Development of Com 00 Gold

SCHOOL OF
CeSL0-<5/
CIVIL
ENGINEERING
JOINT HIGHWAY
RESEARCH PROJECT
JHRP-78-6
THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE
COMPUTERIZED GEOTECHNICAL DATA BANK FOR THE STATE OF NDIANA RECEIVED

Gary D. Goldberg
APR 2
5 1979
PURDUE UHIVERSW
3^ In
UNIVERSITY
HIGHWAY COMMISSION
TECHNICAL REPORT STANDARD TITLE P* r.r

1 .
Report No.
?.
Government
Accemon
No.
3.
u.
tnt
Cotoiog Ho
JHRP-78-6
4.
Tillo and Subtitle
S.
Report Dote
THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE COMPUTERIZED GEOTECHNICAL DATA BANK FOR THE STATE OF INDIANA
7.
June
6.
1978
Performing O'goniiotion Cod*
Authord)
8.
Performing Orgon.iotion Report No
Gary
9.
Goldberg
Nome
ond Addreii
10.
JHRP-78-6
Wort Un.l No.
Performing Organization
Joint Highway Research Project Civil Engineering Building Purdue University A 79 West Lafayette, Indiana 7
12.
II,
Contmrt
or
Grant Ne
I
HPR-PL-1 (15) Part
1.1.
Type of Report ond Period Co*
Sponjoring Agoncy
Nome ond Addrel-
Indiana State Highway Commission State Office Building 100 North Senate Avenue k620h Indianapolis, Indiana
15.
Interim Report
14.
Sponioring Agency Code
Supplementary Note*
Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Department or Transportation, Federal Highway Administration. From the study, "A Computer ized Information Storaqe and Retrieval System for Soils of Indiana."
16.
Abstroct
informa tion storage and retrlev al computerized, u s e r -o r en ted pedological and geot echnical engineering insystem for geological The computer ized data system is flex formation has been developed. ible so that changes can be made easily as the requirements of user nstructional User's Manu A complete become more clearly defined. has been prepared compatible with the prese nt requirements and need of the Indiana State Highway Commission and the Joint Highway R e The c omputerized data bank search Project at Purdue University. should facilitate efficient and economical handling of geotechnical information from the State of Indiana.
A
i , , i
The application of statistical methods to the geotechnical data The grouping of soils by stored to January, 1978 is promising. material areas is justified for the parent and regions physiographic t soil parameters from soil te rm n e f f cu to-de of some d prediction The groups of soils and determine. easier to properties which are must be examcorrelations provide acceptable which soil parameters ined on a case by case basis.
i
i
17.
Koy Wordi
18.
Distribution Statement
soils data, computer, data storage, data retrieval,
statistics
C'omf.
i
restrictions. This document is available to the public through the National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Va. 22161
No
of Kit
17.
Security
(of 'hit report)

i
20.
Security Cluitlf.
poue)
21.
No. of Pagei
22.
Price
Unc
a s s
ed
Unclassified
163
Fofm
DOT
F 1700.7 io-si
Interim Report
THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE COMPUTERIZED GEOTECHNICAL
DATA BANK FOR THE STATE OF INDIANA
TO:
J. F. McLaughlin, Director Joint Highway Research Project
June 1, 1978
Project:
C-36-51T
FROM:
Michael, Associate Director Joint Highway Research Project

H. L.
File:
1-5-20
Attached is an Interim Report on the HPR, Part I Study entitled "A Computerized Information Storage and Retrieval System for the Soils of It has been authored by Mr. Gary D. Goldberg, Graduate Instructor Indiana". in Research on our staff, under the direction of C. W. Lovell and R. D. Miles of our staff.
The report presents the results from the development of the geotechnical A complete instructional User's Manual data bank for the State of Indiana. The application of is included which describes the details of the system. statistical methods to the geotechnical data stored to January, 1978, is The promising. The collection of additional soils data is in progress. application of advanced statistical methods of new input data is expected.
The report is submitted as partial fulfillment of the objectives of the Study. Copies of the report will also be submitted to ISHC and FHWA for their review, comment and similar acceptance.
Respectfully submitted,
/(M^
Harold L. Michael Associate Director
HLM:ms
cc:
Altschaeffl 0. M. Bevilacqua W. L. Dolch R. L. Eskew G. D. Gibson W. H. Goetz M. J. Gutzwiller

A.
G.
G.
D.
K. R. R.
P. G.
Hallock E. Hancher R. Hoover F. Marsh D. Miles L. Owens T. Satterly

K.
C.
M.
K.
C.
L.
E.
S.
Scholer B. Scott C. Sinha A. Venable E. Wood J. Yoder R. Yoder

F.
Interim Report
THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE COMPUTERIZED GEOTECHNICAL DATA BANK FOR THE STATE OF INDIANA
by
Goldberg Gary D Graduate Instructor in Research

.
Joint Highway Research Project
Project No.
File No.
C- 361
-5-20
Prepared as Part of an
Investigation
Conducted by
Joint Highway Research Project Engineering Experiment Station Purdue University
in
cooperation with the
Indiana State Highway Commission and the U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration
The contents of this report reflect the views of the author who is responsible for the facts and the The conaccuracy of the data presented herein. tents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the Federal Highway Administration. This report does not constitute a standard, specifi cation, or regulation.
Purdue University West Lafayette, Indiana June 1 1978

,
Digitized by the Internet Archive

in
2011 with funding from

Indiana Department of Transportation
LYRASIS members and Sloan Foundation;
http://www.archive.org/details/developmentofcomOOgold
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The author wishes to express his sincere appreciation
to
Professors C.W. Lovell and R.D. Miles for their assistance

and guidance throughout
the course of
to
this
study.
The author
is
grateful
the Joint Highway Research
Project of Purdue University, The
Indiana State Highway
Commission, and the Federal Highway Administration for their

financial
support of this study.
Thanks are due to Professor J.E. Yahner for his assistance on the pedologic aspects of this study and Professor
G.P.
McCabe for his review of the statistical methods of this

.
research
Special
thanks are due to Mr. Mark Nye, Mr.

Lisa Reid, Mr.
Ronald
Farmer, Ms.
Gary Re
and especially Mr.

in
Robert Ringholz, for their assistance

the proj ec t data
the collection of
Iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
List of Tables
vi
List of Figures
viii
Nomenclature
Highlight Summary
xI
'
Introduction
Purpose
Scope
The Concept of
a
Geotechnical
Data Bank.
Benefits of
Geotechnical
Data Bank
....
.
Direct Use of Raw Data
Statistical
Methods of Data Reduction
DEVELOPMENT OF THE GEOTECHNICAL DATA BANK

Information Collected
Data Collection
....
20
Process
2&
2 7
Data Management and Manipulation

Data Preparation Data Processing
2 8
ANALYSIS OF DATA
Distributional
General
Characterization of Data.
33
Method of Analysis
Results
47
Statistical
PAGE
DISCUSSION OF STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Soi
1
55
59
Variabi
ty
Predictions and Correlations
60 60
Consolidation Test Results

Unconfined Compressive Strength Test Results
Compaction and California Bearing Ratio Test Results
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
63
6*
68
72
1k
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH
BIBLIOGRAPHY
APPENDICES
APPENDIX
A
-
8l
Distributional Characterization Propert es of So

i
81
USER'S MANUAL
101 101
Introduction
APPENDIX APPENDIX APPENDIX
Description of Data
Coding System
Items
103
125
Formats, Card and Column Locat ions
1^3
APPENDIX
APPENDIX
Computer Programs
Example Problems
1^8
162
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE
1
.
PAGE
Summary of Published Regression Equations Index, C c for Prediction of Compression from (Adapted and Compression Ratio, C p ) Azzouz et a
, 1
Counties with Modern Soil pleted Since 1958
Surveys Com-
Summary of Statistical Parameters for Different Soil Properties of All Samples Stored as of January 1978
k.
Comparison of the Coefficient of Variation of Soil Properties Among Soil Groupings.

.
5-
Values for All Samples for Compression Index (C ) and Compression Ratio (C r
2
)
(N = 96)
5-A
Values for C and C f of Soils from the Crawford Upland Physiographic Region
2
r
(N-28)
5-B
Values for C c and C r of Soils from the Wabash Lowland Physiographic Region
2
r
(N-28)
5-C
r
Values for C c and C r of Soils Derived from Outwash and Alluvial Deposits (N=63)2
H ?
6.
Values for All Samples for Unconfined ComN=3 56 pressive Strength (q y

2
r
) (
6-A
Values for q u of Soils Derived from Lacustrine Deposits (N = 8)

2
r
i
6-B
Values for q of Soils from the Calumet Lacustrine Plain (N=40)

2
r
50
7-
Values of All Samples for Maximum Dry ), Maximum Wet Density (y Density (y. d a* max _ (N-167).!> z and Optimum Moisture Content (w Qpt
2
r
)
TABLE
7-A.
2
r
PAGE
max max Morainal Valparaiso the from Soils

(N = 26)
2
Values for Y d
and w
Qpt
of
Section
'Z
7-B
of and W Ym Qpt max max Soils Derived from Limestone Bedrock (N-22)
r
Values for y
Values of All Samples for Soaked CBR at 100 (CBRS01) and 95 (CBRS02) Percent of Standard Proctor Maximum Dry Density
2
r
(N=l 38)
sk
Summary of Regression Equations for Prediction of Compression Index (C c and Compression Ratio (C r
)
10
Summary of Regression Equations for Prediction of Unconfined Compressive Strength (q u

)
Summary of Regression Equations for Prediction of Standard Proctor Maximum Dry Densities and and Wet (Y (v J m d max max Optimum Moisture Content (w q
)
VIII
LIST OF FIGURES
F.GURE
I.
PAGE
County Data Sources Sample Distribution Curve for Houdek Series, C Horizon (Adapted from Crawford
et
al.
(8))
3.
California Bearing Ratio-Liquid Limit Curve (Adapted from Crawford et al. 18)).
Data
Input
Form (DIF)
3^
5.
Physiographic Units Based on Present TopModified from Malott (35) ography.
6.
Soil
Regions of Indiana Reference (36))
(Adapted from
Classification of Soil Samples in Accordance with Unified Soil Classification System
8.
Classification of Soil Samples in Accordance with AASHTO Soil Classification System

