W912QR25R0016_CERT_Final_Vol6_ ProjGIR_9bof16_C1b-0000.pdf
PDF 21 MB Posted
- Solicitation number
- W912QR25R0016
About this file
This federal contract solicitation is for the Rough River Dam Safety Modification Phase II project, specifically for new outlet works and cutoff wall construction at Rough River Lake in Falls of Rough, KY. The project requires comprehensive planning, programming, administration, management, supervision, communications, and inspection services to ensure compliance with contract requirements and applicable regulations.
The solicitation (W912QR25R0016) is a full and open procurement issued by the Department of the Army Corps of Engineers Louisville District, with a HUBZone 10% price evaluation requirement. Large businesses must submit a subcontracting plan. Quotes are due March 20, 2025, at 10:00 AM EST. The contract will be awarded as a firm-fixed price to a single contractor, with payment via Electronic Funds Transfer. Contractors must be registered in SAM.gov with NAICS code 237990 prior to submission. Price proposals will be evaluated for reasonableness, realism, and balanced line item distribution.
View the file
Other files
Show 40 more
Latest 50 of 114 listed here. See the rest on GovTribe.
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Solicitation For Rough River Dam Safety Modification Project Phase II - New Outlet Works and Cutoff Wall, Rough River Reservoir, Falls of Rough, KY
P2: 145870
Design-Bid-Build
Geotechnical Information Report (GIR) Vol. 6 (9b of 16) Appendix C1b
Certified Final
20 December 2024
W912QR25R0016
ARIMS: 1200
Disposition: Permanent
W912QR25R0016_CERT_Final_Vol6_ ProjGIR_9bof16_C1b-0000
Rough River Dam Geotechnical Data Report for Tunnel Construction
Volume 6: Project GIR
Appendix C1b - Soil Laboratory Test Results (9b of 16)
ROUGH RIVER, FALLS OF ROUGH, KY
LOUISVILLE DISTRICT, LRD DIVISION
ROUGH RIVER, FALLS OF ROUGH, KY
LOUISVILLE DISTRICT, LRD DIVISION
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…
This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .