REPORT OF PRELIMINARY SUBSURFACE …enterpriserealtyservices.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/8073... · Fill Placement 7 ... glass jars and returned to the ECS laboratory for ... Groundwater

REPORT OF PRELIMINARY

SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION,

LABORATORY TESTING AND

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING ANALYSES

Maryland Masonic Home

Cockeysville, Baltimore County, Maryland

ECS Project No. 8073

Prepared For

BALTIMORE LAND DESIGN GROUP, INC.

230 SCHILLING CIRCLE

SUITE 364

HUNT VALLEY, MD 21031

May 3, 2016

May 3, 2016 Mr. Valek Zarski Baltimore Land Design Group, Inc. 230 Schilling Circle Suite 364 Hunt Valley, MD 21031

ECS Project No. 02-8073 Reference: Report of Preliminary Subsurface Exploration, Laboratory Testing and

Geotechnical Engineering Analyses, Maryland Masonic Home, Cockeysville, Baltimore County, Maryland

Dear Mr. Zarski: ECS Mid-Atlantic, LLC (ECS) has completed the preliminary geotechnical investigation for the above-referenced project. This work was performed in accordance with our proposal No. 02-16603-P, dated February 29, 2016. This report contains a discussion of our current understanding of the proposed development, the subsurface exploration procedures employed, the exploration and laboratory test results, and our preliminary recommendations for the design and construction of the geotechnical aspects of the proposed development. It has been our pleasure to be of service to Baltimore Land Design Group, Inc. on this project. We would appreciate the opportunity to continue our role as Geotechnical Engineer of Record during final design and subsequent construction. If you have any questions with regard to the information contained in the enclosed report, or if we can be of further assistance to you during the planning or construction phases of the project, please contact us. Most sincerely,

ECS MID-ATLANTIC, LLC

Zachary Adcock, E.I.T. Hasan M. Aboumatar, Ph.D., P.E. Project Manager Principal Engineer

Professional Certification I hereby certify that these documents were prepared or approved by me, and that I am a duly licensed professional engineer under the laws of the State of Maryland.

License No 29553. Expiration Date: 12/31/2017

REPORT OF PRELIMINARY

SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION,

LABORATORY TESTING AND

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING ANALYSES


Cockeysville, Baltimore County, Maryland

ECS Project No. 8073

Prepared for:

BALTIMORE LAND DESIGN GROUP, INC.

230 SCHILLING CIRCLE

SUITE 364

HUNT VALLEY, MD 21031

Submitted by:

ECS Mid-Atlantic, LLC

1340 Charwood Road, Suite A

Hanover, Maryland 21076-3117

April 4, 2016

MARYLAND MASONIC HOME PRELIMINARY STUDY

TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE

INTRODUCTION 1

Project Location 1 Project and Site Description 1 Scope of Services 1

EXPLORATION PROCEDURES 2

Subsurface Exploration Procedures 2 Laboratory Testing Program 3

EXPLORATION RESULTS 3

Geologic Conditions 3 Water Level Observations 4

ANALYSES AND PRELIMINARY RECOMMENDATIONS 5

5 5 6

Building Foundations Ground-Supported Floor Slabs Seismic Site Design Earthwork Operations 6

Subgrade Preparation 6 7 Fill Placement

Construction Considerations 8

CLOSING 9

APPENDIX

MARYLAND MASONIC HOME PRELIMINARY STUDY

INTRODUCTION

Project Location

The project site is adjacent to 307 International Circle in the Cockeysville area of Baltimore County, Maryland. A Site Location Diagram, depicting the approximate location of the project site, is provided in the Appendix.

Project and Site Description

Our understanding of the project is based on the information contained in your email dated February 25, 2016, which included an Existing Utility Locations Plan, as prepared by Baltimore Land Design Group (BLDG) and dated February 2016. ECS proposed boring locations, and BLDG selected another location, as well as confirmed the ECS selected locations.

The site is currently undeveloped, with both tree cover and open grass areas. In addition, there are BGE utility easements located to the northeast of 307 International Circle. Based on discussions with you and review of the marked up Existing Utility Locations Plan, we understand that the proposed development may consist of: an office or residential building at the southeast portion of the site; a 5- to 6-story office building with parking deck, and a 4 story apartment building at the northeast portion of the site; and a 4 story office building at the northern portion of the site. The existing grades at the site range from EL 420 to EL 500. Proposed finished grades, building locations, and structural loading, were not available at the time this report was prepared. The subsurface exploration is preliminary, and a final geotechnical study should be performed once the final grades and layouts have been established.

Scope of Services

Our scope of services included drilling twelve (12) soil borings in general accordance with ASTM D 1586 standards. The borings were drilled to a depth of 30 feet below existing grades, each, or until auger and/or spoon refusal due to the presence of rock. The borings were distributed as follows: Borings B-1 through B-3 was drilled for a possible office or apartment building; Borings B-4 through B-8 were drilled for a possible 5- to 6-story office building with parking deck, and possible 4 story apartment building; and borings B-9 through B-12 were drilled for a possible 4 story office building.

The scope of services also included performing classifications of the recovered soil samples in our laboratory, performing limited laboratory testing of selected samples, conducting various engineering analyses, and providing this report. This report contains the following information:

Maryland Masonic Home Preliminary Study

ECS Job No. 02-8073

May 3, 2016

Page 2

a. Information regarding site conditions, including surface drainage, geology, and special site features;

b. Descriptions of the field exploration and laboratory testing procedures used;

c. Boring logs in accordance with the standard practice of geotechnical engineers, showing subsurface strata and descriptions, groundwater conditions, and results of field tests;

d. A Site Vicinity Map, a Boring Location Plan, and pertinent Reference Sheets;

e. Preliminary Recommendations for allowable bearing pressure for conventional spread footing foundations and estimates of predicted foundation settlement;

f. Evaluation of the subsurface profile to provide preliminary recommendations for the seismic soil site classification per IBC 2012; and

g. Preliminary Recommendations for slab-on-grade construction, including subgrade improvements, as required;

EXPLORATION PROCEDURES

Subsurface Exploration Procedures The soil borings were drilled with an ATV-mounted drill rig, using rotary drilling methods and continuous-flight, hollow-stem augers to advance the boreholes. Drilling fluid was not used during advancement of the boreholes. Representative soil samples were obtained by means of the split-barrel sampling procedure in general accordance with ASTM D 1586. In the soil sampling procedure, a 2-inch O.D. split-barrel sampler is driven into the soil a distance of 18 inches by means of a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches. The number of hammer blows required to drive the sampler through the final 12-inch interval is termed the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) value, blow count, or N-value, and is indicated for each sample on the Boring Logs, contained in the Appendix of this report. N-values derived from the Standard Penetration Test procedure can be used to provide indications of the in-place relative densities of granular soil types and, in a less reliable way, of the in-place consistencies of cohesive soil types. The indications of relative densities and consistencies are qualitative, since many factors can influence N-values and prevent direct correlations, including differences among drill crews, drill rigs, drilling procedures, and hammer-rod-sampler assemblies. In addition, N-values from Standard Penetration Tests performed in fine-grained granular soils below groundwater levels sometimes can result in erroneous information regarding the in-situ conditions of those soils. A field log of the subsurface conditions encountered in each boring was maintained by the Drill Crew during the drilling operations. After recovery, each boring sample was removed from the sampler and visually classified. Representative portions of the soil samples were then sealed in glass jars and returned to the ECS laboratory for further examination and possible laboratory testing. The subsurface conditions encountered at the site are further discussed in a later section of this report.


