Continued Soil Classification Soil Value as Transportation Sectors USCS Symbols Embankment Subgrade Subbase Base Backfill in MSE Wall (1) (2) (13) (14) (15) (16) (17) GW excellent excellent excellent good good to excellent Gravel excellent to GP fair to good good good to fair excellent and good Gravelly excellent to good to GM fair to good good to fair good to fair Soil good unsuitable2 GC fair to good good fair poor to unsuitable fair SW excellent good good to fair poor good Sand SP fair to good good to fair fair poor to unsuitable good and good to Sandy SM fair to good good to fair poor to unsuitable fair poor1 Soil SC fair to good good to fair poor unsuitable poor very poor to ML poor fair to poor unsuitable unsuitable Silt and unsuitable Clay CL good fair to poor unsuitable unsuitable unsuitable (LL<50) OL unsuitable poor unsuitable unsuitable unsuitable MH unsuitable poor unsuitable unsuitable unsuitable Silt and CH fair poor unsuitable unsuitable unsuitable Clay poor to very (LL>50) OH unsuitable unsuitable unsuitable unsuitable poor Note: 1, If LL<25 and value as subbase ranged from fair to good. Otherwise, SM's PI, SM’ value as subbase ranged from poor to fair. 2, If LL<25 and PI, value as base ranged from fair to good. Otherwise, GM's value GM’s as subbase ranged from poor to unsuitable. a, geotechdata.info b, Average values of compacted soils from Western United States (USBR) c, According USBR, k less than 1 ft/year as impervious (no drainage), k between 1 and 100 ft./year as semipervious (poor); k greater than 100 ft./year as pervious (good) d, American Concrete Pavement Association (ACPA) Table 7.1 Geotechnical properties of the RDM in Milwaukee Harbor CDF
Continued Soil Classification Soil Value as Transportation Sectors USCS (1) Symbols (2) Embankment (13) Subgrade (14) Subbase (15) Base (16) Backfill in MSE Wall (17) Gravel and Gravelly Soil GW excellent excellent excellent good good to excellent GP fair to good excellent to good good good to fair excellent GM fair to good excellent to good good to fair good to unsuitable2 good to fair GC fair to good good fair poor to unsuitable fair Sand and Sandy Soil SW excellent good good to fair poor good SP fair to good good to fair fair poor to unsuitable good SM fair to good good to fair good to poor1 poor to unsuitable fair SC fair to good good to fair poor unsuitable poor Silt and Clay (LL<50) ML poor fair to poor unsuitable unsuitable very poor to unsuitable CL good fair to poor unsuitable unsuitable unsuitable OL unsuitable poor unsuitable unsuitable unsuitable Silt and Clay (LL>50) MH unsuitable poor unsuitable unsuitable unsuitable CH fair poor unsuitable unsuitable unsuitable OH unsuitable poor to very poor unsuitable unsuitable unsuitable Note: 1, If LL<25 and PI, SM’ value as subbase ranged from fair to good. Otherwise, SM's value as subbase ranged from poor to fair. 2, If LL<25 and PI, GM’s value as base ranged from fair to good. Otherwise, GM's value as subbase ranged from poor to unsuitable. a, geotechdata.info b, Average values of compacted soils from Western United States (USBR) c, According USBR, k less than 1 ft/year as impervious (no drainage), k between 1 and 100 ft./year as semipervious (poor); k greater than 100 ft./year as pervious (good) d, American Concrete Pavement Association (ACPA) Table 7.1 Geotechnical properties of the RDM in Milwaukee Harbor CDF
Hua-Yu_MS-Thesis.docx