Consolidation Test Results, Triaxial
Permeability Values, and Particle
Size Distributions
98thStreet Ground Water
Monitoring Well
Albuquerque, New Mexico
Open File Report #436
Report Prepared at the
New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources
William Haneberg
Barry Allred
Priscilla Swearingen
Amy Gibson
Table of Contents
Section A - Monitoring Well Location and Abbreviations
Monitoring Well Location
Unit Abbreviations
page A- 1
page A- 1
Section B - Consolidation Test Results
Description of Consolidation Testing of Undisturbed Samples
Tabulated Results ofConsolidation Testing
Charted Results ofConsolidation Testing
page B-1
page B-3
page B-8
Section C - Triaxial Permeability Test Results
Triaxial Hydraulic ConductivityProcedures
Tabulated Results of Triaxial Hydraulic Conductivity Testing
Hydraulic Conductivity Charts, Particle Size Tables and Charts
page C-1
page C-2
page C-5
Section D - Composite Sample ParticleSize Distribution Data
Description of Panicle Size Distribution Analysis
page D- I
Sample Percentage of Gravel, Sand, and Fines
page D-3
Coefficients of Curvature, Coefficients of Uniformity, and Grading page D-4
Particle Size Distribution Tables and Charts
page
D-5
- Section A Monitoring Well Location
and Unit Abbreviations
Monitoring Well Location
The monitoring well is located off 98th Street, north of Interstate 40, about 6.5 km west
of downtown Albuquerque. This well was installed by the City of Albuquerque, in collaboration
with the United States Geological Survey and the New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral
Resources. The first borehole at this location was drilledsolely for the purpose of obtaining
continuous sample core to a depth of 457m (1500 feet). A second larger diameter borehole was
drilled 6m offset from the first. Only select intervals were cored in this borehole, which was used
for placement of monitoring well piezometers. Mud rotary drilling procedures were used for both
holes, and the second, like the first, had a depth of 457m.
Unit Abbreviations
Length:
mm - millimeters
cm - centimeters
m - meters
km - kilometers
Weight:
g - weight in grams
kgi - weight in kilograms
Time:
s - seconds
Pressure:
kPa - kilopascals
A- 1
- Section B Consolidation Test Results
Consolidation Testingof Undisturbed Samples
Consolidation testing of undisturbed samples from the98thStreet
monitoring well
location was accomplished using a SOJLTEST C-252 fixed-ring consolidometer and a Soil Test
C-280 consolidation loading device. Samples were selected by visually examining the core, and
removing sections that appeared to be representative fine grained material. The samples were
moist, and all were quickly wrapped in plastic film to reduce dehydration. Becausethecore
diameter was slightly less than the standard consolidation test sample diameter of 6.3 cm (2.5
inches), the consolidation apparatus was modified to accept diameters of 5.1 cm (2.0 inch). A
trimming ring was used to reduce sample diameter to the 5.1 cm value required. All samples were
saturated with distilled water prior to laboratory testing. Applied consolidation pressures for the
first five tests were 48, 145, 339, 726, and 1500 Wa. For the final four tests, the they were 27,
75, 172, 365, 753, 1140, and 1914 @a. Due to the limited range ofthe consolidation apparatus
available, applied loads were substantially less than the in situ vertical stress for each sample.
Consolidation parameters determined through testing may therefore differ from actual in situ
values. Tests were conducted using standard procedures as described by Das (1983) andWray
(1986).
Consolidation testing is used to determine several important soivsediment parameters.
The coefficient of consolidation, Cv, is one of these. The coefficient of consolidation governs the
rate of consolidation under a change in applied pressure. Wray (1986) describes two graphical
procedures for determining Cv. The equation for the log-of-time method is expressed:
while the expression for the square-root-of-time method is givenas:
H, is one-half the initial specimen thickness prior to change in applied pressure, The values of ts0
and t,, reflect the time for 50 Yo and 90 % of total specimen thickness reduction to occur, Cv
values were obtained for each of theapplied consolidation pressures.
The parameter controlling the total amount of consolidation resulting from an applied load
is expressed:
where C,, is the compression index, C,,,. is the recompression index, and Ae is the change in
void ratio The values, p1 and p2. arethe initialandfinal consolidation pressures for a given
change in load. Due to the limited consolidation pressures that could be achieved using the
apparatus available, it was not possible to ascertain whether calculated index values represent
compression or recompression.
B- 1
Saturated hydraulic conductivity was another important parameter determined through
consolidation testing. The flow rate of water through soil or aquifer material depends on the
magnitude of the hydraulic conductivity value. The saturated hydraulic conductivity for each load
increment was calculated using ( Terzaghi, 1943; Das, 1983):
. the specific weight of water, e is the initial load increment void ratio, and aVis the
where ~ I I is
negative local value of the change in void ratio divided by the change in applied pressure, -$.
The samples that were tested camefrom a vertical borehole in flat lying sediments. Therefore, the
value given by the above equation representsthe vertical component of the hydraulic conductivity
tensor.
References:
Das, B. M. 1983. Advanced Soil Mechanics. Hemisphere Publishing Corporation. Washington,
DC. 51 1 pages.
Terzaghi, K. 1943. Theoretical Soil Mechanics. John Wiley and Sons. New York, NY. 510 pages.
Wray, W. K. 1986. Measuring Engineering Properties of Soil. Prentice-Hall, Inc. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ. 276 pages.
B-2
Tabulated Results of Consolidation Testing of Undisturbed Samples from the
98th Street Monitoring Well Location
-
Drive 20
Depth = 38.3nt
Lithology 'Silt'
Specific Gruvity of Gruins = 2.75 Dry Bulk Density = 1.34 g/cnf'
Unconfined Conzpresshe Strength = 306 kPu
Slzeur Strengtlt = 49 kP[l
Initiul VoidRutio = 1.052Averuge(Re?)Conzpression
Index = 0.151
tion
of
Consolidation
Coefficient
Ratio
Void
Pressure
tion
(cm'/s)
Wa)
1.25
0.985
27
3.34
0.954
75
4.91
x loJ
x 10"
Vertical
Hydraulic
(m/s)
2.15 x 10.~
x 10"
172
365
753
0.912
0.863
0.801
1.38 x 10"'
9.26 x 10"
1140
0.761
4.29 x 10.'
3.57 x 10."
1914
0.706
3.92 x 10.;
2.59 x 10."
1.78 x 10"
3.37 x 10."
2.69 x 10."
1.18 x 10."
Drive
24A
Depth = 45.8n1
Lithology - 'Silty Sun#
Specific Gruvity of Gruins = 2.68 Dry Bulk Density = 1.59 g/cnz3
Shew Strength = 2 7 kp(1
Unconfined Conzpressivestrengtlt = >431 kPu
Initial Void Rutio = 0.686
Averuge (Re?)ConzpressionIndex = 0.109
of
Consolidation
Coefficient
Ratio
Void
Pressure
(Wa)
27
75
0.605
2.69
0.569
(cm'/s)
3.07 x 10-3
2.21
x 10-3
Vertical
Hydraulic
(m/s)
1.39 x 10.'
x 10.~
172
0.53
1.32 x lo3
4.91 x 10"'
365
0.489
1.25 x lo3
2.40 x 10"'
753
0.454
1.04 x lo3
6.75 x 10"
1.24 x 10"'
x 10."
1140
7.77
0.428
Drise 3 7A
Depth
= 72.4~11
Lithology
- 'SiltyClay'
SpeciJc Gruvity of Groins = 2.71 Dry Bulk Density = 1.86 g/cm'
Unconfined Conzpressive Strength = 396 kPu
Shear Strength = 69 kpn
Averuge(Re?)Conzpression Index = 0.I09
Initiul VoidRutio = 0.457
0.406
Coefficient of
Consolidation
(cm'/s)
1.11 x lo3
2.40 x 10"
172
0.381
1.95 x 10'
365
753
0.344
0.287
1.77 x 10'
9.10 x 10'
Consolidation
Pressure
(Pa)
0.422
27
75
Void Ratio
5.11
I
1914
4.50
5.11 x 10"
0.259
1140
I
I
I
0.221
I
4.46 x 10"
Vertical Hydraulic
Conductivity
(m/s)
1.20 x 10.~
x 10"'
lo-"
4.00 x lo-"
6.60 x
I
I
1.50 x 10."
x 10.''
2.60 x IO"'
Drive 38A
Depth = 74.2n1
Litltology - 'Sun#
Specific Grmdty of Gruins = 2.66 Dry Bulk Density = 1.72 g/cnr'
Sheur Strength = -Unconfined Conzpressive Strength = 26 kPu
InitinlVoidRntio
= 0.547
Averuge(Re?)Compression Int1.s = 0.033
Consolidation
Pressure
(Pa)
27
Void Ratio
0.511
Coefficient of
Consolidation
(cm?/s)
7.80 x 10"
Vertical Hydraulic
Conductivity
(m/s)
9.80 x 10'
75
0.496
6.04 x 10'
1.85 x 10.'
172
0.486
5.95 x 10.'
6.70 x
365
0.477
5.85 x 10.'
2.90 x lo9
753
0.466
5.76 x 10.'
1.70 x lo9
1140
0.46
1.39 x 10.'
2.49 x 10"'
1914
0.45
8.83 x 10"
1.20 x 10-l0
E-4
I
Drise 40A
Depth = 76.Snz
Lithology - 'Very Fine Silt'
Specific Gravity of Grains = 2.75 Dry Bulk Density = 1.33 g/cnz3
Unconfined Conzpressive strength = >431 kPa
Shear Strength = 81 kPu
Initial Void Rutio = 1.068
Average
(Re?)Conzpression In& = 0.167
Consolidation
Pressure
(Wa)
48
Void Ratio
145
339
726
1500
I
3.47
Coefficient o f
Consolidation
(cm2/s)
3.41 x 10"
Vertical Hydraulic
Conductivity
0.921
1.48 x 10'
8.18 x lo-"
0.859
0.794
9.18 x 10"
6.19 x 10.'
2.89 x 10."
1.15 x 10."
