ML18017A562

Forwards Rept on Rock Fill Test Sections,Main Dam. Requests Approval of Rept as Soon as Possible

ML18017A562
Person / Time
Site:	Harris
Issue date:	07/18/1979
From:	Mcduffie M CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT CO.
To:	Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML18017A563	List: ML18017A562 ML19241C048
References
NUDOCS 7907260460
Download: ML18017A562 (108)

Text

REGULATORY IN MATION DISTRIBUTION SYST (RIDS) r ACCFSSION NBR:7907260460 DOC ~ DATE: 79/07/18 QOTARI'ZED:

NO DOC FACIL;50 40'0 Shearon Harr)s Nuclear Power-Plantg Un)t li Carolina 0

50~-401 Shear on Harris Nuclear Power Plantr.Unit 2'g Carolina 05000401 50<402 Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Planti Unit, 3g Carolina 05000402 AUTHBYNAME'UTHOR AFFILIATION MCDUFFIE'iM,A, Carolina Power L Light Co ~

RECIP ~ NAME RECIPIENT AFFILIATION DENTONiH,R.

Office of Nuclear Reactor-Regulation 4/gg SUBJECT!'orwards" "Rept on Rock Fill Test.SectipnsrMain Dam;"

1gpg Requests approval of r ept as soon asE possibles DISTRIBUTION CODE'>>

BOOIB COPIES, RECEIVED>>LTR' ENCLIZE>>.

T'ITLEo PSAR/FSAR AMDTS AND RELATED CORRESPONDENCEB N

ES ~

~a iyfeeweeK woiw y w m

e&iegeRN'cafe eeee w

amwoeeeww eeeeeew ieeea e

RECIPIENT COPIES RECIPIENT COPIES ID CODE/NAME'TTR ENCL" ID CODE/NAME LTTR ENCL'CTION;

05. PM M/~<>>I>>,'

1 AD P'HXDB6M 1

0 BC

~W ~D 1

0 LA C.~R W~

INTERNALe 0

E 09 GEOSCIEN BR 11 MECH ENG BR 13 MATL ENG BR 16 ANALYSIS BR 18 AUX SYS BR 20 I L

C SYS BR 22 AD SITE TECH 27 EFFL TRT SYS 29 KIRKliOOD AD PLANT SYS AD SITE: ANLYSIS HYDRO~METEOR BR>>

OELD 1

1 2'

1 1

2 2

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 0

1 1

1 1

0 0

2 2

1-0 02 NRC PDR 08 OPERA LIC BR 10 QAB 12 STRUC ENG BR 15 REAC "SYS BR 17 CORE>> PERF BR 19 CONTAIN SYS 21 POliER SYS BR 26 ACCDNT ANLYS 28 RAn ASMT BR AD FOR ENG AD" REAC>> SAFETY DIRECTOR NRR MPA 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

0 0

1 0

1 0

l EXTERNAl! 03 LPDR 30 ACRS 1.

1 10 10 04 NSIC Enldc-P'/< ES LPBR PN pyro+~

E/'8 Wa at" KEG LRxeg 8/'8 TOTA'L'UMBER OF COPIES REQUIRED:

LT'TR ~

ENCL

(Fj 4

" ~ f 4

le, IF>>>>>>

i ((1 4 f F>>(4(r

~

4 I C

4>>>>'

rt( I >>

f, )(

f'>>" f k

~ w

""> fhf "I

f S>>I t k'f f

4>>fa I

~ ~ fO

'f,F$ kf ffh g F )I -y k III kr)>>

I )(>> f

'>>>>>>'1<,44

~ I 4'>>(<

>>l Z","4',

>>I I

I I

t ~

~

I

(

~ Fl>>'I 3 41>>'

>> I>> <'f3'~ f 'f gF>>-

~ F( f

$ f Ff Pf>>%$

> '<<f' f>>

lt r>>>>,,~

((>>I k

~

1 ll tr ~ >>k>>

( I 0

<,(

tt

<<< <<I 0%<<4<<<<<rot

~

I' j" $

EI

<if

>> ~ ',Ik)PJ g kg'l.4

)'k "I'l,l('<4" k

I I>> j j i

4k "<">>

t k f

' f,';

I

()

tt<t( <(rtw*<<<<<<c<<W)seam F ver Fee

<<N <<<<<w(>>

as<<J) sew <<w<<r<<<<<<'<<4(~ee<<t<<oes s

F<) w '4 f '>> ">> j ') 3'j Ql '>>J (ffy f,

jg)<<f 1

F

>>4

)

k, f

~ fg ll.

1

'j Vr

'4

~

4 F ~

I f

I 'I 4

I Fg I.p F>

g(

kt'

>>L kr7 r

>" >>(l I,

I

<F 1(

Ir 4>>4 k

4

)

Carolina Power 8 Light Company July "l8, 1979

~@"<<I'I~ORB Fg[ ~OPy I~

Mr. Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington D. C.

20555 7

I SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNIT NOS. 1, 2,. 3, 'AND 4 DOCKET NOS. 50-400, 50-401, 50-402, AND 50-403 MAIN DAM IN-PLACE TEST PILL PROGRAM

Dear Mr. Denton:

During the'onstruction Permit review for the Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant (SHNPP), Carolina Power tx Light Company (CPGL) committed to provide the results of the'n-place test fillprogram to the NRC for review and approval prior to beginning construction of SHNPP's main and auxiliary dams, as well as the separating dike.

Earlier this year, your staff reviewed and approved the test fillprogram for the auxiliary dam and separating dike.

We request that you review and approve the attached rockfill test report as soon as possible so that construction of the main dam can proceed without delay.

Yours very truly, MAM/tl Attachment M. A. McDuffie Senior Vice President Engineering and Construction Q

s g

@~i

~it, 411 Fayetteville Street

~ P. O. Box 1551 o Raleigh, N. C. 27602 ji

~p5"'

9 O'V @6 tt vj'g

1 I

I C ~

Q 1,

A f /

RETSN 'l0 RM'lm90MET.

tllL5-REPORT ON ROCK FILL TEST SECTIONS HAIN DAN SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT CAROLINA POWER

& LIGHT COMPANY JULY, 1979

TABLE OF CONTENTS I.

Introduction II.

Summary of Test Fill Construction III.

Conclusions IV.

Procedures A.

Description of Test Fills B.

Material Description C.

Settlement Measurement D.

In-Place Density Determination V.

E.

Grain Size Distribution Test F.

Permeability Test G.

Large Scale Triaxial Test Discussion of Results A.

Settlement B.

Material Gradation C.

In-Place Density D.

Permeability Measurements E.

Strength Testing F.

Excavation of Test Fill CrossSection VI.

Appendix A Figures and Laboratory Data VII.

Appendix B

Field Inspection Reports VIII.

Appendix C

Corps of Engineers Report IX.

Appendix D

Photographs of Construction

I.

Introduction Rockfill test sections VRMD 24-4-3 and VRMD 24-2-4 were constructed

1) to establish and evaluate placement and compaction procedures and

2) to evaluate engineering properties of materials to be placed in the rock shell portions of the main darn.

Field construction was supervised by Carolina Power and Light and Ebasco Services personnel.

Laboratory testing was performed by the Raleigh office of Law Engineering and Testing Company with the exception of large diameter triaxial tests which were performed by the Atlanta offices of the Corps of Engineers.

II.

Summar of Test Fill Construction Test sections of two gradation ranges were constructed; a) VRM)-24-4-3; maximum allowable particle size of 22 inch greatest dimension and b)

VRMD 24-2-4; maximum allowable particle size of 22 inch average dimension.

For each test section, slightly to moderately weathered granitics of as excavated gradation were placed in lifts and worked by dozer to exclude oversize and achieve a

24 inch lift thickness.

Equipment used was similar to that which will be used during dam construction.

Loose lifts were then compacted by 10 passes of a vibratory smooth drum roller with settlement readings surveyed after individual passes.

Correlations made between compaction effort and measured settlement were related to visual observations of the condition of the lift surface.

From this information, the optimum

compactive effort to minimize post-construction settlement and prevent excessive surface breakage was determined to be 8 passes.

Lifts for documentation of engineering properties of rockfill were then compacted by 8 passes of the specified roller.

Before and after compaction gradations, inplace density and permeability, and large-scale triaxial strength tests were performed to ensure that methods and materials utilized in the test section(s) satisfied all aspects of design requirements.

Test sections were then cut in half to observe distribution of fines, interlock of large particles, and uniformity of compaction.

III, Conclusions Test Section VRHD-24-4-3 was constructed using a criteria for maximum allowable particle size of 22 inch length or maximum dimension.

Because of the rectangular shape of granitic fragments obtained from the spillway cut, it was found that exclusion of rock of greater than 22 inch length (1) effectively required removal of the majority of desirable fragments greater than 10-12 inch average dimension, and (2) indirectly caused excessive and undesirable overworking of the lift surface.

Test Section VRMD-24-4-3 was therefore used only to aid in establishing placement technique and optimum amount of compactive effort.

Based on the above observations, Test Section VRMD 24-2-4 was constructed using a maximum allowable particle of 22 inch average dimension.

A

4 representative after compaction gradation from lift 2 of this test section indicates a D5 size of approximately 4 inches.

In order to allow for sample variance and to conservatively measure rockfill

strength, a parallel gradation curve with D50 of 3 inches was modelled for large diameter triaxial strength tests.

Data obtained from field and laboratory testing of Test Section VRMD-24-2-4 lift 2 are as follows:

a.

gradation analysis 1.

before compaction Dmax = 18" D50 6"

2.

after compaction Dmax = 18" D50 = 4" b.

inplace density l.

dry density 139.9 pcf 2.

moisture content 3.9%

c.

settlement 8 passes of vibratory roller produced 3.5% settlement d.

permeability constant head e.

an inplace permeability test indicated a permeability (k)

-2 of 1.1 x 10 cm/sec.

effective strength parameters per large scale triaxial shear tests (R) 1.

cohesion (c')

= 0 psi 2.

friction angle

(~ )= 40.5 degrees Note:

Strength parameters represent a rockfill gradation with D50 =

3 inches.

