Concrete Landing Update
Concrete Landing Update
(OP)
Just thought I'd give an update on what was going on. Here's the original thread that you can refer to:
Thread507-86835
Well, after dumping more than 1000 cubic yards of dirt, the pad fill is pretty much done. I'm not sure what type of dirt was used, but it pretty much seemed like the same dusty, loose type of dirt that is oh-so-abundant in El Paso. See the pics below.
I have a copy of the Nuclear Density Test. Here are the numbers:
Location 1:
Wet Dens.- 128.6
%Moist.- 11.1
Dry Dens.- 115.8
%Comp.- 100.7
Opt Moist.- 11.5
Max Dens.- 115.0
Probe Depth- 12"
Location 2:
Wet Dens.- 128.1
%Moist.- 11.9
Dry Dens.- 114.4
%Comp.- 99.4
Opt Moist.- 11.5
Max Dens.- 115.0
Probe Depth- 12"
Location 3:
Wet Dens.- 127.6
%Moist.- 13.3
Dry Dens.- 112.6
%Comp.- 97.9
Opt Moist.- 11.5
Max Dens.- 115.0
Probe Depth- 12"
Quick question. 100.7% Compaction? Is that even possible?
Anyway I'm wondering if these numbers seem to jive, considering the type of dirt used. I should have pictures of the final fill sometime soon.
http://www2.et.byu.edu/~brb6/EngTip/Site_06.jpg
http://www2.et.byu.edu/~brb6/EngTip/Site_07.jpg
http://www2.et.byu.edu/~brb6/EngTip/Site_08.jpg
http://www2.et.byu.edu/~brb6/EngTip/Site_09.jpg
http://www2.et.byu.edu/~brb6/EngTip/Site_10.jpg
Thread507-86835
Well, after dumping more than 1000 cubic yards of dirt, the pad fill is pretty much done. I'm not sure what type of dirt was used, but it pretty much seemed like the same dusty, loose type of dirt that is oh-so-abundant in El Paso. See the pics below.
I have a copy of the Nuclear Density Test. Here are the numbers:
Location 1:
Wet Dens.- 128.6
%Moist.- 11.1
Dry Dens.- 115.8
%Comp.- 100.7
Opt Moist.- 11.5
Max Dens.- 115.0
Probe Depth- 12"
Location 2:
Wet Dens.- 128.1
%Moist.- 11.9
Dry Dens.- 114.4
%Comp.- 99.4
Opt Moist.- 11.5
Max Dens.- 115.0
Probe Depth- 12"
Location 3:
Wet Dens.- 127.6
%Moist.- 13.3
Dry Dens.- 112.6
%Comp.- 97.9
Opt Moist.- 11.5
Max Dens.- 115.0
Probe Depth- 12"
Quick question. 100.7% Compaction? Is that even possible?
Anyway I'm wondering if these numbers seem to jive, considering the type of dirt used. I should have pictures of the final fill sometime soon.
http://www2.et.byu.edu/~brb6/EngTip/Site_06.jpg
http://www2.et.byu.edu/~brb6/EngTip/Site_07.jpg
http://www2.et.byu.edu/~brb6/EngTip/Site_08.jpg
http://www2.et.byu.edu/~brb6/EngTip/Site_09.jpg
http://www2.et.byu.edu/~brb6/EngTip/Site_10.jpg






RE: Concrete Landing Update
This gives you a density of X pcf. In the field, the compaction could be more intense, and this would get you higher densities than the maximum Proctor density.
RE: Concrete Landing Update
I had a job a few years ago where the contractor achieved a mean relative compaction of over 99% with no accepted lift having a value less than 98%. The fill thickness was very uneven, and he didn't want there to be any potential for the owner to complain about a substandard job -
Please see FAQ731-376 for great suggestions on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips Fora.