I
0.727
5.51
4.49 x 10-lo
I
~~
x 10"
x
lo-"
Drive 4
Depth = 78.Inz
Lithology - 'Silt'
Spec@ Grmity of Gruins = 2.71 Dry Bulk Density = 1.29 g/cnl"
Unconfined Conzpressive Strength = >431 kPu
Sheur Strength = j 6 kpu
Initial Void Rutio = 1.101
Average
(Re?)Conzpression Inrltx = 0.194
Consolidation
Pressure
Void Ratio
Coefficient o f
Consolidation
(cm'/s)
(@a)
3.85
1.009
x lo5
x lo3
x lo4
48
145
1.18
0.955
339
7.53
0.887
726
1500
0.719
B-5
Vertical Hydraulic
Conductivity
(m/s)
6.45 x 10.~
6.40 x 10"'
2.25 x 10"'
3.01 x 10'
4.78 x 10."
9.19 x 10.;
7.43 x
lo"?
Drive 5
Depth = 97.3~12
Lithology - 'Fine Snnrl'
Specific Gravity of Grains = 2.65 Dry
Bulk Density = 1.75 g/cnz3
Unconfined Conlpressive Strength = >431 kPa
Sheur Strength = 1 56 kpa
Initial Void Ratio = 0.514
Average
(Re?)Contpression Inrley = 0.105
of
Consolidation
Coefficient
Ratio
Void
Pressure
P a )
48
ion
I
145
0.435
339
0.411
726
1500
I
0.347
I
(cm'/s)
6.37 x 10.~
3.41 x 10"
2.32 x 10"
1.3s x lo5
7.85 x 10"
Vertical Hydraulic
I
(m/s)
1.23 x 10.'
1.89 x 10.~
5.24 x 10"'
1.18 x
3.99 x 10"
Drise90CDepth
= 154.5n1
Lithology
- 'Silt/Cluy '
Specific Gruvity of Grains = 2.70 D y Bulk Density = 1.48 g/cnz3
Sheur Strength = I56 kPu
Unconfined Compressive Strength = >431 kPa
Initid Void Ratio = 0.824
Average
(Re?)Conzpression Inrlev = 0.122
ion
8.10
Consolidation
Pressure
(Wa)
0.766
48
145
Coefficient of
Void Ratio
(cm'/s)
x 10"
4.88
x IO"
1.36 x 10"
2.55
1.15 x 10"
6.74 x 10"
0.728
339
0.684
726
0.636
1500
0.583
B-6
Vertical Hydraulic
8.38 x loLo
1.67 x 10"'
x 10"'
1.36 x 10.''
7.31 x 10"'
Drive 93B
Deptlt = 159,2nt
Lithology - ‘FineSand’
Specific Gravity of Grains = 2.66 Dry Bulk Density = 1.81 g/cm’
VnconJinerl Conzpressive Strength = -Shear
Strength = -Initiul Void Ratio = 0,470
Average (Re?) Conpression Inrlev = 0.122
Consolidation
Pressure
(kw
48
Void Ratio
0.433
Coefficient of
Consolidation
(cm’/s)
5.98 x 10”
Vertical Hydraulic
Conductivity
(m/s)
5.11 x
145
0.411
5.75 x 10”
1.45 x 10.’
339
0.395
5.62 x 10.’
5.67 x 1 0 ’ ~
726
0.377
0.357
x 10”
x 10”
1500
Note:
2.56 x 10.’ 4.66
6.97 x 10”’ 2.41
Unconfined
compressive
strength
was
measured
using
a
SOILTEST pocket
devicewas used toobtainshearstrength
penetrometer. A SOILTESTtorvaneshear
values. Drive 4 (78.1111) and Drive 5 (97.3111) samples were obtained from a borehole offset
approximately 6m fromthecoring
location. Only select intervalswerecored
in this
borehole, which was used for placement of monitoring well piezometers.
B-7
Drive 20 Consolidation Test Results: Void Ratio and
Coefficient of Consolidation vs Applied Pressure
Consolidation Pressure (kPa)
B-8
Drive 20 Consolidation Test Results: Vertical Hydraulic
Conductivitty vs Applied Pressure
G
z
1.OE-8
Y
%
e
>
0
3.OE-9
1.OE-9
z
7
=I
3.OE-10
0
".-- 1.OE-I0
0
3
2
-a
3.OE-11
-
-m 1.OE-11 F
-0 3.OE-12
3
-
1.OE-12
20
I
50
I
I
, , I
I
I
I
I
, , I
500
1000
Consolidation Pressure (kPa)
100
200
B-9
I
2000
5000
Drive 24A Consolidation Test Results: Void Ratio and
Coefficient of Consolidation vs Applied Pressure
-3.OE-3 5
0.65 -
3.5E-3
m
(Y
<
0.60 -
>
0
a
=A
2.5E-3
0.55 -
2
0.50
3
0
F
m
U
2.OE-3 5
v)
S
-
0
1.5E-3
0
Y
S
0.45 0.40
20
a,
I
50
I
,
*
,
I
100
I
200 1000
I
500
I
1
1
1
1
'
I.OE-3 :E
5.OE-4
2000
%0
0
Drive 24A Consolidation Test Results: Vertical
Hydraulic Conductivitty vs Applied Pressure
'.0E-7
~
1.OE-8
1.OE-9 :
.-0
3
E
'E3
>
1.OE-IO
- 1.OE-11
I
(11
0
i
Consolidation Pressure (kPa)
B-11
Drive 37A Consolidation Test Results: Void Ratio and
Coefficient of Consolidation vs Applied Pressure
0.45 -
7
-1.OE-3 5
1.2E-3
v)
N
C
-
0.40 -
-
a
I
0 0.35
-
Y
m
Yi
2
0.30 3
-
6.OE-4
v)
S
0
- 4.OE-4
0
.w
8
0.25 0.20 20
8.OE-4
0’
A
.-0
- 2.OE-4
50
100
500
200
I000
Consolidation Pressure (kPa)
B-12
2000
- O.OE+O
5000
.-al
.o
%0
0
Drive 37A Consolidation Test Results: Vertical
Hydraulic Conductivitty vs Applied Pressure
Consolidation Pressure (kPa)
Drive 38A Consolidation Test Results: Void Ratio and
Coefficient of Consolidationvs Applied Pressure
0.52
0.51
I
-5
i
-
8.OE-2
0.50 -
a
.-
1.
n
-
'0 0.49 -
E
c
0
- 6.OE-2 P
m
I
.
I
d
2 0.48 -
3 0.47
ln
-
-0
E
ln
S
6
a
4.OE-2
0
0.46 -
4-
S
2.OE-2 .$
5
0.45 -
0
i
0.44
20
LC
50
I00
200
500 I000
Consolidation Pressure (kPa)
B-14
2000
O.OE+O
5000
0
Drive 38A Consolidation Test Results: Vertical
Hydraulic Conductivitty vs Applied Pressure
1.OE-9
1.OE-I 0
1 .OE-11
50
20
I
I
, , , I
100
I
I
200
500
t
, , , I
1000
Consolidation Pressure (kPa)
B-15
I
2000
5000
Drive 40A Consolidation Test Results: Void Ratio and
Coefficient of Consolidation vs Applied Pressure
1.oo
4.OE-4
-
0.95 -
-
4.'
0.90
-
s
3.5E-4
'E
3.OE-4
&
*
0
zl
2 0.85 D
.3 0.80 -
0.75 0.70
20
1.OE-4 Za,
.-
V
I
50
I
,
,
,
I
100
I
I
200
500
I
Consolidation Pressure (kPa)
B-16
I
, , I
1000
O.OE+O
2000
Drive 40A Consolidation Test Results: Vertical
Hydraulic Conductivitty vs Applied Pressure
B-17
Drive 4 Consolidation Test Results: Void Ratio and
Coefficient of Consolidation vs Applied Pressure
1
<
.oo
5.0E-3
I
a 0.95
S
I
3.OE-3
=O 0.90
2
'c1 0.85
8 0.80 t-
0
m
x
-0
v)
2.OE-3
0-
6
S
e
0
Y
- 1.OE-3
0.75 -
S
$
E
(u
0
0.70
20 100
I
50
I
,
,
,
I
200
500
Consolidation Pressure (kPa)
B-18
1000
O.OE+O
2000
Drive 4 Consolidation Test Results: Vertical Hydraulic
Conductivitty vs Applied Pressure
Z
2
1.OE-8 c
v
.-h>
.w
!
=
I
v
3
‘c1
u
V
3
3.OE-9
-
1.OE-9 7
3.OE-10
1.OE-10 :
2
n
> 3.OE-11
-
-
I
0
3
1.OE-11 :
3 3.OE-1220
I
50
,
1
1
1
I
1
I
I
100
200
500
Consolidation Pressure (kPa)
I
I
I
I
1000
2000
B-19
-
Drive 5 Consolidation Test Results: Void Ratio and
Coefficient of Consolidation vs Applied Pressure
7.OE-3
In
a
6.OE-3
0.50
0
Y
5.OE-3
>
I:
0
A 0.45
z
2
3
2
4.OE-3 %
E
3.OE-3
0.40
2.OE-3
2
0
e
0
0.35
0
0.30
20
50
I00
200
500
Consolidation Pressure (kPa)
B-20
1000
O.OE+O
2000
0
Drive 5 Consolidation Test Results: Vertical Hydraulic
Conductivitty vs Applied Pressure
G
2
3.OE-8
v
>
e
>
.-
.
I
d
0
3
1.OE-8
7
3.OE-9 -
v
8
o 1.OE-9 :
0
0
=3 3.OE-IO 2
I
.-E2
1.OE-10 7
3.OE-11
’
>”50 1.OE-1120
I
I
,
,
I
I
I
100
200
500
,
I
Consolidation Pressure (kPa)
B-2 1
,
,
,
I
1000
2000
Drive 9OC Consolidation Test Results: Void Ratio and
Coefficient of Consolidation vs Applied Pressure
-
0.80
0.75
I 1.OE-3 u)
G
c
E
-
8.OE-4 -2
>
0
a
C
Az 0.70 -
6.OE-4 m
2
-
rr"
2 0.65 3
4.OE-4
0
In
S
8
P
0
.
