Daily Field Report

Density test report

Date *

Project Number *

Name of the Project *

Project Location

Client Company *

Weather

Arrival Date

Arrival Time

Departure Date

Departure Time

Onsite Hours

ASEC Technician Name

Observations/Finding

Summary *

As requested, a representative of AS Engineering &amp; Consulting (ASEC) conducted a site visit to perform quality control inspection and testing services. Visual observation techniques were employed to verify compliance with project drawings/specifications, applicable codes, and approved material submittals.

<h2 data-start="333" data-end="359">2. Earthwork Activities</h2>
<ul data-start="361" data-end="525">
 	<li data-start="361" data-end="484">
Placement and compaction of backfill materials were in progress in the following locations:

<ul data-start="403" data-end="484">
 	<li data-start="403" data-end="442">
Water line trench at the entrance/pit area.
</li>
 	<li data-start="445" data-end="484">
Backfill behind Retaining Wall #1.
</li>
</ul>
</li>
 	<li data-start="486" data-end="525">
During the observation, active placement of fill material was observed being performed in 1-foot lifts. Compaction was executed using a 12-ton sheeps-foot roller and trench compactors.
</li>
</ul>

<h2 data-start="532" data-end="556">3. Compaction Testing</h2>
<ul data-start="558" data-end="679">
 	<li data-start="558" data-end="639">
Compaction testing was carried out using a Troxler nuclear density gauge in accordance with ASTM D6938.
</li>
 	<li data-start="640" data-end="679">
Additional verification was conducted with general probing, using a 3/8-inch diameter probe rod.
</li>
</ul>
Test Results:

<ul data-start="699" data-end="963">
 	<li data-start="699" data-end="874">
Water Line Trench:

<ul data-start="743" data-end="874">
 	<li data-start="743" data-end="830">
Did not achieve the specified minimum 95% relative compaction based on maximum dry density (MDD) per the Standard Proctor method (ASTM D698).
</li>
 	<li data-start="833" data-end="874">
Moisture content exceeded the specified permissible range, indicating the soil was overly wet.
</li>
</ul>
</li>
 	<li data-start="876" data-end="963">
Retaining Wall #1 Backfill:

<ul data-start="922" data-end="963">
 	<li data-start="922" data-end="963">
Achieved the specified minimum 95% relative compaction per ASTM D698.
</li>
 	<li data-start="922" data-end="963">Our ASEC representative arrived on site to observe the placement of MSE retaining walls #1.It was noted that behind the block and in the cells, No. 57 stone was used.

Every 2nd course a geotextile fabric was placed followed by an 8-inch compacted lift.

No. 57 stone was utilized 1-foot behind the block and within the cells.

No remedial recommendation was made.</li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
Notes:

<ul data-start="976" data-end="1017">
 	<li data-start="976" data-end="1017">
Moisture content was above the specified range. Under this condition, soils require scarification and aeration (moisture correction) prior to re-compaction. The contractor was notified but did not implement corrective action. Consequently, the trench was backfilled without achieving the required compaction.
</li>
</ul>

<h2 data-start="1024" data-end="1068">4. Recommendations &amp; Required Remediation</h2>
<ol data-start="1070" data-end="1684">
 	<li data-start="1070" data-end="1157">
Undercut and Remove Non-Conforming Material Excavate the inadequately compacted zones around the water line to a depth sufficient to remove all non-conforming soils.
</li>
 	<li data-start="1159" data-end="1232">
Moisture Conditioning Adjust the moisture content of the excavated soil to within ±2% of the laboratory-determined Optimum Moisture Content (OMC) before re-compaction
</li>
</ol>
Thank you for the opportunity to support this project. Should you have any questions or wish to discuss these findings further, please feel free to contact us.

Upload Images