geotechnical exploration and subgrade evaluation … · strength parameters correlating to the...

Geotechnical Exploration and Subgrade Evaluation Report

Taxiway F Reconstruction Project

General Mitchell International Airport

Milwaukee, Wisconsin

GESTRA Project No.: 16011-10

May 20, 2016

Prepared for:

Airport Engineering Department


5300 South Howell Ave.

Milwaukee, WI 53207

Report Prepared by:

GESTRA Engineering, Inc.

191 W. Edgerton Avenue

Milwaukee, WI 53207

(414) 933-7444

Taxiway F Reconstruction, General Mitchell International Airport May 20, 2016

GESTRA Engineering, Inc. 16011-10

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................3

1.1 Project Information ....................................................................................................................... 3

2.0 SCOPE OF WORK ....................................................................................................................4

3.0 EXPLORATION RESULTS .........................................................................................................4

3.1 Site Conditions .............................................................................................................................. 4

3.2 Subsurface Soil Profile.................................................................................................................. 5

3.3 Groundwater Observations ........................................................................................................... 7

4.0 ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................................................................7

4.1 Subgrade Preparation .................................................................................................................... 7

4.2 Soil Parameters for Taxiway Pavement Design ............................................................................ 9

4.3 Drainage ...................................................................................................................................... 10

5.0 EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES .......................................................................... 10

5.1 Layout and Elevation Procedures ............................................................................................... 10

5.2 Field Testing Procedures ............................................................................................................. 10

5.3 Laboratory Testing Procedures ................................................................................................... 10

STANDARD OF CARE ........................................................................................................................ 11

Appendix I Example Pictures of Site Condition, Site Layout, Boring Layout Plan, Test Boring

Logs and Nomenclature

Appendix II Laboratory Test Results

Appendix III DCP Test Results

© GESTRA Engineering, Inc. 2016



Geotechnical Exploration and Subgrade Evaluation Report

Taxiway F Reconstruction Project



GESTRA Project No.: 16011-10

May 20, 2016

1.0 INTRODUCTION

GESTRA Engineering, Inc. (GESTRA) was authorized by the Airport Engineering Department,

General Mitchell International Airport (GMIA) to complete a subsurface exploration and

geotechnical investigation for the Proposed Taxiway F Reconstruction Project at the GMIA in

Milwaukee, Wisconsin. This report presents the results from the subsurface soil exploration and

describes the field exploration, laboratory test results, and provides recommendations pertaining

to the design and construction of the proposed project.

The engineering recommendations and analysis contained within this report are based on the

following project information, which is a projection of GESTRA’s understanding of the project.

If for any reason the actual project information differs from what is reported below, GESTRA

should be contacted so that we can review our recommendations in light of any new information.

1.1 Project Information

General Mitchell International Airport is owned and operated by Milwaukee County located on

5300 South Howell Avenue in the City of Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Approximate annual

operation in this airport is about 130,000 including commercial, air taxi, transient general

aviation, local and military operations.

Based on the information provided by Airport Engineering Department, the improvement project

at GMIA will include reconstruction of Taxiway F. This project includes the western section of

the Taxiway F and an approximate project length is about 1,200 feet. The existing pavement

surface is asphalt and it is one of the oldest pavement structures in this airport based on the

information provided by Airport Engineering Department. Based on the project background

information, the existing taxiway pavement was resurfaced with 5-inch of bituminous overlay in

1985. A plan prepared in 1955 indicates that rehabilitation with bituminous reinforcement over

existing pavement was performed.

This taxiway is about 100 feet wide with about 6 feet of turf on each side of the pavement. The

proposed project includes removing the existing pavement section and replacement with a ridged

concrete pavement designed by Airport Engineering for heavy loads. The objective of

geotechnical services was to evaluate the subgrade conditions and establish the soil parameters

for design of the new pavement section by Airport Engineering. As part of our scope, we also

documented the existing pavement thickness, and provide recommendations for subgrade

preparation.



2.0 SCOPE OF WORK

Based on our understanding of the project and scope provided by MKE Airport Engineering

Department, GESTRA has performed the following scopes in this project:

1. Coordinated with the airport to discuss the project specifics, safety and security measures

prior to commencement of the work.

2. Attended airport safety and security training, and obtained badging card from GMIA for

the GESTRA drilling crew.

3. Contacted Diggers Hotline to identify the public utilities at the site.

4. Performed eight (8) standard penetration (SPT) borings, to 11 feet each, for a total of 88

feet of drilling for the proposed reconstruction of Taxiway F at General Mitchell

International Airport. GESTRA used a coring subcontractor for coring through the

thicker pavement layers. Our site work included abandonment of the boreholes per

Wisconsin DNR requirements. Boreholes were patched based on the instruction from

Airport Engineering Department.

5. The Dynamic cone penetration (DCP) test was performed at each of the pavement boring

locations to evaluate the in-situ strength parameters for the upper subgrade based on a

request from Airport Engineering Department.

6. Performed laboratory soil tests to assign classification and engineering properties to the

soils encountered. Dependent upon the types of soils encountered, the testing may

include the following: hand penetrometer, P200, moisture-density relations, Atterberg

limits, dry density and unconfined compressive strength test, moisture, and organic

contents.

7. Prepared this report presenting the results of the field exploration, laboratory testing,

recommendations pertaining to the proposed construction, and soil parameters for

thickness design by Airport Engineering.

3.0 EXPLORATION RESULTS

3.1 Site Conditions

Taxiway F is a connector of the north ramp of the GMIA to Runway 13-31, 1L-19R and 7L-25R.

The section of Taxiway F from Runway 13-31 to Taxiway Z is included in this project. A site

location drawing for this project is included in Appendix I. The existing taxiway pavement

surface is asphalt. The existing pavement surface is deteriorated with appearance of transvers

and longitudinal cracks, block cracks and edge cracks. Crack seal was observed along the crack

paths. Site photographs showing pavement conditions in some locations are attached in

Appendix I.



3.2 Subsurface Soil Profile

SPT Soil Borings

A total of eight SPT soil borings were completed on May 4, 2016 at the locations depicted on the

Boring Layout Plans in Appendix I. The soil boring locations were marked in the field by

GESTRA, coordinating with Airport Engineering and surveyed by GMIA. Based on direction

from Airport Engineering, borings were placed to avoid drilling along the centerline of Taxiway

F. A summary of the soil boring information is presented in Table 1.

Table 1: Boring Information

SPT Boring

Number Northing Easting

Surface Elevation

at Boring, feet

Drilled Location

TB-1 356000 2530217 670.4 Right side of centerline

TB-2 356038 2530362 671.1 Left side of centerline







All soil borings completed on Taxiway F encountered an asphalt layer and a base course layer.

The asphalt layer thickness was found in the range of 8 inches to 14.5 inches (average of 11.3

inches). Underlying the asphalt, base course layer was observed with a thickness varying from 4

to 10 inches (average of 6.9 inches).

The pavement layer thicknesses and soils reported on the boring logs are summarized and

presented in Table 2.

Table 2 – Summarized Profile

Boring

No.

Asphalt

Thickness

(inches)

Base

Thickness

(inches)

Depth of

Fill/ Possible

Fill (feet)

Soil Description

(Depth of Layer Bottom, feet)

TB-1 10.5 7 - Pavement section (1.5),

Lean clay, stiff to hard (11) a

TB-2 14 6 -

Pavement section (1.7),

Lean clay, stiff (6.5) a

Sandy silt, medium dense (9.5)

Lean clay, stiff (11)

TB-3 12 6 4


Clayey fill (4) a

Silty sand, medium dense (6.5)

Lean clay, very stiff (11)

TB-4 14.5 4 - Pavement section (1.5),

Lean clay, very stiff to hard (11)



Boring

No.

Asphalt

Thickness

(inches)

Base

Thickness

(inches)

Depth of

Fill/ Possible

Fill (feet)

Soil Description

(Depth of Layer Bottom, feet)

TB-5 12.5 6 -



Sand with silt, medium dense (7.5)


TB-6 10.5 8.5 -


Fat clay, very stiff (4) a


Clayey sand, medium dense (11)

TB-7 8.5 8 2


Sandy fill (2)

Lean clay, stiff (4) a

Lean clay, stiff (11)

TB-8 8 10 -


Silty clay, stiff (4) a

Lean clay, hard (6.5)

Silty sand, loose (7.5)


Notes:

a- With or trace organic.

Results of the field and laboratory tests and observations are depicted on the individual test

boring logs included in the Appendix I of this report. Soils were grouped together based on

similar observed properties. The stratification lines were estimated by the reviewing engineer

based on the available data and experience. The actual in-situ changes between layers may differ

slightly and may be more gradual than depicted on the boring logs. Subsurface and groundwater

conditions can vary between borehole locations and in areas not explored.

It is important to note that the soil observations and pavement section thickness estimates were

made in small diameter boreholes. Therefore, it should be understood that thicker or thinner

deposits of the individual strata may be encountered throughout the project area. Furthermore,

the estimation of base course thickness at a particular location can differ from person to person

due a sometime indistinct transition between the base material and underlying subgrade soils.

DCP Test

GESTRA completed a total of eight dynamic cone penetration (DCP) tests, one at each SPT

boring location in order to assess the strength properties of the upper subgrade soil.

The DCP test consists of driving a rod with a 60 degree angled conical tip into the soil by

dropping a single-mass 17.6-pound hammer from a travel length of 22.6 inches. Each drop is

called a blow, the number of blows per depth driven into the soil is recorded. The resistance, or

blows per depth, was correlated to common soil parameters. Dynamic cone penetration (DCP)

tests were performed at each boring locations below the pavement sections for assessing in-situ

strength parameters correlating to the California Bearing Ratio (CBR), subgrade modulus (k-

value) and resilient modulus (MR) for the designing the proposed pavement sections for heavy

loads. DCP test results are attached in Appendix III with this report. The generalized subgrade

strength assessment based on DCP test results are reported in Table 3.



Table 3. Subgrade Strength from DCP Tests

DCP Test

Location

Subgrade Strength

California Bearing

Ratio (CBR), %

Subgrade

Modulus ( k), pci

Resilient Modulus

(Mr), ksi

TB-1 6 160 9

TB-2 7 160 9

TB-3 10+ 200 11

TB-4 6 150 9

TB-5 5 130 7

TB-6 4 120 6

TB-7 5 140 8

TB-8 5 140 8

3.3 Groundwater Observations

Groundwater was observed in boring TB-2, TB-5, TB-6 and TB-8 during drilling operation. The

shallowest observed water level was 4.5 feet in boring TB-5. The groundwater level may

fluctuate with time and seasonal changes due to variations in precipitation, evaporation, surface

water runoff and local dewatering. Perched water pockets or higher water table may also be

encountered during wet weather periods, particularly in more permeable silt and sand seams or

fill material overlying less permeable clays. Installation and monitoring of an observation well

would be required to assess true groundwater elevation. Groundwater is not expected to be

encountered during subgrade preparation. If perched water is encountered during subgrade

preparation, we anticipate the appropriate number of temporary sump pits and pumps should be

sufficient to remove anticipated volume of water.