4-
C
0.60 -
2.OE-4 $
.-
%0
..
0.55
20
I
50
,
1
1
1
1
I
I
I
200 1000 500
Consolidation Pressure (kPa)
100
B-22
I
I
f
1
I O.OE+O
2000
Drive 9OC Consolidation Test Results: Vertical
Hydraulic Conductivitty vs Applied Pressure
Consolidation Pressure (kPa)
B-23
Drive 93B Consolidation Test Results: Void Ratio and
Coefficient of Consolidationvs Applied Pressure
0.44
I
7.OE-2
fn
a
<
E
0.42 -
6.OE-2 -2
>
0
a
&
z
S
0.40 -
2
0.38
9
5.OE-2
m
u0
fn
I
4.0 E-2
v0
*
S
3.OE-2
0.36
11
0.34
20
~
50
100
200
500
Consolidation Pressure (kPa)
B-24
1000
2.OE-2
2000
.E
s$
0
0
Drive 93B Consolidation Test Results: Vertical
B-25
- Section C Triaxial Permeability Test Results
Triaxial Hydraulic Conductivity Procedures for
Recompacted Samples
The hydraulic conductivity of recompacted samples from the 98thstreetcorewas
measured in a triaxial cell using the constant head method (Das, 1983). Samples that appeared to
be visually representative of the sandy portions of the core were chosen for triaxial permeability
testing,although
we discovered that many of these sampleshad appreciable finegrained
components. (See particle size distribution data provided in this section.) Samples that contained
very coarse sand granules were not selected in order to make sure that the typical grain size was
much smaller than the diameter of the triaxial samples. Our original intention was to use trimmed
undisturbed samples; however, the sandy materials were brittle and intact samples could not be
removed from thecore.Each
sample was manually disaggregated and homogenized, then
recompactedin a cylindricalmold to a length of7.4 to 8.6 cm and a diameter of3.6 cm.
Hydraulicconductivity was measured for flowparallel to the long axis of the sample (i.e.,
perpendicular to the direction of compaction).
The hydraulic conductivity was measured under confining pressures of approximately 69,
207, 345, 483, and 621 Wa. The head difference for all tests was 1.07 m, which produced an
average pore water pressure of approximately 10 kPa. The permeant was tap water. Trials with
smallerheaddifferences produced infinitesimallysmallflow rates andwould have resulted in
unacceptably long test durations. Because the triaxial cell serves as a flexible walled permeameter
and the sample is encased in only a thin latex membrane, attempts to saturate the sample inan
emptycellandheaddifferenceinexcess
of 1 m resulted in sample liquefaction. Therefore, we
could not measure hydraulic conductivity values for zero confining pressure using the triaxial cell.
Each confining pressure was maintained for only a short time, generally less than an hour, so the
results obtained represent values for the unconsolidated state.
References:
Das, B. M. 1983. Advanced Soil Mechanics. Hemisphere Publishing Corporation. Washington,
DC. 5 11 pages.
c-1
Tabulated Results of Unconsolidated-Drained Triaxial HydraulicConductivity
Testing of Recompacted Samples from the98th Street Core
Note: Axial load represents the force exerted by the specimen on the loading ram as the
cell pressure is increased. It is negative for compression andpositive for tension.
Drive 14B Depth
= 29.9nt
Confining
Pressure
69
I
(kPa)
= 1803 kg/nz3
Hydraulic
Conductivity
7.15 x 10”
Sample Length
(m/s)
= Z40 cnz
Axial Load (kg,)
0.5
207
345
2.47 x 10.~
2.05 x 10”
-0.5
-2.3
483
1.88 x 10”
-4.1
I
621
Drive 17B Depth
=3
I
1.73 x IO’
5 . h Packed Density = 2023 k g h ’
ConfiningPressure (@a)
6.51
Packed Density
Sanzple Length = 7.90 cnz
[HydraulicConductivity (m/s)l
69
I
-5.9
x lo6
Axial Load (kg,)
0.5
~~
207
I
4.65 x
I
345
483
Drive 21B Depth
I
3.80 x 1 0 6
3.27 x
2.88 x lo6
621
= 41.5,~
ConfiningPressure (@a)
Packed Density
-2.3
-4.1
-5.9
= 2184 k g h ’
IHydraulicConductivity
Snntple Lengtlz = 8.34 cnz
(m/s)I
Axial Load (kg,)
69
2.31 x
0.5
207
1.73 x
-0.9
345
1.42 x
-2.3
483
1.21 x
-4.1
621
1.04 x 1 0 6
-5.9
c-2
~~
-0.5
I
Drive 23A
Depth = 44.8n1Puckerl
Confining Pressure (Wa)
69
3.35 x
-0.9
345
2.73 x
2.32 x
-2.7
-4.5
I
621
= 48.8n1
Confining Pressure (kPa)
69
I
2.02 x lo6
Pucked Density
= 1996
(m/s)
=
1.40 x
-0.5
345
1.01 x
-2.7
483
s.11 x 10”
-4.1
I
Confining Pressure (kPa)
I
7.04 x 10.~
= 2020
Iig/nlJSunzple
IHydraulic Conductivity (m/s)I
-5
Axial Load (kgr)
1.47 x
0.9
207
1.22 x
-0.9
I
Drise 27B Depth
I
1.03 x
8.80 x 10.~
I
-3.2
-4.1
= 52. 7n1 Pucker1 Density = 1828 kg/nz3 Sunlple Lengtlt = 8.28 cnz
Confining Pressure (kPa)
69
Hydraulic
Conductivity
2.05 x
(m/s)
Axial Load (kg,)
1.4
207
1.69 x
-1.4
345
1.57 x
-2.3
483
1.49 x
-4.1
621
1.45 x
-5.9
C-3
I
Length = 8.10 cnz
69
345
483
Z91 cnz
Axial Load (kgr)
0
207
621
I
-6.4
kg/nz3 Sample Length
Hydraulic
Conductivity
3.10 x IO6
Drive 25B Depth = 4 9 . 4 ~ ~
Puckerl Density
I
Axial Load (kgr)
0.5
207
Drive 25A Depth
I
Sunlple Length = 8.56 cnz
Hydraulic
Conductivity (m/s)
4.67 x
483
I
Density = I 773 kg/m’
I
86
Drive 33A Depilt
= 62.2nz
Confining
Pressure
69
Packed Density = 1944 kg/nl’
(ma)
Hydraulic
Conductivity (m/s)
8.06 x 10‘~
Axial Load (kg,)
0.9
345
5.09 x 10.~
3.56 x 10.~
-0.5
-2.7
483
2.1s x lo7
-4.1
621
2.37 x lo7
-5.9
207
Drive 38A
Suntple Length = 8.30 cnz
Depth = 7 4 . h Pucketl Density = I726 kg/nz’
Sunzple Lengilt
ConfiningPressure (kPa) IHydraulicConductivity (m/s)I
I
= 8.51
2.55 x lo6
0.9
207
2.76 x lo7
-1.4
345
1.95 X 10”
-3.2
I
Drive 55B Depth = 102.lnz Packed
Confining
Pressure
69
207
345
483
621
I
9.80 x 10.’
cnz
Axial Load (kg,)
69
621
1
I
-5
Density = 1822 kg/nz‘ Suntple Length = 7.40 cnz
(ma) Hydraulic
Conductivity
x
1.49 x
1.34 x
1.23 x
1.15 x lo6
c-4
(m/s)
Axial Load (kg,)
1.4
-0.5
-2.3
~~
-4.1
-5.9
Triaxial Hydraulic Conductivity
Drive 14B at Depth = 29.9m
Initial Density = 1803 kg/mA3
c-5
Mechanical Sieve Analysis
of Triaxial Permeability Test Sample
Drive 14B: 29.6m-30.lm
Sample Weight = 140.29 grams
Sieye
Number
20
Grain
Diameter
I
40
60
I
140
I
I
200
I
120
I
I
-
I
0.42
80
100
0.84
I
I
0.25
0.18
I
0.1
I
I
0.07
I
0.15
0.12
PAN
mm = millimeters
g = grams
I
I
Retained Soil
Weight
Cumulative
Retained Soil
Weight
0.25
0.25
7.92
8.17
5.82
38.61
26.28
46.78
33.35
73.06
52.08
20.81
11.22
93.87
66.91
105.09
74.91
13.53
Cumulative
Percent Passing
Percent Retained
I
I
I
84.55
10.12
128.74
91.77
11.11
139.85
99.69
C-6
I
94.18
66.65
47.92
33.09
25.09
15.45
8.23
-
Particle Size Distributionof
Triaxial Permeability Test Sample
98th St. Core Drive 14B: 29.6m-30.1m
-
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
f-
30
20
. .~
I
10
OL
0.01
.~
0.02 0.03
0.05
0.1
.
.
0.2
Grain Diameter (mm)
0.3
0.5
1
Triaxial Hydraulic Conductivity
Drive 17B at Depth = 35.7m
Initial Density = 2023 kg/mA3
t
\ I
3E-6
Confining Pressure (kPa)
c-8
Mechanical Sieve Analysis
of Triaxial Permeability Test Sample
Drive 17B: 35.4m-36.0m
Sample Weight = 139.76 grams
Grain
Diameter
Retained Soil
Weight
(mm')
(g')
(g)
20
0.84
0.35
0.35
40
0.42
4.43
60
0.25
24.82
29.6
21.18
78.82
so
0.18
27.73
57.33
41.02
58.98
Sieye
Number
100
I
18.17
120
140
200
PAN
I
0.15
I
15.05
Retained Soil
Weight
Cumulative Cumulative
Percent Passing
Percent Retained
0.25
3.42
I
64.79
72.38
0.12
0.1
15.13
105.68
0.07
23.15
128.83
-
10.7
139.53
I
51.79
90.55
mm = millimeters
g = grams
c-9
99.75
4.78
I
96.58
48.21
35.21
75.62
24.38
7.82
99.84
-
92.18
Particle Size Distribution of
Triaxial Permeability Test Sample
98th St. Core - Drive 17B: 35.4m-36.Om
100
90
n
$ 80
W
cr)
?
