ML18017A477

Large Scale Triaxial Shear & Permeability Tests. Forwards Results of 15 Inch Diameter Consolidated Undrained Triaxial Shear Test,Grain Size Analyses & 14 Inch Diameter Constant Head Permeability Tests

ML18017A477
Person / Time
Site:	Harris
Issue date:	04/30/1975
From:	ARMY, DEPT. OF, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
To:
Shared Package
ML18017A476	List: ML18017A475 ML18017A477 ML18017A479 ML18017A480 ML19270F601 ML19270F602
References
H-02022, H-2022, NUDOCS 7902220072
Download: ML18017A477 (56)

Text

4 I

i+

I

~

?

c ~w &95L4falA14&~

~ ~ "i ';

~

~

.i, t

'i I

4

~C'r

~a

~

i

.. I U.S. ARMYENGINEER DIVISIONLABORATORY SOUTH ATLANTIC II II h

~

II

)

I J/ ~

yi LARGE SCALE TRIAXIALSHEAR AND PERMEABILITY TESTS SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY f'i"i,' ),,

tT~ ai'3(

~.goo/oo i jot>>l<~~

R0gZ4o o&k jl>W

'A Fi" '

APRIL 1975 CORPS OF ENGINEERS MARIETTA, GEORGIA Requisition No'.

H-02022

~p i

gA F90 2220 07+

~. fii I

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

Work Order No.

9051

S I

e 1

r

~

~

I

~

I w ~ >>

~

PREFACE The Carolina Power and Light Company'CP 6 L), Raleigh, North C rolina, in.a letter dated 4 October

1974, requested that the U. S. Army Engineer Division Laboratory, South Atlantic, perform laboratory tests on material from a random rockfill sample taken from a test section at Weir Shearon Harris Nuclear Plant Site.

The test program was authorized by Office, Chief of Engineers, in the first indorsement, DAEN-CWO, 11 November 1974, to letter SADEN-L, 25 October 1974, sub)ect:

"Request for Approval to Perform 15-In. Triaxial Shear Test Program for Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Carolina Power and Light Company".

Tests conducted were:

a 15-in. diameter consolidated undrained triaxial shear test, grain size analyses, and 14>>in. diameter constant head permeability tests.

The work was performed under the general direction of Mr. Robert J. Stephenson, P.E., Director, South Atlantic'ivision Laboratory.

The laboratory tests were supervised by Messrs.

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

The ana]ysis of the data and prep-aration of this report were performed by Mr. William L. Tison.

~ r s).=

)l gr!

r'l~

I~ r y

~

I Ilr.i,",inc'r'~r

~

~4trr'v.. ~~~1 ahi~

~ ~ i i~ i',,~~v

~ ". r irag~e.pei~~peyr.-;i~

I I

t

~ 5

~

.'. 5

~

I ~ I~ M

~

I 5

pl

~ ~

+44

~ 4 'I<A~

lltk45>> I\\XLhWb~ka 4<<6 I l(4%A

'Nate w

c ~,

tu I,~

5

', ~

CONTENTS

~Pa e reface

<<>> <<<<<<<<>> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>><<<<<<<<<<>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<>><<<<>><<<<<<ji p

Conversion Factors, British to Metric Units of Measurement-iv Ob)ect References

.1 Special Equipment 1

Description of Sample-

<<3 Scope of Tests-Test Procedures Test Results-Discussion of Test Results 13 13 I

~ g 5

Conclusions 17 APPENDIX.

Individual Test Reports k

~4'

<<I 5%

'I Ic,

~

Jp,

'<<5 Ip I iI;I

~ f

~ g

~

~

~

, ~'5I l,

I/ <,.,+<<I <<45PyI4lv g, QW/~.tel<<~+ $

4 5 5',I QI " q <<,a <<

~ / JQ ', P

5<< i,v e ~

• y 5

~ ~

~, ~sI I

~

~

~ >>I'"t 4crgiry. (55t'f4'yyay~~t'

'A r

air

i ~( a ~

' <<<<<<'l e 4

~ ~ f

~.>>

a p'<<<<fax tp<<t>><<>>Lt u A a >e~o,tt 6

...~.: > ~ ~ ~"vr,.

o w

~

~ av;g...

