3.1 Site Selection

The site selection process began with the identification of quarries that produce AHTD Class 7 crushed stone aggregate base course throughout the state of Arkansas. The quarries were divided according to rock type, parent geological formation, and geographic location. Portions of Arkansas, such as the eastern and southeastern portions of the state, do not contain geologic formations conducive to the mining and production of crushed stone aggregate base and were not represented in this study. While not all approved Class 7 base is native to the state, all sites evaluated as part of this research are located within Arkansas.

After consulting with AHTD personnel in the Materials Division along with Resident Engineers from within AHTD Districts 4 and 10, the focus of this study was narrowed to five quarries that represent the predominant rock type and geological formations in Arkansas: Sharps (Benton County), Preston (Crawford County), Black Rock (Lawrence County), Glen Rose (Hot Springs County), and Granite Mountain (Pulaski County). Figure 3.1 illustrates the geographic distribution of the sites throughout the state. The location of each of the selected quarries is represented with a star. The aggregate types and parent geological formations for each quarry are listed in Table 3.1.

102

Table 3.1: Parent stone of the selected quarries.

Quarry	Location (County)	Aggregate Type	Geological Formation
Sharps	Benton	Limestone	Boone
Preston	Crawford	Sandstone	Hartshorne
Black Rock	Lawrence	Dolomite	Powell
Glen Rose	Hot Springs	Noviculite	Arkansas Noviculite
Granite Mountain	Pulaski	Syenite	Cretaceous

103

3.2 Sampling

AHTD personnel were largely responsible for sampling of the subject quarries and trucking the material to the University of Arkansas’ Engineering Research Center (ERC) in Fayetteville, Arkansas. It is understood that the material was obtained from the working faces of produced Class 7 stockpiles with heavy-duty front-end loaders. The delivered material was stockpiled at the ERC facility. The close proximity of Sharps quarry to the ERC made it possible for the researchers to obtain material from that quarry without assistance from the AHTD.

Approximately 3000 to 5000 pounds of Class 7 material was sampled from each quarry. The stockpiled material was sampled in accordance with AASHTO T-2. Sieve analyses (AASTHO T-37) were conducted on the materials obtained to determine the “as-received” material gradations. Grainsize distribution curves for each quarry can be found in Appendix A.2. After air-drying, the aggregate was fractioned using the AHTD gradation acceptance criteria particle size breakpoints of 37.5 mm (1-1/2 in.), 19.0 mm (3/4 in.), 4.75 mm (No. 4), 0.425 mm (No. 40), and 0.075 mm (No. 200) sieves.

3.3 Index Properties

Liquid limit (AASHTO T-89), plastic limit and plasticity index (AASHTO T-90) testing was completed on material passing the 0.425 mm (No. 40) sieve. Both wet and dry sieving methods were used to obtain minus 0.425 mm (No. 40) material for use in plasticity testing. The specific gravity and absorption of material retained on the 4.75 mm (No. 4) sieve were determined in accordance with (AASHTO T-85). Two samples of each quarry material were prepared with grain size distributions intended to meet the upper and lower boundaries of the AHTD Class 7 acceptance criteria. This criterion is

104

given in Section 303 of the AHTD Standard Specifications for Highway Construction (AHTD, 1996). The upper boundary blend followed a grain-size distribution curve that allowed the greatest percentage of material passing a particular gradation breakpoint. The lower boundary blend followed a distribution curve having the least amount of material passing a particular gradation breakpoint. Moisture density relationships were developed for each of these blends in accordance with AASHTO T-180, Method D. In accordance with AHTD requirements, all plus 19.0 mm (3/4 in.) material was replaced with an equivalent weight of plus 4.75 mm (No. 4) material. This process of sample preparation and determination of material index properties was repeated for each quarry.

3.4 Model Blending

The “as-received” material gradation results were compared to historical gradation information furnished by the AHTD Materials Division. Following an evaluation of all the gradation data, a model gradation was established for each quarry. The model gradation was intended to represent the upper boundary of the historical and “as-received” gradation data, under the hypothesis that finer grained blends would represent the worst-case conditions for both strength and hydraulic conductivity. Figure

3.2 illustrates the historical, “as-received”, and model gradations for Sharps quarry along with the current AHTD acceptance limits. Historical gradations for all quarries can be found in Appendix A.1. The maximum dry density and optimum moisture content for the model blends was established based upon the results of the density testing for the upper and lower bound blends (Fig. 4.2).

105

100 10 1 0.1 0.01

Particle size (mm)

It was assumed that these values for the extremes in gradation adequately represented the full range of sample blends to be tested. Modified Proctor testing for each of the various sample blends was considered unnecessary since only minor differences in unit weight and optimum moisture content existed between the coarsest and finest blends of each material.

A variety of grain-size distributions were used to create compacted specimens for shear strength testing and evaluation. Boundary blend samples were first established according to the AHTD upper and lower gradation acceptance tolerances. The upper boundary blend had a fines content, minus 0.075 mm (No. 200), of 10 percent. The lower boundary blend had a fines content of 6 percent in lieu of the expected 3 percent

106

because the historical data from each quarry indicated that 6 percent was the practical minimum percentage of fines produced in the state.

The fines content of the model blends was varied from 6 percent to 16 percent in increments of 2 percent. The amount of material passing the 0.425 mm (No. 40) sieve was adjusted as the fines content increased in order to maintain a constant total sample weight. The purpose of varying the fines content on only the model gradation and not the boundary blends was to replicate likely crusher production scenarios. While Fig. 3.2 graphically illustrates the blending concept for the Sharps quarry, Table 3.2 presents the percentages of material used in the model gradations for each quarry at a fines content of 10 percent. Blending for all quarries and all gradations can be found in Appendix D.

Table 3.2: Summary of model blend gradation percentages for all quarries at a fines content of10 percent.

Quarry	Sharps	Preston	Black Rock	Glen Rose	Granite Mountain
Sieve, mm (size)		Percent Passing: Model Blend 10% Fines
19.0 mm (3/4 inch)	81	75	81	86	81
4.75 mm (No. 4)	43	35	35	47	45
0.425 mm (No. 40)	18	20	18	20	18
0.075 mm (No. 200)	10	10	10	10	10

Compacted cylindrical specimens were prepared in a split mold for triaxial shear testing. These specimens measured 15.25 cm (6 in.) in diameter and 30.48 cm (12 in.) in height, resulting in a specimen volume of approximately 5550.1 cubic cm (0.196 cubic ft). The AHTD requires that all base course aggregate be compacted to at least 98 percent of the maximum modified Proctor dry density at a moisture content near the optimum value (AHTD, 1996). Accordingly, the established model blend maximum dry density value was multiplied by 98 percent to obtain a target unit weight in kg per cubic

107

meter (lbs. per cubic ft). Each of the aggregates were allowed to dry for several days inside the laboratory after which hygroscopic moisture contents on the order of 0.2 percent were measured. Because air-dry weights for these materials were so close to the oven-dry weights, air-dry material weights were used in sample blending. The weight of material to be compacted into each triaxial specimen was determined by multiplying the target unit weight by the specimen volume. Table 3.3 presents the material quantities used for a typical model blend. The material weights use in the blending for all gradations and quarries are presented in Appendix D.

Table 3.3: Summary of material quantities used in preparing test specimens for Sharps quarry.

		% Passing
Size	Lower bound	Model Gradation	Upper bound
1-1/2"	100	100	100
3/4"	50	81	90
#4	25	43	55
#40	10	18	30
#200	6	Varried	10
PAN	0	0	0

γd, max (pcf)	141.0
98% γd, max (pcf)	138.2
Mold Dia (in)	6
Mold Ht.(in)	12
Mold Vol (cf)	0.1963
Material/sample (lb)	27.13
OMC (%)	5.5

Lower Bound Blend: 6% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	27.13	Upper Bound Blend: 10% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	27.13
Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)		Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)
3/4"	50	6153.1		3/4"	10	1230.6
#4	25	3076.5		#4	35	4307.2
#40	15	1845.9		#40	25	3076.5
#200	4	492.2		#200	20	2461.2
Pan	6	738.4		Pan	10	1230.6
Model Blend: 6% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	27.13	Model Blend: 12% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	27.13
Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)		Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)
3/4"	19	2338.2		3/4"	19	2338.2
#4	38	4676.3		#4	38	4676.3
#40	25	3076.5		#40	25	3076.5
#200	12	1476.7		#200	6	738.4
Pan	6	738.4		Pan	12	1476.7
Model Blend: 8% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	27.13	Model Blend: 14% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	27.13
Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)		Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)
3/4"	19	2338.2		3/4"	19	2338.2
#4	38	4676.3		#4	38	4676.3
#40	25	3076.5		#40	25	3076.5
#200	10	1230.6		#200	4	492.2
Pan	8	984.5		Pan	14	1722.9
Model Blend: 10% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	27.13	Model Blend: 16% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	27.13
Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)		Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)
3/4"	19	2338.2		3/4"	19	2338.2
#4	38	4676.3		#4	38	4676.3
#40	25	3076.5		#40	25	3076.5
#200	8	984.5		#200	2	246.1
Pan	10	1230.6		Pan	16	1969.0

108

3.5 Selection of Evaluative Methods

Consolidated-drained (CD) conventional triaxial testing was selected to evaluate the effect of fines on the shear strength of AHTD Class 7 crushed stone aggregate base course. Index tests such as the CBR or R-Value do not provide direct information on performance capabilities of a material. The values obtained from these index or classification tests must be correlated to the real engineering properties for the material. The CBR and R values obtained for crushed stone aggregate base would all be confined to the very highest range of their respective evaluative scale (perhaps exceeding the scale) and would yield only quantitative information on the relative performance of various base course materials. For example: CBR values for crushed stone base would typically range in the 80’s and 90’s (Barksdale, 2000). While the Texas Triaxial test provides definitive information on engineering properties, it is no longer accepted as a material standard by either AASHTO or ASTM. In addition, the equipment required to conduct this test was not available. Even if the equipment could have been fabricated, the requirement of molding seven test specimens for each single model gradation was considered excessive. Also, the requirement to subject all test specimens to capillary moisture action for 10 days would have greatly extend the testing regimen. The development of a series of Mohr stress circles to define the Mohr-Coulomb failure envelope for Texas Triaxial testing is essentially the same as the methods of CD triaxial testing, except the Texas Triaxial offers less control over applied stresses. The consolidated-drained testing can be accomplished more efficiently than Texas Triaxial testing.

109

According to the AASHTO design guide, the definitive material property for assessment of subgrade and base material performance in pavement analyses and design is the repeated load triaxial test, or “resilient modulus” test. However, this testing procedure requires elaborate testing equipment and highly trained personnel. Research completed by Thompson and Smith (1990) also revealed that resilient modulus testing may not be an effective method of evaluating the performance potential of crushed stone aggregate base course materials having slightly different gradations.

After evaluating the advantages and disadvantages of each of the test methods, conventional triaxial testing was selected as the method which would offer the most effective comparative evaluation of the effect of fines on strength. Additional considerations are that the test protocol developed form this study would be easily transportable to other testing agencies and the necessary equipment for this testing is relatively inexpensive, when compared to resilient modulus testing equipment and is widely available from many commercial venders. The drainage characteristics of the granular aggregate base course are such that it may be tested rapidly using the consolidated-drained method.

To evaluate the drainage characteristics of the various gradations both falling head and constant head laboratory hydraulic conductivity tests were selected using both rigid and flexible wall permeameters. Gradients for both test types were kept very low in an attempt to replicate field conditions. While infiltrometers of various configurations could have been used to measure performance of these materials in a field setting the ability to replicate testing procedures and create constant environmental conditions would have been compromised. The selection of commercially available testing

110

equipment and the standard procedures of the laboratory tests make this testing protocol easily transportable to other testing agencies. In addition to hydraulic conductivity testing, suction, or capillary rise, tests were conducted to determine if variation in fines content had an impact on the materials affinity for water or ability to retain water.

3.6 Triaxial Testing

Triaxial test specimens 152 mm (6 in.) in diameter by 304 mm (12 in.) in height were created in a split mold, Figs. 3.3 and 3.4, using dynamic compaction from a Marshall hammer having a 3” face. A detailed step-by-step description of the preparation of triaxial test specimens is presented in Appendix E.

The equipment used for the testing consisted of a triaxial system having the following components: computer controlled loading frame, triaxial cell, load cell, pressure transducers, pressure panel, variable power supply, communication module, and PC unit. The hardware selected for this research was the Sigma-1 automated load test system manufactured by Trautwein Soil Testing Equipment. The Sigma-1 loading frame is powered by a D.C. servo motor which theoretically provides infinite resolution on the control of the motor’s rate of revolution. In practice however, one revolution of the

111

motor consists of 2000 counts, or pulses, and the pulse rate can vary from approximately 58 million pulses per second to as slow as 3 seconds per pulse. As a result, the maximum and minimum travel rates are approximately 20 mm/minute (0.787 in./minute) and 7.52 x 10^-3 mm/minute (2.96 x 10^-5 in./minute), respectively. The peak and continuous torque provided by the motor is 500 ounce-inches and 250 ounce-inches, respectively. The load frame is capable of providing 62.3 kN (14 kip) of thrust through the use of an efficient ball screw and gear reduction system. The load cell has a 44.5 kN (10 kip) maximum capacity with a linearity of 0.025 percent. The linear displacement sensor has a maximum range of 50 mm (1.97 inches) with a linearity of 0.03 percent. The pore pressure transducers have a maximum pressure 1034 kPa (150 psi) and a linearity of 0.1 percent. Figure 3.5 shows the testing system configuration. The GEOTAC^® TestNet component provided automatic data acquisition according to a user developed schedule and control of the load frame motor in accordance with a user defined program.

Staged consolidated-drained (CD) triaxial testing was selected as the method of determining shear strength for the materials tested in this study. Test specimens were backpressure saturated and then sequentially subjected to a confining pressure and loaded axially until yielding occurred. The confining pressure was increased for subsequent stages and an axial load was applied until the specimen yielded. Drained testing was considered appropriate for the aggregate material tested in this study because excess pore water pressure, uc, was dissipated rapidly during the application of confining pressure and deviator stress. In consolidated-drained (CD) testing drainage is permitted during both stages so that full consolidation occurs under the confining stress (σ2 = σ3)

112

and no excess pressure develops during the application of deviator stress, σd. The test specimen was considered to be fully consolidated when the water levels in the accumulators, which provided pressure to the top and bottom drain lines of the test specimen, ceased to change after application of a specified confining pressure. This stabilization occurred within 10 seconds after application of a confining pressure. The specimens were loaded so slowly that and pore pressures that would tend to develop were dissipated to at least the 95 percent consolidtation level at all times during cyclic and staged triaxial testing as described later in this chapter. Each test specimen initially underwent a cyclic test in the elastic region followed by staged load testing at varying

113

effective confining pressures which were carried to deformations somewhat beyond the yield point.

