeremy Hudson 11 Mar 2020 Rough River Dam, Green River Basin, Kentucky Nick Hudson 15 Mar 2020

C-1161

Reviewed By: Date:

Approved By: Date:

Statistical Analysis of % passing #200 Sieve

9.2 13.9

7.9

8 % 10 % 3 % 14 % 9 % 10

- Cohesive Foundation Overburden - Embankment - Low Plasticity Oveerburden

- Cohesionless Foundation Overburden - Drain

Maximum Median Variance Minimum Average Standard Deviation

Loc.

Moisture Content %

AD-

AD-

AD-

AD-

All Materials

Rough River Dam Outlet Works Phase 2 Jeremy Hudson 11 Mar 2020 Rough River Dam, Green River Basin, Kentucky Nick Hudson 15 Mar 2020

C-1162

Subject: Prepared By: Date:

Project: Checked By: Date:

Falls of Rough, KY Reviewed By: Date:

Approved By: Date:

Statistical Analysis of Normalized Standard Penetration Test (SPT) Resistances, (N1)60-values Ref: Youd, T.L. and Idriss, I.M. et al. "Liquefaction Resistance of Soils: Summary Report from the 1996 and 1998 NCEER/NSF Workshops on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of

Soils," J. Geotech. and Geoenvir. Engrg. , ASCE, Oct. 2001, 127(10), 817-833.

12 15 -- 26 17 7 2 20 -- 25 35 2 -- 8 -- 27 22 12

17 15 14 11 19 14 71 -- 41 29 43 12

2 bpf 22 bpf 15 bpf 71 bpf 19 bpf 218

- Cohesive Foundation Overburden - Embankment

- Cohesionless Foundation Overburden - Drain

N or m al iz ed

S ta nd ar d Pe ne tra tio n

Te st

(S

PT

) R es ist an ce s, (N 1)

-v al ue s ( bp f)

Median Standard Deviation Variance

Minimum Maximum

Loc. AD-

AD-

AD-

AD-

AD-

AD-

SPT (N1)60-values (bpf)

Average

FY 17 Instrumentation Nick Hudson 12 Mar 2020 Rough River Dam Jeremy Hudson

C-1163

Falls of Rough, KY Reviewed By: Date:

Approved By: Date:

Statistical Analysis of Normalized Standard Penetration Test (SPT) Resistances, (N1)60-values Ref: Youd, T.L. and Idriss, I.M. et al. "Liquefaction Resistance of Soils: Summary Report from the 1996 and 1998 NCEER/NSF Workshops on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of

Soils," J. Geotech. and Geoenvir. Engrg. , ASCE, Oct. 2001, 127(10), 817-833.

15 26 17 20 25 8 27

17 15 19 14

8 bpf 22 bpf 8 bpf 41 bpf 19 bpf 62

- Cohesive Foundation Overburden - Embankment - Low Plasticity Oveerburden

- Cohesionless Foundation Overburden - Drain

Standard Deviation

N or m al iz ed

S ta nd ar d Pe ne tra tio n

Te st

(S

PT

) R es ist an ce s, (N 1)

-v al ue s ( bp f)

Maximum Median Variance Minimum Average

Loc.

SPT (N1)60-values (bpf)

AD-

AD-

AD-

AD-

AD-

AD-

FY 17 Instrumentation Nick Hudson 12 Mar 2020 Rough River Dam Jeremy Hudson

C-1164

Falls of Rough, KY Reviewed By: Date:

Approved By: Date:

Statistical Analysis of Normalized Standard Penetration Test (SPT) Resistances, (N1)60-values Ref: Youd, T.L. and Idriss, I.M. et al. "Liquefaction Resistance of Soils: Summary Report from the 1996 and 1998 NCEER/NSF Workshops on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of

Soils," J. Geotech. and Geoenvir. Engrg. , ASCE, Oct. 2001, 127(10), 817-833.

-- 35 -- 22

9 bpf 22 bpf 11 bpf 43 bpf 23 bpf 114

- Cohesive Foundation Overburden - Embankment - Low Plasticity Oveerburden

- Cohesionless Foundation Overburden - Drain

Standard Deviation

N or m al iz ed

S ta nd ar d Pe ne tra tio n

Te st

(S

PT

) R es ist an ce s, (N 1)

-v al ue s ( bp f)

Maximum Median Variance Minimum Average

Loc.

SPT (N1)60-values (bpf)

AD-

AD-

AD-

AD-

AD-

AD-

FY 17 Instrumentation Nick Hudson 12 Mar 2020 Rough River Dam Jeremy Hudson

C-1165

Falls of Rough, KY Reviewed By: Date:

Approved By: Date:

Statistical Analysis of Normalized Standard Penetration Test (SPT) Resistances, (N1)60-values Ref: Youd, T.L. and Idriss, I.M. et al. "Liquefaction Resistance of Soils: Summary Report from the 1996 and 1998 NCEER/NSF Workshops on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of

Soils," J. Geotech. and Geoenvir. Engrg. , ASCE, Oct. 2001, 127(10), 817-833.

2 bpf 19 bpf 21 bpf 63 bpf 12 bpf 437

- Cohesive Foundation Overburden - Embankment - Low Plasticity Oveerburden

- Cohesionless Foundation Overburden - Drain

Standard Deviation

N or m al iz ed

S ta nd ar d Pe ne tra tio n

Te st

(S

PT

) R es ist an ce s, (N 1)

-v al ue s ( bp f)

Maximum Median Variance Minimum Average

Loc.

SPT (N1)60-values (bpf)

AD-

AD-

AD-

AD-

AD-

AD-

FY 17 Instrumentation Nick Hudson 12 Mar 2020 Rough River Dam Jeremy Hudson

C-1166

Falls of Rough, KY Reviewed By: Date:

Approved By: Date:

Statistical Analysis of Normalized Standard Penetration Test (SPT) Resistances, (N1)60-values Ref: Youd, T.L. and Idriss, I.M. et al. "Liquefaction Resistance of Soils: Summary Report from the 1996 and 1998 NCEER/NSF Workshops on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of

Soils," J. Geotech. and Geoenvir. Engrg. , ASCE, Oct. 2001, 127(10), 817-833.

14 bpf 14 bpf ##### bpf 14 bpf 14 bpf #####

- Cohesive Foundation Overburden - Embankment - Low Plasticity Oveerburden

- Cohesionless Foundation Overburden - Drain

Standard Deviation

N or m al iz ed

S ta nd ar d Pe ne tra tio n

Te st

(S

PT

) R es ist an ce s, (N 1)

-v al ue s ( bp f)

Maximum Median Variance Minimum Average

Loc.