Plasticity Charts for Consolidation Test
-
9.
Data
10.
..01
Plasticity Charts for Unconfined Compressive Strength Test Data Plasticity Charts for Compaction Test
Data
II.
APPENDIX FIGURE
A-l
Distributional Characterization of Percent Passing No. 10 Sieve

Distributional Characterization of Percent Passing No. ^0 Sieve
'
A-2
APPENDIX FIGURE
A-3

A-*|
A-5
Distributional
Sand
Characterization of Percent
^
'
A-6
Distributional Characterization of Percent

Silt
A-7
Distributional
Clay
A-8
Distributional Colloids
Limit
A-9
Distributional Characterization of Liquid

Distributional Limit
A-10
Characterization of Plastic
A-
Distributional Characterization of Plasticity ndex

I
A-12
Distributional Characterization or Shrinkage Limit Distributional Characterization of Natural Moisture Content

Distributional
Dry
A-13
A-14
Characterization of Natural
Dens
ty
A-15
Distributional Characterization of Compaction Test Data
A-16
Distributional Characterization of Soaked California Bearing Ratio
A-17 A-18
Distributional Characterization of Unconfined Compressive Strength

Distributional Characterization of Consolidation Test Data
NOMENCLATURE
AASHTO
CBR
CBRSOl
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

California bearing ratio
soaked California bearing ratio at 100 percent of standard Proctor maximum dry density soaked California bearing ratio at 95 percent of standard Proctor maximum dry density
CBRS02
Cc
C
coefficient of concavity compression index

Control
Data Corporation
CDC
C
r
compression ratio
coefficient of uniformity
Data
Input Form
vo id
Cu
DIF
initial
ratio
skewness
kur tos
P
i
plasticity
ISHC
L
.
ndex
Indiana State Highway Commission
liquidity index
numbe r of samples
c
preconso
da
ion
pressure
po
overburden pressure
Purdue University Computing Center
PUCC
unconf ined compressive strength
coefficient of determination
coefficient of multiple determination

adjusted coefficient of multiple determination
standard dev at on
i i
var ance
i
SPSS
SPT
Statistical
Package for the Social
Sciences
Standard Penetration Test

Unified Soil
uses
Classification System
USDA
V
United States Department of Agriculture
coefficient of variation
liquid
w.
limit
w w
natural moisture content

opt
optimum moisture content

plastic limit
shr nkage
i
w w
limit
mean natural
dry dens ty
i
standard Proctor maximum dry density

max
Ym
standard Proctor maximum wet density

max
xl
HIGHLIGHT SUMMARY
computerized information storage and retrieval

to
system
has been developed
include geological,
pedological and
Indi-
geotechnical engineering information from the State of

ana.
A
User's Manual
in
describes the details of the system and

Data are being collected for
instructs
its
use.
inclusion
into the system from private consulting
firms and private soil
testing firms, as well as from tests conducted by the Division of Materials and Tests of the
Comm ission
Such
(ISHC).
information
is
transmitted to the ISHC
in
sub-
surface investigation reports, containing data from both
laboratory tests and field surveys.

a
As
of January,
1978,
total
It
of
is
508 data sets have been stored within
the sys-
tem.
anticipated that an additional 6000 data sets

1978, when the
ISHC will
will
be
stored by December,
assume full
responsibility for maintenance and operation of

data bank.
the geotechnical
Various statistical methods have been applied to the

data.
Results
a
indicate that the range

given soil
in
values to be
expected for
physical
has
parameter depends on the particular
property and on the population from which the soil

Some soil
been sampled.
properties appear to be
xll
inherently more variable than others.

by
The grouping of soils
physiographic regions and/or the origin of their parent

suggests that the
p
material
can be
soil
red
cab
ty of
some parameters
improved for certain combinations of parameters and
groups, but not others.
Specifically, prediction equations have been generated

for compression
index
(C
and compression
for:
ratio
(a)
(C
r
from simple-to-determine soil measures
all
test
data,
(b)
for the soils

(c)
from the Wabash Lowland physiographic
unit and
for
Crawford Upland physiographic unit scils.
Additionally, soils derived from outwash and alluvial deposits produced acceptable regression models for
C
Valid regression equations have also been developed

for the unconfined compressive strength
(q
)
for soils
from
the Calumet Lacustrine Plain and soils derived from
lacus-
trine deposits.
test values,
It
is
also possible to predict
compaction
standard Proctor maximum dry and wet densities

(a)
and optimum moisture content for
soils from the Valpar-
aiso Morainal
1
i
area and
(b)
soils derived from residuum of
mes tone bed rock
INTRODUCTION
The need for geo og ca

1 i
pedo og ca
1
i
and geotechnical
engineering information for use
in
site selection, planning,
design, construction, and maintenance of transportation facilities and of most engineering structures
ized.
is
widely real-
Much of the
is
information
initially required by the
engineer
used
in
preliminary construction planning, site

in
selection and for guidance
further soil
investigations.
Unfortunately, most of these data are necessarily limited

in
quantity due to economic and time constraints.

The engineer
is
therefore faced with the problem of
determining the location, sequence, thickness, and areal extent of each soil
stratum,
including
description and
classification of the soils and their structure, by extrapolating the data from
a
few selected sites to an area many times
greater than that which has been sampled.
Even though
large amounts of detailed soils data are available from
work performed during planning and construction of adjacent

and nearby projects,
these data are usually not readily

is
accessible for use, or their existence

The accumulation of
unknown.
laboratory and field testing data

Indiana
for characterizing the engineering properties of
soils
is
extensive.
An
enormous amount of data, collected
and
stored from highway projects within the State of

in
Indiana
over the last 20 years, has been retained
the form of
subsurface investigation reports.
These reports have been
prepared by private consulting firms and governmental agencies from routine soil
investigations.
In
their bulky,
voluminous form, the majority of these data are not very

useful
.
The need therefore exists to make this
information more
in
accessible both for the engineer interested

formation of
soil
a
detailed
in
in-
site and the engineer

a
interested
A
general
characteristics over
large area.
computerized geo-
technical data bank was judged to be the most efficient, ex-
pedient, and economical way to reduce the accumulated data

to
a
form which could readily be made available to interested
individuals, such as highway engineers, geotechnical engineers,
contractors,
land use planners,
the Soil
Conservation
Service, and universities throughout the State.

Pu rpos e
It
is
the purpose of this study to develop
user-
oriented, dynamic information storage and retrieval

system for geotechnical data.
People without
a
computer
computer
programming background should be able to use the system with

a
minimum amount of instruction.
In
addition to being user-
oriented, the system should also be flexible so that changes

can be made easily as the requirements of users become more
clearly defined.
3H
The collection of large amounts of soils test data and the

fact that most natural soil deposits are highly variable in both
horizontal and vertical directions, Justifies the use of a statistical approach (31, 32, 33)
.
This study also attempts to
evaluate, in a preliminary way, some of the methods by which the
engineering properties of the soils of Indiana may be characterized

and predicted.
Scope
Data are being collected for inclusion into the geotechnical
bank from private consulting firms, private soil testing firms,

as well as
from tests conducted by the Division of Materials and
Tests of the Indiana State Highway Commission (ISHC).

is reported to the ISHC in subsurface
Information
,
investigation reports
con-
taining data from both laboratory tests and field surveys.

logic soils information is also being collected.
Pedo-
Since no standard procedure was required for reporting the

results from subsurface investigations before the mid 1960's, the
manner of presentation and the information which was reported,

are dependent upon the source of such information.
A User's Manual
has been prepared describing the details of the system and instruc-
tions on the use of the computerized geotechnical data bank.
Numerals in parentheses refer to entries in the Bibliography
Over twenty-five hundred sets of data have been collected as of this date
(
Ja
ua
78
These data sets have
subsequently been stored within the data bank and subjected

to various methods
of statistical
analyses.
These analyses
of have included soil characterizations and formulations
correlation and prediction equations.
Figure
shows the
representative counties with the State from which the data

have been collected and the soil
tions and predictions, generated.
The Concept of
a
characterizations, correla-
Geotechnical
Data Bank
Large amounts of geotechnical
information for transpor-
tation projects are accumulated each year by highway depart-
ments throughout the United States and abroad.
Geotechnical
investigations are conducted to provide surface and subsurface
information relative to soil, rock, and water.

is
This
information
used
in
In
selecting the proper locations for

(17,
the project and
making design decisions
6M.
Sub-
sequent use of this information after the design and con-
struction of
project from which soil
samples were taken

limited
(22,
and geotechnical data generated, has been
63).
The State of South Dakota realized the value of extensive soils data which had been accumulated
in
that state
over many years
(8).
It
was recognized that expensive soil
testing programs were being conducted on new routes which
closely paralleled old routes on which extensive soil

ing
test-
had been prev ous
under taken
study was consequently
Elkhart
i
\T-\
D.la-,2 war* ,
SCALE- MILES
FIGURE
COUNTY DATA SOURCES
inaugerated
using the
in
1965 with
the main
goal
of
finding
way of
large amount of past soil
testing experience on
new highway locations.