Each sample was backpressure saturated according to the procedure presented in Appendix B.3. Initial testing of the Sharps quarry material indicated that a B-value (Skempton, 1954) of at least 0.85 could be achieved quickly at a backpressure of 414 kPa (60 psi) and a confining pressure of 448 kPa (65 psi). The backpressure was maintained at this level while the cell pressure was increased to 483 kPa (70 psi) and 552 kPa (80 psi) to create effective confining pressures of 34.5, 69, and 138 kPa (5, 10, and 20 psi) for the cyclic and first stage, second stage and third stages of testing, respectively.

Initial cyclic testing consisted of 300 readings at 0.0084 percent strain followed by 100 readings at 0.025 percent strain. The cyclic reading schedule was later refined to include more frequent readings to avoid an overshoot of loading and unloading before the commence and halt commands could be invoked. Ultimately the number of readings was increased to 600 at 0.0042 percent strain intervals. All of the staged testing consisted, in the order shown, of 40 readings at 0.025 percent strain, 40 readings at 0.1 percent strain, and 40 readings at 0.25 percent strain. The following data were collected at each reading: applied load, cell pressure, pore pressure, deformation, and strain, from which the specimen stresses σ1, σ3, and σd were calculated.

3.7 Cyclic Triaxial Tests

Cyclic triaxial tests were performed on each specimen under consolidated-drained, CD, conditions. The effective confining pressure of 35 kPa (5 psi) was selected because it represents typical confining stress found in highway base course (Thornton

114

and Elliott, 1988). The strain rate used for loading the specimen was initially set at 60 percent/hour for a few samples but was later reduced to 30 percent/hour because the computer system could not reliably reverse cycles at the proper level of stress. A review of the testing output data (further discussed within Chapter 4) confirmed that both strain rates were sufficiently slow enough to prevent any buildup of excess pore water pressure during the loading phase.

Testing consisted of 40 stress-controlled loading and unloading cycles. For each cycle, loading of the specimen increased to, and was held at, a 21 kPa (3 psi) deviator stress level for a period of 30 seconds followed by unloading the specimen to a lower limit of 3.5 kPa (0.5 psi) deviator stress. This level was held for 30 seconds until the next loading-unloading cycle began. The low applied axial stress was intentionally selected to avoid a premature failure the specimen prior to the beginning of staged triaxial testing and to determine the modulus values of the test specimen at intermediate levels of strain.

The repeated load testing was conducted at strain rates that were much lower than those for typical resilient modulus, MR, testing. As a result, the modulus values developed were expected to be lower than those from standard resilient modulus testing. The purpose of completing repeated load testing prior to the first stage of triaxial shearing was to develop some correlation between the modulus values from this testing and the more expensive and time consuming resilient modulus testing.

3.8 Shear Strength Testing

At the conclusion of cyclic testing multiple stage triaxial shear tests were performed on each test specimen. The first stage was completed at the conclusion of the

115

cyclic testing at a confining pressure of 35 kPa (5 psi), using the same strain rates of 60 percent/hour and later 30 percent/hour as discussed in section 3.6. The termination strain for the first stage of testing was set at 3 percent.

The second stage of testing was completed under an effective confining stress of 69 kPa (10 psi). The predetermined stage 2 termination strain was selected as 6 percent. However, as illustrated in Fig 3.6, testing was typically terminated when the real-time stress vs. strain plot indicated the specimen had yielded. Typically loading was terminated at each stage when a clear yield could be established to prevent premature sample destruction prior to completing the final stage testing.

116

The third and final stage of testing was completed at an effective confining stress of 138 kPa (20 psi) to a maximum incremental strain level of 4 percent (cumulative total strain for all stages did not exceed 10 percent). The real-time stress vs. strain plots indicated shear failure for a majority of the test specimens occurred prior to a cumulative strain of 10 percent. In these instances testing was halted at the indication of a clear shear failure. The selection of the effective confining pressures in the staged triaxial test was made so that the Mohr-Coulomb failure envelope could be adequately established. Three testing stages were selected to adequately define the Mohr-Coulomb failure envelope over the range of stresses expected under typical highway loading conditions.

3.9 Membrane Modulus Testing

The rubber membranes used to isolate the specimen in the triaxial chamber act as short hollow columns when they are confined on one side by the liquid confining pressure and on the other side by the sample and liquid backpressure. As a result, the modulus of elasticity for the rubber membranes was required to determine what portion of the applied deviator stress was acting on the three (3) confining membranes and what portion was actually acting on the test specimen.

To determine this value a 101.6 mm (4 in.) width of the 0.686 mm (0.027 in.)thick membrane was cut for testing. The membrane was suspended from a 12.5 mm (No. 4) diameter rebar 406.4 mm (16 in.) in length. A second 12.5 mm (No. 4) rebar was placed inside the test specimen and weights were incrementally suspended from it. An ink line 101.6 mm (4 in.) in length was drawn on the membrane in the direction of loading which established the gage length, L. With each applied load the length between the two endpoints of the gage line was measured. The incremental strain, ∆L/L, was

117

determined with each addition of weight to the membrane. The stress (σ) at each increment was found by dividing the total weight by the membrane corrected cross-sectional area. Table 3.4 summarizes the data obtained from the modulus testing. A plot of stress divided by strain (modulus) vs. strain, as illustrated in Fig. 3.7 was generated from which an average membrane modulus was extracted for the range of strains used in the triaxial testing. The membrane modulus was multiplied by the strain at a particular stage of the test to determine the stress in the membranes under the associated load.

Table 3.4: Membrane modulus determination raw data.

Initial gauge	Initial gauge	Initial
length, mm	width, mm	Thickness, mm
100	100	0.686
Reading	Weight, g	Length, mm	Width, mm	Corrected Area, mm2	Thickness,	∆L, mm	∆L/L	σ, g/mm2	E, g/mm2
	0	100	100	68.6	0.686	0.0	0	0.0	-
	267	100.2	99.0	68.5	0.692	0.2	0.002	3.9	1953.9
1	248	102.0	98.0	67.3	0.686	2.0	0.02	3.7	188.1
2	362.5	103.0	97.0	66.6	0.687	3.0	0.03	5.4	186.9
3	477	104.0	96.5	66.0	0.684	4.0	0.04	7.2	188.0
4	591.5	104.5	96.0	65.6	0.684	4.5	0.04	9.0	209.2
5	706	106.0	95.5	64.7	0.678	6.0	0.06	10.9	192.7
6	820.5	108.0	95.0	63.5	0.669	8.0	0.07	12.9	174.4
7	935	109.0	94.5	62.9	0.666	9.0	0.08	14.9	179.9
8	1049.5	111.0	94.0	61.8	0.657	11.0	0.10	17.0	171.4
9	1164	112.0	93.5	61.3	0.655	12.0	0.11	19.0	177.4
10	1278.5	113.0	93.0	60.7	0.653	13.0	0.12	21.1	183.1
	1393	115.0	92.0	59.7	0.648	15.0	0.13	23.4	179.0
12	1507.5	116.0	91.0	59.1	0.650	16.0	0.14	25.5	184.8
13	16	118.0	90.5	58.1	0.642	18.0	0.15	27.9	182.9
14	1736.5	120.0	90.0	57.2	0.635	20.0	0.17	30.4	182.3
15	1851	121.0	89.0	56.7	0.637	21.0	0.17	32.6	188.1
16	1965.5	124.0	88.5	55.3	0.625	24.0	0.19	35.5	183.6
17	2080	126.0	88.0	54.4	0.619	26.0	0.21	38.2	185.1
18	2194.5	129.0	87.0	53.2	0.611	29.0	0.22	41.3	183.6
19	2309	131.0	86.0	52.4	0.609	31.0	0.24	44.1	186.3
20	2423.5	134.0	85.0	51.2	0.602	34.0	0.25	47.3	186.6
25	2996	148.0	80.0	46.4	0.579	48.0	0.32	64.6	199.3
6364	3182	158.0	79.0	43.4	0.550	58.0	0.37	73.3	199.6
8634	4317	196.0	70.0	35.0	0.500	96.0	0.49	123.3	251.8
10924	5462	225.0	62.0	30.5	0.492	125.0	0.56	179.1	322.5
12069	6034.5	284.0	58.0	24.2	0.416	184.0	0.65	249.8	385.6
13214	07	311.0	56.0	22.1	0.394	211.0	0.68	299.5	441.5

118

E, g/mm²

500

450

400

350

300

250

200

150

100

50

0

0

ε, ∆L/L (%)

Figure 3.7: Modulus vs. strain for single membrane.

Figure 3.7 illustrates that the membrane modulus of E = 185 g/mm² (0.41 lb/mm²) remains relatively constant until strains of about 25 percent are achieved. Since the majority of all staged triaxial testing was terminated by a maximum cumulative strain, ε, of under 10 percent, it was reasonable to assume a constant value for modulus over the entire strain range of a triaxial test.

Three membranes were used for each test specimen. The inner membrane closest to the sample material was punctured frequently by the aggregate during compaction process; thus its ability to isolate the sample from the confining fluid was compromised. The middle membrane and outer membranes were added to insure that the specimen would be totally isolated from the confining water. Equation 3.1 was

119

A =πnDt (3.1)

where A = area of all membranes

n = number of membranes

D = specimen diameter

t = individual membrane thickness. The total area for the three membranes was determined to be 985 mm² (1.53 in²). As a result the load to be subtracted from the corrected load cell reading is given by Eqn. 3.2.

P_membrane =EεA (3.2)

where E = membrane modulus

ε = maximum cumulative strain during testing

A = total corrected membrane areas. The load carried by the membranes during deviator stress application varies with strain. Considering the maximum cumulative strain during staged triaxial testing rarely exceeded 8 percent, the maximum load applied to the membranes would be less than

143.7 N (32.3 lbs). When one compares this to the axial load applied to the specimen it can be concluded that the membrane load is low when compared to the total applied loads and as a result would have little affect on the Mohr-Coulomb failure analyses if it were ignored.

3.10 Verification of Consolidated-Drained (CD) Test Conditions

Most reference texts on soil mechanics indicate that no cohesion should exist for granular materials, and they are typically represented in graphical form with a cohesion intercept value of 0. This concept was not verified in this study. While the Mohr-Coulomb failure envelope for cohesionless materials is expected to pass through the

120

origin, indicative of a cohesion intercept value of 0, each of the Mohr-Coulomb failure envelopes generated from the test data had a finite value for cohesion. Hvorslev (1960) believed that the Mohr-Coulomb failure envelope was actually curved with the envelope being steeper at low stresses and flatter at high stresses. The failure envelope was steeper at low stresses due to the forced intersection with the origin. Testing conducted by Olson (2004) contradicts this concept. Olson’s work with drained tests on kaolinite shows a cohesion intercept even at low stresses. It is thus concluded that the cohesion intercept values observed during testing were valid and the true measurement of shear strength should include cohesion for these granular materials.

Since the findings of this study are contrary to many reported, the possibility that the test specimens were not tested in a totally drained condition was examined. The coefficient of consolidation, cv, was determined from the initial consolidation stage prior to triaxial shear testing. Consolidation times were taken conservatively as 10 seconds based on the cessation of water level changes within the cell and drain accumulators after application of a confining pressure. A cv value of 1695.6 ft²/day was calculated for the specimens using Eqn. 3.3. Equation 3.4 was then used to calculate a time to failure at an average degree of consolidation equal to 95 percent considering the specimen drainage conditions, sample height, coefficient of consolidation, and time to shear failure (Gibson and Henkel, 1954). Discussion of this method of analysis has been previously presented in Chapter 2.

πH ²

c= (3.3)

v

^4t100

where cv = coefficient of consolidation

H = specimen height 121

t100 = time at which 100 percent consolidation is achieved.

U =1−_η ^H_Cv^d_t ² _f (3.4)

f

where U_f = target degree of consolidation H_d = sample drainage height

η = drainage condition parameter C = calculated coefficient of consolidation

v

t_f = time to shear failure. Table 3.5 summarizes the η parameter values based upon drainage conditions. The target degree of consolidation is established as 95 percent for this study and the minimum time to failure, tf, was calculated to be 1.42 minutes by rearranging Eqn. 3.3.

Table 3.5: Summary of η parameter values for time to failure analysis.

All of the tests were conducted at strain rates that gave times to failure in excess of the minimum 1.42 minutes. No excess pore water pressures were developed during the staged or cyclic testing; the CD triaxial testing conditions were present throughout. Results are summarized in Chapter 4.

122

The testing methods described were repeated for each of the quarry materials. In total 88 independent tests were conducted on samples at varying fines contents from the five quarries under investigation in an attempt to quantify the affect of fines on the shear strength and stiffness of the crushed stone base materials.

3.11 Hydraulic Conductivity Testing

Samples containing 6 percent and 8 percent fines were tested by the constant head method in accordance with AASHTO T -215 (ASTM, D2434). The AASHTO specification used in this study is identical to the ASTM specification, except that the sieve analysis for the test according to AASHTO shall conform to T-88. The A STM specification requires that the sieve analysis conform to D-422.

Samples containing 10 percent, 12 percent, 14 percent, and 16 percent fines were tested by the falling head –rising tailwater method in accordance with ASTM D5084, me thod C. The ASTM procedure was followed for falling head tests because no AASHTO specification exists for a falling head test.

3.11.2 Constant Head Hydraulic Conductivity Test Procedure

A schematic of the device shown in Fig. 3.8 is illustrated in Fig. 3.9 which portrays the relative position of the sample in the device and the head suppli ed to the device through the Marriotte reservoir. The adjustable bubble tube controls the amount of head applied to the test specimen. Prior to starting the test the bubble tube is plugged and water is sucked into the reservoir from the supply tub using a vacuum source. The residual vacuum pressure in the top of the reservoir is equal and opposite to the press ure head created by the column of water suspended above the specimen. When the test is started the bubble tube is unplugged exposing the reservoir to atmospheric pressure at the bubble tube tip. At this point bubbles will enter the reservoir and reduce the vacuum

124

and cause the pressure head on the test specimen to be equal the distance from the tip of the bubble tube to the water level in the 5-gallon bucket. During the test, water flows from the main

125

7) Determination of hydraulic conductivity using Darcy’s Law as shown in Equation 2.14

Q = A × k × i × t (2.14)

Where gradient is:

Hi =

L (2.15)

and: H = equals distance from bottom of bubb le tube to overflow water elevation L = height of the specimen

Equa tion (2.14) can be rearranged as H

Q = A × k × × t

L And hydraulic conductivity is calculated as follows:

Q

k = ^{i ×A}s ^{× t} (3.8)

where: k = hydraulic conductivity, cm/s Q = change in water elevation in reservoir multiplied by net area of reservoir (Ar),

3

cm i = hydraulic gradient As = cross sectional area of specimen, cm ² Ar = inside cross sectio nal area of reservoir minus the outside cross sectional area

of the bubble tube, cm²
t = time of test, sec

126

VENT/VACUUM PORT

BUBBLE TUBE

MAIN RESERVOIR

WATER INFLOW FROM TUB

H

OVERFLOW

L SPECIMEN

RUBBER COUPLING (TYP)

DRAIN HOLES (TYP)

TAILWATER TUB
PERFORATED METAL PLATE W/
SCREEN & FILTER PAPER, TOP &
BOTTOM OF SPECIMEN

Figure 3.9 – Typical constant head test set-up using the principle of Marriotte’s bottle to
apply head.