A replacement gradation was tested at a density of 135 pcf at 4.0% moisture.

Because of the pattern of weathering, fresher granitics of coarser graradation will be obtained as the excavation increases in depth.

It is therefore believed that strength and permeability as determined

0 0'

by test section construction are conservative and will represent lower bounds for materials to be used in the main dam.

Based on our evaluation of these test sections, construction of main dam rockfill shells should be as outlined below:

Materials:

Rockfill shall be well-graded durable fragments of grantics, as can be obtained from the spillway excavation, Deeply weathered zones shall be wasted so as to meet gradation requirements as specified r

below.

Placement:

Rockfill shall be blasted by suitable

means, loaded and end dumped by Euclid R-50 or equivalent haul truck on, the fillsurface.

The material shall be spread diagonally outward from the core by D-8 dozer to place oversize materials at the exterior of the dam shell and to achieve a nominal 24 inch loose lift.

~Com action:

Rockfill shall be compacted by a smooth drum vibratory roller (Raygo Rascal 600A) using forward and backward travel for a total of 8 overlapping passes.

Roller frequency shall be between 1400 to 1500 vpm and roller speed shall be less than or equal to 3.0 mph.

s Xn lace Testin Tests to document inplace density and gradation shall be performed as per Carolina Power and Light Test Procedure TP08.

Requirements shall be as follows:

a.

in lace densit average dry density shall be 135 pcf.

Absolute minimum dry density shall be 130 pcf.

b.

in lace radation:

the rockfill shall be well graded with a minimum D50 size of 3 inches.

Maximum size shall be of 22 inch average dimension (90% of lift thickness) with a length to width ratio of less than or equal to 3:1.

IV.

Procedures As in-place test fillsection was constructed on site to simulate the actual hauling,

dumping, spreading, and compaction processes of main dam rockfill construction.

From this test fill, in-place properties such as gradation, density, permeability, and settlement due to rolling were determined.

A.

Descri tion of Test Fill Test fillsections designated VRMD-24-4-3 and VRMD-24-2-4 were constructed during February and March 1979 in separate areas adjacent to the site of the main dam.

The areas selected were free of excessive surface water and reasonably level.

The areas were staked out, graded, and then proof rolled with a vibratory roller until no appreciable settlement was detected.

The test fills were constructed in accordance with PPCD SHNPP Technical Procedure TP-01, The test sections were approximately 40 feet by 55 feet in plan dimension with 24 settlement points.

Ramps were constructed with 5 horizontal to 1 vertical slopes.

The sides of the test section were maintained at approximately 1.5 H to 1V.

The material was end dumped, spread to approximately 24 inch loose thickness, and compacted with 10 passes of a Raygo Rascal 600-A roller.

The roller produces a dynamic force of 40,000 pounds for a vibration frequency between 1400 and 1500 VPM.

The roller was operated at a

maximum speed of 3 mph.

Test fillSection VRMD-24-4-3 consisted of four lifts.

Test Section VRMD-24-2-4 consisted of 2 lifts.

B, Material The material used was slightly to moderately weathered granites and granite gneisses obtained from blasting in the spillway excavation.

All material came from between Sta 10+50 and ll+75, El 250-.260, West of centerline (Photo 1).

Maximum particle size allowed for test fillVRMD-24-4-3 was 22 inches length or maximum dimension (corresponding to 90% lift thickness),

Maximum particle size allowed for test fill VRM)-24-2-4 was 22 inches average dimension.

C.

Settlement Measurement VRND-24-4-3 Prior to placement of the first lift, initial readings were recorded for each of the 24 settlement points.

A system of offset control was used to ensure proper relocation of settlement points after each lift placement.

The rockfill material was then end dumped by Euclid R 50 trucks and spread in approximately 24 inch lifts by a dozer equivalent to that to be used on the dam (Photos 2 and 3).

The method and operating time utilized by both types of equipment simulated anticipated field conditions.

After spreading, each settlement point was marked with paint sprayed directly on the lift surface.

Level readings were recorded for each of the points and averaged to determine the initial lift thickness.

The vibratory roller then made one pass over the entire surface of the lift without vibration and level readings were taken and averaged to determine the initial liftheight.

The procedure was then repeated with vibration for a total of 10 passes with settlement readings taken after each pass (Photos 4 thru 6).

The settlement points were repainted as necessary.

After completion of the first lift, settlement data was collected in the same manner for the second and third lifts.

The final level readings recorded from a previous lift were used as the initial readings in determination of the thickness of the next lift.

A plot of percent decrease in lift thickness versus number of passes was constructed from the data collected for each lift.

An examination of the settlement plots for the first three lifts revealed that 8 passes of the roller produced an optimum amount of settlement per compaction effort.

Therefore, the fourth lift was rolled with only 8 passes, VRG)-24-.2-4 Settlement measurements for Test Section VRHD 24-2-4 were performed as per the above description except that only the first lift was compacted by 10 passes.

After observation of settlement data and confirmation of the suitability of 8 passes, lift 2 was compacted with I

8 passes in preparation for testing for documentation.

D.

In-Place Densit Determination After the final layer of the respective test fills were compacted and all settlement data was

recorded, in-place density test(s) were performed.

The following procedure was used to conduct the tests:

1.

A wood frame measuring 8 feet x 8 feet x 6 inches high was placed over the test area and held in-place by stakes.

2.

Level readings of all four corners of the frame were recorded from a nearby established bench mark.

3.

One sheet of polyethylene was laid loosely over the frame to be in as close contact as possible with the inside of the frame and the rock surface.

4.

The depression in the slack membrane was filled with water via a calibrated barrel to within 3 or 4 inches of the top of the frame (Photo 7).

5.

The volume of water added and the distance'rom the top of the frame to the water surface was measured and recorded.

6.

The water was removed without, disturbing the frame or damaging the membrane.

7.

The polyethylene sheet was removed and checked for leaks.

8.

The material within the frame was then carefully excavated and placed into a truck and enveloped in plastic.

9.

The hole was then hand-cleaned to remove all loose or sharp material in the sides and bottom, 10.

The weight of the total sampled excavated was determined by weighing the truck full and empty.

ll.

The polyethylene sheet was again placed loosely over the excavated hole and frame.

12.

The hole was filled with water to the same level as in Step 4.

13.

Level readings were again taken at all four corners of the frame to assure the frame had not moved.

14, The volume of water added was recorded.

15.

Steps 6 and 7 were repeated.

E.

Grain Size Distribution Test Before and after gradation analyses were performed on the rockfill used in the test fills.

Before compaction gradation samples were taken from the end dumped loose liftof the test fillprior to spreading.

The after compaction gradation sample was obtained from the in-place density test.

Samples weighing approximately 3500 lbs. were taken directly to the testing laboratory, spread out on a concrete floor, and heated with space heaters to remove the moisture.

The material was graded by hand using square wooden sieves of 6, 12, 18, and 24 inch sizes.

The sample was then reduced by quartering and graded down to the

!18 sieve using a Gilson Sieve Shaker.

A Ro-Tap Sieve Shaker was used to determine particle size down to the 8200 sieve.

The weights retained on each sieve were carefully measured and the Percent Passing Total was determined for each sieve ranging from 24" down to //200.

F.

Permeabilit Test In-place permeability tests were performed on the test fills.

A constant head method was used to determine the coefficient of permeability of the rockfill material.

A brief discussion of the permeability test used is presented below:

1.

In-place permeability tests were performed on the test fill in accordance with a modification of the Bureau of Reclamation, Department of the Interior, Field Permeability Test, (Well Permeameter Method) Designation E-19.

The procedure used was as follows:

a.

An air track drilling rig drilled a hole in the top of the test fillto a 2.8 ft. depth.

b.

The sides of the well were scarified and all loose material was removed from the bottom of the well.

c.

The well was filled to the top with pea gravel of known density and a standpipe placed in the top of the hole.

d.

The volume and radius of the well were then determined.

3.

In order to provide a large enough reservoir of water to conduct each permeability test at anticipated flows, a pump truck was used instead of the calibrated 50 gallon barrel.

Flow rates were controlled by pump rate and by valve and were measured by using an in-line calibrated flow meter at the collar of the hole (Photo 8).

f.

Water was kept at a constant head in the well by maintaining the free water surface within the 3 1/2 inch casing a constant distance beneath a string baseline,

g.

Water was allowed to flow into the well for approximately one hour (or until a constant head could be maintained) to ensure saturation of the area adjacent to the well.

h.

Measurements were then made at 15 minute intervals to measure the quantity of water that flowed into the well.

This was continued for approximately 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.

An average flow rate was then calculated.

i.

All the data was compiled and the permeability of the test filldetermined for a constant

head, low water table condition per Designation E19.

G.

Lar e-Scale Triaxial Tests Large diameter (15") triaxial strength testing was performed on material from a rockfill sample representative of material used to construct test section VIQG)-24-2-4.

Tests were conducted by the U. S. Army Engineer Division Laboratory, South Atlantic, under the direction of Mr. Robert J.

Stephenson.

The complete laboratory report is included as Appendix C.

Testing included a controlled strain 15-inch diameter consolidated undrained triaxial shear test with pore pressure measurements (R test).

Tests were conducted at confining pressures

(~>) of 1, 2, and 4 tons per square foot (tsf).

Test specimens were reconstituted with material from a rockfill sample taken from test section VRMD-24-2-4.

A "replace-ment gradation" containing minus 3-inch sizes was established for the tests based on the gradation of. the total rockfill sample.

Test samples were prepared by reconstituting samples of this replacement gradation to densities comparable to that measured from the test section.

Individual samples were then saturated, consolidated to the applicable confining pressure, and axially loaded at a strain rate of approximately 0.1 percent per minute.

Shear strength parameters were computed at 15 percent axial strain.

Total and effective strength envelopes were then plotted.

V.

Discussion of Results A.

Settlement Settlement data were analysed using (a) raw settlement data and (b) smoothed data where settlement decreases are discarded.

For test section VKG)-24-4-3 raw and smoothed cumulative settlement data are shown in Figures 1 thru 3 for the first through third lifts respectively.

Breaks in the average rate of settlement per pass were noted for each lift between passes 1-2, 3 thru 8, and 9-10 as shown in Figures 4 and 5.