ECS Job No. 02-8073

May 3, 2016

Page 3

The boring locations were staked in the field by a representative from MTPLS, and elevations were provided to us by MTPLS.

Laboratory Testing Program The laboratory testing program included visual classifications of all soil samples by an experienced geotechnical engineer. The classifications were based on texture and plasticity in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). A brief explanation of the USCS is included in the Appendix of this report. The USCS group symbol for each soil type is indicated in parentheses following the soil descriptions on the boring logs. The various soil types were grouped into the major zones (strata) noted on the boring logs. The stratification lines designating the interfaces between earth materials on the boring logs are approximate. In situ, these transitions will likely be gradual. The limited laboratory testing program included index property tests, such as moisture contents, Atterberg Limits, percent passing the No. 200 sieve on selected boring samples to estimate engineering properties of the soils and to help verify the visual classifications. The results of the laboratory testing are included in the Appendix of this report. The soil samples will be retained in our laboratory for a period of 60 days, after which, the samples will be discarded unless other instructions are received as to the disposition.

EXPLORATION RESULTS

Geologic Conditions project site is located within the Piedmont Physiographic Province. Based on the results of the test borings and a review of the Geologic Map of the Cockeysville Quadrangle, Maryland, dated 1975, the natural soils at the project site are generally described as the Cockeysville Marble (cld) which are described as:

“Layered metadolostone member. Pure, white, metadolostone interlayered on a scale of several decimeters with dark metadolostone containing silicate minerals, mainly diopside (commonly as stubby porphyroblasts), tremolite, phlogopite, and quartz. The darker metadolostone locally contains small patches of calcite (less than one cm in longest dimension), and, in the northern body accessory pyrite. Many outcrops in the northern body are partially disintegrated to dolomite sand.”

Subsurface Conditions In general, the subsurface conditions encountered during our field exploration consisted of 2 to 7 inches of topsoil, overlying natural soils. A brief description of the soils encountered is presented in the following paragraphs. More detailed descriptions are provided on the boring logs in the Appendix.


ECS Job No. 02-8073

May 3, 2016

Page 4

Natural soils were encountered below the surficial materials in all borings. The natural soils generally consisted of SILT (ML), Clayey SILT (ML/CL), Clayey SAND (SC), CLAY (CL/CH), Silty SAND (SM),SAND (SP), Silty CLAY (CL/ML), and Sandy SILT (ML) soil types.N-values recorded in the granular natural soils were noted to range from 6 blows per foot (bpf) to more than 50 bpf, indicating loose to very dense relative densities. N-values recorded in the cohesive natural soils were noted to range from 3 bpf to more than 50 bpf, indicating very soft to very hard relative consistencies. Material considered to be decomposed rock was encountered below the natural soils. Decomposed Rock is typically defined as natural materials that exhibit N-values of 60 bpf or more. These materials can possess the parent rock type qualities and structure and may require rock excavation methods, such as hoe ramming or blasting for removal. Auger refusal due to bedrock or relatively massive rock was encountered in Borings B-2, B-4 through B-9, B-11, and B-12 at depths ranging from approximately 2 feet to 28.83 feet below existing grade, or approximately EL 443 to EL 479. More detailed descriptions of the encountered subsurface conditions are provided on the boring logs in the Appendix.

Water Level Observations Groundwater level observations were made in each of the boreholes during the drilling operations and at completion of drilling operations, both before and after removal of the drilling augers. Cave-in levels for the open boreholes were observed during water level observations in the various borings, following removal of the drilling augers. The groundwater levels and the cave-in levels for each boring are shown on the Boring Logs presented in the Appendix. Groundwater was not encountered during drilling to the depths explored. After completion, cave-in depths were measured in the borings and ranged from 1.0 feet to 21.5 feet below existing grades. The absence or presence of groundwater in the borings reflects the conditions at the time of the subsurface exploration only. Fluctuations in the locations of groundwater tables or the presence of perched water levels could occur as a result of seasonal variations in evaporation, precipitation, surface water run-off, and other factors. Therefore, water levels at future times could vary from those observed at the time of the borings.


ECS Job No. 02-8073

May 3, 2016

Page 5

ANALYSES AND PRELIMINARY RECOMMENDATIONS

General Foundation Considerations Based on the provided information, we understand that the proposed development may consist of: an office or residential building at the southeast portion of the site; a 5-6 story office building with parking deck, and a 4 story apartment building at the northeast portion of the site; and a 4 story office building at the northern portion of the site. The existing grades at the site range from EL 420 to EL 500. Proposed finished grades, building locations, and structural loading, were not available at the time this proposal was prepared. Therefore, the subsurface exploration is considered preliminary, and a final geotechnical study should be performed once the final grades and layouts have been established. Based on our understanding of the proposed construction and the results of the preliminary subsurface exploration, it is feasible to support the proposed structures on shallow spread footings. However, the maximum column loads and final grading will be an important factor in the final analyses. For this preliminary analysis we have assumed maximum column loads on the order of 550 kips, and that minor grading at the boring locations. Our analyses indicated that for preliminary foundation design, the footings may be designed for a net allowable soil bearing pressure ranging between 2,500 and 3,000 pounds per square foot (psf). The net allowable soil bearing pressure refers to the pressure which can be transmitted to the foundation bearing soils in excess of the final overburden pressure at the base of a footing. We estimate that total settlements of individual footings should be less than 1 inch. Maximum differential settlements within the proposed structure are not expected to be greater than approximately ½ inch over a horizontal distance of 30 feet. If higher loads are anticipated and depending on the final grades ground improvement may be necessary for some structures to improve the bearing capacity and limit the total and differential settlements to within the typically accepted range of 1 inch and ½ inch, respectively. In addition, bedrock or relatively massive rock was encountered in Borings B-2, B-4 through B-9, B-11, and B-12 at depths ranging from approximately 2 feet to 28.83 feet below existing grade, or approximately EL 443 to EL 479. These materials can possess the parent rock type qualities and structure and may require rock excavation methods, such as hoe ramming or blasting for removal, depending on the proposed footing elevations.