Example Hydraulic Conductivity Calculation

A sample from the Sharp’s quarry, which is designated as MB8-2, was tested on

7/13/02. The hand calculations as well as the spreadsheet calculation are shown to

illustrate the procedure for calculating hydraulic conductivity.

In this case, the reservoir reading went from 52.8 cm to 50.3 cm in 100 minutes.

The equation used to calculate hydraulic conductivity is:

Q

k = ^i×As^{× t} (3.8)

in this case:

A_R = ^⎡⎢π×⎜^{⎛ 5.96} ⎟^⎞2 − π×⎜^{⎛ .749} ⎟^{⎞2 ⎤}⎥× _⎢⎣^⎡2.54 ^cm _⎥⎦^{⎤ 2} = 177.15cm² ⎢⎝ 2 ⎠⎝ 2 ⎠⎥ in

⎣⎦ _⎡ 2 _⎤ 2

⎛ 6 ⎞⎡ cm⎤ 2

A =π× × 2.54 = 182.41cm

^{S ⎢}_⎢ ^⎜⎝ 2 ^⎟⎠^⎥_⎥ ^⎢⎣ in ^⎥⎦

⎣⎦

Q = 2.5 cm × 177.15 cm² = 442.87 cm³

127

1.37 in

i == .2962

4.625 in

therefore,

442.87 cm³

k =

.2962×182.41cm² ×100 min× 60 ^sec

min k = .00137 cm/sec

Fig. 3.10 presents a data sheet and the total flow versus time regression line used to determine hydraulic conductivity of the same sample MB8-2 from Sharp’s quarry. For values reported in this study, the slope of the regression line for total flow versus time was used to determine hydraulic conductivity based on 10 minute reading intervals rather than the 100 minute interval used in the above example. As a result, the hand calculated value differs slightly from the spreadsheet value.

128

Sample	MB-8(2)
Sharp's quarry, MB-8
Date-7/13/02			Ar = 177.15 cm2
			As = 182.41 cm2
L (inches) =		4.6250
H (inches) =		1.3700
I (gradient) =		0.2962

Time (min)	Reservoir (cm)	Difference (cm)	Interval Flow (cm3)	Total flow (cm3)	Flow Rate (cm3/sec)	Hydraulic Conductivity (cm/sec)*
0.0	52.80	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.0000
10.0	52.50	0.30	53.14	53.14	0.09	0.0016
20.0	52.20	0.30	53.14	106.29	0.09	0.0016
30.0	52.00	0.20	35.43	141.72	0.06	0.0011
40.0	51.70	0.30	53.14	194.86	0.09	0.0016
50.0	51.50	0.20	35.43	230.30	0.06	0.0011
60.0	51.20	0.30	53.14	283.44	0.09	0.0016

Total Flow (cm³)

300.00

250.00

200.00

150.00

100.00

50.00

0.00

*-k cm/sec based on Total Flow Regression = 1.43E-03 cm/sec

129

3.11.3 Equipment for Falling Head – Rising Tail Hydraulic Conductivity Test

In this study the falling head permeameter, shown in Fig. 3.11, was used to determine values of hydraulic conductivity for the upper bound and 10, 12, 14, and 16 percent model blends. The figure shows a falling head – rising tail permeability test setup for two (2) samples from Sharp’s quarry.

Item # 1 in Figure 3.11 denotes the permeameter water supply which flows to the pressure panel via a siphon. Valves on the pressure panel are used to mechanically route the permeant to the appropriate burette.

Item # 2 in the figure denotes the Wykeham Farrance WF 13100 pressure panel used to measure water flow and to apply an inflow head, back pressure head, and confining pressure to the sample tested. The appropriate valves on the pressure panel are opened to fill the vacuum burette (outflow), backpressure (inflow), and chamber (cell) burette with permeant. Direct measurement of the quantity of water supplied to the specimen and the permeameter cell is accomplished by using the graduated scale on the burettes. The pressure panel is also used to apply the appropriate vacuum, backpressure, and cell pressures via an “air over water” arrangement.

Item # 3 in the figure denotes the standard flexible wall permeability cell used to route permeant through the specimen and apply confining pressure. Use of the flexible wall permeability cell minimizes side wall leakage (a problem with the rigid wall permeameter) and allows measurements of the low flows common with samples of low hydraulic conductivities (less than approximately 10 ^-4 cm/s).

The equipment also allows for back pressure saturation which is normally required to saturate the specimen. Back pressure saturation is used to dissolve any air bubbles inside

130

the sample and fill all the pore spaces with permeant. For this study back pressure saturation with a 450 kPa (65 psi) confining pressure and a 380 kPa (55 psi) pore pressure was used to produce an effective stress of 70 kPa (10 psi) on the test specimen. Since hydraulic conductivity decreases as the effective stress increases, the effective stress should be minimized to replicate field conditions.

131

3.11.4 Falling Head-Rising Tail Hydraulic Conductivity Test Procedure

A schematic of the falling head permeameter used in the study is illustrated in Fig. 132

3.12 which portrays the relative position of the sample in the device and plumbing from the pressure panel.

PERMEABILITY CELL

OUTFLOW LINE FROM TOP CAP
FLEXIBLE MEMBRANE (TYP)

SP ECIMEN OUTFLOW LINE FROM TOP CAP

END CAP W/PERFORATED METALPLATE, SCREEN, & FILTER PAPER Chamber Burette TOP & BOTTOM OF SPECIMEN (Fill cell & confining pressure)

Back Pressure Burette (Inflow)

Vacuum Burette (Outflow)

x- Flow control valves

Figure 3.12 – Schematic diagram of flexible wall permeameter cell used in study.

The inflow water from the backpressure burette flows into the base plate of the permeameter cell and upwards through the specimen. As the water exits the specimen it collects in grooves in the top cap and exits the permeameter via the two (2) tubes from the top cap. The vacuum burette (outflow) is connected to these tubes from the top cap meaning that permeant flow is through the sample from bottom to top.

The cell is initially filled with water and a 5 psi confining pressure is placed on the sample via the chamber burette. Water is forced through the sample from the back pressure burette under a slight head (1-3 psi) until the amount entering the sample equals the amount exiting the sample. This condition exists when the decrease of water in the back pressure burette is equal to the increase in water in the vacuum burette. When this condition is attained back-pressure saturation can begin to insure saturation of the

133

specimen.

Determining the level of saturation for specimens subjected to triaxial testing is of critical importance. Skempton proposed the concept of the pore-pressure coefficients (B value) in his 1954 paper. The equipment used in this test permitted the determination of this B value.

The B value is defined as the ratio of the pore water pressure increase resulting from an increase in confining pressure to the change in confining pressure when no drainage is allowed. For saturated soft soils like clays, the B parameter should equal 1. Skempton stated that in a saturated soil (zero air voids) water is infinitely more incompressible than the soil solids matrix. The degree to which water is more incompressible than the solids structure is seen to be somewhat decreased for more granular materials. In essence, the change in stress applied to a granular specimen will be “carried” to varying amounts by both pore water pressure and stiffness of the solids skeleton.

This concept is reinforced by Skempton’s (1954) own findings. A plot of B value vs. degree of saturation for a clay gravel soil showed that at approximately 95 percent saturation the B values obtained are approximately 85 percent. It is interesting to note that the clay gravel material tested has a maximum dry density of 136 lbs/ft³ and an optimum water content of 7.8 percent. The liquid limit and plasticity index were 17 and 2, respectively. Since these values are very similar to those obtained for the crushed stone base course aggregate tested in this study, a target B-value of 0.85 or greater was chosen for this study.

A complete step by step pictorial illustrating the assembly of the device and test

134

procedure used is presented in Appendix B.2. In general terms, the sequence consisted

of:

1) Preparation of the blend in accordance with the percentage of fines being

tested

2) Compaction of the material in a flexible membrane using a split mold

3) Assembly of the flexible wall permeability cell

4) Attachment of the lines from the pressure panel which control vacuum pressure, backpressure, and cell pressure 5) Subjecting the sample to backpressure saturation

6) Obtaining an appropriate B value and running the falling head-rising tail hydraulic conductivity test. 7) Determination of hydraulic conductivity using Equation 3.4

⎛ a_in × a_out ×L ⎞⎛ h₁ ⎞^{k = ⎜⎜}_⎝ (a_in + a_out )× A_s ×∆t ^⎟⎟_⎠^×ln⎜⎜_⎝ h₂ ^⎟⎟_{⎠ (3.9)}

where:

k = hydraulic conductivity, cm/s
a in = cross sectional area of inflow burette , cm²
a out = cross sectional area of outflow burette, cm²
L = length of specimen, cm
As = cross sectional area of specimen, cm²
∆t = interval of time over which flow occurs, sec
h1 = head difference at start of test, cm
h2 = head difference at end of test, cm

Example Hydraulic Conductivity Calculation

135

Sharp’s quarry sample MB10-1 was tested on 8/8/02. The recorded data was h1 = 100, h2 = 37.6 , ∆t = 50 min. The burettes used in this study were graduated such that 1 cm of the burette’s length contained 1.675 ml of permeant.

_{k =} ⎛_⎜⎜ a_in × a_out ×L ⎞_⎟⎟×ln⎛_⎜⎜ h₁ ⎞_{⎟⎟ ⎝} (a_in + a_out )× A_s ×∆t _⎠⎝ h_{2 ⎠ (3.9)}

where: a in = a out = 1.67 cm²

A_S = ^⎡⎢π×⎜^{⎛ 6} ⎟^{⎞2 ⎤}⎥× ^⎡2.54 ^cm⎤2 =182.41cm²
⎢⎝ 2 ⎠ ⎥_⎦ ^⎢⎣ in ^⎥⎦

⎣

L = 4 in x 2.54 cm/in = 10.16 cm
Solving for k:

_{k =} ⎛_⎜⎜ 1.67 cm² ×1.67 cm²₂ ×10.16 cm ⎞_{⎟⎟× ln}⎛_⎜ 100 ml ⎞_{⎟ ⎝} (1.67 cm +1.67 cm) ×182.41cm × 50 min × 60 sec/mint _⎠⎝ 37.6 ml ⎠

= .00001516 cm/sec (.0000152 as per spreadsheet)

Fig 3.13 presents the data sheet used to determine the hydraulic conductivity of MB10-1 class 7 base course from Sharp’s quarry. A calculator or computer program must be available on site to solve Eq. (3.8) as the test is being run. The specimen should be permeated until at least four (4) values of hydraulic conductivity are obtained over an interval of time in which: the ratio of the inflow to outflow is between 0.75 and 1.25 and the hydraulic conductivity is steady. In this study, the ratio of inflow to outflow was approximately 1.0 for all tests. Steady state flow conditions were assumed when four (4) or more values of hydraulic conductivity were within 50% of each other and a plot of

136

hydraulic conductivity versus time showed no significant upward or downward trend.

3.12 Suction Testing

Two (2) replicate samples of the model gradations with 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, and 16 percent fines were created. Each sample was compacted at optimum moisture to 98 percent of maximum dry density as determined by the modified proctor using a Marshall compaction hammer. Standard plastic concrete cylinder molds (152.4 mm diameter by

304.8 mm tall) were used to contain the samples used in the test. In addition to the model blends replicate specimens of the lower bound gradation with 6 percent fines and the upper bound gradation with 10 percent fines were created to bring the total number of tube suction test specimens to fourteen (14) per quarry.

Sample -MB-10(1) ain=aout=1.67cm²

Sharp's quarry As = 182.41 cm²

L = 10.16 cm
SATURATION

START DATE	CHAMBER	PORE	VACUUM
	PRESSURE	BURRETTE	BURRETTE
	(psi)	PRESSURE (psi)	PRESSURE (psi)
8/5/02	10	0	0
8/5/02	65	55	55

PERMEATION

Figure 3.13 – Data sheet used to determine the hydraulic conductivity of MB10-1 class 7 base course from Sharp’s quarry.

START DATE	ELAPSED TIME (minutes)	OUTFLOW (ml, Vac Bur)	INFLOW (ml, B-P Bur)	INFLOW (ml, Cham Bur)	H1(Intial head diff)	H2(Final head diff)	k
8/8/02	0.00	100.0	0.0	0.0	100.0
B=4.5/5 =.90	50.00	68.8	31.2	0.0		37.6	1.52E-05

137

To allow water to enter the sample, 12-6.5 mm diameter holes were drilled on approximately 38 mm centers around the base of the mold. The inlet holes were approximately 25 mm from the base of the molds.

The samples were placed in tubs which contained approximately 50 mm of water for soaking. The samples were removed and weighed at intervals of 1 hr, 2 hrs, 4 hrs, 24 hrs, 48 hrs, 96 hrs, 120 hrs, 144 hrs, 168 hrs, 192 hrs, 216 hrs, and 240 hrs. A graph relating the percent of moisture gain versus the square root of time was plotted for each sample blend. Figure 3.14 shows the general setup of the suction test.

Figure 3.14- Suction test samples from Sharp’s quarry in water bath . Due to problems with testing which will be describe in more detail in Chapter 4, the test procedure was modified throughout the study to assure more uniform conditions.

138

The test procedure used for Glen Rose and Granite Mountain quarries is described

below.

Test procedure (Glen Rose and Granite Mountain quarries)

1. The quantity of material to be hand blended was selected based on the unit weight and optimum moisture determined by the modified proctor which would achieve the target dry density for the volume of the test specimen.

2. A 40 mm thick layer of material retained on the # 40 sieve was placed at the base of the mold to serve as a filter to prevent fines from clogging the inlet holes during soaking and to prevent fines from being washed from the sample when it was removed for weighing.

3. The material was compacted into the mold to 98 percent of maximum dry density. For this study a Marshall hammer was used to compact the material in 8 lifts with 25 blows /lift to obtain target density. The samples were oven dried at 100º C. for 48 hours.

4. The samples were then placed into the water soak tub. The water soak tub was plumbed so that a steady flow of water entered the tub with a maximum depth of approximately 50 mm of water.

5. The samples were removed at intervals of 1 hr, 2 hrs, 4 hrs, 24 hrs, 48 hrs, 96 hrs, 120 hrs, 144 hrs, 168 hrs, 192 hrs, 216 hrs, and 240 hrs and the weights recorded.

