4

I

i+ I ~

?

c ~w &95L4falA14&~ ~ ~"i '; ~ ~.i,

t'iI

4~C'r

~a

~

i.. I

U.S. ARMYENGINEER DIVISIONLABORATORY

SOUTH ATLANTIC

IIII

h ~

II

)

I

J/ ~

yi

-'$,'

LARGE SCALE TRIAXIALSHEAR AND PERMEABILITY TESTS

SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT

CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY

f'i"i,„' ),, ™

tT~ ai'3(

~.goo/oo i jot»l<~~

R0gZ4o o &k

jl>W

'AFi" '

APRIL 1975CORPS OF ENGINEERS

MARIETTA, GEORGIARequisition No'.

H-02022~p i

gA

F90 2220 07+~ . fii I

i'i'P i ~>C~~~~Xr~%,

Work Order No.9051

*

*S

I

e

1

r~ ~

I ~

I

w ~ » ~

PREFACE

The Carolina Power and Light Company'CP 6 L), Raleigh,

North C rolina, in.a letter dated 4 October 1974, requested that

the U. S. Army Engineer Division Laboratory, South Atlantic, perform

laboratory tests on material from a random rockfill sample taken from

a test section at Weir Shearon Harris Nuclear Plant Site. The test

program was authorized by Office, Chief of Engineers, in the firstindorsement, DAEN-CWO, 11 November 1974, to letter SADEN-L, 25 October

1974, sub)ect: "Request for Approval to Perform 15-In. Triaxial

Shear Test Program for Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Carolina

Power and Light Company". Tests conducted were: a 15-in. diameter

consolidated undrained triaxial shear test, grain size analyses, and

14»in. diameter constant head permeability tests.

The work was performed under the general direction of

Mr. Robert J. Stephenson, P.E., Director, South Atlantic'ivision

Laboratory. The laboratory tests were supervised by Messrs.

William L. Tison, Civil Engineer, and Coy A. Colwell, Supervisory

Civil Engineering Technician. The ana]ysis of the data and prep-

aration of this report were performed by Mr. William L. Tison.

~ r

s).=

)l

gr!

r'l~

I~ r y ~

I

Ilr.i,",inc'r'~r ~ ~ 4trr'v.. ~~~1 ahi~ ~ ~ i i~ i',,~~v ~ ". r irag~e.pei~~peyr.-;i~

I

I

t

~ 5

~ .'. 5

~ I ~ I~ M ~I 5 pl

~ ~ +44 « ~ 4 'I<A~ lltk45» I\XLhWb~ka 4«6 I l(4%A 'Nate w c ~, ' tu I,~ 5 ', ~

CONTENTS

~Pa e

reface «» ««««» ««««««««««««««««««»«««««»»«««««««»««»«««jip

Conversion Factors, British to Metric Unitsof Measurement- iv

Ob)ect

References »«««»« .1

Special Equipment «» «««» 1

Description of Sample- «3Scope of Tests-

Test Procedures

Test Results-

Discussion of Test Results

13

13

I~ g

5Conclusions 17

APPENDIX. Individual Test Reports

k~ 4'

«I

5%

'I

Ic, ~

Jp,'«5

IpI iI;I

~ f

~ g ~

~ ~

, ~'5I

l,I/ <,.,+«I «45PyI4lv g, QW/~.tel«~+ $ 4 5 5',I QI " q «,a « ~ / JQ ', P ''5« i,v e ~ * y 5 ~ ~ ~, ~ sI

I

~ ~

~ »I'"t 4crgiry. (55t'f4'yyay~~t'

'A

r

air

i ~ ( a ~' «««'l

e 4~

„~ f~ .» a p'««fax tp«t»«»Lt u A a >e~o,tt 6 ...~.„: > ~ ~ ~ "vr'',. o w ~ ~ av;g... >s «)at '« '4

CONVERSION FACTORS

BRITISH TO METRIC UNITS OF MEASUREMENT

British units of measurement used in this report can be convertedY

to metric units as follows:«

Multi 1 To Obtain

inches

pounds

cubic feet

2.54 centimeters

0.45336 kilograms

0.028317 cubic meters

pounds per square inch(ps i)

703.1 kilograms per square meter

tons per square foot 0.9765

centimeters per second 1.969

kilograms per square centimeter

feet per minute

g'st ~

<'i~)t

1 ~

t ~

S'

e'~ ~

iv

'QP'8<' ) J(4 0 t' 't«i ~ " ~[««~st, 0 t ~ «mitt y «» H \+ I~ p I 'P ~ ) qlPP'P%'0+$ ';l 't ~ 'P '0 gv, ) t' ~ +)» ~fPI

f

5'V

4.