SPT (N1)60-values (bpf)

AD-

AD-

AD-

AD-

AD-

AD-

FY 17 Instrumentation Nick Hudson 12 Mar 2020 Rough River Dam Jeremy Hudson

C-1167

Falls of Rough, KY Reviewed By: Date:

Approved By: Date:

Statistical Analysis of Normalized Standard Penetration Test (SPT) Resistances, (N1)60-values Ref: Youd, T.L. and Idriss, I.M. et al. "Liquefaction Resistance of Soils: Summary Report from the 1996 and 1998 NCEER/NSF Workshops on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of

Soils," J. Geotech. and Geoenvir. Engrg. , ASCE, Oct. 2001, 127(10), 817-833.

2 bpf 2 bpf ##### bpf 2 bpf 2 bpf #####

- Cohesive Foundation Overburden - Embankment - Low Plasticity Oveerburden

- Cohesionless Foundation Overburden - Drain

FY 17 Instrumentation Nick Hudson 12 Mar 2020 Rough River Dam Jeremy Hudson

Loc.

SPT (N1)60-values (bpf)

AD-

AD-

AD-

AD-

AD-

AD-

N or m al iz ed

S ta nd ar d Pe ne tra tio n

Te st

(S

PT

) R es ist an ce s, (N 1)

-v al ue s ( bp f)

Minimum Average Standard Deviation Maximum Median Variance

C-1168

Falls of Rough, KY Reviewed By: Date:

Approved By: Date:

Normalized Standard Penetration Test (SPT) Resistances, (N1)60-values Ref: Youd, T.L. and Idriss, I.M. et al. "Liquefaction Resistance of Soils: Summary Report from the 1996 and 1998 NCEER/NSF Workshops on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of

Soils," J. Geotech. and Geoenvir. Engrg. , ASCE, Oct. 2001, 127(10), 817-833.

Boring and Ground Water Location SPT Measured Blow Counts, Nm-values, Normalized to Equivalent Blow Counts, (N1)60-values

Top of Hole Elevation feet Depth to Ground Water feet Ground Water Elevation feet 109.0 109.2 50+/0.2 125.0 109.10 441.90 0.20 13,638 69 13,569 1.00 1.00 441.90 Unit Weight of Ground Water pcf 114.0 114.2 89/0.2 125.0 114.10 436.90 0.20 14,263 381 13,882 1.00 1.00 436.90 Borehole Diameter inches 119.0 119.3 50+/0.3 125.0 119.15 431.85 0.30 14,894 696 14,198 1.00 1.00 431.85

1.00 Corrections to SPT (N1)60 = Nm·CN·CE·CB·CR·CS 1.00

1.00 Overburden Pressure, CN 1.00

CN = 2.2 / (1.2 + σ′vo/2000) 1.00 Energy Ratio, CE 1.00

CE = 0.5-1.0 (donut hammer); 1.00 CE = 0.7-1.2 (safety hammer); 1.00 CE = 0.8-1.5 (automatic-trip donut-type hammer) 1.00

Borehole Diameter, CB 1.00 CB = 1.0 (65-115 mm); 1.00 CB = 1.05 (150 mm); 1.00 CB = 1.15 (200 mm) 1.00

Rod Length, CR 1.00 Assumed Rod Stickup feet 1.00 CR = 0.75 (< 3 m); 0.8 (3-4 m); 1.00 CR = 0.85 (4-6 m); 0.95 (6-10 m); 1.00 CR = 1.0 (10-30 m) 1.00

Sampling Method, CS 1.00 CS = 1.0 (standard sampler); 1.00 CS = 1.1-1.3 (sampler without liners) 1.00

1.00

FY 17 Instrumentation Nick Hudson 12 Mar 2020 Jeremy Hudson

AD-1710

Rough River Dam

108.0 443.0

CN CR551.0 ztop

(feet) zbot

(feet) Nm

(bpf) γwet

(pcf)

1.00

2.0

1.20

(N1)60

(bpf) ELmid

(ft)

4.25

1.00

0.86

62.4

H (feet) σvo

(psf) u

(psf) σ′vo

(psf) zmid

(feet) ELmid

(ft)

C-1169

Falls of Rough, KY Reviewed By: Date:

Approved By: Date:

Normalized Standard Penetration Test (SPT) Resistances, (N1)60-values Ref: Youd, T.L. and Idriss, I.M. et al. "Liquefaction Resistance of Soils: Summary Report from the 1996 and 1998 NCEER/NSF Workshops on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of

Soils," J. Geotech. and Geoenvir. Engrg. , ASCE, Oct. 2001, 127(10), 817-833.

Boring and Ground Water Location SPT Measured Blow Counts, Nm-values, Normalized to Equivalent Blow Counts, (N1)60-values

Top of Hole Elevation feet Depth to Ground Water feet Ground Water Elevation feet 1.5 3.0 16 125.0 2.25 453.95 1.50 281 0 281 1.00 0.75 12 453.95 Unit Weight of Ground Water pcf 4.0 5.5 2 125.0 4.75 451.45 1.50 594 0 594 1.00 0.75 2 451.45 Borehole Diameter inches 7.5 7.9 50+/0.4 125.0 7.70 448.50 0.40 963 0 963 1.00 0.75 ##### 448.50

1.00 Corrections to SPT (N1)60 = Nm·CN·CE·CB·CR·CS 1.00

1.00 Overburden Pressure, CN 1.00

CN = 2.2 / (1.2 + σ′vo/2000) 1.00 Energy Ratio, CE 1.00

CE = 0.5-1.0 (donut hammer); 1.00 CE = 0.7-1.2 (safety hammer); 1.00 CE = 0.8-1.5 (automatic-trip donut-type hammer) 1.00

Borehole Diameter, CB 1.00 CB = 1.0 (65-115 mm); 1.00 CB = 1.05 (150 mm); 1.00 CB = 1.15 (200 mm) 1.00

Rod Length, CR 1.00 Assumed Rod Stickup feet 1.00 CR = 0.75 (< 3 m); 0.8 (3-4 m); 1.00 CR = 0.85 (4-6 m); 0.95 (6-10 m); 1.00 CR = 1.0 (10-30 m) 1.00

Sampling Method, CS 1.00 CS = 1.0 (standard sampler); 1.00 CS = 1.1-1.3 (sampler without liners) 1.00

1.00

1.20

1.00

(N1)60

(bpf)

CR

u (psf)

CN

σ′vo

(psf)

2.0 σvo

(psf) ztop

(feet) zbot

(feet) H

(feet) γwet

(pcf) zmid

(feet) ELmid

(ft)

0.86

356.2

1.00

100.0

62.4 4.25

AD-1714

ELmid

(ft)

FY 17 Instrumentation Nick Hudson 12 Mar 2020 Jeremy Hudson

456.2 Nm

(bpf)

Rough River Dam

C-1170

Falls of Rough, KY Reviewed By: Date:

Approved By: Date:

Normalized Standard Penetration Test (SPT) Resistances, (N1)60-values Ref: Youd, T.L. and Idriss, I.M. et al. "Liquefaction Resistance of Soils: Summary Report from the 1996 and 1998 NCEER/NSF Workshops on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of

Soils," J. Geotech. and Geoenvir. Engrg. , ASCE, Oct. 2001, 127(10), 817-833.