Ground-Supported Floor Slabs Floor slabs may be ground-supported on natural soils or new engineered fill soils, provided that the subgrades are prepared in accordance with the recommendations in the sections entitled Subgrade Preparation and Fill Placement. It is important that the slab subgrade be firm and stable before the placement of the granular subbase materials, the moisture barrier, and the concrete. The slab subgrades should be thoroughly proofrolled with suitable equipment and/or probed and observed by a qualified representative of the Geotechnical Engineer in an effort to detect unstable or otherwise unacceptable soil conditions.


ECS Job No. 02-8073

May 3, 2016

Page 6

Proofrolling should be concentrated in those areas where any wall and utility backfill have been placed. Soils in any excessively unstable areas should be undercut and replaced with new engineered fill, as determined by the Geotechnical Engineer. Recommendations for construction of engineered fill are presented in a later report section.

Seismic Site Design Section 1613.3.2 of the IBC 2012 refers to Chapter 20 of ASCE7 for seismic site classification, which is based on various criteria, one of which is the Standard Penetration Resistance, Nbar, derived from the Standard Penetration Test Procedure (ASTM D-1586). ASCE7 Table 20.3.1 provides correlations for Site Classes C, D, and E with various ranges of Nbar to be calculated for the top 100 feet of the subsurface materials at a site in accordance with procedures described in Section 20.4.2 of ASCE7. In addition, the table presents criteria related to various soil properties for Site Classes E and F. ECS has used Table 20.3.1 of ASCE7 and the procedures outlined in Section 20.4.2 of ASCE7 to evaluate the Site Class for this project site. Based on our preliminary subsurface exploration results, it appears that the average Nbar value should be between 15 and 50 blows per foot over a depth of 100 ft. This Nbar places the project site within the Site Classification of D, according to Table 20.3.1 of ASCE7.

Earthwork Operations Subgrade Preparation Subgrade preparation should generally include the stripping of any unsuitable surface materials from the areas to be developed. Caution should be taken when stripping unsuitable materials so as not to mix these materials with otherwise suitable subgrade soils. It is recommended that the stripping of topsoil or other deleterious materials be extended to a minimum of 5 feet beyond the building and pavement limits. A qualified representative of the Geotechnical Engineer should observe the removal operations to determine the necessary horizontal and vertical limits of excavation. The actual depths, quantities, and quality of surface materials must be determined during the stripping operations. Prior to the placement of any new fill materials or subbase materials for foundations, slabs, or pavements, a qualified representative of the Geotechnical Engineer should observe the exposed subgrade soils. At that time, the exposed soils should be thoroughly proofrolled by a vehicle having an axle load of at least 10 tons, such as a loaded, tandem-axle dump truck. This proofrolling procedure is intended to assist in identifying any unstable materials that may need to be improved in place or removed. If areas exist that are not accessible for proofrolling operations, the Geotechnical Engineer should evaluate the soils at the exposed subgrade levels by conducting hand auger borings and Dynamic Cone Penetrometer (DCP) tests.


ECS Job No. 02-8073

May 3, 2016

Page 7

Fill Placement

Upon achieving competent subgrade materials, the exposed soils should be filled, where appropriate, to planned building subgrade levels with an approved controlled, compacted fill. All fill and backfill placed within the building and pavement areas should be placed in lifts not exceeding 8-inches in loose thickness and moisture conditioned to within 2 percentage points of the optimum moisture content. We recommend that the lifts be compacted to at least 95 percent of their maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D 698, Standard Proctor, for the full depth of the fill; however, under the parking garage the compaction level should be 98 percent of their maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D 698, Standard Proctor. It should be noted that prior to the commencement of fill operations and/or utilization of any off-site borrow materials, the Geotechnical Engineer should be provided with representative samples in order to determine the material’s suitability for use in a controlled compacted fill and to develop moisture-density relationships. All non-select type soils to be used as controlled fill should be approved inorganic materials, free of debris, and have a liquid limit and plasticity index less than 40 and 20, respectively. In order to expedite the earthwork operations, we recommend where off-site borrow materials are required, those materials be comprised of select granular materials which will provide suitable support, and be easily compacted and free draining. Based on our review of the soil types encountered in the test borings conducted at this site, it is our opinion that most of the soil types encountered are suitable for reuse as fill at this site. The footprint of all proposed structures should be well defined, including the limits of the fill zones at the time of fill placement. Grade controls should be maintained throughout the filling operations. All filling operations should be observed on a full-time basis by a qualified soils technician to determine that minimum compaction requirements are being achieved. A minimum of one compaction test per 2,500 square foot area should be made for each lift. The elevation and location of the tests should be clearly identified at the time of fill placement. Compaction equipment suitable to the soil type used as fill should be selected to compact the fill. Theoretically, any equipment type can be used as long as the required density is achieved. Ideally, a steel drum roller should be used for compacting and sealing the surface soils. All areas receiving fill should be graded to facilitate positive drainage away from the building pads and pavement areas to maintain subgrade conditions free of water associated with precipitation and surface run-off. Fill materials should not be placed on frozen soils or frost-heaved soils and/or soils, which have been recently subjected to precipitation. All frozen soils should be removed prior to continuation of fill operations. Borrow fill materials, if required, should not contain frozen materials at the time of placement. All frost-heaved soils should be removed prior to placement of controlled, compacted fill, granular subbase materials, foundation or slab concrete, and asphalt pavement materials. Soil bridging lifts within the proposed building limits should not be used since excessive settlement of the structure can occur.


ECS Job No. 02-8073

May 3, 2016

Page 8

Construction Considerations The near-surface, on-site soils contain appreciable amounts of fines and will be very sensitive to moisture increases and to construction disturbance. Construction activities in the presence of excessive moisture can lead to softening of the subgrade soils and loss of bearing capacity. Therefore, it will be prudent to schedule earthwork operations during the warmer and drier seasons of the year that generally occur from late spring to early fall. Measures should also be taken to limit site disturbance, especially from rubber-tired heavy construction equipment, and to provide for drainage of surface water away from areas being developed. It will be advisable to designate construction traffic areas to limit areas of disturbance and to prevent construction traffic from excessively degrading sensitive subgrade soils over large portions of the site. A firm working surface for the placement of engineered fill should be established prior to construction of new fills. The moisture content of the fill soils at the time of placement should be carefully controlled to ensure that the required compaction effort can be achieved without excessive pumping or movement of the fill mass. In the event that the earthwork operations are accomplished during the cooler and wetter periods of the year, delays and additional costs should be anticipated. At these times, reduction of soil moisture may need to be accomplished by a combination of mechanical manipulation and the use of chemical additives, such as lime or cement, in order to lower moisture contents to levels appropriate for compaction. Because the on-site soils are moisture-sensitive and are susceptible to loss of strength upon exposure to precipitation during construction activity, all foundation excavations must be protected to prevent the disturbance of the subgrade materials and to minimize any potential loss of support capacity. Foundation concrete generally should be placed for foundations during the same day that the foundation excavations are made and approved. Should excavating and placing the foundation concrete the same day not be practical, we recommend that a concrete mud mat, 2 to 3 inches thick, be placed to protect the subgrade soils from moisture changes and disturbance. If protection of the soils is not provided, then undercutting of softened or loosened soils may be necessary prior to the placement of reinforcing steel and foundation concrete. Prior to the placement of any foundation concrete or mud mat, the subgrade soils must be carefully examined and tested by a qualified representative of the Geotechnical Engineer to confirm the availability of the design soil bearing capacity. To minimize disturbance to the subgrade soils during excavation, we recommend that a bucket without scarifying teeth, in addition to hand excavation methods, be used during the final phases of the excavation for the foundations. Any cuts or excavations associated with building and utility excavations may require forming or bracing, slope flattening or other physical measures to control sloughing and/or to prevent slope failures. An examination of the applicable codes (e.g. OSHA) should be made by the appropriate Contractor to ensure that adequate protection of the excavations and trench walls is provided.