In
cooperation with the Soil Conservation Service

the South
in
South Dakota,
a
Dakota Department of Highways began

soil
program to determine the pedological
series name
This effort may
(2)
represented by each highway soil
profile.
in
have been suggested by previous work
Indiana
and
Michigan (38).
Engineering data and the project and location

The pro-
information for each sample site were determined.

ject number,
limit,
stationing, offset, depth, gradation,
liquid
plasticity index, maximum density, optimum moisture

sample were then placed on sample was then classified
content, and color of each soil
computer punch cards.
Each soil
according to several methods of soil
classification, viz.,
Transportation the American Association of State Highway and

Officials
(AASHTO)
and
a
system, the Unified Soil

textural
Classification
System (USCS)
classification system.
The data were then sorted and subjected to various
methods of statistical
vast amount of data to
analyses.
a
One method of reducing the

yet
concentrated
meaningful
form
ser-
was to develop sample distribution curves for each soil

ies
based upon any one of the many engineering characterisOne such curve has been reproduced and shown
in
tics.
ure 2.
Fig-
Figure
has also been
reproduced from the South

to
Dakota report
test data
to
(8)
to demonstrate an attempt
use the soil
determine the California bearing ratio (CBR)
o o
c o
o 0)
O N K O I
(0 UJ
* > Q. 0> E Q
? 5
.o
'
T3
-s
CE UJ
o C
o
en
V)
UJ
eg (0
-2
a D
81
UJ
T
?
CQC"(DO w
>a a: o O u.
%
zo
Od)
o
j
gI cr D CD a: o cr H u_
o
ro
O
CM
s3|<juios
jdqainN
UJ AC
u.
O
ce
Q H
LlI
< Q <
>
cc
a
2
a
o
cc
> 3
at
is <
.
UJ"5
CD _
0)
|8 (TO
OGl
-S _1<
<cc
ro UJ
cc
from the
results of
much easier and more economical
liquid
limit determination.
In
1976,the Kentucky Department of Transportation puba
lished
report that discussed the development of

(56).
computerThe pur-
ized soils data system for highway projects
pose of this system was to facilitate the collection, cen-
tralized storage, and retrieval of soils data from highway

and other engineering projects within Kentucky.
The soils data system
in
Kentucky
is
divided
into collec-
tion,
ing
storage, and retrieval
subsystems.
The type of data be

(1)
collected can be grouped into four categories:

(2)
raw
data, data.
basic data,
(3)
derived data, and
(k)
descriptive
(56):
brief description of this
information follows
"Raw data are measurements such as wet weight, dry weight, temperature, and hydrometer reading that must be recorded to find the basic soil characteristics...
"Basic data are the soil characteristics and properties, such as density, moisture content, specific gravity, and percent of material passing a certain sieve, found by mathematically manipulating the Some independently meaningful data, such raw data. as amount of swell of a sample, are measured directly and could be called either raw or basic data...
"Derived data are deduced from known mathematical and empirical relationships, using the raw and (or) Examples of derived data include maximum basic data. density, optimum moisture, textural classification, Derived liquid limit, and California Bearing Ratio. it (sic) since data summary called be also could data properties... and characteristics soil summarizes
"Descriptive data are not found by laboratory or They are field tests as are other types of data. or indirectly they since however, very important, They soils. the locate or directly indicate, affect, and bedrock, color, depth, include geographic location, soil series name."
LOP
Some of the data which were collected were not suitable for
direct computer storage.
An extensive codification system wa3 con-
sequently devised by the Kentucky Department of Transportation.

Due to the completeness of the coding system and its applicability
to soils information in general, some of the details of the coding
system were adopted in this research (see Appendix C).

Wlaschin (69) reports that the West Virginia Department of
Highways has adopted a computerized system whereby boring log in-
formation is directly placed onto computer cards in the field.
Laboratory data are added to the storage system when the cards are
returned to the engineer's office.
A complete description of the
operation of the system is not available as of this date, and only

a rough draft of the preliminary user's manual was reviewed.
Sweden has also developed a system of computer banks for geotechnical data (3*0.
report:
As stated in the English summary of the final
"Data deriving from soil surveys is a type of information which never becomes obsolete or out-of-date. Nevertheless, each year vast amounts of the source data disappear through mismanagement of records. This mismanagement takes the form of scattering data throughout the files of Government offices, local authorities, consultants, contractors, and many others to remain in obscurity and often inaccessible."
In Finland and Denmark, computer techniques are to a certain
extent used for plotting soil sounding data
(3*+).
Spradling (56)
states that in France, the Lille Regional Laboratory has prepared

a card index system for retrieving boring and soils test data (30).
And in Southern Rhodesia (20)
and Algeria
h 7
large scale mapping programs are under way.
The Department of Natural

has developed
a
Resources,
Province of Quebec,
inall
system for storing and retrieving field

is
formation.
Canada
also building
national
index
for
geological data, while making major

ing ma ter
i
inventories of exist-
(29
3*0
South Africa has also done extensive work

The objective of their work
is
in
this area.
to
develop
data bank for

is
constructional materials
way and
a
(6k).
The project
still
under
final
report
is
not yet available
(58).
Benefits of
Geotechnical
Data Bank
The benefits which can be obtained

of
a
from the development
computerized geotechnical data storage and retrieval

(a)
system can be divided into two major categories:

direct use of raw data; and
to
(b)
the
the use of statistical
methods
reduce the data to
usable form via distribution characOther uses
terizations, correlations, and predictions.
of the computerized data system can be realized and are
mentioned briefly with citations of reference literature.

Direct Use of Raw Data
A
computerized geotechnical data bank provides the
capability of retrieving an extensive listing of available

soil
and
rock information both quickly and economically.

the
For
instance,
location of
selected soil
type from
specific geographic location may be used to develop preliminary sources of
information for initial
site investigations
(56)
12
Rapid
for
inventories and summary tables of soil

in
characteristics
use planning
a
use
town,
building, and
long
range
land
are also possible
(3M-
With the production of

the
summary
of available soils data, of granular and
location of possible sources
select borrow materials could be facili-
right-of-way tated, along with route selection studies and

appraisals.
In
addition, the compilation of large scale
engineering engineering soil maps and profiles based on
characteristics
As
is
possible (8).
South previously mentioned, the objectives of the
about African work include the collection of information
constructional materials for inclusion
in
data bank.
Specifically, this will help to locate constructional

ials more readily,
to
mater-
inform of expected subgrade conditions,

and
to
to warn of construction hazards
aid
6).
in
route location,
assisted by soil engineering maps

Deen
(10),
(52),
(5,
as
referenced by Spradling
(68), and
(56),
and
Sisiliano
Witczak
Roberts
(50),
studied the
regional or physiographic approach to soil

w ith
characterizations
to
the objectives of demonstrating
the ability
recog-
regard to nize certain areas potentially troublesome with
engineering performance of soils.
Sisiliano concluded:
"The Physiographic Subdivision Approach outlined and worthwhile in this study can lead to meaningful implications and conclusions for use in the prel imlnary modern stages of planning, route location and design of highway facilities in the State of Indiana."
However,
ano
fu
the
concluded that landform or parent
generalizations material areas would provide the best basis for

of soil
behavior
in
Indiana.
McKittrick (37)
costs were related
(26)
showed that subsurface investigation
to
physiographic units
in
Indiana.
approach described the applicability of the correlation

in
to work
Alaska on the Trans-Alaska pipeline.

(3*,000
tremendous
amount of data
samples from 3,500 soil borings)

in
a
were collected and subsequently stored

data bank.
and offset),
computer-based
centerline
Specifically, boring location
(by
sample depths and type of sample, water table

laboratory test results
depth, permafrost encountered, and

for each
sample (Unified classification, moisture content,
dry density,
specific gravity, thaw settlement test results,

in
etc.) were stored
the
Alyeska
data bank
(27).
The
land-
form type was also

of the soils
included with the sample data.

Kreig
(26)
Summaries
writes:
information were prepared.
"Summaries could be prepared for a quantitative picture of the natural variation in critical soil characteristics for each landform.
"Such data bank summaries were useful for many purposes including the comparison of conditions in^ different landforms and the allocation of exploration For example, the number of boreholes expenditures. to made during field programs was usually limited due drilling The problems. access high costs and difficult program was more efficiently planned using the known variability of different landforms so that few holes holes were drilled in the uniform landforms and more Had landforms. were programmed for highly variable spacing uniform on the drilling program been predicted without regard to landform, exploration expenditures Once the propwould have been used inefficiently. erties of a landform were fairly well known, prelimwere inary soil studies in new areas such as reroutes exof done from airphotos and quantitative estimates depected soil conditions were made from previously veloped data bank summaries."
Statistical
Methods of Data Reduction
Statistical methods are used to study the variability

of
the engineering
index properties,
to group
to
compare one soil

types with sim-
type to another,
ilar engineering
and
together soil
index properties
and Hampton,
(30(19)
Hampton
the variation
(18)
in
Yoder, and Burr
studied
the engineering properties of soils derived and and
from the same parent material

of climate, vegetation, age,
under similar conditions
topography.
Soil
samples
were selected from horizons of the Crosby and Brookston

soil
series within the State of
Indiana.
Atterberg limit
tests, standard AASHTO compaction tests, Hveem stabilometer

and swelling pressure tests,
California bearing ratio tests,
grain size distribution tests, and unconfined compression

tests were performed on selected samples and the results
were statistically analyzed.
It
was concluded that soil
variability
is
function of the property being measured.

Illinois have
soil
Numerous studies at the University of
attempted to show the relationship between pedological

types,
62).
soil
parent materials, and engineering properties
(60,
61,
Significant correlations are shown between pedologic

types and the engineering and physical
properties of
the soil
profiles.
Of course,
some soil
types are more

a
variable than others and the degree of variation within

given soil
physical
type appears to be different for the different

In
properties being measured.

from which
a
addition, the parent
material
soil
type has been derived has been
found to be useful for predicting the differences in the engineering
properties of the soil.

Various correlations among selected soil properties can be useful to the engineer when the need for extensive laboratory testing
is
being considered
(1*9,
67).
As reported by Ring, Sallberg, and
Collins (U8), Woods and Litehiser (TO) showed the general interrela-
tion of plastic limit, plasticity index, liquid limit, optimum moisture
content, and maximum dry density for a large number of soils from
Ohio.
They reported that increases in the plastic properties of the
soils were accompanied by increases in optimum moisture content and
decreases in maximum dry density.
Rowan and Graham (51) report that
the optimum moisture content from the standard Proctor test can be
predicted from the shrinkage limit (SL), percentage passing the No.
sieve (A), and the percentage passing the No. Uo sieve (B) by the
following formula:
Calculated ontimum moisture content (percent),
opt
= SL (f) A
Rowan and Graham suggested that the calculated optimum moisture contest be reduced by three percent, after they compared the predicted
values with the results of tests on 10 soils
Davidson and Gardiner (9) modified the Rowan-Graham formula
after comparing the calculated and the laboratory values of optimum
::-.
moisture content of 210 soils from different areas in the United

States.
They reported the greatest deviations between calculated

.
and laboratory values occurred with the more plastic soils
modified optimum moisture content relation is obtained by adding

the correction factor,
PI
- h, to the Rowan-Graham formula, where
PT is the plasticity index.
Thus:
optimum moisture content (percent)
Jumikis {2k), Ring el al.
(1+8)
and James (23) studied the rela-
tionships between liquid limit, plastic limit, plasticity index,
gradation, optimum moisture content, and maximum dry density.

Jumikis examined various glacial soils of New Jersey.
Ring et al
used simple and multiple regression analyses to predict optimum
moisture content and maximum dry density from simpler classification

tests.
And finally, James developed families of liquid limit curves
to predict the standard Proctor maximum dry density from the plas-
ticity index, and presented relationships between plastic limit and
optimum moisture content.

Black (3) and Crawford et al. (8), presented methods of deter-
mining the California bearing ratio from the results of index property
and moisture content tests.
C
Black used the consistency index,
5=
where w is the moisture content, LL is the liquid limit,
and PI is the plasticity
17
index,
to
predict CBR values.
Crawford et al. defined
CBR values relationship between liquid limit values and

for
use
in
highway design
in
South Dakota
(see
Figure 3).
Relationships have been
investigated between unconfined

index, and natural
compressive strength,
content.
m oisture
liquidity
moisture
Peck
(*5)
examined the relation between natural
content and the logarithm of unconfined compresHe
sive strength for Chicago clays.
concluded that the revalue due

to
a
lationship was not of much practical

amount of scatter.
A
large
better correlation existed between
compressive liquidity index and the logarithm of unconfined

strength at various levels of natural
moisture content.
for
(\k)
Similar studies have been reported by Sisiliano (52)
selected soil
for
types of
Indiana, and by Fredlund and Dahlman

in
proglacial
Lake Edmonton sediments
Canada.
Additional
relationships between the values of the standard penetration

test
in
(SPT)
and
the unconfined compressive strength are
found
the
literature.
Since samples for unconfined compressive
the strength tests are usually taken by methods other than
split spoon
(by
the
ISHC),
very few samples for which
values. unconfined strengths tests have been run contain SPT
Therefore,
this
relationship has not been investigated here.
Numerous researchers have attempted to predict the com-
pression index
(C
and compression
ratio
(C
p
from easierlimit
(w
L
)
to-determine soil
natural
properties,
(w
)
for example,
liquid
1
moisture content
and
the
initia
a
void
ratio
(e)
Azzouz, Krizek, and Corotis
(1)
present
summary of different
published equations for prediction of both
and
C
r
in-
cluding the data base used to establish the relationships.

This
information has been reproduced as Table

in
1.
Additional
(25,
regression relationships reported

52,
66)
the
in
literature
Table
I.
23,
are similar to those presented
Differ-
of Table ences which exist between these equations and those

1
are directly attributed
to
the data base from which
the
equations have been derived.
19
1_

vO
-3"
-3"
o
X
3
l_
3E
en
c~\
^ ^
O V
c
TO
*~
L.
-XL

,
4-1
CA
-3-
o o
t-
o c
r^.
l_
a
p
uCO
4->
c o
4-1
-a
c
TO
X C
TO
TO
^-^
*
CM
a.
X
01
CTI
^*
r^
"
O c
-
r^-
^-^
r-~
a*
'
'
-3-
o c
O
~
LA LA
l/l
c
TO
l_ TO
CTI CTI
CTI
CTI
L.
4-1
XI
.c
o
<_>

O
3:
X C
TO
o N N
N N o
CJ
u
>mmi
o N N O
^
L.
4)
TO
1_
N
1_
a)
TO
'
m
h-
2 O
1/5
C
LU
O
4->
Ul
c/i
>4J
M
4-1
4-1
-a
F O
l_
__ ._
>4-t
l/>
TO 0)
O
^
>-
a.
>.
TO
H
1/1
Q. 4i_
T3
_ ._
_o
TO
^
...
*,
o 3
O
F
TO
o 3
>
>
i/)
4-1
""
TO
u
4-*
l/l
U
mm >
TO
4-1
Ml/l
V
a.
to
o
</1
E U O
XI
TO 
c o
u
TO
***
1-
x <
_. a.
> U
1/1
(U
X c
TO
4-1
o
TO
<S>
X
t)
4-*
TO
TO
/>
"^ a.
<
M-
Q.
</)
>
4-1
.
3
c o
o CT
4->
x:
</)
0)
E
l
E O
IA
1/1
>TO
to
Ld
o
l/>
>
TO
>TO
o a
(/)
o
TO
c o
ai
a>
U
XI
.*
l/>
in in 
U O
CTI
>-
en

TO
.C
<_>
_ -C
on
CC
O _ _ <
TO
o c
TO
CT)
>-
TO
0J
W u O c TO u CTI 1_ c O
l/l >
TO
>-
l_ i*t/)
E O L.
<4-
X
^
TO
>l_ a>
in
2 O
<
<J
TO
O
c
>
lO
>-
^~
^
TO
TO
O in c O u
>-
>-
>
l/l
TO
TO
TO
(J
O
>1
l_
TO
CTI
o E C o
1/)
N
TO
l_
N
TO l_
> V
4-1
*
1
O
i/i
TO
(_>
O o
CT)
^~
4-1
TO
TO
X)
L.
c
TO
o
3:
co
as
o z
E !_ o
-^
"
^~
i
to
<
O U
r-
X
u
-C
^
u-
I/)
u OF O
<_>
X
TO
-Q -o a.
a c
PA en
-3"
'
r^-
oo
-
OO
o
<_>
>
i_
13
4-1
c o
la ca
o
*.
1
-
i
+
CM
TO
3 C o
OO
ri
LT\
c
LA
*
C\
F h 3
L/)
<X LU
o o o
+
^^
r-.
LA
1
la
<-A
o
c u ^^
LA
CM
O _
X
vO
1
1
^_
1
o
i
CM
1
a)
o
3)
^-^
s.
en
i
o
I
^-^v
n-i
-3"
UA UA
_j
o ^~
1
o
1
O ^ o
o
+
\D LA
i
_j
<n in 0) L.
cti
o
X
LA
O
+
MD
LT\
O
+
__
*
3
a>
o
OO
o
*^
cv->
^2
vO
-3"
_J
o
^
a>

<J
C_>
U
e_5
IJ
(_>
o
<_3
L.
(_)
20
DEVELOPMENT OF THE GEOTECHNICAL DATA BANK
Most of
the
information being gathered
is
taken from
subsurface
investigation reports from highway projects

Pedological
soils
within the state.
information
The
is
addit-
ionally being collected and stored.

is
latter
information
(5*0
taken from recent agricultural

Soil
Soil
Survey Manuals
individual
and General
Maps
(16)
prepared on an
county
basis.
Approximately one-third of the counties within the

surveys
(Table 2).
state have completed modern soil
many surveys developed prior to 1958 are obsolete, since

soil
have series names have been changed and new methods

in-
been adopted for collecting and reporting pedological

formal ion.
Information Collected
Information gathered during

tion
is
roadway soil
investiga-
generally limited.
is
Usually, only simple laboratory

few selected soil
testing
m ore
performed on
samples, with
advanced testing reserved for samples taken from sites
where special
soil
structures are to be constructed or non-typical

Consequently, very small
conditions are encountered.
quantities of tests are available for the majority of soil

borings from subsurface investigation reports.
21
Table
Counties with Modern Soil

Compl
e
Surveys
ted
nee
1958
1.
Allen
(1969)
16. 17. 18. 19.
Jennings
Lake
(1976)
2.
3.
Bartholomew (1976)
Boone
(1975) (1958)
(1972) (1967)
Madison
Owen
A.
5.
Carroll
(196*0 (1967)
Clark
(197*0
(1975)
20.
Parke Perry
6. 7.
Crawford
Daviess
21.
22.
23-
(1969)
(1968)
(197*0
(1972) (197*0 (I960)
Pulaski
Scott
8.
9.
Delaware
Elkhart
(1962)
(197**)
Ik. 25. 26. 27.

28.
Shelby
10. 11.
12.
Fayette
Floyd
Spencer
Sul
1 i
(1973)
(197**)
van
(1970
Fountain
(1966)
(1975) (197*0
Tippecanoe (1959)
Union
(I960) (1976)
13.
lit.
Harrison
Hendricks
Howard
29.
Vanderburgh
Vigo
(197*+)
15.
(1971)
30.
22
The minimum
information to be stored for

B
particular
boring
(see Appendix
1.
for details)
is
as
follows:
gradational characteristics based on standard sieve sizes and hydrometer analysis
Atterberg
visual
."
textural
classifications
k.
color based on moist condition

to
computer program utilizing the above information
clas-
sify the samples by the AASHTO

and
(including the group index)

is
USCS systems has been developed and

3,
presented as
test data,
Program
Appendix
if
E.
The following additional
are stored,
1.
available:
organic content
pe rcen
t
(loss on
ignition)
as
2.
3.
k
.
in in
situ moisture content situ dry and wet densities,

i
pcf
spec
rav ty
i
5.
6.
compaction test results California bearing ratio (CBR)

unconfined compressive strength failure strain (percent)
strength data from triaxial tests
(tsf)
7.
and
8.
and direct shear
9. In
consolidation test results

information
addition to laboratory testing data,

to
will
be stored
1.
include:
project
a.
b.
identification
n
project
umber
contract number
23
road
umbe
d.
data collection agency
sample location
a
.
coun ty
b c
d
district
townsh
range
i
e
f
.
section
line number
g h
stationing
in
feet
offset in feet and the left or right direction from the centerline
3.
sample identification
a. b. c.
boring number
laboratory number
sampling procedure
h.
date the sample was taken from the hole
5.
6.
physiographic region
parent material de r ved
i
from which the soil

feet
has
been
7.
ground surface elevation
in
8.
depth from which the sample has been removed n feet

i
9.
depth to bedrock
in
feet
in
10. 11. 12.
depth to groundwater
feet
standard penetration resistance (SPT)
pedological
a.
soils
information
soil
association name
2kh
b.
c.
soil series name
horizon
slope (topographic) class
d.
e.
f.
g.
erosion class
natural soil drainage class
permeability
flooding potential
frost heave susceptibility
h.
i.
j.
shrink-swell potential
pH
k.
Data Collection Process
The various
consulting organizations contracted by the ISHC
for subsurface investigation prior to the mid 1960's had unique
methods of presenting their results.
The information reported by
one agency was not necessarily reported by another (for example,
some consultants reported the complete range of gradational char-
acteristics
while other consultants reported only a limited range
of sieve sizes)
At present, the geotechnical data needs to be transferred to the
Data Input Form (DIF) shown in Figure h.
25
O L_ H
Q.
UJ tr
26
Information recorded on the DIF can then be directly punched

on
is
cards and transferred to magnetic tape for storage.
This
Program
1,
Appendix
E.
Details of the data

are described
in
items
B.
to be
stored
in
the
is
computer
not
Appendix
Some
information
suit-
able for direct
input, and an extensive codification system

is
has been developed and
presented
in
Appendix
in
C.
Since
large amounts of data are collected,

and punching the data are
has been written to
errors
An
recording
inevitable.
"audit" program
identify those errors which can be de-
tected with the computer and,
thereby, allow mistakes to be

E,
corrected.
p
Program 2, Appendix
gives
listing of this
rog ram
Data Management and Manipulation
The Statistical
Sciences
(SPSS)
was selected to provide systematic and effective accessibility
for
identifying, organizing, storing,
retrieving, and
cataloging all data.

(PUCC)
The Purdue University Computing Center

Data Corporation
in
operates the Control
(CDC)
E
6500 have
computer.
The SPSS programs presented
Appendix
been designed for use on this computer system. The SPSS system
is
a
documented,
in
integrated system of
The system
computer programs written

provides
a
Fortran language.
unified and comprehensive package designed for

The
data transformation, analysis, and file manipulation.

SPSS text
(42)
is
a
complete instructional manuscript for the
SPSS programs and data management operation.
27
For
E
the most run on
part,
IBM
the
programs presented
in
Appendix
to
can
be
the
360 computer system available
the
ISHC by merely
replacing the system control

local
cards.
Differ-
ences
in
operating systems,
procedures, and other
factors complicate the problem of describing job deck setups.
However, the SPSS text

detail
A
.
(42)
describes these differences
in
duplicate magnetic tape containing
listing of the
information presently stored within the CDC 6500 geotechnical

data bank (2508 soil
for use on
samples)
has
been provided to the

use and
ISHC
the
IBM 360.
Accordingly, full
operation
at
of the geotechnical
data bank by the
ISHC can begin
any-
time.
To access
the data stored on magnetic tape,

a
the SPSS
system
is
activated by means of
IBM-card format).
sequence of control
cards
(80-column
The control
in
cards cause the

in
specified operations to be performed

the control
the order
which
The
cards are arranged
in
in
the program deck.

a
control
cards must be prepared
manner consistent with

cards
the
the SPSS operation.
Over 75 different types of control

to the operation of
are available and those most useful
geotechnical
data bank will
be discussed.
Data Preparation
Data are card punched onto
series of six cards for
each sample.
Decimal
is
points are not to be included.

left blank.
Missing
information
to be
The order of the data
23
cards
is
fixed.
number,
from one to six,

to
is
is
sequentially
assigned to each card

within each data set.
(sample number)
as
is
(card number)
identify the care

also assigned
a
Each sample
number
each hole
(hole number).
These numbers
Each county
the hole
are assigned sequentially within each county.
name
is
coded.
The card number,
the
county code,
assigning number and the sample number have the purpose of

a
unique
l.D.
identification number (l.D. number)

number
is
to
each data card
The
used
for
internal
bookkeeping.
Details of the formats, card locations, and column

locations are presented
in
Appendix
D.
Da ta
Proces sing
the SPSS system
in
Data are processed

file utilized teen control
in in
in
files.
Each
the data manipulation
process contains six-
cards.
The details of the system are contained

E.
Program
fo
1
1
3,
Appendix
:
The control
card
identifications
are as
ows
FILE NAME
RUN NAME
run
at
-
2.
identifies the current computer

is
(the title on the run name card
printed
the top of each page of output generated
on
3.
that run)
VARIABLE LIST
INPUT MEDIUM
-
k.
identifies the source of the
data file.
5.
INPUT FORMAT
29
6.
VAR LABELS
assigns
name to each variable
included on the VARIABLE LIST card.

7.
VALUE LABELS
assigns
name to each coded
value of each variable defined on the VARIABLE

LIST card.
8.
MISSING VALUES
statistical
excludes missing values from

Normally, missing
in
processing.
values are treated as zeros
the data manip-
ulation and processed accordingly.

g.
|F
-
creates variable transformations needed

the USCS, AASHTO,
and group
to generate
index
codes
10.
ASSIGN MISSING
assigns
code
(-8)
to
those
variables calculated
program.
This
internally with the SPSS
includes the codes assigned to

the
the USCS and AASHTO classifications and
group index.
is
1
The purpose of this control

the MISSING VALUES card.
card
the same as
-
RECODE
to
causes values of existing variables

tered
.
be
12
OF CASES
defines the number of samples
(cases)
contained on the magnetic tape at
the time of processing.

13.
PRINT FORMATS
defines the formats for data
from computer output.

\k. 15.
READ
INPUT DATA
SAVE FILE
30
16.
FINISH
sys tem
.
terminates processing of the SPSS
The control
cards
identified above, along with the data

into
a
contained on the magnetic tape, have been combined

general
and
is
SPSS system file.
This
is
Program
All
k,
Appendix
E,
stored on
magnetic tape.
data processing and
manipulations will access this magnetic tape with the control
card GET FILE
(Appendix F).
The following control
cards
include those which are an-
ticipated to be of most use to the operation of the geotechnical

(A2)
data bank.
for
a
The reader
is
referred to the SPSS text

a
complete description of their application plus

included below (the
description of those control cards not

name of the control
card
is
punched
in
in
columns
1-15;
the
instructions are punched starting

1.
column 16):
IF
COMPUTE
similar to the
to
control
card.
For example,
generate the new variable,

the procedure
I
liquidity index (Ll),

COMPUTE
LI
LI
is:
(NATMC-PL)/P
ASSIGN MISSING
2.
(-8)
SELECT
IF
allows the selection of data from

For example,
to
specific cases.
select all
(code
samples derived from lacustrine deposits

1)
with plasticity
the procedure
IF
indices greater than

is:
1
30,
SELECT
(PARENT EQ
AND
PI
GT 30)
31
SORT CASES
permits
reordering of cases
a
according to any one or

variables.
specified set of
to
in
For example,
sort
all
the data
by counties and
townships,
ascending order,
the procedu re
is:
SORT CASES
COUNTY, TOWN
(A)
The SORT CASES procedure begins by sorting

the file first by county.
The file
is
next
sorted by township within each county.
TASK NAME
ific or
run
.
enables the user to identify speca
separate tasks within
given computer
LIST CASES
enables the user to list the cona
tents of all or
the file.
designated set of cases

card must be used
in in
This control
conjunction with the SPSS statistical

ing
process(see
procedures, such as CON DESCR PT

I
V E
description of sample procedural cards below).

Suppose
a
user would
like
listing of the
depths to bedrock which have been encountered
within Floyd County (code 22).

control
cards would be used
The following
(assuming 100 sam-
ples from Floyd County are contained within

the data bank):
SELECT
(COUNTY EQ 22)
CASES =
1
LIST CASES
00/VAR AB L ES
I
BEDRKB
32
6.
CONDESCRI PT VE
I
computes descriptive statisstandard deviation,
tics
such as mean, mode,
kurtosis, etc.
7.
FREQUENCIES
computes and presents one-way
frequency distribution tables and histograms.

8.
CROSSTABS
n-way
c
computes and displays two-way to

ab
u
1
ros
s - t
on
tables
to
for
any discrete
variables.
For example,
determine the
joint frequency distribution of physiographic

regions and parent material
card wou
1
areas the control
be
CROSSTABS
9.
TABLES
a
PHYSIO BY PARENT
plot.
SCATTERGRAM- prints
REGRESSION
-
two-dimensional
10.
In
performs regression analyses.

procedural
cards
addition to the few statistical

(
I
listed above
tics
CONDES CR PT VE to REGRESSION), numerous statisI
(such as mean, mode,

a
standard deviation, etc.)

a
can be
selected with
STATISTICS card, and
variety of options
are available for data processing and presentation of results
with an OPTIONS card.
Examples of the use of the SPSS

included
in
system with the geotechnical data bank have been
Appendix
33
ANALYSIS OF DATA
total
of 2508 data sets
(cases)
were collected and
subjected to various methods of statistical

cluding characterizations of the total
analyses,
in-
data and character-
izations on the basis of physiographic units and parent
material areas.
Figure
shows the physiographic regions