6. The percentage moisture gain with respect to the square root of time was plotted on an Excel spread sheet.

139

conductivity of replicate samples are plotted against the percentage of fines for the quarries studied and a hand drawn trend line was inserted. Between 6 and 10 percent fines, the hydraulic conductivity changes approximately 1 order of magnitude for each 1 percent change in fines. However, above fines contents of 10 percent the hydraulic conductivity changes by less than 1 order of magnitude for the entire 6 percent change in fines. This suggests that the decrease in hydraulic conductivity for fine contents greater than about 10 percent is relatively insignificant. In agreement with theory and earlier research, Fig. 4.4 clearly demonstrates that the hydraulic conductivity of granular base course decreases as the percentage of fines increases.

It was noted that material from Granite Mountain had consistently lower hydraulic conductivities than other quarries while material from Glen Rose had consistently higher hydraulic conductivities than the other quarries. In an effort to investigate this trend, the grain size distribution curves for these quarries were compared as shown in Fig 4.5.

It should be kept in mind that these grain size distribution curves were developed by the wet sieving procedure and the material was handled multiple times prior to reaching ERC. As a result, it was expected that the percent of fines could be falsely elevated for the “as received” material. When comparing these two quarries it was found that material passing the # 200 sieve was 7.16 percent for Glen Rose quarry and 11.85 percent for Granite Mountain quarry.

An inspection of the data presented in Fig. 4.5, with emphasis placed on material larger than the # 40 sieve, reveals that the material from Granite Mountain quarry is somewhat “finer” than that from Glen Rose quarry. This finer material would result in smaller void space, and hence decreased hydraulic conductivity.

146

The model blend gradation data used to generate Figs. 4.26 through 4.40 along with statistical parameters is presented by quarry in Tables 4.12 through 4.16. The maximum, minimum, average, and deviation from overall mean for each of the parameters analyzed (φ, c, and τ) were calculated. The mean angle of internal friction, φ, values for each quarry ranged from 40.6 (Preston) to 43.3 (Black Rock). Within the individual quarries the deviation from the overall mean was never more than 4 degrees over the range of blends tested. The average deviation from the quarry mean values was more typically on the order of 1.5 to 2 degrees.

203

Figure B.1.1 – Pictorial sequence demonstrating assembly of constant head permeameter

249

Appendix B.3
Specimen Blending

265

Table B.3.1: Sharps quarry triaxial specimen blending. Table B.3.2: Preston quarry triaxial specimen blending. Table B.3.3: Black Rock quarry triaxial specimen blending. Table B.3.4: Glen Rose quarry triaxial specimen blending. Table B.3.5: Granite Mountain quarry triaxial specimen blending.

		% Passing
Size	Lower bound	Model Gradation	Upper bound
1-1/2"	100	100	100
3/4"	50	81	90
#4	25	43	55
#40	10	18	30
#200	6	Varried	10
PAN	0	0	0

γd, max (pcf)	141.0
98% γd, max (pcf)	138.2
Mold Dia (in)	6
Mold Ht.(in)	12
Mold Vol (cf)	0.1963
Material/sample (lb)	27.13
OMC (%)	5.5

Lower Bound Blend: 6% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	27.13	Upper Bound Blend: 10% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	27.13
Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)		Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)
3/4"	50	6153.1		3/4"	10	1230.6
#4	25	3076.5		#4	35	4307.2
#40	15	1845.9		#40	25	3076.5
#200	4	492.2		#200	20	2461.2
Pan	6	738.4		Pan	10	1230.6

Model Blend: 6% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	27.13	Model Blend: 12% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	27.13
Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)		Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)
3/4"	19	2338.2		3/4"	19	2338.2
#4	38	4676.3		#4	38	4676.3
#40	25	3076.5		#40	25	3076.5
#200	12	1476.7		#200	6	738.4
Pan	6	738.4		Pan	12	1476.7

Model Blend: 8% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	27.13	Model Blend: 14% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	27.13
Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)		Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)
3/4"	19	2338.2		3/4"	19	2338.2
#4	38	4676.3		#4	38	4676.3
#40	25	3076.5		#40	25	3076.5
#200	10	1230.6		#200	4	492.2
Pan	8	984.5		Pan	14	1722.9

Model Blend: 10% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	27.13	Model Blend: 16% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	27.13
Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)		Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)
3/4"	19	2338.2		3/4"	19	2338.2
#4	38	4676.3		#4	38	4676.3
#40	25	3076.5		#40	25	3076.5
#200	8	984.5		#200	2	246.1
Pan	10	1230.6		Pan	16	1969.0

		% Passing
Size	Lower bound	Model Gradation	Upper bound
1-1/2"	100	100	100
3/4"	50	75	90
#4	25	35	55
#40	10	18	30
#200	6	Varried	10
PAN	0	0	0

γd, max (pcf)	132.0
98% γd, max (pcf)	129.4
Mold Dia (in)	6
Mold Ht.(in)	12
Mold Vol (cf)	0.1963
Material/sample (lb)	25.40
OMC (%)	7.5

Lower Bound Blend: 6% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	25.40	Upper Bound Blend: 10% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	25.40
Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)		Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)
3/4"	50	5760.7		3/4"	10	1152.1
#4	25	2880.4		#4	35	4032.5
#40	15	1728.2		#40	25	2880.4
#200	4	460.9		#200	20	2304.3
Pan	6	691.3		Pan	10	1152.1

Model Blend: 6% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	25.40	Model Blend: 12% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	25.40
Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)		Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)
3/4"	25	2880.4		3/4"	25	2880.4
#4	40	4608.6		#4	40	4608.6
#40	18	2073.9		#40	14	1613.0
#200	11	1267.4		#200	9	1036.9
Pan	6	691.3		Pan	12	1382.6

Model Blend: 8% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	25.40	Model Blend: 14% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	25.40
Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)		Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)
3/4"	25	2880.4		3/4"	25	2880.4
#4	40	4608.6		#4	40	4608.6
#40	17	1958.6		#40	13	1497.8
#200	10	1152.1		#200	8	921.7
Pan	8	921.7		Pan	14	1613.0

Model Blend: 10% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	25.40	Model Blend: 16% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	25.40
Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)		Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)
3/4"	25	2880.4		3/4"	25	2880.4
#4	40	4608.6		#4	40	4608.6
#40	15	1728.2		#40	11	1267.4
#200	10	1152.1		#200	8	921.7
Pan	10	1152.1		Pan	16	1843.4

		% Passing
Size	Lower bound	Model Gradation	Upper bound
1-1/2"	100	100	100
3/4"	50	81	90
#4	25	35	55
#40	10	18	30
#200	6	Varried	10
PAN	0	0	0

γd, max (pcf)	144.0
98% γd, max (pcf)	141.1
Mold Dia (in)	6
Mold Ht.(in)	12
Mold Vol (cf)	0.1963
Material/sample (lb)	27.71
OMC (%)	6.5

Lower Bound Blend: 6% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	27.71	Upper Bound Blend: 10% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	27.71
Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)		Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)
3/4"	50	6284.6		3/4"	10	1256.9
#4	25	3142.3		#4	35	4399.2
#40	15	1885.4		#40	25	3142.3
#200	4	502.8		#200	20	2513.9
Pan	6	754.2		Pan	10	1256.9

Model Blend: 6% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	27.71	Model Blend: 12% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	27.71
Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)		Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)
3/4"	19	2388.2		3/4"	19	2388.2
#4	46	5781.9		#4	46	5781.9
#40	17	2136.8		#40	17	2136.8
#200	12	1508.3		#200	6	754.2
Pan	6	754.2		Pan	12	1508.3

Model Blend: 8% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	27.71	Model Blend: 14% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	27.71
Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)		Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)
3/4"	19	2388.2		3/4"	19	2388.2
#4	46	5781.9		#4	46	5781.9
#40	17	2136.8		#40	17	2136.8
#200	10	1256.9		#200	4	502.8
Pan	8	1005.5		Pan	14	1759.7

Model Blend: 10% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	27.71	Model Blend: 16% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	27.71
Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)		Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)
3/4"	19	2388.2		3/4"	19	2388.2
#4	46	5781.9		#4	46	5781.9
#40	17	2136.8		#40	17	2136.8
#200	8	1005.5		#200	2	251.4
Pan	10	1256.9		Pan	16	2011.1

		% Passing
Size	Lower bound	Model Gradation	Upper bound
1-1/2"	100	100	100
3/4"	50	86	90
#4	25	47	55
#40	10	20	30
#200	6	Varried	10
PAN	0	0	0

γd, max (pcf)	135.0
98% γd, max (pcf)	132.3
Mold Dia (in)	6
Mold Ht.(in)	12
Mold Vol (cf)	0.1963
Material/sample (lb)	25.98
OMC (%)	6.0

Lower Bound Blend: 6% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	25.98	Upper Bound Blend: 10% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	25.98
Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)		Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)
3/4"	50	5892.3		3/4"	10	1178.5
#4	25	2946.1		#4	35	4124.6
#40	15	1767.7		#40	25	2946.1
#200	4	471.4		#200	20	2356.9
Pan	6	707.1		Pan	10	1178.5

Model Blend: 6% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	25.98	Model Blend: 12% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	25.98
Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)		Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)
3/4"	14	1649.8		3/4"	14	1649.8
#4	39	4596.0		#4	39	4596.0
#40	27	3181.8		#40	27	3181.8
#200	14	1649.8		#200	8	942.8
Pan	6	707.1		Pan	12	1414.1

Model Blend: 8% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	25.98	Model Blend: 14% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	25.98
Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)		Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)
3/4"	14	1649.8		3/4"	14	1649.8
#4	39	4596.0		#4	39	4596.0
#40	27	3181.8		#40	27	3181.8
#200	12	1414.1		#200	6	707.1
Pan	8	942.8		Pan	14	1649.8

Model Blend: 10% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	25.98	Model Blend: 16% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	25.98
Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)		Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)
3/4"	14	1649.8		3/4"	14	1649.8
#4	39	4596.0		#4	39	4596.0
#40	27	3181.8		#40	27	3181.8
#200	10	1178.5		#200	4	471.4
Pan	10	1178.5		Pan	16	1885.5

		% Passing
Size	Lower bound	Model Gradation	Upper bound
1-1/2"	100	100	100
3/4"	50	81	90
#4	25	45	55
#40	10	18	30
#200	6	Varried	10
PAN	0	0	0

γd, max (pcf)	134.2
98% γd, max (pcf)	131.5
Mold Dia (in)	6
Mold Ht.(in)	12
Mold Vol (cf)	0.1963
Material/sample (lb)	25.82
OMC (%)	7.5

Lower Bound Blend: 6% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	25.82	Upper Bound Blend: 10% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	25.82
Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)		Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)
3/4"	50	5856.0		3/4"	10	1171.2
#4	25	2928.0		#4	35	4099.2
#40	15	1756.8		#40	25	2928.0
#200	4	468.5		#200	20	2342.4
Pan	6	702.7		Pan	10	1171.2

Model Blend: 6% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	25.82	Model Blend: 12% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	25.82
Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)		Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)
3/4"	19	2225.3		3/4"	19	2225.3
#4	36	4216.3		#4	36	4216.3
#40	27	3162.2		#40	27	3162.2
#200	12	1405.4		#200	6	702.7
Pan	6	702.7		Pan	12	1405.4

Model Blend: 8% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	25.82	Model Blend: 14% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	25.82
Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)		Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)
3/4"	19	2225.3		3/4"	19	2225.3
#4	36	4216.3		#4	36	4216.3
#40	27	3162.2		#40	27	3162.2
#200	10	1171.2		#200	4	468.5
Pan	8	937.0		Pan	14	1639.7

Model Blend: 10% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	25.82	Model Blend: 16% Fines		Est. Total Sample Wt. (lbs)	25.82
Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)		Size	% Retained per sieve	Weight Material Ret. (g)
3/4"	19	2225.3		3/4"	19	2225.3
#4	36	4216.3		#4	36	4216.3
#40	27	3162.2		#40	27	3162.2
#200	8	937.0		#200	2	234.2
Pan	10	1171.2		Pan	16	1873.9

Sample	CB-6(1)
Preston quarry, CB-6
Date12/28/02			Ar = 177.15 cm2
			As = 182.41 cm2
L (inches) =		4.6250
H (inches) =		1.5000
I (gradient) =		0.3243

Time (min)	Reservoir (cm)	Difference (cm)	Interval Flow (cm3)	Total flow (cm3)	Flow Rate (cm3/sec)	Hydraulic Conductivity (cm/sec)*
0.0	54.80	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.0000
10.0	49.60	5.20	921.18	921.18	1.54	0.0260
20.0	44.90	4.70	832.61	1753.79	1.39	0.0235
30.0	40.40	4.50	797.18	2550.96	1.33	0.0225
40.0	35.60	4.80	850.32	3401.28	1.42	0.0240

Total Flow (cm³)

4000.00

3500.00

3000.00

2500.00

2000.00

1500.00

1000.00

500.00

0.00

*-k cm/sec based on Total Flow Regression = 2.38E-02

314

APPENDIX D

Suction test result of the class 7 base material coming from the Black Rock Glen Rose, Preston, Sharp’s, and Granite Mountain quarries

336

SUCTION TEST - BLACK ROCK Start date: 4/11/2003								TIME
SAMPLE	dry wt.(g)	1HR weight(g)	% H20	2HR weight(g)	% H20	4HR weight(g)	% H20	24HR weight(g)	% H20	2 DAYS weight(g)	% H20	3 DAYS weight(g)	% H20	4 DAYS weight(g)

MB-6a
MB-6b
MB-8a
MB-8b
MB-10a
MB-10b
MB-12a
MB-12b
MB-14a
MB-14b
MB-16a
MB-16b
LB-6a
UB-10a

12652	12718	0.522	12736	0.664	12759	0.846	12857	1.616	12954	2.387	13019	2.901	13082
12597.00	12664.00	0.53	12681.00	0.67	12706.00	0.87	12816.50	1.74	12927.00	2.62	12998.00	3.18	13062.00
12545.00	12649.00	0.83	12671.00	1.00	12700.00	1.24	12815.50	2.16	12931.00	3.08	13003.00	3.65	13062.00
12630.00	12706.00	0.60	12726.00	0.76	12751.00	0.96	12852.50	1.76	12954.00	2.57	13023.00	3.11	13093.00
12551.00	12677.00	1.00	12698.00	1.17	12724.00	1.38	12837.00	2.28	12950.00	3.18	13026.00	3.78	13073.00
12572.00	12669.00	0.77	12685.00	0.90	12712.00	1.11	12826.50	2.02	12941.00	2.94	13010.00	3.48	13067.00
12550.00	12630.00	0.64	12653.00	0.82	12683.00	1.06	12794.00	1.94	12905.00	2.83	12976.00	3.39	13041.00
12523.00	12613.00	0.72	12637.00	0.91	12667.00	1.15	12775.50	2.02	12884.00	2.88	12953.00	3.43	13014.00
12642.00	12694.00	0.41	12711.00	0.55	12733.00	0.72	12814.50	1.36	12896.00	2.01	12950.00	2.44	13006.00
12767.00	12824.00	0.45	12838.00	0.56	12856.00	0.70	12928.00	1.26	13000.00	1.83	13049.00	2.21	13099.00
12552.00	12634.00	0.65	12657.00	0.84	12682.00	1.04	12789.00	1.89	12896.00	2.74	12963.00	3.27	13028.00
12613.00	12700.00	0.69	12715.00	0.81	12733.00	0.95	12816.50	1.61	12900.00	2.28	12952.00	2.69	13006.00
11396.00	11577.00	1.59	11578.00	1.60	11587.00	1.68	11645.50	2.19	11704.00	2.70	11750.00	3.11	11776.00
11990.00	12088.00	0.82	12103.00	0.94	12127.00	1.14	12229.50	2.00	12332.00	2.85	12401.00	3.43	12472.00

