UHWO Construction Contract Reference Material
HONOLULU RAIL TRANSIT PROJECT
UH WEST O’AHU TEMPORARY PARK & RIDE AND CAMPUS ROAD ‘B’
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING EXPLORATION UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII WEST OAHU ROAD ‘B’
FEBRUARY 11, 2011
W.O. 5822-40 GEOLABS, INC. Page i Hawaii ● California
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING EXPLORATION
UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII WEST OAHU
DRIVEWAY “B”
EWA, OAHU, HAWAII
W.O. 5822-40 FEBRUARY 11, 2011
TABLE OF CONTENTS Page
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.............................................. iii
1. GENERAL ............................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Introduction ................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Project Considerations............................................................................... 1 1.3 Purpose and Scope ................................................................................... 1
2. SITE CHARACTERIZATION................................................................................ 3 2.1 Regional Geology ...................................................................................... 3 2.2 Existing Site Conditions ............................................................................. 4 2.3 Subsurface Conditions............................................................................... 4
3. DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................ 6 3.1 Site Grading............................................................................................... 6
3.1.1 Site Preparation.............................................................................. 7 3.1.2 Fills and Backfills............................................................................ 8 3.1.3 Fill Placement and Compaction Requirements .............................. 9 3.1.4 Boulder Fill ..................................................................................... 9 3.1.5 Cut and Fill Slopes ....................................................................... 11 3.1.6 Settlement Monitoring .................................................................. 12
3.2 Pavement Design .................................................................................... 12 3.3 Sidewalks................................................................................................. 13 3.4 Erosion Control Measures (Landscape)................................................... 14 3.5 Utility Trenches ........................................................................................ 15 3.6 Design Review......................................................................................... 16 3.7 Construction Monitoring ........................................................................... 16
4. LIMITATIONS..................................................................................................... 17
CLOSURE..................................................................................................................... 19 PLATES
Project Location Map................................................................................... Plate 1 Site Plan ...................................................................................................... Plate 2 Recommended Site Preparation Procedure ............................................... Plate 3 Recommended Boulder Fill Schematic Section........................................... Plate 4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
W.O. 5822-40 GEOLABS, INC. Page ii Hawaii ● California
APPENDIX A Field Exploration ..................................................................................... Page A-1 Soil Log Legend ..........................................................................................Plate A Logs of Borings ........................................................................ Plates A-1 thru A-7
APPENDIX B Laboratory Tests ..................................................................................... Page B-1 Laboratory Test Data ............................................................... Plates B-1 thru B-9
W.O. 5822-40 GEOLABS, INC. Page iii Hawaii ● California
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING EXPLORATION
UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII WEST OAHU
DRIVEWAY “B”
EWA, OAHU, HAWAII
W.O. 5822-40 FEBRUARY 11, 2011
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Our field exploration at the project site generally encountered clayey alluvial soils
extending down to the maximum depth explored of approximately 16.5 feet below the existing ground surface. The alluvial soils encountered generally consisted of soft to very hard clays with some sands and gravels. We did not encounter groundwater in the borings at the time of our field exploration.
Based on our field observations, the surface soils at the project site are dry and friable. In addition, we observed substantial shrinkage cracks extending on the order of about 0.5 to 2.5 feet deep at the existing ground surface. Because of the observed ground conditions, we recommend implementing specific site preparation procedures during the earthwork construction for this project. The upper 12 inches of the soils below the existing ground surface should be stripped and removed as part of the clearing and grubbing operations, and the resulting spoils should be disposed properly off-site (or used in landscaped areas, if appropriate) because they contain an appreciable amount of organic materials and may be classified as “unsuitable” materials.
After clearing and grubbing to remove the upper 12 inches of the surface soils below the existing ground surface, the exposed soils should be over-excavated by at least another 12 inches, moisture conditioned to at least 2 percent above the optimum moisture content, and replaced as compacted fills. After over-excavation of the soils below the existing ground surface, the over-excavated subgrade areas should be scarified to a depth of at least 12 inches, moisture conditioned to at least 2 percent above the optimum moisture content, and compacted to no less than 90 percent relative compaction. The 12 inches of the over-excavated soils (not the 12 inches of materials removed as part of clearing and grubbing) may be re-used as a source of general fill materials provided that the materials are free of deleterious materials and are moisture-conditioned and compacted as recommended herein.
Deep fills up to 22 feet in depth are planned within the Kaloi Gulch area. For the purpose of discussion for this project, boulders are defined as rock fragments between 12 and 36 inches in largest dimension. Boulder fills should be located below 5 feet from finished subgrade and more than 8 feet from the finished slope face, if applicable. Boulder fills should not be placed in areas where future excavations for utilities will take place. Boulder fills should be placed in lifts not greater than 60 inches. A minimum 18-inch thick choking layer of well-graded granular fill materials with rock fragments ranging in size from about 8 inches to 1 inch in dimension should be placed on top of the boulder fill layer to
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
W.O. 5822-40 GEOLABS, INC. Page iv Hawaii ● California
seal off the voids of the boulder fill. The boulder fill should be watered heavily during placement and compaction. Conventional compaction testing is generally not practicable in fills composed of rocks, boulders, and/or cobbles. Instead, a testing program to evaluate the number of passes by a compactor needed to achieve the desired level of compaction should be conducted at the start of the grading phase of the project.
The assumed design traffic used in our pavement analysis for the new roadway consisted of a daily traffic of about 500 passenger vehicles, 10 two-axle trucks, and 8 three-axle trucks. Based on the moderately to highly expansive soil conditions, we recommend placing the pavement section on a minimum 18-inch thick non-expansive, select granular fill. Based on the above assumptions, a flexible pavement section consisting of 3.0 inches of asphaltic concrete underlain by 8 inches of aggregate base course may be considered.
The text of this report should be referred to for detailed discussions and specific design recommendations.
END OF SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
W.O. 5822-40 GEOLABS, INC. Page 1 Hawaii ● California
SECTION 1. GENERAL
1.1 Introduction
This report presents the results of our geotechnical engineering exploration
performed for the proposed University of Hawaii West Oahu Driveway “B” project
located in the District of Ewa on the Island of Oahu, Hawaii. The project location and
general vicinity are shown on the Project Location Map, Plate 1.
This report summarizes the findings and our geotechnical recommendations
derived from our field exploration, laboratory testing, and engineering analyses. These
recommendations are intended for the design of site grading, pavements, and
underground utilities for the project only. The findings and recommendations presented
herein are subject to the limitations noted at the end of this report.
1.2 Project Considerations
The University of Hawaii West Oahu Campus covers approximately 103.5 acres
and is south and east of Farrington Highway and west of North-South Road in the
District of Ewa on the Island of Oahu, Hawaii. A new driveway is planned from
North-South Road to Kaloi Gulch.
We understand that the new roadway will be about 108 feet wide and about
1,040 feet long. The new roadway will consist of 12 and 10 feet wide traffic lanes, 6 feet
wide bike lane, and a 12 feet wide sidewalk in each direction. In addition, a 20 feet wide
median and turn bay is located in the middle of the roadway.
Based on the grading plans, fills up to about 6 and 22 feet are planned for the
roadway and within Kaloi Gulch, respectively. New utility lines (water, drain, and sewer)
will be constructed along the new roadway.
1.3 Purpose and Scope
The purpose of our exploration was to obtain an overview of the surface and
subsurface conditions at the project site. The subsurface information obtained was used
to develop an idealized soil data set to formulate geotechnical recommendations for the
design of site grading, pavements, and underground utilities for the proposed project.
SECTION 1. GENERAL
W.O. 5822-40 GEOLABS, INC. Page 2 Hawaii ● California
Our work was performed in general accordance with our fee proposal dated
September 7, 2010. The scope of work for our exploration included the following tasks
and work efforts.
1. Trail clearing with a loader to provide access to the boring locations for our truck-mounted drilling equipment.
2. Mobilization and demobilization of trail clearing equipment and a truck-mounted drill rig and operators to and from the project site.