ECS Job No. 02-8073

May 3, 2016

Page 9

The surface soils contain fines and are considered erodible. The Contractor should provide and maintain good site drainage during earthwork operations to help to maintain the integrity of the surface soils. All erosion and sedimentation shall be controlled in accordance with sound engineering practice and current local requirements. Surface water should be directed away from the construction area, and the work area should be sloped at gradients of 1 to 2 percent to reduce the potential for ponding water and the subsequent saturation of the surface soils.

CLOSING

This report has been prepared to provide Baltimore Land Design Group, Inc. and the Design Team with preliminary subsurface information and evaluations and recommendations to guide geotechnical-related design and construction for development of the site. The report scope is limited to this specific project and the location described. The project description represents our current understanding of the significant aspects of the proposed development relevant to geotechnical considerations for the project. The evaluations and preliminary recommendations presented in this report are, of necessity, based on the information made available to us at the time of the actual writing of the report and the site conditions, surface and subsurface, that existed at the time the exploratory borings were drilled. Further assumption has been made that the limited exploratory borings, in relation both to the aerial extent of the site and to depth, are representative of general subsurface conditions across the site. If subsurface conditions are encountered that differ significantly from those reported herein, the Geotechnical Engineer should be notified immediately so that the analyses and recommendations presented in this report can be reviewed for validity. Should there be significant changes to the proposed construction; ECS may need to review the changes to determine whether the evaluations and recommendations of this report will remain valid. ECS should be provided with appropriate plans and other information as project design progresses, so that we can review the information and provide additional geotechnical exploration, testing analyses, and guidance, as needed. In addition, the Geotechnical Engineer should be retained to prepare, or at least to review, the earthwork specifications, to assure that the recommendations of the final report have been properly interpreted and included in the construction documents.

APPENDIX

Site Location Diagram

Unified Soil Classification System

Laboratory Test Results

Reference Notes For Boring Logs

Boring Logs

Boring Location Plan

Subsurface Profiles

1 " = 1,500 '

3/2/2016

Service Layer Credits: Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors

²

0 740 1,480 2,220 2,960370ft

ENGINEER

SCALE

02:80731 OF 1

PROJECT NO.

SHEET

DATEBLDG

MARYLAND MASONIC HOME

COCKEYSVILLE, MD

Site Location Diagram

UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (ASTM D 2487)

Major Divisions Group

Symbols Typical Names Laboratory Classification Criteria

GW

Well-graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or no

fines

Cu = D60/D10 greater than 4

Cc = (D30)2/(D10xD60) between 1 and 3

Cle

an g

ravels

(L

ittle o

r no

fines)

GP

Poorly graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or

no fines

Not meeting all gradation requirements for GW

d

GMa

u

Silty gravels, gravel-sand mixtures

Atterberg limits below “A” line or P.I. less than 4

Gra

vels

(M

ore

than h

alf o

f coars

e fra

ction is

larg

er

than N

o. 4 s

ieve s

ize)

Gra

vels

with fin

es

(Appre

cia

ble

am

ount of

fines)

GC

Clayey gravels, gravel-sand-clay mixtures

Atterberg limits below “A” line or P.I. less than 7

Above “A” line with P.I.

between 4 and 7 are borderline cases requiring use of dual symbols

SW

Well-graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines

Cu = D60/D10 greater than 6 Cc = (D30)

2/(D10xD60) between 1 and 3

Cle

an s

ands

(Little o

r no

fines)

SP

Poorly graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines

Not meeting all gradation requirements for SW

d

SMa

u

Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures

Atterberg limits above “A” line

or P.I. less than 4

Coars

e-g

rain

ed s

oils

(M

ore

than h

alf o

f m

ate

rial is

larg

er

than N

o. 200 S

ieve s

ize)

Sands

(More

than h

alf o

f coars

e fra

ction is

sm

alle

r th

an N

o. 4 s

ieve s

ize)

Sands w

ith fin

es

(Appre

cia

ble

am

ount o

f

fines)

SC

Clayey sands, sand-clay mixtures

Dete

rmin

e p

erc

enta

ges o

f sand a

nd g

ravel fr

om

gra

in-s

ize c

urv

e.

Dependin

g o

n p

erc

enta

ge o

f fines (

fraction s

malle

r th

an

No. 200 s

ieve s

ize),

coars

e-g

rain

ed s

oils

are

cla

ssifie

d a

s follo

ws:

Less than 5

perc

ent

GW

, G

P, S

W, S

P

More

than 1

2 p

erc

ent

G

M, G

C, S

M, S

C

5 to 1

2 p

erc

ent B

ord

erl

ine c

ases r

equirin

g d

ual sym

bols

b

Atterberg limits above “A” line with P.I. greater than 7

Limits plotting in CL-ML zone with P.I. between 4 and 7 are borderline

cases requiring use of dual symbols

ML

Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock flour, silty or clayey fine sands, or clayey

silts with slight plasticity

CL

Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, gravelly

clays, sandy clays, silty clays, lean clays

Silt

s a

nd c

lays

(Liq

uid

lim

it less than 5

0)

OL Organic silts and organic silty

clays of low plasticity

MH

Inorganic silts, micaceous or

diatomaceous fine sandy or silty soils, elastic silts

CH

Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays

Silt

s a

nd c

lays

(Liq

uid

lim

it g

reate

r th

an 5

0)

OH

Organic clays of medium to high plasticity, organic silts

Fin

e-g

rain

ed s

oils

(M

ore

than h

alf m

ate

ria

l is

sm

alle

r th

an N

o. 200 S

ieve)

Hig

hly

Org

anic

soils

Pt

Peat and other highly organic soils

Plasticity Chart

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Liquid Limit

Plas

ticity

Inde

x

"A" line

CH

MH and OH

CL

ML and OLCL-ML

a Division of GM and SM groups into subdivisions of d and u are for roads and airfields only. Subdivision is based on Atterberg limits; suffix d used when