& S
70
.
I
m 60
m
2
50
*
S
40
8
30
tj
e
20
10
OL
0.01
0.02 0.03
0.05
0.1
0.2
Grain Diameter (mm)
0.3
0.5
1
Triaxial Hydraulic Conductivity
Drive 21B at Depth = 41.5m
Initial Density = 2184 kg/mA3
I
’CI
2.6E-6
00 2.4E-6 -2.2E-6 a 2E-6 E 1.8E-6
.-a> 1.6E-6 1.4E-6 3
1.2E-6 E
2
.
U
Y
0
0
-
-
-2
a
1E-6
I”
8E-7 0
2
I
I
I00
200
1
I
I
I
300
400
500 700600
Confining Pressure (kPa)
c-11
Triaxial Hydraulic Conductivity
Drive 23A at Depth = 44.8
Initial Density = 1773 kg/mA3
5
5E-6
4.5E-6
v)
'i: 4E-6
a
,
.w
3.5E-6 2 3E-6 -
E
Y
>
P
'CJ
C
".--
2.5E-6 -
0
0
2E-6
-
3
E
'CJ
* 1.5E-6
I
I
0
I
I
I
I
100
400300200
500
Confining Pressure (kPa)
c-12
I
600
700
Mechanical Sieve Analysis
of Triaxial Permeability Test Sample
Drive 23A: 44.5m-45.lm
Sample Weight = 141.71 grams
Sieve
Number
40
Grain
Diameter
I
60
120
I
I
140
I
so
100
I
200
I
I
I
0.42
0.25
I
I
0.12
I
I
0.1
I
0.18
0.15
0.07
I
Retained
Cumulative
Soil
Cumulative
Weight
Retained
Soil
Weight
I
1.11
14.36
I
I
16.42
i
I
17.76
I
25.79
24.22
20.68
I
I
I
mm = millimeters
g = grams
c-13
1.32
15.68
Percent Passing
I
Percent Retained
I
82.1 1
I
I
99.87
I
41.47
65.69
120.55
I
I
I
0.93
11.06
I
99.07
88.94
57.94
I
I
42.06
70.47
I
29.53
29.26
46.36
85.07
I
I
I
70.74
53.64
14.93
II
Particle Size Distribution of
Triaxial Permeability Test Sample
98th St. Core - Drive 23A: 44.5m-45.1m
100
90
n
80
W
0 70
? S
z'iii 60
2
e
*
S
50
40
30
e
20
10
6.01
0.02 0.03
0.05
0.1
0.2
Grain Diameter (mm)
0.3
0.5
1
Triaxial Hydraulic Conductivity
Drive 25A at Depth = 48.8m
Initial Density = 1996 kg/mA3
Confining Pressure (kPa)
C-15
Triaxial Hydraulic Conductivity
Drive 25B at Depth = 49.4m
Initial Density = 2020 kg/mA3
5
1.6E-6
3tn 1.5E-6 % 1.4E-6 1.3E-6 .-> 1.2E-6 0
53 1.lE-6 0
.cI
Y
'E)
0
1E-6 -
0
2a 9E-7 E
'E)
I
8E-7
l
0
I
I
I
I
100300 200
400
500
Confining Pressure (kPa)
C-16
600
Mechanical Sieve Analysis
of Triaxial Permeability Test Sample
Drive 25B: 49.0m-49.7m
Sample Weight = 146.21 grams
Sieve
Number
I
I
I
20
I
60
I
I
80
I
100
I
140
200
I
I
40
120
I
Grain
Diameter
I
I
0.84
Retained
Cumulative
Cumulative
Soil
Weight
Retained
Soil
I
0
I
0
Percent Passing
Percent Retained
I
0
I
100
I
0.42
I
0.48
I
0.48
I
0.33
I
99.67
0.25
I
1
I
7.3 1
I
I
5
I
95
I
0.18
I
6.83
0.15
I
15.35
24.93
I
22.66
47.59
I
15.5
32.55
I
84.5
67.45
I
0.12
0.1
0.07
PAN
1
mm = millimeters
I
I
14.49
19.97
I
I
62.08
82.05
I
I
I
11.38
I
93.43
I
I
51.7
I
145.13
I
g = grams
C-17
42.46
56.12
I
I
I
63.9
I
99.26
I
57.54
43.88
36.1
-
II
Particle Size Distribution of
Triaxial Permeability Test Sample
98th St. Core - Drive 25B: 49.Om-49.7m
100
90
n
$ 80
W
cr)
?S
z'z
70
t
60
n 50
.cI
C
40
30
5 20
n
~-
I
10
OL
0.01
...
0.02 0.03
0.05
0. I
"
0.2
Grain Diameter (mm)
0.3
0.5
1
Triaxial Hydraulic Conductivity
Drive 27B at Depth = 52.7m
Initial Density = 1828 kg/mA3
'El
0
0
0
m
"-
2.1E-6
2E-6 -
3E 1.9E-6 L
- 1.8E-6 %
>
a
1.7E-6 -
'El
5
1.6E-6
0
0
3
1.5E-6
-
E
'El
1.4E-6
I
0
I
I00
I
I
I
I
I
200
300
400
500 700600
Confining Pressure (kPa)
C-19
Mechanical Sieve Analysis
of Triaxial Permeability Test Sample
Drive 27B: 52.6m-53.2m
Sample Weight = 153.17 grams
Number
I
60
Diameter
I
I
I
I
0.25
0.12
200
I
I
0.07
PAN
mm = millimeters
o = grams
Retained Soil
Weight
I
I
3.63
I
29.94
29.92
33.57
63.49
II
25.34
88.83
14.61
Weight
I
I
Cumulative
Percent Passing
Percent Retained
2.37
21.92
I
I
97.63
78.08
41.45
I
58.55
I
57.99
I
42.01
103.44
II
67.53
.~
I
32.47
I
18.82
122.26
I
I
16.89
139.15
I
79.82
90.85
20.1 8
9.15
I
13.34
152.49
~
c-20
I
I
~~
~
~
~
99.56
I
I
II
I
~
~~
-
I
I
Particle Size Distribution of
Triaxial Permeability Test Sample
98th St. Core - Drive 27B: 52.6m-53.2m
100
90
n
80
W
13)
(?S
.
I
-v)
70
60
n 50
C
40
30
n
20
10
~
-"
Grain Diameter (mm)
.
I
"
Triaxial Hydraulic Conductivity
Drive 33A at Depth = 62.2m
Initial Density = 1944 kg/mA3
s 1E-60
0
Q,
v)
I
.w
E"
7E-7
-
v
S'
5E-7
>
z
0
3
'CI
E
6.- 3E-7 0
3
E
m
I
2E-7 0
100
200 400300
500
Confining Pressure (kPa)
c-22
600
700
Mechanical Sieve Analysis
of Triaxial Permeability Test Sample
Drive 33A: 61.9m-62.5m
Sample Weight = 152.25 grams
120
I
0.12
0.1
140
0.07
200
PAN
mm = millimeters
g = grams
11.58
75.25
114.57 24.75
11.43
126
82.76
17.24
7.16
133.16
87.46
12.54
99.64
-
151.7
c-23
18.54
Particle Size Distribution of
Triaxial Permeability Test Sample
98th St. Core - Drive 33A: 61.8m-62.5m
100
90
n
$ 80
U
0)
70
v)
60
50
P
g.- S
n
S
40
30
n
20
10
Grain Diameter (mm)
Triaxial Hydraulic Conductivity
Drive 38A at Depth = 74.4m
Initial Density = 1726 kg/mA3
n
E:
0
0
5E-6
a3
-
v)
.I-
2E-6
-1E:1E-6
0
:
5E-7
a
'CI
0
2E-7 -
0
5 IE-7 :
E
'CI
I 5E-8
l
0
100
I
I
I
I
200
300
400
500
Confining Pressure (kPa)
c-2s
I
600
700
Mechanical Sieve Analysis
of Triaxial Permeability Test Sample
Drive 38A: 74.lm-74.7m
Sample Weight = 137.98 grams
Sieve
Number
20
40
60
I
Grain
Diameter
Retained Soil
Weight
Cumulative
Retained Soil
Weight
(mm')
(g')
tg)
0.12
I
I
0.42
0.25
I
I
I
21.12
I
mm = millimeters
g = grams
C-26
Cumulative
Percent Passing
Percent Retained
(%)
0.12
0.84
0.09
I
3 1.45
I
(Oh)
99.91
I
22.79
I
96.86
77.21
3.14
4.33
4.21
Particle Size Distribution of
Triaxial Permeability Test Sample
98th St. Core - Drive 38A: 74.lm-74.7m
100
90
n
$ 80
W
.-
v)
v)
60
2
50
*
S
40
?
S
N
4
70
30
5
e
20
10
OL
0.01
0.02 0.03
0.05
0. I
0.2
'Grain Diameter (mm)
L
0.3
0.5
1
Triaxial Hydraulic Conductivity
Drive 55B at Depth = 102.1m
Initial Density = 1822 kg/mA3
%35
3!