Correlation between visual field observation (field inspection reports are included in Appendix B) and settlement data showed the following relationship:.

Passes 1-2:

0.80% settlement per pass at initial high rate; rocks are repositioned and knit into a moderately compacted mass at a high rate of settlement per pass.

Passes 3-8:

0.30% settlement per pass at constant rate; rocks are tightly compacted, sharp corners are broken to form shards over 10-20% of the surface area.

Passes 9-10:

0,18% settlement per pass at decreasing rate; surface breakage only.

Based on the above, the fourth lift-of Test Section VRMD-24-4-3 was compacted with 8 passes of the vibratory roller using forward and backward travel.

The number of passes was chosen to minimize post-construction settlement and prevent excessive surface breakage.

Settlement data and rates obtained from lift 4 are shown in Figure 6.

These data show a relationship similar to data obtained from lifts 1-3.

I Settlement data and settlement rates for the first lift of Test Section VRMD-24-2-4 are shown in Figures 7 and 8, respectively.

Since these data showed consistent settlement rates to that observed in Test Section VRG)-24-4-3, intermediate lifts were believed to be unnecessary and the second liftwas compacted to 8 passes for documentary purposes.

Settl'ement data for lift 2 are shown in Figure 9.

B.

Material Gradation Before and after gradations for material placed in lift 4 of Test Section VRMD-24-4-3 are shown in Figure 10.

A D of 24 inches and max D50 of 6 inches were measured from a sample obtained prior to spreading the loose lift. After compaction gradations showed a

D of 18 inches max and D

varying between 1.5 and 2 inches.

The differences in before and after gradation were attributed to three factors:

a.

variance in actual material gradation.

b.

removal of materials exceeding 22 inch length (or maximum dimension) from the loose liftprior to compaction, thereby creating an artificially fine sieve gradation.

Note that rock fragments available are generally not cubic.

With increasing length to width ratios, the difference between maximum dimension and sieve size increases and is believed to be significant.

c.

removal of unacceptable sizes exceeding 22 inch length unavoidably requires removal of significant quantities of acceptable si.zes.

d.

particle breakage upon compaction.

Since it was believed that the effects of excluding material of 22 inch or greater dimension were appreciable, Test Section VIQQ)-24-2-4 was constructed using a maximum size particle of 22 inch average dimension with a length to width ratio not exceeding 3 to 1.

Test Section VRfD 24-4-3 was therefore used only to establish placement technique and required compactive effort.

Before and after gradations of material placed in lift 2 of Test Section VRMD-24-2-4 are shown in Figure ll.

A Dmax of 18 inches and a D~o of 7 inches were measured from a sample obtained prior to spreading the

loose lift. After compaction gradations of a representative sample showed a

D of 18 inches and a D50 of 4 inches.

Differences in max before and after gradation are attributed to:

a.

variance in actual material gradation, b.

removal of some acceptable

sizes, as unacceptable sizes are rolled to the sides of the test area by dozer, and c.

particle breakage.

Based on visual observation of the compaction process, it is believed that particle breakage is minor and that before and after differences in gradation are due primarily to items a and b.

Based on observation of test fillconstruction, it is believed, that inplace after compaction gradations of D5O greater than 3 inches are obtainable on a production basis using a maximum size criteria of 22 inch average dimension.

In-place density measurements performed on test section VRG)-24-4-3 indicate densities as follows (see Appendix A for laboratory report):

Test 1 dry density 137.4 pcf at moisture content of 2.3%

Test 2 dry density 134.2 pcf at moisture content of 2.8%

Density measurements performed on Test Section VIQG)-24-2-4 indicate a dry density of 139.9 pcf at a moisture content of 3.9%.

These results indicate that densities averaging 135 pcf or greater can be reached on a production basis using 8 passes of the roller.

D.

Permeabilit Measurement Inplace permeability measurements (Appendix A) indicate permeabilities

-3

-2 (K) = 8.1 x 10 cm/sec for Test Section VRMD-24-4-3 and K = 1.1 x 10 cm/sec for Test Section VRMD-24-2-4.

E.

Stren th Determinations A gradation with D50 equal to 3 inches, parallel to that measured after compaction in VIQH)-24-2-4, was modelled for testing by the Corps of Engineers (Report included as Appendix C).

Figure 12 is a plot of the tested material replacement gradation in comparison to the inplace material gradation of D50 = 4 inches and the constructed parallel curve with D

= 3 inches.

For a test density of 135 pcf at"4% moisture, the large scale triaxial tests indicate effective strength parameters for this material and gradation as follows:

cohesion (C')

0 psi friction angle (9')

40.5 degrees F.

Examination of Test Fill Cross Section After the test fills were completed, cuts were made through all lifts.

Observations made were as follows:

1.

Test Section VRMD-24-4-3 A transverse cut was made thru all four lifts of Test Section VRMD-24-4-3.

Good bonding between lifts was observed (Photo 9).

No layering or segregation of large particles was observed, fines are distributed throughout and are uniformly compacted.

Because of the material gradation, however, not all large particles interlock and in portions of the cross section, well compacted fines separate the larger rock particles (Photo

10).

2.

Test Section V1QE-24-2-4 A longitudinal cut was made thru the two lifts of Test Section VRMD-24-2-4.

As in Test Section VRMD-24-4-3, good bonding between each liftwas observed.

No layering or segregation of large particles can be seen (Photo

11).

Fines are uniformly distributed and compacted.

As in Test Section VRMD-24-4-3, small areas of the cross section have well compacted fines separating the larger rock particles (Photo 12).

APPENDIX A

&4MICat/ / kfcfc'g~~ Z~Axrg Wrz P'/

r~ri" - "-i/

z'l/-p

/.fo.

f.

2/ 4 mi Qypg bp~~~

Vie~ in~,'z~omzl r~urr> 17'~p' Q<v~'inc'/~

4-4c 0 reer lo

)ElZCBM7 Ma7TLEmE<7 V'5. iV~B IZ CP A55P5'C.IEAQcw 4>Rtzs5 AAim~

7+r PjL.L y&O-Zd 4- 0

>or XO Z n.e" Mi~N~~>

Pay& soo3 vvze~my s~~i ze~i~A'occee Frhc'ua Jy ia-zoo yogin Xj-@su = a~pc Dgr~ >jl/7/

~pAMrP ZS4 c/Jzck zv CV/Auld't7VE CIVEZcldF 5Er/CPAPIVT pl'&7k/

0

.~~~~5M I4 senc~e~

pls<4%oeo

/0

/

4 b

AV&8aP ~f'Ayygg

/o

DA/-4Pzi~ pAQgi g AAw DA~

MSr Fin. Y&o-P4-4 9

L/p-Ho. 9 3/,}'t-l/~/-r"E.5 Ayeo

&mA I'r>Pire&/ Sr'~oord Pk'cry.:

QsM~s.rlcg rd l5-ou'lp" zpEsv 4 swlxl

~g re

>/>/17 A&ii2 PM C'/lac keg

C5' 7kIZo 9

PA55i 5'- 2

~Fp &8 PA55 gd~t~~ i-9, 90)

P w~

PAN'5 e/

~-r-'~~~

c'~~ > P~~-

/

./Ol

~Q I

I Q

9o

/

p.wy zg -p.~

3/~/1g k~/!

AVErN<<F pE/CCFrVTCi EF 5C PQy i-/~j

~p pp$ >

yg rv'L/> 8&.f~

oz~ p4'sf~

lips 5'-g

< lo-j

~

C:)

,'. U5< a +455~5 G

C>

G gQ~

I l

I 2

cf b

gvP8zd op/WEEL'0

$i(gj'v ~

5li&>JPdM IJAfNIQtv/if'>g 7es'r

&I.L bio 4-3 DFf wd. 4 z4.c" n4ic'k~z55 psycho boo 8 ViasZ/'rg+ sr~w1iJ M~/~ ~LIER PP~ c/L-N~y j~j-t5do Ups~;

spea,g

~ Pr~p~l

,aarr 3/ie/vg

'pgeM Mll c~rz0 C vs uc ArrvE h Vega(

Zero E>g~r (Qw Ob rA)

Q DZCIPmded le 5errc.e'Ae~r P<<(AdnLa 4

g~ z

~C~7 5zrra~z<7 YH /v~8 E ap Sil~~~rl i'r2id Aai~ Dcv~

7egV Rii VIP+0 24--g-g

.OFr Nd, J

~F7" pdizlcr<W gpgbP NO+

VI8gPhTyP'y'~y rgb SQ<rnn Hog~+

FVsc~~ac/ id"Isoo up~~

5pae~ < 9 ~pl Dere ~/S/pg

~APE Q.

g~~-I cld~mP cue ~wrvc Av~~Cg 5677LW<grgT (PAlrt ~l/IJ Q

MIZmsr=d i4 s~rrc.cn ~riv-P5ccr<ucp 3

G I

I

.3r

/

b pu~8&Z ~ p+5y~p

/o pizui2z 7

VrFuu;c/- z-g 4g'~/1g ~&!

+NCEr-'7 SE. DtEA"Br<7 fK/Z P'~

/v'Vhr<9y 4 dp pggg~g

&Fr J

/.o 8,

-a.

4 '-

l 2

0 G

G G

.'. use b paszsy G

Q I

4.

b t Ln eaC'p'shaw&

0

/o figuZi S'

~~l.tl~R~r.'Jhow'r2]g ~gR pAAnr, msr veau.

vRtno ad z-4 gpr IVO. 2 g9,~" 7shCEiv'c5S p>yz>

poo 8 t/isMto<g 5n oonl Oi2~ P~z~~

<~<< >~ay p<. i>zo vppn pC~ 4 3'-l

~ tE C/S/7g pz~pcR'r:Z P<W CyJcc k GO

Wji w/iz/~g I

C p b e

I.