.0I ~

LARGE SCALE TRIAXIALSHIKAR AND PERMEABILI1Y TESTSSHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLAgT

1 OBJECT:

The ob)ect of the test program was to determine the gradation of

the rockfill sample and the triaxial shear and permeability character-

istics of specimens reconstituted from the random rockfill sample.

2. REFERENCES:

Department of the Army, Office of the Chief of Engineers, Engineer

Manual No. 1110-2-1906, Laboratory Soils Testing, 30 November 1970.

+I(

~ 'j

;i>,'

I',

3 ~ SPECIAL EQUI'ENT:

a. Controlled-Strain Triaxial Device (Figure 1). The unit accom-

modates a specimen'15 inches in diameter by 32 inches high and is capable

of a maximum chamber pressure of 400 psi. Axial load is applied by a

14-in. diameter, 200,000 lbs. capacity hydraulic ram fastened to a

5 in. diameter piston. The piston seats in a socket on the specimen

loading cap. Specimen drainage is through a 2.5-in. diameter Norton

porous stone in the pedestal and a similar 1.25-in. diameter stone

in the specimen cap. Drainage lines are 1/4-in. polyethelene tubing

with Whitey needle valves and Swagelok quick-connect couplers. The

interior of the specimen is connected to a 6-in. diameter aluminum

saturation reservoir having a capacity of 19,000 ml with 100 ml

graduations. The chamber fluid is connected to a 5-in. diameter,

11,500 ml aluminum reservoir with 100 ml graduations. During saturation,

'

4t4E

T

h I

0

0

~i

1 ~,,

gj

$~ ~

~ ~r '

~

Fig. 1 « Unassembled triaxial shear test apparatus. In theforeground are the collar, split mold, rubber mem-brane, and membrane stretcher utilized in preparingthe test specimens.

L

Pig. 2 - Equipment set up for constant-head permeabilitytests on.rockfill material.

C g V

ri~r,'

V

: a 2000 ml lucite burette with 10 ml graduations is connected to the

specimen through the upper drainage line.,~

~

S

r,.1

b. Permeameter (Figure 2). The permeameter is open ended and

accommodates a specimen 14 inches in diameter and 18 inches high. A

column of water equal in diameter to the test specimen is the source

of flow through the specimen. The permeameter is constructed with

three overflow pipes at different heights above the specimen top so

the constant head elevation can be varied. The permeameter is placed

inside a larger diameter container with an overflow which maintains

the tail water at a constant height.

pC~I

c. Gradation E ui ment. A large Tylab mechanical shaker con-

taining six screens from the 3-in. to the 3/8-in. sieve sizes was

used. Larger sizes werc separated by hand over a series of screens

with openings up to 8-inches. Rocks over G-in, size were measured

with templates. Conventional equipment was utilized to grade the

No. 4 to the No. 200 sieve sizes.

4. DESCRIPTION OF SAMPLE:

All test specimens were reconstituted with material from an

8-ton random rockfill sample taken from a field test section by

CP 6 L personnel (Figure 3). The material classified as brown. siltygravel sizes (GM) with some cobble sizes. All of the sample was finer

than 24-in. size and 17 percent was finer than the No. 200 sieve size

(Plate 1)*. The soil had a liquid limit of 35 and a plastic limit

+All plates are contained in the Appendix.

' C

I ~ 'r r rrrrI I(» ~ ' I (r ~ %)IVl rr'sa't( avr(

\ ~

of 27 CP 6 L furnished the field compacted in-place density and

Ii( ~~

moisture content which were 135.0 pcf dry density and 5.0 percent

water content, respectively.

5. SCOPE OF TESTS:

The gradation of the total sample, air dried, was obtained and

a "replacement gradation" containing minus 3»in. sizes established

for the tests. Three 15-in. diameter triaxial specimens with the

replaced gradation (Plate 2) were compacted to the field density and

moisture conditions and tested "in consolidated undrained triaxial

shear with pore pressure measurements (R Tests). Confining pressures

( g~) of 1.0, 2.0, and 4.0 tons per square foot were applied. The

grain size distribution of each specimen after shear was obtained to

determine the degree of particle breakdown due to compaction and

shear forces. Three 14-in. diameter specimens were prepared simi-

h.r

1

r%'

'

larly with various gradations for permeability tests. The grain

size distribution of these specimens after testing were also deter-

mined.

6. TEST PROCEDURES:

a. Gradation. The total sample was spread out and air dried.