>s <<)at '<<

'4 CONVERSION FACTORS BRITISH TO METRIC UNITS OF MEASUREMENT British units of measurement used in this report can be converted Y

to metric units as follows:

Multi 1 To Obtain inches pounds cubic feet 2.54 centimeters 0.45336 kilograms 0.028317 cubic meters pounds per square inch (ps i) 703.1 kilograms per square meter tons per square foot 0.9765 centimeters per second 1.969 kilograms per square centimeter feet per minute g's t ~

<'i~)t 1

~

t ~

S' e'

~ ~

iv

'QP'8<'

) J(4 0 t'

't<<i ~ "

~[<<<<~st, 0 t

~ <<mitt y <<>> H \\+

I~ p I 'P ~ )

qlPP'P%'0+$ ';l 't

~ 'P

'0 gv,

) t'

~ +)>>

~fP I

f

5'V 4.

.0 I

~

LARGE SCALE TRIAXIALSHIKAR AND PERMEABILI1Y TESTS SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLAgT 1

OBJECT:

The ob)ect of the test program was to determine the gradation of the rockfill sample and the triaxial shear and permeability character-istics of specimens reconstituted from the random rockfill sample.

2.

REFERENCES:

Department of the Army, Office of the Chief of Engineers, Engineer Manual No. 1110-2-1906, Laboratory Soils Testing, 30 November 1970.

+I

(

~ 'j

i>,'

I',

3 ~

SPECIAL EQUI'ENT:

a.

Controlled-Strain Triaxial Device (Figure 1). The unit accom-modates a specimen'15 inches in diameter by 32 inches high and is capable of a maximum chamber pressure of 400 psi.

Axial load is applied by a 14-in. diameter, 200,000 lbs. capacity hydraulic ram fastened to a 5 in. diameter piston.

The piston seats in a socket on the specimen loading cap.

Specimen drainage is through a 2.5-in. diameter Norton porous stone in the pedestal and a similar 1.25-in. diameter stone in the specimen cap.

Drainage lines are 1/4-in. polyethelene tubing with Whitey needle valves and Swagelok quick-connect couplers.

The interior of the specimen is connected to a 6-in. diameter aluminum saturation reservoir having a capacity of 19,000 ml with 100 ml graduations.

The chamber fluid is connected to a 5-in. diameter, 11,500 ml aluminum reservoir with 100 ml graduations.

During saturation,

4t 4

E T

h I

0 0

~i 1 ~,,

gj

~

~

~

~

r '

~

Fig.

1 << Unassembled triaxial shear test apparatus.

In the foreground are the collar, split mold, rubber mem-

brane, and membrane stretcher utilized in preparing the test specimens.

L Pig.

2 - Equipment set up for constant-head permeability tests on.rockfill material.

C g

V ri

~r,'

V

a 2000 ml lucite burette with 10 ml graduations is connected to the specimen through the upper drainage line.,

~ ~

S r,.

1 b.

Permeameter (Figure 2).

The permeameter is open ended and accommodates a specimen 14 inches in diameter and 18 inches high.

A column of water equal in diameter to the test specimen is the source of flow through the specimen.

The permeameter is constructed with three overflow pipes at different heights above the specimen top so the constant head elevation can be varied.

The permeameter is placed inside a larger diameter container with an overflow which maintains the tail water at a constant height.

p C

~I c.

Gradation E ui ment.

A large Tylab mechanical shaker con-taining six screens from the 3-in. to the 3/8-in. sieve sizes was used.

Larger sizes werc separated by hand over a series of screens with openings up to 8-inches.

Rocks over G-in, size were measured with templates.

Conventional equipment was utilized to grade the No. 4 to the No. 200 sieve sizes.

4.

DESCRIPTION OF SAMPLE:

All test specimens were reconstituted with material from an 8-ton random rockfill sample taken from a field test section by CP 6 L personnel (Figure 3).

The material classified as brown. silty gravel sizes (GM) with some cobble sizes.

All of the sample was finer than 24-in. size and 17 percent was finer than the No. 200 sieve size (Plate 1)*.

The soil had a liquid limit of 35 and a plastic limit

+All plates are contained in the Appendix.

C

I

~

'r r

rrrrII(>>

~ '

I (r

~ %)IVl rr'sa't( avr(

\\ ~

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

~

~

moisture content which were 135.0 pcf dry density and 5.0 percent water content, respectively.

5.

SCOPE OF TESTS:

The gradation of the total sample, air dried, was obtained and a "replacement gradation" containing minus 3>>in. sizes established for the tests.

Three 15-in. diameter triaxial specimens with the replaced gradation (Plate 2) were compacted to the field density and moisture conditions and tested "in consolidated undrained triaxial shear with pore pressure measurements (R Tests).

Confining pressures

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

The grain size distribution of each specimen after shear was obtained to determine the degree of particle breakdown due to compaction and shear forces.

Three 14-in. diameter specimens were prepared simi-h.

r 1

r%

larly with various gradations for permeability tests.

The grain size distribution of these specimens after testing were also deter-mined.

6.

TEST PROCEDURES:

a.

Gradation.

The total sample was spread out and air dried.

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

The minus S<<in. to plus 3-in. sizes were graded by I jr r rr

~.

,"1 l,r

, ~ (

hand using the large screens.

The minus 3-in. sizes were graded

'~(rll+%t 'I t,+~+>IVV;w.pip ~4tlrpr(rg+ 'I) t pv)'I I l'rtrhs ':, rl'r-~, "",~.'(r(I r, ('Il,II'lr>'(vtr lr errt'tre

~ r Irl,tlat rtgtr>>(,Ir

~ ~

~

r ~

I@A

~ I

~

~ 4 III A

~

~ '

~ Ar ~ r

~ ~ ~

~

~

~ &

Pig.

3 - Sample from random rockfill test section at Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant when delivered to SAD Laboratory.

Cv'cg Crl lL S.

~f+CTIII Pig. 4 - Material prepared with the replaced gradation to form one liftin the 15-in. triaxial shear test specimen.

Ct (

~4'r1",rl(-,)P(,4 fIr/44(fig+

~ pl~1.Ir i~ I+7+ tP~Prr.~..gg..gr

~ r,II;;7.g

( W,,~'

~ '" ':

~, ~ ~ '

.-,V(1$

4 0

1 4W 4

'V =

4 4~

~

~

Vl

~

~,'a<< ~ <<4'1 'Q4

~1%+vh>> a<<<<

~

Il >>

~ >>

4>>atada

~ ~

<< ~

~ ~

through the Tylab shaker in batches of about 40 lbs.

Shaking time was the minimum required to obtain a "clean" separation without unduly breaking down the particles further.

This was usually about 8 minutes.

A conventional sieve analysis was performed on a representative sample of the minus No. 4 sieve sizes as outlined in App. V of the reference.

~,J'.

Triaxial Shear Test.

Except as noted below, the triaxial shear test procedure was genexally the same as that outlined in paxa-

~ ><<

graph 7 of Appendix X to the reference.

(1)

Preparation of Specimen.

For each specimen, four sepa-x'ate equal-weight batches of air-dry material were prepared by combining the necessary amount of each sieve size to obtain the minus 3-in. sizes xeplaced gradation (Figure 4).

The replaced gradation was based on a total gradation furnished by CP & L instead of on the total gradation

~ 4 A

~4

,'C

~

~

<<.~r r~~

~

p,<<

<<<<!r.

~

>V<<;

j.ft>

')

~,<<<<

ll

;ty iC

'l.,T;;

of the sample submitted.

The gradation furnished by CP & L had been developed fry a number of field tests and was believed to be more representative of the in-situ compacted rockfill without additional processing.

Each batch was mixed at 5 percent water content and placed in aix tight 'containers until needed for preparation of the test specimen.

Each of the prepared batches was quartered and the quarter-portions compacted individually into the rubber membrane-lined mold and collar placed on the.triaxial base.

Thus, each specimen was formed in 16"lifts.

Each liftwas spread inside the mold and then compacted to the required thickness (Figure 5) with a large compaction

-4 ~

)

J S

ll I

C

~

'C I

1 5

JP

+ 'I Fig. 5 - Top of one liftafter compaction inside the mold forming the 15<<in. Itriaxial shear test specimen.

A;

}<<"

vl

'i

'7(

i".'

pi~:.

.,r

)lI

~.'(p.

Fig.

6 - Prepared specimen for 15-in. diameter triaxial shear test. inclosed by water tight membrane.

~

~

~

'I

~

l r '

'anNLer previously fabricated for standard compaction tests in a 12-in. diameter mold.

The lifts were compacted to obtain a uniform

~

~

4,

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

The collar and mold were removed and the specimen cap secured.

Initial dimensions of the specimen were measured and water tight membranes placed around the specimen (Figure 6).

(2)

Saturation Procedure:

The apparatus was completely assembled, (Figure 7), the chamber filled with water, and saturation of the specimen initiated through the bottom by means of a vacuum on the top of the specimen.

Approximately 2000 cc of water was allowed

\\ ~

( I to flow from the top of the specimen.

The vacuum was then replaced by back pressure.

To insure complete saturation, the back pressure was increased in 14 psi increments to a total of 63 psi.

~L I

M

.pl 4 J

J (3)

Consolidation Procedure:

When 100 percent saturation was indicated, the chamber pressure was increased to the required test confining pressure (M3).

Volume change measurements were obtained from the interior burette and plotted versus logaritham of time until primary consolidation was accomplished.

(4)

Compression Procedure:

The piston was brought into contact with the specimen cap and the load indicator set to zero.

All valves were closed to prevent drainage and the specimen axially loaded at a controlled strain rate of about 0'

percent per minute.

Load, deflection, and pore pressure measurements were taken during

fi 4'

. ~

I

~

F ~

St ~

~ ~

~ e Fig.

7 - Assembled test chamber for 15-in. diameter triaxial shear test with contxol console on right.

~

~

4'

P

I

~

~

~

~ I

/

~

shear.

Loading was discontinued at 20 percent axial strain.

The chamber was then dismantled, (Figure 8), the membrane

removed, and the oven-dry weight and after-test gradation of the total specimen determined (Figures 9, 10,

& ll).

Permeabilit Test:

(1)

Preparation of Specimen:

Each specimen was prepared similar to the triaxial shear specimen using four equal-weight batches compacted in four lifts to form the specimen inside the permeameter.

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

gradation equivalent to the replaced gradation corresponding to the total gradation furnished by CP & L.

This was in order to test a

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

I M

I

~

(2)

Test Procedure:

The pezmeameter was placed in the large container which was filled with water and the specimen saturated by IL ~

rl' PJi;r I~

rl'

~

jr seepage through the bottom for 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />.

Water flow into the perm-eameter was then regulated to maintain a constant head water elevation at the first overflow pipe.

Flow through the specimen, top to bottom, produced by the differential head was measured for a given time. This was repeated for two more increasing differential heads.

The apparatus was then dismantled and the dry weight and after-test gradation of the entire specimen determined.

10

,r't>

'h+ g'P~Q W~P

~ %f7 'JPP g

\\O'J ~ f P+Ar

~ % ~ r,,rfV'0>> r'J<'L ~

'Vq,

-ra--=:,

W V

'rrral'rrr rr r

~

r V rNyr Jr~r ~ ~err ~

"7 I

r

~

~

~,

Ar

-.3

I

.I p

='

~

~

rr 4'I v

~'

\\

ja,a

..I rt

~ I

~l fIl' w;":f I

'r r,

I

,L, I

1 3

, 'I

~

~III I <<r e ~ aery Cr a ~ II J.J Ieaa <<I ae aa f.\\ ~

,t e

~< r'~ W v v

<<eaka ah Agf e1I 4 v

.;,IrIr C

Fig.

8 - Specimen after 15-in. triaxial shear test before the membrane has been removed.

.Pig.

9 - Specimen after triaxial test at 1 tsf confining pressure

( g).

C M

'I V'

5

~ 55 m <<<<>><<..~>~h <<. "~~~i >>S~.~,i><<'~WC,pr<.~<<5+'it ~i 5V~. ~TA

<<<<,/55>jl)'5 5

5 j i,i,

.5,<<j <<,

5 ) ~

45

. v 55'.

~

~

CI i

f 5

S 5

5

~.

'5 t

5 5

J r 5'

'.?

5'

~

~

'i'<<p 55<<<<<<<<15

~

~

0<<<<<< ~

~ 5 ~ r iff1 I

~

~

57 ~

~ <<<<5 5

~ C 5

I

~5 Pig.

10 - Specimen after triaxial test at 2 tsf confining pressure

( ~3)

Fig.

11 - Specimen after triaxia1 test at 4 tsf confining pressure

( ~j) ~

T r

f 7.

TEST RESULTS:

The results of all the tests are shown on standard forms in the Appendix hereto as listed below.

~ g Test Total Gradation Report (ENG Form 2087)

Plate No.

Gradation Curves for the Triaxial Test (ENG Form 2087)

Triaxial Compression Test Report (ENG Form 2089)

Permeability Test No.

1 Report (SAD Form 1971)

Permeability Test No.

2 Report (SAD Form 1971)

~

Permeabi.lity Test No.

3 Report (SAD Form 1971) r

~ g>>

V<

g>>

~

pi'>>

8.

DISCUSSION OF TEST RESULTS:

a.

Triaxial Shear (Plate 3).