4.0 ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

4.1 Subgrade Preparation

The near surface soil in most borings was clayey soil with a fairly high moisture content (over

20%) and in several cases (TB-1, TB-2, and TB-7) the organic content was 4% or higher. The

subgrade soils were generally in a stiff condition due to long term loading under the pavement.

However, high moisture soils with organics are easily disturbed under direct contact loads

(trucking), particularly in marginal to wet weather. It is likely that during original construction

there was not adequate time and budget for removal of the soils with moderate organic content.

New construction will now be faced with potential problems due to these soils which are easily

disturbed. We are including two options below for subgrade preparation. Option 1 would have a

lower initial cost with greater potential for extras, particularly if subgrade is exposed outside of

dry periods in the months of June through August. Subgrade parameters for pavement design

recommended in Table 3 are slightly better if Option 2 is followed. In either option it would be

important to minimize truck loading over the subgrade.



Option 1: Minimal Replacement

If construction activity can be planned for the summer season and prepared subgrade can be

protected from disturbance (particularly during wet weather), subgrade preparation can proceed

in a manner to minimize the amount of excavation and replacement. The subgrade material is

currently in a stiff condition. The amount of traffic loading on the subgrade should be

minimized as the soil condition could deteriorate with repeated heavy equipment loads. After

excavation to the planned grade, the subgrade can be compacted. Where subgrade yielding is

evident under compaction equipment, excavation and replacement and/or use of biaxial geogrid

will be required (discussed below).

Advantage – lower cost subgrade preparation.

Disadvantage – Slightly lower subgrade parameters could require thicker pavement section.

Requires work proceed in dry summer weather. Higher risk of extra costs if subgrade cannot be

compacted to a firm condition. Because the airport site is relatively level, it may be difficult to

prevent water from ponding in prepared areas, and this could lead to longer stoppages in work.

Option 2: Proofroll with Removal and Replacement:

After removal of the existing pavement section we recommend re-compacting the subgrade

followed by a proofroll. The proofroll should be completed with a fully loaded tri-axle dump

truck moving at no more than 5 mph to determine the stability of subgrade soils. Soil

remediation work may be needed where excessive yielding during the proofroll is noted. The

type of remediation and the depth needed should be determined at the time of construction based

on drainage, weather and soil conditions. Therefore, a geotechnical engineer should be present

during the proofroll in order to identify soft or unstable areas, if any, and subsequently

recommend rectification procedures. Based on the high moisture content (>20%) with various

amount of organic matter observed in the near surface soil in boring TB-1, TB-2, TB-6, TB-7

and TB-8, it is likely that the subgrade at these locations show instability, particularly outside of

dry summer season conditions. For budgeting purposes, we estimate that 50% of the subgrade

would require excavation and replacement and/or use of biaxial geogrid (discussed below).

Removal and Replacement:

Removal and replacement of soft or unstable soils can be performed by a smooth bucket backhoe

or small dozer and replaced with well graded granular fill. For budgeting purpose, 24-inches of

excavation below subgrade (EBS) may be needed for remediation of yielding subgrade.

Granular fill should be compacted to at least 95% of maximum dry density as obtained by the

maximum Modified Proctor Density (ASTM D1557). If an open graded clean stone is used as

fill, a geotextile separator fabric might be necessary to provide an adequate separation between

the underlying subgrade and new fill and to prevent migration of the finer subgrade soils into the

void space of the new fill. The depth of EBS can be reduced if a biaxial geogrid is used, as

described below.

Geogrid:

A layer of BX 1200 geogrid or similar product can generally be used to reduce a 24-inch EBS to

a 12-inch EBS. A minimum of 10 inches of granular soil (which may include the base course



material) is necessary over geogrid to provide proper confinement under the pavement section.

Use of geogrid is based on the following assumptions:

� The subgrade should be smoothed and shaped to the required grade prior to installation of

geogrid.

� No traffic or construction equipment will be allowed to travel directly over geogrid.

� The geogrid should be rolled out and pulled taut manually to remove wrinkles.

� Parallel strips should be overlapped at least 18 inches.

� Geogrid should be covered within 72 hours of installation.

4.2 Soil Parameters for Taxiway Pavement Design

From an evaluation of the available data, and referring to the information available in the Airport

Pavement Design and Evaluation Manual – U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation

Administration (AC No: 150/5320-6E, Chapter 2); we recommend that the specific pavement

design values outlined below be used in establishing the appropriate pavement section(s) for the

project.

The recommended average soil parameters for the project area are indicated in Table 4 assuming

that the subgrade soil is prepared as described in Section 4.1 of this report. These parameters

assume soil preparation has been performed as identified in this report and are based on a general

average Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) for the subgrade soils of CL.

Table 3 – Estimated Average Soil Parameters for Pavement Design

Design Parameters

Subgrade Preparation Minimal replacement Proof Roll and Replace

USCS Soils Classification CL CL

California Bearing Ratio (CBR), % 4 6

Modulus of Subgrade Reaction (k), pci 125 150

Drainage Characteristics Practically Impervious Practically Impervious

Frost Group a FG-3 FG-3

Maximum Dry Density b , pcf 128 128

Optimum Moisture content b , % 10 10

Notes:

a Frost group was estimated based on the guidelines provided in Airport Pavement Design

and Evaluation Manual – AC No: 150/5320-6E, Table 2-3.

b Based on Modified Proctor Density test (ASTM D1557) from auger cuttings of primarily

clay, with some sand and gravel base material. Not representative of the dark gray to

black soil with organic content over 4%.

Based on the observed soil conditions with relatively high moisture and organic matter, it is

likely that some areas of subgrade improvement may be needed. Additionally, the use of the

recommended design values is based on the following assumptions:

• The subgrade has been closely monitored during development of the subbase.

• The subgrade has been thoroughly and adequately compacted.

• Wet zones have been dried, drained, or removed.



• Pockets of dissimilar material have been removed, replaced or mixed to achieve a

homogeneous subgrade.

• Adequate subgrade drainage has been achieved.

4.3 Drainage

One of the important considerations in constructing a high quality and durable pavement is

providing adequate drainage. Drainage design is outside of our scope for this project. Ponding

on the turf area near or along the pavement edge may reduce the structural capacity of the

pavement and affect the serviceability. We recommend a system along the edges of the taxiway

to provide adequate drainage in the base course. The existing catch basins and storm sewer

systems should also be maintained regularly to prevent flooding and long term ponding.

5.0 EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES

5.1 Layout and Elevation Procedures

A total of eight SPT soil borings were completed at the locations shown on the attached Boring

Layout Plans in Appendix I. The borehole locations were selected, located on the field by

GESTRA and surveyed by Airport Engineering Department.

5.2 Field Testing Procedures

All of the boreholes were drilled using a CME 45 truck mounted drill rig. Each borehole was

initiated and drilled to the termination depth using 2¼ inch hollow stem augers. All

representative soil samples were taken in general accordance with the “Standard Method for

Penetration Test and Split-Barrel Sampling of Soils” (ASTM D1586). After collecting each

sample, a soil sample was retained and placed in a jar and recorded for type, color, consistency,

and moisture, sealed and then transported to the laboratory for further review and testing, if

required. The specific drilling method used including the depths, rig type, crew chief, and

borehole abandonment are included on each individual boring log.

5.3 Laboratory Testing Procedures

After completion of drilling operations, all of the retained soil samples were transported to

GESTRA’s laboratory and classified by a geotechnical engineer using the Unified Soil

Classification System (USCS) classification system. A chart describing the classification system

used is included in the Appendix I of this report. The engineer assigned laboratory testing suited

to extract important index properties of the soil layers. These tests included moisture and

organic content, Atterberg Limit, Modified Proctor density, P200 and unconfined compressive

strength tests. Results from the laboratory testing can be found on the individual boring logs and

in Appendix II of this report.



STANDARD OF CARE

Our exploration was limited to evaluating subsurface soil and groundwater conditions pertaining

to the proposed project. GESTRA did not perform any environmental, chemical, or

hydrogeologic testing as these were not part of our work scope.

This report should be made available in its entirety to bidding contractors for information

purposes. The soil borings and site sketch should not be detached from this report. Our report is

not valid if used for purposes other than what is described in the report.

All OSHA regulations such as those regarding proper sloping and temporary shoring of

excavations should be followed during the entire construction process.

GESTRA has presented our professional opinions in this report in the form of recommendations.

Our opinions are based on our understanding of current project information and related accepted

engineering practices at the time of this report. Other than this, no warranty is implied or

intended.

Sincerely,


Nayan Saha, PE Doug Bath, PE

Geotechnical Engineer Senior Engineer

APPENDIX I

SITE PICTURES, SITE LOCATION MAP, BORING LAYOUT PLAN,

TEST BORING LOGS AND NOMENCLATURE

Picture of Site Condition: P-1


GE

ST

RA

Engin

eeri

ng, In

c.191

W. E

dger

ton

Aven

ue

Mil

wau

kee

,W

I 5

3207

Phone:

(414)

933-7

444 F

ax:

(414)

933-7

844

ww

w.g

estr

ainc.

com

Dra

wn B

y:

NS

Dat

e:M

ay 1

8, 2016

Pro

ject

No.:

16011-1

0

Sca

le:

Not

- to

- s

cale

Dra

win

gT

itle

:S

ite

Loca

tion M

ap

Dra

win

g N

o.:

1 o

f 1

Pro

ject

Nam

e &

Loca

tio

n:

Tax

iway

F R

econst

ruct

ion P

roje

ctG

ener

al M

itch

ell

Inte

rnat

ional

Air

port

, M

ilw

aukee

,W

IC

hec

ked

By:

DB

B-1

GIL

ES

-3

B-1

B-2

B-4

N

NO

RT

H R

AM

P

LA

YT

ON

AV

E.