337

TIME
5 DAYS			6 DAYS		7 DAYS	8 DAYS			9 DAYS		10 DAYS
SAMPLE	weight(g)	% H20	weight(g)	% H20	weight(g)	% H20	weight(g)	% H20	weight(g)	% H20	weight(g)	% H20

MB-6a
MB-6b
MB-8a
MB-8b
MB-10a
MB-10b
MB-12a
MB-12b
MB-14a
MB-14b
MB-16a
MB-16b
LB-6a
UB-10a

13120.00	3.70	13148.00	3.92	13154.00	3.97	13161.00	4.02	13168.00	4.08	13172.00	4.11
13071.00	3.76	13083.00	3.86	13085.00	3.87	13089.00	3.91	13095.00	3.95	13098.00	3.98
13069.00	4.18	13078.00	4.25	13081.00	4.27	13083.00	4.29	13090.00	4.34	13093.00	4.37
13125.00	3.92	13146.00	4.09	13153.00	4.14	13155.00	4.16	13161.00	4.20	13165.00	4.24
13075.00	4.17	13084.00	4.25	13086.00	4.26	13087.00	4.27	13094.00	4.33	13096.00	4.34
13084.00	4.07	13096.00	4.17	13100.00	4.20	13103.00	4.22	13109.00	4.27	13112.00	4.30
13078.00	4.21	13099.00	4.37	13107.00	4.44	13112.00	4.48	13118.00	4.53	13121.00	4.55
13041.00	4.14	13053.00	4.23	13059.00	4.28	13065.00	4.33	13072.00	4.38	13075.00	4.41
13041.00	3.16	13085.00	3.50	13107.00	3.68	13121.00	3.79	13129.00	3.85	13133.00	3.88
13133.00	2.87	13176.00	3.20	13201.00	3.40	13216.00	3.52	13225.00	3.59	13229.00	3.62
13069.00	4.12	13109.00	4.44	13117.00	4.50	13129.00	4.60	13135.00	4.64	13139.00	4.68
13042.00	3.40	13085.00	3.74	13107.00	3.92	13121.00	4.03	13129.00	4.09	13133.00	4.12
11785.00	3.41	11789.00	3.45	11795.00	3.50	11797.00	3.52	11797.00	3.52	11798.00	3.53
12509.00	4.33	12535.00	4.55	12541.00	4.60	12543.00	4.61	12545.00	4.63	12547.00	4.65

338

Start date: 8/7/2003 SUCTION TEST - GLEN ROSE			TIME
1HR	2HR	4HR	24HR	2 DAYS	3 DAYS	4 DAYS

SAMPLE dry wt.(g) % H20 % H20 % H20 % H20 % H20 % H20 % H20

MB-6a
MB-6b
MB-8a
MB-8b
MB-10a
MB-10b
MB-12a
MB-12b
MB-14a
MB-14b
MB-16a
MB-16b
LB-6a
UB-10a

11554.00	11619.00	0.56	11638.00	0.73	11647.00	0.80	11723.00	1.46	11785.00	2.00	11829.00	2.38	11873.00	2.76
11189.00	11262.00	0.65	11272.00	0.74	11283.00	0.84	11355.00	1.48	11417.00	2.04	11458.50	2.41	11500.00	2.78
11083.00	11160.00	0.69	11175.00	0.83	11192.00	0.98	11275.00	1.73	11345.00	2.36	11381.00	2.69	11417.00	3.01
11187.00	11267.00	0.72	11280.00	0.83	11292.00	0.94	11363.00	1.57	11430.00	2.17	11474.00	2.57	11518.00	2.96
11097.00	11183.00	0.77	11204.00	0.96	11214.00	1.05	11291.00	1.75	11355.00	2.32	11401.50	2.74	11448.00	3.16
11202.00	11280.00	0.70	11302.00	0.89	11315.00	1.01	11390.00	1.68	11449.00	2.20	11491.00	2.58	11533.00	2.95
11444.00	11530.00	0.75	11548.00	0.91	11569.00	1.09	11653.00	1.83	11711.00	2.33	11750.00	2.67	11789.00	3.01
11371.00	11438.00	0.59	11452.00	0.71	11463.00	0.81	11541.00	1.50	11604.00	2.05	11645.00	2.41	11686.00	2.77
10865.00	10953.00	0.81	10984.00	1.10	11009.00	1.33	11118.00	2.33	11188.00	2.97	11201.00	3.09	11214.00	3.21
11249.00	11368.00	1.06	11384.00	1.20	11413.00	1.46	11499.00	2.22	11564.00	2.80	11604.50	3.16	11645.00	3.52
11023.00	11104.00	0.73	11124.00	0.92	11158.00	1.22	11264.00	2.19	11327.00	2.76	11352.00	2.98	11377.00	3.21
10663.00	10759.00	0.90	10775.00	1.05	10804.00	1.32	10891.00	2.14	10959.00	2.78	10989.00	3.06	11019.00	3.34
10372.00	10482.00	1.06	10511.00	1.34	10530.00	1.52	10611.00	2.30	10651.00	2.69	10658.00	2.76	10665.00	2.82
10859.00	10928.00	0.64	10947.00	0.81	10960.00	0.93	11020.00	1.48	11070.00	1.94	11105.50	2.27	11141.00	2.60

339

TIME

5 DAYS 6 DAYS 7 DAYS 8 DAYS 9 DAYS 10 DAYS SAMPLE % H20 % H20 % H20 % H20 % H20 % H20

MB-6a
MB-6b
MB-8a
MB-8b
MB-10a
MB-10b
MB-12a
MB-12b
MB-14a
MB-14b
MB-16a
MB-16b
LB-6a
UB-10a

11910.00	3.08	11905.00	3.04	11931.00	3.26	11928.00	3.24	11934.00	3.29	11938.80	3.33
11539.00	3.13	11529.00	3.04	11555.00	3.27	11558.00	3.30	11545.00	3.18	11534.60	3.09
11432.00	3.15	11429.00	3.12	11434.00	3.17	11434.00	3.17	11440.00	3.22	11444.80	3.26
11543.00	3.18	11546.00	3.21	11554.00	3.28	11556.00	3.30	11560.00	3.33	11563.20	3.36
11460.00	3.27	11464.00	3.31	11476.00	3.42	11475.00	3.41	11483.00	3.48	11489.40	3.54
11550.00	3.11	11554.00	3.14	11561.00	3.20	11562.00	3.21	11567.00	3.26	11571.00	3.29
11805.00	3.15	11812.00	3.22	11817.00	3.26	11820.00	3.29	11827.00	3.35	11832.60	3.40
11706.00	2.95	11713.00	3.01	11722.00	3.09	11726.00	3.12	11734.00	3.19	11740.40	3.25
11223.00	3.29	11230.00	3.36	11232.00	3.38	11235.00	3.41	11239.00	3.44	11242.20	3.47
11656.00	3.62	11662.00	3.67	11667.00	3.72	11671.00	3.75	11676.00	3.80	11680.00	3.83
11383.00	3.27	11391.00	3.34	11395.00	3.37	11395.00	3.37	11409.00	3.50	11420.20	3.60
11026.00	3.40	11030.00	3.44	11035.00	3.49	11039.00	3.53	11045.00	3.58	11049.80	3.63
10672.00	2.89	10675.00	2.92	10681.00	2.98	10681.00	2.98	10688.00	3.05	10693.60	3.10
11181.00	2.97	11211.00	3.24	11225.00	3.37	11233.00	3.44	11250.00	3.60	11263.60	3.73

340

Start date: 1/2/2004 SUCTION TEST - GMQ				TIME
	1HR	2HR	4HR	24HR	2 DAYS	3 DAYS	4 DAYS

SAMPLE dry wt.(g) % H20 % H20 % H20 % H20 % H20 % H20

MB-6a
MB-6b
MB-8a
MB-8b
MB-10a
MB-10b
MB-12a
MB-12b
MB-14a
MB-14b
MB-16a
MB-16b
LB-6a
UB-10a

11118.00	11310.00	1.73	11342.00	2.01	11376.00	2.32	11590.00	4.25	11696.00	5.20	11718.00	5.40	11733.00
11214.00	11392.00	1.59	11433.00	1.95	11479.00	2.36	11703.00	4.36	11792.00	5.15	11793.00	5.16	11807.00
11310.00	11509.00	1.76	11551.00	2.13	11602.00	2.58	11851.00	4.78	11932.00	5.50	11938.00	5.55	11954.00
11168.00	11360.00	1.72	11400.00	2.08	11446.00	2.49	11711.00	4.86	11805.00	5.70	11799.00	5.65	11816.00
11077.00	11261.00	1.66	11310.00	2.10	11363.00	2.58	11557.00	4.33	11702.00	5.64	11714.00	5.75	11727.00
11253.00	11447.00	1.72	11560.00	2.73	11596.00	3.05	11763.00	4.53	11905.00	5.79	11900.00	5.75	11912.00
11373.00	11558.00	1.63	11623.00	2.20	11670.00	2.61	11898.00	4.62	12018.00	5.67	12040.00	5.86	12051.00
11181.00	11365.00	1.65	11411.00	2.06	11454.00	2.44	11616.00	3.89	11766.00	5.23	11820.00	5.72	11829.00
11294.00	11506.00	1.88	11573.00	2.47	11605.00	2.75	11789.00	4.38	11941.00	5.73	11967.00	5.96	11979.00
11130.00	11312.00	1.64	11353.00	2.00	11402.00	2.44	11599.00	4.21	11770.00	5.75	11802.00	6.04	11809.00
10838.00	11043.00	1.89	11059.00	2.04	11104.00	2.45	11301.00	4.27	11480.00	5.92	11495.00	6.06	11504.00
11191.00	11407.00	1.93	11423.00	2.07	11475.00	2.54	11668.00	4.26	11827.00	5.68	11875.00	6.11	11881.00
10311.00	10540.00	2.22	10609.00	2.89	10655.00	3.34	10908.00	5.79	10924.00	5.95	10935.00	6.05	10935.00
11275.00	11451.00	1.56	11494.00	1.94	11535.00	2.31	11830.00	4.92	11948.00	5.97	11994.00	6.38	12002.00

341

TIME

5 DAYS 6 DAYS 7 DAYS 8 DAYS 9 DAYS 10 DAYS SAMPLE % H20 % H20 % H20 % H20 % H20 % H20

MB-6a
MB-6b
MB-8a
MB-8b
MB-10a
MB-10b
MB-12a
MB-12b
MB-14a
MB-14b
MB-16a
MB-16b
LB-6a
UB-10a

11740.00	5.59	11743.00	5.62	11745.00	5.64	11749.00	5.68	11754.00	5.72	11756.00	5.74
11814.00	5.35	11817.00	5.38	11819.00	5.40	11823.00	5.43	11827.00	5.47	11829.00	5.48
11962.00	5.76	11963.00	5.77	11965.00	5.79	11969.00	5.83	11974.00	5.87	11978.00	5.91
11825.00	5.88	11825.00	5.88	11824.00	5.87	11830.00	5.93	11835.00	5.97	11837.00	5.99
11735.00	5.94	11738.00	5.97	11740.00	5.99	11743.00	6.01	11745.00	6.03	11746.00	6.04
11922.00	5.95	11925.00	5.97	11927.00	5.99	11930.00	6.02	11932.00	6.03	11933.00	6.04
12061.00	6.05	12066.00	6.09	12069.00	6.12	12071.00	6.14	12075.00	6.17	12078.00	6.20
11839.00	5.88	11843.00	5.92	11845.00	5.94	11848.00	5.97	11851.00	5.99	11853.00	6.01
11989.00	6.15	11992.00	6.18	11994.00	6.20	11998.00	6.23	12000.00	6.25	12002.00	6.27
11822.00	6.22	11825.00	6.24	11828.00	6.27	11831.00	6.30	11834.00	6.33	11837.00	6.35
11512.00	6.22	11513.00	6.23	11515.00	6.25	11520.00	6.29	11523.00	6.32	11525.00	6.34
11892.00	6.26	11896.00	6.30	11900.00	6.34	11902.00	6.35	11906.00	6.39	11907.00	6.40
10935.00	6.05	10938.00	6.08	10940.00	6.10	10942.00	6.12	11944.00	15.84	10945.00	6.15
12008.00	6.50	12013.00	6.55	12020.00	6.61	12023.00	6.63	12023.00	6.63	12026.00	6.66

342

Start date: 12/7/2002 SUCTION TEST -PRESTON			TIME
1HR	2HR	4HR	24HR	2 DAYS	3 DAYS	4 DAYS

SAMPLE dry wt.(g) % H20 % H20 % H20 % H20 % H20 % H20 % H20

MB-6a
MB-6b
MB-8a
MB-8b
MB-10a
MB-10b
MB-12a
MB-12b
MB-14a
MB-14b
MB-16a
MB-16b
LB-6a
UB-10a

11731.00	11850.00	1.01	11881.00	1.28	11919.00	1.60	12095.00	3.10	12190.00	3.91	12296.00	4.82	12352.00	5.29
11627.00	11746.00	1.02	11772.00	1.25	11805.00	1.53	11945.00	2.74	12020.00	3.38	12104.00	4.10	12151.00	4.51
11101.00	11222.00	1.09	11250.00	1.34	11282.00	1.63	11443.00	3.08	11530.00	3.86	11628.00	4.75	11677.00	5.19
11574.00	11689.00	0.99	11715.00	1.22	11748.00	1.50	11907.00	2.88	11994.00	3.63	12090.00	4.46	12142.00	4.91
11572.00	11697.00	1.08	11725.00	1.32	11760.00	1.62	11925.00	3.05	12008.00	3.77	12103.00	4.59	12154.00	5.03
11541.00	11628.00	0.75	11660.00	1.03	11695.00	1.33	11894.00	3.06	11996.00	3.94	12107.00	4.90	12161.00	5.37
11493.00	11586.00	0.81	11613.00	1.04	11648.00	1.35	11822.00	2.86	11909.00	3.62	12007.00	4.47	12062.00	4.95
11507.00	11620.00	0.98	11653.00	1.27	11694.00	1.63	11901.00	3.42	12006.00	4.34	12117.00	5.30	12163.00	5.70
11627.00	11724.00	0.83	11752.00	1.08	11787.00	1.38	11973.00	2.98	12071.00	3.82	12176.00	4.72	12236.00	5.24
11638.00	11730.00	0.79	11761.00	1.06	11799.00	1.38	12006.00	3.16	12109.00	4.05	12221.00	5.01	12278.00	5.50
11546.00	11636.00	0.78	11664.00	1.02	11699.00	1.33	11880.00	2.89	11974.00	3.71	12078.00	4.61	12136.00	5.11
11565.00	11665.00	0.86	11699.00	1.16	11740.00	1.51	11950.00	3.33	12056.00	4.25	12166.00	5.20	12222.00	5.68
11506.00	11655.00	1.29	11674.00	1.46	11705.00	1.73	11839.00	2.89	11904.00	3.46	11977.00	4.09	12012.00	4.40
11532.00	11647.00	1.00	11681.00	1.29	11722.00	1.65	11933.00	3.48	12045.00	4.45	12166.00	5.50	12226.00	6.02