I'S 4" </

e" U S STANDARD SIEVE SIZES 0

20 40 0

IOD ROO ao 70 eo w3 50 w

IL X

SO a

IO IOO IO IO Ol ORAIH SIZE IH MILLIMETERS OOI BOU GRAVEL DER COBBLES COARSE SAND FIN E COARSE MEDIUM FINE FINES SILT SIZES CLAY SIZES BORING NO ELEV OR DEPTH HAT WC LL PL Pl DESCRIPTION OR CLASSIFICATION J(p'r4'gpss~~

co>f~ ri@&

Q gag 4 pprpsc c'o~p8cflnrl DEN~~rry >I g ~~g pfrEg c'oApA:7loiI K'/vdlTp ~Z GRAlN SIZE 01STRlBUTIMI

gi./3 cgj/>//g 8 b Z"I.

I 34 8"

4 U S STAHDARD SIEVE SIZES 0

20 40 0

IOD Z 0 70 80 3

50 30 r

IO 0

100 IO IO 01 BRAIN SIZE IH MILLIMETERS ODI BOU DER COBBLES COARSE SAND FINE COARSE MEDIUM FINE FINES S ILT S IZE S CLAY Sl Z ES BORING HO ELEV OR DEPTH NAT WC LL PL Pl DESCRIPTIOH OR CLASSIFICATION L~pp g PE/=ape C'dAnpAc'r iurI 8

/~pg g ger(-~ ~<,il<pArTlti/ l.Erl ~El j'l~/

GRAIN SIZK OISTRIBUTKÃil 7/ ~7'! c 1 lol '

&'P4~S gi(ug-s //

~ I I 34" j' 4

U S STANDARD SIEVE SIZES 0

20

~

40 0

IOD 200 80 70 eo 50 w

eo CC X

4.

30 w

I

~

I IO IOO IO IO OI GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS OOI OOOI COBBLES BOU GRAVEL SAND COARSE FINE COARSE MEDIUM FINE FINES SILT SIZES CLAY SIZES BORING XO ELEV OR DEPTII NAT WC LL PL Pl DESCRIPTION OR CLASSIFICATION 4fr2 gfrzP C~A'yA'real P~.=4'g

/1AIZdllc:L E/B(AliOIV l<'/foal L~r

= 9

"/C Q +/(~E. Af~/i'-PQPJl f'/@hi Qz R'coasrirurz.a

/S Ii.'rz CHAIN StzK DtSTA)BUTKN lt(el@f2

DENSITY TEST DATf.

RAG-1136 A

<'i st Fill Ho.

MDVR 24-4-3DA Layer Thickness Number Layers ype Compaction Equp RAY-GO RASCAL Model 600 A Vibratory Material Description 3-12-79 caira d$

Atwater DENSITY l.

Volume of water for surface measurement 2.

Top of water to top of frame N.W. 2", N.E.

1 3 4" S.W.

2 1 4" S.E.

2 5 8" Ft.

In.

3.

Weight can (X No. of times filled) 4.

Weight can fi 1 1 ed

( total )

5.

Samp1 e wei ght (4-3)

Weight of sand mortar before 7.

Volume of sand mortar bucket - before 8.

Density of sand mortar (6/7) 9.

Weight of sand mortar - after 10.

Weight of sand mortar in hole (6-9) ll.

Volume of sand mortar in hold (10/5) 12.

Volune of water for hole measurement 13.

Volume of hole (12 -1+11) 14.

Wet density of material (5/13) 15.

Dry density of material (14/one

-: 21)

MOISTURE CONTENT 16.

Weight wet moisture sample

container 17.

Weight dry moisture sample

-: container

'O Weight water (16-17) 19.

Wei ght container 20.

Weight dry material (17-19) 21.

Moi s ture content (15/20)

Gal.

10274 20680 10406 98 140.6 137.4 10.,406 10,168.4 237. 6 10,168.4 2

310 lb.

lb.

lb.

Ft.

1 b/Ft.

lb.

lb.

Ft.

Ft.

Ft.

lb/Ft.

lb/Ft.

lb.

lb.

'1 b.

lb.

lb.

Snearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant I'ain Dam Rock Fill LETCO Job.

No.

RAG-1136 A LABORATORY TEST DATA SIEVE ANALYSIS SNlPLE NO:

SIEVE SIZE U.S.

STANDARD BEFORE TEST ldDVR 24-4-3

PERCENT, BY WEIGHT PASSING 24 II 18" 12" 6"

3 II 2U 1 /2 II 3/8" gl0 k'40 n 200 100 93 85 32 29 25 20 18 14 10 2.9 TOTAL SAMPLE WEIGHT, lbs.:

4886.0

~ '

"XSETIIIIIIXTIRllllXNTHIXIIR)

ETlllflIXTTXIIIXSETI

., RIETIIIIIXTIMIIIXXESWIIIIIIISETIIIIIIXSRTXIIIXSEl8

~NETXIIIXTIRXIIXX$5%11IIIIISETllllllXTTXIIIXRE LI

.XaETXIIIXaamXlhaEmmllaaETeiXaa TXIIIXaE I I

~hETXIIIXTHIIIIXlliEHIIIIIII

~

IlllllXTTXIIIXSE I I

,UllTXIIIXTIKIIIIXXIEHIIIIIElk llllllXSRTXIIIXEE III ~

~SIXTXNRXTtRIHIXXSEHIIIIIXiETlllfllXTTEIIIISEEll I

.XaatTXniaarmnnXXaaaaiiiaaE TaSIIXamlliXXETI4I

~SRITllllIXTIKIIIXXSERllllIEIRETIIIIIIXRSTXIIIXSETII I

, XSRRIIRIIXSEIRllllXXSERIIIIIIISEHIIPIIXSETXIIIXSETXlll

~SEE%XIIIXSRIHllllXISEHIIIIIIISETIIIIIIXSSTIIIIIXIETII II

,Xaaaeailaaa TXIIXXaaamIIaaraliIIXrE XIIIXarT I II

~SEiRXhllXiETIlllXXkETIIIIIIlSETIIIIIIX)EXIIIXSE Il

,XTTIAIIXkEIRIIIXI)5TIIIIISETIIIIIIXSEIIIIIXRE II

~SETIISIIRSETIIIIXXS RIIIISSETIIIIIIHR IllllXSE

~

., XARTIIIIIXhEw%IIIIXXSWIIIIIIIEETIIIIIIHETIIIIILE I

~55TIIIIIXSEIRPilIXllPETXIIIXSETIIIIIISETIIIIIXIE I

.XTTllllIXTTIIIIXiR5%&XIISRETllllllXEETIIIIIXSE

'XTTaallXaE Iniaahau.'iiiaaaE TamiXaETXIIIXaE

. XSETIIXIIXT llllXXTHIIIIIIITTIIAIIIERTllIIIXSET I

5!El%8~

Shearon Harris NUclear Power Plant Main Dam Rock Fill LETCO Job llo.

RAG-1136 A

SAMPLE NO:

SIEVE SIZE U.S.

STANDARD AFTER TEST LABORATORY TEST DATA SIEVE ANALYSIS MDVR 24-4-3DA

PERCENT, BY WEIGHT, PASSING 24" 1 8ll 12" 6

II 3

II 2

II 1 1/2" 3/4 II 1/2" 3/8" 810 840 f200 100 100 90 77 61 56 51 46 43 38 35 27 10 5.7 3.0 TOTAL SAMPLE WEIGHT, lbs.:

10168.4

I '

kEPKlklIkEXHllllkIIEXKIHIIREXHllllllkEXHIIIIIkERH IIII

., kERHIIIIIkERIRllllkkEXHIIIIIIIEXHIINIkEXHIIIIIkERH IIII

~ERWlllllkEXWkllkllEXWIIEINEXWll)Ilk EXWklllkEX IIII

.. kEXHlllllkEXIRkllkkEXHIIEINSXRllllllkEXHIIIIIkEXIIIII kEXL%IIIllkEX&llllkkEXWIIEINEX&llllllkEX&klllkEX&llll

, kEXKWlllllkEXmkllklEXWIIEIIISXWllllllkEXWlllllkEX IIIII kER&ll)llkEXWllllkllEXWIIIIIllSX&llllllkEXWIIIIIkER ILIII

.kEXWIHIIkEXWkllkkEX&IIIIIIEX&llllllkEX&lllllkEX&

1 II

~EXWkSIkEXWkllkllEX&IIIIIEEXWllllllkEXWIIIIIkEXW I II

,kERHIIIllk%XIWllllkliXRlllllllSXHllllllkEXHlllllkEXHllll

~EXWI15IIkEXWllllkllEXWllllIREX%Ill!

IlkEXHIIIIIkEXWIIIII

,kEPmk1llkaaeakmkkaXmmllaram111llkramnlllkEXm1 Itl

~EXWIIKIIkERK>llllklIEXWI1lllllEXHII8llkEXWIllllkEX&j I I

. kERHII$IIkEXIRlj'IkIEXKIIIIIIISPHllllllkEXHlllllkEXI I

~EXWII%IIkEXWIIRlkSEXHIIIIIIEXHIIHIIkEXKIIIIIkEXIII

., kEXHklllkEXRIlllkhEXRIIIIINEXHIIRIIkEXWIllllkEXIII

~EXWkSIIkEXHllllkjlEPKIIIIINEXHllllllkEXHlllllkEX I II

.kEX&lllllkEXIWlllkllER&llllllSXWIIRIlkEXWIIIIIkEX

~EXHlllllkEX IlllklEXL~LilIISXWllllllkEXHIIIIIkmXI

, kEXHlllllkEX JlllktlEXRIIIIIN)Xa1lllllkEXHHIIIkEX I I II IKEI~

DENSITY TEST DATE RAG-1136 A

Fi] )

No MDVR 24 4

3DB yer Thickness 24 INCHES Number Layers Type Compacts on Equp RAY-GO RASCAL Model 600 A Vi b ra tory Materi al Description Rockfil 1 Dage 3 16 79 By C an a dy DENSITY l.

Volume of water for surface measurement of wat r to to of f m

N.W. 2", N.E.

1 7/8", S. W.

3 1/8", S. E.

2 1/4" 3.

Weight can (X No. of times filled) 10,040 4.

Weight can filled (total) 20,800 24 Ft.

In.

'I b.

5.

Sample weight, (4-3)

Weight of sand mortar before 7.

Volume of sand mortar bucket - before 8.