Boring and Ground Water Location SPT Measured Blow Counts, Nm-values, Normalized to Equivalent Blow Counts, (N1)60-values

Top of Hole Elevation feet Depth to Ground Water feet Ground Water Elevation feet 49.5 51.0 15 130.0 50.25 499.35 1.50 6,533 0 6,533 1.00 1.00 15 499.35 Unit Weight of Ground Water pcf 51.0 52.5 19 130.0 51.75 497.85 1.50 6,728 0 6,728 1.00 1.00 20 497.85 Borehole Diameter inches 52.5 54.0 8 130.0 53.25 496.35 1.50 6,923 0 6,923 1.00 1.00 8 496.35

54.0 55.5 16 130.0 54.75 494.85 1.50 7,118 0 7,118 1.00 1.00 17 494.85 Corrections to SPT (N1)60 = Nm·CN·CE·CB·CR·CS 55.5 57.0 18 130.0 56.25 493.35 1.50 7,313 0 7,313 1.00 1.00 19 493.35

57.0 58.5 40 130.0 57.75 491.85 1.50 7,508 0 7,508 1.00 1.00 41 491.85 Overburden Pressure, CN 58.5 60.0 42 125.0 59.25 490.35 1.50 7,406 0 7,406 1.00 1.00 43 490.35

CN = 2.2 / (1.2 + σ′vo/2000) 60.0 61.5 22 125.0 60.75 488.85 1.50 7,594 0 7,594 1.00 1.00 23 488.85 Energy Ratio, CE 61.5 63.0 14 125.0 62.25 487.35 1.50 7,781 0 7,781 1.00 1.00 14 487.35

CE = 0.5-1.0 (donut hammer); 63.0 64.5 10 125.0 63.75 485.85 1.50 7,969 0 7,969 1.00 1.00 10 485.85 CE = 0.7-1.2 (safety hammer); 64.5 66.0 9 125.0 65.25 484.35 1.50 8,156 0 8,156 1.00 1.00 9 484.35 CE = 0.8-1.5 (automatic-trip donut-type hammer) 66.0 67.5 24 125.0 66.75 482.85 1.50 8,344 0 8,344 1.00 1.00 25 482.85

Borehole Diameter, CB 67.5 69.0 26 125.0 68.25 481.35 1.50 8,531 0 8,531 1.00 1.00 27 481.35 CB = 1.0 (65-115 mm); 69.0 70.5 14 125.0 69.75 479.85 1.50 8,719 0 8,719 1.00 1.00 14 479.85 CB = 1.05 (150 mm); 70.5 72.0 11 125.0 71.25 478.35 1.50 8,906 0 8,906 1.00 1.00 11 478.35 CB = 1.15 (200 mm) 104.5 106.0 16 125.0 105.25 444.35 1.50 13,156 0 13,156 1.00 1.00 17 444.35

Rod Length, CR 106.0 107.5 16 125.0 106.75 442.85 1.50 13,344 0 13,344 1.00 1.00 17 442.85 Assumed Rod Stickup feet 107.5 109.0 30 125.0 108.25 441.35 1.50 13,531 0 13,531 1.00 1.00 31 441.35 CR = 0.75 (< 3 m); 0.8 (3-4 m); 109.0 110.5 29 125.0 108.25 441.35 1.50 13,531 0 13,531 1.00 1.00 30 441.35 CR = 0.85 (4-6 m); 0.95 (6-10 m); 110.5 112.0 30 125.0 109.75 439.85 1.50 13,719 0 13,719 1.00 1.00 31 439.85 CR = 1.0 (10-30 m) 112.0 113.5 18 125.0 111.25 438.35 1.50 13,906 0 13,906 1.00 1.00 19 438.35

Sampling Method, CS 113.5 115.0 23 125.0 112.75 436.85 1.50 14,094 0 14,094 1.00 1.00 24 436.85 CS = 1.0 (standard sampler); 115.0 116.5 28 125.0 114.25 435.35 1.50 14,281 0 14,281 1.00 1.00 29 435.35 CS = 1.1-1.3 (sampler without liners) 116.5 118.0 61 125.0 115.75 433.85 1.50 14,469 0 14,469 1.00 1.00 63 433.85

119.0 120.5 50+/0.3 125.0 117.25 432.35 1.50 14,656 47 14,609 1.00 1.00 432.35

122.5 124.0 54 125.0 119.75 429.85 1.50 14,969 203 14,766 1.00 1.00 56 429.85

ELmid

(ft)

FY 17 Instrumentation Nick Hudson 12 Mar 2020 Jeremy Hudson

549.6

AD-1709

zbot

(feet)

Rough River Dam

1.00

116.5

62.4 4.25

H (feet)

1.20

1.00

(N1)60

(bpf)

CR

u (psf)

CN

σ′vo

(psf) γwet

(pcf) zmid

(feet) ELmid

(ft) Nm

(bpf)

2.0 σvo

(psf) ztop

(feet)

0.86

433.1

C-1171

Falls of Rough, KY Reviewed By: Date:

Approved By: Date:

Normalized Standard Penetration Test (SPT) Resistances, (N)60-values Ref: Youd, T.L. and Idriss, I.M. et al. "Liquefaction Resistance of Soils: Summary Report from the 1996 and 1998 NCEER/NSF Workshops on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of

Soils," J. Geotech. and Geoenvir. Engrg. , ASCE, Oct. 2001, 127(10), 817-833.

Boring and Ground Water Location SPT Measured Blow Counts, Nm-values, Normalized to Equivalent Blow Counts, (N1)60-values

Top of Hole Elevation feet Depth to Ground Water feet Ground Water Elevation feet 49.5 51.0 25 125.0 50.25 495.75 1.50 6,281 0 6,281 1.00 1.00 26 495.75 Unit Weight of Ground Water pcf 51.0 52.5 24 125.0 51.75 494.25 1.50 6,469 0 6,469 1.00 1.00 25 494.25 Borehole Diameter inches 52.5 54.0 26 125.0 53.25 492.75 1.50 6,656 0 6,656 1.00 1.00 27 492.75

54.0 55.5 15 125.0 54.75 491.25 1.50 6,844 0 6,844 1.00 1.00 15 491.25 Corrections to SPT (N1)60 = Nm·CN·CE·CB·CR·CS 55.5 57.0 14 125.0 56.25 489.75 1.50 7,031 0 7,031 1.00 1.00 14 489.75