6
of the State, and Figure
shows the distribution of parent
material
and
8
areas.
To further
identify the data,
Figures
give frequencies within the USCS and AASHTO clas-
sification systems,
respectively.
It
should be remembered
that the data have been collected throughout the entire
state, but no attempt was made to collect equal
numbers of
1.
samples from all

fore,
parts of the state.
See Figure
There-
the correlation and
prediction equations presented
have are applicable for only those areas from which data
been collected.
Distributional
Table
3
Characterization of Data
presents the results of the statistical analysis

parameters for all
the samples
1978.
of the different soil

ted and
collecand
stored
(31)
in
the computer as of January

a
Liu
Thornburn
present
good discussion of the value of
many of these statistics and their applicability to the study

of natural
soil
deposits.
3*
VJ
FIGURE 5 PHYSIOGRAPHIC UNITS BASED ON PRESENT TOPOGRAPHY. MODIFIED FROM MAL0TT(35)
35
Soil PeRions, Their Parent Llaterlals and Representative Soil
knu
1.
3.
A.
5.
6.
7.
8.
10.
11.
12.
13.
Sandy and loamy lacustrine deposits and eollan sand (Maumee, Rensselaer, Plainfield) Silty and clayey lacustrine deposits (McGary, Patton, Hoytville, Dubois) Alluvial and outuash deposits (Fox, Genessee, Warsaw, Wheeling) Eollan sand deposits (Plainfield, Oshtemo, Bloomfield) Thick loess deposits (Alford, Hosmer, Iva) Loamy glacial till (Riddles, Miami, Crosier, Brookston) Clayey glacial till (Blount, Rewamo, Morley) Thin loess over loamy glacial till (Brookston, Crosby, Miami Parr) Moderately thick loess over loamy glacial till (Fincastle, Russell, Miami, Brookston) Moderately thick loess over weathered loamy glacial till (Cincinnati, Avonburg, Vigo, Ava) Discontinuous loess over weathered sandstone and shale (Zanesville, Berks, Well ston, Muskingrum) Discontinuous loess over weathered limestone (Crider, Frederick, Corydon) Discontinuous loess over weathered limestone and shale (Eden, Switzerland, Pate)
FIGURE 6 SOIL REGIONS OF INDIANA (ADAPTED FROM
REFERENCE
(36))
36
N=2469
Note=
39 samples not
due
classified
to insufficient data
Unified Soil Group Classification
FIGURE 7
CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL SAMPLES IN ACCORDANCE WITH UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
37
1200
1000
N=2506
a.
915
800
Note: 2 samples not classified due to insufficient data
o w 600
636
"
OU
O
i
E 3
400
200
14
I
140
51
.
22
_l
1
c b
27
88
3
10
i
i
03
i
<
<
"cm
<<VJ
*3
Soil
CO
<
<
<

r<
-T
cm cm cm
cn cn cn
e'-
r*.
en
vO on
CO on en
o vO
CSJ
on
r-
-3"
CM
on
on
Maximum Value
oo oo ooo o oo oo
o oo o CC
o oo o o envo O (TiCOOO o ooo o oo o

-3-
CM
on
O
CM
cn en
rn
CM
O cn
Min imum
Val ue
in
<U
o o
CM
t
CM
o o
o
M3
cn
O rn
cn
CM
MM
4-1
10)
a.
1_
Kurtosis, g 2
on on .
-3-
-3-
CO vo
I
fNI
vO
en
en
m
on
vO vO on on
on
oo
o oo
i
sO
O-
_ .
O
oo
4-)
Skewness, g.
Ji
c oo
.
i_
U_ u_
>
o
1_
to
3 c
TO
Coefficient of Variation, V
-3"
vO vo vo r^ cn
co
v>
cn cn cn
O o oo
enco
-3"
-3-
-3"
cn
oo
CM CM
O CM
vO
vO
on
CM
co
-3-
oo on r^
r-~
o o
CM
CM
on
u- -3
in <4L.
4-1
O
in TO
1)
E
Q_
i
Standard Deviation,
cn r-^-3- -3cn cm cn
s
cn-3- cn
r
-3-
\o cn cn co vo cn
oo
-3"
CM
cn
cn on
j-
on
O
voO
onvO
CM CM
vO
o
cn
u 
CL
TO
to
00
-3>
4J
/>
Mean, x
on
oO
envo
cn on vo co co cn r^ o cn cn cm
on vO cn
o
CM
CO
vO on
CM
PM
u_
<
-3-1
cnoovovo
cn
^
!_
TO
3
oo
Units
<3*>
e-e *<?
a*
<j*
<**?
<?
<>*?
a*
<>*?
a*?
<3~e
<*<?
 > >

ai
Soil
> u
/>
4-1
-.
._
> > o u
TO L.
in
>4-1
EL
*
W)
4-
c
in in TO
o o o O o CN
Os)
"O
T3
V
cn
TO
1
*
J-
O
zz.
C
TO
CO
Q_
<h>
z:
o z z
oo
avp
O > O oo O o
*>
TO
<j4? <j-p
T>
O w
ro
O
4->
ifl
o
-c
X c
.* .
^ ^
TO L.
TO
1_
c
0)
4-1
4-1
3
cr _i
a*
*_ Cu
TO
C F .^
1-
_l
c 3 o u
3
4-1
4)
-=
D-
oo
TO
TO
V:
No. of
CO
CO
r*.
oo
-3"
oo
-3"
\0
o
OA
Samples,
o
Maximum Value
CM
CT,
rA
o PA
CM
-J
la pa
CT\
'
OO
m
CA
CM
c
CO M3
vO
Minimum Value
<U
r-~
-3"
CO
co
o
PA
r-.
MO
O O
o o
Kurtosis,
a.
g.
ct\ -a-
PA
CM
o
-3-
-T
CM
LA
cn
cn
CM
o
Q-
mO
CO OO
4J <T\
"
Skewness, g.
-a-
cn
-3"
o
PA
O
CM
MO
PA
MO LA
C

ui (D
L. 0)
4J TJ
OJ
0)
Standard Deviation,
CM
-3"
CM
cn cn
LA
OO
LA
E
(TJ
O
4-
i_
(TJ
to
CL
o a. e 4J
<1)
Variance,
o o
O cn
CM
-3"
mD
CM
MO mO
cn
r-
CO cn
CM
(TJ
o o
CO
PA
(TJ
UI
CO
ro
4->
<
Mean, x
O -3-
O CM
CO
CM
MO
o
r-~
cn CO
LA
CO
LA
cn
-3"
CA
CM
O
>i_ (D
3
CO
Units
d*
3
CT
4-1
tj
(JJ
X E Soil
X
ro
X
0) l_ ro
X
(TJ
ui 0) l_
<_>
4J
E
fZS
3
4J
t/1
e
TJ Jd-e
CL .C
c
<4-
CL
E
tj >-
o
PA
c o
>
i_
>-
2
4-J
o
<_)
cn
o
TJ
4->
c
0) L.
4-1
Property
>
i/l
CO
<
E 3 ui E c <D X Q
(TJ
4-1
E E C
X
CO
Q)
c a; B 4-1 3 E c o
4-1
o o
o >
0)
4-i
ro
&e LA cn
4-1
(TJ
TJ
4)
C
J}
TJ
*~"
C
u-
CO
0)
4-)
(TJ
3:
O. o
tc CO
tC
CO
<_>
> C o u c
l/l
o QC
CO
"
.
4-J
4-1
(TJ
o o UI <*- c n- o 4) L-> o
(J
bOS
The value of maximum, minimum, mean and standard deviation are

of obvious interest.
The coefficient of variation, V, is useful for
comparing the degree of variation within a population or among populations with respect to a given soil property.
k
Accordingly, Table
has been prepared containing the coeffients of variation of each
parameter for all the physiographic regions and parent material areas
under investigation.
Figures Al through Al8, presented in Appendix A, graphically
illustrate the range, 95% confidence interval and the mean of the
parameters, based upon the soil groupings.
These values would help

,
the practicing engineer not familiar with Indiana soils

an idea of the expected values of the soil parameters.
to obtain
Full illustration
of the usefulness of such statictics is deferred to a later report,

where the data base has been enlarged.
It is important to note that the statistical results presented
within this report are valid only for plastic soils.
Some investigators
have assigned a zero to the index properties for non-plastic soils,
while others have arbitrarily assigned values to the soils based upon
the index properties of other soils contained within the populations
under study.
No method was judged acceptable, and therefore non-plastic
soils were excluded from all analyses
General Method of Analysis
State-wide prediction models for each dependent variable are potentially of value.
The dependent variables of major interest are:
)
l)
coefficient of consolidation (C
C /1+e
and compression ratio (C

,
which equals
CO
where e
is the initial void ratio)
2)
unconfined compressive strength
41
cn
la
vo
r-.
-a-
cn
...
ex
r-~
l*
i
i i
"^
r-~
CA
la
_3-
cm
.3-
vO
l---
oo cA LA LA
f> LA LA
c">
'
'-n
w
LA
CM
-S
-
\>
vO
<~A
OO
-3"
r-~
CM
CM
CA
CO
vO
r-.
CM
r-.
in
CNJ
CM
cn
ca
CM
CM
r-.
CM
o
CNI
CM
vjOÔ cnr~CM
(VI
CM
-3"
r
1-1
o
-3"
ca
vO
ô
O
CA
r-
c-
(Ti -3"
O0
\40
LA OO
vO
CM
LA LA LA
CM
M3
f
CM
~
LA
-3"
LA vO
CM
oo
ca
o O
CM
O .
-3"
,
CO
CM
vO
<"A
O
cn CA
r-
CM
OOrA-3-CO
CM
-3"
CM
OO
-3"
CA
cm
-3"
LA
r~
-3"
c
4-1
w.
in
-3"
CM cm
r--3-
vor-.ee CA CA CA
cm
CA
o
o CA
i i
o
cn
TO l_
TO
c
o
cn
a 3
cn la
cn co vo
la ca
r-
Colloids
oo
r-
la
r--
vo
i
i
o o
co
ms
C3
4-
O
*->
o
l/)
cm
cn
CM
-3r--
Clay
%
r-
LA
-3-
r~-.oocMr--.aooo CO CArA-3-LA-3-
o
-3"
la ca LA
OO
CM
0)
o c o <4g <j- <