3. Drilling and sampling of seven borings at the project site extending to depths of approximately 15.5 to 16.5 feet below the existing ground surface.
4. Collection of bulk soil samples for laboratory test analyses.
5. Coordination of the field exploration and logging of the borings by our field geologist.
6. Laboratory testing of selected samples obtained during the field exploration as an aid in classifying the materials and evaluating their engineering properties.
7. Engineering analyses of the field and laboratory data to develop geotechnical recommendations for the design of site grading, pavements, and underground utilities for the project.
8. Preparation of this report summarizing our work on the project and presenting our findings and geotechnical recommendations.
9. Coordination of our overall work on the project by our senior engineer.
10. Quality assurance of our work and client/design team consultation by our principal engineer.
11. Miscellaneous work efforts such as drafting, word processing, and clerical support.
Detailed descriptions of our field exploration methodology and the Logs of
Borings are provided in Appendix A. Results of the laboratory tests performed on
selected soil samples are presented in Appendix B.
END OF GENERAL
W.O. 5822-40 GEOLABS, INC. Page 3 Hawaii ● California
SECTION 2. SITE CHARACTERIZATION
2.1 Regional Geology
The Island of Oahu was built by the extrusion of basaltic lavas from the
Waianae and Koolau Shield Volcanoes. The older Waianae Volcano is estimated to be
middle to late Pliocene in age and forms the bulk of the western one-third of the island.
The younger Koolau Volcano is estimated to be late Pliocene to early Pleistocene (Ice
Age) in age and forms the majority of the eastern two-thirds of the island. As volcanic
activity in Waianae Volcano ceased, lava flows from Koolau Volcano banked against its
eroded eastern slope forming a broad plateau, known as Schofield Plateau. The Koolau
Volcano reached the end of its main shield-building phase about 2 million years ago.
Following extrusion of the lavas in the early Pleistocene Epoch, the island
underwent a long cycle of erosion and weathering forming the prominent ridgelines and
summits as we know today. During the erosion period, the Island of Oahu began to
slowly subside by more than 1,200 feet in elevation, resulting in the drowning and
sedimentation of the valleys and the formation of the steep Koolau Pali. Coral reefs
continued to grow in the surrounding shallow waters of the island.
From the mid to late Pleistocene Epoch, the sea level repeatedly rose and fell in
response to global glaciation and the availability of surface waters to sustain the
oceans. The various sea level elevations and their representative deposits are known
as “stands” and include from oldest to youngest: the Kahuku, Kahipa, Kaena, Laie,
Waialae, Waipio, and Waimanalo stands. Geologic deposits associated with the various
sea level stands, including marine sediments and coral reefs, were deposited and
subsequently altered or removed by later sea level fluctuation. Therefore, depositional
records reflecting the changes in sea level and the occurrence of emerged coral reef
deposits are often incomplete.
The project site is situated on the Ewa Plain to the southeast of the
Waianae Mountain Range. The Ewa Plain is a gently sloping alluvial plain formed by the
deposition of alluvial clays and silts derived from weathering of the basalt rock formation
further up-slope. The alluvial deposits were laid down and are inter-bedded with marine
SECTION 2. SITE CHARACTERIZATION
W.O. 5822-40 GEOLABS, INC. Page 4 Hawaii ● California
sediments and coral/algal reef formations to form a sedimentary wedge. The thickness
of the sedimentary wedge ranges from zero in the area of the Interstate Route H-1
Highway to over 1,000 feet at Ewa Beach. This wedge forms the Ewa Plain and serves
as the confining formation, or “caprock,” over the artesian basal aquifers of southern
Oahu. Basalt rock formation resides below the marine deposits at a substantial depth.
The project site is situated over the relatively thick alluvial clay soils. The
coralline and marine deposits are believed to underlie the site but at some depth
beneath the alluvium. Agricultural developments within the last 100 years have brought
the area to its present form.
2.2 Existing Site Conditions
The University of Hawaii West Oahu Campus is south and east of Farrington
Highway and west of North-South Road in the District of Ewa on the Island of Oahu,
Hawaii, as shown on the Site Plan, Plate 2.
Presently, the site is occupied by vacant areas vegetated with wild grasses and
some sparse trees. Substantial shrinkage cracks were observed at the ground surface
within the project site. The shrinkage cracks ranged from about 6 inches up to 30 inches
in depth. Numerous shrinkage cracks were observed near the top of slope area
adjacent to Kaloi Gulch.
The project site generally slopes down toward the east from about 20 horizontal
to one vertical (20H:1V) to 50H:1V inclination. Steeper slopes from about 1H:1V to
2H:1V inclination are located within Kaloi Gulch. Based on the topographic survey map
provided, the existing ground surface elevations generally range from about +122 to
+140 feet Mean Sea Level (MSL) down to Elevation +108 feet MSL within Kaloi Gulch.
2.3 Subsurface Conditions
Our field exploration consisted of drilling and sampling seven borings, designated
as Boring Nos. 1 through 7, extending to depths of about 15.5 to 16.5 feet below the
existing ground surface. Two bulk samples of the near-surface soils, designated as
Bulk-1 and Bulk-2, were collected at selected locations along the new roadway to
SECTION 2. SITE CHARACTERIZATION
W.O. 5822-40 GEOLABS, INC. Page 5 Hawaii ● California
evaluate the pavement support characteristics of the near-surface soils. The
approximate borings and bulk sample locations are shown on the Site Plan, Plate 2.
In general, the project site appears to be underlain by clayey alluvial soils over
the majority of the project site. The clayey alluvial soils extended down to the maximum
depth explored of approximately 16.5 feet below the existing ground surface.
The alluvial soils generally consisted of soft to very hard clays with some sands
and gravels. Cobbles and boulders were also encountered within the alluvial deposit. It
should be noted that the alluvial clays are moderately to highly expansive when
subjected to moisture fluctuations.
We did not encounter groundwater in the borings at the time of our field
exploration. However, it should be noted that water levels at the project site may be
influenced by seasonal precipitation and other factors.
Detailed descriptions of the field exploration methodology are presented in
Appendix A. Descriptions and graphic representations of the materials encountered in
the borings are provided on the Logs of Borings, Plates A-1 through A-7. Laboratory
tests were performed on selected soil samples, and the test results are presented in
Appendix B.
END OF SITE CHARACTERIZATION
W.O. 5822-40 GEOLABS, INC. Page 6 Hawaii ● California
SECTION 3. DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on our field exploration, the University of Hawaii West Oahu Driveway “B”
project site generally is underlain by soft to very hard clayey alluvial soils extending
down to the maximum depth explored of approximately 16.5 feet below the existing
ground surface. Field observations during our exploration indicated the surface soils at
the project site are dry and friable. In addition, we observed substantial shrinkage
cracks on the order of about 0.5 to 2.5 feet deep at the existing ground surface.
Our laboratory tests indicate that the near-surface clayey soils exhibit moderate
to high shrink/swell characteristics when subjected to fluctuations in the soil moisture
contents. Therefore, special attention should be given to the site preparation
recommendations for the site grading design to account for the moderately to highly
expansive soil conditions at the site.
Based on our analysis, a flexible pavement section consisting of asphaltic
concrete underlain by aggregate base course and non-expansive select granular fill
material is recommended for the new roadway. Our geotechnical recommendations
pertaining to the design of site grading, pavements, and underground utilities are
discussed further in the following sections.
3.1 Site Grading
Based on our field observations, the surface soils at the project site are dry and
friable. In addition, we observed substantial shrinkage cracks of about 0.5 to 2.5 feet
deep at the existing ground surface. Because of the observed ground conditions at the
existing ground surface, we recommend implementing special site preparation
procedures during the earthwork construction for the project. Items of grading that are
addressed in the subsequent subsections include the following:
1. Site Preparation 2. Fills and Backfills 3. Fill Placement and Compaction Requirements 4. Boulder Fill 5. Cut and Fill Slopes 6. Settlement Monitoring
SECTION 3. DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
W.O. 5822-40 GEOLABS, INC. Page 7 Hawaii ● California
3.1.1 Site Preparation
In general, the areas within the contract grading limits should be cleared and
grubbed thoroughly at the on-set of earthwork. Vegetation, debris, deleterious
materials, and other unsuitable materials should be removed and disposed properly
off-site or disposed in a designated area to reduce the potential for contamination of
the excavated materials. The upper 12 inches of the soils below the existing ground
surface should be stripped and removed as part of the clearing and grubbing
operations, and the resulting spoils should be disposed properly off-site (or used in
landscaped areas, if appropriate) because they contain an appreciable amount of
organic materials. The upper 12 inches of the soils below the ground surface that
will be removed as part of the clearing and grubbing operations may be classified
as “unsuitable” materials and should not be used as fill for this project.
After clearing and grubbing to remove the upper 12 inches of the soils below the
existing ground surface, the normally dry and friable soils should be over-excavated
by at least another 12 inches, moisture conditioned to at least 2 percent above the
optimum moisture, and replaced as compacted fills. After over-excavation of the
soils below the existing ground surface, the over-excavated subgrade areas should
be scarified to a depth of at least 12 inches, moisture-conditioned to at least
2 percent above the optimum moisture content, and compacted to no less than
90 percent relative compaction. The 12 inches of the over-excavated soils (not the
12 inches of materials removed as part of clearing and grubbing) may be re-used
as a source of general fill materials provided that the materials are free of
deleterious materials and are moisture-conditioned and compacted as
recommended herein. The above site preparation procedure is shown on the
Recommended Site Preparation Procedure, Plate 3.
Relative compaction refers to the in-place dry density of soil expressed as a
percentage of the maximum dry density of the same soil established in accordance
with ASTM D 1557 test procedures. Optimum moisture is the water content
(percentage by dry weight) corresponding to the maximum dry density. The intent
of the recommended site preparation procedures serves to close up some of the
large shrinkage cracks observed at the site. We strongly recommend that a
SECTION 3. DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
W.O. 5822-40 GEOLABS, INC. Page 8 Hawaii ● California
Geolabs representative be present during and after the clearing and grubbing
operations to evaluate the exposed ground conditions prior to site preparation
operations.
Soft and/or yielding areas encountered at the bottom of the over-excavation below
areas designated to receive fill or future improvements should be over-excavated to
expose stiff and/or dense materials. The resulting excavation should be backfilled
with compacted on-site soils or replaced with select granular fill materials. The
excavated soft and/or organic soils should be disposed properly off-site or used in
landscaped areas, if appropriate. Contract documents should include additive and
deductive unit prices for over-excavation and compacted fill placement to account
for variations in the over-excavation quantities.
Where shrinkage cracks are noted after compaction of the subgrade, we
recommend preparing the soil again as recommended above. Saturation and
subsequent yielding of the exposed subgrade due to inclement weather and poor
drainage may require over-excavation of the soft areas and replacement with
well-compacted fill at no additional cost to the owner. A Geolabs representative
should evaluate the need for over-excavation in the field.
3.1.2 Fills and Backfills
In general, the excavated on-site materials (not including the 12 inches of soil
materials removed as part of clearing and grubbing) may be re-used as a source of
general fill materials if the materials are free of deleterious materials. Imported fill
materials should consist of non-expansive select granular fill materials, such as
crushed coralline or basaltic materials. The materials should be well graded from
coarse to fine with particles no larger than 3 inches in largest dimension and should
contain between 10 and 30 percent particles passing the No. 200 sieve. The
materials should have a laboratory CBR value of 25 or more and should have a
maximum swell of 1 percent or less.
SECTION 3. DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
W.O. 5822-40 GEOLABS, INC. Page 9 Hawaii ● California
3.1.3 Fill Placement and Compaction Requirements
General fill materials should be placed in level lifts not exceeding 8 inches in loose
thickness, moisture-conditioned to at least 2 percent above the optimum moisture
content, and compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction. The compaction
requirements for finished subgrades subjected to vehicular traffic, such as the
pavement subgrade, should be increased to a minimum of 95 percent relative
compaction.
The non-expansive select granular fill materials required under the paved areas
(refer to the “Pavement Design” section) should be placed in level lifts of about
8 inches in loose thickness, moisture-conditioned to above the optimum moisture,
and compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction (or 95 percent relative
compaction for finished subgrades subjected to vehicular traffic). Aggregate base
and aggregate subbase materials should be moisture-conditioned to above the
optimum moisture content, placed in level lifts not exceeding 8 inches in loose
thickness, and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction.
Relative compaction refers to the in-place dry density of soil expressed as a
percentage of the maximum dry density of the same soil established in accordance
with ASTM D 1557. Optimum moisture is the water content (percentage by weight)
corresponding to the maximum dry density.
3.1.4 Boulder Fill
For the purpose of discussion on this project, boulders are defined as rock
fragments between 12 and 36 inches in largest dimension. Boulder fills should be
located below 5 feet from finished subgrade and more than 8 feet from the finished
slope face, if applicable. Boulder fills should also be kept out of utility alignments to
prevent difficulty in the later excavation of the utility trenches.
Prior to placement of boulders, the gulch area should be thoroughly cleared and
grubbed. Vegetation, debris, rubbish, and other unsuitable materials should be
removed and disposed of properly off-site. The upper 12 inches of the soils below
the existing ground surface should be stripped and removed as part of the clearing
and grubbing operations. Soft and yielding areas encountered during the clearing
SECTION 3. DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
W.O. 5822-40 GEOLABS, INC. Page 10 Hawaii ● California
and grubbing should be over-excavated to expose firm natural material, and the
resulting excavation should be backfilled with well-compacted engineered fill. Prior
to filling within the gulch area, the existing ground should be scarified to a depth of
18 inches, moisture-conditioned to at least 2 percent above the optimum moisture
and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction.
Loose/soft soils at the gulch slope face and at the top of the gulch should be
removed to stiff natural ground prior to fill placement.
Prior to the start of the boulder fill placement, the lateral limits and elevations of the
area where boulder fills are to be placed should be surveyed. Boulder fills should
not be placed in areas where future excavations for utilities and/or foundations will
take place. In addition, the top elevations of the top and bottom of the boulder fill
should be plotted on the as-built grading plans for future reference.
Boulder fills should be placed in lifts not greater than 60 inches. Spreading and
compaction of each layer of the boulder fill should be accomplished with a
Caterpillar D-9 bulldozer (or larger) for a minimum of 6 to 8 passes to facilitate
“seating” of the boulders. The boulder fill should be watered heavily by water trucks
traversing in front of the current boulder lift face and sprayed with water
continuously during placement.
A minimum 18-inch thick choking layer of well-graded granular fill materials should
be placed on the top of the boulder fill layer to seal off the voids of the boulder fill.
The choking layer should consist of well-graded granular fill materials with rock
fragments ranging in size from about 8 inches to 1 inch in dimension.
The choking layer of well-graded granular fill should be watered heavily and
compacted with a 10-ton vibratory drum roller a minimum of 6 to 8 passes to
provide a firm surface. The upper 5 feet of fill material below the finished grades
should consist of 3-inch minus fill material compacted to at least 90 percent relative
compaction. The aforementioned recommendations are presented on the
Recommended Boulder Fill Schematic Section, Plate 4.
SECTION 3. DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
W.O. 5822-40 GEOLABS, INC. Page 11 Hawaii ● California
Conventional compaction testing is generally not practicable in fills composed of
rocks, boulders, and/or cobbles. Instead, a testing program to evaluate the number
of passes by a compactor needed to achieve the desired level of compaction
should be conducted at the start of the grading phase of the project under the
observation of a Geolabs representative. The minimum numbers of passes noted
above are preliminary estimates.