57.0 58.5 28 125.0 57.75 488.25 1.50 7,219 0 7,219 1.00 1.00 29 488.25 Overburden Pressure, CN 58.5 60.0 12 125.0 59.25 486.75 1.50 7,406 0 7,406 1.00 1.00 12 486.75

CN = 2.2 / (1.2 + σ′vo/2000) 1.00 Energy Ratio, CE 1.00

CE = 0.5-1.0 (donut hammer); 1.00 CE = 0.7-1.2 (safety hammer); 1.00 CE = 0.8-1.3 (automatic-trip donut-type hammer) 1.00

Borehole Diameter, CB 1.00 CB = 1.0 (65-115 mm); 1.00 CB = 1.05 (150 mm); 1.00 CB = 1.15 (200 mm) 1.00

Rod Length, CR 1.00 Assumed Rod Stickup feet 1.00 CR = 0.75 (< 3 m); 0.8 (3-4 m); 1.00 CR = 0.85 (4-6 m); 0.95 (6-10 m); 1.00 CR = 1.0 (10-30 m) 1.00

Sampling Method, CS 1.00 CS = 1.0 (standard sampler); 1.00 CS = 1.1-1.3 (sampler without liners) 1.00

1.00

1.20

1.00

(N1)60

(bpf)

CR

u (psf)

CN

σ′vo

(psf)

2.0 σvo

(psf) ztop

(feet) zbot

(feet) H

(feet) γwet

(pcf) zmid

(feet)

0.86

446.0

1.00

100.0

62.4 4.25

AD-1702

ELmid

(ft)

FY 17 Instrumentation Nick Hudson 12 Mar 2020 Jeremy Hudson

546.0 Nm

(bpf) ELmid

(ft)

Rough River Dam

C-1172

Falls of Rough, KY Reviewed By: Date:

Approved By: Date:

Normalized Standard Penetration Test (SPT) Resistances, (N1)60-values Ref: Youd, T.L. and Idriss, I.M. et al. "Liquefaction Resistance of Soils: Summary Report from the 1996 and 1998 NCEER/NSF Workshops on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of

Soils," J. Geotech. and Geoenvir. Engrg. , ASCE, Oct. 2001, 127(10), 817-833.

Boring and Ground Water Location SPT Measured Blow Counts, Nm-values, Normalized to Equivalent Blow Counts, (N1)60-values

Top of Hole Elevation feet Depth to Ground Water feet Ground Water Elevation feet 44.5 46.0 16 125.0 45.25 456.55 1.50 5,656 0 5,656 1.00 1.00 17 456.55 Unit Weight of Ground Water pcf 46.0 47.5 34 125.0 46.75 455.05 1.50 5,844 0 5,844 1.00 1.00 35 455.05 Borehole Diameter inches 47.5 49.0 21 125.0 48.25 453.55 1.50 6,031 84 5,947 1.00 1.00 22 453.55

49.0 50.5 14 125.0 49.75 452.05 1.50 6,219 178 6,041 1.00 1.00 14 452.05 Corrections to SPT (N1)60 = Nm·CN·CE·CB·CR·CS 50.5 52.0 69 125.0 51.25 450.55 1.50 6,406 271 6,135 1.00 1.00 71 450.55

1.00 Overburden Pressure, CN 1.00

CN = 2.2 / (1.2 + σ′vo/2000) 1.00 Energy Ratio, CE 1.00

CE = 0.5-1.0 (donut hammer); 1.00 CE = 0.7-1.2 (safety hammer); 1.00 CE = 0.8-1.3 (automatic-trip donut-type hammer) 1.00

Borehole Diameter, CB 1.00 CB = 1.0 (65-115 mm); 1.00 CB = 1.05 (150 mm); 1.00 CB = 1.15 (200 mm) 1.00

Rod Length, CR 1.00 Assumed Rod Stickup feet 1.00 CR = 0.75 (< 3 m); 0.8 (3-4 m); 1.00 CR = 0.85 (4-6 m); 0.95 (6-10 m); 1.00 CR = 1.0 (10-30 m) 1.00

Sampling Method, CS 1.00 CS = 1.0 (standard sampler); 1.00 CS = 1.1-1.3 (sampler without liners) 1.00

1.00

1.00

2.0

1.20

(N1)60

(bpf) ELmid

(ft)

4.25

1.00

0.86

46.9 454.9 62.4

H (feet) σvo

(psf) u

(psf)

AD-1712

501.8 ztop

(feet) zbot

(feet) Nm

(bpf) γwet

(pcf) zmid

(feet) ELmid

(ft) σ′vo

(psf)

CN CR

FY 17 Instrumentation Nick Hudson 12 Mar 2020 Jeremy HudsonRough River Dam

C-1173

Falls of Rough, KY Reviewed By: Date:

Approved By: Date:

Normalized Standard Penetration Test (SPT) Resistances, (N1)60-values Ref: Youd, T.L. and Idriss, I.M. et al. "Liquefaction Resistance of Soils: Summary Report from the 1996 and 1998 NCEER/NSF Workshops on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of

Soils," J. Geotech. and Geoenvir. Engrg. , ASCE, Oct. 2001, 127(10), 817-833.

Boring and Ground Water Location SPT Measured Blow Counts, Nm-values, Normalized to Equivalent Blow Counts, (N1)60-values

Top of Hole Elevation feet Depth to Ground Water feet Ground Water Elevation feet 20.5 22.0 7 125.0 21.25 450.25 1.50 2,656 0 2,656 1.00 0.95 7 450.25 Unit Weight of Ground Water pcf 22.0 23.5 2 125.0 22.75 448.75 1.50 2,844 0 2,844 1.00 0.95 2 448.75 Borehole Diameter inches 23.5 25.0 12 125.0 24.25 447.25 1.50 3,031 0 3,031 1.00 0.95 12 447.25

25.0 26.5 11 125.0 25.75 445.75 1.50 3,219 0 3,219 1.00 0.95 11 445.75 Corrections to SPT (N1)60 = Nm·CN·CE·CB·CR·CS 26.5 27.8 66+/0.8 125.0 27.15 444.35 1.30 3,394 0 3,394 1.00 0.95 ##### 444.35

28.0 28.2 50+/0.2 125.0 28.10 443.40 0.20 3,513 0 3,513 1.00 0.95 ##### 443.40 Overburden Pressure, CN 1.00

CN = 2.2 / (1.2 + σ′vo/2000) 1.00 Energy Ratio, CE 1.00

CE = 0.5-1.0 (donut hammer); 1.00 CE = 0.7-1.2 (safety hammer); 1.00 CE = 0.8-1.3 (automatic-trip donut-type hammer) 1.00

Borehole Diameter, CB 1.00 CB = 1.0 (65-115 mm); 1.00 CB = 1.05 (150 mm); 1.00 CB = 1.15 (200 mm) 1.00