0)
cn
OLALAO-3o CA
,
vO
i
O
r
Silt
%
oo
vO CA
r
cn
-3"
-3-3"
cn CA oo
-3"
la
-3"
Cn-3-
o o
<D
4-1
-3-
ca
P-.
vc
(-
laco
-3-
ID
Sand
No.
S
oo
o
cn cn
LA
r-.
CM
-C
4-1
L. (U
Q.
>4-
o c o
O
i_
270
Q_
ieve
CM
...... COCALAOO
o
ca
CM cm
co
CO cn
cn ca CA
cn
ca
O cn
ca
OO
r-.
OÔ
cn
la ca
CA
CO
OO cnrA
cn
in 1_

LO
CM
No.
ra
200 Sieve
oo
LALACnrACM CA CA
o
cn
-3-
la
vO
co
-3-
oo
PMD
cn
r00 CA
-3"
CA
CM
vO
r-
CL<4f=
o
<->
No. 40
vo
cm
0-t
r-
o
CM
CM
la
CM
'
co CA
Sieve
No.
10
oo
_
CM

vO OO
O _CM
LA
-3"
rACM
CM
vO
-T CA
vO
M0
VO
Ô
CA
Sieve
..
LA
LA
_
TJ

C
TO
_
TO
jz
D.
(0 l_
i a.
a.
a. 3
-o
i_
c
TO
in
*
-J
3
J3
2 o
3 u
TO
o
31
3
U
0) tu
in
^
c o
4-t
TO
TO
o
i/l
_l
_J
4-1
~
h-
*
<\>
cn
c
CO
Q.
W o U
F
cn
cn
4-> 4->
Q.
o
in
CO C3
3 O
-
to
. .
<
SL a.
>
/)
C TO E i_ o
JZ
o M3
-C
Ul TO
(U
TO
.
TO i_
TO
F 3
^-
TO 0)
.*
4-1
.
3:
TO l_
J3
0-
O- 1_ i
<
^ C
TO
-*:
TO
o
0)
C O
4->
CO
TO
TO
(_>
>
TO
a.
hi
LA
r^
CM
\D pa PA CO
-3"
LA
CM
i
CM
CA CA
QO
-3"
OO
o
LTV
CA
co
CM
CM
OO
CM
LA
CM
CM
-3"
LA
OO
CA rA
LA
w
OO
CM
O CM
r~.
CA
CM
PA
CM
-3r--
-3"
CM
CM CM
PA
CM
PA
-3"
r-Lf\
\D
-3-
O
-3-
LA
V40
LA
LA MD
PA LA CO
CM
LA
LA
O o rA
1-^.
PA
CM
PA
CM
-3-
O
CM
PA OO
\0
PA P~
en
PA
PA
CA
M0
w.
4-1
u->
PA
OO PA
PA PA
LA
-ar
CA PA
MD
CM
LA PA
vO PA
Ol
10
c
CL
1_
ft)
D
1_
O > o o
4-1
Col loi ds
%
OO LA \0
PA OO
PA PA \0
-3"
PA LA
OO oo
CM
NO
P^
CM
-3-
vO PA
CO
CA LA -T oo
-3"
-3"
\o vO
Clay
%
LA
vO PA
OO PA
C oo
0)
en u C O U
vO
vO PA PA
CA
00
14-
1
in 0)
Silt
LA
CO
O LA
LA VO
CA PA
-3" -3"
CA
-3"
CO
CM
LTV
o
0)
4J
!_
Sand
O O
O
en pa LA
CA
PA CO
vjO
r^ CA vO
CO oo
-3"
-C
4-1
3)
Q.
l-
O
l_
0-
270 Sieve
No. No.
o
CM CM
CM
PA
OO CA
PA
MO
CM CM
CA
CM
oo
1_ (D
U1
O
oo
200 Sieve
No.
O
.
P^
CO
vO
CM
LA
-3"
.
LA
CM
PA
CM
CA
CM CM
.
CM
mT
^
PA
CM
a.u-
F O o
<_)
40
CA
LA
Sieve
No.
10
CA
OO
CM
CM
-3*
PA
wmm
^~
CNJ
rmm
O o
OO
\D
-3"
oo
^~
LA
OO
PA
.
CA
P>
CM CM
CA
CO vO
Sieve
CO 0) l_
-3"
vO
LA
CO
V 3
i/i
c
1_
Q.
<z i_ 
en
T
4-1
CD
.c
(/i
t/1
_J
w U O
c O o
.3 >in
u in C <D > O O O
i/l /i
<a
O
tn
i/>
>

r-
c O
4-1
1/1
0)
in
t/1
4-1
T3
C
ro
V
1
~
CO
E C O ._
-J
>
<TJ
O O c o
.* .
_i t_
SI P-
^ h-
E Z! 3
"O
1) CO
E 3 D
TJ
U1
-C oo
a
ex
W a
i
DC
i-
oo ca
Q-
<3
(q
),
3)
standard Proctor maximum dry
(Y
rf
nd
wet
*
max
opt
),
^m
max;
densities and optimum moisture content

California bearing ratios
(CBRS02)
(CBR)
at
(w
and
soaked
100
(CBRS01)
and 95
percent of standard Proctor maximum dry densities.
The
independent variables
),
included:
1)
initial
void
ratio
(e
natural moisture content

,
(wj, natural dry

(w
p
density (yJ
ticity
index
liquid
(I
limit
(w
L
>
plastic limit
),
plas(p Q ),
),
percent clay, overburden pressure

(p
)
and preconsol idation pressure
for
the consolidation
(L.)
test
data;
2)
w
L>
Yd
a nd
liquidity index
3)
for
l
the
,
unconfined compressive strength data; and

and w
If
w
p
for
a
the compaction and
CBR test data.
particular dependent variable resisted state-wide

if
regression modelling, or
ant quantities
data were contained
in
significthat
is,
to justify modelling on
smaller units,
areas, and
in
physiographic regions, parent material

cases on soil
types,
some
to
the data were grouped accordingly
determine
i
if
the prediction models
could be significantly
mp roved
The following general
approach was applied
in
the devel-
opment of the regression models for each dependent variable.

The method of least squares was used
to to
find "good" estim-
ates of the regression parameters and

of the
isolate the effects
independent variables on the chosen dependent varDraper and Smith

is
iables.
(11)
discuss this method
in
more
detail, and the reader
referred to this text for further
kk
explanation of the theory of regression analysis.

Each
of the
regression model
formulated had random levels

The methods of formulation
independent variables.
appropriate for fixed employed were the regression methods

levels of the
level
The two conditions
that justify fixed

1)
methods for random level
data are:
The conditional
distribution of each dependent variable

is
(given the
independent variables)
normal with the mean
given by the model

also,
(dependent on independent variables),

be
must the measurements of the dependent variable

2)
mutually independent.
The levels of the
independent variinde-
mutually ables for the different data points must be
variables pendent, and the distribution of the independent

must be
independent of the model
parameters.
Both of the
data modelled, above assumptions are reasonable for each set of

and
they have been assumed to be valid.

The regression models developed are linear
in
the
paramis
eters
(because no parameter appears as an exponent or
multiplied or divided by another parameter).

terms
in
The potential
each model
are
linear
independent variables, squared
independent variables, reciprocal

pendent variables, and linear
transformations of indeindependent
interactions of
variables.
Logarithmic transformations of dependent and

it
independent variables were attempted when

that the model
ma t on
i
was suspected
was
intrinsically linear by suitable transfor-
Each dependent variable was
first plotted against each
U5I-
independent variable in order to investigate the nature of the dependence.
These plots indicate whether linear terms, quadratic terms,
or transformations of the variables are appropriate.

the coefficient of determination, r
2
,
Additionally,
was examined to determine the
degree of relation between the dependent variable and the single
independent variable in each case.

GRAM was applied.
The SPSS routine called SCATTER-
Next, the independent variables and/or transformations suggested
by the scatterplots to have some relationship to the dependent variables were selected for an examination of all possible regressions.
The Purdue computer program DRRSQU was selected to identify the "best"
set of independent variables.
Different criteria for selecting the

The C
p
fitted models may be used to determine the "best" equation.
criterion (Ul), concerned with the total square error (consisting of

a random error and bias component) of the n fitted observations, was
selected to identify the set of independent variables that leads to

the smallest C
value with a low bias component.
The "best" set of
independent variables for each dependent variable provided a model for
additional examination.
To further select the terms appropriate for each model, stepwise
regressions were performed, modelling each dependent variable using

the terms indicated by DRRSQU.
The REGRESSION routine of the SPSS
system was used.
The stepwise regression results (see Reference Ul
for a discussion of this method) give adjusted coefficients of multi-
pie determination (R
the model.
2 as each variable is added to or deleted from ) a
Usually, only the coefficient of multiple determination,
kCh
denoted by
2 R
,
is used as a measure of the proportionate reduction
of the total variation in the dependent variable associated with the

use of a set of independent variables.
However, since in the step-
wise regression procedure used, R
can be made large by increasing

2
the independent variables in the model, R
was used as a criterion
for selecting a good model.
2
Q.
explicitly recognizes the number of
independent variables in the model, as shown below (71),

2 _ a
n - 1 ^ sum of squares due to error (or deviation) sum of squares of total n - p
or R
due to error mean square 2 , 1 = 1 ...., mean square of total a
where
p = number of independent variables considered n = number of data sets
The value may actually become smaller when another independent vari-
able is introduced into the model (^l).

and 1.
The larger R
2
,
takes on values between
the better the fitted equation explains the
variation in the data.