It should be noted that if the boulder fill is not placed in such a manner to obtain a
well-compacted fill mass, the boulder fill may need to be removed and
reconstructed to obtain a well-compacted mass.
3.1.5 Cut and Fill Slopes
We envision the cut slopes at the project site generally will expose the stiff to very
hard clays encountered in the borings drilled. In general, cut slopes and permanent
fill slopes constructed of the on-site soils may be designed with a slope inclination
of 2H:1V or flatter. Fills placed on slopes steeper than 5H:1V should be keyed and
benched into the existing slope to provide stability of the new fill against sliding. The
filling operations should start at the lowest point and continue up in level horizontal
compacted layers in accordance with the above general fill placement
recommendations. Fill slopes should be constructed by overfilling and cutting back
to the design slope ratio to obtain a well-compacted slope face. Surface water
should be diverted away from the tops of slopes, and slope planting should be
provided as soon as possible to reduce the potential for erosion of the finished
slopes.
Because moisture-conditioning and compaction of the clayey subgrade soils are
critical elements of the earthwork, Geolabs should perform observations and soil
density tests during site grading operations to assist the contractor in obtaining the
required degree of compaction and the proper moisture content on each fill lift.
Where compaction is less than required, additional compaction effort should be
applied with adjustment of the moisture content, as necessary, to obtain the
specified compaction. It should be noted that the moisture requirement of the
on-site fills, imported general fills, and soil subgrades (at least 2 percent above the
SECTION 3. DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
W.O. 5822-40 GEOLABS, INC. Page 12 Hawaii ● California
optimum moisture) is an important requirement considering the moderately to highly
expansive nature of the clayey soils. Therefore, observation and testing during the
site grading operations for this project should be designated as a “Special
Inspection” item under “Special Grading, Excavation and Filling.”
3.1.6 Settlement Monitoring
We understand that up to 22 feet of fill will be placed within Kaloi Gulch near the
end of Driveway “B” and for the future Campus Loop Road. We estimate about 2 to
4 inches of ground settlements may occur as a result of the up to 22 feet of new fill
placement within the gulch. Therefore, a settlement monitoring program should be
implemented for these areas and the paving of the new roadways should be
delayed to allow for the majority of the settlement to occur under the new load. We
recommend a settlement waiting period of about 3 to 4 weeks.
To monitor the settlement rate, we recommend installing settlement monitoring
points at the finished subgrade level. The monitoring points should be read
optically by a qualified professional surveyor, and the readings should be
transmitted to Geolabs for review. We recommend taking two readings (one day
apart) for each settlement point at the start of the monitoring period to establish a
baseline. Subsequent readings should be taken on a weekly basis for the entire
settlement period.
3.2 Pavement Design
We understand a flexible pavement will be used for the new roadway. In general,
we anticipate the future vehicle loading for the access driveway will consist of some
heavy vehicular traffic, including delivery and container trucks in addition to the
passenger vehicles and light pick-up trucks. In addition, a design life of 30 years was
used.
The assumed design traffic used in our pavement analysis for the new roadway
consisted of a daily traffic of about 500 passenger vehicles, 10 two-axle trucks, and
8 three-axle trucks. Based on the moderately to highly expansive soil conditions, we
recommend placing the pavement section on a minimum 18-inch thick non-expansive,
SECTION 3. DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
W.O. 5822-40 GEOLABS, INC. Page 13 Hawaii ● California
select granular fill in lieu of aggregate subbase course. Based on the above
assumptions, we recommend using the following flexible pavement section for
preliminary design purposes:
Flexible Pavement
3.0-Inch Asphaltic Concrete 8.0-Inch Aggregate Base Course (95 Percent Relative Compaction) 11.0-Inch Total Pavement Thickness over 18-Inch Select Granular Fill
The non-expansive, select granular fill should be placed in level lifts of about
8 inches in loose thickness, moisture-conditioned to above the optimum moisture, and
compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction. The compaction requirement for
the final lift of the select granular fill should be increased to at least 95 percent relative
compaction. The clayey subgrades below the non-expansive, select granular fill should
be scarified to a depth of about 8 inches, moisture-conditioned to at least 2 percent
above the optimum moisture, and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent relative
compaction. The aggregate base course and aggregate subbase materials should
consist of crushed basaltic aggregates compacted to no less than 95 percent relative
compaction.
In general, paved areas should be sloped, and drainage gradients should be
maintained to carry the surface water off the site. Surface water ponding should not be
allowed on the site during or after construction. Where concrete curbs are used to
isolate landscaping in or adjacent to the pavement areas, we recommend extending the
curbs a minimum of 2 inches into the soils below the aggregate base course and
aggregate subbase layers to reduce the potential for migration of excessive landscape
water into the pavement section. Alternatively, a subdrain system could be constructed
to collect the excess water from landscaping irrigation. For long-term performance, we
suggest constructing a subdrain system adjacent to the paved/landscaped areas.
3.3 Sidewalks
Concrete slab-on-grade sidewalks will be constructed for the project. Unless
concrete slab-on-grade constructed above the expansive soils encountered at the
project site are properly designed, there is a potential for future distress to the lightly
SECTION 3. DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
W.O. 5822-40 GEOLABS, INC. Page 14 Hawaii ● California
loaded concrete sidewalks resulting from shrinking and swelling of the clayey soils due
to changes in the moisture content. To reduce the potential for appreciable structural
distress resulting from swelling of the subgrade soils, we recommend properly preparing
the subgrade soils prior to fill placement. In addition, we recommend providing a
minimum of 24 inches of non-expansive, select granular fill material below the sidewalk
slabs-on-grade. Construction joints should be provided at intervals equal to the width of
the sidewalk with expansion joints at right-angle intersections.
It should be noted that the moisture content requirement of the clayey subgrades
(at least 2 percent above the optimum moisture) is an important requirement
considering the expansive nature of the on-site clayey soils. Therefore, the subgrade
soils underneath the sidewalk should be properly moisture-conditioned and maintained
moist until placement of the select granular fill and concrete.
It should be emphasized that the areas adjacent to the slabs should be backfilled
tightly against the slab edges with low expansion, relatively impervious soils.
Additionally, these areas should be graded to divert water away from the slabs and to
reduce the potential for water ponding around the slabs.
3.4 Erosion Control Measures (Landscape)
As indicated previously, we observed substantial shrinkage cracks (on the order
of about 0.5 to 2.5 feet deep) at the existing ground surface of the project site based on
field observations. Shallower shrinkage cracks were noted in the areas that were
recently graded. In general, shrinkage cracks will develop in the ground due to the lack
of maintenance of the soil moisture content as the soils start to dry out under the sun
and dry weather conditions. The development of shrinkage cracks in the ground was
apparently intensified by the prolonged dry climatic conditions in the Ewa area resulting
in large fluctuations in the soil moisture content.
We recommend grassing the graded surfaces (including cut and fill slopes) to
reduce the potential for significant soil erosion soon after completion of the site grading.
The relatively dry climatic conditions of the Ewa area likely will require controlled
irrigation of the graded surfaces to maintain the moisture contents and to keep graded
SECTION 3. DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
W.O. 5822-40 GEOLABS, INC. Page 15 Hawaii ● California
surfaces free of large shrinkage cracks. However, over-watering of the graded surfaces
should be avoided to reduce the potential for saturation and softening of the surface
soils.
3.5 Utility Trenches
We understand that the utilities lines (water, drain, and sewer) will be installed
along the new roadway for the proposed project. In general, good construction practices
should be utilized for the installation and backfilling of the trenches for the proposed
utilities. The contractor should determine the method and equipment to be used for
excavation, subject to practical limits and safety considerations. The excavation should
comply with all applicable local, state, and federal safety requirements. The contractor
should be responsible for trench shoring design and installation. Trench shoring and
bracing should conform to the appropriate health and safety requirements.