343

TIME

5 DAYS 6 DAYS 7 DAYS 8 DAYS 9 DAYS 10 DAYS SAMPLE % H20 % H20 % H20 % H20 % H20 % H20

MB-6a
MB-6b
MB-8a
MB-8b
MB-10a
MB-10b
MB-12a
MB-12b
MB-14a
MB-14b
MB-16a
MB-16b
LB-6a
UB-10a

12396.00	5.67	12410.00	5.79	12420.00	5.87	12427.00	5.93	12431.00	5.97	12435.00	6.00
12202.00	4.95	12225.00	5.14	12244.00	5.31	12255.00	5.40	12263.00	5.47	12267.00	5.50
11714.00	5.52	11726.00	5.63	11734.00	5.70	11741.00	5.77	11745.00	5.80	11748.00	5.83
12190.00	5.32	12208.00	5.48	12221.00	5.59	12229.00	5.66	12234.00	5.70	12237.00	5.73
12205.00	5.47	12222.00	5.62	12234.00	5.72	12240.00	5.77	12244.00	5.81	12247.00	5.83
12195.00	5.67	12204.00	5.74	12212.00	5.81	12217.00	5.86	12222.00	5.90	12224.00	5.92
12119.00	5.45	12138.00	5.61	12149.00	5.71	12154.00	5.75	12157.00	5.78	12159.00	5.79
12185.00	5.89	12193.00	5.96	12199.00	6.01	12202.00	6.04	12208.00	6.09	12209.00	6.10
12291.00	5.71	12307.00	5.85	12317.00	5.93	12322.00	5.98	12328.00	6.03	12330.00	6.05
12314.00	5.81	12322.00	5.88	12329.00	5.94	12333.00	5.97	12338.00	6.01	12340.00	6.03
12196.00	5.63	12218.00	5.82	12231.00	5.93	12237.00	5.98	12242.00	6.03	12242.00	6.03
12259.00	6.00	12265.00	6.05	12273.00	6.12	12278.00	6.17	12282.00	6.20	12284.00	6.22
12048.00	4.71	12061.00	4.82	12070.00	4.90	12076.00	4.95	12082.00	5.01	12083.00	5.01
12257.00	6.29	12262.00	6.33	12269.00	6.39	12273.00	6.43	12277.00	6.46	12279.00	6.48

344

SUCTION TEST - SHARP'S Start date: 5/11/02			TIME
1HR	2HR	4HR	24HR	2 DAYS	3 DAYS	4 DAYS

SAMPLE dry wt.(g) % H20 % H20 % H20 % H20 % H20 % H20 % H20

MB-6a
MB-6b
MB-8a
MB-8b
MB-10a
MB-10b
MB-12a
MB-12b
MB-14a
MB-14b
MB-16a
MB-16b
LB-6a
UB-10a

12711.00	12738.00	0.21	12743.00	0.25	12747.00	0.28	12777.00	0.52	12801.00	0.71	12820.00	0.86	12836.00	0.98
12788.00	12814.00	0.20	12818.00	0.23	12822.00	0.27	12845.00	0.45	12866.00	0.61	12880.00	0.72	12890.00	0.80
12764.00	12797.00	0.26	12800.00	0.28	12802.00	0.30	12829.00	0.51	12851.00	0.68	12869.00	0.82	12884.00	0.94
12886.00	12912.00	0.20	12915.00	0.23	12918.00	0.25	12941.00	0.43	12964.00	0.61	12978.00	0.71	12989.00	0.80
12804.00	12824.00	0.16	12828.00	0.19	12836.00	0.25	12878.00	0.58	12913.00	0.85	12937.00	1.04	12954.00	1.17
12656.00	12681.00	0.20	12687.00	0.24	12694.00	0.30	12739.00	0.66	12777.00	0.96	12806.00	1.19	12826.00	1.34
12898.00	12935.00	0.29	12942.00	0.34	12950.00	0.40	13004.00	0.82	13045.00	1.14	13076.00	1.38	13096.00	1.54
12748.00	12822.00	0.58	12828.00	0.63	12836.00	0.69	12893.00	1.14	12940.00	1.51	12972.00	1.76	12989.00	1.89
12675.00	12721.00	0.36	12726.00	0.40	12734.00	0.47	12783.00	0.85	12822.00	1.16	12848.00	1.36	12866.00	1.51
12762.00	12795.00	0.26	12801.00	0.31	12808.00	0.36	12856.00	0.74	12893.00	1.03	12922.00	1.25	12941.00	1.40
12795.00	12846.00	0.40	12853.00	0.45	12862.00	0.52	12917.00	0.95	12959.00	1.28	12991.00	1.53	13010.00	1.68
12765.00	12809.00	0.34	12818.00	0.42	12828.00	0.49	12887.00	0.96	12937.00	1.35	12971.00	1.61	12992.00	1.78
12372.00	12428.00	0.45	12428.00	0.45	12434.00	0.50	12494.00	0.99	12534.00	1.31	12563.00	1.54	12581.00	1.69
12843.00	12876.00	0.26	12885.00	0.33	12895.00	0.40	12949.00	0.83	12991.00	1.15	13020.00	1.38	13037.00	1.51

345

TIME

5 DAYS 6 DAYS 7 DAYS 8 DAYS 9 DAYS 10 DAYS
SAMPLE %H20 % H20 % H20 % H20 % H20 %H20

MB-6a
MB-6b
MB-8a
MB-8b
MB-10a
MB-10b
MB-12a
MB-12b
MB-14a
MB-14b
MB-16a
MB-16b
LB-6a
UB-10a

12849.00	1.09	12862.00	1.19	12871.00	1.26	12874.00	1.28	12879.00	1.32	12883.00	1.35
12898.00	0.86	12908.00	0.94	12913.00	0.98	12915.00	0.99	12919.00	1.02	12922.00	1.05
12896.00	1.03	12908.00	1.13	12915.00	1.18	12919.00	1.21	12925.00	1.26	12929.00	1.29
12996.00	0.85	13006.00	0.93	13011.00	0.97	13013.00	0.99	13018.00	1.02	13021.00	1.05
12965.00	1.26	12977.00	1.35	12982.00	1.39	12985.00	1.41	12991.00	1.46	12996.00	1.50
12838.00	1.44	12849.00	1.52	12855.00	1.57	12857.00	1.59	12860.00	1.61	12864.00	1.64
13109.00	1.64	13121.00	1.73	13126.00	1.77	13128.00	1.78	13133.00	1.82	13136.00	1.85
12998.00	1.96	13008.00	2.04	13011.00	2.06	13013.00	2.08	13016.00	2.10	13018.00	2.12
12875.00	1.58	12881.00	1.63	12884.00	1.65	12886.00	1.66	12889.00	1.69	12893.00	1.72
12953.00	1.50	12965.00	1.59	12970.00	1.63	12972.00	1.65	12977.00	1.68	12982.00	1.72
13021.00	1.77	13032.00	1.85	13037.00	1.89	13040.00	1.91	13045.00	1.95	13050.00	1.99
13003.00	1.86	13014.00	1.95	13018.00	1.98	13021.00	2.01	13025.00	2.04	13029.00	2.07
12588.00	1.75	12600.00	1.84	12603.00	1.87	12604.00	1.88	12606.00	1.89	12608.00	1.91
13052.00	1.63	13064.00	1.72	13070.00	1.77	13074.00	1.80	13079.00	1.84	13084.00	1.88

346

Appendix E
Cyclic and Staged Triaxial Test Stress vs. Strain Plots

347

Deviator Stress (psi)Deviator Stress (psi)

14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.500% 0.600% 0.700%

Strain

Figure E.1: Sharps quarry cyclic triaxial- L.B. 6% B

180

160

140

120

100 Stage 2 Stage 3 Cyclic 80

60

40

20

0
0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0%

Strain

Deviator Stress (psi)Deviator Stress (psi)

14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

1.0000% 1.1000% 1.2000% 1.3000%

Strain

Figure E.3: Sharps quarry cyclic triaxial- L.B. 6% 2B

180

160

140

120

100 Stage 2 Stage 3 Cyclic 80

60

40

20

0
0.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0% 8.0% 10.0% 12.0%

Strain

Deviator Stress (psi)Deviator Stress (psi)

12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

0
0.04%	0.05%		0.06%	0.07%	0.08%	0.09%	0.10%	0.11%	0.12%	0.13%	0.14%	0.15%	0.16%	0.17%
							Strain
		Figure E.			5: Sha	rps qu	arry cyclic t		riaxial	- L.B.	6% C
160

140

120

100

Stage 2 80 Stage 3 Cyclic

60

40

20

0
0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0% 10.0%

Strain

Deviator Stress (psi)Deviator Stress (psi)

10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

0
0.02% 0.03% 0.04% 0.05% 0.06% 0.07% 0.08% 0.09% 0.10% 0.11% 0.12% 0.13% 0.14%

Strain

Figure E.7: Sharps quarry cyclic triaxial- M.B. 6% A

160

140

120

100

Stage 2 80 Stage 3 Cyclic

60

40

20

0
0.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0% 8.0% 10.0% 12.0%

Strain

Deviator Stress (psi)Deviator Stress (psi)

12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

0 0.05 %	0.06 %	0.07 %	0.08 %	0.09 %	0.10 %	0.11 %	0.12 %	0.13 %	0.14 %	0.15 % Strain	0.16 %	0.17 %	0.18 %	0.19 %	0.20 %	0.21 %	0.22 %	0.23 %	0.24 %	0.25 %
			Fi	gure	E.9	: Sh	arps	qua	rry	cycl	ic tr	iaxi	al-	M.B		. 6% B
160

140

120

100

Stage 2 80 Stage 3 Cyclic

60

40

20

0
0.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0% 8.0% 10.0% 12.0%

Strain

352

Deviator Stress (psi)Deviator Stress (psi)

14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.3300% 0.3400% 0.3500% 0.3600% 0.3700% 0.3800% 0.3900% 0.4000% 0.4100% 0.4200% 0.4300% 0.4400% 0.4500% 0.4600% 0.4700%

Strain

Figure E.11: Sharps quarry cyclic triaxial- M.B. 8% A

200

180

160

140

120
Stage 2
100	Stage 3
	Cyclic
80

60

40

20

0
0.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0% 8.0% 10.0% 12.0%

Strain

Deviator Stress (psi)Deviator Stress (psi)

16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.0200% 0.0300% 0.0400% 0.0500% 0.0600% 0.0700% 0.0800% 0.0900% 0.1000% 0.1100% 0.1200% 0.1300% 0.1400% 0.1500% 0.1600%

Strain

Figure E.13: Sharps quarry cyclic triaxial- M.B. 8% B

180

160

140

120

100	Stage 2
	Stage 3
80	Cyclic

60

40

20

0
0.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0% 8.0% 10.0% 12.0%

Strain

Deviator Stress (psi) Deviator Stress (psi)

9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.10 0.11 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.15 0.16 0.17 0.18 0.19 0.20 0.21 0.22 0.23 0.24 0.25 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

Strain

Figure E.15: Sharps quarry cyclic triaxial- M.B. 8% B2

180

160

140

120

100 Stage 2 Stage 3 Cyclic 80

60

40

20

0
0.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0 % 8.0% 10.0% 12.0%

Strain

355

Deviator Stress (psi)Deviator Stress (psi)

16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.0400% 0.0600% 0.0800% 0.1000% 0.1200% 0.1400% 0.1600% 0.1800% 0.2000% 0.2200%

Strain

Figure E.17: Sharps quarry cyclic triaxial- M.B. 10% A

140

130

120

110

100

90

80 Stage 2 70 Stage 3 Cyclic60

50

40

30

20

10

0
0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0% 10.0% 11.0%

Strain

Deviator Stress (psi)Deviator Stress (psi)

16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.0220% 0.0420% 0.0620% 0.0820% 0.1020% 0.1220% 0.1420% 0.1620% 0.1820%

Strain

Figure E.19: Sharps quarry cyclic triaxial- M.B. 10% B

150

140

130

120

110

100

90

80 Stage 2 Stage 3 70 Cyclic

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0% 10.0% 11.0%

Strain

Deviator Stress (psi)Deviator Stress (psi)

12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.0200 0.0300 0.0400 0.0500 0.0600 0.0700 0.0800 0.0900 0.1000 0.1100 0.1200 0.1300 0.1400 0.1500 0.1600 0.1700 0.1800 0.1900 0.2000

% %	% %	%	%	%	%	%	% Strain	%	%	%	%	%	% % % %
	Figur	e E.	21: S	harp	s qu	arry	cycli	c tri	axia	l- M	.B. 1		2% A
160

140

120

100

Stage 2 80 Stage 3 Cyclic

60

40

20

0
0.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0 % 8.0% 10.0% 12.0%

Strain

358

Deviator Stress (psi)Deviator Stress (psi)

14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.10 0.11 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.15 0.16 0.17 0.18 0.19 0.20 0.21 0.22 0.23 0.24 0.25 0.26 0.27 0.28 0.29 0.30 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

Strain

Figure E.23: Sharps quarry cyclic triaxial- M.B. 12% B

140

120

100

80 Stage 2 Stage 3 Cyclic

60

40

0.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0% 8.0% 10.0% 12.0%

Strain

Deviator Stress (psi)Deviator Stress (psi)

14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.0300% 0.0400% 0.0500% 0.0600% 0.0700% 0.0800% 0.0900% 0.1000% 0.1100% 0.1200% 0.1300% 0.1400% 0.1500% 0.1600% 0.1700%

Strain

Figure E.25: Sharps quarry cyclic triaxial- M.B. 14% A

140

120

100

80 Stage 2 Stage 3 Cyclic

60

40

20

0
0.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0% 8.0% 10.0% 12.0%

Strain

Deviator Stress (psi)Deviator Stress (psi)

14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.09% 0.10% 0.11% 0.12% 0.13% 0.14% 0.15% 0.16% 0.17% 0.18% 0.19% 0.20% 0.21% 0.22% 0.23% 0.24% 0.25% 0.26% 0.27%

Strain

Figure E.27: Sharps quarry cyclic triaxial- M.B. 14% B

160

140

120

100

80	Stage 2 Stage 3 Cyclic
60

40

20

0
0.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0 % 8.0% 10.0% 12.0%

Strain

361

Deviator Stress (psi)Deviator Stress (psi)

14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.0400% 0.0500% 0.0600% 0.0700% 0.0800% 0.0900% 0.1000% 0.1100% 0.1200% 0.1300% 0.1400% 0.1500% 0.1600%

Strain

Figure E.29: Sharps quarry cyclic triaxial- M.B. 16% A

140

120

100

80 Stage 2 Stage 3 Cyclic

60

40

20

0
0.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0% 8.0% 10.0% 12.0%

Strain

Deviator Stress (psi)Deviator Stress (psi)

14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.07% 0.08% 0.09% 0.10% 0.11% 0.12% 0.13% 0.14% 0.15% 0.16% 0.17% 0.18% 0.19% 0.20% 0.21% 0.22% 0.23%

Strain

Figure E.31: Sharps quarry cyclic triaxial- M.B. 16% B

140

120

100

80 Stage 2 Stage 3 Cyclic

60

40

20

0
0.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0% 8.0% 10.0% 12.0%

Strain

0.0000% 0.1000% 0.2000% 0.3000% 0.4000% 0.5000%

Strain

Stage 2 Stage 3 Cyclic Stage 1

0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0% 30.0%

Strain

Deviator Stress (psi)Deviator Stress (psi)

12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.00% 0.05% 0.10% 0.15% 0.20% 0.25% 0.30%

Strain

Figure E.35: Sharps quarry cyclic triaxial- U.B. 10% C

140

120

100

80 Stage 2 Stage 3 Cyclic

60

40

20

0
0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0%

Strain

Deviator Stress (psi)Deviator Stress (psi)

12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20% 0.22% 0.24% 0.26% 0.28% 0.30%

Strain

Figure E.37: Preston quarry cyclic triaxial- L.B. 6% A

160

140

120

100

80	Stage 2 Stage 3 Cyclic
60

40

20

0
0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0% 10.0%

Strain

12 11 10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20% 0.22% 0.24%

Strain

Figure E.39: Preston quarry cyclic triaxial- L.B. 6% B

160

140

120

100

Stage 2 80 Stage 3 Cyclic

60

40

20

0

0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0%

Strain

367

Deviator Stress (psi)Deviator Stress (psi) Deviator Stress (psi)Deviator Stress (psi)

12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.0000%

160

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

0 0.0%

0.0200% 0.0400% 0.0600% 0.0800% 0.1000% 0.1200% 0.1400% 0.1600% 0.1800% 0.2000%

Strain

Figure E.41: Preston quarry cyclic triaxial- M.B. 6% A

Stage 2 Stage 3 Cyclic

1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0%

Strain

Deviator Stress (psi)Deviator Stress (psi)

12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20% 0.22% 0.24% 0.26% 0.28% 0.30%

Strain

Figure E.43: Preston quarry cyclic triaxial- M.B. 6% B

140

120

100

80 Stage 2 Stage 3 Cyclic

60

40

20

0
0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0%

Strain

Deviator Stress (psi)Deviator Stress (psi)

12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20% 0.22% 0.24% 0.26% 0.28% 0.30% 0.32% 0.34%

Strain

Figure E.45: Preston quarry cyclic triaxial- M.B. 8% A

160

140

120

100

80	Stage 2 Stage 3 Cyclic
60

40

20

0
0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0 % 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0%

Strain

370

Deviator Stress (psi)Deviator Stress (psi)

12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20% 0.22% 0.24%

Strain

Figure E.47: Preston quarry cyclic triaxial- M.B. 8% B

160

140

120

100

Stage 2 80 Stage 3 Cyclic

60

40

20

0
0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0%

Strain

Deviator Stress (psi)Deviator Stress (psi)

12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20% 0.22% 0.24% 0.26% 0.28% 0.30% 0.32% 0.34%

Strain

Figure E.49: Preston quarry cyclic triaxial- M.B. 10% A

160

140

120

100

80	Stage 2 Stage 3 Cyclic
60

40

20

0
0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0%

Strain

Deviator Stress (psi)Deviator Stress (psi)

12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20% 0.22% 0.24% 0.26% 0.28% 0.30%

Strain

Figure E.51: Preston quarry cyclic triaxial- M.B. 10% B

160

140

120

100

80	Stage 2 Stage 3 Cyclic
60

40

20

0
0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0%

Strain

373

12

11

10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20% 0.22% 0.24% 0.26% 0.28% 0.30%

Strain

Figure E.53: Preston quarry cyclic triaxial- M.B. 12% A

140

120

100

80

Stage 2

Stage 3

Cyclic

60

40

20

0

0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0%

Strain

374

Deviator Stress (psi) Deviator Stress (psi) Deviator Stress (psi)Deviator Stress (psi)

12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

0 0.00 %	0.02 %	0.04 %	0.06 %	0.08 %	0.10 %	0.12 %	0.14 %	0.16 %	0.18 %	0.20 % Strain	0.22 %	0.24 %	0.26 %	0.28 %	0.30 %	0.32 %	0	.34 %	0.36 %	0.38 %	0.40 %
			Figu	re E	.55	: Pre	ston	qu	arry	cycl	ic t	riaxi	al-	M.B	. 12		% B
160

140

120

100

Stage 2 80 Stage 3 Cyclic

60

40

20

0
0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0%

Strain

375

Deviator Stress (psi) Deviator Stress (psi)

12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

0 0.00 %	0.02 %	0.04 %	0.06 %	0.08 %	0.10 %	0.12 %	0.14 %	0.16 %	0.18 %	0.20 % Strain	0.22 %	0.24 %	0.26 %	0.28 %	0.30 %	0.32 %	0.34 %	0.36 %	0.38 %	0.40 %
			Figu	re E	.57	: Pre	ston	qu	arry	cycl	ic t	riaxi	al-	M.B		. 14% A
120

100

80

Stage 2 60 Stage 3 Cyclic

40

20

0
0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0 % 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0%

Strai n

376

12 11 10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.20 0.22 0.24 0.26 0.28 0.30 0.32 0.34 0.36 0.38 0.40 0.42 0.44
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

Strain

Figure E.59: Preston quarry cyclic triaxial- M.B. 14% B

160

140

120

100

Stage 2 80 Stage 3 Cyclic

60

40

20

0

0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0%

Strain

377

Deviator Stress (psi) Deviator Stress (psi) Deviator Stress (psi)Deviator Stress (psi)

12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20% 0.22% 0.24% 0.26% 0.28% 0.30% 0.32% 0.34%

Strain

Figure E.61: Preston quarry cyclic triaxial- M.B. 16% A

160

140

120

100

80	Stage 3 Cyclic Stage 2
60

40

20

0
0.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0% 8.0% 10.0% 12.0%

Strain

Deviator Stress (psi)Deviator Stress (psi)

12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20% 0.22% 0.24%

Strain

Figure E.63: Preston quarry cyclic triaxial- M.B. 16% B

120

100

80

Stage 2 60 Stage 3 Cyclic

40

20

0
0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8. 0%

Strain

379

Deviator Stress (psi) Deviator Stress (psi)

12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.20 0.22 0.24 0.26 0.28 0.30 0.32 0.34 0.36 0.38 0.40 0.42 0.44 0.46 0.48 0.50 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

Strain

Figure E.65: Preston quarry cyclic triaxial- U.B. 10% A

160

140

120

100

80	Stage 2 Stage 3 Cyclic
60

40

20

0
0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0%

Strain

Deviator Stress (psi)Deviator Stress (psi)

12 11 10 9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20% 0.22% 0.24% 0.26% 0.28% 0.30% 0.32% 0.34% 0.36% 0.38% 0.40% 0.42% 0.44%

Strain

Figure E.67: Preston quarry cyclic triaxial- U.B. 10% B

160

140

120

100

80	Stage 2 Stage 3 Cyclic
60

40

20

0
0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0%

Strain

12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14%

Strain

Figure E.69: Black Rock quarry cyclic triaxial- L.B. 6% A.

Deviator Stress (psi)

160

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

Deviator Stress (psi)

Stage 2 Stage 3 Cyclic

0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0%

Strain

382

Deviator Stress (psi)Deviator Stress (psi)

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16%

Strain

Figure E.71: Black Rock quarry cyclic triaxial- L.B. 6% B.

160

140

120

100

Stage 2 80 Stage 3 Cyclic

60

40

20

0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0%

Strain

383

Deviator Stress (psi)Deviator Stress (psi)

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20%

Strain

Figure E.73: Black Rock quarry cyclic triaxial- M.B. 6% A.

160

140

120

100

Stage 2 80 Stage 3 Cyclic

60

40

0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0%

Strain

Deviator Stress (psi) Deviator Stress (psi)

12
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0 0.00% 140	0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20% 0.22% Strain Figure E.75: Black Rock quarry cyclic triaxial- M.B. 6% B.								0.24%
120
100
60 80	Stage 2 Stage 3 Cyclic
40
20
0 0.0%	1.0%	2.0%	3.0%	Strain	4.0%	5.0%	6.0%	7.0%

Deviator Stress (psi) Deviator Stress (psi)

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20%

Strain

Figure E.77: Black Rock quarry cyclic triaxial- M.B. 8% A.

160

140

120

100

Stage 2 80 Stage 3 Cyclic

60

40

0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0%

Strain

Deviator Stress (psi)Deviator Stress (psi)

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20% 0.22% 0.24% 0.26% 0.28% 0.30%

Strain

Figure E.79: Black Rock quarry cyclic triaxial- M.B. 8% B.

160

140

120

100

Stage 2 80 Stage 3 Cyclic

60

40

0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0%

Strain

Deviator Stress (psi)Deviator Stress (psi)

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20%

Strain

Figure E.81: Black Rock quarry cyclic triaxial- M.B. 10% A.

160

140

120

100

Stage 2 80 Stage 3 Cyclic

60

40

0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0% 10.0%

Strain

Deviator Stress (psi) Deviator Stress (psi)

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20%

Strain

Figure E.83: Black Rock quarry cyclic triaxial- M.B. 10% B.

160

140

120

100

Stage 2 80 Stage 3 Cyclic

60

40

0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0%

Strain

Deviator Stress (psi) Deviator Stress (psi)

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.37% 0.39% 0.41% 0.43% 0.45% 0.47% 0.49% 0.51% 0.53% 0.55% 0.57% 0.59% 0.61% 0.63% 0.65% 0.67%

Strain

Figure E.85: Black Rock quarry cyclic triaxial- M.B. 12% A.

160

140

120

100

Stage 2 80 Stage 3 Cyclic

60

40

0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0%

Strain

Deviator Stress (psi)Deviator Stress (psi)

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.18% 0.20% 0.22% 0.24% 0.26% 0.28% 0.30% 0.32% 0.34% 0.36% 0.38% 0.40%

Strain

Figure E.87: Black Rock quarry cyclic triaxial- M.B. 12% B.

160

140

120

100

Stage 2 80 Stage 3 Cyclic

60

40

0.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0% 8.0% 10.0% 12.0%

Strain

Deviator Stress (psi)Deviator Stress (psi)

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20% 0.22% 0.24% 0.26% 0.28% 0.30%

Strain

Figure E.89: Black Rock quarry cyclic triaxial- M.B. 14% A.

160

140

120

100

Stage 2 80 Stage 3 Cyclic

60

40

0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0%

Strain

Deviator Stress (psi) Deviator Stress (psi)

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.05% 0.07% 0.09% 0.11% 0.13% 0.15% 0.17% 0.19% 0.21%

Strain

Figure E.91: Black Rock quarry cyclic triaxial- M.B. 14% B.

160

140

120

100

Stage 2 80 Stage 3 Cyclic

60

40

0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0%

Strain

Deviator Stress (psi)Deviator Stress (psi)

12 10

9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20% 0.22% 0.24% 0.26% 0.28% 0.30%

Strain

Figure E.93: Black Rock quarry cyclic triaxial- M.B. 16% A.

160

140

120

100

80	Stage 2 Stage 3 Cyclic
60

40

20

0
0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0%

Strain

Deviator Stress (psi)Deviator Stress (psi)

12 10

9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20% 0.22% 0.24% 0.26% 0.28% 0.30%

Strain

Figure E.95: Black Rock quarry cyclic triaxial- M.B. 16% B.

160

140

120

100

80	Stage 2 Stage 3 Cyclic
60

40

20

0
0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0% 10.0%

Strain

Deviator Stress (psi) Deviator Stress (psi)

12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.25% 0.27% 0.29% 0.31% 0.33% 0.35% 0.37% 0.39% 0.41% 0.43% 0.45% 0.47% 0.49% 0.51% 0.53% 0.55% 0.57% 0.59%

Strain

Figure E.97: Black Rock quarry cyclic triaxial- U.B. 10% A.

160

140

120

100

80	Stage 2 Stage 3 Cyclic
60

40

20

0
0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0%

Strai n

Deviator Stress (psi)

12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.0000% 0.1000% 0.2000% 0.3000% 0.4000% 0.5000% 0.6000%

Strain

Figure E.99: Black Rock quarry cyclic triaxial- U.B. 10% B.

Deviator Stress (psi)

160

140

120

100

Stage 2 80 Stage 3 Cyclic

60

40

0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0%

Strai n

397

Deviator Stress (psi) Deviator Stress (psi)

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.0000% 0.1000% 0.2000% 0.3000% 0.4000%

Strain

FigureE.101:BlackRockquarrycyclictriaxial-U.B.10%C.

160

140

120

100

Stage 2 80 Stage 3 Cyclic

60

40

0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0%

Strai n

Deviator Stress (psi) Deviator Stress (psi)

12 10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14%

Strain

Figure E.103: Glen Rose quarry cyclic triaxial- L.B. 6% A.

140

120

100

80 Stage 2

Stage 3

Cyclic

60

40

20

0
0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0% 10.0%

Strai n

Deviator Stress (psi) Deviator Stress (psi)

12 10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20%

Strain

Figure E.105: Glen Rose quarry cyclic triaxial- L.B. 6% B.

140

120

100

80
Stage 2
Stage 3
Cyclic
60

40

20

0
0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0%

Strai n

Deviator Stress (psi) Deviator Stress (psi)

12 10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20% 0.22% 0.24% 0.26% 0.28% 0.30%

Strain

Figure E.107: Glen Rose quarry cyclic triaxial- M.B. 6% A.

140

120

100

80
Stage 2
Stage 3
Cyclic
60

40

20

0
0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0%

Strai n

Deviator Stress (psi) Deviator Stress (psi)

12 10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20% 0.22% 0.24% 0.26% 0.28% 0.30%

Strain

Figure E.109: Glen Rose quarry cyclic triaxial- M.B. 6% B.