2E-6
-
1.8E-6
a
1.6E-6 L
\
CI
v
>
z
>
0
3
'El
1.4E-6 -
S
0"0 1.2E-6 -
-.-s
2
'El
r
IE-6
I
0
200100
I
I
I
300
600500400
C-28
I
I
700
Mechanical Sieve Analysis
of Triaxial Permeability Test Sample
Drive 55B: 101.8m-102.4m
Sample Weight = 142.14 grams
c
Sieve
Number
-1
I
I
I
I
1
Grain
Diameter
Retained Soil
Weight
I
Cumulative
Cumulative
Percent Passin
Retained Soil
Percent Retained
Weight
0.1s
I
0.13
I
2.65
I
20.24
I
0.42
I
3.58
3.76
I
0.25
I
25.01
28.77
I
38.09
66.86
I
17.62
84.48
I
16.24
100.72
I
70.86
I
I
79
I
100
0.15
I
120
0.12
I
140
0.1
I
11.57
112.29
200
0.07
129.04
I
90.78
I
9.22
I
16.75
12.51
141.55
I
99.58
I
-
g = grams
C-29
59.43
I
79.76
I
PAN
mm = millimerers
I
97.35
0.18
I
47.04
99.87
52.96
40.57
29.14
21
Particle Size Distribution of
Triaxial Permeability TestSample
98th St. Core - Drive 55B: 101.8m-102.4m
100
90
n
$
80
v
GI
?
g.-S
70
v)
v)
2
60
50
*
S
40
L
30
20
10
OL
0.01
0.02 0.03
0.05
0.1
0.2
Grain Diameter (mm)
0.3
0.5
I
- Section D Composite Sample
Particle Size Distribution Data
Particle Size Distribution Analysis
Mechanical Sieve Analysis:
Prior to sieving,samples were broken-up with a mortar and pestle. A standard set of
sieves were used, including numbers 4, 10, 20, 40, 60, 140, and 200. The sample portion retained
in each sieve was weighed to determine the distribution of gravel and sand size particles. Fines
were collected in a pan placed at the bottom of the stacked sieves. After dry sieving, the fines
(silt/clay) were set aside for later use in hydrometer analysis.
Hydrometer Analysis:
Hydrometer analysis was used to measure the silt and clay distribution of the sample that
passed through the number 200 sieve. The fines collected in the pan during mechanical sieving
were soaked overnight in 125 mL of sodium hexametaphosphate solution in order to disperse the
grains. Afterwards, the suspension was placed in a blender for 10 minutes for hrther dispersion.
Next, the suspension was diluted to 1000 mL withdistilled water, placedin a hydrometer
cylinder, and the test conducted using a 152H hydrometer. A hydrometer correction of -3 was
used to account for the impact of sodium hexametaphosphate on solution density. The following
two equations were used for hydrometer analysis of grain size, d, in millimeters and percent finer
than, P,:
Pf=-I OOnR
WS
where N is the coefficient of viscosity in poises for water at test temperature, L is hydrometer
effective depth in centimeters, G, is the specific gravity of the soil solids (assumed to be 2.65),
G!\. is the specific gravity of water at test temperature, t is time in minutes, a is ratio of Gs to
2.65, R is the corrected hydrometer reading, and W, is the dry weight in grams of the sample
usedin the hydrometer analysis. Wray (1986) provides a thorough description of particle size
distribution analysis.
Gradation Analysis:
Sample gradation was determined after calculating the coefficient of curvature, C,, and the
coefficient of uniformity, C,. Equations for both coefficients are as follows:
D-1
where D,, is the grain diameter at 10 % passing, D,, is the grain diameter at 30 YOpassing, and
D,, is the grain diameter at 60 % passing. A sandy sample is considered well-oraded if
If either of these conditions do not hold, then the sample is said to be uniformlv-zraded.
References:
Wray, W. K. 1986. Measuring Engineering Properties of Soil. Prentice-Hall, Inc. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ. 276 pages.
Note:
Thesesamples(Units 1-21) appear to be composite rotary drill cuttings obtained
from the borehole offset approximately 6 meters from the coring location.
If this is the
case, residual drilling mud may skew the overall results. Coring was done for stratigraphic
information, while the rotary drill borehole was
used for placement of monitoring well
piezometers.
D-2
Percentage of Gravel, Sand, and Fines
Percent
Sample
Gravel
Percent Sand
Percent Silt andClay
(greater than 2 mm') (2 mm to 0.074 mm) (less than 0.074 mm)
%
%
YO
5.9
84.5
Unit 1 (452m-457111)
0.9
Unit 2 (426111-452m)
0.7
93.4
Unit 3 (409m-426111) 9.7
Unit 4 (393m-409m) 4.3
0.9
1.2
89.4
94.5
Unit 5 (380111-393m)
8.8
85.3
Unit 6 (328m-380m)
0.5
Unit 7 (310111-328111)
6.5
87.4
Unit 8 (240111-310111)
3.7
91.0
Unit 9 (229111-240111)
14.3
76.6
Unit 10 (216111-229m)
23.7
63.7
Unit 11 (190111-216111)
13.6
78.4
I
5.9
4.2
mm = millimeters
D-3
6.1
5.3
9.1
12.6
8.0
95.3
Coefficients of Curvature, Coefficients of Uniformity, and Grading
I
Sample
ICoefficient of Curvature ICoefficient of Uniformity1
~~
Unit 1 (452111-457111)
1.32
4.00
2.40
Unit 2 (426111-452111)
~~~
Uniform
1.20
Uniform
Unit 3 (409111-426m)
0.86
3.00
Uniform
Unit 4 (393111-409111)
1.47
3.40
Uniform
3.17
Unit 5 (3801x1-393111)
Unit 6 (328m-3SOm)
Unit 7 (310m-328m)
1.19
Unit 8 (240m-310111)
1.16
2.69
Unit 9 (229m-240111)
Unit 10 (216111-229111)
Unit 11 (190m-216m)
I
0.29
6.67
8.24
.~
0.85
I
1.52
1.23
Uniform
2.33
2.70
I
Grading
Uniform
0.95
Uniform
~
13
1.33
I
1.47
I
Unit 15 (102111-134111)
0.88
Unit
(163m-190m)
(141111-163m)
(134m-141m)
14 IUnit
I
0.74
~
I
I
I
12 I Unit
Uniform
I
I
I
I
4.70
9.25
5.33
Uniform
Tiniform
~~~~
Uniform
Well
Uniform
7.55
3.00
Uniform
Unit 16 (72m-102m)
2.74
1.04
Uniform
Unit 17 (56m-72m)
2.84
1.13
Uniform
Unit 18 (30m-56m)
Unit 19 (24m-30m)
2.78
1.00
2.70
D-4
Uniform
1.07
I
~
Uniform
Mechanical Sieve Analysis
Unit #1: 452m-457m (1483'-1500')
Date: 5/29/97
Sample Weight = 150 grams
I
100
0.15
465
511.9
46.9
81.2
54.13
45.87
140
0.1
242.3
266.4
24.1
105.3
70.2
29.8
200
0.07
358.9
381.7
22.8
128.1
392
21.8
149.9
PAN
370.2
mm = millimeters
g = grams
D-5
14.6
99.93
-
85.4
s)
Hydrometer Analysis
Unit #1: 452m-457m (1483'-1500')
Date: 6/2/97
Sample Weight for Hydrometer Analysis = 21.8 grams
Overall Sample Weight = 150 grams
Hydrometer Type = 152H
El;~psedTime
Actual
Corrected
Hydrometer
Hydrometer
ReadingReading
(-3)
("Celsius)
Water
Specific
Viscosity of
Tem~~erature Gravity of Wbter at Test
Water at Test Teml~er;~ture
Tempernture
Percent
Smaller
Percent
Smaller
(Overall
(Hydrometer
Sample)
Saml~le
(centimeters) (millimeters)
(minutes)
("/)
("/)
0.25
25
22
28
0.99623
0.00836
12.2
0.0869
100
.
0.5
21
18
28
0.99623
0.00836
12.9
0.0632
82.6
12
240
I
990
I
Grain
Diameter
L
1500
8
I
7.5
I
7
5
I
4.5
I
4
28
I
28
I
28
0.99623
I
0.99623
I
0.99623
I
0.00836 22.9
0.00836
I
0.00836
15.2
I
15
15.1
I
0.0015
0.0013
I
20.6
18.3
I
3.3
3
2.7
Particle Size Distribution
98th St. MonitoringWell - Unit I:452m-457m
0~0001
0.001
0.01
0.1
Grain Diameter (mm)
1
O
I
Mechanical Sieve Analysis
Unit #2: 426m-452m (1399'-1483')
Date: 6/6/97
Sample Weight= 150 grams
Weight
Sieve +
Retained
Soil
Retained
Cumulative
Soil Weight Retained Soil
Weight
Cumulative
Percent
Retained
Percent
Passing
536.2
499.5
500.5
1
1
0.67
99.33
304.1
305.5
1.4
2.4
1.6
98.4
391.8
400.4
8.6
7.33
92.67
403.3
440.5
37.2
11
48.2
32.13
67.87
527.5
62.5
110.7
73.8
26.2
242.3
263.4
21.1
131.8
87.87
12.13
358.9
368.2
9.3
141.1
94.07
370.2
379.3
0.42
200
0.07
PAN
~~
I
~
I
9.1
mm = millimeters
g = grams
D-S
I
150.2
I
100.13
I
5.93
-
I
Hydrometer Analysis
Unit #2: 426m-452m (1399'-1483')
Date: 6/9/97
Sample Weight for Hydrometer Analysis = 9.1 grams
Overall Sample Weight = 150 grams
Hydrometer Type = 152H
Particle Size Distribution
98th St. Monitoring Well- Unit 2: 426m-452m
.....
100
....go
...............
80
70
........
....
.
"
~.. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-
60
_"
50
40
-
30
-
20
10
......
~
-
"
-
.~
"
._
....
.............
- ...
1
7
"
"
c
........
n
0~001
0.001
0.01
0.1
Grain Diameter (mm)
1
O
I
Mechanical Sieve Analysis
Unit #3: 409111-426111(1341'-1399')
Date: 6/6/97
Sample Weight = 150 grams
Sieve
Number
4
I
10
20
200
I
1
I
Grain
Diameter
Sieve
Weight
@mi)
(g?