L.L. is 28 or less and the P.I. is 6 or less; the suffix u used when L.L. is greater than 28. b Borderline classifications, used for soils possessing characteristics of two groups, are designated by combinations of group symbols. For example:

GW-GC,well-graded gravel-sand mixture with clay binder. (From Table 2.16 - Winterkorn and Fang, 1975)

B-1

S-3

5.0

0 -

6.5

020

.2

S-4

8.5

0 -

10.0

019

.9

S-5

13

.50 -

15.0

016

.9

S-6

18

.50 -

20.0

024

.8

B-3

S-2

2.5

0 -

4.0

011

.9

S-3

5.0

0 -

6.5

015

.2

S-4

8.5

0 -

10.0

024

.6

S-5

13

.50 -

15.0

027

.5S

M37

NP

NP

43.7

S-6

18

.50 -

20.0

018

.1

B-4

S-2

2.5

0 -

4.0

028

.7

S-3

5.0

0 -

6.5

031

.7

S-4

8.5

0 -

10.0

017

.0

S-5

13

.50 -

15.0

024

.7

S-6

18

.50 -

20.0

020

.1

B-5

S-2

2.5

0 -

4.0

023

.8

S-3

5.0

0 -

6.5

028

.8

S-4

8.5

0 -

10.0

019

.9

S-5

13

.50 -

15.0

017

.7

S-6

18

.50 -

20.0

03.0

B-7

S-2

2.5

0 -

4.0

025

.3

S-4

8.5

0 -

10.0

018

.7

S-5

13

.50 -

13.7

57.8

S-6

18

.50 -

20.0

029

.4

Lab

ora

tory

Te

sti

ng

Su

mm

ary

No

tes:

1.

AS

TM

D 2

21

6,

2.

AS

TM

D 2

48

7,

3.

AS

TM

D 4

318

, 4

. A

ST

M D

11

40,

5.

Se

e t

est

rep

ort

s f

or

test

me

tho

d,

6.

Se

e t

est

rep

ort

s f

or

test

meth

od

De

fin

itio

ns

:M

C:

Mo

istu

re C

on

ten

t, S

oil

Typ

e:

US

CS

(U

nifie

d S

oil

Cla

ssific

atio

n S

yste

m),

LL

: L

iqu

id L

imit,

PL

: P

lastic L

imit,

PI:

Pla

sticity I

nde

x,

CB

R:

Ca

lifo

rnia

Be

ari

ng

Ra

tio

, O

C:

Org

an

ic C

on

ten

t (A

ST

M D

297

4)

Pro

jec

t N

o.

80

73

Pro

jec

t N

am

e:

Ma

ryla

nd

Mas

on

ic H

om

e

PM

:Z

ac

hary

L. A

dc

oc

k

PE

:H

as

an

M.

Ab

ou

ma

tar

Pri

nte

d O

n:

Tu

es

da

y,

May

03

, 2

016

Sam

ple

So

urc

eS

am

ple

Nu

mb

er

De

pth

(feet)

MC

1

(%)

So

ilT

yp

e2

LL

Att

erb

erg

Lim

its3

PL

PI

Perc

en

tP

assin

gN

o. 20

0S

ieve

4

Max

imu

mD

en

sit

y(p

cf)

Mo

istu

re -

De

ns

ity

(C

orr

.)5

Op

tim

um

Mo

istu

re(%

)

CB

RV

alu

e6

Oth

er

Pag

e 1

of

2

B-1

0

S-2

2.5

0 -

4.0

021

.7

S-3

5.0

0 -

6.5

021

.1

S-4

8.5

0 -

10.0

020

.7

S-5

13

.50 -

15.0

022

.1

S-6

18

.50 -

20.0

019

.2

B-1

1

S-2

2.5

0 -

4.0

022

.8S

M31

NP

NP

33.0

S-3

5.0

0 -

6.5

020

.3

S-4

8.5

0 -

10.0

022

.8

S-5

13

.50 -

15.0

013

.4

S-6

18

.50 -

20.0

015

.0

Lab

ora

tory

Te

sti

ng

Su

mm

ary

No

tes:

1.

AS

TM

D 2

21

6,

2.

AS

TM

D 2

48

7,

3.

AS

TM

D 4

318

, 4

. A

ST

M D

11

40,

5.

Se

e t

est

rep

ort

s f

or

test

me

tho

d,

6.

Se

e t

est

rep

ort

s f

or

test

meth

od

De

fin

itio

ns

:M

C:

Mo

istu

re C

on

ten

t, S

oil

Typ

e:

US

CS

(U

nifie

d S

oil

Cla

ssific

atio

n S

yste

m),

LL

: L

iqu

id L

imit,

PL

: P

lastic L

imit,

PI:

Pla

sticity I

nde

x,

CB

R:

Ca

lifo

rnia

Be

ari

ng

Ra

tio

, O

C:

Org

an

ic C

on

ten

t (A

ST

M D

297

4)

Pro

jec

t N

o.

80

73

Pro

jec

t N

am

e:

Ma

ryla

nd

Mas

on

ic H

om

e

PM

:Z

ac

hary

L. A

dc

oc

k

PE

:H

as

an

M.

Ab

ou

ma

tar

Pri

nte

d O

n:

Tu

es

da

y,

May

03

, 2

016

Sam

ple

So

urc

eS

am

ple

Nu

mb

er

De

pth

(feet)

MC

1

(%)

So

ilT

yp

e2

LL

Att

erb

erg

Lim

its3

PL

PI

Perc

en

tP

assin

gN

o. 20

0S

ieve

4

Max

imu

mD

en

sit

y(p

cf)

Mo

istu

re -

De

ns

ity

(C

orr

.)5

Op

tim

um

Mo

istu

re(%

)

CB

RV

alu

e6

Oth

er

Pag

e 2

of

2

REFERENCE NOTES FOR BORING LOGS I. Drilling Sampling Symbols

SS Split Spoon Sampler ST Shelby Tube Sampler RC Rock Core, NX, BX, AX PM Pressuremeter DC Dutch Cone Penetrometer RD Rock Bit Drilling BS Bulk Sample of Cuttings PA Power Auger (no sample) HSA Hollow Stem Auger WS Wash sample REC Rock Sample Recovery % RQD Rock Quality Designation %

II. Correlation of Penetration Resistances to Soil Properties

Standard Penetration (blows/ft) refers to the blows per foot of a 140 lb. hammer falling 30 inches on a 2-inch OD split-spoon sampler, as specified in ASTM D 1586. The blow count is commonly referred to as the N-value.