Rod Length, CR 1.00 Assumed Rod Stickup feet 1.00 CR = 0.75 (< 3 m); 0.8 (3-4 m); 1.00 CR = 0.85 (4-6 m); 0.95 (6-10 m); 1.00 CR = 1.0 (10-30 m) 1.00

Sampling Method, CS 1.00 CS = 1.0 (standard sampler); 1.00 CS = 1.1-1.3 (sampler without liners) 1.00

1.00 zbot

(feet) H

(feet) ELmid

(ft) σvo

(psf) (N1)60

(bpf)

CR

AD-1713

ELmid

(ft)

471.5 u

(psf)

CN

σ′vo

(psf) zmid

(feet)

FY 17 Instrumentation Nick Hudson 12 Mar 2020 Jeremy HudsonRough River Dam

62.4

Nm

(bpf) γwet

(pcf)

1.20

1.00

2.0 ztop

(feet)

0.86

371.5

1.00

100.0

4.25

C-1174

Project:

Prepared By: Nick Hudson Date:

Checked By: Jeremy Hudson Date:

Normalized Standard Penetration Test (SPT) Resistances, N60-values Ref: Youd, T.L. and Idriss, I.M. et al. "Liquefaction Resistance of Soils: Summary Report from the 1996 and 1998 NCEER/NSF Work-shops on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of Soils," J. Geotech. and Geoenvir. Engrg. , ASCE, Oct. 2001, 127(10), 817-833.

EM 1110-1-1804, Geotechnical Investigations , 1 January 2001.

12-Mar-2020

FY 17 Instrumentation Rough River Dam

V er y So ft

So ft

M ed

. S tif f

St iff

V er y St iff

H ar d

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70

El ev at io n (f ee t)

SPT N60-value (bpf)

AD-1714

AD-1709

AD-1710

#REF!

AD-1702

#REF!

#REF!

AD-1712

AD-1713

#REF!

#REF!

#REF!

#REF!

#REF!

C-1175

Project:

Location:

Prepared By: Date:

Checked By: Date:

Plasticity Chart Ref: ASTM D2487 Standard Practice for Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes

AD-1702

AD-1702

AD-1702

AD-1702

AD-1702

AD-1702

CL

CL

1715-1718 44 17 27

CL

AD-1713 25-26.5 35 24 11 28.1

AD-1713 22-23.5 36 19 17 27 CL

CL

AD-1709 122.7'-123.9' 42 22 20 CL

AD-1710

AD-1709 115.0'-116.5' 39 18 21 CL

CL

AD-1709 110.5'-111.5' 30 18 12 CL

55.5-56.6 35 17 18

AD-1702 59-60 33 16 17 18 CL

55.5-56.6 41 16 25 19.9 CL

AD-1702 49.5-51 27 15 12 15.6

Test Location

Depth (feet)

Liquid Limit

Plastic Limit

Plasticity Index

Natural Moisture

CL

Rough River Dam Modification Phase 2

Falls of Rough, KY K. Murray 28 Jan 2021

USCS Classification LL PL PI Content

28 Jan 2021

2017 PZ Install

S. Shifflett

AD-1718 113.5-115 37 17 20 18.6

54.0-54.8 31 18 13 CL

CL

AD-1709 112.0'-112.7' 31 19 12

52.5-54 33 19 14 18.3 CL

52.5-54 32 20 12 CL

1.0-5.0

32 16 16 CL5.0-10.0

106-107.5 38 16 22 19.1

1715-1717

21.2 CL

AD-1712 46.0-46.9 34 15 19 CL

AD-1712 44.5-46.0 34 18 16

AD-1702 59-60 24 14 10 18 CL

56.6-57 33 19 14 23.8 CL

AD-1709 104.5'-106.0' 36 15 21 17.5 CL

AD-1709 109.0'-110.5' 29 18 11 CL

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130

Pl as tic ity

In de x, P

I

Liquid Limit, LLCL or OLCL-ML

Version 04012005 Sheet 1 of 1 Atterberg Limit summary.xlsm: Plasticity Chart

SUMMARY OF ATTERBERG LIMITS / SIEVE AND HYDROMETER ANALYSIS

Sample Depth

Atterberg Limits (ASTM D4318) Classification Particle Size Analysis (ASTM D422)

Liquid

Limit

Plastic

Limit

Plasticity

Index (%)

USCS

Classification

Group

Name

AASHTO

Classification

Gravel

(ASTM)

Sand

(ASTM)

Silt

(ASTM)

Clay

(ASTM)

AD-1714

4.0'-

5.5'

NP NP NP SM

Silty sand with gravel

A-1-a ( 0 ) 40.3 47.3 9.5 2.9

AD-1714

1.8'-

3.0'

- - - - - - 3.8 25.3 48.8 22.1

AD-1702

52.5'-

54.0' 32 20 12 - - - - - - -

AD-1702

54.0'-

54.8'

31 18 13 CL

Lean clay A-6 ( 10 ) 0.1 11.4 61.1 27.4

AD-1702

55.5'-

56.6' 35 17 18 - - - - - - -

AD-1702

58.5'-

59.0'

NP NP NP SM

Silty sand with gravel

A-1-b ( 0 ) 32.9 54.4 10.2 2.5

AD-1702

59.0'-

60.0'

29 14 15 CL

Lean clay with sand

A-6 ( 9 ) 0.4 21.1 50.9 27.6

AD-1709

104.5'-

106.0'

36 15 21 CL

Lean clay with sand

A-6 ( 14 ) 0.3 22.3 42.8 34.6

AD-1709

109.0'-

110.5'

29 18 11 CL

Lean clay A-6 ( 9 ) 0.3 10.5 63.8 25.4

AD-1709

110.5'-

111.5'

30 18 12 CL

Lean clay A-6 ( 9 ) 1.6 10.6 61.0 26.8

Atterberg Limits (ASTM D4318) Classification Particle Size Analysis (ASTM D422)

Liquid

Limit

Plastic

Limit

Plasticity

Index (%)

USCS

Classification

Group

Name

AASHTO

Classification

Gravel

(ASTM)

Sand

(ASTM)

Silt

(ASTM)

Clay

(ASTM)

AD-1709

112.0'-

112.7'

31 19 12 CL

Lean clay with sand

A-6 ( 9 ) 0.0 15.5 60.0 24.5

AD-1709

115.0'-

116.5'

39 18 21 CL

Lean clay with sand

A-6 ( 17 ) 7.4 9.5 50.5 32.6

AD-1709

122.7'-

123.9'

42 22 20 CL

Lean clay A-7-6 ( 21 ) 0.5 4.9 50.6 44.0

AD-1709

49.5'-

51.0'

34 19 15 CL

Lean clay A-6 ( 13 ) 1.2 9.7 60.4 28.7

AD-1709

51.0'-

52.5'

32 16 16 CL

Lean clay with sand

A-6 ( 11 ) 0.4 20.0 51.7 27.9

AD-1709

54.0'-

55.5'