140

120

100

80
Stage 2
Stage 3
Cyclic
60

40

20

0
0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0% 10.0%

Strai n

Deviator Stress (psi) Deviator Stress (psi)

12 10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20% 0.22% 0.24% 0.26% 0.28% 0.30%

Strain

Figure E.111: Glen Rose quarry cyclic triaxial- M.B. 8% A.

120

100

80

Stage 2
60 Stage 3
Cyclic

40

20

0
0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0%

Strai n

12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20%

Strain

Figure E.113: Glen Rose quarry cyclic triaxial- M.B. 8% B.

Deviator Stress (psi)

120

100

80

Stage 2 60 Stage 3 Cyclic

40

20

Deviator Stress (psi)

0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0%

Strai n

404

Deviator Stress (psi) Deviator Stress (psi)

12 10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20% 0.22% 0.24% 0.26% 0.28% 0.30%

Strain

Figure E.115: Glen Rose quarry cyclic triaxial- M.B. 10% A.

140

120

100

80 Stage 2

Stage 3

Cyclic

60

40

20

0
0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0% 10.0%

Strai n

Deviator Stress (psi) Deviator Stress (psi)

12 10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20% 0.22% 0.24% 0.26% 0.28% 0.30%

Strain

Figure E.117: Glen Rose quarry cyclic triaxial- M.B. 10% B.

120

100

80

Stage 2 60 Stage 3 Cyclic

40

20

0
0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0%

Strai n

Deviator Stress (psi) Deviator Stress (psi)

12 10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20% 0.22% 0.24% 0.26% 0.28% 0.30%

Strain

Figure E.119: Glen Rose quarry cyclic triaxial- M.B. 12% A.

120

100

80

Stage 2
60 Stage 3
Cyclic

40

20

0
0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0%

Strai n

Deviator Stress (psi) Deviator Stress (psi)

12 10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20% 0.22% 0.24% 0.26% 0.28% 0.30%

Strain

Figure E.121: Glen Rose quarry cyclic triaxial- M.B. 12% B.

140

120

100

80
Stage 2
Stage 3
Cyclic
60

40

20

0
0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0%

Strai n

12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20% 0.22% 0.24%

Strain

Figure E.123: Glen Rose quarry cyclic triaxial- M.B. 14% A.

Deviator Stress (psi)

120

100

80

Stage 2 60 Stage 3 Cyclic

40

20

Deviator Stress (psi)

0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0%

Strai n

409

Deviator Stress (psi)

12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20% 0.22% 0.24% 0.26% 0.28% 0.30%

Strain

Figure E.125: Glen Rose quarry cyclic triaxial- M.B. 14% B.

Deviator Stress (psi)

140

120

100

80 Stage 2 Stage 3 Cyclic

60

40

0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0%

Strai n

410

Deviator Stress (psi)

6

5

4

3

2

1

0
0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20% 0.22% 0.24%

Strain

Figure E.127: Glen Rose quarry cyclic triaxial- M.B. 16% A.

120

100

80

Stage 2 60 Stage 3 Cyclic

40

20

Deviator Stress (psi)

0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0%

Strai n

411

Deviator Stress (psi)

12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20%

Strain

Figure E.129: Glen Rose quarry cyclic triaxial- M.B. 16% B.

Deviator Stress (psi)

140

120

100

80 Stage 2 Stage 3 Cyclic

60

40

0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0% 10.0%

Strai n

412

12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.00% 0.10% 0.20% 0.30% 0.40% 0.50% 0.60% 0.70%

Strain

Figure E.131 Glen Rose quarry cyclic triaxial- U.B. 10% A.

Deviator Stress (psi)

120

100

80

Stage 2 60 Stage 3 Cyclic

40

20

Deviator Stress (psi)

0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0% 10.0%

Strain

413

12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.00% 0.10% 0.20%

Strain

Figure E.133: Glen Rose quarry cyclic triaxial- U.B. 10% B.

Deviator Stress (psi)

120

100

80

Stage 2 60 Stage 3 Cyclic

40

20

Deviator Stress (psi)

0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0%

Strain

414

Deviator Stress (psi) Deviator Stress (psi)

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20%

Strain

Fig ureE.135:GraniteMountainquarrycyclictriaxial-L.B.6%A.

160

140

120

100

Stage 2 80 Stage 3 Cyclic

60

40

0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0% 10.0%

Strai n

Deviator Stress (psi) Deviator Stress (psi)

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16%

Strain

Fig ureE.137:GraniteMountainquarrycyclictriaxial-L.B.6%B.

160

140

120

100

Stage 2 80 Stage 3 Cyclic

60

40

0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0%

Strai n

Deviator Stress (psi) Deviator Stress (psi)

12 10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20% 0.22% 0.24% 0.26% 0.28% 0.30%

Strain

Fig ureE.139:GraniteMountainquarrycyclictriaxial-M.B.6%A.

140

120

100

80
Stage 2
Stage 3
Cyclic
60

40

20

0
0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0%

Strai n

Deviator Stress (psi) Deviator Stress (psi)

12 10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20% 0.22% 0.24% 0.26% 0.28% 0.30%

Strain

Fig ureE.141:GraniteMountainquarrycyclictriaxial-M.B.6%B.

140

120

100

80
Stage 2
Stage 3
Cyclic
60

40

20

0
0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0% 10.0%

Strai n

Deviator Stress (psi) Deviator Stress (psi)

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20% 0.22% 0.24% 0.26% 0.28% 0.30%

Strain

Fig ureE.143:GraniteMountainquarrycyclictriaxial-M.B.8%A.

160

140

120

100

Stage 2 80 Stage 3 Cyclic

60

40

0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0%

Strai n

Deviator Stress (psi) Deviator Stress (psi)

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20% 0.22% 0.24% 0.26% 0.28% 0.30%

Strain

Fig ureE.145:GraniteMountainquarrycyclictriaxial-M.B.8%B.

160

140

120

100

Stage 2 80 Stage 3 Cyclic

60

40

0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0%

Strai n

Deviator Stress (psi) Deviator Stress (psi)

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20% 0.22% 0.24% 0.26% 0.28% 0.30% 0.32%

Strain

Fig ureE.147:GraniteMountainquarrycyclictriaxial-M.B.10%A.

160

140

120

100

Stage 2 80 Stage 3 Cyclic

60

40

0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0%

Strai n

Deviator Stress (psi) Deviator Stress (psi)

12 10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20% 0.22% 0.24% 0.26% 0.28%

Strain

Fig ureE.149:GraniteMountainquarrycyclictriaxial-M.B.10%B.

160

140

120

100

0.30%

Stage 2 80 Stage 3 Cyclic

60

40

20

0
0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0% 10.0%

Strai n

Deviator Stress (psi) Deviator Stress (psi)

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20% 0.22% 0.24% 0.26% 0.28% 0.30% 0.32% 0.34%

Strain

Fig ureE.151:GraniteMountainquarrycyclictriaxial-M.B.12%A.

160

140

120

100

Stage 2 80 Stage 3 Cyclic

60

40

0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0%

Strai n

Deviator Stress (psi) Deviator Stress (psi)

12 10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20% 0.22% 0.24% 0.26% 0.28% 0.30% 0.32% 0.34%

Strain

Fig ureE.153:GraniteMountainquarrycyclictriaxial-M.B.12%B.

140

120

100

80
Stage 2
Stage 3
Cyclic
60

40

20

0
0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0%

Strai n

Deviator Stress (psi) Deviator Stress (psi)

12 10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20% 0.22% 0.24%

Strain

Fig ureE.155:GraniteMountainquarrycyclictriaxial-M.B.14%A.

140

120

100

80
Stage 2
Stage 3
Cyclic
60

40

20

0
0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0%

Strai n

Deviator Stress (psi) Deviator Stress (psi)

12 10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14%

Strain

Fig ureE.157:GraniteMountainquarrycyclictriaxial-M.B.14%B.

120

100

80

Stage 2
60 Stage 3
Cyclic

40

20

0
0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0%

Strai n

Deviator Stress (psi) Deviator Stress (psi)

12 10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16%

Strain

Fig ureE.159:GraniteMountainquarrycyclictriaxial-M.B.16%A.

140

120

100

80
Stage 2
Stage 3
Cyclic
60

40

20

0
0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0%

Strai n

Deviator Stress (psi) Deviator Stress (psi)

12 10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20% 0.22%

Strain

Fig ureE.161:GraniteMountainquarrycyclictriaxial-M.B.16%B.

140

120

100

80
Stage 2
Stage 3
Cyclic
60

40

20

0
0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0%

Strai n

Deviator Stress (psi) Deviator Stress (psi)

12 10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20% 0.22% 0.24% 0.26% 0.28% 0.30%

Strain

Fig ureE.163:GraniteMountainquarrycyclictriaxial-U.B.10%A.

120

100

80

Stage 2
60 Stage 3
Cyclic

40

20

0
0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0% 10.0%

Strai n

Deviator Stress (psi) Deviator Stress (psi)

12 10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

0.00% 0.02% 0.04% 0.06% 0.08% 0.10% 0.12% 0.14% 0.16% 0.18% 0.20% 0.22% 0.24% 0.26% 0.28% 0.30%

Strain

Fig ureE.165:GraniteMountainquarrycyclictriaxial-U.B.10%B.

120

100

80

Stage 2
60 Stage 3
Cyclic

40

20

0
0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0% 10.0%

Strai n

Appendix F
Mohr-Coulomb Failure Envelope Plots

431

Figure F.1: Sharps quarry L.B. 6% 2B consolidated drained strength.

Shear Stress (psi)

c = 12.2 psi

Figure F.2: Sharps quarry L.B. 6% B consolidated drained strength. 432

Figure F.3: Sharps quarry L.B. 6% C consolidated drained strength.

Figure F.4: Sharps quarry M.B. 6% A consolidated drained strength. 433

Figure F.5: Sharps quarry M.B. 6% B consolidated drained strength.

Figure F.6: Sharps quarry M.B. 8% A consolidated drained strength. 434

Figure F.7: Sharps quarry M.B. 8% B consolidated drained strength.

Figure F.8: Sharps quarry M.B. 8% B2 consolidated drained strength. 435

F

436

Figure F.11: Sharps quarry M.B. 12% A consolidated drained strength.

Figure F.12: Sharps quarry M.B. 12% B consolidated drained strength. 437

Figure F.13: Sharps quarry M.B. 14% A consolidated drained strength.

Figure F.14: Sharps quarry M.B. 14% B consolidated drained strength. 438

Figure F.15: Sharps quarry M.B. 16% A consolidated drained strength.

Figure F.16: Sharps quarry M.B. 16% B consolidated drained strength. 439

Figure F.17: Sharps quarry U.B. 10% A consolidated drained strength.

Figure F.18: Sharps quarry U.B. 10% C consolidated drained strength. 440

Figure F.19: Preston quarry L.B. 6% A consolidated drained strength.

Figure F.20: Preston quarry L.B. 6% B consolidated drained strength. 441

Figure F.21: Preston quarry M.B. 6% A consolidated drained strength.

Figure F.22: Preston quarry M.B. 6% B consolidated drained strength. 442

Figure F.23: Preston quarry M.B. 8% A consolidated drained strength.

Figure F.24: Preston quarry M.B. 8% B consolidated drained strength.

443

F

444

Figure F.27: Preston quarry M.B. 12% A consolidated drained strength.

Figure F.28: Preston quarry M.B. 12% B consolidated drained strength. 445

F

446

Figure F.31: Preston quarry M.B. 16% A consolidated drained strength.

Figure F.32: Preston quarry M.B. 16% B consolidated drained strength. 447

Figure F.33: Preston quarry U.B. 10% A consolidated drained strength.

Figure F.34: Preston quarry U.B. 10% B consolidated drained strength. 448

Figure F.35: Black Rock quarry L.B. 6% A consolidated drained strength.

Figure F.36: Black Rock quarry L.B. 6% B consolidated drained strength. 449

Fi

c = 23.0 psi

20

0

100

Shear Stress (psi)

80

60

40

Figure F.39: Black Rock quarry M.B. 8% A consolidated drained strength.

Figure F.40: Black Rock quarry M.B. 8% B consolidated drained strength. 451

Shear Stress (psi)

120

100 80 60 40 20

c = 10.5 psi

0

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 Normal Stress (psi)

	φ = 44.3 deg.

Fig

452

Figure F.43: Black Rock quarry M.B. 12% A consolidated drained strength.

Figure F.44: Black Rock quarry M.B. 12% B consolidated drained strength. 453

Fi g

454

Figure F.47: Black Rock quarry M.B. 16% A consolidated drained strength.

Figure F.48: Black Rock quarry M.B. 16% B consolidated drained strength. 455

Figure F.49: Black Rock quarry U.B. 10% A consolidated drained strength.

Figure F.50: Black Rock quarry U.B. 10% B consolidated drained strength. 456

Figure F.51: Black Rock quarry U.B. 10% C consolidated drained strength.

Figure F.52: Glen Rose quarry L.B. 6% consolidated drained strength. 457

Figure F.53: Glen Rose quarry L.B. 6% B consolidated drained strength.

Figure F.54: Glen Rose quarry M.B. 6% A consolidated drained strength. 458

Figure F.55: Glen Rose quarry M.B. 6% B consolidated drained strength.

Figure F.56: Glen Rose quarry M.B. 8% A consolidated drained strength. 459

Figure F.57: Glen Rose quarry M.B. 8% B consolidated drained strength.

Figure F.58: Glen Rose quarry M.B. 10% A consolidated drained strength. 460

Figure F.59: Glen Rose quarry M.B. 10% B consolidated drained strength.

Figure F.60: Glen Rose quarry M.B. 12% A consolidated drained strength. 461

Figure F.61: Glen Rose quarry M.B. 12% B consolidated drained strength.

Figure F.62: Glen Rose quarry M.B. 14% A consolidated drained strength. 462

Figure F.63: Glen Rose quarry M.B. 14% B consolidated drained strength.

Figure F.64: Glen Rose quarry M.B. 16% A consolidated drained strength. 463

Figure F.65: Glen Rose quarry M.B. 16% B consolidated drained strength.

Figure F.66: Glen Rose quarry U.B. 10% A consolidated drained strength. 464

Figure F.67: Glen Rose quarry U.B. 10% B consolidated drained strength.

Figure F.68: Granite Mountain quarry L.B. 6% A consolidated drained strength. 465

F

466

Figure F.71: Granite Mountain quarry M.B. 6% B consolidated drained strength.

Figure F.72: Granite Mountain quarry M.B. 8% A consolidated drained strength. 467

F

468

Figure F.75: Granite Mountain quarry M.B. 10% B consolidated drained strength.

Figure F.76: Granite Mountain quarry M.B. 12% A consolidated drained strength. 469

F

470

Figure F.79: Granite Mountain quarry M.B. 14% B consolidated drained strength.

Figure F.80: Granite Mountain quarry M.B. 16% A consolidated drained strength. 471

F

472

Figure F.83: Granite Mountain quarry U.B. 10% B consolidated drained strength.

473