TB

-1

TB

-2

TB

-3

TB

-4

TB

-5

TB

-6

TB

-7

TB

-8

Sit

e L

ocati

on

GE

ST

RA

Engin

eeri

ng, In

c.191

W. E

dger

ton

Aven

ue

Mil

wau

kee

,W

I 5

3207

Phone:

(414)

933-7

444 F

ax:

(414)

933-7

844

ww

w.g

estr

ainc.

com

Dra

wn B

y:

NS

Dat

e:M

ay 1

8, 2016

Pro

ject

No.:

16011-1

0

Sca

le:

Not

- to

- s

cale

Dra

win

gT

itle

:B

ori

ng L

ayout

Pla

n

Dra

win

g N

o.:

1 o

f 1

Pro

ject

Nam

e &

Loca

tio

n:

Tax

iway

F R

econst

ruct

ion P

roje

ctG

ener

al M

itch

ell

Inte

rnat

ional

Air

port

, M

ilw

aukee

,W

IC

hec

ked

By:

DB

B-1

GIL

ES

-3

B-1

Note

- B

ase

ma

p w

ith

plo

tte

d b

ore

ho

les w

as p

rovid

ed

by

Airp

ort

En

gin

ee

rin

g D

ep

art

me

nt

B-2

B-4

N

NO

RT

H R

AM

P

LA

YT

ON

AV

E.

TB

-1

TB

-2

TB

-3

TB

-4

TB

-5

TB

-6

TB

-7

TB

-8

18

18

18

10

19

4676

369

237

367

36

SS

- 1

SS

- 2

SS

- 3

SS

- 4

CL

CL

4.50

3.50

1.50

ASPHALT (10.5")

0.88 (669.52)BASE COURSE (7")

1.46 (668.94)LEAN CLAY, trace organic, dark gray, moist, stiff

4 (666.4)LEAN CLAY, gray and brown mottled, moist, stiff tohard

Trace organic was observed in sample SS-3 andSS-4.

Color changed to gray at 9.5'

11 (659.4)End of Boring at 11.0 ft.

20.4

19.4

20.2

19.2

13

15

10

13

LOI= 4.8%

LOI= 4.5%

LOI= 1.3%

1 of 1

DRILLING RIG

DRILLING METHOD

WATER ENCOUNTERED DURING DRILLING: NE ft.

TB-1

N -

Val

ue

GMIA Improvement Project (Taxiway F)DATE DRILLING ENDED

PROJECT NAME

PROJECT LOCATION

SURFACE ELEVATION

Liqu

id L

imit

5/4/2016

Pla

stic

ity In

dex

LAB LOG / QC3¼" HSA

670.4 ft

FIELD LOG

Comments

WETDRY

5/4/2016

Dep

th (f

t)

Ele

vatio

n

N. Saha

CME 45

16011-10

BORING NUMBER

NOTE: Stratification lines between soil types represent the approximate boundary; gradual transition between in-situ soil layers should be expected.

PAGE NUMBER

WETDRY

FIRM: GESTRACREW CHIEF: K. Gorenschek

5

10

15

WATER LEVEL AFTER 0 HOURS: NMR

CAVE DEPTH AT COMPLETION: 3 ft.


US

CS

Cla

ssifi

catio

n

BORING DRILLED BY

Rec

over

y(in

)

Gra

phic

Soil Descriptionand Geological Origin for

Each Major Unit

670.0

665.0

660.0

NORTHING

Unc

onfin

ed C

omp.

Stre

ngth

(Quo

r Qp)

(tsf

)

Moi

stur

e C

onte

nt (%

)

DATE DRILLING STARTED

Blo

w C

ount

s

M. Rhodes

Wel

l Dia

gram

WATER & CAVE-IN OBSERVATION DATA

PROJECT NUMBER

Num

ber

and

Type

EASTING

WATER LEVEL AT COMPLETION: NE CAVE DEPTH AFTER 0 HOURS: NMR

356000

2530217

SOIL BORING LOG

Gestra Engineering Inc.191 W. Edgerton AvenueMilwaukee, WI 53207Phone: 414-933-7444, Fax: 414-933-7844

18

18

18

2

12

5688

232

358

248

24

SS

- 1

SS

- 2

SS

- 3

SS

- 4

CL

CL

ML

CL

ASPHALT (14")

1.17 (669.93)BASE COURSE (6")

1.67 (669.43)LEAN CLAY WITH ORGANIC, dark gray to black,moist, stiff

4 (667.1)LEAN CLAY, with silt lenses, trace organic, gray witholive gray layers, very moist to wet, soft to mediumstiff

6.5 (664.6)SANDY SILT, gray, wet, medium dense

9.5 (661.6)LEAN CLAY, with possible gravel, brown, moist, stiff


24.5

29.8

15.8

14

5

13

12

LOI= 6.7%

Poor recovery due topossible stone ( Driller'sobservation)

1 of 1

DRILLING RIG

DRILLING METHOD

WATER ENCOUNTERED DURING DRILLING: 6.5 ft.

TB-2

N -

Val

ue


PROJECT NAME

PROJECT LOCATION

SURFACE ELEVATION

Liqu

id L

imit

5/4/2016

Pla

stic

ity In

dex


671.1 ft

FIELD LOG

Comments

WETDRY

5/4/2016

Dep

th (f

t)

Ele

vatio

n

N. Saha

CME 45

16011-10

BORING NUMBER


PAGE NUMBER

WETDRY


5

10

15


CAVE DEPTH AT COMPLETION: 6.5 ft.


US

CS

Cla

ssifi

catio

n

BORING DRILLED BY

Rec

over

y(in

)

Gra

phic


Each Major Unit

670.0

665.0

660.0

NORTHING

Unc

onfin

ed C

omp.

Stre

ngth

(Quo

r Qp)

(tsf

)

Moi

stur

e C

onte

nt (%

)


Blo

w C

ount

s

M. Rhodes

Wel

l Dia

gram


PROJECT NUMBER

Num

ber

and

Type

EASTING


356038

2530362

SOIL BORING LOG


15

18

18

18

8468

689

259

246

SS

- 1

SS

- 2

SS

- 3

SS

- 4

SM

CL

3.50

2.00

ASPHALT (12")

1 (670.4)BASE COURSE (6")

1.5 (669.9)FILL, lean clay, with sand, trace gravel, brown anddark brown mixed, moist

4 (667.4)SILTY SAND, trace gravel, brown, moist, mediumdense (Possible Fill)

6.5 (664.9)LEAN CLAY, brown, moist, very stiff



17.4

19.9

23.1

10

17

14

10

P200 =14.4%

1 of 1

DRILLING RIG

DRILLING METHOD


TB-3

N -

Val

ue


PROJECT NAME

PROJECT LOCATION

SURFACE ELEVATION

Liqu

id L

imit

5/4/2016

Pla

stic

ity In

dex


671.4 ft

FIELD LOG

Comments

WETDRY

5/4/2016

Dep

th (f

t)

Ele

vatio

n

N. Saha

CME 45

16011-10

BORING NUMBER


PAGE NUMBER

WETDRY


5

10

15




US

CS

Cla

ssifi

catio

n

BORING DRILLED BY

Rec

over

y(in

)

Gra

phic


Each Major Unit

670.0

665.0

660.0

NORTHING

Unc

onfin

ed C

omp.

Stre

ngth

(Quo

r Qp)

(tsf

)

Moi

stur

e C

onte

nt (%

)


Blo

w C

ount

s

M. Rhodes

Wel

l Dia

gram


PROJECT NUMBER

Num

ber

and

Type

EASTING


356010

2530612

SOIL BORING LOG


15

18

1

18

589

368

356

131816

SS

- 1

SS

- 2

SS

- 3

SS

- 4

CL

CL

4.50

3.50

4.5+

ASPHALT (14.5")

1.21 (670.79)BASE COURSE (4")

1.54 (670.46)LEAN CLAY, with silt lenses, brown and graymottled, moist, very stiff to hard

Color changed to brown and trace gravel observedbelow 4.5'

10 (662)LEAN CLAY WITH SAND, trace gravel, gray, moist,hard

11 (661)End of Boring at 11.0 ft.

17.3

19.8

16.1

12.7

17

14

11

34

Poor recovery due topossible stone (Driller'sobservation)

1 of 1

DRILLING RIG

DRILLING METHOD


TB-4

N -

Val

ue


PROJECT NAME

PROJECT LOCATION

SURFACE ELEVATION

Liqu

id L

imit

5/4/2016

Pla

stic

ity In

dex


672 ft

FIELD LOG

Comments

WETDRY

5/4/2016

Dep

th (f

t)

Ele

vatio

n

N. Saha

CME 45

16011-10

BORING NUMBER


PAGE NUMBER

WETDRY


5

10

15




US

CS

Cla

ssifi

catio

n

BORING DRILLED BY

Rec

over

y(in

)

Gra

phic


Each Major Unit

670.0

665.0

660.0

NORTHING

Unc

onfin

ed C

omp.

Stre

ngth

(Quo

r Qp)

(tsf

)

Moi

stur

e C

onte

nt (%

)


Blo

w C

ount

s

M. Rhodes

Wel

l Dia

gram


PROJECT NUMBER

Num

ber

and

Type

EASTING


356047

2530821

SOIL BORING LOG


18

18

18

15

367

247

367

3514

SS

- 1

SS

- 2

SS

- 3

SS

- 4

CL

SP-SM

CL

3.50

2.50

2.75

ASPHALT (12.5")

1.04 (671.06)BASE COURSE (6")

1.54 (670.56)LEAN CLAY WITH SAND, trace gravel, dark gray,moist, very stiff

4 (668.1)SAND WITH SILT, brownish gray, very moist to wet,medium dense

7.5 (664.6)LEAN CLAY, trace gravel, very moist to wet, very stiff


15.8

14.8

18.1

13

11

13

19

P200 = 8.9%

1 of 1

DRILLING RIG

DRILLING METHOD


TB-5

N -

Val

ue


PROJECT NAME

PROJECT LOCATION

SURFACE ELEVATION

Liqu

id L

imit

5/4/2016

Pla

stic

ity In

dex


672.1 ft

FIELD LOG

Comments

WETDRY

5/4/2016

Dep

th (f

t)

Ele

vatio

n

N. Saha

CME 45

16011-10

BORING NUMBER


PAGE NUMBER

WETDRY


5

10

15


CAVE DEPTH AT COMPLETION: 3.5 ft.


US

CS

Cla

ssifi

catio

n

BORING DRILLED BY

Rec

over

y(in

)

Gra

phic


Each Major Unit

670.0

665.0

660.0

NORTHING

Unc

onfin

ed C

omp.