33 14 19 CL

Lean clay with sand

A-6 ( 11 ) 0.6 28.0 44.3 27.1

AD-1709

55.5'-

57.0'

31 14 17 CL

Sandy lean clay

A-6 ( 9 ) 3.5 27.1 43.9 25.5

AD-1709

58.5'-

60.0'

NP NP NP SP-SM

Poorly graded sand with silt and gravel

A-1-b ( 0 ) 28.9 61.9 7.3 1.9

Atterberg Limits (ASTM D4318) Classification Particle Size Analysis (ASTM D422)

Liquid

Limit

Plastic

Limit

Plasticity

Index (%)

USCS

Classification

Group

Name

AASHTO

Classification

Gravel

(ASTM)

Sand

(ASTM)

Silt

(ASTM)

Clay

(ASTM)

AD-1709

61.5'-

63.0'

NP NP NP SP-SM

Poorly graded sand with silt and gravel

A-1-b ( 0 ) 29.3 62.1 6.6 2.0

AD-1709

63.0'-

64.5'

NP NP NP - - - - - - -

AD-1709

67.5'-

69.0'

NP NP NP SP-SM

Poorly graded sand with silt and gravel

A-1-b ( 0 ) 30.4 60.6 7.4 1.6

AD-1709

70.5'-

72.0'

- - - - - - 30.9 63.0 4.9 1.2

AD-1712

44.5'-

46.0' 33 18 15 - - - - - - -

AD-1712

46.0'-

46.9'

34 15 19 CL

Lean clay with sand

A-6 ( 14 ) 2.7 16.3 49.4 31.6

AD-1712

49.7'-

50.5'

NP NP NP SM

Silty sand A-2-4 ( 0 ) 0.0 72.2 21.5 6.3

AD-1712

50.9'-

52.0'

NP NP NP SM

Silty sand with gravel

A-2-4 ( 0 ) 17.1 68.7 10.1 4.1

Summary of Soil Tests

Project Name Rough River Dam Geotech Project Number 175557138 Source PZ-87/AD-1702, 49.5'-51.0' Lab ID 1

Sample Type SPT Date Received 11-2-17 Date Reported 11-21-17

Test Results

Natural Moisture Content Atterberg Limits Test Method: ASTM D 2216 Test Method: ASTM D 4318 Method A

Moisture Content (%): 15.6 Prepared: Dry Liquid Limit: 27

Plastic Limit: 15 Particle Size Analysis Plasticity Index: 12

Preparation Method: ASTM D 421 Activity Index: 0.7 Gradation Method: ASTM D 422 Hydrometer Method: ASTM D 422

Moisture-Density Relationship Particle Size % Test Not Performed

Sieve Size (mm) Passing Maximum Dry Density (lb/ft3): N/A

N/A Maximum Dry Density (kg/m3): N/A

N/A Optimum Moisture Content (%): N/A N/A Over Size Correction %: N/A

1 1/2" 37.5 100.0 3/4" 19 94.4 3/8" 9.5 92.2 California Bearing Ratio

No. 4 4.75 89.8 Test Not Performed No. 10 2 88.6 Bearing Ratio (%): N/A

No. 40 0.425 86.8 Compacted Dry Density (lb/ft3): N/A No. 200 0.075 61.3 Compacted Moisture Content (%): N/A

0.02 42.2

0.005 21.4

0.002 16.5 Specific Gravity estimated 0.001 14.2 Estimated

Plus 3 in. material, not included: 0 (%) Particle Size: No. 10 Specific Gravity at 20° Celsius: 2.70

ASTM AASHTO

Range (%) (%) Gravel 10.2 11.4 Classification

Coarse Sand 1.2 1.8 Unified Group Symbol: CL Medium Sand 1.8 --- Group Name: Sandy lean clay

Fine Sand 25.5 25.5 Silt 39.9 44.8

Clay 21.4 16.5 AASHTO Classification: A-6 ( 4 )

Comments:

Reviewed By

Template: tmp_sum_input.xlsm Version: 20170217 Approved By: RJ

Stantec Consulting Services Inc.

Louisville, Kentucky

Reported By: RHB Report Date: 11/21/2017C-1177

Project Name Rough River Dam Geotech Project Number 175557138 Source PZ-87/AD-1702, 52.5'-54.0' Lab ID 3

Sample Type SPT Date Received 11-2-17 Date Reported 11-21-17

Test Results

Natural Moisture Content Atterberg Limits Test Method: ASTM D 2216 Test Method: ASTM D 4318 Method A

Moisture Content (%): 18.3 Prepared: Dry Liquid Limit: 33

Plastic Limit: 19 Particle Size Analysis Plasticity Index: 14

Preparation Method: ASTM D 421 Activity Index: 0.7 Gradation Method: ASTM D 422 Hydrometer Method: ASTM D 422

Moisture-Density Relationship Particle Size % Test Not Performed

Sieve Size (mm) Passing Maximum Dry Density (lb/ft3): N/A

N/A Maximum Dry Density (kg/m3): N/A

N/A Optimum Moisture Content (%): N/A N/A Over Size Correction %: N/A N/A N/A

3/8" 9.5 100.0 California Bearing Ratio No. 4 4.75 99.9 Test Not Performed No. 10 2 99.8 Bearing Ratio (%): N/A

No. 40 0.425 98.7 Compacted Dry Density (lb/ft3): N/A No. 200 0.075 85.5 Compacted Moisture Content (%): N/A

0.02 60.1

0.005 26.2

0.002 20.3 Specific Gravity estimated 0.001 18.1 Estimated

Plus 3 in. material, not included: 0 (%) Particle Size: No. 10 Specific Gravity at 20° Celsius: 2.70

ASTM AASHTO

Range (%) (%) Gravel 0.1 0.2 Classification

Coarse Sand 0.1 1.1 Unified Group Symbol: CL Medium Sand 1.1 --- Group Name: Lean clay

Fine Sand 13.2 13.2 Silt 59.3 65.2

Clay 26.2 20.3 AASHTO Classification: A-6 ( 11 )

Comments:

Reviewed By

Template: tmp_sum_input.xlsm Version: 20170217 Approved By: RJ

Stantec Consulting Services Inc.