In general, we recommend using granular bedding consisting of 6 inches of
open-graded gravel (ASTM C 33, No. 67 gradation) for support of the utility lines. The
initial trench backfill up to about 12 inches above the pipes should consist of
free-draining backfills, such as open-graded gravel, to reduce the potential for damaging
the pipes from compaction of the backfill. It is critical that a free-draining granular
material be used to reduce the potential for formation of voids below the haunches of
pipes and to provide adequate support for the sides of the pipes. The use of on-site
clayey soils as backfill directly around the utility pipes is not recommended and should
not be allowed.
The upper portion of the trench backfill from the level 12 inches above the pipes
to the finished subgrade may consist of approved on-site soils or select granular fill
material. The backfill material should be moisture-conditioned to above the optimum
moisture content, placed in level lifts not exceeding 8 inches in loose thickness, and
compacted to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction to reduce the potential for
appreciable future ground subsidence. The upper 3 feet of the trench backfill below the
pavement grade should be compacted to not less than 95 percent relative compaction.
Mechanical compaction equipment should be used to compact the backfill material
considering the clayey nature of the on-site soils.
SECTION 3. DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
W.O. 5822-40 GEOLABS, INC. Page 16 Hawaii ● California
3.6 Design Review
Preliminary and final drawings and specifications for the proposed construction
should be forwarded to Geolabs for review and written comments prior to construction.
This review is needed to evaluate conformance of the plans and specifications with the
intent of the earthwork and pavement recommendations provided herein. If this review
is not made, Geolabs cannot assume responsibility for misinterpretation of our
recommendations.
3.7 Construction Monitoring
Due to the variability in the subsurface conditions, it is highly recommended to
retain Geolabs to provide geotechnical engineering services during the construction of
the project. The following are critical items of construction monitoring that require
"Special Inspection":
1. Removal of the cleared and grubbed materials 2. Subgrade preparation 3. Fill placement and compaction 4. Trench excavation and backfill
A Geolabs representative should monitor the other aspects of the earthwork
construction to observe compliance with the intent of the design concepts,
specifications, and/or recommendations, and to expedite suggestions for design
changes that may be required in the event that subsurface conditions differ from those
anticipated at the time this report was prepared. The recommendations presented
herein are contingent upon such observations.
If the actual exposed subsurface soil conditions encountered during construction
differ from those assumed or considered in this report, Geolabs should be contacted to
review and/or revise the geotechnical recommendations presented herein.
END OF DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
W.O. 5822-40 GEOLABS, INC. Page 17 Hawaii ● California
SECTION 4. LIMITATIONS
The analyses and recommendations submitted in this report are based in part
upon information obtained from the field borings and bulk samples. Variations of
subsurface conditions between and beyond the field borings and bulk samples may
occur, and the nature and extent of these variations may not become evident until
construction is underway. If variations then appear evident, Geolabs should be
contacted to re-evaluate the recommendations presented herein.
The field boring locations indicated in this report are approximate, having been
estimated by taping from the features shown on the grading plan received from
Engineering Concepts, Inc. on October 26, 2010. Elevations of the field borings were
interpolated from the spot elevations and contour lines shown on the same plan. The
physical locations and elevations of the field borings should be considered accurate
only to the degree implied by the methods used.
The stratification lines shown on the graphic representations of the borings depict
the approximate boundaries between the soil types, and as such, may denote a gradual
transition. Water level data from the borings were measured at the times shown on the
graphic representations and/or presented in the text herein. These data have been
reviewed and interpretations made in the formulation of this report. However, it must be
noted that fluctuation may occur due to variation in rainfall, temperatures, and other
factors.
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of John Hara & Associates,
Inc. for specific application to the proposed University of Hawaii West Oahu
Driveway “B” project in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering
principles and practices. No warranty is expressed or implied.
This report has been prepared solely for the purpose of assisting the architect
and engineers in the design of the proposed project. Therefore, this report may not
contain sufficient data, or the proper information, to serve as a basis for construction
cost estimates nor for bidding purposes. A contractor wishing to bid on this project
SECTION 4. LIMITATIONS
W.O. 5822-40 GEOLABS, INC. Page 18 Hawaii ● California
should retain a competent geotechnical engineer to assist in the interpretation of this
report and/or in the performance of additional site-specific exploration for bid estimating
purposes.
The owner/client should be aware that unanticipated subsurface conditions are
commonly encountered. Unforeseen soil conditions, such as perched groundwater, soft
deposits, hard layers, or cavities, may occur in localized areas and may require
additional probing or corrections in the field (which may result in construction delays) to
attain a properly constructed project. Therefore, a sufficient contingency fund is
recommended to accommodate these possible extra costs.
This geotechnical engineering exploration conducted at the project site was not
intended to investigate the potential presence of hazardous materials existing at the
site. The equipment, techniques, and personnel used to conduct a geo-environmental
exploration differ substantially from those applied in geotechnical engineering.
END OF LIMITATIONS
PLATES
APPENDIX A
W.O. 5822-40 GEOLABS, INC. FEBRUARY 2011 Page A-1 Hawaii ● California
A P P E N D I X A
Field Exploration
The subsurface conditions at the site were explored by drilling and sampling seven borings extending to depths of about 15.5 to 16.5 feet below the existing ground surface at the approximate locations shown on the Site Plan, Plate 2. The borings were drilled using truck-mounted and track-mounted drill rigs equipped with continuous flight augers. The materials encountered in the borings were classified by visual and textural examination in the field by our geologist, who observed the drilling operations on a near-continuous basis. These classifications were further reviewed by visual observation and testing in the laboratory. Soils were classified in general conformance with the Unified Soil Classification System, as shown on Plate A. Graphic representations of the materials encountered are presented on the Logs of Borings, Plates A-1 through A-7. Some soil samples were obtained from the drilled borings in general accordance with ASTM D 1586, Penetration Test and Split-Barrel Sampling of Soils, by driving a 2-inch OD standard penetration sampler with a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches. In addition, some soil samples were obtained in general accordance with ASTM D 3550, Ring-Lined Barrel Sampling of Soils, by driving a 3-inch OD modified California sampler using the same hammer and drop. The blow counts needed to drive the sampler the second and third 6 inches of an 18-inch drive are shown as the “Penetration Resistance” on the Logs of Borings at the appropriate sample depths. Pocket penetrometer tests were performed on selected cohesive soil samples retrieved in the field. The pocket penetrometer test provides an indication of the unconfined compressive strength of the soil sample. The pocket penetrometer test results are presented on the Logs of Borings at the appropriate sample depths.