A. Non-Cohesive Soils (Silt, Sand, Gravel and Combinations)

Density Relative Properties Under 4 blows/ft Very Loose Adjective Form 12% to 49% 5 to 10 blows/ft Loose With 5% to 12%

11 to 30 blows/ft Medium Dense 31 to 50 blows/ft Dense Over 51 blows/ft Very Dense

Particle Size Identification

Boulders 8 inches or larger Cobbles 3 to 8 inches Gravel Coarse 1 to 3 inches Medium ½ to 1 inch Fine ¼ to ½ inch Sand Coarse 2.00 mm to ¼ inch (dia. of lead pencil) Medium 0.42 to 2.00 mm (dia. of broom straw) Fine 0.074 to 0.42 mm (dia. of human hair) Silt and Clay 0.0 to 0.074 mm (particles cannot be seen)

B. Cohesive Soils (Clay, Silt, and Combinations)

Blows/ft Consistency Unconfined

Comp. Strength Qp (tsf)

Degree of Plasticity

Plasticity Index

Under 2 Very Soft Under 0.25 None to slight 0 – 4 3 to 4 Soft 0.25-0.49 Slight 5 – 7 5 to 8 Medium Stiff 0.50-0.99 Medium 8 – 22

9 to 15 Stiff 1.00-1.99 High to Very High Over 22 16 to 30 Very Stiff 2.00-3.00 31 to 50 Hard 4.00–8.00 Over 51 Very Hard Over 8.00

III. Water Level Measurement Symbols

WL Water Level BCR Before Casing Removal DCI Dry Cave-In WS While Sampling ACR After Casing Removal WCI Wet Cave-In WD While Drilling Est. Groundwater Level Est. Seasonal High GWT

The water levels are those levels actually measured in the borehole at the times indicated by the symbol. The measurements are relatively reliable when augering, without adding fluids, in a granular soil. In clay and plastic silts, the accurate determination of water levels may require several days for the water level to stabilize. In such cases, additional methods of measurement are generally applied.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

450

445

440

435

430

425

420

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

S-7

S-8

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

1

18

18

18

18

10

18

Topsoil Depth [6.00"]

(ML) SILT, Trace Clay, Dark Brown, Moist, Soft

(ML/CL) CLAYEY SILT, Rock Fragments, DarkBrown, Moist, Medium Stiff to Stiff

(ML) SANDY SILT, Brown, Moist, Very Stiff toStiff

END OF BORING @ 30'

113

423

234

212

222

1134

91012

669

4

5

7

3

4

7

22

15

CLIENT

Baltimore Land Design Group, Inc.

JOB #

02:8073

BORING #

B-1

SHEET

PROJECT NAME


ARCHITECT-ENGINEER

Baltimore Land Design Group, Inc.SITE LOCATION

International Circle, Cockeysville, Baltimore County, MDNORTHING EASTING STATION

THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES. IN-SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL.

WL DRY WS WD BORING STARTED 03/08/16 CAVE IN DEPTH 21.5' @ EOD

WL(BCR) WL(ACR) BORING COMPLETED 03/08/16 HAMMER TYPE Auto

WL DRY @ EOD RIG 45C Tk. FOREMAN B. SQUIER DRILLING METHOD HSADRILLING METHOD HSA

DE

PT

H (

FT

)

SA

MP

LE

NO

.

SA

MP

LE

TY

PE

SA

MP

LE

DIS

T.

(IN

)

RE

CO

VE

RY

(IN

)

SURFACE ELEVATION

DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL

WA

TE

R L

EV

ELS

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

FT

)

BLO

WS

/6"

10 20 30 40 50+

20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

1 2 3 4 5+

ENGLISH UNITS

BOTTOM OF CASING LOSS OF CIRCULATION

CALIBRATED PENETROMETER TONS/FT2

PLASTICLIMIT %

WATERCONTENT %

LIQUIDLIMIT %

ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION & RECOVERY

RQD% REC.%

STANDARD PENETRATIONBLOWS/FT450.43

1 OF 1

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

455

450

445

440

435

430

S-1 SS 18 14Topsoil Depth [4.00"]

(SC) CLAYEY SAND, Rock Fragments, Brownand Gray, Moist, Medium Dense

AUGER REFUSAL @ 2'

177

14

CLIENT


JOB #

02:8073

BORING #

B-2

SHEET

PROJECT NAME


ARCHITECT-ENGINEER







DE

PT

H (

FT

)

SA

MP

LE

NO

.

SA

MP

LE

TY

PE

SA

MP

LE

DIS

T.

(IN

)

RE

CO

VE

RY

(IN

)

SURFACE ELEVATION


WA

TE

R L

EV

ELS

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

FT

)

BLO

WS

/6"

10 20 30 40 50+

20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

1 2 3 4 5+

ENGLISH UNITS



PLASTICLIMIT %

WATERCONTENT %

LIQUIDLIMIT %


RQD% REC.%


1 OF 1

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

475

470

465

460

455

450

445

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

S-7

S-8

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

14

18

18

12

18

18

18


(ML) SILT WITH SAND, Dark Brown and Gray,Moist, Medium Stiff to Very Stiff

(CL/CH) LEAN TO FAT CLAY, Red, Moist, Soft

(SM) SILTY SAND, Rock Fragments, BrownishGray, Moist, Dense

(ML) SANDY SILT, Brown and Gray, Moist,Very Hard to Hard

END OF BORING @ 30.0'

124

2512

7915

2122

212

192221

142229

101419

6

17

24

14

3

43

51

33

CLIENT


JOB #

02:8073

BORING #

B-3

SHEET

PROJECT NAME


ARCHITECT-ENGINEER







DE

PT

H (

FT

)

SA

MP

LE

NO

.

SA

MP

LE

TY

PE

SA

MP

LE

DIS

T.

(IN

)

RE

CO

VE

RY

(IN

)

SURFACE ELEVATION


WA

TE

R L

EV

ELS

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

FT

)

BLO

WS

/6"

10 20 30 40 50+

20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

1 2 3 4 5+

ENGLISH UNITS



PLASTICLIMIT %

WATERCONTENT %

LIQUIDLIMIT %


RQD% REC.%


1 OF 1

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

490

485

480

475

470

465

460

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

S-7

S-8

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

18

18

18

18

18

18

12

1

10

18

18

18

18

18

12

1


(ML/CL) CLAYEY SILT, Trace Sand, OrangishBrown, Moist, Medium Stiff, Contains Organics

(SM) SILTY SAND, Trace Clay, Dark Brown,Moist, Loose

(SM) SILTY SAND, Dark Brown and Gray,Moist, Loose to Medium Dense

(ML) SILT, Dark Brownish Gray, Moist, Stiff toHard

(ML) DECOMPOSED ROCK SAMPLED ASSILT, Dark Brown, Moist, Very Hard

SPOON REFUSAL @ 28.58'

123

234

335

468

368

161819

1750/6

50/1

5

7

8

14

14

37

50/6

50/1

CLIENT


JOB #

02:8073

BORING #

B-4

SHEET

PROJECT NAME


ARCHITECT-ENGINEER







DE

PT

H (

FT

)

SA

MP

LE

NO

.

SA

MP

LE

TY

PE

SA

MP

LE

DIS

T.