Louisville, Kentucky

Reported By: RHB Report Date: 11/21/2017C-1178

Project Name Rough River Dam Geotech Project Number 175557138 Source PZ-87/AD-1702, 55.5'-56.6' Lab ID 7

Sample Type SPT Date Received 11-2-17 Date Reported 11-21-17

Test Results

Natural Moisture Content Atterberg Limits Test Method: ASTM D 2216 Test Method: ASTM D 4318 Method A

Moisture Content (%): 19.9 Prepared: Dry Liquid Limit: 41

Plastic Limit: 16 Particle Size Analysis Plasticity Index: 25

Preparation Method: ASTM D 421 Activity Index: 1.0 Gradation Method: ASTM D 422 Hydrometer Method: ASTM D 422

Moisture-Density Relationship Particle Size % Test Not Performed

Sieve Size (mm) Passing Maximum Dry Density (lb/ft3): N/A

N/A Maximum Dry Density (kg/m3): N/A

N/A Optimum Moisture Content (%): N/A N/A Over Size Correction %: N/A N/A

3/4" 19 100.0 3/8" 9.5 99.1 California Bearing Ratio

No. 4 4.75 98.4 Test Not Performed No. 10 2 97.2 Bearing Ratio (%): N/A

No. 40 0.425 95.6 Compacted Dry Density (lb/ft3): N/A No. 200 0.075 79.2 Compacted Moisture Content (%): N/A

0.02 58.0

0.005 30.6

0.002 25.5 Specific Gravity estimated 0.001 24.7 Estimated

Plus 3 in. material, not included: 0 (%) Particle Size: No. 10 Specific Gravity at 20° Celsius: 2.70

ASTM AASHTO

Range (%) (%) Gravel 1.6 2.8 Classification

Coarse Sand 1.2 1.6 Unified Group Symbol: CL Medium Sand 1.6 --- Group Name: Lean clay with sand

Fine Sand 16.4 16.4 Silt 48.6 53.7

Clay 30.6 25.5 AASHTO Classification: A-7-6 ( 19 )

Comments:

Reviewed By

Template: tmp_sum_input.xlsm Version: 20170217 Approved By: RJ

Stantec Consulting Services Inc.

Louisville, Kentucky

Reported By: RHB Report Date: 11/21/2017C-1179

Project Name Rough River Dam Geotech Project Number 175557138 Source PZ-87/AD-1702, 56.6'-57.0' Lab ID 8

Sample Type SPT Date Received 11-2-17 Date Reported 11-21-17

Test Results

Natural Moisture Content Atterberg Limits Test Method: ASTM D 2216 Test Method: ASTM D 4318 Method A

Moisture Content (%): 23.8 Prepared: Dry Liquid Limit: 33

Plastic Limit: 19 Particle Size Analysis Plasticity Index: 14

Preparation Method: ASTM D 421 Activity Index: 0.5 Gradation Method: ASTM D 422 Hydrometer Method: ASTM D 422

Moisture-Density Relationship Particle Size % Test Not Performed

Sieve Size (mm) Passing Maximum Dry Density (lb/ft3): N/A

N/A Maximum Dry Density (kg/m3): N/A

N/A Optimum Moisture Content (%): N/A N/A Over Size Correction %: N/A N/A N/A N/A California Bearing Ratio

No. 4 4.75 100.0 Test Not Performed No. 10 2 99.3 Bearing Ratio (%): N/A

No. 40 0.425 98.4 Compacted Dry Density (lb/ft3): N/A No. 200 0.075 92.8 Compacted Moisture Content (%): N/A

0.02 70.1

0.005 30.9

0.002 25.6 Specific Gravity estimated 0.001 24.0 Estimated

Plus 3 in. material, not included: 0 (%) Particle Size: No. 10 Specific Gravity at 20° Celsius: 2.70

ASTM AASHTO

Range (%) (%) Gravel 0.0 0.7 Classification

Coarse Sand 0.7 0.9 Unified Group Symbol: CL Medium Sand 0.9 --- Group Name: Lean clay

Fine Sand 5.6 5.6 Silt 61.9 67.2

Clay 30.9 25.6 AASHTO Classification: A-6 ( 13 )

Comments:

Reviewed By

Template: tmp_sum_input.xlsm Version: 20170217 Approved By: RJ

Stantec Consulting Services Inc.

Louisville, Kentucky

Reported By: RHB Report Date: 11/21/2017C-1180

Project Name Rough River Dam Geotech Project Number 175557138 Source PZ-87/AD-1702, 57.2'-58.5' Lab ID 10

Sample Type SPT Date Received 11-2-17 Date Reported 11-21-17

Test Results

Natural Moisture Content Atterberg Limits Test Not Performed Test Not Performed

Moisture Content (%): N/A Liquid Limit: N/A

Plastic Limit: N/A Particle Size Analysis Plasticity Index: N/A

Preparation Method: ASTM D 421 Activity Index: N/A Gradation Method: ASTM D 422 Hydrometer Method: ASTM D 422

Moisture-Density Relationship Particle Size % Test Not Performed

Sieve Size (mm) Passing Maximum Dry Density (lb/ft3): N/A

N/A Maximum Dry Density (kg/m3): N/A

N/A Optimum Moisture Content (%): N/A N/A Over Size Correction %: N/A N/A

3/4" 19 100.0 3/8" 9.5 84.2 California Bearing Ratio

No. 4 4.75 61.4 Test Not Performed No. 10 2 43.6 Bearing Ratio (%): N/A

No. 40 0.425 24.4 Compacted Dry Density (lb/ft3): N/A No. 200 0.075 7.9 Compacted Moisture Content (%): N/A

0.02 4.2

0.005 1.7

0.002 1.0 Specific Gravity estimated 0.001 0.6 Estimated

Plus 3 in. material, not included: 0 (%) Particle Size: No. 10 Specific Gravity at 20° Celsius: 2.70

ASTM AASHTO

Range (%) (%) Gravel 38.6 56.4 Classification

Coarse Sand 17.8 19.2 Unified Group Symbol:

Medium Sand 19.2 --- Group Name:

Fine Sand 16.5 16.5 Silt 6.2 6.9

Clay 1.7 1.0 AASHTO Classification:

Comments:

Reviewed By

Template: tmp_sum_input.xlsm Version: 20170217 Approved By: RJ

Stantec Consulting Services Inc.

Louisville, Kentucky

Reported By: RHB Report Date: 11/21/2017C-1181

Project Name Rough River Dam Geotech Project Number 175557138 Source PZ-87/AD-1702, 59.0'-60.0' Lab ID 12

Sample Type SPT Date Received 11-2-17 Date Reported 11-21-17

Test Results

Natural Moisture Content Atterberg Limits Test Method: ASTM D 2216 Test Method: ASTM D 4318 Method A

Moisture Content (%): 18.0 Prepared: Dry Liquid Limit: 33

Plastic Limit: 16 Particle Size Analysis Plasticity Index: 17

Preparation Method: ASTM D 421 Activity Index: 0.7 Gradation Method: ASTM D 422 Hydrometer Method: ASTM D 422