The plus 8-in. sizes were separated and graded by hand using a series

of templates. The minus S«in. to plus 3-in. sizes were graded by

I jr r

rr~ .

,"1l,r, ~ (

hand using the large screens. The minus 3-in. sizes were graded

'~(rll+%t 'I t,+~+>IVV;w.pip ~4tlrpr(r g+ 'I) t pv)'I „I l'rtrhs ':, rl'r-~, "",~.'(r(I r, ('Il,II'lr>'(vtr lr err t't re ' ~ r Ir l,tlat rtgtr»(,Ir~ ~ ~ r ~

I@A

~ I ~ ~ 4 III A ~ ~ ' ~ Ar ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ &

Pig. 3 - Sample from random rockfill test section at ShearonHarris Nuclear Power Plant when delivered to SAD

Laboratory.

Cv'cgCrl lL

S.

~f+CTIII

Pig. 4 - Material prepared with the replaced gradation toform one lift in the 15-in. triaxial shear testspecimen.

Ct ( ~4'r1",rl„(-,) P(,4 fIr/44(fig+~ pl~1.Ir i~ I+7+ tP~Prr.~..gg..gr ~ r,II;;7.g ( W,,~' ~ '" ': ~, ~ ~' .-,V(1$

4 01

4W

4

'V =

4

4~

~ ~

«

Vl ~ ~,'a« ~ «4'1 'Q4 ~ 1%+vh» a«« ~ Il'' » ~ » «» 4»atada

~ ~

« ~~ ~

through the Tylab shaker in batches of about 40 lbs. Shaking time

was the minimum required to obtain a "clean" separation without unduly

breaking down the particles further. This was usually about 8 minutes.

A conventional sieve analysis was performed on a representative sample

of the minus No. 4 sieve sizes as outlined in App. V of the reference.

~,J'. Triaxial Shear Test. Except as noted below, the triaxial

shear test procedure was genexally the same as that outlined in paxa-

~ >«graph 7 of Appendix X to the reference.

(1) Preparation of Specimen. For each specimen, four sepa-

x'ate equal-weight batches of air-dry material were prepared by combining

the necessary amount of each sieve size to obtain the minus 3-in. sizes

xeplaced gradation (Figure 4). The replaced gradation was based on a

total gradation furnished by CP & L instead of on the total gradation

«

~ 4

A~4

,'C

~ ~

«.~r'*»r~~~

«p,«

««!r.

~ >V«;

j.ft>

')~,««

ll

'';ty

iC'l .,T;;

«

'

of the sample submitted. The gradation furnished by CP & L had been

developed fry a number of field tests and was believed to be more

representative of the in-situ compacted rockfill without additional

processing. Each batch was mixed at 5 percent water content and

placed in aix tight 'containers until needed for preparation of the

test specimen. Each of the prepared batches was quartered and the

quarter-portions compacted individually into the rubber membrane-

lined mold and collar placed on the .triaxial base. Thus, each specimen

was formed in 16"lifts. Each liftwas spread inside the mold and then

compacted to the required thickness (Figure 5) with a large compaction

-4 ~

)

JS

ll

I

C ~

'C

I

1

5

JP+ 'I

Fig. 5 - Top of one liftafter compaction inside the moldforming the 15«in. Itriaxial shear test specimen.

A;

}«"vl

'i

'7„(

i".'

pi~:.

.,r

)lI

~ .'(p.

Fig. 6 - Prepared specimen for 15-in. diameter triaxial sheartest. inclosed by water tight membrane.

~ ~

~'I

~ lr '

'anNLer previously fabricated for standard compaction tests in a

12-in. diameter mold. The lifts were compacted to obtain a uniform ~

~4,''

dry density of approximately 135.0 pounds per cubic foot at 5 percent

water content. The collar and mold were removed and the specimen cap

secured. Initial dimensions of the specimen were measured and water

tight membranes placed around the specimen (Figure 6).

(2) Saturation Procedure: The apparatus was completely

assembled, (Figure 7), the chamber filled with water, and saturation

of the specimen initiated through the bottom by means of a vacuum on

the top of the specimen. Approximately 2000 cc of water was allowed

\ ~

( I

to flow from the top of the specimen. The vacuum was then replaced

by back pressure. To insure complete saturation, the back pressure

was increased in 14 psi increments to a total of 63 psi.

~L

I

M

.pl 4J

J

(3) Consolidation Procedure: When 100 percent saturation

was indicated, the chamber pressure was increased to the required

test confining pressure (M3). Volume change measurements were

obtained from the interior burette and plotted versus logaritham

of time until primary consolidation was accomplished.