MORE THAN 50%OF COARSEFRACTION
RETAINED ONNO. 4 SIEVE
(2-INCH) O.D. STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
POCKET PENETROMETER (tsf)
UNCONFINED COMPRESSION (psi)
50% OR MORE OFCOARSE FRACTION
PASSINGTHROUGH NO. 4
SIEVE
MORE THAN 50%OF MATERIAL
RETAINED ON NO.200 SIEVE
50% OR MORE OFMATERIAL PASSINGTHROUGH NO. 200
SIEVE
TORVANE SHEAR (tsf)
TRIAXIAL COMPRESSION (ksf) A
(3-INCH) O.D. MODIFIED CALIFORNIA SAMPLE
SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND-SILTMIXTURES
OL
PEAT, HUMUS, SWAMP SOILS WITH HIGHORGANIC CONTENTS
INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO MEDIUMPLASTICITY, GRAVELLY CLAYS, SANDYCLAYS, SILTY CLAYS, LEAN CLAYS
Soil Log Legend
UC
TV
ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO HIGHPLASTICITY, ORGANIC SILTS
SC
Plate
GM
FINE-GRAINED
SOILS
COARSE-GRAINED
SOILS
UNCONSOLIDATED UNDRAINED
CLEAN SANDS
SANDS WITHFINES
SP
SANDS
GRAVELS
WELL-GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SANDMIXTURES, LITTLE OR NO FINES
ML
CL
OH
LESS THAN 5%FINES
GRAVELS WITHFINES
CLEANGRAVELS
UU
PEN
PI
LL
INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINE SANDS,ROCK FLOUR, SILTY OR CLAYEY FINE SANDSOR CLAYEY SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY
POORLY-GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SANDMIXTURES, LITTLE OR NO FINES
CLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND-CLAYMIXTURES
WELL-GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY SANDS,LITTLE OR NO FINES
POORLY-GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLYSANDS, LITTLE OR NO FINES
SILTY SANDS, SAND-SILT MIXTURES
CLAYEY SANDS, SAND-CLAY MIXTURES
GRAB SAMPLE
PLASTICITY INDEX (NP=NON-PLASTIC)
SILTSAND
CLAYS
SILTSAND
CLAYS
LIQUID LIMITLESS THAN 50
USCSTYPICAL
DESCRIPTIONS
GW
MORE THAN 12%FINES
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS
NOTE: DUAL SYMBOLS ARE USED TO INDICATE BORDERLINE SOIL CLASSIFICATIONS
SM
MAJOR DIVISIONS
GP
MORE THAN 12%FINES
PT
LESS THAN 5%FINES
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (USCS)
ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC SILTYCLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY
SW
GC
INORGANIC SILT, MICACEOUS ORDIATOMACEOUS FINE SAND OR SILTYSOILS
INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH PLASTICITY
LEGEND
CORE SAMPLE
WATER LEVEL OBSERVED IN BORING
LIQUID LIMIT50 OR MORE CH
MH
SHELBY TUBE SAMPLE
LIQUID LIMIT (NP=NON-PLASTIC)
GEOLABS, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering
LO
G L
EG
EN
D F
OR
SO
IL
58
22
-40
.GP
J
GE
OL
AB
S.G
DT
2
/15
/11
3.0
3.5
3.0
31
22
45
33
49
Brown SANDY SILT with gravel (coralline), dry(fill)
Brown CLAY with some fine sand and gravel,very stiff, dry (alluvium)
grades to hard
grades to very stiff
Boring terminated at 16.5 feet
* Elevations estimated Grading Plan transmittedby Engineering Concepts, Inc. on October 26,2010.
95
112
103
ML
CL
16
19
18
20
21
LL=46PI=27
UC
Po
cke
t P
en
.(t
sf)
Date Started:
Date Completed:
Logged By:
Total Depth:
Work Order:
Dry
De
nsity
(pcf)
CME-75
4" Auger
140 lb. wt., 30 in. drop
Co
reR
eco
ve
ry (
%)
Laboratory
Pe
ne
tra
tio
nR
esis
tan
ce
(blo
ws/f
oo
t)
Sa
mp
le
Field
October 18, 2010
October 18, 2010
D. Gremminger
16.5 feet
5822-40
US
CS
De
pth
(fe
et)
5
10
15
20
25
Gra
ph
ic
Drill Rig:
Drilling Method:
Driving Energy:
Mo
istu
reC
on
ten
t (%
)Approximate Ground SurfaceElevation (feet MSL): 127 *
1
RQ
D (
%)
A - 1
Description
Water Level:
Oth
er
Te
sts
Log ofBoring
Plate
Not Encountered
BO
RIN
G_
LO
G
58
22
-40
.GP
J
GE
OL
AB
S.G
DT
2
/15
/11
GEOLABS, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering
UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII WEST OAHU CAMPUSDRIVEWAY "B"
EWA, OAHU, HAWAII
3.5
2.5
>4.5
>4.5
35
22
70
88
20/2"Ref.
Brown CLAY with sand, very stiff, dry (alluvium)
grades with some weathered gravel
grades to very hard
Brown CLAY, very hard, dry (alluvium)
Boring terminated at 15.7 feet
95
104
95
CL
CL
28
15
22
20
20
Po
cke
t P
en
.(t
sf)
Date Started:
Date Completed:
Logged By:
Total Depth:
Work Order:
Dry
De
nsity
(pcf)
CME-75
4" Auger
140 lb. wt., 30 in. drop
Co
reR
eco
ve
ry (
%)
Laboratory
Pe
ne
tra
tio
nR
esis
tan
ce
(blo
ws/f
oo
t)
Sa
mp
le
Field
October 18, 2010
October 18, 2010
D. Gremminger
15.7 feet
5822-40
US
CS
De
pth
(fe
et)
5
10
15
20
25
Gra
ph
ic
Drill Rig:
Drilling Method:
Driving Energy:
Mo
istu
reC
on
ten
t (%
)Approximate Ground SurfaceElevation (feet MSL): 127.5 *
2
RQ
D (
%)
A - 2
Description
Water Level:
Oth
er
Te
sts
Log ofBoring
Plate
Not Encountered
BO
RIN
G_
LO
G
58
22
-40
.GP
J
GE
OL
AB
S.G
DT
2
/15
/11
GEOLABS, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering
UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII WEST OAHU CAMPUSDRIVEWAY "B"
EWA, OAHU, HAWAII
2.0
>4.5
>4.5
15
32
97
64
60/6"Ref.
Brown CLAY with some fine sand, stiff, dry(alluvium)
grades to hard
Brown CLAY, very hard, dry (alluvium)
Boring terminated at 15.5 feet
82
90
82
CL
CL
14
16
17
18
17
LL=36PI=15
UC
Po
cke
t P
en
.(t
sf)
Date Started:
Date Completed:
Logged By:
Total Depth:
Work Order:
Dry
De
nsity
(pcf)
CME-75
4" Auger
140 lb. wt., 30 in. drop
Co
reR
eco
ve
ry (
%)
Laboratory
Pe
ne
tra
tio
nR
esis
tan
ce
(blo
ws/f
oo
t)
Sa
mp
le
Field
October 19, 2010
October 19, 2010
D. Gremminger
15.5 feet
5822-40
US
CS
De
pth
(fe
et)
5
10
15
20
25
Gra
ph
ic
Drill Rig:
Drilling Method:
Driving Energy:
Mo
istu
reC
on
ten
t (%
)Approximate Ground SurfaceElevation (feet MSL): 128 *
3
RQ
D (
%)
A - 3
Description
Water Level:
Oth
er
Te
sts
Log ofBoring
Plate
Not Encountered
BO
RIN
G_
LO
G
58
22
-40
.GP
J
GE
OL
AB
S.G
DT
2
/15
/11
GEOLABS, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering
UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII WEST OAHU CAMPUSDRIVEWAY "B"
EWA, OAHU, HAWAII
13
27
73
54/6"Ref.
20/1"Ref.
Brown CLAY with some sand and gravel, stiff,dry (alluvium)
grades with gravel (coralline), very stiff
grades to very hard
Gray BOULDER (BASALTIC), very dense
Brown CLAY with some gravel, very hard, dry
Boring terminated at 15.6 feet
89
110
84
CL
CL
14
4
12
3
17
Consol.
LL=47PI=28
UC
Po
cke
t P
en
.(t
sf)
Date Started:
Date Completed:
Logged By:
Total Depth:
Work Order:
Dry
De
nsity
(pcf)
CME-45
4" Auger
140 lb. wt., 30 in. drop
Co
reR
eco
ve
ry (
%)
Laboratory
Pe
ne
tra
tio
nR
esis
tan
ce
(blo
ws/f
oo
t)
Sa
mp
le
Field
October 19, 2010
October 19, 2010
D. Gremminger
15.6 feet
5822-40
US
CS
De
pth
(fe
et)
5
10
15
20
25
Gra
ph
ic
Drill Rig:
Drilling Method:
Driving Energy:
Mo
istu
reC
on
ten
t (%
)Approximate Ground SurfaceElevation (feet MSL): 110 *
4
RQ
D (
%)
A - 4
Description
Water Level:
Oth
er
Te
sts
Log ofBoring
Plate
Not Encountered
BO
RIN
G_
LO
G
58
22
-40
.GP
J
GE
OL
AB
S.G
DT
2
/15
/11
GEOLABS, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering
UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII WEST OAHU CAMPUSDRIVEWAY "B"
EWA, OAHU, HAWAII
>4.590
62
60/6"Ref.