Stre

ngth

(Quo

r Qp)

(tsf

)

Moi

stur

e C

onte

nt (%

)


Blo

w C

ount

s

M. Rhodes

Wel

l Dia

gram


PROJECT NUMBER

Num

ber

and

Type

EASTING


356027

2530952

SOIL BORING LOG


12

16

18

18

35266

269

246

3910

55

SS

- 1

SS

- 2

SS

- 3

SS

- 4

CH

CL

SC

2.50

3.00

2.50

ASPHALT (10.5")

0.88 (671.92)BASE COURSE (8.5")

1.58 (671.22)FAT CLAY, trace sand and organic, dark gray, moist,very stiff

4 (668.8)LEAN CLAY, brown and gray mottled, moist, verystiff

9 (663.8)CLAYEY SAND, trace gravel, brown, very moist towet, medium dense


23.6

19.9

24.1

12

15

10

19

1 of 1

DRILLING RIG

DRILLING METHOD


TB-6

N -

Val

ue


PROJECT NAME

PROJECT LOCATION

SURFACE ELEVATION

Liqu

id L

imit

5/4/2016

Pla

stic

ity In

dex


672.8 ft

FIELD LOG

Comments

WETDRY

5/4/2016

Dep

th (f

t)

Ele

vatio

n

N. Saha

CME 45

16011-10

BORING NUMBER


PAGE NUMBER

WETDRY


5

10

15




US

CS

Cla

ssifi

catio

n

BORING DRILLED BY

Rec

over

y(in

)

Gra

phic


Each Major Unit

670.0

665.0

660.0

NORTHING

Unc

onfin

ed C

omp.

Stre

ngth

(Quo

r Qp)

(tsf

)

Moi

stur

e C

onte

nt (%

)


Blo

w C

ount

s

M. Rhodes

Wel

l Dia

gram


PROJECT NUMBER

Num

ber

and

Type

EASTING


356056

2531202

SOIL BORING LOG


4

5

12

15

4

57

445

135

124

368

SS

- 1

SS

- 2

SS

- 3

SS

- 4

SS

- 5

CL

CL

1.00

1.50

ASPHALT (8.5")

0.7 (671.5)BASE COURSE (8")

1.38 (670.82)FILL, silty sand with gravel, clay pockets andrecycled asphalt, dark brown, moist

2 (670.2)LEAN CLAY, trace organic, dark gray, moist, stiff

4 (668.2)LEAN CLAY, with silt lenses, gray and brownmottled, moist, stiff to very stiff

Color changed to brown at 7'


24.1

20.8

19

19.4

9

8

6

14

LOI= 4.0%

Qu= 2.51 tsfWet density= 131.3 pcfDry density= 108.7 pcf

1 of 1

DRILLING RIG

DRILLING METHOD


TB-7

N -

Val

ue


PROJECT NAME

PROJECT LOCATION

SURFACE ELEVATION

Liqu

id L

imit

5/4/2016

Pla

stic

ity In

dex


672.2 ft

FIELD LOG

Comments

WETDRY

5/4/2016

Dep

th (f

t)

Ele

vatio

n

N. Saha

CME 45

16011-10

BORING NUMBER


PAGE NUMBER

WETDRY


5

10

15




US

CS

Cla

ssifi

catio

n

BORING DRILLED BY

Rec

over

y(in

)

Gra

phic


Each Major Unit

670.0

665.0

660.0

NORTHING

Unc

onfin

ed C

omp.

Stre

ngth

(Quo

r Qp)

(tsf

)

Moi

stur

e C

onte

nt (%

)


Blo

w C

ount

s

M. Rhodes

Wel

l Dia

gram


PROJECT NUMBER

Num

ber

and

Type

EASTING


356033

2531416

SOIL BORING LOG


12

10

15

18

18

33

345

467

345

246

SS

- 1

SS

- 2

SS

- 3

SS

- 4

SS

- 5

CL-ML

CL

SM

CL

2.00

4.00

2.00

3.50

ASPHALT (8")

0.67 (671.43)BASE COURSE (10")

1.5 (670.6)SILTY CLAY, trace organic, dark gray, moist,medium stiff to stiff

4 (668.1)LEAN CLAY, gray and brown mottled, moist, hard

6.5 (665.6)SILTY SAND, brown, wet, loose

7.5 (664.6)LEAN CLAY, brown, moist, very stiff



20.2

21.2

18.1

21.9

20.6

9

13

9

10

LOI= 3.2%

1 of 1

DRILLING RIG

DRILLING METHOD


TB-8

N -

Val

ue


PROJECT NAME

PROJECT LOCATION

SURFACE ELEVATION

Liqu

id L

imit

5/4/2016

Pla

stic

ity In

dex


672.1 ft

FIELD LOG

Comments

WETDRY

5/4/2016

Dep

th (f

t)

Ele

vatio

n

N. Saha

CME 45

16011-10

BORING NUMBER


PAGE NUMBER

WETDRY


5

10

15




US

CS

Cla

ssifi

catio

n

BORING DRILLED BY

Rec

over

y(in

)

Gra

phic


Each Major Unit

670.0

665.0

660.0

NORTHING

Unc

onfin

ed C

omp.

Stre

ngth

(Quo

r Qp)

(tsf

)

Moi

stur

e C

onte

nt (%

)


Blo

w C

ount

s

M. Rhodes

Wel

l Dia

gram


PROJECT NUMBER

Num

ber

and

Type

EASTING


356087

2531554

SOIL BORING LOG


GESTRA Engineering, Inc server_share\report\10-geotechnical\General Notes.doc

GENERAL NOTES DRILLING AND SAMPLING SYMBOLS TEST SYMBOLS

SYMBOL HSA RWB _FA _HA _DC _RC PD CS DM JW SS _L ST 3TP _TO W B P _Q _X CR NSR NMR

DEFINITION Hollow Stem Auger Rotary Wash Boring (Mud Drilling) 4”, 6” or 10” Diameter Flight Auger 2”, 4” or 6” Hand Auger 2 1/2” , 4” , 5” or 6” Steel Drive Casing Size A, B, or N Rotary Casing Pipe Drill or Cleanout Tube Continuous Split Spoon Sampling Drill Mud Jetting Water 2” O.D. Split Spoon Sample 2 1/2” or 3 1/2” O.D. SB Liner Sample 3” Thin Walled Tube Sample (Shelby Tube) 3” Thin Walled Tube (Pitcher Sampler) 2” or 3” Thin Walled Tube (Osterberg Sampler) Wash Sample Bag Sample Test Pit Sample BQ, NQ, or PQ Wireline System AX, BX, or NX Double Tube Barrel Core Recovery – Percent No Sample Recovered, classification based on action of drilling, equipment and/or material noted in drilling fluid or on sampling bit. No Measurement Recorded, primarily due to presence of drilling or coring fluid. Water Level Symbol

SYMBOL MC OC DD LL, PL

DEFINITION Moisture Content - % of Dry Wt. – ASTM D 2216 Organic Content - % of Dry Wt. – ASTM D 2974 Dry Density – Pounds Per Cubic Foot Liquid and Plastic Limit – ASTM D 4318

Additional Insertions Qu Qp Ts G SL OC SP PS FS pH SC CC C* Qc* D.S.* K* D* DH* MA* R E* PM* VS* IR* RQD

Unconfined Comp. Strength-psf – ASTM D 2166 Penetrometer Reading – Tons/Square Foot Torvane Reading – Tons/Square Foot Specific Gravity – ASTM D 854 Shrinkage Limits – ASTM D 427 Organic Content – Combustion Method Swell Pressure - Tons/Square Foot Percent Swell Free Swell – Percent Hydrogen Ion Content. Meter Method Sulfate Content – Parts/ Million, same as mg/L Chloride Content - Parts/ Million, same as mg/L One Dimensional Consolidation – ASTM D 2453 Triaxial Compression Direct Shear – ASTM D 3080 Coefficient of Permeability – cm/sec Dispersion test Double Hydrometer – ASTM D 4221 Particle Size Analysis – ASTM D 422 Laboratory Receptivity, in ohm – cm – ASTM G 57 Pressuremeter Deformation Modulus – TSF Pressuremeter Test Field Vane Shear – ASTM D 2573 Infiltrometer Test – ASTM D 3385 Rock Quality Designation – Percent *See attached data sheet or graph

WATER LEVEL Water levels shown on the boring logs are the levels measured in the borings at the time and under the conditions indicated. In sand, the indicated levels may be considered reliable ground water levels. In clay soil, it may not be possible to determine the ground water level within the normal time required for test borings, except where lenses or layers of more pervious waterbearing soil are present. Even then, an extended period of time may be necessary to reach equilibrium. Therefore, the position of the water level symbol for cohesive or mixed texture soils may not indicate the true level of the ground water table. Perched water refers to water above an impervious layer, thus impeded in reaching the water table. The available water level information is given at the bottom of the log sheet.

DESCRIPTIVE TERMINOLOGY DENSITY

TERM Very Loose Loose Medium Dense Dense Very Dense

“N” VALUE

0-4 4-10

10-30 30-50

Over 50

CONSISTENCY TERM

Very Soft Soft Medium Stiff Stiff Very Stiff Hard

Unconfined Compressive Strength, (tsf)

<0.25 0.25 - 0.49 0.5 - 0.99 1.0 - 1.99 2.0 - 3.99

4.0+

“N” VALUE

0-2 2-4 4-8 8-16

16-30 Over 30

Lamination Layer Lens Varved Dry Moist Wet Water bearing

Up to 1/2” thick stratum 1/2” to 6” thick stratum 1/2” to 6” discontinuous stratum Alternating laminations Powdery, no noticeable water Below saturation Saturated, above liquid limit Pervious soil below water

Standard “N” Penetration: Blows per Foot of a 140 Pound Hammer Falling 30 inches on a 2 inch OD Split Barrel Sampler

RELATIVE GRAVEL PROPORTIONS RELATIVE SIZES CONDITION

Coarse Grained Soils

Fine Grained Soils 15-29% + No. 200 15-29% + No. 200

30% + No. 200 30% + No. 200 30% + No. 200

TERM trace of gravel

with gravel

trace of gravel with gravel

trace of gravel

with gravel gravelly

RANGE 2-14%

15-49%

2-14% 15-29%

2-14%

15-24% 25-49%

Boulder Cobble Gravel

Coarse Fine Sand

Coarse Medium

Fine Silt & Clay

Over 12” 3” - 12”

3/4” - 3” #4 – 3/4”

#4 - #10

#10 - #40 #40- #200

- # 200, Based on Plasticity

Group

Symble

Coarse-Grained Soils Gravels Clean Gravels Less

than 5% fines C

Cu≥ 4 and 1≤ Cc ≤3E GW Well graded gravel

F

More than 50% retained on More than 50% coarse Less than 5% fines C

Cu< 4 and/or 1> Cc >3E GP Poorly graded gravel

F

No. 200 sieve fraction retained on Gravels with Fines

More than 12% fines C

GM Silty gravel F.G.H.

No. 4 sieve more than 12% fines C GC Clayey gravel

F.G.H.

Sands Clean sandss Cu≥ 6 and 1≤ Cc ≤3E SW Well graded sand

I

50% or more of coarse Less than 5% fines D

Cu< 6 and/or 1> Cc >3E SP Poorly graded sand

I

fraction passes No. Sands with Fines

More than 12% fines D

SM Silty sand G.H.I

4 sieve more than 12% fines D SC Clayey sand

G.H.I

Fine-Grained Soils Silts and Clays inorganic PI >7 and plots on or above

50% or more passes the Liquid Limit less than 50 " A" line

No. 200 sieve PI<4 or plots below " A "

line

organic OL Organic clay K.L.M.N

Organic Silt K.L.M.O

Silts and Clays inorganic PI plots on or above " A " line CH Fat clay K.L.M

Liquid Limit 50 or more PI plots below " A " line MH Elastic silt K.L.M

Organic OH Organic clay K.L.M.P

Organic Silt K.L.M.Q

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

Fibric Peat > 67% Fibers Hemic Peat 33 % - 67 % Fiberssapric Peat < 33% Fibers

ABased on the material passing the 3-in (75- mm)sieve

E ( D30 )2 J

If Atterberg limits plot in hatched area, soil is a CL_ML

BIf field sample contained cobbles or boulders, or both. add D10 x D60 silty clay

with cobbles or boulders, or both to group name If soil contains 15 to 29% plus No. 200, add, "with sand"

CGravels with 5 to 12 % fines require dual symbols:

FIf soil contains ≥ 15% sand, add "with sand" to group or " with gravel", whichever is predominent

GW - GM well-graded gravel with silt name LIf soil contains ≥ 30% plus No.200, predominantly sand,

GW - GC well-graded gravel with clayG

If fines classify as CL-ML, use dual symbol GC-GM. or add "sandy" to the group name

GP - GM poorly-graded gravel with Silt SC-SM MIf soil contains ≥ 30% plus No.200, predominantly

GP - GC poorly-graded gravel with clayH

If fines are organic, add "with organic fines" to group gravel add "gravelly" to the group name

DSands with 5 to 12 % fines require dual symbols: name. N

PI ≥4 and plots on or above "A" Line

SW -SM well-graded sand with siltI

If soil contains ≥15% gravel, add "with gravel" to O

PI < 4 or plots below "A" Line

SW - SC well-graded sand with clay group name. PPI plots on or above "A" Line

SP - SM poorly-graded sand with SiltQ

PI plots below "A" Line

SP - SC poorly-graded sand with clay

< 0.75

Cc =

Liquid limit - not dried

"A" l

ine

"U" li

ne

Liquid limit - oven dried< 0.75

Liquid limit - not dried

Fines Classify as ML or MH

Fines classify as CL or CH

Lean clay K.L.M

ML Silt K.L.M

Liquid limit - oven dried

CL

SOIL ENGINEERING

Soil ClassificationB

Group NameCriteria for Assigning GroupSymbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tests A

SOILS CLASSIFICATION FOR ENGINEERING PURPOSES

ASTM Designation: D 2487 - 83

(Based on Unified Soil Classification System)

Fines Classify as ML or MH

Fines classify as CL or CH

"A" l

ine

"U" li

ne

CH OR O

H

CH OR O

H

CL OR O

L

MH OR OH

D60

D10

Geotechnical -Structural- Pavement - Construction Materials

ML or OL

CL OR O

L

Cu=

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

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

PL

AS

TIC

ITY

IN

DE

X (

PI)

LIQUID LIMIT (LL)

47 CL - ML

For classification of fine grained soilsand fine-grained fraction of coarse - grainedSoils.

Equation of "A" - LineHorizontal at PI = 4 to LL=25.5then PI = 0.73 (LL-20)

Equation of "U" - LineVertical at LL = 16 to PI=7then PI = 0.9 (LL-8)

16

0102030405060708090

100

0.0

1

0.11

10

3 2 1 1

/2

1 3/4

3/8

#4

#10

#40

#100

#200

100

80

60

40

20

00

SIEVE NO.SCREEN -in

PARTICLE SIZE IN MILIMETERS

SIEVE ANALYSIS

PE

RC

EN

T P

AS

SIN

G

PE

RC

EN

T R

ET

AIN

ED

D30= 2.5 mm

D10= 0.75 mm

D60 = 15 mm

═15

0.075 ═ 200 Cc =

(D30)2

D60X D10

= 15X 0.075

(2.5) 2

= 5.6

D60 = 15 mm

D60

D10

Cu =

GESTRA Engineering, Inc ASTM D2487-83, Classification.xls

APPENDIX II

LABORATORY TEST RESULTS

GE

ST

RA

En

gin

eeri

ng

, In

c

191 W

. E

dger

ton A

ve

Mil

wau

kee

, W

I 53207

Phone:

(414)

933-7

444; F

ax: (4

14)

933-7

844

Date:

Report To:

Project Location:

D2216,

D 2

974

TB

1T

B 1

TB

1T

B 1

12

34

PC

107

Y1

PC

571

PC

105

61.4

423.8

466.2

057.9

8

124.7

047.6

6106.4

4129.2

5

113.9

743.7

999.6

7117.7

5

111.4

598.1

6116.9

7

Wei

ght

of

Sam

ple

for

Den

sity

(lb

s)

20.4

19.4

20.2

19.2

4.8

4.5

1.3

TB

-2T

B-2

TB

-2

12

4

PC

701

B8

Q6

47.9

026.7

224.0

0

103.7

248.6

538.5

5

92.7

443.6

136.5

6

89.7

2

Wei

ght

of

Sam

ple

for

Den

sity

(lb

s)

24.5

29.8

15.8

6.7

Perform

ed by

BJB

Reviewed by NS

Dry

Den

sity

(pcf

)

Org

anic

Conte

nt

(%)

Wet

Den

sity

(pcf

)

Org

anic

Conte

nt

(%)

Wei

ght

of

Wet

Soil

and C

up (

g)

Wei

ght

of

Dry

Soil

and C

up (

g)

Wei

ght

of

Soil

and C

up A

fter

Burn

(g)

Bori

ng N

um

ber

Sam

ple

Num

ber

Dia

met

er (

in)

Len

gth

(in)

Mois

ture

Conte

nt

(%)

Wei

ght

of

Cup (

g)

Wet

Den

sity

(pcf

)

Dry

Den

sity

(pcf

)

Cup N

um

ber

Len

gth

(in)

Mois

ture

Conte

nt

(%)

May 5, 2016

GMIA

GMIA

Improvem

ent Project

16011-10

Sam

ple

Num

ber

Cup N

um

ber

Bori

ng N

um

ber

Wei

ght

of

Cup (

g)

Wei

ght

of

Wet

Soil

and C

up (

g)

Wei

ght

of

Dry

Soil

and C

up (

g)

Wei

ght

of

Soil

and C

up A

fter

Burn

(g)

Dia

met

er (

in)

Milwaukee, W

I

Project Nam

e:

Project Number:

ASTM Designation:

Lab

ora

tory

Tes

t R

esu

lts

of

Mois

ture

Con

ten

t, O

rgan

ic C

on

ten

t, a

nd

Den

sity

of

Soil

Geote

ch

nic

al-

Str

uctu

ral-

Pavem

en

t-C

on

str

ucti

on

Mate

ria

l

GE

ST

RA

En

gin

eeri

ng

, In

c

191 W

. E

dger

ton A

ve

Mil

wau

kee

, W

I 53207

Phone:

(414)

933-7

444; F

ax: (4

14)

933-7

844

Date:

Report To:

Project Location:

D2216,

D 2

974

TB-3

TB-3

TB-3

13

4

M10

P6

Q11

24.15

27.42

24.85

48.35

55.11

48.90

44.77

50.52

44.38

Wei

ght

of

Sam

ple

for

Den

sity

(lb

s)

17.4

19.9

23.1

TB-4

TB-4

TB-4

TB-4

TB-4

12

34A

4

A6

A7

Y9

V5

P8

23.99

25.11

25.32

22.37

26.52

44.97

49.54

36.85

50.93

50.25

41.88

45.50

35.25

46.13

47.58

Wei

ght

of

Sam

ple

for

Den

sity

(lb

s)

17.3

19.8

16.1

20.2

12.7

Perform

ed by

BJB

Reviewed by NS

Dry

Den

sity

(pcf

)

Org

anic

Conte

nt

(%)

Wet

Den

sity

(pcf

)

Org

anic

Conte

nt

(%)

Wei

ght

of

Wet

Soil

and C

up (

g)

Wei

ght

of

Dry

Soil

and C

up (

g)

Wei

ght

of

Soil

and C

up A

fter

Burn

(g)

Bori

ng N

um

ber

Sam

ple

Num

ber

Dia

met

er (

in)

Len

gth

(in)

Mois

ture

Conte

nt

(%)

Wei

ght

of

Cup (

g)

Wet

Den

sity

(pcf

)

Dry

Den

sity

(pcf

)

Cup N

um

ber

Len

gth

(in)

Mois

ture

Conte

nt

(%)

May 5, 2016

GMIA

GMIA

Improvem

ment project

16011-10

Sam

ple

Num

ber

Cup N

um

ber

Bori

ng N

um

ber

Wei

ght

of

Cup (

g)

Wei

ght

of

Wet

Soil

and C

up (

g)

Wei

ght

of

Dry

Soil

and C

up (

g)

Wei

ght

of

Soil

and C

up A

fter

Burn

(g)

Dia

met

er (

in)

Milwaukee Co., WI

Project Nam

e:

Project Number:

ASTM Designation:

Lab

ora

tory

Tes

t R

esu

lts

of

Mois

ture

Con

ten

t, O

rgan

ic C

on

ten

t, a

nd

Den

sity

of

Soil

Geote

ch

nic

al-

Str

uctu

ral-

Pavem

en

t-C

on

str

ucti

on

Mate

ria

l

GE

ST

RA

En

gin

eeri

ng

, In

c

191 W

. E

dger

ton A

ve

Mil

wau

kee

, W

I 53207

Phone:

(414)

933-7

444; F

ax: (4

14)

933-7

844

Date:

Rep

ort T

o:

Pro

ject L

oca

tion:

D2216,

D 2

974

TB-5

TB-5

TB-5

13A

4

q3

y91

a5

26.69

26.24

26.84

49.76

52.92

48.98

46.62

49.48

45.59

Wei

ght

of

Sam

ple

for

Den

sity

(lb

s)