(4) Compression Procedure: The piston was brought into

contact with the specimen cap and the load indicator set to zero.

All valves were closed to prevent drainage and the specimen axially

loaded at a controlled strain rate of about 0 ' percent per minute.

Load, deflection, and pore pressure measurements were taken during

fi 4'. ~

„I„„~ F ~St ~

~ ~

~ e

Fig. 7 - Assembled test chamber for 15-in. diameter triaxialshear test with contxol console on right.

~ ', ~ 4'

P

:I ~ ~ . ~ '

~ I

/ ~

shear. Loading was discontinued at 20 percent axial strain. The

chamber was then dismantled, (Figure 8), the membrane removed, and

the oven-dry weight and after-test gradation of the total specimen

determined (Figures 9, 10, & ll).'.

Permeabilit Test:

(1) Preparation of Specimen: Each specimen was prepared

similar to the triaxial shear specimen using four equal-weight batches

compacted in four lifts to form the specimen inside the permeameter.

-Various gradations were used in an attempt to produce an after test

F

gradation equivalent to the replaced gradation corresponding to the

total gradation furnished by CP & L. This was in order to test a

specimen with gradation as close as possible to the in-situ rockfill

gradation.

IM

I~

(2) Test Procedure: The pezmeameter was placed in the large

container which was filled with water and the specimen saturated by

IL ~

rl'

PJi;rI~

rl'~

jr

seepage through the bottom for 24 hours. Water flow into the perm-

eameter was then regulated to maintain a constant head water elevation

at the first overflow pipe. Flow through the specimen, top to bottom,

produced by the differential head was measured for a given time. This

was repeated for two more increasing differential heads. The apparatus

was then dismantled and the dry weight and after-test gradation of the

entire specimen determined.

10

,r't> 'h+ g'P~Q W~P ~ %f7 'JPP g \O'J ~ f P+Ar ~ % ~ r,,rfV'0» r'J<'L ~ 'Vq, -ra--=:—, W V 'rrral'rrr rr r ~ r V rNyr Jr~r ~ ~err ~

"7

I

r ~

~~, Ar

-.3''I

.I

p='

~ ~ rr 4'I v~ '

'

\

ja,a

..I„rt

~ I

~l

fIl'w;":f

I

'r

r,I

,L,

I

1

3

, 'I~ ~

IIII «r e ~ aery Cr

a ~ IIJ.J

Ieaa «I ae aa

f.\ ~

,t

e

~< r'~ W v v«eaka ah Agf

e1I4 v.;,IrIr

C'

Fig. 8 - Specimen after 15-in. triaxialshear test before the membranehas been removed.

.Pig. 9 - Specimen after triaxial testat 1 tsf confining pressure .

( g).

C M

'I

V'

* „. 5

~ 55

m ««»«..~>~h «. "~~~i »S~.~,i>«'~W„C,pr<„.~«5+'it ~ i 5 V~. ~TA ««,/55>jl)'5 5 5 j i,i, .5,«j «, 5 ) ~ 45 ' . v 55'.

~ ~

CI

if5

S5

5

~ .

'5

t5

5 J r

5'

— '.?

5'

~ ~

'i'«p55««««15 ~ ~0««« ~~ 5 ~ r iff1 I~ ~

57 ~~ ««5 5

~ C

5

I

~5

«

Pig. 10 - Specimen after triaxial testat 2 tsf confining pressure( ~3)

Fig. 11 - Specimen after triaxia1 testat 4 tsf confining pressure( ~j) ~

T

r

f»»

»

7. TEST RESULTS:

The results of all the tests are shown on standard forms in the

»

Appendix hereto as listed below.

~ g

Test

Total Gradation Report (ENG Form 2087)

Plate No.

Gradation Curves for the Triaxial Test(ENG Form 2087)

Triaxial Compression Test Report (ENG Form 2089)

Permeability Test No. 1 Report (SAD Form 1971)

Permeability Test No. 2 Report (SAD Form 1971)

»~

Permeabi.lity Test No. 3 Report (SAD Form 1971)

r'»

'

~ g»

»

V<

g»

» ~

pi„'»

8. DISCUSSION OF TEST RESULTS:

a. Triaxial Shear (Plate 3). The remolded test specimens aver-

aged 4.5 percent water content and 135.6 pcf dry density. These were

considered satisfactory when compared to the field water content of

5.0 percent and dry density of 135.0 pcf. This density was obtained

in the laboratory without using what would be considered excessive

compactive effort. The procedure did not provide a means to measure

particle breakdown due to compaction alone. Figure 5 indicates the

larger sizes were breaking down somewhat during specimen preparation.