54/6"Ref.
60/5"Ref.
Brown CLAY with sand, very hard, dry (alluvium)
grades with gravel
Gray COBBLES AND BOULDERS (BASALTIC)
Brown CLAY with sand, very hard, dry (alluvium)
Boring terminated at 15.9 feet
102
88
101
CL
CL
9
13
17
11
19
Po
cke
t P
en
.(t
sf)
Date Started:
Date Completed:
Logged By:
Total Depth:
Work Order:
Dry
De
nsity
(pcf)
CME-45
4" Auger
140 lb. wt., 30 in. drop
Co
reR
eco
ve
ry (
%)
Laboratory
Pe
ne
tra
tio
nR
esis
tan
ce
(blo
ws/f
oo
t)
Sa
mp
le
Field
October 19, 2010
October 19, 2010
D. Gremminger
15.9 feet
5822-40
US
CS
De
pth
(fe
et)
5
10
15
20
25
Gra
ph
ic
Drill Rig:
Drilling Method:
Driving Energy:
Mo
istu
reC
on
ten
t (%
)Approximate Ground SurfaceElevation (feet MSL): 118 *
5
RQ
D (
%)
A - 5
Description
Water Level:
Oth
er
Te
sts
Log ofBoring
Plate
Not Encountered
BO
RIN
G_
LO
G
58
22
-40
.GP
J
GE
OL
AB
S.G
DT
2
/15
/11
GEOLABS, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering
UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII WEST OAHU CAMPUSDRIVEWAY "B"
EWA, OAHU, HAWAII
>4.5
1.5
4.0
57
18
13
33
51
Brown CLAY with sand and some gravel, hard,dry (alluvium)
grades to very stiff
grades to stiff
Brown CLAY, hard, dry (alluvium)
Boring terminated at 16.5 feet
92
75
93
CL
CL
14
22
19
18
25
LL=43PI=17
Po
cke
t P
en
.(t
sf)
Date Started:
Date Completed:
Logged By:
Total Depth:
Work Order:
Dry
De
nsity
(pcf)
CME-75
4" Auger
140 lb. wt., 30 in. drop
Co
reR
eco
ve
ry (
%)
Laboratory
Pe
ne
tra
tio
nR
esis
tan
ce
(blo
ws/f
oo
t)
Sa
mp
le
Field
October 18, 2010
October 18, 2010
D. Gremminger
16.5 feet
5822-40
US
CS
De
pth
(fe
et)
5
10
15
20
25
Gra
ph
ic
Drill Rig:
Drilling Method:
Driving Energy:
Mo
istu
reC
on
ten
t (%
)Approximate Ground SurfaceElevation (feet MSL): 130 *
6
RQ
D (
%)
A - 6
Description
Water Level:
Oth
er
Te
sts
Log ofBoring
Plate
Not Encountered
BO
RIN
G_
LO
G
58
22
-40
.GP
J
GE
OL
AB
S.G
DT
2
/15
/11
GEOLABS, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering
UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII WEST OAHU CAMPUSDRIVEWAY "B"
EWA, OAHU, HAWAII
4.0
0.5
1.0
>4.5
40
5
10
68
65/6"Ref.
Brown CLAY, hard, dry (alluvium)
grades to soft
Brown CLAY with sand and weathered gravel,stiff, dry (alluvium)
grades to very hard
Boring terminated at 16 feet
100
97
103
CL
CL
17
18
25
19
21
UC
Po
cke
t P
en
.(t
sf)
Date Started:
Date Completed:
Logged By:
Total Depth:
Work Order:
Dry
De
nsity
(pcf)
CME-75
4" Auger
140 lb. wt., 30 in. drop
Co
reR
eco
ve
ry (
%)
Laboratory
Pe
ne
tra
tio
nR
esis
tan
ce
(blo
ws/f
oo
t)
Sa
mp
le
Field
October 18, 2010
October 18, 2010
D. Gremminger
16 feet
5822-40
US
CS
De
pth
(fe
et)
5
10
15
20
25
Gra
ph
ic
Drill Rig:
Drilling Method:
Driving Energy:
Mo
istu
reC
on
ten
t (%
)Approximate Ground SurfaceElevation (feet MSL): 126 *
7
RQ
D (
%)
A - 7
Description
Water Level:
Oth
er
Te
sts
Log ofBoring
Plate
Not Encountered
BO
RIN
G_
LO
G
58
22
-40
.GP
J
GE
OL
AB
S.G
DT
2
/15
/11
GEOLABS, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering
UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII WEST OAHU CAMPUSDRIVEWAY "B"
EWA, OAHU, HAWAII
APPENDIX B
W.O. 5822-40 GEOLABS, INC. FEBRUARY 2011 Page B-1 Hawaii ● California
A P P E N D I X B
Laboratory Testing
Moisture Content (ASTM D 2216) and Unit Weight (ASTM D 2937) determinations were performed on selected soil samples as an aid in the classification and evaluation of soil properties. The test results are presented on the Logs of Borings at the appropriate sample depths. Four one-inch Ring Swell tests were performed on relatively undisturbed and remolded samples to evaluate the swelling potential of the near-surface soils. The test results are summarized on Plate B-1. Three Atterberg Limits tests (ASTM D 4318) were performed on selected soil samples to evaluate their liquid and plastic limits and to aid in soil classification. The test results are summarized on the Logs of Borings at the appropriate sample depths. Graphic presentations of the test results are provided on Plate B-2. Four Unconfined Compression tests (ASTM D 2166) were performed on selected in-situ cohesive soil samples to evaluate the unconfined compressive strength of the soils. The test results are presented on the Logs of Borings at the appropriate sample depths, and graphic presentations of the test results and stress-strain curves are provided on Plates B-3 through B-6. One One-Dimensional Consolidation test (ASTM D 2435) was performed on a selected soil sample to evaluate the consolidation characteristics of the soils. Graphic presentation of the test results is provided on Plate B-7. Two laboratory California Bearing Ratio tests (ASTM D 1883) were performed on bulk samples of the near-surface soils to evaluate the pavement support characteristics of the soils. The test results are presented on Plates B-8 and B-9.
W.O. 5822-40 GEOLABS, INC. FEBRUARY 2011 PLATE B-1 Hawaii ● California
SUMMARY OF ONE-INCH RING SWELL TESTS
University of Hawaii West Oahu
Driveway “B” Ewa, Oahu, Hawaii
Moisture Contents Location
Depth
Soil Description
Dry Density Initial Air-Dried Final
Ring Swell
(feet) (pcf) (%) (%) (%) (%)
B-1 1.0 - 2.5 Brown Clay 83 18 14 38 3.6
B-2 1.0 - 2.5 Brown Clay 115 17 13 26 6.9
B-3* 1.0 - 2.5 Brown Clay 109 20 16 26 8.7
B-7 1.0 - 2.5 Brown Clay 95 19 15 32 4.4
NOTE: Samples tested were relatively undisturbed or remolded in 2.4-inch diameter by 1-inch high rings. They were air-dried overnight and then saturated for 24 hours under a surcharge pressure of 55 psf.