15.8

14.8

18.1

TB-6

TB-6

TB-6

12

3

y8

m8

v1

26.06

23.89

24.30

51.58

44.11

47.82

46.71

40.76

43.25

Wei

ght

of

Sam

ple

for

Den

sity

(lb

s)

23.6

19.9

24.1

Perfo

rmed

by

BJB

Rev

iewed

byNS

Pro

ject N

ame:

Pro

ject N

umber:

ASTM

Des

ignation:

Lab

ora

tory

Tes

t R

esu

lts

of

Mois

ture

Con

ten

t, O

rgan

ic C

on

ten

t, a

nd

Den

sity

of

Soil

Len

gth

(in)

Mois

ture

Conte

nt

(%)

May

5, 2016

GM

IA

GM

IA Impro

vem

men

t pro

ject

16011-1

0

Sam

ple

Num

ber

Cup N

um

ber

Bori

ng N

um

ber

Wei

ght

of

Cup (

g)

Wei

ght

of

Wet

Soil

and C

up (

g)

Wei

ght

of

Dry

Soil

and C

up (

g)

Wei

ght

of

Soil

and C

up A

fter

Burn

(g)

Dia

met

er (

in)

Milwau

kee

Co., W

I

Dry

Den

sity

(pcf

)

Org

anic

Conte

nt

(%)

Wet

Den

sity

(pcf

)

Org

anic

Conte

nt

(%)

Wei

ght

of

Wet

Soil

and C

up (

g)

Wei

ght

of

Dry

Soil

and C

up (

g)

Wei

ght

of

Soil

and C

up A

fter

Burn

(g)

Bori

ng N

um

ber

Sam

ple

Num

ber

Dia

met

er (

in)

Len

gth

(in)

Mois

ture

Conte

nt

(%)

Wei

ght

of

Cup (

g)

Wet

Den

sity

(pcf

)

Dry

Den

sity

(pcf

)

Cup N

um

ber

Geote

ch

nic

al-

Str

uctu

ral-

Pavem

en

t-C

on

str

ucti

on

Mate

ria

l

GE

ST

RA

En

gin

eeri

ng

, In

c

191 W

. E

dger

ton A

ve

Mil

wau

kee

, W

I 53207

Phone:

(414)

933-7

444; F

ax: (4

14)

933-7

844

Date:

Report To:

Project Location:

D2216,

D 2

974

TB

-7T

B-7

TB

-7T

B-7

23

45

PC

101

M7

Y4

T8

69.3

323.0

225.7

624.0

3

120.1

151.5

150.9

945.9

4

110.2

546.6

146.9

742.3

8

108.6

2

Wei

ght

of

Sam

ple

for

Den

sity

(lb

s)

24.1

20.8

19.0

19.4

4.0

TB

-8T

B-8

TB

-8T

B-8

TB

-8

12

34A

5

PC

CP

9Y

3J41

P7

65.5

523.7

726.3

724.9

227.7

7

122.3

350.1

643.7

046.5

051.1

0

112.8

045.5

541.0

442.6

247.1

2

111.3

1

Wei

ght

of

Sam

ple

for

Den

sity

(lb

s)

20.2

21.2

18.1

21.9

20.6

3.2

Perform

ed by

BJB

Reviewed by NS

Dry

Den

sity

(pcf

)

Org

anic

Conte

nt

(%)

Wet

Den

sity

(pcf

)

Org

anic

Conte

nt

(%)

Wei

ght

of

Wet

Soil

and C

up (

g)

Wei

ght

of

Dry

Soil

and C

up (

g)

Wei

ght

of

Soil

and C

up A

fter

Burn

(g)

Bori

ng N

um

ber

Sam

ple

Num

ber

Dia

met

er (

in)

Len

gth

(in)

Mois

ture

Conte

nt

(%)

Wei

ght

of

Cup (

g)

Wet

Den

sity

(pcf

)

Dry

Den

sity

(pcf

)

Cup N

um

ber

Len

gth

(in)

Mois

ture

Conte

nt

(%)

May 5, 2016

GMIA

GMIA

Improvem

ment project

16011-10

Sam

ple

Num

ber

Cup N

um

ber

Bori

ng N

um

ber

Wei

ght

of

Cup (

g)

Wei

ght

of

Wet

Soil

and C

up (

g)

Wei

ght

of

Dry

Soil

and C

up (

g)

Wei

ght

of

Soil

and C

up A

fter

Burn

(g)

Dia

met

er (

in)

Milwaukee Co., WI

Project Nam

e:

Project Number:

ASTM Designation:

Lab

ora

tory

Tes

t R

esu

lts

of

Mois

ture

Con

ten

t, O

rgan

ic C

on

ten

t, a

nd

Den

sity

of

Soil

Geote

ch

nic

al-

Str

uctu

ral-

Pavem

en

t-C

on

str

ucti

on

Mate

ria

l

GESTRA Engineering, Inc

191 W. Edgerton Ave

Milwaukee, WI 53207

Phone: (414) 933-7444; Fax: (414) 933-7844

Project Name: GMIA Improvement Project Date:

Project Number: 16011-10 Client: GMIA

Project Location: Milwaukee, WI

ASTM Designation: D4318

Sample InformationType of Sample Split SpoonBoring Number TB-1Sample Number 2Depth of Sample 4.5'-6'

Determination of Liquid Limit Determination of Plastic Limit

L4 G4 D24 Cup Number L19 D9

Weight of Cup (g) 14.47 14.92 14.33 Weight of Cup (g) 7.40 7.33

32.45 36.14 35.52 Weight of Wet Soil and Cup (g) 13.63 13.55

27.71 30.45 29.78 Weight of Dry Soil and Cup (g) 12.72 12.64

35.8 36.6 37.2 Moisture Content (%) 17.1 17.1

30 23 17

Compilation of Test Results

Liquid Limit 36

Plastic Limit 17

Plasticity Index 19

USCS Symbol CL

BJB NS


Reviewed By:Performed by:

Cup Number

Blow Counts

Atterberg Limits of Soil

Laboratory Test Results of

Weight of Wet Soil and Cup (g)

Weight of Dry Soil and Cup (g)

Moisture Content (%)

May 12, 2016

CL

or

OL

CH

or

OH

MH

or

OH

CL-MLML

or

OL

PI=7

PI=40

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Pla

sti

cit

y I

nd

ex

Liquid Limit

Geotechnical-Structural-Pavement-Construction Material


191 W. Edgerton Ave

Milwaukee, WI 53207

Phone: (414) 933-7444; Fax: (414) 933-7844





Sample InformationType of Sample Split SpoonBoring Number TB-2Sample Number 2Depth of Sample 4.5'-6'


D3 D11 D23 Cup Number B27 L10





34 28 15


Liquid Limit 24

Plastic Limit 12

Plasticity Index 12

USCS Symbol CL

BJB NS



Cup Number

Blow Counts






May 12, 2016

CL

or

OL

CH

or

OH

MH

or

OH

CL-MLML

or

OL

PI=7

PI=40

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Pla

sti

cit

y I

nd

ex

Liquid Limit



191 W. Edgerton Ave

Milwaukee, WI 53207

Phone: (414) 933-7444; Fax: (414) 933-7844





Sample InformationType of Sample Split SpoonBoring Number TB-6Sample Number 1Depth of Sample 1.5'-3.5'


D10 B27 D8 Cup Number B4 D15





30 23 17


Liquid Limit 55

Plastic Limit 20

Plasticity Index 35

USCS Symbol CH

BJB NS



Cup Number

Blow Counts






May 12, 2016

CL

or

OL

CH

or

OH

MH

or

OH

CL-MLML

or

OL

PI=7

PI=40

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Pla

sti

cit

y I

nd

ex

Liquid Limit


GE

ST

RA

Engi

neeri

ng,

Inc.

191 W

. E

dger

ton A

ve

Mil

wau

kee

, W

I 53207

Phone:

(414)

933-7

444; F

ax: (4

14)

933-7

844

Date:

Rep

ort T

o:

Pro

ject L

oca

tion:

Milwau

kee

, W

I

D1140 TB

-3T

B-5

22

2 h

r 40 m

in3 h

r

125.1

124.9

439.7

251.1

314.6

126.2

420.3

228.9

295.2

104.0

Wei

ght of

Soil

and P

an a

fter

Was

h (

g)

377.7

219.6

252.6

94.7

14.4

8.9

6.5

721.3

5

Wei

ght of

Soil

and P

an a

fter

Was

h (

g)

Perfo

rmed

by

BJB

Rev

iewed

by N

S

Pro

ject N

ame:

Pro

ject N

umber:

ASTM

Des

ignation:

La

bo

ra

tory

Test

Resu

lts

of

Am

ou

nt

of

So

il f

iner t

ha

n #

20

0 S

iev

e

May

10, 2016

GM

IA

GM

IA Impro

vem

ent

16011-1

0

Wei

ght of

Dry

Soil

and P

an (

g)

Wei

ght of

Dry

Soil

(g)

Per

centa

ge

of

Mat

eria

l P

assi

ng #

200 (

%)

Mois

ture

Conte

nt (%

)

Soak

Tim

e (t

o the

nea

rest

10 m

in.)

Wei

ght of

Soil

aft

er W

ash (

g)

Soak

Tim

e (t

o the

nea

rest

10 m

in.)

Bori

ng N

um

ber

Wei

ght of

Pan

(g)

Wei

ght of

Wet

Soil

and P

an (

g)

Wei

ght of

Wet

Soil

(g)

Sam

ple

Num

ber

Mois

ture

Conte

nt (%

)

Per

centa

ge

of

Mat

eria

l P

assi

ng #

200 (

%)

Wei

ght of

Wet

Soil

(g)

Wei

ght of

Dry

Soil

and P

an (

g)

Bori

ng N

um

ber

Sam

ple

Num

ber

Wei

ght of

Pan

(g)

Wei

ght of

Dry

Soil

(g)

Wei

ght of

Soil

aft

er W

ash (

g)

Wei

ght of

Wet

Soil

and P

an (

g)

Geote

ch

nic

al-

Str

uctu

ral-

Pavem

en

t-C

on

str

ucti

on

Mate

ria

l

GE

ST

RA

En

gin

eeri

ng

, In

c

191 W

. E

dger

ton A

ve

Mil

wau

kee

, W

I 53207

Phone:

(414)

933-7

444, F

ax: (4

14)

933-7

844

Date:

Report To:

Project Location:

D2166

Test

Data

Sam

ple

In

form

ati

on

Deform

ation

Sam

ple

dial

stress

Boring no.:

TB-7

Diameter (in)

1.36

reading

Sam

ple no.:

SS-3

Area (sq. in.):

1.45

(0.001 in.)