Moisture-Density Relationship Particle Size % Test Not Performed

Sieve Size (mm) Passing Maximum Dry Density (lb/ft3): N/A

N/A Maximum Dry Density (kg/m3): N/A

N/A Optimum Moisture Content (%): N/A N/A Over Size Correction %: N/A N/A

3/4" 19 100.0 3/8" 9.5 99.2 California Bearing Ratio

No. 4 4.75 98.9 Test Not Performed No. 10 2 97.8 Bearing Ratio (%): N/A

No. 40 0.425 96.4 Compacted Dry Density (lb/ft3): N/A No. 200 0.075 77.0 Compacted Moisture Content (%): N/A

0.02 61.4

0.005 29.9

0.002 23.7 Specific Gravity estimated 0.001 20.5 Test Method: ASTM D 854 Prepared: Dry

Plus 3 in. material, not included: 0 (%) Particle Size: No. 10 Specific Gravity at 20° Celsius: 2.70

ASTM AASHTO

Range (%) (%) Gravel 1.1 2.2 Classification

Coarse Sand 1.1 1.4 Unified Group Symbol: CL Medium Sand 1.4 --- Group Name: Lean clay with sand

Fine Sand 19.4 19.4 Silt 47.1 53.3

Clay 29.9 23.7 AASHTO Classification: A-6 ( 11 )

Comments:

Reviewed By

Template: tmp_sum_input.xlsm Version: 20170217 Approved By: RJ

Stantec Consulting Services Inc.

Louisville, Kentucky

Reported By: RHB Report Date: 11/21/2017C-1182

Project Name Rough River Dam Geotech Project Number 175557138 Source PZ-80/AD-1709, 58.5'-60.0', 60.0'-61.5', 61.5'-63.0', 63.0'-64.5', Lab ID 20

64.5'-66.0', 66.0'-67.5', 67.5'-69.0', 69.0'-70.5', 70.5'-72.0' Sample Type SPT Composite Date Received 11-2-17

Date Reported 11-21-17

Test Results

Natural Moisture Content Atterberg Limits Test Not Performed Test Not Performed

Moisture Content (%): N/A Liquid Limit: N/A

Plastic Limit: N/A Particle Size Analysis Plasticity Index: N/A

Preparation Method: ASTM D 421 Activity Index: N/A Gradation Method: ASTM D 422 Hydrometer Method: ASTM D 422

Moisture-Density Relationship Particle Size % Test Not Performed

Sieve Size (mm) Passing Maximum Dry Density (lb/ft3): N/A

N/A Maximum Dry Density (kg/m3): N/A

N/A Optimum Moisture Content (%): N/A N/A Over Size Correction %: N/A

1 1/2" 37.5 100.0 3/4" 19 96.4 3/8" 9.5 79.7 California Bearing Ratio

No. 4 4.75 61.2 Test Not Performed No. 10 2 43.9 Bearing Ratio (%): N/A

No. 40 0.425 28.1 Compacted Dry Density (lb/ft3): N/A No. 200 0.075 9.2 Compacted Moisture Content (%): N/A

0.02 5.6

0.005 2.7

0.002 1.8 Specific Gravity estimated 0.001 1.3 Estimated

Plus 3 in. material, not included: 0 (%) Particle Size: No. 10 Specific Gravity at 20° Celsius: 2.70

ASTM AASHTO

Range (%) (%) Gravel 38.8 56.1 Classification

Coarse Sand 17.3 15.8 Unified Group Symbol:

Medium Sand 15.8 --- Group Name:

Fine Sand 18.9 18.9 Silt 6.5 7.4

Clay 2.7 1.8 AASHTO Classification:

Comments:

Reviewed By

Template: tmp_sum_input.xlsm Version: 20170217 Approved By: RJ

Stantec Consulting Services Inc.

Louisville, Kentucky

Reported By: RHB Report Date: 11/21/2017C-1183

Project Name Rough River Dam Geotech Project Number 175557138 Source PZ-80/AD-1709, 106.0'-107.5' Lab ID 31

Sample Type SPT Date Received 11-2-17 Date Reported 11-21-17

Test Results

Natural Moisture Content Atterberg Limits Test Method: ASTM D 2216 Test Method: ASTM D 4318 Method A

Moisture Content (%): 19.1 Prepared: Dry Liquid Limit: 38

Plastic Limit: 16 Particle Size Analysis Plasticity Index: 22

Preparation Method: ASTM D 421 Activity Index: 0.8 Gradation Method: ASTM D 422 Hydrometer Method: ASTM D 422

Moisture-Density Relationship Particle Size % Test Not Performed

Sieve Size (mm) Passing Maximum Dry Density (lb/ft3): N/A

N/A Maximum Dry Density (kg/m3): N/A

N/A Optimum Moisture Content (%): N/A N/A Over Size Correction %: N/A N/A N/A

3/8" 9.5 100.0 California Bearing Ratio No. 4 4.75 99.8 Test Not Performed No. 10 2 99.2 Bearing Ratio (%): N/A

No. 40 0.425 98.1 Compacted Dry Density (lb/ft3): N/A No. 200 0.075 81.6 Compacted Moisture Content (%): N/A

0.02 63.4

0.005 34.2

0.002 27.5 Specific Gravity estimated 0.001 26.0 Estimated

Plus 3 in. material, not included: 0 (%) Particle Size: No. 10 Specific Gravity at 20° Celsius: 2.70

ASTM AASHTO

Range (%) (%) Gravel 0.2 0.8 Classification

Coarse Sand 0.6 1.1 Unified Group Symbol: CL Medium Sand 1.1 --- Group Name: Lean clay with sand

Fine Sand 16.5 16.5 Silt 47.4 54.1

Clay 34.2 27.5 AASHTO Classification: A-6 ( 17 )

Comments:

Reviewed By

Template: tmp_sum_input.xlsm Version: 20170217 Approved By: RJ

Stantec Consulting Services Inc.

Louisville, Kentucky

Reported By: RHB Report Date: 11/21/2017C-1184

Project Name Rough River Dam Geotech Project Number 175557138 Source PZ-80/AD-1709, 113.5'-115.0' Lab ID 39

Sample Type SPT Date Received 11-2-17 Date Reported 11-21-17

Test Results

Natural Moisture Content Atterberg Limits Test Method: ASTM D 2216 Test Method: ASTM D 4318 Method A

Moisture Content (%): 18.6 Prepared: Dry Liquid Limit: 37

Plastic Limit: 17 Particle Size Analysis Plasticity Index: 20

Preparation Method: ASTM D 421 Activity Index: 0.8 Gradation Method: ASTM D 422 Hydrometer Method: ASTM D 422

Moisture-Density Relationship Particle Size % Test Not Performed

Sieve Size (mm) Passing Maximum Dry Density (lb/ft3): N/A

N/A Maximum Dry Density (kg/m3): N/A

N/A Optimum Moisture Content (%): N/A N/A Over Size Correction %: N/A

1 1/2" 37.5 100.0 3/4" 19 96.8 3/8" 9.5 92.2 California Bearing Ratio

No. 4 4.75 89.3 Test Not Performed No.