* Remolded
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
PIDepth (ft)Sample LL PL
Description
46
36
47
2.5-4.0
5.0-6.5
2.5-4.0
ML or OLCL-ML
CL or OL CH or OH
19
21
19
ATTERBERG LIMITS TEST RESULTS - ASTM D 4318
Brown clay (CL)
Brown clay
Brown clay (CL)
B - 2
MH or OH
27
15
28
LIQUID LIMIT
PLA
ST
ICIT
Y I
ND
EX
B-1
B-3
B-4
Plate
W.O. 5822-40
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING
GEOLABS, INC.UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII WEST OAHU CAMPUS
DRIVEWAY "B"EWA, OAHU, HAWAII
G_
AT
TE
RB
ER
G
58
22
-40
.GP
J
GE
OL
AB
S.G
DT
2
/15
/11
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
0 2 4 6 8 10
Location:
AXIAL STRAIN, %
5.0 - 6.5 feet
Description:
Depth:
CO
MP
RE
SS
IVE
ST
RE
SS
, ksf
B-1
Brown clay
Axial Strain at Failure (%):
Unconfined Compressive Strength (ksf):
Dry Density (pcf)
Moisture (%)
112.1
18.0
Sample Diameter (inches)
Sample Height (inches)
UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST - ASTM D 2166
Strain Rate (% / minute):
7.5
12.9
Test Date: 11/3/2010
5.470
2.389
B - 3
0.97
Plate
W.O. 5822-40
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING
GEOLABS, INC.UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII WEST OAHU CAMPUS
DRIVEWAY "B"EWA, OAHU, HAWAII
G_
UC
5
82
2-4
0.G
PJ
GE
OL
AB
S.G
DT
2
/15
/11
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
0 2 4 6 8 10
Location:
AXIAL STRAIN, %
5.0 - 6.5 feet
Description:
Depth:
CO
MP
RE
SS
IVE
ST
RE
SS
, ksf
B-3
Brown clay
Axial Strain at Failure (%):
Unconfined Compressive Strength (ksf):
Dry Density (pcf)
Moisture (%)
107.4
15.4
Sample Diameter (inches)
Sample Height (inches)
UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST - ASTM D 2166
Strain Rate (% / minute):
2.5
18.3
Test Date: 11/3/2010
5.381
2.411
B - 4
0.85
Plate
W.O. 5822-40
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING
GEOLABS, INC.UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII WEST OAHU CAMPUS
DRIVEWAY "B"EWA, OAHU, HAWAII
G_
UC
5
82
2-4
0.G
PJ
GE
OL
AB
S.G
DT
2
/15
/11
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
0 2 4 6 8 10
Location:
AXIAL STRAIN, %
5.0 - 6.5 feet
Description:
Depth:
CO
MP
RE
SS
IVE
ST
RE
SS
, ksf
B-4
Brown clay
Axial Strain at Failure (%):
Unconfined Compressive Strength (ksf):
Dry Density (pcf)
Moisture (%)
109.9
12.1
Sample Diameter (inches)
Sample Height (inches)
UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST - ASTM D 2166
Strain Rate (% / minute):
2.5
2.0
Test Date: 11/4/2010
5.354
2.407
B - 5
1.01
Plate
W.O. 5822-40
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING
GEOLABS, INC.UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII WEST OAHU CAMPUS
DRIVEWAY "B"EWA, OAHU, HAWAII
G_
UC
5
82
2-4
0.G
PJ
GE
OL
AB
S.G
DT
2
/15
/11
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
0 2 4 6 8 10
Location:
AXIAL STRAIN, %
5.0 - 6.5 feet
Description:
Depth:
CO
MP
RE
SS
IVE
ST
RE
SS
, ksf
B-7
Brown clay
Axial Strain at Failure (%):
Unconfined Compressive Strength (ksf):
Dry Density (pcf)
Moisture (%)
97.2
24.7
Sample Diameter (inches)
Sample Height (inches)
UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST - ASTM D 2166
Strain Rate (% / minute):
5.6
1.9
Test Date: 11/4/2010
5.468
2.389
B - 6
0.98
Plate
W.O. 5822-40
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING
GEOLABS, INC.UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII WEST OAHU CAMPUS
DRIVEWAY "B"EWA, OAHU, HAWAII
G_
UC
5
82
2-4
0.G
PJ
GE
OL
AB
S.G
DT
2
/15
/11
0
5
10
15
20
25
300.1 1 10 100
Initial Final
Dry Density, pcf:
35.7
0.7955
100.0
1.202 0.763
Degree of Saturation, %
Void Ratio
Sample Height, inches 1.0000
Water Content, %Sample: B-4
Depth: 1.0 - 2.5 feet
Description: Brown clay
Liquid Limit = Plasticity Index =
CO
NS
OLID
AT
ION
%
NORMAL PRESSURE, ksf
B - 7
CONSOLIDATION TEST - ASTM D 2435
13.8 24.4
110.588.4
N/A N/A
Plate
W.O. 5822-40
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING
GEOLABS, INC.UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII WEST OAHU CAMPUS
DRIVEWAY "B"EWA, OAHU, HAWAII
G_
CO
NS
OL
5
82
2-4
0.G
PJ
GE
OL
AB
S.G
DT
2
/15
/11
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
0 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60
Depth:
Description:
117.1
Molding Moisture (%)
Hammer Wt. (lbs)
Hammer Drop (inches)
Sample:
Molding Dry Density (pcf)
16.7
Swell (%)
4.5
Bulk 1
Brown clay
6.39
Corr. CBR @ 0.1"
PENETRATION, inches
ST
RE
SS
, psi
Surface
Days Soaked 4
No. of Layers
CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO - ASTM D 1883
No. of Blows
3/4 inch minus
10
5Aggregate
18
56
B - 8Plate
W.O. 5822-40
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING
GEOLABS, INC.UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII WEST OAHU CAMPUS
DRIVEWAY "B"EWA, OAHU, HAWAII
G_
CB
R
58
22
-40
.GP
J
GE
OL
AB
S.G
DT
2
/15
/11
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
0 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60
Depth:
Description:
117.1
Molding Moisture (%)
Hammer Wt. (lbs)
Hammer Drop (inches)
Sample:
Molding Dry Density (pcf)
16.7
Swell (%)
4.5
Bulk 1
Brown clay
6.39
Corr. CBR @ 0.1"
PENETRATION, inches
ST
RE
SS
, psi
Surface
Days Soaked 4
No. of Layers
CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO - ASTM D 1883
No. of Blows
3/4 inch minus
10
5Aggregate
18
56
B - 8Plate
W.O. 5822-40
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING
GEOLABS, INC.UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII WEST OAHU CAMPUS
DRIVEWAY "B"EWA, OAHU, HAWAII
G_
CB
R
58
22
-40
.GP
J
GE
OL
AB
S.G
DT
2
/15
/11
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
0 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60
Depth:
Description:
113.6
Molding Moisture (%)
Hammer Wt. (lbs)
Hammer Drop (inches)
Sample:
Molding Dry Density (pcf)
17.7
Swell (%)
3.5
Bulk 2
Brown clay
5.43
Corr. CBR @ 0.1"
PENETRATION, inches
ST
RE
SS
, psi
Surface
Days Soaked 5
No. of Layers
CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO - ASTM D 1883
No. of Blows
3/4 inch minus
10
5Aggregate
18
56
B - 9Plate
W.O. 5822-40
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING
GEOLABS, INC.UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII WEST OAHU CAMPUS
DRIVEWAY "B"EWA, OAHU, HAWAII
G_
CB
R
58
22
-40
.GP
J
GE
OL
AB
S.G
DT
2
/15
/11
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
0 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60
Depth:
Description:
113.6
Molding Moisture (%)
Hammer Wt. (lbs)
Hammer Drop (inches)
Sample:
Molding Dry Density (pcf)
17.7
Swell (%)
3.5
Bulk 2
Brown clay
5.43
Corr. CBR @ 0.1"
PENETRATION, inches
ST
RE
SS
, psi
Surface
Days Soaked 5
No. of Layers
CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO - ASTM D 1883
No. of Blows
3/4 inch minus
10
5Aggregate
18
56
B - 9Plate
W.O. 5822-40
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING
GEOLABS, INC.UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII WEST OAHU CAMPUS
DRIVEWAY "B"EWA, OAHU, HAWAII
G_
CB
R
58
22
-40
.GP
J
GE
OL
AB
S.G
DT
2
/15
/11