(psf)

Depth of Soil:

4.5'-6'

Height: (in.):

2.81

00

Description of Soil:

20

1003

Strain Rate (in/m

in):

0.050

40

1743

60

2307

80

2863

100

3086

150

3666

200

4223

250

4526

Sketch/photo

300

4663

350

4939

400

4983

421

5011

Remarks

UC Strength, Q

u (tsf)

2.51

Wet Density (pcf)

131.3

Dry Density (pcf)

108.7


20.8

BJB

Reviewed By: NS


Perform

ed By:

Due Calibration: 06/2016

Updated on September 20, 2012

ASTM Designation:

Milwaukee, W

I

Lean clay, gray &

brown mottled, moist

GMIA

Improvem

ent

16011-10

Un

con

fin

ed

Com

press

ive S

tren

gth

of

Soil

Lab

orato

ry T

est

Resu

lts

of

GMIA

May 12, 2016

Project Nam

e:

Project Number:

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

Stress (psf)

Un

it S

train

, %

Geo

tech

nic

al-

Str

uctu

ra

l-P

avem

en

t-C

on

str

ucti

on

Ma

teria

l


191 W. Edgerton Ave

Milwaukee, WI 53207

Phone: (414) 933-7444; Fax: (414) 933-7844

Project Name: GMIA - Taxiway F Date:


Projection Location: Milwaukee Co., WI

ASTM Designation: D1557 Method: A

Sample InformationType of Sample Lean Clay, trace to with sand, trace gravel, dark graySample Location Composite of Upper SoilSample Number 1

OPTIMUM MOISTURE: 10.8 %

Maximum Density: 125.0 lb/ft3

Maximum Dry Density 128.2 lb/ft3

Test Gravel Content: % Original Gravel Content 13 %

Corrected Optimum Moisture 9.5 %

Notes:

Performed by: JB Reviewed By: NS

GESTRA Engineering

¹The solid dot indicates uncorrected maximum density at test gravel content.

²Field density tests should be compared to the corrected maximum dry density, listed above,

which uses insitu gravel content

CORRECTEDUNCORRECTED


Proctor Sample

May 12, 2016

95.0

105.0

115.0

125.0

135.0

145.0

155.0

165.0

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Dry

De

ns

ity (

lb/f

t3)


Gs = 2.65

Gs = 2.75

Gs = 2.85


APPENDIX III

DCP TEST RESULTS

GM

IA I

mpr

ovem

ent P

roje

ct -

Tax

iway

FP

roje

ct L

ocat

ion

:D

ate:

Pro

ject

No:

1601

1-10

Bor

ehol

e:T

B-1

Rep

ort T

o:

Pav

emen

t Se

ctio

n

Asp

halt

Thi

ckne

ss:

10.5

0in

chC

oncr

ete

Thi

ckne

ss:

NA

inch

Bas

e C

ours

e T

hick

ness

:7.

00in

chO

ther:

inch

Rem

arks

:

Ref

eren

ce: 1

Gen

erat

ed u

sing

Fig

. 10,

pag

e- 1

6, "

Des

ign

of C

oncr

ete

Air

port

Pav

emen

t", P

ortla

nd C

emen

t Ass

ocia

tion,

197

3 S

. Mill

er2

Gen

erat

ed u

sing

cor

rela

tion

reco

mm

ende

d by

Wis

DO

T F

acili

ties

Dev

elop

men

t Man

ual 1

4-25

-15

(200

8)

3M

echa

nist

ic-E

mpi

rica

l Pav

emen

t Des

ign

Gui

de (

ME

PDG

) D

ocum

enta

tion,

Nat

iona

l Coo

pera

tive

Hig

hway

Res

earc

h Pr

ogra

m, 2

007

Milw

auke

e, W

I 53

207

Ph: (

414)

933

744

4 Fa

x: (

414)

933

784

5

May

4, 2

016

GM

IA

Sum

mar

y of

DC

P T

est

Res

ults

DC

P T

est

Milw

auke

e, W

I

GE

STR

A E

ngin

eeri

ng, I

nc

Pro

ject

Nam

e:

Rev

iew

ed b

y: N

. Sah

aG

ES

TR

A E

ngi

neeri

ng,

In

c

191

W. E

dger

ton

Ave

Per

form

ed b

y:

18

20

22

24

26

010

020

030

040

050

0

Depth Below Ground Surface (in.)

Mod

ulus

of

subg

rade

Rea

ctio

n (p

si/in

)

Dep

th v

s M

odul

us o

f Su

b-gr

ade

Rea

ctio

n1

18

20

22

24

26

110

10

0


CB

R (

%)

Dep

th v

s C

BR

2

18

20

22

24

26

010

20

30

40

50


Res

ilien

t M

odul

us (

ksi)

Dep

th v

s R

esili

ent M

odul

us 3

GM

IA I

mpr

ovem

ent P

roje

ct -

Tax

iway

FP

roje

ct L

ocat

ion

:D

ate:

Pro

ject

No:

1601

1-10

Bor

ehol

e:T

B-2

Rep

ort T

o:

Pav

emen

t Se

ctio

n

Asp

halt

Thi

ckne

ss:

14.0

0in

chC

oncr

ete

Thi

ckne

ss:

NA

inch

Bas

e C

ours

e T

hick

ness

:6.

00in

chO

ther:

inch

Rem

arks

:

Ref

eren

ce: 1

Gen

erat

ed u

sing

Fig

. 10,

pag

e- 1

6, "

Des

ign

of C

oncr

ete

Air

port

Pav

emen

t", P

ortla

nd C

emen

t Ass

ocia

tion,

197

3 S

. Mill

er2

Gen

erat

ed u

sing

cor

rela

tion

reco

mm

ende

d by

Wis

DO

T F

acili

ties

Dev

elop

men

t Man

ual 1

4-25

-15

(200

8)

3M

echa

nist

ic-E

mpi

rica

l Pav

emen

t Des

ign

Gui

de (

ME

PDG

) D

ocum

enta

tion,

Nat

iona

l Coo

pera

tive

Hig

hway

Res

earc

h Pr

ogra

m, 2

007

Milw

auke

e, W

I 53

207

Ph: (

414)

933

744

4 Fa

x: (

414)

933

784

5

May

4, 2

016

GM

IA

Sum

mar

y of

DC

P T

est

Res

ults

DC

P T

est

Milw

auke

e, W

I

GE

STR

A E

ngin

eeri

ng, I

nc

Pro

ject

Nam

e:

Rev

iew

ed b

y: N

. Sah

aG

ES

TR

A E

ngi

neeri

ng,

In

c

191

W. E

dger

ton

Ave

Per

form

ed b

y:

20

22

24

26

010

020

030

040

050

0


Mod

ulus

of

subg

rade

Rea

ctio

n (p

si/in

)

Dep

th v

s M

odul

us o

f Su

b-gr

ade

Rea

ctio

n1

20

22

24

26

110

10

0


CB

R (

%)

Dep

th v

s C

BR

2

20

22

24

26

010

20

30

40

50


Res

ilien

t M

odul

us (

ksi)

Dep

th v

s R

esili

ent M

odul

us 3

GM

IA I

mpr

ovem

ent P

roje

ct -

Tax

iway

FP

roje

ct L

ocat

ion

:D

ate:

Pro

ject

No:

1601

1-10

Bor

ehol

e:T

B-3

Rep

ort T

o:

Pav

emen

t Se

ctio

n

Asp

halt

Thi

ckne

ss:

12.0

0in

chC

oncr

ete

Thi

ckne

ss:

NA

inch

Bas

e C

ours

e T

hick

ness

:6.

00in

chO

ther:

inch

Rem

arks

:

Ref

eren

ce: 1

Gen

erat

ed u

sing

Fig

. 10,

pag

e- 1

6, "

Des

ign

of C

oncr

ete

Air

port

Pav

emen

t", P

ortla

nd C

emen

t Ass

ocia

tion,

197

3 S

. Mill

er2

Gen

erat

ed u

sing

cor

rela

tion

reco

mm

ende

d by

Wis

DO

T F

acili

ties

Dev

elop

men

t Man

ual 1

4-25

-15

(200

8)

3M

echa

nist

ic-E

mpi

rica

l Pav

emen

t Des

ign

Gui

de (

ME

PDG

) D

ocum

enta

tion,

Nat

iona

l Coo

pera

tive

Hig

hway

Res

earc

h Pr

ogra

m, 2

007

Rev

iew

ed b

y: N

. Sah

aG

ES

TR

A E

ngi

neeri

ng,

In

c

191

W. E

dger

ton

Ave

Per

form

ed b

y:

Pro

ject

Nam

e:

Milw

auke

e, W

I 53

207

Ph: (

414)

933

744

4 Fa

x: (

414)

933

784

5

May

4, 2

016

GM

IA

Sum

mar

y of

DC

P T

est

Res

ults

DC

P T

est

Milw

auke

e, W

I

GE

STR

A E

ngin

eeri

ng, I

nc

20

22

24

010

020

030

040

050

0


Mod

ulus

of

subg

rade

Rea

ctio

n (p

si/in

)

Dep

th v

s M

odul

us o

f Su

b-gr

ade

Rea

ctio

n1

20

22

24

110

10

0


CB

R (

%)

Dep

th v

s C

BR

2

20

22

24

010

20

30

40

50


Res

ilien

t M

odul

us (

ksi)

Dep

th v

s R

esili

ent M

odul

us 3

GM

IA I

mpr

ovem

ent P

roje

ct -

Tax

iway

FP

roje

ct L

ocat

ion

:D

ate:

Pro

ject

No:

1601

1-10

Bor

ehol

e:T

B-4

Rep

ort T

o:

Pav

emen

t Se

ctio

n

Asp

halt

Thi

ckne

ss:

14.5

0in

chC

oncr

ete

Thi

ckne

ss:

NA

inch

Bas

e C

ours

e T

hick

ness

:4.