The remolded test specimens aver-aged 4.5 percent water content and 135.6 pcf dry density.

These were considered satisfactory when compared to the field water content of 5.0 percent and dry density of 135.0 pcf.

This density was obtained in the laboratory without using what would be considered excessive compactive effort.

The procedure did not provide a means to measure particle breakdown due to compaction alone.

Figure 5 indicates the larger sizes were breaking down somewhat during specimen preparation.

Final saturation computations and pore pressure observations indicated 100 percent saturation was achieved.

The strain rate of 0.1 percent per minute was slow enough to allow equalization of the induced pore 13

>>~5 j V',

>>'hr Q

~.

~ g

~

~

~ I

'>>>>-. ~ >>',.<<

~ >>>>

s V. '>>. >>>> V. V>>>> ~

~ >>>>, %>>i t, ',>> 4 rf

~

>> h

.~.>>>>

. \\,.,>>>>~ll,>>. '>>'; ~ V

~ >>, 4>>>>>> ~ '">>','g ~ ~,V>>>>.>>>> t

>>F'd.l "2), ~

C 4

1

~

I

~

~ <<

I -9

~ <<4\\

~ L <<A 1 c,lk.

pressures throughout the specimens.

In each.specimen, the maximum induced pore pressure was reached at'bout, 4.5 percent axial strain

'nd showed very little dissipation thereafter.

Deviator stress

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

The shear strength parameters were arbitrarily computed at 15 percent axial strain.

The total strength envelope thus obtained indicated an. in-ternal friction angle (g) of 20o and-a cohesion intercept of O.l tsf.

~ ~

The corresponding effective strength envelope (9') is 40.0o with 0.0 cohesion.

These strengths are comparable to data. obtained pre-

% ~

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

The after>>test gradations for the three triaxial test specimens show there was some breakdown of particles.

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

The indication that most of the particle breakdown occurred during specimen preparation rather than during shear was evident since the specimen at the highest confining pressure (56 psi) did not break

~'I

~

~l 1

'I" "pl,

'1:

P Nl SI),

\\ ~

~

~

< ~1 I

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

{14 psi).

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

The results are summarized in Table I.

'1)

The first gradation was the same as that used in the triaxial test. It produced consistent permeability coefficients 14

~VW P

~ P f VI~ k )t $ 4+ ~

~ 8

~ P '('tW tag 7 ~

yl )4

~

4 I 'ft

~ r~.~

~.

~ i

~i

~ >e,

.% ~i ~~i ~ awe;egr,w,.%

P

'i I

e

'I I

1 Ik t( <<.l

<<4l<<h>>C1%

~ I >> ii I~

<< ~

\\

l<<%<I ~ I

<< ~ ~ $

~

~

~

C <<Cl,

~

w,

~

5

~

~ '

I

~ ~

SUMMARY

OF PREMEABILITY TEST X Passing X Passing Test Ho. 4 Sieve No. 4 Sieve Differential K 0 x 10<<<<

cm/sec Run No.

32.4 (1

32 6'2 (3

11.4 18.4 52.5 14.9 11.2 15.4 32.4 (1

36.5 (2

(3

11. 3 18.7 36.3 91.7 74.6 21.2 28.0 I

(1

34. 1 (2

(3

11. 1 18.5 36.1 74.6 58.5

13. 9

)<<'l t< ~

~<<,

~ \\

C<<

>> 'I I

15

~l.

C r% >PL ~<<>l5c'0 +lwFl'"tPwlg~~, >>>><<Q'P~.rwJ4rgc<<icnf5'/

~ ~ i')

~ '

i

<<<<c<<>>'I)III<<g'ii'<I<<,y

'I

r.

N e

tion indicated breakdown of the gravel-size particles but less than one percent in-crease in the amount passing the No. 4 sieve.

The latter was believed to be erroneous because of the amount of breakdown in the gravel sizes.

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

the larger particles making an accurate gradation difficult.

(2)

The second specimen was prepared with a coarser gradation'n the gravel sizes but the same percent passing the No. 4 sieve.

The range of the measured permeability coefficients were significantly greater (21.2 to 91.7 x 10"4.cm/sec).

The apparent decrease in per-meability during continued testing was attributed to migration of the fines.

The after<<test gradation indicated an increase of about four percent passing the No. 4 sieve size.

This was comparable to the breakdown in the triaxial test.

Extra effort was made to obtain a "cleaner" after-test gradation on this specimen.

(3)

The third permeability specimen was much coarser with 28.0 percent passing the No. 4 sieve.

This gradation was a further attempt to obtain an after-test gradation equal to the actual or theoretical replaced gradation corresponding to the field gradation obtained by CP & L.

The after-test percent passing the No. 4 was less than two percent higher than desired, but the permeability co-efficients were slightly less than the values obtained in the second

test, Though somewhat inconsistent with the gradation, this tended 16

a C

"~i

'k

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

9.

CONCLUSIONS:

a.

Triaxial Shear.

The shear strength parameters measured in the R Tests are comparable to the strengths obtained previously on similar materials.

In fact, the characteristics of the sample tested in this program are very much like material tested from the New Hope Dam in North Carolina.

Therefore, the data obtained on this sample from the Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant are considered quite reliable.

in these tests varied, experience indicates their order of magnitude is reasonable for this type material. It is difficult to obtain con-sistent permeability data in laboratory tests with relatively small diameter specimens on very coarse materials that contain significant quantities of finer sizes, Thc finer particles are often insufficient to fillall of the voids between the coarser rocks so there is little doubt that these finer sizes migrate with the flow of water through the specimen during the test.

As a result, they accumulate in spots, restricting the flow of water and producing rather conservative (low permeability) data compared to what would be obtained if a true field

'fI e ~

sample could be tested.

Nevertheless, the permeability coefficients measured on the material in these tests are in the range of "good drainage" suitable for pervious sections of dams and dikes.

Typically, values of this order of magnitude are obtained on clean sands or clean sand and gravel mixtures.

17 I

~,

~ ~

V 'C

~

~ l

~

~;

@PIC@

~L'. ly.

y, jt'lg:~ oC. w

~

~

Eh

~, ~,. ~a f~.

~ l,

~,'

tl,w l ~

i

~s>>

i ll,i Iw t-

~ Ã

'l 4

~, ~,

0

4 1 t M ~

~ o A

l

~ I

~ ~ I APPENDIX

~ ~

INDIVIDUALTEST REPORTS Test Total Gradation-Gradation Curves for Triaxial Test ---

~Pa e

Al A2 Triaxial Compression Test --------<<-

A3 Permeability Test No.

1 Permeability Test No. 2--

A4

~s os m

A5 Permeability Test No.

3 A6

E

'I C

1 JC

'k t f

C I

DEPART.IBG'F THE'R".fY, SOUTH ATiKELTIC DIVISION LABORATORY, CORPS OF ENGIiIEERS, 611 SOUTH COBB DRIVE, MARIETTA, GA. 30061 WORK ORDER NO.

9051:

WEQ

"'O H-02022

-1

'V U. S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES 24M12 8

6 U. S. STANOARO SIEVE NUMBERS 3

4 6

8 10 1416 20 30 40 50 70 100 140 200 HYDROMETER 10 C,

n I

C-.

n r.I'

~

I

-" 60

à CN~

50 IZ 0

BIN ion IX 40 ~

CCI CN 50 I/l o

CP IX 60 CJ jI I

n hP 0

10 OX

~mpj:

10 5

GRAIN QZE IN MILUMETERS 0.1 0.05 0.01 0.005 100 0.001

\\

'I

't

~ C SCNICI'C NO.

VR-24-3-7 COBBLES EIev IN DCgW 210.0'-225.0 GRAVEL Brown silt ravel sizes GN~w/ao.-..e cobble sizes Moisture content of sample GRADATION CURVES IIGYUIC

~ Wg 5

hen r LL PL 35 27 ceive~

PI SILT OR C1AY earon arr s uc ear over n.~ Plant CP&L Lab; No. 145/393 Acs Plant Excavation NNNNN Nnm~l~nNn 4 10 January 1975 EHG, ',""2087 Plate l.

4~

Pl I

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, SOUTH ATLANTIC DIVISION LABORATORY, CORPS OF ENGINEERS, 611 SOlEll COBB DRIVF., MARIETTA, GA. 30061 PORK ORDER NO.