Density of sand mortar (6/7) 9.

Weight of sand mortar - after 10.

Weight of sand mortar in hole (6-9) ll.

Volume of sand mortar in hold (10/5) a 12.

Volume of water for hole measurement 13.

Volume of hole (12 -1+11) 14.

Wet density of material (5/13) 15.

Dry density of material (14/one

. 21)

MOISTURE CONTENT 16

~

Weight wet moisture sample

-: container 17.

Weight dry moisture sample

. container Weight water (16-17) 19.

Wei ght container 20.

Weight dry material

( 17-19) 21.

Moisture contempt (L5/20)

• lrartthlt101" lard(f 10,760 1 oh 760 10,471 289 10,471 Gal.

2.8 102 78 137, 9 134. 2 lb.

lb.

Ft.

lb/Ft.

lb.

lb.

Ft.

Ft.

Ft.

lb/Ft.

lb/Ft.

lb.

lb.

lb.

lb.

lb.

lb.

Shearon Harris Nuclear Povrer Plant Main Dam Rock Fi 11 LETCO Job No.

RAG-1136 A

LABORATORY TEST DATA SIEVE ANALYSIS SAMPLE NO:

SIEVE SIZE:

U.S.

STANDARD 24" 18" 12" 6"

3 II 2

II 1 1/2" 3/4" 1/2" 3/8" 810 f40 f200 AFTER TEST MDVR 24-4-3DB

PERCENT, BY WEIGHT, PASSING 100 100 93 76 43 37 33 29 26 19 14 2.5 TOTAL SAMPLE WEIGHT, lbs.:

9848.5

~ '

E%XWEIIIIERXtRIIIIENRXRIIIIISXRlllfllERXRllllIERXH I II

,, EL'XHEIIIERX IlllEERXHIIIISRXKlllillERXHEIIIERX I I

~RElHEIIIERX IIIIEERXRllllSRXHIII}IIERXHEIIIERX

~

.ERXWENIERXWllllEERX&llllllkXWllmlERXWEIIIERX I

~RXL%EIIIERXWllllEERX&IIIIIRR llllllERX&EIIIERX I

, ERXR%E)IIERX&EIIEIIRX&IIIIIIISWlllllIERX&EIIIERX II I

~RX%1iEIIIERXIKEIIEERXWIIIIIRSXWIIIIIIERXWEIIIERXII I

, ERXWIHIIERXIHEIIEIIRXWIIIIIIjSXWlllllIERX&EIIIERXl I

~RXWE'IIIERXWIIIIEERXWIIIIRRXWllllllERXWEIIIERXI I

, ERX~ElllERX~IIIIEllRX~lllllllRX~llllllERX~IIIIIERX II II

~RXRllllIERXIRIIIIEERXWIIIIIIJRXRllllllERXHEIIIERXEIII

, ERXWll)IIERXIWIIIEIIRXWEIIIIIXXWlllllERXWIIIIIERXW lllI

~RXWIIIIIEFillHIIIIEIIRXKEIIIIIRXWIIIIIIERXWIIIIIERX&

II

,ERX&llllIERX85llllEIRXWERIRRX&IIIIIIERXWEIIIERX II

~RXWEIIIERX +IIIIEERXWIIIIIRRX&llIIERX&ElllERX

., ERXWIISIERX IIIIEIIRXWIIIIIIIRX&ll IIERXWIIIIIERX II I

~RXWEIIIERX&llllEEl%&llllINRXWIIIIERXWEIIERX

.ERXmellEXX elaiiaan!allaaXmamlERXmEII ERX I I

~RXWEIIIERX IIIIEERXWIIIIRSSWIIIIIIERXWIII ERX I I

. ESXHE)l)ERX llllEERXHIIIIIIIRX>hillllERXWEIIIEIXI I

~

r

~

~

s gQ+gggggm

[SIKE~

WELL PERMEAMETER TEST DETERMINATIOH OF TEST WELL DIMENSIONS Carolina Power 8 Light Company JOB NAME:

SHNPP, Main Dam Rock Fill New Hill N.C.

COB NO.: ~6~

TEST NO.:

1 GROUND ELEVATION:~

DATE:~~ MADE BY:

LOCATION:

Rock Fill Test Stri II I. D. NO.:

MDVR 24-4-3PI OBSERVATION HOLE SOIL CLASSIFICATION STRATA DEPTH (ft.)

FROM TO 0

37 II Rock Fill With Moderate Fines 1.

DEPTH (ft.)

TO WATER TABLE:

~

~

N/A WELL DIMENS IONS (DEPTHS FROM STRING BASELINE) 1.080 2.

DEPTH (ft.)

3.

DEPTH (ft.)

4.

DEPTH.(ft.)

5.

DEPTH (ft.)

6.

DEPTH (ft.)

7.

DEPTH (ft.)

TO GROUND SURFACE'O BOTTOM OF WELL:

TO TOP OF SAND'F SAND (3) - (4):

TO WATER SURFACE IN WELL:

OF WATER IN WELL h=(3 - 6

3. 917 1.708 2.209 1.542 DETERMINATION OF WELL RADIUS 102.2

19. 65

30. 35 0.297 207 8.

DENS I TY (pcf)

OF 'STANDARD SAND:

9.

WEIGHT (lb.)

OF GRAVEL + CONTAINE WELL'0.

WEIGHT (Ib.)

OF )RAVEL + CONTAINER. AFTER FILLING WELLI.

WEIGHT (lb.)

OF GRAVEL.USED 9 - 10 12.

VOLUME (cu. ft.)

OF WELL (11) ":(8)':

13.

RADIUS

( ft.)

OF 'WELL r=

12 (5)

CALIBRATED TOOL ID:

C-4353 (Horns Scales)

)

~

I '