Final saturation computations and pore pressure observations indicated

100 percent saturation was achieved. The strain rate of 0.1 percent'»

per minute was slow enough to allow equalization of the induced pore

13

»~5 j V', »'hr Q ~ . ~ g ~ ~ ~ I „'»»-. ~ »',.« - ~ »» s V. '» . »» V. V»» ~ ~ »», %»i t, ',» 4 rf ~ » h .~.»» . \,.,»»~ll,». '»'; ~ V ~ », 4»»» ~ '"»','g ~ ~,V»».»» t »F'd.l "2), ~

C4

1

~ I ~ ~ « I -9 ~ «4\ ~ L «A 1 c,lk.

pressures throughout the specimens. In each .specimen, the maximum

induced pore pressure was reached at'bout, 4.5 percent axial strain'nd

showed very little dissipation thereafter. Deviator stress

( 8~- 8>) increased with'axial strain i.n each specimen. The shear

strength parameters were arbitrarily computed at 15 percent axial

strain. The total strength envelope thus obtained indicated an. in-

ternal friction angle (g) of 20o and-a cohesion intercept of O.l tsf.

~ ~

The corresponding effective strength envelope (9') is 40.0o with

0.0 cohesion. These strengths are comparable to data. obtained pre-

% ~

viously on 15-in. diameter tests performed on similar materials.

The after»test gradations for the three triaxial test specimens

show there was some breakdown of particles. The percent passing

the No. 4 sieve size increased an average of about 4.5 percent.

The indication that most of the particle breakdown occurred during

specimen preparation rather than during shear was evident since the

specimen at the highest confining pressure (56 psi) did not break

~'I~ ~l

1

'I"

"pl,'1:

P

Nl

SI),

\ ~

~~

< ~1

I

down si.gnificantly more than the one tested at the lowest confining

pressure {14 psi).

were made on each of three separate specimens with different grada-

tions. The results are summarized in Table I.'1) The first gradation was the same as that used in the

triaxial test. It produced consistent permeability coefficients

14

~VW P ~ P f VI~ k )t $ 4+ ~ ~ 8 ~ P '('tW tag 7 ~ yl )4 ~ 4 I 'ft ~ r~ .~ ~ . ~ i ~i ~ >e, .% ~i ~~i ~ awe;egr,w,.%

P

'i

I

e

'I I '

1

Ik t( «.l «4l«h»C1% ~ I » ii I~ " « ~ \ l«%<I ~ I « ~ ~ $ ~ ~ ~ C «Cl, ~ w, ~ 5 « ~ ~ ' I

~ ~

SUMMARY OF PREMEABILITY TEST

X Passing X PassingTest Ho. 4 Sieve No. 4 Sieve Differential K 0 x 10««*'- *- cm/sec

RunNo.

32.4(1

32 6'2(3

11.418.452.5

14.911.215.4

32.4(1

36.5 (2(3

11. 318.736.3

91.774.621.2

28.0I (134. 1 (2

(3

11. 118.536.1

74.658.513. 9

)«'l

t< ~~«,~ \»

«C«

» 'I „

I

15

~l.C

r% >PL ~ «>l5c'0 +lwFl'"tPwlg~~, »»«Q'P~.rwJ4rgc«icnf5'/ ~ ~ i') ~ ' > ' i ««c«»'I)III«g'ii'<I«,y'I

r.

N

e

tion indicated

breakdown of the gravel-size particles but less than one percent in-

crease in the amount passing the No. 4 sieve. The latter was believed

to be erroneous because of the amount of breakdown in the gravel sizes.

It is likely that when the specimen was oven dried the fines stuck toI

the larger particles making an accurate gradation difficult.

(2) The second specimen was prepared with a coarsergradation'n

the gravel sizes but the same percent passing the No. 4 sieve. The

range of the measured permeability coefficients were significantly

greater (21.2 to 91.7 x 10"4.cm/sec). The apparent decrease in per-

meability during continued testing was attributed to migration of the

fines. The after«test gradation indicated an increase of about four

percent passing the No. 4 sieve size. This was comparable to the

breakdown in the triaxial test. Extra effort was made to obtain a

"cleaner" after-test gradation on this specimen.

(3) The third permeability specimen was much coarser with

28.0 percent passing the No. 4 sieve. This gradation was a further

attempt to obtain an after-test gradation equal to the actual or

theoretical replaced gradation corresponding to the field gradation

obtained by CP & L. The after-test percent passing the No. 4 was

less than two percent higher than desired, but the permeability co-

efficients were slightly less than the values obtained in the second

test, Though somewhat inconsistent with the gradation, this tended

16

!

a

C

"~i'k

to confirm the permeability values in the second hand third tests.