4.75
535.1
2
0.84
0.07
I
I
Retained
Cumulative
Sieve +
Retained Soil Weight Retained Soil
Weight
Soil Weight
525.9
524.5
404.3
280.6
I
I
1.4
I
I
I
1.4
1
I
I
0.93
I
I
I
99.07
7.6
16.5
25.5
17
83
392.3
297.1
425.7
33.4
58.9
39.27
60.73
243.7
280.6
36.9
95.8
63.87
36.13
297.9
320.6
238
254.9
PAN
349.9
mm = millimeters
g = grams
~
364.3
I
I
22.7
16.9
14.4
D-11
I
I
I
118.5
135.4
149.8
I
I
6
Percent
Passing
411.9
I
9
Cumulative
Percent
Retained
79
90.27
99.87
I
I
I
94
I
I
21
9.73
-
I
Hydrometer Analysis
Unit #3: 409m-426m (1341'-1399')
Date: 6/9/97
Sample Weight for Hydrometer Analysis = 14.4 grams
Overall Sample Weight = 150 grams
Hydrometer Type = 152H
I
(minutes)
I
Hydrometer
Reading
Corrected
Water
Specific
Viscosity of
Hydrometer Teml~erature Gravity of Water at Test
Reading
Water at Test Teml~erature
Teml~ernture
(-3)
15
I
24
Diameter
Smaller
Smaller
Sample
Sample)
(centimeters) (millimeters)
('Celsius)
w
L
I
0.9973
I
0.00916
I
13.3
0.095
0.0674
11.5
30
9.5
12
24
0.9973
0.00916
13.8
0.0484
10.5
24
0.9973
0.00916
14.1
0.0346
9.5
24
0.9973
0.00916
14.25
0.022
14.4
0.0156
14.7
0.0129
14.75
0.0091
14.8
0.0065
14.9
0.0032
15
0.0013
8.5
I
7
I
6.5
I
6
24 5
8.5
5.5
1560
25
5
I
24
I
24
I
24
I
0.9973
I
0.9973
0.9973
I
0.9973 24
I
25
0.00916
I
0.00916
I
0.00916
I
0.00916
I
0.99704
0.99704
I
0.00895
0.00895
I
72.9
I
I
59
5.7
48.6
I
4.7
45.1
I
4.3
41.7
I
I
38.2
34.7
I
I
4
3.7
3.3
Particle Size Distribution
98th St. Monitoring Well = Unit 3: 409m-426m
Mechanical Sieve Analysis
Unit #4: 393m-409m (1291'-1341')
Date: 6/12/97
Sample Weight = 200 grams
I
mm = millimeters
g = grams
D-14
Hydrometer Analysis
Unit #4: 393m-409m (1291’-1341’)
Date: 6/13/97
Sample Weight for Hydrometer Analysis = 8.5 grams
Overall Sample Weight = 200 grams
Hydrometer Type = 152H
Elnpsed Time
Actual
Hydrometer
Reading
Corrected
Water
Viscosity of
Specific
Hydrometer Temperature Grwity of Water at Test
Water at Test Temperature
Reading
(-3)
Temperature
(minutes)
(“Celsius)
(poises)
U
e
cn
L
0.25
11.5
8.5
25
0.5
11
8
25
0.99704
L
Percent
Smaller
(Hydrometer
Snml)le
(centimeters) (millimeters)
0.00895
0.00895
Grain
Diameter
0.99704
14.5
(“/I
Percent
Smnller
(Overall
Sample)
(%)
0.0977
14.4 100
-
0.0693
94.1
4
Particle Size Distribution
98th St. Monitoring Well - Unit 4: 393m-409m
20
1-
t
- ___
"t
A
0u0001
0.001
0.01
0.1
Grain Diameter (mm)
I
I
1
10
Mechanical Sieve Analysis
Unit #5: 380m-393m (1246'-1291')
Date: 6/12/97
Sample Weight = 200 grams
Retained
Cumulative
Cumulative
Sieve +
Retained Soil Weight Retained Soil
Percent
Soil Weight
Weight
Retained
-1
+
Percent
Passing
93.35
II
II
I
528.8
1
I
I
4.3
I
I
I
17.6
I
I
I
8.8
20
I
0.84
I
404.3
413
40
I
0.42
I
280.6
302.5
21.9
48.2
24.1
451.3
59
107.2
53.6
243.7
295.2
51.5
158.7
79.35
8.7
26.3
13.15
140
I
0.1
I
297.9
317
19.1
177.8
88.9
200
I
0.07
I
238
248.5
10.5
188.3
94.15
I
I
PAN
349.9
mm = millimeters
360.7
1
10.8
g = grams
D-17
I
199.1
I
99.55
=-I
86.85
~1
75.9
I
46.4
I
I
20.65
Hydrometer Analysis
Unit #5: 380m-393m (1246'-1291')
Date: 6/13/97
Sample Weight for Hydrometer Analysis = 10.8 grams
Overall Sample Weight = 200 grams
Hydrometer Type = 152H
~
Reading
Water at Tes:
I
('Celsius)
I
11.5
5.517
30
I
("/I
I
25
I
11
I
25
I
9.5
I
25
I
0.0681
100
0.99704
0.00895
I
14.25
I
0.0486
0.99704
0.00895
I
14.5
I
0.0347
0.00895
I
14.6
I
0.022
I
25
I
0.99704
6
I
25
I
0.99704
I
I
14
I
I
-
I
13.9
("/)
100
0.00895
I
Percent
Smaller
(Overall
Sample)
0.096
0.99704
8.5
4.5
I
0.00895
I
25
I
0.99704
8
8.5
7.5
I
I
Percent
Smaller
(Hydrometer
Sample
~~~~
~
25
0.99704
0.00895
14.9
0.01 13
50.9
2.8
25
0.99704
0.00895
15.1
0.0091
41.7
2.3
Particle Size Distribution
98th St. Monitoring Well - Unit 5: 380m-393m
0~0001
0.001
0.01
0.1
Grain Diameter (mm)
1
Mechanical Sieve Analysis
Unit #6: 328m-380m (1076'-1246')
Date: 6/16/97
Sample Weight= 200 grams
Sieve
Number
Grain
Diameter
(mml)
II
I
2
(d
536.2
~
4.75
536.2
0.9
I
0.45
311.3
I
7.2
8.1
I
I
4.05
I
95.95
415.3
I
23.5
63.9
31.6
I84.2 15.8
I
95.5
I
I
52.25
69.9
18.9
165.4
I
47.75
184.3
I
7.3
191.6
I
8.6
200.2
I
500.4
20
I
0.84
I
304.1
I
40
I
1
I
100
I
I
I
I
140
0.15
0.1
0.07
I
I
I
I
I
465
242.3
358.9
PAN
370.2
mm = millimeters
g = grams
I
0.9
499.5
60
(g)
I
I
391.8
403.3
Retained
0
2
1
Passing
Weight
0
I
0.42
0.25
~
(s)
4
10
200
I
Sieve +
Retained
Retained Soil Weight
Soil Weight
Sieve
Weight
I
467.2
I
I
I
I
534.9
I
I
I
261.2
366.2
378.8
D-20
1
0
100
99.55
~~
~~
82.7
92.15
95.8
100.1
~
~~~~
17.3
I
7.85
I
4.2
-
Hydrometer Analysis
Unit #6: 328111-380111
(1076'-1246')
Date: 6/17/97
Sample Weight for Hydrometer Analysis = 8.6 grams
Overall Sample Weight = 200 grams
Hydrometer Type = 152H
Elaltsetl Time
Actual
Corrected
Water
Viscosity of
Sltecific
Hydrometer Hydrometer Temperature Gravity of Water at Test
Water at Test Temlteruture
Reading
Reading
(-3)
Temperature
(minutes)
('Celsius)
0.25
13
10
0.5
12
9
25
25
(poises)
L
Grain
Diameter
Percent
Smaller
Sample
(centimeters) (millimeters)
Percent
Smaller
(Overall (Hydrometer
Sample)
(%)
("/)
-
0.99704
0.00895
14.2
0.097
100
0.99704
0.00895
14.3
0.0689
100
Particle Size Distribution
98th St. Monitoring Well = Unit 6: 328m-380m
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0~001
0.001
0.01
0.1
Grain Diameter (mm)
1
10
Mechanical Sieve Analysis
Unit #7: 310m-328m (1017'-1076')
Date: 6/16/97
Sample Weight = 193.8 grams
Sieve
Number
Grain
Diameter
Sieve
Weight
(mm')
(!33
4
I
10
I
60
100
140
200
I
I
I
I
I
I
2
1
0.25
I
0.15
I
0.1
0.07
535.1
Sieve +
Retained
Cumulative
Retained Soil Weight Retained Soil
Soil Weight
Weight
(8)
(g)
Percent
Passing
(Oh)
(%)
524.5
4.75539
533.1
I
I
8.6
I
12.5
I
6.45
392.3
I
I
33
I
77.7
I
40.09
243.7
I
297.9
I
(g)
Cumulative
Percent
Retained
238
425.3
302.7
325.1
I
256
3.9
I
I
I
59
I
27.2
18
PAN
349.9 11.9 361.8
mm = millimeters
g = grams
D-23
I
136.7
163.9
181.9
193.8
3.9
I
I
2.01
97.99
~~
70.54
84.57
93.86
100
~~
93.55
I
I
I
I
I
59.91
~~
~~~
29.46
15.43
6.14
-
I
Hydrometer Analysis
Unit #7: 310111-328m (1017'-1076')
Date: 6/17/97
Sample Weight for Hydrometer Analysis = 11.9 grams
Overall Sample Weight = 193.8 grams
Hydrometer Type = 152H
25
I
0.99704
I
0.00895
I
14.7
25
I
0.99704
I
0.00895
1
14.7
58.8
I
0.0127
I
58.8
I
2.6
2.6
Particle Size Distribution
98th St. Monitoring Well - Unit 7: 3lOm-328m
0~001
0.001
0.01
0.1
Grain Diameter (mm)
L
I
10
Mechanical Sieve Analysis
Unit #8: 240m-310m (786'-1017')
Date: 6/18/97
Sample Weight = 200 grams
Sieve
Number
Grain
Diameter
Sieve
Weight
Sieve +
Retained
Retained Soil Weight Retained Soil
Soil Weight
Weight
140
0.1
242.3
14.5
200
I
358.9
PAN
370.2
mm = millimeters
g = grams
0.07
365.2
256.8183.2
6.3
10.5
D-26
380.7200
Cumulative Cumulative
Percent
Percent
Passing
Retained
91.6
8.4
94.75
189.55.25
100
-
Hydrometer Analysis
Unit #8: 240m-310m (786'-1017')
Date:6/19/97
Sample Weight for Hydrometer Analysis = 1 0 5 grams
Overall Sample Weight = 200 grams
Hydrometer Type = 152H
Particle Size Distribution
98th St. Monitoring Well - Unit 8: 240m-3lOm
Mechanical Sieve Analysis
Unit #9: 229m-240m (751'-786')
Date: 6/18/97
Sample Weight = 175 grams
100
0.15
140
I
243.7
27 1
27.3
134
76.57
23.43
297.9
0.1313.3
15.4
149.4
85.37
14.63
247.7 159.1
90.91
9.09
100
-
200
0.07
238
PAN
-
349.9
9.7
365.8
15.9
mm = millimeters
g = grams
D-29
175
-
Hydrometer Analysis
Unit #9: 229m-240m (751'-786')
Date: 6/19/97
Sample Weight for Hydrometer Analysis = 15.9 grams
Overall Sample Weight = 175 grams
Hydrometer Type = 152H
Elapsed Time
Actual
Hydrometer
Reading
Corrected
Water
Viscosity of
Specific
Hydrometer Teml~erature Gravity of Water at Test
Water at Test Teml~ernture
Reading
(-3)
Temllerature
(minutes)
(OCelsins)
(poises)
L
Grain
Diameter
(centimeters) (millimeters)
Percent
Smaller
(Hydrometer
Sample
("/I
Percent
Smaller
(Overall
Sample)
(oh)
0.25
19
16
26
0.99678
0.00875
13.2
0.0925
IO0
-
0.5
17
14
26
0.99678
0.00875
13.5
0.0661
88.1
8
Particle Size Distribution
98th St. Monitoring Well - Unit 9: 229m-240m
100
go
..................