~

RKHMRH~RRZ~%%5~

RKHEE~~~i~i~~

~iRiil~

~~REEMRP5 RH~~iRKIM

~Wil~Ni%5%

RSDiM~~

W%MR)RiPR RSHR~i&iWM~

RK%

RRRH~~RR~~

RÃ~~iRS~~~~~~Wi%7R

~~RS~~~~~R5~$

Ãh%

~~~RS~RKil%

ggi]Q~ggi]R~~~~~gggg

~Ã5558%5Ãl>%~~~~

~

Ni%%Ã5

I Tee]

Ti s I-No:

Fill..

Hath "I'::

so /.....:,

l

")

I I".

~< 0 I..... -...

i.,'

I ~ ~

I

~

a I

I'

,ao, I'

I 20 a

l t

I I I

~ ~ tr

~ ~

~ I ~ ~

~ I

~ ~

~ ~

~

~ '

~ ~ '

~

.:)l:.::::

l,i ~

~ ~ ~

II I v.'i,'

,all

• t 10

.i,J Test..S

..U I

j);.,I

~ f ~ I "lt

'-I

~ ~ ~-

ap "ti 1

~

~

I ~ I t la i

il;I illa I i'.l.

i4 ~

!"I ill:

'li:

tilt

fli, I:.i I!j',

Ilia

.;It I

I Ill I ~ it r ~

f:II

.fi

!Ill)f

'I

~"

a a ~

"'I t

~ I

~

~ i) lii~

LI,'!

)3!)

llew,

~

~

t at

~

lj".'ri.

I I I'>>

~3 p

I

+ il E-.

).I:

~ fl; I ~

Il)i ii.'

~

fjtj

.I!

II I

I I

I I

I I

I a

i i

BR~

I".I it);

)

..a

~ )

,'..ll'll I ~I

",'I I;tf i

1

.;;il

~'

~ ti

.-! Il'-

'll I ~

~ I ~ I I ~

~

t I

'Itfi

~ ~

a I, I I ~

illa I

~

~

)i:i If'ill'.ii

!.'l.um 30 I

Ij)l i'f

. f)j

,~'i!l jjlj

)]

..Ii jl!I I:Ii

,'.iti Ii))

)',),

I'.I'I ll) 4/

I I

!f 6f 50 jj J~!!

I)

I 70 90 110

'h'30 a

iiU

'll

))

150 I

I U

)

!["

!Ifil 11 11'})

Q,.

2 170 I

~I t

li

)'0'l

)il I'

Ii I

I s'ITI If'I /:i'

~

I i

~

"III

".L!i

tl) afljifl I

it)i i))i Ir ~ l

~ tat tl

)

I I Ii ill t)li

~g 'I

'lIiaif Ij;

~

i;'I r ri.

';lt)t I

I ~ fr

~ I Time Minutes

DENSITY fiST OAT!-

RAG-1136 A

~

v e

t Fi 1 1 ht.

NDVR 24-2-4D 24" Layer Thickness Number Layers Type Compaction Equp.

Ray-Go Rascal t1odel 600 A Vibratory hlaterial Description Rockfill Date 4-2-79 Qy Canady / Harward DENSITY l.

Volume of water for surface measurement 5 barrels 2.

Top of water to top of frame NE 7/8" SE 1 5/8" SW 4" NW 4 15/16" 3.

We i ght can (X No. of times fi 1 'I ed) 10280 30 Ft.

In.

lb.

4.

Weight can filled (total) 5.

Sample weight (4-3)

Weight of sand mortar - before Volume of sand mortar bucket - before 8.

Density of sand mortar {6/7) 9.

Weight of sand mortar - after 10.

Weight of sand mortar in hole (6-9) 11.

Volume of sand mortar in hold (10/5) 12.

Volume of water for hole measurement 13.

Volume of hole

{12 -1+ll) 14.

Wet density of material (5/13) 15.

Dry density of material (14/one

-: 21)

MOISTURE CONTENT 16.

Weight wet moisture sample

-: container 17.

Weight dry moisture sample

-: container I.

Weight water (16-17) 19.

Wei ght container

• Gal.

18420 8140 86 145.4 139.9 8140 7833. 5 306.5 lb.

lb.

Ft.

lb.

lb.

Ft.

Ft.

lb/Ft.

lb/Ft.

lb.

lb.

lb.

lb.

20.

21.

Weight dry material (17-19)

Moisture content (15/20)

• Container Tared 7833 '

3.9 lb.

lb.

Shearon Harri s Nuclear Power P 1 ant Main Dam Rock Fill LETCO Job No.

RAG-1136 A

LABORATORY TEST DATA SIEVE ANALYSIS SAMPLE NO:

SIEVE SIZE U.S.

STANDARD 24" 18" 12".

3 II 2 II 1 1/2" 3/4 II BEFORE TEST MDVR 24-2-4

PERCENT, BY WEIGHT, PASSING 100 100 74 43 28 22 20 17 15 13 12 kl0 f40 j~r200 1.9 TOTAL SAMPLE WEIGHT, lbs.:

4829

I '

" 1XR&kkIIHXRI&kkklNXRWkkkISERWklklllXR&kklllRXR&kkill

,, iERWkkIIIHR&kkkIRXR&kklIIlkER&klkllRERWkkllIUR&kkill

'RWkklllEXRWkkkllIXR&kkkIINER&klkIIEXRWkklIINRWkkIII

..lIR&kkillllXR&kkkllllXR&kkkIIIERWkl IILRWkklllRXRWkkIII IKIRWkkIIIIXR&kkklRERWkkklIKE IIIILR&kklllEXRWkklll

, ILR&kkkllSER&lkklRER&kkllIEIE kllllllXR&kkllIRERWkkllI

~XSWkkllllXRWkkklRER&kkklIIIERWkllllllXRWlkllllXRWkkIII

.IX%WkkkllEXRIWkkIRER&kkklIRERWklllllIXRWkkllllXR&kklll

- 'tEasmkkklIaXRmkkklraErmkkklIItErmklkllrERmkknlaXRmkkllI

, Nk'HkkhllSRWkkkIRERHkkkIRERHklllllSRHkkllIIXRHkklll

'Ri%kkkllEXRHllklllXRHkkklRERHkllllIIXRHkkllIIXRHkklll

, IERL%114IIIXRIHkkkIRXRHkkkIIIIER&kIAIIEXR&IIIIIXR&kkllI

~XRE%klkkllXRIRkkklRERHkkkIIlkERKklkIIIXRHkkllllXRHkklll

. XRWkkllllXRWkkkIIIXRWkkklIIIERWklAIIEXR&kkIIIIXR&kklll

~RHhkllSRfRkkkIEIXRHkkkIIIIERRkIHIISRRkkllIIXRHkkllI

., IXRHkfklISXRHkkklRXRHkkklIIERHklllIIEXRHkkIIIIXRKkklll

~XRWkk%IIRERWkkkllllXR&kkkIINXR&klllIINRWkkllSXRWkklll

. IXRKkkklIEXRlh~ad!kIIIIXRHkkkIINERKklkIISRHlkHIIXRHkklll

'arRmkkklmamiiiliraa~mkkklaaarmklklaErmkklllaXRmkkm

. SRHkkklllXRIRkkkIRER%lkkTiiRR kWIISRKIkIIIRXRKkklll Q 'ZIRH~

1 '

I

~

ER23HIQSQl

~ I

~

Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant Main Dam Rock Fill LETCO Job No.

ING-1136 A

LABORATORY TEST DATA SIEVE ANALYSIS SAMPLE NO.:

(AFTER TEST) flDVR 24-2-4D SIEVE SIZE U.S.

STANDARD 2 4 II 18" 12" 6"

3 II 2

II 1 1/2" 3/4 II 1/2" 3/8" 810 j/40 8200

Percent, B

Wei ht, Passin 100 100 85 59 43 39 34 30 26 22 21 18 15 5.2 TOTAL SAMPLE WEIGHT, lbs.;

7833.5

I L%ERIIIIIIXREHIIIIERERIIIIIRRERIIIIIIXR EallIIIXRE%IIIII

., IREWIIIIIXREIHIIIIXIREHIIIIIIREWIIIIXXREWIIIIIXRE&lllll R1EHIIIIIXREIRIIIIIIIREWIIRINREKIIHIIIREHIIIIIXREHIIIII

..XREWIIIIXXREIHIIIIISRE&llllllSE&

llIIIREWlllllXREWIIIII

~REWIIIIXXREIHIIIIEIIREHIIIIXRS IIIXIRE&IIIIXXRE&lllll

, LLXWIHIIXRE&llllERE&lllllllS lllllllREWEIIIIXREWIIIII

~RERIIHXXREIRIIIIIIIREHlllllllREHEIIIIEREWHIXXXREWlllll

.. IREE&llllXXREWIIIIENREWIIIIIIREWIIIIIIIRE&lllllXREWlllll LEK%lllllXREIHllllRIRE&llllllREWIIIIIIRRE&lllllXRE&lllll

, IREhlll%IXXREISIIIIINRERIIIIXRRERIIIIIIRERlllllXRE%IIIII

'RE%114IIIREIRIIIIE}REKlllllljSEHIIIIISREHIIIIIXRE%IIIII

,eraaitIIIXREmalaaaranrllaararlelaREannlaREanlll

~REHIIIlXXREHIIIIINREHIIIIIIIREHIIIIIXIREWIIIIXXRE&kllll

. EREWI1$IIXREIWlllXNREWIIIIIIISEWIIPIIXREW IIIIXREWXIII LEKIIIIIIRh%IIIIXIREHllll5REHII8lliREH IIIIIRERIIIII

, lREWllgllIRE1%IIIINREHIIIIINREHIIIIIIXREW IIIINEKlllll

~RE&11NIXREIWlllllfRREHIIIIIIREWIIIIIIEEWIIIIIX RE&IIIII

. LERIIIIIXREIHIIIEREIKHIIIREHIIHIISEHIIIIIXREHlllll IREWlllllXREIHIIIISREWIIIIINRE+%IIAIIHE&lllllXRE&IIIII

. IRE%lllllXREIHIIIIEllRERIIIIIIREhllAIIIRERIIIIIIRE%IIIII ELHB~

WELL PERMEAMETER TEST DETERMI NATION OF. TEST WELL D I MENS I ONS Carolina Power Im Light Company,

SHNPP, JOB 'NAME..

Ha in Dam, Roc k Fil1, New Hil1, North Carol ina PAG-1136A TEST NO.:

GROUND ELEVATlON:

Top

LDGATloN, Rock Fill Test Strip I..D. NO.:

NDVR-24-2-4PI DATE. 5-16-79 MADE BY:

F.R. Foster STRATA DEPTH (ft.)

FROM TO OBSERVATION HOLE SOIL CLASSIFICATION 0

3 9ll Rock Fill with Moderate Fines I.

DEPTH (ft.)

TO WATER TABLE:

2.

DEPTH (ft.)

3.

DEPTH (ft.)

4. DEPTH,(ft.)

5.

DEPTH (ft.)

6.

DEPTH (ft.)

7.

DEPTH (ft.)

1:833 1.771 WELL DIMENSIONS (DEPTHS FROM STRING BASELINE)

TO GROUND SURFACE 1.250 TO BOTTOM OF WELL:

4.438 TO TOP OF SAND OF SAND (3) - (4):

2. 604 TO WATER SURFACE IN WELL:

OF WATER IN WELL h=(3 - 6 2.667 DETERMINATION OF WELL RADIUS 102.2 8.

DENSITY (pcf)

OF STANDARD SAND:

9.

WEIGHT (lb.)

OF GRAVEL- + CONTAINER BEFORE FILLING WELL:

IO. WEIGHT (lb.)

OF GRAVEL + CONTAINER AFTER FILLING WELL:

II. WEIGHT (lb.)

OF GRAVEL USED (9)-(10):

I2.

VOLUME (cu. ft.)

OF WELL

( I I)

~ (8)':

13.

RADIUS (ft.)

OF 'WELL r=

l2 (5) 50.00 18.64 31.36 0.3068 0.1 94 Calibrated Tool ID:

C-4353 (Horns Scales)

j

~

KE~KH~~Rsl

~Sml

~Hl(iiiQ~

aim~~~~ama

~Hi~i RHEA

~gg+~~~i

~

i I

I EHE~H i

RRERK%~~~5RRERiRR

~%l~RRM~~~K4K&NR%

RRMi:i RH~