9. CONCLUSIONS:

a. Triaxial Shear. The shear strength parameters measured in

the R Tests are comparable to the strengths obtained previously on

similar materials. In fact, the characteristics of the sample tested

in this program are very much like material tested from the New Hope

Dam in North Carolina. Therefore, the data obtained on this sample

from the Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant are considered quite

reliable.

*

in these tests varied, experience indicates their order of magnitude

is reasonable for this type material. It is difficult to obtain con-

sistent permeability data in laboratory tests with relatively small

diameter specimens on very coarse materials that contain significant

quantities of finer sizes, Thc finer particles are often insufficient

to fillall of the voids between the coarser rocks so there is littledoubt that these finer sizes migrate with the flow of water through

the specimen during the test. As a result, they accumulate in spots,

restricting the flow of water and producing rather conservative (low

permeability) data compared to what would be obtained if a true field

'fIe ~

sample could be tested. Nevertheless, the permeability coefficients

measured on the material in these tests are in the range of "good

drainage" suitable for pervious sections of dams and dikes. Typically,

values of this order of magnitude are obtained on clean sands or clean

sand and gravel mixtures.17

I ~, ~ ~ V 'C ~ ~ l~ ~; @PIC@ ~L'. ly. y, jt'lg:~ oC. w ~ ~ Eh ~, ~, „. ~„a f~. ~ l, ~ „,' tl,w l ~ i ~ s» i ll,i Iw t -'' ~ Ã 'l 4~, ~, 0

4

*1 t M ~

~ oA

l

~ I

~ ~ I APPENDIX

~ ~ INDIVIDUALTEST REPORTS

Test

Total Gradation-

Gradation Curves for Triaxial Test ---

~Pa e

Al

A2

Triaxial Compression Test --------«- A3

Permeability Test No. 1

Permeability Test No. 2--A4

~s os m A5

Permeability Test No. 3 A6

E 'I

C

1 JC

'k

t f

CI

DEPART.IBG'F THE'R".fY, SOUTH ATiKELTIC DIVISION LABORATORY,CORPS OF ENGIiIEERS, 611 SOUTH COBB DRIVE, MARIETTA, GA. 30061

WORK ORDER NO. 9051:WEQ "'O H-02022

-1'V

U. S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES24M12 8 6U. S. STANOARO SIEVE NUMBERS

3 4 6 8 10 1416 20 30 40 50 70 100 140 200

HYDROMETER

10

C, n

IC-.

n

r.I'~

'

I

-" 60Ã

CN~ 50

IZ

0

BIN

ion—

IX40 ~

CCI

CN

50 I/l

oCP

IX60 CJ

jI

In

hP

0

10

OX ~mpj:

10 5GRAIN QZE IN MILUMETERS

0.1 0.05 0.01 0.005100

0.001

\

'I

't

~ C

SCNICI'C NO.

VR-24-3-7

COBBLES

EIev IN DCgW

210.0'-225.0

GRAVEL

Brown silt ravel sizesGN~w/ao.-..e cobble sizes

Moisture content of sample

GRADATION CURVES

IIGYUIC

~ Wg

5

hen r

LL PL

35 27

ceive ~PI

SILT OR C1AY

earon arr s uc ear overn .~ Plant CP&L

Lab; No. 145/393

Acs Plant Excavation

NNNNN Nnm~l~nNn 4-2-10 January 1975

EHG, ',""„2087 Plate l.

4~

Pl

I''

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, SOUTH ATLANTIC DIVISION LABORATORY,

CORPS OF ENGINEERS, 611 SOlEll COBB DRIVF., MARIETTA, GA. 30061PORK ORDER NO.

9051'EQ,

NO, CPL NO. H"-02022

U.S. STANOARO SEVE OPENING IN INCHES86 4 2 1 1

U. S. STANOARO SIEVE NUMBERS

3 4 6 8 10 1416 20 30 40 50 70 100 140 200HYDROMETER

10

ra 3.on s t

70

603dtIZ

50

I

. fLlrni,Shedb"scdI on C

tda al.