9051'EQ, NO, CPL NO. H"-02022 U.S. STANOARO SEVE OPENING IN INCHES 8

6 4

2 1

1 U. S. STANOARO SIEVE NUMBERS 3

4 6

8 10 1416 20 30 40 50 70 100 140 200 HYDROMETER 10 ra 3.on s

t 70 60 3

dt IZ 50 I

.fLlrni,Shed b"scdI on C

t da al.

e tg pl a at

-gra t

0 3

P R

IX Id

'4l dt 50 III

%o8 I

a 60 4l CJ 30 ra)atio 8

si RT COBBLES 100 50 10 5

0.5 GRAIN SITE IN MILLIMETERS O.l 0.05 QOl 0.005 SILT OR CLAY 100 0.001 SadI."'. No,

..'-24-3-7 EIev 'dr tkIc4 210.0'2~0'otal cLaaaIScaod Bro.:n well graded silty gra:el (Gh'-G:t) w/a little cobbles GRADATION CURVES Nat wg 6.0 35 PI PL 27 8

earOn arr3.S uC ear Ower

~<<alaIII, CP&L I.ab; No. 145/393 (R Test)

A~ Plant Excavation ammglaE Sam le No. VR-24-3-7 14 February 1975 EHG..'.".",. 2087 Plate 2

~

'\\

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

r

~

~ ~

0 CaS0 0

nI O C2 Ch

~

~

0 0A

~

~

8 0 Or Ts 4

I TS a

~I 00 S

O 4

0

~aX ~

4&ii 2

4 6

Normal Stress, 0,

T/sq ft 10

~o Cl Cl 0

Test No.

Water content Void ratio Saturation ry ens ys 1h cu ft vo So yd 4.5 4 4.5 271

.270 135,6 135.7 4.6

. 272 135.5

~

~

A 0 0 g A Q 0 A O

'al c2 n

p%

OO 0

e0 0

0 5

lo 15 20 Axial Strain, $

'Shear Str Pa te s

'Mater content Void ratio Saturation n

ac pres-sure T s Mater content Void ratio vc cc Sc 9.4

$ 9.2

.258

.255 100.0 < 00.0 <

4.50 4.50 94 4 92

. 258

. 255 8.4

.233 100.0~

4.50 8.4

.233 20 0

tan e

.364

.839 Ool 0 '

T/sq a

Notho4 ot oataoaIIoo D Controlled stress Controlled strain incr priqc p stress T/sq ft 03 Max deviator

stress, T/sq ft ( 1 3)max 1.00 2.00 1.45 1.99 Time to failure, min tf Rate of strain, rcent/min 150 0.10 150 0.10

~ Strain at(col o3)

U)t de i o

(cl 0 )

Initial diameter, in.

go Initial height, in.

8 14.87 14o86 1.45

l. 99 14.88 14.88 32.00 32.00 4.00 4.49 150 0.10 14.93 4.49 14.88 32.00 35 PL 27

~~ l. See lab classifi-'at on ata on PI 8

Os 2.76 WtdoAvg earon arr s

uc ear ower ect Plant CP6L Lab. No.

145/393 Plant Excavation TyPe of test R TyPe of sPecimen Remolded*

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

2. +Specimens requested to Boring No.

Sample No. VR-24-3"7 be remolded to 135.0 pcf ry ens y a wa er DeP h 210. 0'-225. 0'ate 15 Feb 1975 KUAXXALCOHPRE!SION TEST REPORT 2089 (EK lf10 2 l902)

Plate 3

PIICVIOUS COITIONS AIIC OISOI CTC TRAlVSLUCEN1'3 o 'rt

~ ~ot:rar,oa>a r r 'a,

<<cor ro a I or

~ Itr oq

. r, <a< o>

~ s >>>

o

J Hl.

CA "C

8 f P

1

~

~

~ ~

+ v

'w> i +

~

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

Z GI:CHEERS, 611 SOUTH ATLANTIC DIVISION LABORATORY, COBB DR.,MARIETTA, GA. 30061 REQN. NO.

CPL NO. H-02022 W. 0.

NO. 9051

~ ~

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

4 4 2

Ihh I

iA 6 5 3

A b

810141b 20 30 40 5070100I40200 HYDROMETER 0

40

,.fter 10 20 70 bO Z

50 V~ 40 30 20 L: ta ra e.'t.

ation pecL?i r

e di eci re olde d ns1t uc.te pc to 30 9

.0 >

50 0

LJ bo Q

IJ 70 <

IO

~r

~ t ghee 5 10 0

500 coeetxs 100 SO COAR5L IO 5

0.5 GlAIN SIZE AAIJ.IALETElS co Abc HkDKJM SINE 0.1 0.05 0.01 0.005 SLT 0% CLAT 100 0.001 Type of Specimen Before Test 3 I am in.