(IN

)

RE

CO

VE

RY

(IN

)

SURFACE ELEVATION


WA

TE

R L

EV

ELS

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

FT

)

BLO

WS

/6"

10 20 30 40 50+

20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

1 2 3 4 5+

ENGLISH UNITS



PLASTICLIMIT %

WATERCONTENT %

LIQUIDLIMIT %


RQD% REC.%


1 OF 1

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

480

475

470

465

460

455

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

S-7

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

18

18

18

18

18

18

1

18

18

18

18

18

18

1


(ML/CL) CLAYEY SILT, Brown, Moist, MediumStiff

(CL/ML) SILTY CLAY, Brown, Moist, MediumStiff to Stiff

(SM) SILTY SAND, Brown and Gray, Moist,Medium Dense, Contains Mica

(SP-SM) DECOMPOSED ROCK SAMPLED ASSAND WITH SILT, Rock Fragments, Dark Gray,Moist, Very Dense

AUGER REFUSAL @ 22.38'

333

344

3312

898

18912

313130

50/1

6

8

15

17

21

61

50/1

CLIENT


JOB #

02:8073

BORING #

B-5

SHEET

PROJECT NAME


ARCHITECT-ENGINEER







DE

PT

H (

FT

)

SA

MP

LE

NO

.

SA

MP

LE

TY

PE

SA

MP

LE

DIS

T.

(IN

)

RE

CO

VE

RY

(IN

)

SURFACE ELEVATION


WA

TE

R L

EV

ELS

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

FT

)

BLO

WS

/6"

10 20 30 40 50+

20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

1 2 3 4 5+

ENGLISH UNITS



PLASTICLIMIT %

WATERCONTENT %

LIQUIDLIMIT %


RQD% REC.%


1 OF 1

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

475

470

465

460

455

450

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

S-7

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

18

18

18

18

18

11

1

18

18

18

18

18

11

1


(ML) SANDY SILT, Dark Brown, Moist, MediumStiff, Contains Mica

(SM) SILTY SAND, Orangish Brown and Tan,Moist, Loose to Dense, Contains Mica

(ML) DECOMPOSED ROCK SAMPLED ASSANDY SILT, Rock Fragments, Dark Brown,Moist, Very Hard


232

565

435

221920

132225

3350/5

50/1

5

11

8

39

47

50/5

50/1

CLIENT


JOB #

02:8073

BORING #

B-6

SHEET

PROJECT NAME


ARCHITECT-ENGINEER







DE

PT

H (

FT

)

SA

MP

LE

NO

.

SA

MP

LE

TY

PE

SA

MP

LE

DIS

T.

(IN

)

RE

CO

VE

RY

(IN

)

SURFACE ELEVATION


WA

TE

R L

EV

ELS

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

FT

)

BLO

WS

/6"

10 20 30 40 50+

20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

1 2 3 4 5+

ENGLISH UNITS



PLASTICLIMIT %

WATERCONTENT %

LIQUIDLIMIT %


RQD% REC.%


1 OF 1

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

490

485

480

475

470

465

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

S-7

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

18

18

18

18

3

18

0

18

16

1

15

2

18

0


(ML/CL) SANDY CLAYEY SILT, RockFragments, Dark Brown, Moist, Medium Stiff toHard

(SP) DECOMPOSED ROCK SAMPLED ASSAND, Trace Silt, Rock Fragments, DarkBrown, Moist, Very Dense

(ML) DECOMPOSED ROCK SAMPLED ASSILT, Brown, Moist, Very Hard


124

241820

121519

151213

50/3

362528

50/0

6

38

34

25

50/3

53

50/0

CLIENT


JOB #

02:8073

BORING #

B-7

SHEET

PROJECT NAME


ARCHITECT-ENGINEER







DE

PT

H (

FT

)

SA

MP

LE

NO

.

SA

MP

LE

TY

PE

SA

MP

LE

DIS

T.

(IN

)

RE

CO

VE

RY

(IN

)

SURFACE ELEVATION


WA

TE

R L

EV

ELS

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

FT

)

BLO

WS

/6"

10 20 30 40 50+

20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

1 2 3 4 5+

ENGLISH UNITS



PLASTICLIMIT %

WATERCONTENT %

LIQUIDLIMIT %


RQD% REC.%


1 OF 1

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

470

465

460

455

450

445

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

18

18

18

6

1

0

10

18

18

6

1

0


(ML) SILT, Brownish Orange, Moist, Soft,Contains Organics

(ML) SANDY SILT, Reddish Brown and DarkBrown, Moist, Hard to Very Stiff

(SM) DECOMPOSED ROCK SAMPLED ASSILTY SAND, Rock Fragments, Gray, Moist,Very Dense


122

121419

9912

50/6

50/1

50/0

4

33

21

50/6

50/1

50/0

CLIENT


JOB #

02:8073

BORING #

B-8

SHEET

PROJECT NAME


ARCHITECT-ENGINEER




WL DRY WS WD BORING STARTED 03/07/16 CAVE IN DEPTH



DE

PT

H (

FT

)

SA

MP

LE

NO

.

SA

MP

LE

TY

PE

SA

MP

LE

DIS

T.

(IN

)

RE

CO

VE

RY

(IN

)

SURFACE ELEVATION


WA

TE

R L

EV

ELS

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

FT

)

BLO

WS

/6"

10 20 30 40 50+

20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

1 2 3 4 5+

ENGLISH UNITS



PLASTICLIMIT %

WATERCONTENT %

LIQUIDLIMIT %


RQD% REC.%


1 OF 1

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

485

480

475

470

465

460

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

SS

SS

SS

SS

8

18

18

1

8

18

18

1


(SP) SAND, Rock Fragments, Gray, Moist, VeryDense

(SP) SAND, Trace Silt, Rock Fragments, Gray,Moist, Medium Dense

(SP) DECOMPOSED ROCK SAMPLED ASSAND, Dark Gray, Moist, Very Dense


117/2

91112

293032

50/1

17/2

23

62

50/1

CLIENT


JOB #

02:8073

BORING #

B-9

SHEET

PROJECT NAME


ARCHITECT-ENGINEER







DE

PT

H (

FT

)

SA

MP

LE

NO

.

SA

MP

LE

TY

PE

SA

MP

LE

DIS

T.

(IN

)

RE

CO

VE

RY

(IN

)

SURFACE ELEVATION


WA

TE

R L

EV

ELS

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

FT

)

BLO

WS

/6"

10 20 30 40 50+

20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

1 2 3 4 5+

ENGLISH UNITS



PLASTICLIMIT %

WATERCONTENT %

LIQUIDLIMIT %


RQD% REC.%


1 OF 1

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

465

460

455

450

445

440

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

S-7

S-8

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

10

18

18

18

5

18

18

18


(ML/CL) CLAYEY SILT, Dark Brown, Moist,Medium Stiff

(ML/CL) CLAYEY SILT, Trace Sand, OrangishBrown, Moist, Stiff to Medium Stiff

(SM) SILTY SAND, Orangish Brown, Moist,Loose

(CL/ML) SILTY CLAY, Dark Brown, Moist,Medium Stiff

(ML) SANDY SILT, Dark Grayish Brown, Moist,Medium Stiff to Very Stiff

END OF BORING @ 30'

371

122

223

235

235

535

334

101315

8

4

5

8

8

8

7

28

CLIENT


JOB #

02:8073

BORING #

B-10

SHEET

PROJECT NAME


ARCHITECT-ENGINEER







DE

PT

H (

FT

)

SA

MP

LE

NO

.