0u0001
"~
0.001
.
"
"
I
_
"
0.01
....
"_
0.1
Grain Diameter (mm)
..
I
... -
Mechanical Sieve Analysis
Unit #lo: 216m-229m (710'-751')
Date: 6/25/97
Sample Weight = 186 grams
I
mm = millimeters
g = grams
D-3 2
Hydrometer Analysis
Unit #lo: 216m-229m (710'-751')
Date: 6/27/97
Sample Weight for Hydrometer Analysis = 22.2 grams
Overall Sample Weight = 186 grams
Hydrometer Type = 152H
Corrected
Hydrometer
Reading
Diameter
(minutes)
Smaller
Sample
Sample)
(millimeters)
('Celsius)
I
0.99678
0.99678
11
L
Smaller
Reading
I
26
I
I
('Yo)
I
I
0.00875
I
13.1
0.0652
I
75.3
I
8.9
0.00875
I
13.5
0.0468
I
63.9
I
I
7.5
I
0.99678
0.00875
54.8
0.0334
0.99678
0.00875
0.0213
I
0.99678
0.00875
0.0151
I
0.99678
0.00875
0.0124
0.99678
0.00875
0.99678
0.00875
14.25
0,0088
0.0062
I
I
I
6.5
50.2
I
5.9
47.9
I
5.6
45.7
I
I
I
5.4
Particle Size Distribution
98th St. Monitoring Well - Unit I O : 216m-229m
100 -
90
-
80
-
70
60
-
50
-
40
-
30
-
20
-
10
-
n-
0~001
0.001
0.01
0.1
Grain Diameter (mm)
1
Mechanical Sieve Analysis
Unit #11: 190m-216m (624'-710')
Date: 6/25/97
Sample Weight = 200 grams
Sieve
Number
Grain
Diameter
4.75
4
Sieve +
Retained
Retained Weight
Soil
Soil Weight
Sieve
Weight
10
0.42
40
I
392.3
100
I
0.15
1
243.7
200
1
I
0.07
24.8
84.7
I
42.35
I
23.1
280.6
I
I
I
29.95
2 547.6
0.25
0.1
I
524.5
I
I
59.9
I
I
4.1
60
140
2.05
539.2
43 7
15.3
297.9
238
PAN
349.9
mm = millimeters
I
I
I
I
I
404.332.7
0.84
305.4
Retained
I
535.1
20
Passing
Weight
4.1
13.6 21.2
I
97.95
86.4
70.05
57.65
I
426.8
I
34.5
119.2
I
59.6
277.1
I
I
33.4
152.6
I
76.3
1
23.7
I
16.8
169.4
I
99.15
I
-
I
314.7
252.6
365.4
I
I
I
14.6
15.5
g = grams
D-3 5
199.5
40.4
Hydrometer Analysis
Unit #11: 190111-216111(624'-710')
Date: 6/27/97
Sample Weight for Hydrometer Analysis = 15.5 grams
Overall Sample Weight = 200 grams
Hydrometer Type = 152H
Particle Size Distribution
98th St. Monitoring Well - Unit 11: 19Om-216m
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
O
I
0~0001
0.001
0.01
0.1
Grain Diameter (mm)
I
10
Mechanical Sieve Analysis
Unit #12: 163m-190m (535'-624')
Date: 6/27/97
Sample Weight= 200 grams
I
100
0.15
465
503.7
38.7
136
68
32
140
0.1
242.3
264.4
22.1
158.1
79.05
20.95
200
0.07
358.9
372.4
171.6
13.5 85.8
14.2
PAN
-
397.7
370.2
27.5
mm = millimeters
g = grams
D-3 8
99.55
199.1 -
Hydrometer Analysis
Unit #12: 163rn-l90m(535'-624')
Date: 6/30/97
Sample Weight for Hydrometer Analysis = 27.5 grams
Overall Sample Weight = 200 grams
Hydrometer Type = 152H
Elapsed
Actual
Corrected
Time
Water
Specific
Viscosity of
Hydrometer Hydrometer Temperature Gravity of Water at Test
Water ReadingReading
at Test Temperature
(-3)
Teml~erature
U
L,
29
\o
(minutes)
('Celsius)
0.25
26
0.99678
0.00875
11.5
26
0.99678
0.00875
11.9
0.5
27
24
(poises)
L
Percent Grain
Diameter
Smaller
(Overall
(Hydrometer
Sample
(centimeters) (millimeters)
Percent
Smaller
Sample)
("h)
(%)
0.0863
100
-
0.0621
87.3
12
Particle Size Distribution
98th St. Monitoring Well - Unit 12: 163m-190m
100
90
r
80
U
b
0
70
60
50
"
I
40
"
-I
_"
30
20
10
0~001
I
I
0.001
0.01
0.1
Grain Diameter (mm)
1
10
Mechanical Sieve Analysis
Unit #13: 141m-163m (464'-535')
Date: 6/27/97
Sample Weight = 200 grams
r
Sieve
Number
Soil Weight
535.1
524.5
I
I
404.3
280.6
0.25
0.15
0.1
I
I
I
0.07
-
0.84
0.42
Weight
535.6
529.4
I
4.9
I
I
417.9
296.3
392.3
243.7
297.9
I
I
I
426.9
289.7
324.5
I
I
238
I
261.6
I
I
349.9
I
384.5
I
I
I
5.4
~~
13.6
15.7
34.6
46
26.6
Retained
I
19
34.7
69.3
115.3
II
I
I
2.7
9.5
I
17.35
34.65
I
I
I
57.65
97.3
90.5
82.65
65.35
42.35
I
70.95
82.75
I
23.6
141.9
165.5
I
29.05
17.25
34.6
200.1
I
100.05
I
-
g = grams
D-4 1
I
N
P
a
Particle Size Distribution
98th St. Monitoring Well - Unit 13: 14lm-163m
100
I
T
"
0u0001
0.001
0.01
0.1
Grain Diameter (mm)
-r
1
10
Mechanical Sieve Analysis
Unit #14: 134m-141m (441'-464')
Date: 6130197
Sample Weight = 100 grams
I
mm = millimeters
g = grams
D-44
Hydrometer Analysis
Unit #14: 134m-141m (441'-464')
Date: 7/3/97
Sample Weight for Hydrometer Analysis = 11.2 grams
Overall Sample Weight = 100 grams
Hydrometer Type = 152H
Elnpsed Time
Actual
Corrected
Water
Viscosity of
Specific
Hydrometer Hydrometer Temperature Gravity of Water at Test
Water at Test Teml~erature
Reading
Reading
(-3)
Temperature
(minutes)
('Celsius)
(~toises)
L
Grain
Diameter
Smaller
Sample
(centimeters) (millimeters)
Percent Percent
Smaller
(Overall (Hydrometer
Sample)
W)
0.25
15
12
26
0.99678
0.00875
13.8
0.0946
100
-
0.5
14
11
26
0.99678
0.00875
14
0.0674
98.2
I1
1
13
10
26
099 I
Particle Size Distribution
98th St. Monitoring Well - Unit 14: 134m-14lm
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
I
.---"--
" "
I
O
I
0:oOol
I
I
0.001
0.01
I
0.1
Grain Diameter (mm)
1
O
I
Mechanical Sieve Analysis
Unit #15: 102m-134m (336'-441')
Date: 6130197
Sample Weight = 200 grams
Grain
Diameter
Sieve
Number
I
4
10
2
40
0.42
100
0.15
140
200
I
4.75
I
0.1
0.07
mm = millimeters
g = grams
D-47
Hydrometer Analysis
Unit #15: 102m-134111(336'-441')
Date: 7/3/97
Sample Weight for Hydrometer Analysis = 18.8 grams
Overall Sample Weight = 200 grams
Hydrometer Type = 152H
E1al)sed Time
Actual
Hydrometer
Corrected
Water
Hydrometer
Temperature
Viscosity of
Specific
Gravity of Water at Test
Water at Test Temperature
!
Tem])erature
(centimeters) (millimeters)
(poises)
b
00
II
0.25
0.5
I
2
22
I
I
I
I
30
15
13
I
11.5
5
15
20
I
I
I
I
I
10
10
19
17
12
IO
I
I
I
I
I
8.5
I
7
7
I
Percent
Smaller
(Hydrometer
Sample
Grain
Diameter
L
Pereent
Smaller
(Overall
Sample)
("/I
(%,)
-
26
26
0.99678
0.00875
0.99678
0.00875
26
0.99678
I
0.00875
26
0.99678
I
0.00875
26
0.99678
0.00875
14.4
0.0216
45.2
4.3
0.99678
0.00875
14.5
0.0153
42.6
4
0.99678
0.00875
14.7
0.0126
37.2
3.5
0.99678
0.00875
14.7
0.0089
37.2
3.5
26
26
I
13
0.0907
12.7
100
I
0.0649
90.4
I
8.5
II
h.