00in

chO

ther:

inch

Rem

arks

:

Ref

eren

ce: 1

Gen

erat

ed u

sing

Fig

. 10,

pag

e- 1

6, "

Des

ign

of C

oncr

ete

Air

port

Pav

emen

t", P

ortla

nd C

emen

t Ass

ocia

tion,

197

3 S

. Mill

er2

Gen

erat

ed u

sing

cor

rela

tion

reco

mm

ende

d by

Wis

DO

T F

acili

ties

Dev

elop

men

t Man

ual 1

4-25

-15

(200

8)

3M

echa

nist

ic-E

mpi

rica

l Pav

emen

t Des

ign

Gui

de (

ME

PDG

) D

ocum

enta

tion,

Nat

iona

l Coo

pera

tive

Hig

hway

Res

earc

h Pr

ogra

m, 2

007

Milw

auke

e, W

I 53

207

Ph: (

414)

933

744

4 Fa

x: (

414)

933

784

5

May

4, 2

016

GM

IA

Sum

mar

y of

DC

P T

est

Res

ults

DC

P T

est

Milw

auke

e, W

I

GE

STR

A E

ngin

eeri

ng, I

nc

Pro

ject

Nam

e:

Rev

iew

ed b

y: N

. Sah

aG

ES

TR

A E

ngi

neeri

ng,

In

c

191

W. E

dger

ton

Ave

Per

form

ed b

y:

20

22

24

26

010

020

030

040

050

0


Mod

ulus

of

subg

rade

Rea

ctio

n (p

si/in

)

Dep

th v

s M

odul

us o

f Su

b-gr

ade

Rea

ctio

n1

20

22

24

26

110

10

0


CB

R (

%)

Dep

th v

s C

BR

2

20

22

24

26

010

20

30

40

50


Res

ilien

t M

odul

us (

ksi)

Dep

th v

s R

esili

ent M

odul

us 3

GM

IA I

mpr

ovem

ent P

roje

ct -

Tax

iway

FP

roje

ct L

ocat

ion

:D

ate:

Pro

ject

No:

1601

1-10

Bor

ehol

e:T

B-5

Rep

ort T

o:

Pav

emen

t Se

ctio

n

Asp

halt

Thi

ckne

ss:

12.5

0in

chC

oncr

ete

Thi

ckne

ss:

NA

inch

Bas

e C

ours

e T

hick

ness

:6.

00in

chO

ther:

inch

Rem

arks

:

Ref

eren

ce: 1

Gen

erat

ed u

sing

Fig

. 10,

pag

e- 1

6, "

Des

ign

of C

oncr

ete

Air

port

Pav

emen

t", P

ortla

nd C

emen

t Ass

ocia

tion,

197

3 S

. Mill

er2

Gen

erat

ed u

sing

cor

rela

tion

reco

mm

ende

d by

Wis

DO

T F

acili

ties

Dev

elop

men

t Man

ual 1

4-25

-15

(200

8)

3M

echa

nist

ic-E

mpi

rica

l Pav

emen

t Des

ign

Gui

de (

ME

PDG

) D

ocum

enta

tion,

Nat

iona

l Coo

pera

tive

Hig

hway

Res

earc

h Pr

ogra

m, 2

007

Milw

auke

e, W

I 53

207

Ph: (

414)

933

744

4 Fa

x: (

414)

933

784

5

May

4, 2

016

GM

IA

Sum

mar

y of

DC

P T

est

Res

ults

DC

P T

est

Milw

auke

e, W

I

GE

STR

A E

ngin

eeri

ng, I

nc

Pro

ject

Nam

e:

Rev

iew

ed b

y: N

. Sah

aG

ES

TR

A E

ngi

neeri

ng,

In

c

191

W. E

dger

ton

Ave

Per

form

ed b

y:

18

20

22

24

26

28

010

020

030

040

050

0


Mod

ulus

of

subg

rade

Rea

ctio

n (p

si/in

)

Dep

th v

s M

odul

us o

f Su

b-gr

ade

Rea

ctio

n1

18

20

22

24

26

28

110

10

0


CB

R (

%)

Dep

th v

s C

BR

2

18

20

22

24

26

28

010

20

30

40

50


Res

ilien

t M

odul

us (

ksi)

Dep

th v

s R

esili

ent M

odul

us 3

GM

IA I

mpr

ovem

ent P

roje

ct -

Tax

iway

FP

roje

ct L

ocat

ion

:D

ate:

Pro

ject

No:

1601

1-10

Bor

ehol

e:T

B-6

Rep

ort T

o:

Pav

emen

t Se

ctio

n

Asp

halt

Thi

ckne

ss:

10.5

0in

chC

oncr

ete

Thi

ckne

ss:

NA

inch

Bas

e C

ours

e T

hick

ness

:8.

50in

chO

ther:

inch

Rem

arks

:

Ref

eren

ce: 1

Gen

erat

ed u

sing

Fig

. 10,

pag

e- 1

6, "

Des

ign

of C

oncr

ete

Air

port

Pav

emen

t", P

ortla

nd C

emen

t Ass

ocia

tion,

197

3 S

. Mill

er2

Gen

erat

ed u

sing

cor

rela

tion

reco

mm

ende

d by

Wis

DO

T F

acili

ties

Dev

elop

men

t Man

ual 1

4-25

-15

(200

8)

3M

echa

nist

ic-E

mpi

rica

l Pav

emen

t Des

ign

Gui

de (

ME

PDG

) D

ocum

enta

tion,

Nat

iona

l Coo

pera

tive

Hig

hway

Res

earc

h Pr

ogra

m, 2

007

Rev

iew

ed b

y: N

. Sah

aG

ES

TR

A E

ngi

neeri

ng,

In

c

191

W. E

dger

ton

Ave

Per

form

ed b

y:

Pro

ject

Nam

e:

Milw

auke

e, W

I 53

207

Ph: (

414)

933

744

4 Fa

x: (

414)

933

784

5

May

4, 2

016

GM

IA

Sum

mar

y of

DC

P T

est

Res

ults

DC

P T

est

Milw

auke

e, W

I

GE

STR

A E

ngin

eeri

ng, I

nc

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

010

020

030

040

050

0


Mod

ulus

of

subg

rade

Rea

ctio

n (p

si/in

)

Dep

th v

s M

odul

us o

f Su

b-gr

ade

Rea

ctio

n1

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

110

10

0


CB

R (

%)

Dep

th v

s C

BR

2

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

010

20

30

40

50


Res

ilien

t M

odul

us (

ksi)

Dep

th v

s R

esili

ent M

odul

us 3

GM

IA I

mpr

ovem

ent P

roje

ct -

Tax

iway

FP

roje

ct L

ocat

ion

:D

ate:

Pro

ject

No:

1601

1-10

Bor

ehol

e:T

B-7

Rep

ort T

o:

Pav

emen

t Se

ctio

n

Asp

halt

Thi

ckne

ss:

8.50

inch

Con

cret

e T

hick

ness

:N

Ain

chB

ase

Cou

rse

Thi

ckne

ss:

8.00

inch

Oth

er:

inch

Rem

arks

:

Ref

eren

ce: 1

Gen

erat

ed u

sing

Fig

. 10,

pag

e- 1

6, "

Des

ign

of C

oncr

ete

Air

port

Pav

emen

t", P

ortla

nd C

emen

t Ass

ocia

tion,

197

3 S

. Mill

er2

Gen

erat

ed u

sing

cor

rela

tion

reco

mm

ende

d by

Wis

DO

T F

acili

ties

Dev

elop

men

t Man

ual 1

4-25

-15

(200

8)

3M

echa

nist

ic-E

mpi

rica

l Pav

emen

t Des

ign

Gui

de (

ME

PDG

) D

ocum

enta

tion,

Nat

iona

l Coo

pera

tive

Hig

hway

Res

earc

h Pr

ogra

m, 2

007

Milw

auke

e, W

I 53

207

Ph: (

414)

933

744

4 Fa

x: (

414)

933

784

5

May

4, 2

016

GM

IA

Sum

mar

y of

DC

P T

est

Res

ults

DC

P T

est

Milw

auke

e, W

I

GE

STR

A E

ngin

eeri

ng, I

nc

Pro

ject

Nam

e:

Rev

iew

ed b

y: N

. Sah

aG

ES

TR

A E

ngi

neeri

ng,

In

c

191

W. E

dger

ton

Ave

Per

form

ed b

y:

18

20

22

24

26

010

020

030

040

050

0


Mod

ulus

of

subg

rade

Rea

ctio

n (p

si/in

)

Dep

th v

s M

odul

us o

f Su

b-gr

ade

Rea

ctio

n1

18

20

22

24

26

110

10

0


CB

R (

%)

Dep

th v

s C

BR

2

18

20

22

24

26

010

20

30

40

50


Res

ilien

t M

odul

us (

ksi)

Dep

th v

s R

esili

ent M

odul

us 3

GM

IA I

mpr

ovem

ent P

roje

ct -

Tax

iway

FP

roje

ct L

ocat

ion

:D

ate:

Pro

ject

No:

1601

1-10

Bor

ehol

e:T

B-8

Rep

ort T

o:

Pav

emen

t Se

ctio

n

Asp

halt

Thi

ckne

ss:

8.00

inch

Con

cret

e T

hick

ness

:N

Ain

chB

ase

Cou

rse

Thi

ckne

ss:

10.0

0in

chO

ther:

inch

Rem

arks

:

Ref

eren

ce: 1

Gen

erat

ed u

sing

Fig

. 10,

pag

e- 1

6, "

Des

ign

of C

oncr

ete

Air

port

Pav

emen

t", P

ortla

nd C

emen

t Ass

ocia

tion,

197

3 S

. Mill

er2

Gen

erat

ed u

sing

cor

rela

tion

reco

mm

ende

d by

Wis

DO

T F

acili

ties

Dev

elop

men

t Man

ual 1

4-25

-15

(200

8)

3M

echa

nist

ic-E

mpi

rica

l Pav

emen

t Des

ign

Gui

de (

ME

PDG

) D

ocum

enta

tion,

Nat

iona

l Coo

pera

tive

Hig

hway

Res

earc

h Pr

ogra

m, 2

007

Rev

iew

ed b

y: N

. Sah

aG

ES

TR

A E

ngi

neeri

ng,

In

c

191

W. E

dger

ton

Ave

Per

form

ed b

y:

Pro

ject

Nam

e:

Milw

auke

e, W

I 53

207

Ph: (

414)

933

744

4 Fa

x: (

414)

933

784

5

May

4, 2

016

GM

IA

Sum

mar

y of

DC

P T

est

Res

ults

DC

P T

est

Milw

auke

e, W

I

GE

STR

A E

ngin

eeri

ng, I

nc

18

20

22

24

26

010

020

030

040

050

0


Mod

ulus

of

subg

rade

Rea

ctio

n (p

si/in

)

Dep

th v

s M

odul

us o

f Su

b-gr

ade

Rea

ctio

n1

18

20

22

24

26

110

10

0


CB

R (

%)

Dep

th v

s C

BR

2

18

20

22

24

26

010

20

30

40

50


Res

ilien

t M

odul

us (

ksi)

Dep

th v

s R

esili

ent M

odul

us 3

geotechnical exploration and subgrade evaluation … · strength parameters correlating to the...

Documents