~~~%8~

ama~mma

. ~~~masm

&Rii%~i

~~~%ERW55%8

~SRRmllRSSW~~

APPENDIX B

CAROLINA POWER 6 LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FIELD INSPECTION REPORT Date Location N b/ Z 4c'~

6 Z oc ov /

Spec.

No.

CIK-5'4' "0 ~& 7f oi-)

InsPector 5. & CFLu~

Elevation Shift Weather COMMENT 7} lie H~

C Oi>>

C.

0 7 i. r (c w

5HG(

I M 4 ll+C=

IZ-cp c.-o I

~n gr Cc'HB I'gee + /rJ. l C.

S4 m-" Z 4

PL-C /~i 'Ippa' CM I/1 ~

/g~

C C-,

>/// 7K-CC,C <4'>44 V N IrI(P

< 4 C'4 i~a INSPECTOR Q A REVIEW '.c~

Date CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FIELD INSPECTION REPORT Spec.

No. Crf~-

Location IV ><~ 4>~

Elevation g

pl&

Inspector D +

Shift Weather CO)KENT lniR& Ft~i <mb 4

) -

ZN HL'c~d4 l

+c'fTW~cW

~v VJ

~ Ac. I(

( a'Ab qgHT 5rl<= )

OA '

W'c.

~ doe <i~xi A'c~c

.c

/P

~E'A,c

. Z 8 i FZ=

Wr Wz&

>PP.5&0..

INS PECTOR Q A REVIEW

CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT Date Location Elevation FIELD INSPECTION REPORT Spec.

No.

Cia'$C/-Clr'- 48+

Inspector ).S.

C ~

Shift Weather COMMENT t-iLrL

'Pc~

P

~(t1,l-f~&.10(=

~

t III

. O'.7vtc.-A i Z<.'4 IO(A -5 jwc'& A ~

PA54

~

Z-> r

<rc Oc.'<<C~

u )'ill

+t v r Cw INSPECTOR Q A REVIEW

CAROLINA POWER 6 LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT Date FIELD INSPECTION REPORT

/

Spec.

No. C8R- &Sf s'Af 4~

P ~/

g Location

&~2

~ ~

~

~/+4~/ ~

Inspector

~ '5. CW 'aD Elevation ZZ>

Fr.

Shift Weather r 'eZCR&l

~ WI/D COI'lMENT Q

~

8 l cl>>

-.- - 0o z~

u A~

4. e' hJ (

E=

04M AO ~

t'

~Q 4

67M i I IZC Pr&

d~(z.-

BC u L

hJt',"

I'~i~&>>

t

~(

6 4fb F I fkPb PPC Q N/C 8

Ohft'gb 6 one IJ Jc '6(8L

~~/

///

/

0 !L.)ZL in.

Ie

+(2

~b ~tmt INS PECTOR Q A REVIEW

PHIAL.

CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FIELD INSPECTION REPORT Date Spec.

No.

C4Z-pA'-erg-f Location Inspector 0 &

C Am~~

Elevation Shift Weather COMIiENT Cac IA j

> 4 4 cJ K,4 4

f42-7 wC~

0\\

~-.

Ra ia

'7E 'Vi~(

a WisA c'> ->0 b&Ji ic ~

Qsl '

r nc altaAlc P

%\\A~ IJPa

~~

1 P Pzfs'W.

"ri

- (-+

Fice=.

Am b UNi Fete g c.V 5ceLJ ~D7 t0 TM C'r KW tC I G. Clo Ai 05 7 W

<<~ ~'CS (TL4 2

bt I C-(~r

<<<>i7LaVi>>~

INSPECTOR Q A REVIEW

CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FIELD INSPECTION REPORT Date Location 547,-

0 b

~ g g

~

C Elevation Spec.

No.

CAC- ~~kJ<.4- - W Inspector b <

. CA m.

Shift

-)

Weather CO>KENT EQ ~ 0>vz v X rs inc.'

o C

m4 <-

50'H U lt-r

'0+K Rc.c

c. c'd g ~rz v

4~~ sP.

~@ca~>'r e

4r D P0 V+x< r~We

~~

)

W

>l~t

>0 4~

J>(

INSPECTOR Q A REVIEW

Phqr.'o I-"

~"

CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FIELD INSPECTION REPORT Date Location hf b

+a '

Z Oar'pec.

No.

r~Mlk 4 '& T7-c i) s 7 Inspector 3) o. L Ato~

Elevation Shift Weather COMMENT P UI (uig

-6+a 1 i~

L-WA3 p'rM~Xip c

2u i~'

chal n >MY ChNcl 7wE Ab<5

~>v (l

() j

~f~es+~e~

INS PEG TOR q A REVIEW

0

CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT Date Location Elevation QgbZ,~o9 Z c~y

~c Shift FIELD INSPECTION REPORT Spec.

No.

5 +N-wk~W

( ~ 8 Inspector

. 5

~ (4&A-)3 V-0 I Weather COMMENT d) c TNT-Af&

v<2-(

C (( ~<~

gc

..EP dc 4 C AC" OOQ 'b' 4

~~

&<~ca, U

K~A 0r Hw 8 e~~c-Lu ~4" t~fii4lfx.d l2i ') ~~X< c.

VISAS AJ

.) g ~c' PLiLMPl +v IrJ 4 Ap rl~ @re~

c

~4"~&~CC~h r y l~ /ZCw~~c ~w n

Ii Of& VilrWe7'o.4 c

o

/r Pr'C J Q M ~ 6c."- )M vM

//il//(/

CP//CM'c'&i INSPECTOR Q A REVIEW

CAROLINA POWER 6 LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT Date A/8&7, 4.og Location

/

FIELD INSPECTION REPORT Spec.

No, CW--~

-CR 4 - 8 ib c-

~c>

Inspector

u. <

~

C>

Elevation Shift Weather C01'1MENT PRb 0

'~ Wt

> r rj

~y r

~gQ~

'~c

/

/ K i~8~

+0 <gc

-C~..

Avow

> iPPt

~JE

~8 8&Sar~.5 r" >anw gU~ eF C~

%C=

Z>ZDF ~

3

~ H -~c'~

WC Vi~

Rue'(

W4 z

~

4a.J ~~. ~

O~ ~/

CPM c

4g ff' g ~r gkcrcH-Q 4 Al~~ d 77

~

P c OWz ~~Dc~

l~OY~'

~ mcvS~~

c%P'70 d C ~ dr~r.

c Cru AC.

aL 4z8w'C'7&M MWoW4 C~B

~ i~

INS PECTOR Q A REVIEW

CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FIELD INSPECTION REPORT 9 -/3 -7A'-Ce FP 8-~/

B.s c+~ ~-

CO>1MENT uzi C l c.

C (tvvilc. Li pJ ir 4'F

('.<) ~r

+~~i+ ka(e

~&~8 c:

/~iJ~PzAi d or< M 8M~/5 Jg~

IC DP F

~

ge 44f

~

rf ~

JD 0/Z t

t,/

urZc

~4 umC DoH/~w~c

/

oA.4 77~

'i~+C 4 ldll u'A P

7/'z; 4'

~/.

<Wctu'em

)

PP8/A c~ ~

jP ~q JP-4z-YW4~

Qgg/8 ri ~-c'&

As,t r

~

o~ ~/M~

E~ vs~

Ca~

y Doris e INS PECTOR Q A REVIEW

CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FIELD INSPECTION REPORT Date

~ a+ 7 p'P /03rrr +~

Location Z.OC' 774-Elevation Spec.

No.

Inspector Shift c Crt/~

y(~ ol Weather illICC r

Cu ivor C rlC Plgt)k - >4 4 "+

COMKNT

).C')r)'C

)

c. ))

h I>L W f '777wl4 a

5~c//-

N //-

~ (

5( ( C ')

/7rK(/'~l/7/

f+/

C " (c c-/!

~ //i7'77PZ.

~dc. c-( /

"c CcN

-</'*

'><Nb~'C 7

c*g pje

'er ccCt p

w S /J&'c Q')

') l4 j?7(

4'rP

/)ie-trr4 76k P~// -

4 5

air l +l ))

7C c'wl." l(/~ > 8//Z r,

)(

6 CL. rl cr (rr'C.t it/ ~

P+

~7/a'5 7 r'/r "

C c't/C() /uC 4i /7 C

0'rid C-

-X Cc.C'v/r) 9 ct r/ <<>>

l)rt-'ll E,rri; ua w'r clair,>r. li'r tr

//18'

)/~f7:>-C/l-(

.C'l Y7C'

./r/..

8/4C/(."

r/4' N)C//

'/..rVf7C/>

'AC~a <r i JCu'c'-

C /P

'&2'l CA,'C/>

CH4

/Ce >

CP/4g

'Ccc < r l /

0 c/y C

/">

C SC~~.

~

//

/C/:e 8,r4

///r'

~WC'C C

. ~

cy S

Cc~ jf/8 c r 4(Cat./CC

/ cg'Cc G/- /~

c" (r CW c; l//

-5 O'V.(Vsi',

xrtrz~

l ~

rrrCc rt C+C H f P

("'Zc AEJ All~

lz~v CO/l

. l r r( M ck'0 rie

/l ca) z~8'r lcp~g rr'/ 5 /

c/~

/bc."

INS PECTOR Q A REVIEW Oeeeee peelrelel Iec.

Watelel ~

N c,

P~js /

CAROLINA POWER 6 LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT Date Location 7

A/C4'+ Z +0 Zm m~7 FIELD INSPECTION REPORT Spec.

No..i'd&AW<~ 4~&

Zespecccr 3.

CH~dp Elevation Shift Weather C/~C 0 )c Cur&8~

CO%TNT 4Fz IP )(iZb'~r Fr'Si ~C&

c i7c'd ~r.

f/"rP sL-

~

>i~

@ @b 5

/~

~

)gC~

A g

~ C wc"~.iWTV4.

• 'g Ld'C'

'+i 9( r)>C'rr'('r

) 'c-4c' )rn:- -r 7re"

/->c f7 ~4 4-Gf ) I(.

INSPECTOR Q A REVIEW

CAROLINA POWER 6 LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FIELD INSPECTION REPORT Date Spec.

No. Cd/2 +rk'-CH'-

iP-&s Location ~ ~~/'+~

XZa ><

Elevation Inspector Shi ft Ph4-Weather

, QA'~~4.ig~

COKKNT A'/c i7'7) 5 'i r

~ 6 Llt~

>c ~re e c

'r. r- )'Para d

2 C i

i<PP 8/

/~re/

4g MZ~z c M

/4/8E..

J(~i riZ'F 8/ 4 r~<Cr7c'ci)

/.'bo s

~/ /

Ag HcvA c> i.~i"i-i-a~

/un',7 P///r y/= W Q'~~

C7c I <ran-<<

C~)/l r ~~

c6&c e"

. i M

ESP

~

C 0l~<~c"/ g+~ orJ 1d exp gU~

pe gC'4 C/lljP:

//

b ~/@

r~ P CM~~(V

- ~i' z.

~&c~zSrs c C-C l2~

~JE>rz w/~c~

INSPECTOR Q A REVIEW 04OYER PAINTIWO lltC kWKIOII H C

CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT Date Location L&b~ o yg FIELD INSPECTION REPORT Spec.

No.

CUPS.-su-c,P-

~ 8 '.c (

,/

Inspector 8 5.

Elevation

~~t~~i) Z 9-Zq'hift Weather CO%"KNT ZXc~l ioW ~

~l<

0~

gC c',3 CE E Kg

" Qp~J4Q ~~d C4f g'%s I

/

>iiiT 'VC~ig "77~

>&i 8 ~

ci i >~

.w~u,r I+

x~z.

~a~

Jd.

~'J ki<+

u',ivn c'r~b 'IA'r-h'x.P x zv'J

&0 t

~ '

2 c.-

5 Co~dCP CnJ

~

77C r

c.

.c.'4 W CC,'ea 6'rF SC%

W.g4'-'~rCrrC<

g 5C ~uZ) c-Hc(c=

i'rm IAJd>

~ /7P rW c

/+"~

(,

I)+~<i46 rm'AtOC demi O~ tlW +

c.c."

g INSPECTOR Q A REVIEW OiAWAItMTQI~, IIIC RllgNN, N C

APPENDIX C

U.S. ARMYENGINEER DIVISIONLABORATORY SOUTH ATLANTIC I

I I

II LARGE SCALE TRIAXIALSHEAR AND GRADAT.ION TESTS ON ROCK TEST FILL I"1ATERIAL SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POMER PLANT CAROLINA POMER AND LIGHT CONPANY REQUISITION NO H-11291 12 JULY 1979 CORPS OF ENGINEERS HARIETTA, GEORGIA WORK ORDER NO<

1366

SADEN-FL 13 July 1979 PREFACE By letter dated 26 July 1978, the Carolina Power and Light Company (CP6L), Raleigh, North Carolina, requested the U.

S.

Army Engineer Division Laboratory, South Atlantic, perform laboratory tests on material from a rock test fill at the Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant main dam site

~

The sample was delivered to the Laboratory in April 1979 and the work was accomplished under the provisions of ER 1140-1-210.

The tests conducted were:

one 15-in. diameter, consolidated, undrained triazial shear (R) test and an after-test gradation analysis.

The work was performed under the general direction of Mr. Robert J.

Stephenson, P. E., Director, South Atlantic Division Laboratory.