e tg

pl

a at

-grat

03

P RIXId'4l

dt

50 III

%o

8Ia

60 4lCJ

30ra) atio 8 si RT

COBBLES

100 50 10 5 0.5GRAIN SITE IN MILLIMETERS

O.l 0.05 QOl 0.005

SILT OR CLAY

1000.001

SadI."'. No,

..'-24-3-7EIev 'dr tkIc4

210.0'2~0'otalcLaaaIScaod

Bro.:n well graded siltygra:el (Gh'-G:t) w/a littlecobbles

GRADATION CURVES

Nat wg6.0 35

PIPL

27 8

earOn arr3.S uC ear Ower~«alaIII, CP&L

I.ab; No. 145/393 (R Test)

A~ Plant Excavation

ammglaE Sam le No. VR-24-3-7

14 February 1975

EHG ..'.„".",. 2087 Plate 2

~

'\

.; ~ I aaIrISaIatQ:4 4a ~ o i wdkoa ~ ao

I

r

~ ~ ~

0CaS0

0

nI OC2 Ch

~ ~0 0A

~ ~

8 0Or

Ts 4I

TS

a~I

00

S

O

4

0

~ aX ~

4&ii

2 4 6Normal Stress, 0, T/sq ft

10

~o

Cl

Cl

0

Test No.

Water content

Void ratioSaturationry ens ys

1h cu ft

vo

So

yd

4.5 4 4.5

271 .270

135,6 135.7

4.6

. 272

135.5

~ ~

A

0 0

g A

Q 0A O

'al c2

n p%OO

0

e0

00 5 lo 15 20

Axial Strain, $

'Shear Str Pa te s

'Mater content

Void ratioSaturation

n ac pres-sure T s

Mater content

Void ratio

vc

cc

Sc

9.4 $ 9.2

.258 .255100.0 < 00.0 <

4.50 4.5094 4 92. 258 . 255

8.4

.233100.0~

4.508.4.233

20 0

tan e .364 .839Ool 0 ' T/sq

a

Notho4 ot oataoaIIoo

D Controlled stress

Controlled strain

incr priqc pstress T/sq ft 03Max deviatorstress, T/sq ft ( 1 3)max

1.00 2.001.45 1.99

Time to failure, min tfRate of strain,

rcent/min

150

0.10150

0.10~ Strain at(col o3)U)t de i o (cl 0 )

Initial diameter, in. go

Initial height, in. 8

14.87 . 14o86

1.45 l. 99

14.88 14.8832.00 32.00

4.004.49150

0.1014.93

4.4914.8832.00

35 PL 27

~~ l. See labclassifi-'at

on ata on

PI 8 Os 2.76 WtdoAvgearon arr s uc ear owerect Plant CP6L

Lab. No. 145/393Plant Excavation

TyPe of test R TyPe of sPecimen Remolded*

Brown well raded silty gravel (GW-GM) w/a little cobbles

2. +Specimens requested to Boring No. Sample No. VR-24-3"7

be remolded to 135.0 pcfry ens y a wa er

DeP h 210. 0'-225. 0 'ate 15 Feb 1975

KUAXXALCOHPRE!SION TEST REPORT

2089 (EK lf10 2 l902) Plate 3PIICVIOUS COITIONS AIIC OISOI CTC

TRAlVSLUCEN1'3

o 'rt ~ ~ot:rar,oa>a r r 'a, «cor ro a I or ~ Itr oq . r, <a< o> ~ s >»o

J

Hl.

CA

"C

8 f

P

1

~ ~ ~ ~ + v 'w> i + ~

D","AR:i"..'.Q'P T!IE AV.K, SOUTH

CC:PS C: Z GI:CHEERS, 611 SOUTH

ATLANTIC DIVISION LABORATORY,

COBB DR.,MARIETTA, GA. 30061

'

REQN. NO. CPL NO. H-02022W. 0. NO. 9051

~ ~

U.S. STANDAlD SIEVE OPENING fN INCHES U.S. STANDAlD SIEVE NUPABERS

b 4 4 2 Ihh I iA 6 5 3 A b 810141b 20 30 40 5070100I40200HYDROMETER

0

40

,.fter10

20

70

bO

Z 50

V~ 40

30

20

L: ta

rae.'t .

ationpecL?i

r e di

ecire olde

d ns1t

uc.tepc

to

30

9.0 >

500LJ

bo QIJ

70 <

IO

~r~ t

ghee 5

10

0500

coeetxs

100 SO

COAR5L

IO 5 0.5GlAIN SIZE AAIJ.IALETElS

co Abc HkDKJM SINE

0.1 0.05 0.01 0.005

SLT 0% CLAT

1000.001

Type of SpecimenBefore Test

3 I am in. Ht 17 ( 3 in. water content,w

Classi f icat ion;, '-l::l)M/a l.' feLL Gs 2. 76

Void Ratio, eo

Saturation, S

. 272

5

Wf

er

Sf

After Test

9.6. 272

5

~ltctShearon liarris Nuclear Pc':erP ant, OPAL

4S/ 9

Plant Excavation

si~rLt wo. VR-24-3-I

7 'lo= 0." r.-:

SAD rOF41 197!21 J': f 1964

ory oensity. 7d "2o 13.2 " N/sec

p,iriabI.ij!Constant Head PERXEA8ILITY TEST REPORT

14 Tcb 1975 ,","fo.o'-25.0'est

No. 1

Plate 4

'P- I'

~

/

L

DEPARTHEL T OP TIIE A."...'%i, SOUTIi ATLANTIC DEVXSTON LABORATORY,

CORPS OF E!;GI;:EERS, 611 SOUTH CQBB DR.,MRTETTA, CA. 30."61CPL '.:0. If-C 20" 214. 0. M. 9051

r ~

t

U.S. STANOARD SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMbERS

d 4 2 IYi I la Yi 5 3 4 8 810 14th 20 30 40 50 TO 100 I40 200HYtÃOMETER

0

~ ~

10

s ra a 20

" 80

X~ 50

40

30

io

Grad

Teseen

8 eqtte007. Sfat

r ep aced

r e -R placf Pe m~ "3'»

f.f eretlti! ad(c..

ll.3

18.736.3'l

21

10

cc

30

9

500V

eo trLJ

TO

80

0500

CCIES

100 50

COAt5fGRAVEL

10 5 0.5 0.1 0.05GRAIN SIZE MKLIMETERS

coktsf MtONM

0.01 0.005

Sa,t CÃ CLAY

1000.001

27 OLO

TyPe of SPec i<en Rc olded

Oi~ 13 86 in. Ht 17 ~ 63 in.rown ~-e, gzactc .;-. y graveTotal Classilication (G~'-GIl'jw a ll.litle

LI. Os 2.76

After TestSefore Test

water Content,w

Void Ratio, eo

Saturation, So

Ory Oensity, Td

S leal Dn ii:llris Is c leg rQIttoxo50 5wf Lab..;o. 145/393

plane Excavation

10.0

ef 0.2770.277

49 6 s sf 5AlltLe Igo, I R99.7 Klt4G HO.

13/>.8 lo/ft "zo Abri'e*cm/sec»n 26 pcb 1975 DLFTH ~

..0.0'--:"S0'AD

FORM I 97 I2I JULY I964

XIXXXX/Constant Head PERMEASIL I TY TEST REPORT LCS t fO ~

Plate 5

~,

«*tt

@IV i I K + fP K@V A Vt l%

DKI'ARTHEHT OF TiiE AR!.YtCo"ZS OF a;CZ:;EZRS, 61.1

SOUTV. mls.@AC DXVXST.O:i uZ"m™O"i:.,SCUT!1 COTE DR.,KLRXETZA, Gh. 3006'L

C".-7. '. O. 1'.-0"„C22M. 0. 50. 9051

~ r~

U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMbERS

6 4 3 2 I'h I ~A 6 h 3 4 6 810141620 30 40 5070100140200HYDROMETEk

'IO

eo r daeldion

fter G a at on20

70

Q~ 60

~ 50Z

40Used

on

p1 ced

I2

er" c

if.er

1.118.5

74.658.5

30 X9

50

0lJ60 9

yo <

20

10

N TE Tes

cn

s eques,o 5.0 p

80

0SOO

CONLRS

100 SO

GRAVEL

10 5 0.5 0.1 0.05 0.01 0.005GRAIN SIZE MRLIMETERS

SRT OR CLAY

100.001

Type of SpecimenBefore Test After Test

s.l:ar":1 > a. r Ai:-" 'a ~ ~ '- '

K)jKT 1; ('1 „T

TotalOiam 13.86 in. Ht 17.63 in.

C 1 assi f i cat ion (G;;-Gp!}~/a 1$ t tipLL 35 2. 76

water Content,w

Void Ratio. eo

Saturation, 5

5.8

0.286

56.0

Wf

ef

Sf

10. 1 s

0.286

97.1 s 00tHG HQ. SAlltgt go A 'i ~ i 3

Lab. '.io. 145/393

Plane. Excavation

PI. 27 010 Ory Oensity. 133-9 1 bi f 1 "20 Above* c m/ s ec 10 Peb 1975 OCAYHEI 210.0 -:25.'

Ais i .0 ~

SAD FORM 197121 JULY 1964

X~AAi'.GCe t Cons t ant Head P ERNEAB I L I TY TEST REPORT

plate 6

7