Ht 17 ( 3 in. water content,w Classi f icat ion;, '-l::l)M/a l.'

fe LL Gs

2. 76 Void Ratio, eo Saturation, S

. 272 5

Wf er Sf After Test 9.6

. 272 5

~ltctShearon liarris Nuclear Pc':er P ant, OPAL 4S/

9 Plant Excavation si~rLt wo. VR-24-3-I 7 'lo= 0." r.-:

SAD rOF41 197!

21 J': f 1964 ory oensity.

7d "2o 13.2 " N/sec p,iriabI.ij!Constant Head PERXEA8ILITY TEST REPORT 14 Tcb 1975

,","fo.o'-

25.0'est No.

1 Plate 4

'P

-I'

~

/

L DEPARTHEL T OP TIIE A."...'%i, SOUTIi ATLANTIC DEVXSTON LABORATORY, CORPS OF E!;GI;:EERS, 611 SOUTH CQBB DR.,MRTETTA, CA. 30."61 CPL '.:0.

If-C 20" 2

14. 0. M. 9051 r ~

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

4 2

IYi I

la Yi 5 3

4 8

810 14th 20 30 40 50 TO 100 I40 200 HYtÃOMETER 0

~ ~

10 s

ra a 20

" 80 X~

50 40 30 io Grad Tes e

en 8

eqtte 0

07. Sfat r

ep aced r e -R plac f

Pe m~ "3'>>

f.f eretlt i! ad(c..

ll.3 18.7 36.3'l 21 10 cc 30 9

50 0V eo tr LJ TO 80 0

500 CCIES 100 50 COAt5f GRAVEL 10 5

0.5 0.1 0.05 GRAIN SIZE MKLIMETERS coktsf MtONM 0.01 0.005 Sa,t CÃ CLAY 100 0.001 27 OLO TyPe of SPec i<en Rc olded Oi~

13 86 in.

Ht 17 ~ 63 in.

rown

~-e, gzactc y grave Total Classilication (G~'-GIl'jw a ll.litle LI.

Os 2.76 After Test Sefore Test water Content,w Void Ratio, eo Saturation, So Ory Oensity, Td S leal Dn ii:llris Is c leg rQI ttoxo 50 5wf Lab..;o.

145/393 plane Excavation 10.0 ef 0.277 0.277 49 6 s

sf 5AlltLe Igo, I R 99.7 Klt4G HO.

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

~

..0.0'--:"S 0'AD FORM I 97 I 2I JULY I964 XIXXXX/Constant Head PERMEASIL I TY TEST REPORT LCS t fO ~

Plate 5

~,

<<*tt

@IV i

I K

+

fP K@V A Vt l%

DKI'ARTHEHT OF TiiE AR!.Yt Co"ZS OF a;CZ:;EZRS, 61.1 SOUTV. mls.@AC DXVXST.O:i uZ"m'O"i:.,

SCUT!1 COTE DR.,KLRXETZA, Gh.

3006'L C".-7.

'. O.

1'.-0"C22 M. 0. 50.

9051

~

r~

U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMbERS 6

4 3

2 I'h I

~A 6 h 3

4 6

810141620 30 40 5070100140200 HYDROMETEk

'IO eo r da eld ion fter G a at on 20 70 Q~

60

~

50 Z

40 Used on p1 ced I

2 er" c if.er 1.1 18.5 74.6 58.5 30 X9 50 0lJ 60 9 yo <

20 10 N TE Tes cn s

eques, o

5.0 p 80 0

SOO CONLRS 100 SO GRAVEL 10 5

0.5 0.1 0.05 0.01 0.005 GRAIN SIZE MRLIMETERS SRT OR CLAY 100

.001 Type of Specimen Before Test After Test s.l:ar":1

> a. r Ai:-"'a

~

~'- '

K)jKT 1;

('1 T

Total Oiam 13.86 in.

Ht 17.63 in.

C 1 assi f icat ion (G;;-Gp!}~/a 1$ ttip LL 35

2. 76 water Content,w Void Ratio.

eo Saturation, 5

5.8 0.286 56.0 Wf ef Sf

10. 1 s

0.286 97.1 s

00tHG HQ.

SAlltgt go A 'i

~ i 3

Lab. '.io. 145/393 Plane. Excavation PI.

27 010 Ory Oensity.

133-9 1 bif 1 "20 Above* cm/ s ec 10 Peb 1975 OCAYH EI 210.0 -:25.'

Aisi

.0 ~

SAD FORM 1971 21 JULY 1964 X~AAi'.GCet Cons t ant Head P ERNEAB I L I TY TEST REPORT plate 6

7