SA

MP

LE

TY

PE

SA

MP

LE

DIS

T.

(IN

)

RE

CO

VE

RY

(IN

)

SURFACE ELEVATION


WA

TE

R L

EV

ELS

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

FT

)

BLO

WS

/6"

10 20 30 40 50+

20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

1 2 3 4 5+

ENGLISH UNITS



PLASTICLIMIT %

WATERCONTENT %

LIQUIDLIMIT %


RQD% REC.%


1 OF 1

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

470

465

460

455

450

445

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

S-7

S-8

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

4

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

4


(CL/ML) SILTY CLAY, Brown, Moist, MediumStiff

(ML) SANDY SILT, Rock Fragments, Orangeand Brown, Moist, Stiff to Hard

(SM) DECOMPOSED ROCK SAMPLED ASSILTY SAND, Brown and Gray, Moist, VeryDense


123

222

223

233

445

468

131218

50/4

5

4

5

6

9

14

30

50/4

CLIENT


JOB #

02:8073

BORING #

B-11

SHEET

PROJECT NAME


ARCHITECT-ENGINEER







DE

PT

H (

FT

)

SA

MP

LE

NO

.

SA

MP

LE

TY

PE

SA

MP

LE

DIS

T.

(IN

)

RE

CO

VE

RY

(IN

)

SURFACE ELEVATION


WA

TE

R L

EV

ELS

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

FT

)

BLO

WS

/6"

10 20 30 40 50+

20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

1 2 3 4 5+

ENGLISH UNITS



PLASTICLIMIT %

WATERCONTENT %

LIQUIDLIMIT %


RQD% REC.%


1 OF 1

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

470

465

460

455

450

445

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

18

18

18

18

1

18

18

18

18

0


(ML) SANDY SILT, Dark Brown, Moist, VerySoft to Hard

(ML) DECOMPOSED ROCK SAMPLED ASSILT WITH SAND, Dark Red, Moist, Very Hard


112

778

456

121518

50/1

3

15

11

33

50/1

CLIENT


JOB #

02:8073

BORING #

B-12

SHEET

PROJECT NAME


ARCHITECT-ENGINEER







DE

PT

H (

FT

)

SA

MP

LE

NO

.

SA

MP

LE

TY

PE

SA

MP

LE

DIS

T.

(IN

)

RE

CO

VE

RY

(IN

)

SURFACE ELEVATION


WA

TE

R L

EV

ELS

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

FT

)

BLO

WS

/6"

10 20 30 40 50+

20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

1 2 3 4 5+

ENGLISH UNITS



PLASTICLIMIT %

WATERCONTENT %

LIQUIDLIMIT %


RQD% REC.%


1 OF 1

B-1

4 5 7 3 4 7

ML

ML

/CL

B-2

14

AU

GE

R R

EF

US

AL

@ 2

'

SC

B-3

6 17

24

14

3 43

51

33

EN

D O

F B

OR

ING

@ 3

0'

ML

CL

/CH

SM

ML

480

468

456

444

432

Elevation in Feet

480

468

456

444

432

Elevation in Feet

GE

NE

RA

LIZ

ED

SU

BS

UR

FA

CE

SO

IL P

RO

FIL

ENOTES:

1 SEE INDIVIDUAL BORING LOG AND GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.

2 PENETRATION TEST RESISTANCE IN BLOWS PER FOOT (ASTM D1586).

3 HORIZONTAL DISTANCES ARE NOT TO SCALE.

Mary

lan

d M

aso

nic

Ho

me

Balt

imo

re L

an

d D

esig

n G

rou

p,

Inc.

Inte

rnati

on

al

Cir

cle

, C

ockeysvil

le,

Balt

imo

rePROJECT NO.:02:8073

DATE:4/4/2016

VERTICAL SCALE:1"=12'

B-4

5 7 8 14

14

37

50/

6 50/

1S

PO

ON

RE

FU

SA

L@

28.5

8'M

L/C

L

SM

ML

B-5

6 8 15

17

21

61

50/

1A

UG

ER

RE

FU

SA

L@

22.3

8'M

L/C

L

CL

/ML

SM

SP

-SM

B-6

5 11

8 39

47

50/

5 50/

1

AU

GE

R R

EF

US

AL

@ 1

9.8

'

ML

SM

ML

B-7

6 38

34

25

50/

3 53

50/

0A

UG

ER

RE

FU

SA

L@

20.5

'

ML

/CL

SP

ML

B-8

4 33

21

50/

6 50/

1 50/

0A

UG

ER

RE

FU

SA

L@

15'

ML

SM

492

480

468

456

444

432

Elevation in Feet

492

480

468

456

444

432

Elevation in Feet

GE

NE

RA

LIZ

ED

SU

BS

UR

FA

CE

SO

IL P

RO

FIL

ENOTES:




Mary

lan

d M

aso

nic

Ho

me

Balt

imo

re L

an

d D

esig

n G

rou

p,

Inc.

Inte

rnati

on

al

Cir

cle

, C

ockeysvil

le,

Balt

imo


DATE:4/4/2016


B-9

17/

2 23

62

50/

1A

UG

ER

RE

FU

SA

L@

8.5

8'

SP

B-1

08 4 5 8 8 8 7 28

EN

D O

F B

OR

ING

@ 3

0'

ML

/CL

SM

CL

/ML

ML

B-1

15 4 5 6 9 14

30

50/

4A

UG

ER

RE

FU

SA

L@

28.8

3'C

L/M

L

ML

SM

B-1

23 15

11

33

50/

1E

ND

OF

BO

RIN

G@

13.6

'

ML

492

480

468

456

444

432

Elevation in Feet

492

480

468

456

444

432

Elevation in Feet

GE

NE

RA

LIZ

ED

SU

BS

UR

FA

CE

SO

IL P

RO

FIL

ENOTES:




Mary

lan

d M

aso

nic

Ho

me

Balt

imo

re L

an

d D

esig

n G

rou

p,

Inc.

Inte

rnati

on

al

Cir

cle

, C

ockeysvil

le,

Balt

imo


DATE:4/4/2016


Documents

REPORT OF PRELIMINARY SUBSURFACE …enterpriserealtyservices.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/8073... · Fill Placement 7 ... glass jars and returned to the ECS laboratory for ... Groundwater