I
13.8
I
0~0473
~.~
I
63
...8
.
I
14.2
I
0.0339
I
53.2
I
~~~
I
I
5
Particle Size Distribution
98th St. Monitoring Well - Unit 15: 102m-134m
0 yo00 1
0.001
0.01
0. I
Grain Diameter (mm)
1
O
I
Mechanical Sieve Analysis
Unit #16: 72m-102m (237'-336')
Date: 7/1/97
Sample Weight= 200 grams
Sieve
Number
4
I
10
I
20
I
40
I
60
100
140
200
1
1
I
I
Sieve +
Grain
Diameter
Sieve
Weight
(mm')
(g')
(g)
($9
4.75
536.2
536.2
0
Retained
Cumulative
Soil Weight Retained
Retained
Soil
Soil Weight
Weight
2
I
499.5
I
0.84
I
304.1
I
0.42
I
0.25
I
0.15
0.1
I
502.5
I
320.4
I
3
I
16.3
I
Cumulative
Percent
Retained
Percent
Passing
(g)
(YO)
("/)
0
0
100
98.5
3
I
1.5
19.3
I
9.65
I
391.8
I
412.7
I
20.9
I
40.2
I
403.3
I
I
441.7
I
38.4
I
78.6
I
465
242.3
358.9
PAN
370.2
mm = millimeters
g = grams
I
529.7
267
0.07
372.4
388
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
20.1
39.3
79.9
I
I
60.7
64.7
143.3
24.7
168
13.5
181.5
90.75
9.25
17.8
199.3
99.65
-
D-50
71.65
90.35
28.35
16 84
Hydrometer Analysis
Unit #16: 72m-102m (237'-336')
Date: 7/10/97
Sample Weight for Hydrometer Analysis = 17.8 grams
Overall Sample Weight = 200 grams
, Hydrometer Type = 1 S2H
Particle Size Distribution
98th St. Monitoring Well - Unit 16: 72m-102m
100
T
90
80
70
.....
"
..
"
1
.~
"
. . . . . .
...
"_
"
.
.-
.....
60
50
40
30
+-I-
1
20
......
10
". ........
.
"
.
"
I
0I"oOOl
0.001
0.01
0.1
Grain Diameter (mm)
1
10
Mechanical Sieve Analysis
Unit #17: 56m-72m (183'-237')
Date: 7/7/97
Sample Weight = 200 grams
Sieve
Number
- Grain
"
4.75
"
2
"
0.84
"
I
I
I
-. 0.42 I
-. 0.25 I
100
I
-.
I
535.5
524.5
I
529.7
404.3
I
280.6
I
I
415.3
I
298.2
440.6
I
I
I
302.3
I
0.1
I
I
I
325.1
297.9
238 16.5254.5
349.9
365.4
I
I
0.07
PAN d.
mm = millimeters
g = grams
I
I
I
0.4
I 5.6 5.2
I 11
0.15
"
200
535.1
392.3
243.7
"
140
Sieve +
Retained
Cumulative
Cumulative
Retained Soil Weight Retained Soil
Percent
Soil Weight
Weight
Retained
Sieve
Weight
Diameter
17.6
48.3
58.6
I
I
0.2
2.8
I
I
I
27.2
I
15.5
I
D-53
0.4
Percent
Passing
I
I
99.8
97.2
16.6
I
8.3
I
91.7
34.2
I
17.1
I
82.9
82.5
141.1
168.3
184.8
200.3
I
I
I
I
41.25
70.55
I
58.75
29.45
84.15
92.4
I
I
15.85
7.6
100.15
I
-
I
I
Hydrometer Analysis
Unit #17: 56m-72m (183'- 237')
Date: 7/10/97
Sample Weight for Hydrometer Analysis = 15.5 grams
Overall Sample Weight = 200 grams
Hydrometer Type = 152H
El~~psctl
Time
Actual
Hydrometer
Reading
Corrected
Water
Viscosity of
Specific
Hydrometer Temperature Gravity of Water at Test
Water at Test Temperature
Reading
(-3)
Tem~~erature
(minutes)
(OCelsius)
0.25
19
0.5
18
1
15
16
15
(poises)
L
Grain
Diameter
(centimeters) (millimeters)
Percent
Smaller
(Hydrometer
Sample
Percent
Smaller
(Overall
Sample)
(%)
(%)
26
0.99678
0.00875
13.2
0.0925
100
-
26
0.99678
0.00875
13.3
0.0656
96.8
7.5
Particle Size Distribution
98th St. Monitoring Well - Unit 17: 56m-72m
Grain Diameter (mm)
Mechanical Sieve Analysis
Unit #18: 30m-56m (97'-183')
Date: 7/10/97
Sample Weight = 200 grams
Sieve
Number
Grain
Diameter
Sieve
Weight
Retained
Cumulative
Cumulative
Sieve +
Retained Soil Weight Retained Soil
Percent
Soil Weight
Weight
Retained
4
10
20
40
60
100
140
200
PAN
mm = millimeters
g = grams
D-56
Percent
Passing
Hydrometer Analysis
Unit #18: 30m-56m (97'-183')
Date: 7/14/97
Sample Weight for Hydrometer Analysis = 17.1 grams
Overall Sample Weight = 200 grams
Hydrometer Type = 152H
2
IO
7
27
0.9965 1
0.00855
14.7
0.034 I
40.9
3.5
5
9
6
27
0.99651
0.00855
14.8
0.0216
35. I
3
10
8.5
27 5.5
0.99651
0.00855
14.9
0.0154
32.2
2.8
15
8
5
27
0.9965 1
0.00855
15
0.0126
29.2
2.5
30
7.5
4.5
27
0.99651
0.00855
15.1
26.3 0.0089 2.3
Particle Size Distribution
98th St. Monitoring Well - Unit 18: 30m-56m
100
90
80
......
70
.
60
."
50
"
"
.....
40
.
30
~
"
20
."
10
n
0u0001
.........
."
I
0.001
le
0.01
....
0.1
Grain Diameter (mm)
.
~"
r
1
....
10
Mechanical Sieve Analysis
Unit #19: 24m-30m (80'-97')
Date: 7/10/97
Sample Weight = 200 grams
Sieve +
Retained
Cumulative
Retained Soil Weight Retained Soil
Soil Weight
Weight
Percent
Passing
4
4.75
535.1
10
2
524.5
20
0.84
404.3
40
0.42
280.6
300.2
19.6
29.6
14.8
85.2
60
0.25
392.3
445.3
53
82.6
41.3
58.7
100
0.15
243.7
307.4
63.7
146.3
73.15
26.85
140
0.1
297.9
200
0.07
23 8
PAN
349.9
mm = millimeters
g = grams
323.5
25.6
171.9
85.95
14.05
255.5
17.5
189.4
94.7
5.3
360.6
10.7
200.1
100.05
-
I
I
Cumulative
Percent
Retained
I
D-59
Hydrometer Analysis
Unit #19: 24m-30m (80'-97')
Date: 7/14/97
Sample Weight for Hydrometer Analysis = 10.7 grams
Overall Sample Weight = 200 grams
Hydrometer Type = 152H
Corrected
Specific
Viscosity
of
Gravity of Water at Test
Water at Test Temperature
Temperature Sample)
Water
Temperature
Reading
-1
(minutes)
L
(Centimeters)
(poises) ('Celsius)
Percent
Smaller
(Hydrometer
Sample
(millimeters)
I
I
I
I
Percent
Smaller
(Overall
("/)
(Oh)
I
I
-
27 100 0.0942
0.9965 1 14 0.00855
27
I
I
I
27
I
27 .
10
2
8.5
Grain
Diameter
I
9
I
27
6
5
15
30
I
8
7.5
I
0.99651
0.99651
0.00855
I
I
0,00855
0.99651
I 14.8
0.00855
0.99651
I
0.00855
I
5
27
4.5
27
0.99651
I
0.99651
I
I
14.2
I
I
14.7
I
0.067
0.0482
I
I
I
0.0342
I
14.9
I
0.00855
0,00855
I
I
0.0217
15.1
I
I
I
0.0126
0.0089
I
I
I
I
56
I
51~4
I
I
I
15
I
I
93.5
65.4
5
3.5
~
~~
3
2~X
I
46.7
42.1
I
I
2.5
2.3
Particle Size Distribution
98th St. Monitoring Well - Unit 19: 24m-30m
~.~
."
...............
"
"
...........
"~
-- .....
.
...
- .- .............
n
ILL
0:oOol
0.001
-
...
"
0.01
-.... -.
.
I~ lt
"
"
" "
"
Y
I
0.1
1
Grain Diameter (mm)
10
Mechanical Sieve Analysis
Unit #21: 6m-18m (19'-60')
Date: 7/14/97
Sample Weight = 200 grams
I
m m = millimeters
g = grams
Hydrometer Analysis
Unit #21: 6m-18m (19'-60')
Date: 7/14/97
Sample Weight for Hydrometer Analysis = 11.3 grams
Overall Sample Weight = 200 grams
Hydrometer Type = 152H
Elapsed Time
Actual
Corrected
Water
Viscosity of
Specific
of Water at Test Gravity
Hydrometer Hydrometer Temperature
Reading
Water at Test Temperature
Reading
(-3)
Tempernture
L
(minutes)
in
Ir.)
(OCelsius)
(11oises)
Grain
Diameter
Percent
Smaller
Sample
(centimeters) (millimeters)
Percent
Smaller
(Overall (Hydrometer
Sample)
("/I
("/I
0.25
14
11
27
0.99651
0.00855
14
0.0942
too
-
0.5
13
10
27
0.9965 1
0.00855
14.2
0.067
88.5
5
Particle Size Distribution
98th St. Monitoring Well - Unit 21: 6m-18m
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
OL
0.0001
0.001
0.01
0.1
Grain Diameter (mm)
1
10