The tests were supervised by Mr. Coy A. Colwell, Supervisory Civil Engineering Technician.

Messrs.

Colwell and Stephenson analyzed the data and prepared this report.

SADEH-FL 13 July 1979 CONVERSION FACTORS BRITISH TO 1'KTRIC UNITS OF MEASURK14KNT British units of measurement used in thi.s report can be converted to metric units as follows:

Multi 1 To Obtain inches pounds cubic feet 2.5<

0.45336 centimeters kilograms 0.028317 cubic meters pounds per square inch (psi) tons per square foot 703. 1 0.9765 ki.lograms per square inch kilograms per square centimeter centimeters per second 1.969, feet per minute

SADEN-FL l3 July 1979 LARGE SCALE TRIAXIAL SHEAR AND GRADATION TESTS on ROCK TEST FILL MATERIAL SHEAPON HARRIS NUCLEAR PO>lER PLANT CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY l.

OBJECT:

The object of this test program was to determine the triaxial shear (R-test) and the after-test gradation of a rockfill sample.

The test specimens were reconstituted using material in a test sample obtained from a rock test fillat the Carolina Power and Light Company (CPBL)

Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant main dam sate.

2.

REFERENCES:

a.

Previous report:

"Large Scale Triaxial Shear and Permeability Tests, Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Carolina Power and Light Company, Requisition

'o No. H-02022, Corps of Engineers, South Atlantic Division Laboratory,

Marietta, Georgia, April 1975.

SADEN-FL 13 July 1979 b.

Engineering Manual lll0-2-1906, Laboratory Soils

Testing, Department of the Army, Office of the Chief of Engineers, 30 Nov 1970.

3.

SPECIAL EQUIPMENT:.

The controlled-strain triaxial apparatus and the gradation equipment were the same used in the previous test program and described in paragraph 3 of reference 2a.

4.

DESCRIPTION OF SP26'LE:

The test sample was provided by CPSL already separated on various sieves ranging from minus 3-in. to minus No.

4 sieve sizes.

The material, which was shipped sealed in 55-gallon metal drums, was received 17 April 1979.

According to CP6L's letter dated 9 May 1979, the test sample had been obtained from a rock test fillat the Shearon Harris"Nuclear Power Plant main dam site.

The same letter contained the field gradation data to use as the basis for computing the replacement gradation for the test specimens.

Based on the field gradation, the sample classified as a tan, poorly graded, silty gravel (GP-GM) with about 50 percent cobble sizes up to 12-in.

maximum size.

SADEN-FL 13 July 1979 5.

SCOPE OF TESTS:

The rockfill material was recombined at the replace-ment gradation for each of the three 15-in. diameter triaxial specimens which were then tested in consolidated undrained triaxial shear with pore pressure measurements (R-tests).

ln the CPGL letter of 9 May, it was requested that the specimens be compacted to 138 pcf dry density at 4 percent moisture content.

After the first specimen was tested at a confining pressure (3) of 2.0 tons/sq. ft.,

Messrs.

Alex Fuller (CP6L) and Nike Pavone (Ebasco) telephoned instructions to reduce the specimen density to 135 pcf in the other two specimens.

After the triaxial

tests, a gradation analysis was performed on the specimen tested at the highest confining pressure.

6.

TEST PROCEDURES:

The test procedures were the same as those used in the previous te'st program and described'n paragraph 6b of reference 2a.

Only the specimen densities and moisture contents were changed to comply with the current'equest and instructions from CP&L representatives.

SADEN-FL 13 July 1979 7.

TEST RESULTS:

The results of all the tests are shown on the attached standard forms as listed below.

Test Attachment No.

Gradation Curves, ENG Form 2087 Triaxial Compression Test Report, ENG Form 2089 8.

DISCUSSION OF TEST RESULTS:

a.

Gradation Curves.

The sample furnished for this test program was not well graded like the 1975 sample.

It contained more gravel sizes and less sand sizes.

The percentage of fines (minus No.

200 sieve sizes) was about the same in both samples.

As a result, there was less sand available to "cushion" the gravel size particles in the specimens prepared for these tests'hat probably caused more apparent degradation in these tests than occurred in the sample tested earlier.

b.

Triaxial Shear.

(1)

The shear strength parameters were arbitrarily

SADEN-FL 13 July 1979 computed at 15 percent axial strain.

As noted above, the No.

2 test specimen was prepared at a higher density than the others, so it was not surprising that the strength circles did not generate a "good" total strength envelope.

Hence, no total strength envelope is shown on the report sheet.

The induced pore pressures,

however, caused the strength circles to shift and line up very well tangent to an effective strength envelope with an angle of internal friction (P') of 40.5 degrees.

This compares favorably with the P'f 40.0 degrees obtained in the previous test program.

(2)

The negative induced pore pressures indicate the specimens tested under the lower confining pressures dilated.

The specimens tested in the previous program did not exhibit this characteristic.

This change in behavior between the two samples, however, is consistent with the d,

higher percentage of gravel sizes in the current sample.

~hh h

p ph d

h progressed.

Unfortunately, the entire roll of film was bad and no pictures are available.

For all practical

SADEN-FL 13 July 1979

purposes, however, the photographs in the previous report are also typical for these tests.

9.

CONCLUSIONS:

a.

This material exhibits some sensitivity to changes in giadation and density.

The maximum deviator stresses, (Yj-g)nez messnred in these tests were consistently higher than those obtained in the previous sample which was more well graded.

The one specimen tested at a higher density was also relatively stronger than the others, but more data would be required to confirm this apparent phenomena.

b.

Notwithstanding the differences in the measured deviator stresses, the effective shear strength parameters for this material under K-test conditions are essentially constant for the range of gradations and densities tested on this sample and the sample tested in 1975.

2 Attachments ENG Form 2087 ENG Form 2089

~

~

I

I I

I

~

~

I

~

~ I

~

I I

~

I I I I II '

~

~

I. -I I

~ '

~

~

I '

I I

I I

I I

II I

I ~

SH I ~ ~

I%ST,

~RR II I E3E,...

I%% III ~

W i IIXSSW

,ESSE II I Ei Pe

'5iiil~

W l IIESSW,

~iSR%lll i

W I IE IllllE R IIIIE SH

,EISRIIII a, I.I,,.... KINE. S& IIIIE S&,

I 1

8

~

~

~

I Il I

~ 5

~

~

~

ERiSSRIII I

-EIEEQRRili 1

'IIESSW, II

')

.'...','.: '.. 'll RN 'NNI IIIESSW:

llli li~kil i I E) R IIIIESSR, aIE,'i>>l.a el~

I Erami llIEar

~ IIEaam

,Ea IIII

~ t[l I ESSHI IIIESS IIIISSH.

~ESHI I

"%%)a I ~ HIIIIIE EIIISSK

,EISWI I I Il N I ~ Willi~

IIIIIERSW.,

~SSH III IllllEIS&EII~

WIIIIIESS

,ESSW III IIIIIPa8%8lll Ei WIIIIIESSW.,

~ES II

~

ESS I I ill IEES

,ESS II ESS l II III IESS I

M~:-&

APPENDIX D

Photo 1

Stockpile of blasted rock used in construction of Test Sections.

Base of stockpile is at El 250+.

Spillway Excavation invert to be El 203 at this location.

~

Pho to 2 End dumping of Rock on Test Section VRMD 24-4-3.

Photo 3

Spreading of Rock to 24 inch nominal li,ft thickness with dozer.

~ t 0

I 0

')1

)

4~~~

r ~~

~>>'~

~

4 I

Cygne

>>RR fy I

I

,'i Photo 4

Test Section VRMD-24-2-4 after spreading but prior to rolling.

('

7 t

r

'(,;

~P~ Ir JJ>>

IL'4,"

'($4,

)4

)

A

'4 I

') L

~

LL 4

<~J)L- >>'

I tg R

Photo 5

Test Section VRMD-24-4-3 during rolling with smoo'th drum vibratory roller.

(Raygo Rascal 600A)

l

1p

- e 9

iQ

)

i r

+ m

~

r

<<(-~.

I 0

Photo 6

Test Section VRMD-24-2-4 lift surface after rolling (& passes)

Photo 7

Volume measurement of density hole.

'5 5

,C3

~ 5 5

I

~

I EQ r

II

~

h,l Ql I,

'L Photo 8 Test E ui ment used in in-place permeability test.

.I ih I ~

I f

I l~

r L

I-5 9

l ie ts Ij I

Fhoto' Overall Vfew of Cross Sectfon of Test ection VfftD-2~3.

Four 24" lifts shown

~ %

/'

/

QF p i r'

~

l '

)<'lw (I Q I'1 J

t ga.,~vQ j

P. ~

I'oto 10 Close-up of Cross,Section of Test Section VIQK-24-4-3

~ p I

~li m

~ t.

I 4

hoto Il Overall View of Cross Section of Test Section VRMD-24-2-4.

Two 24" lifts shown.

.4 0

r Photo 12 Close-up of Cross Section of Test Section VRMD-24-2-4

Ai 0

e