The regression equations with high R
EL
values (greater than O.65)
were checked to determine if the relationships were statistically

useful.
The criteria included:
1)
small confidence intervals (at the
93% confidence level) and 2) confidence intervals that did not cross
zero.
Those equations considered valid, satisfied these two criteria. After obtaining good prediction models
,
it is important to exam-
ine these models to determine if they are appropriate for the particular
UC-n.
data being examined.
Certain assumptions are inherent in formulation
of the regression models; an examination of the residuals (differences

between the observed and corresponding predicted values) will suggest
if any of the usual assumptions are invalid.
The usual assumptions
are that the errors are independent, have zero mean,
A7
constant variance, and follow

An examination of
normal
distribution.
the
residuals of the final models

defic-
were made
iencies.
in
model each case to investigate possible
The residuals of each model

in
were plotted against

in
each
independent variable
the model,
addition to the
The
dependent variable and its predicted value.
residuals
Computer Program were tested for normality by the Purdue displaying The models with residual plots not called NORP. but tendsystematic tendencies to be positive or negative,
ing
to
fall
within horizontal
bands centered around 0, and

at
additionally satisfying the normality criterion
the 90
percent confidence level, were selected as the final models.
Statistical
The
in
Resul
t s
independent variables selected as possible terms

the associated
in
the
regression equations and

2
r
,
coefficients
for
C
of determination,
C
.
are presented
2
r
Table
and
c
Attempting to obtain higher
values, the physiographic

20 data
areas which contained at least

for further
sets were selected
investigation.
These
Lowland, included the soils of the Crawford Upland, Wabash

and soils derived
from outwash and alluvial
deposits.
AM
three groups reduced the total
variation
in
the dependent
selected variables associated with the use of some of the
The
2
r
values have been tabulated
in
Tables 5-A, 5"B, and 5-C for each of the three groups.
Table
6
shows that no adequate
values were obtained
48
TABLE
5.
Values of All Samples for Compression Index (C ) and Compression Ratio

r
(C
r
(N=96)
Independent Variables
w
0.795
0.771
V.
w,
w
p
Clay
0.639
0.330
0.268
0.243
0.107
0.029
0.013
0.685
0.674
0.551
0.304
0.206
0.245
0.111
0.030
0.003
TABLE 5-A.
Values for
and
C
r
of Soils
from the Crawford Upland Physiographic Region (N=28)
Y.
w,
w
p
Clay
0.796
0.786
0.700
0.399
0.368
0.220
0.177
0.056
0.029
0.705
0.704
0.647
0.417
0.317
O.256
0.215
0.057
0.025
49
TABLE 5-B
Values for
and
of Soils
(N=29)
from the Wabash Lowland Physiographic Region
e
Y,
w,
w
0.364
Clay
0.844
0.818
0.628
0.243
0.123
0.030
0.026
0.003
0.758
0.757
0.567
0.203
0.281
0.112
0.024
0.032
0.000
TABLE 5-C.
Values for
and
of Soils Derived from
Outwash and Alluvial
Deposits
(N=63)
w
0.844 0.815
Y,
w,
w
p
Clay
0.716
0.362
0.305
0.297
0.168
0.015
0.006
0.742
0.722
0.637
0.326
0.234
0.286
0.165
0.015
0.000
v<
TABLE
6.
2
r
Values of All Samples for Unconfined Compressive Strength (q ) (N-356)
w
w.
0.003
u
0.008
0.170
0.020
0.060
0.105 0.179
0.173
0.13*
0.191
log q u
0.001
0.250
TABLE 6-A.
Values for
q
u
of Soils Derived from
Lacustrine Deposits (N=43)
w.
T,
0.209
u
0.170
0.171
0.219
0.181
0.607 0.668
0.701
0.309
0.321
log q
0.185
u
0.692
TABLE 6-B,
Values for q
of Soils from the

u
Calumet Lacustrine Plain (N=40)
w
L
P
w
P
y,
d
L
.
0.100
u
0.098
0.09* 0.0*0
0.560 O.698
0.737
0.356
0.331
log q u
0.059
0.088
0.7*5
51
when an attempt was made to find

and
log
q u
relationship between
in
q u
and
low
the
2
r
independent variables shown

values were obtained for
q y
the
Table.
Similarly,
Tipton Till
data of the
Plain,
Scottsburg Lowland, Mitchell
Plain,
Wabash Lowland, and the Crawford Upland.

soils derived from residuum of siltstone,
stone;
Additionally,
shale, and sandloess over
residuum of limestone bedrock;

till;
thin
loamy
Wisconsin age glacial

its,
and outwash and alluvial

in
in
r
.
depos-
did not show any
improveme nt
For
soils deri ved
from lacustrine deposits as shown
Table 6-A, an
improve-
ment
in
2
r
was achieved,
but
significant improvement was
moisobserved only for the independent variables of natural

ture content, w r
,
and natural
2
r
dry density, Y d
As
seen
in
Table 6-B, similarly high

found
in
values were observed for soils

This
is
the Calumet
Lacustrine Plain.
expected
since most of the soils found within this physiographic
region have been derived from lacustrine deposits.
Relatively low
2
r
were obtained for the dependent var-
iables of standard Proctor maximum dry and wet densities,
optimum moisture content and their logarithmic transformations,

for all the compaction
test data
(Table 7).
Soils
of the Tipton Till
Plain and soils derived from outwash and
alluvial deposits;
residuum of siltstone, shale, and sand-
stone; and thin loess deposits over loamy Wisconsin age
glacial
till,
also had
low
2
r
values.
in
Additionally, those
A-6,
and
soils classified as CL and CH
the USCS and A-^,

to
A-7-6
in
the AASHTO System, were also selected
determine
52
TABLE
7.
Values of All Sampl es for Maximum Dry Density ), and Optimum Moisture ), Maximum Wet Density (y (y. max max Content (w J (N=l67) opt
r
W
L
w
P
w
P
s
Yd
max log y d
0.566
0.489
0.496 0.436
.
0.440
0.091
max
0.589 0.456
0.463 0.340 0.349

0.563
0.086
0.106
0.103
max log 3 y m w
t opt
0.466
0.439
0.503
max
0.681
0.056 0.065
log 3 w
opt
0.613
0.485
0.493
TABLE 7-A
Values for y
y
max
and w
max
of Soils from the Valparaiso Morainal
Section (N=26)
1
w
L P
n P
w
s
^d
max log Y
0.823
d
0.724
0.597
0.591
0.237
0.241
0.835
max
0.788
0.750
0.683
0.701
Y m
max log 3 Y
opt
0.580 0.574 0.547

0.512
0.199
0.203
max
0.794 0.755
0.664 0.559
0.256 0.238
log 3 w
opt
0.670
53
if
any
improvements could be made

in
in
No
significant
Coefficfor
increases
any of the
2
r
values were observed.
ients of determination greater
than 0.65 were obtained

in
compaction data of soils found
the Valparaiso Morainal
Section and soils derived from residuum of limestone bedrock.

The
independent variables, along with the improved

included
r
2
r
values, are
in
Tables
7,
7~A and 7~B.
Very low
were observed for CBR test data.
Table
contains the results for the entire set of data.

ships for the soil
sets,
Relation-
groups which contained 20 or more data

selected for the compaction
2
r
that
is,
those groupings
data,
produced similarly poor
values.
Following the application of all
possible regressions
and stepwise regression modelling for those sets of vari-
ables and transformations selected from above,
the
final
9
acceptable regression models are presented

11.
i
in
s
Tables
ou
t
1
through
the
These equations satisfy the requ remen t
ned in
General
Method of Analysis, with adjusted coefficients of
multiple determination greater than 0.65-
5*
TABLE 7-B
Values for Y.
d
max
and w
max
opi
of Soils
De rived from Limestone Bedrock
(N=22)
W
L
w
p p
s
Yd
max log Y d
0.802
max
0.618 0.625
0.715
0.035
0.815 0.656
0.727
0.586
0.039
0.016
0.017
0.101
Ym
0.500
0.500
0.675
max
m
log Y
0.663
0.595
0.719
max
0.823
opt
log a w
opt
0.81
i*
0.655
0.717
0.075
TABLE 8
Values of All Samples for Soaked CBR at 100 (CBRSOl)and 95 (CBRS02) Percent of Standard Proctor Maximum Dry Density (N=l 38)
r
ndependent Variables
1
w
L P
p r
Y^ d
max
Ym m
w max
* opt
CBRS01
.192
.221
.082
.187
.233
.272
-228
.237 .180
.271
.258
.2hh .353
CBRS02
log CBRS01 log CBRS02
.068
.143
321
.310
.332
.328 .273
.328
.120
-214
.309
55
v-
NO en
en
CM
E E 3 ro
to
CM CM
co
-3-
o
x
T3
I
C
en
c o
</>
CM
O o
o
+
en la
CM
r-.
-3-3"
m
<o L.
Ql
e o
c o
oo
TJ
CD
c u O' 4-1 O o
4-1
to
o o o
I
oo
vO
OO
o
I
CM
a>
O
CO
*
.
TO
CC
c o
in
'"*
3
CM
t-
\o
-3-
CO
1_
o_
u O >*-
C o
(/I
V
!_
(/>
Ol
CD
o o o
+
c
CD
o
-3-
LA
CM
v)
O O
+ C
en
CM
LA vO -T
CM
CM CM
-3"
co co
O
I
O
I
O
I
-3" r-~
O
I
O
I
c o. o e o
4->
m u
0)
o
-3"
o CO o
vO CO vO
+
*
,_ c
" *
O
CO vO
CM
C_>
TO
-3-
CM
-a
O" LU
ra
oo vO LA
CO
LA
O O O
II
CO CO
o en
r~-
o
*
1
0)
2 * LA
vO
-3"
c o
(A
</!
(1)
,_.
o o
li
o CM
r.
vO IA
CM
II
CM CM
O O
co
O O
*-^
u o oo oo o
rji
1-
l_
o
oo
1-
X.
Ol
<
i.
TO
CM TO QC
vO LA CO
O o CO
CM
en
1*^
CO oo
!**
en vo
OO CO oo
CO CO
o LA
r-
LA
-3" r-.
CO
E E 3
to
c
a)
0)
-s to s
Q.
C71
to
in
S)
-o
sz
in TO
en
CO
<
<
"o.
3 O
to
E
TO
-o
TO
to
56
z t o I
</T
i01
a)
co
CM
PA MD
-O
D-
E E 3 TO
</>
vO CO
-3"
^~
x c c o
in
o
u
Q.
^_^
PA
CM
.
O PA
-3"
,
,
\>
v>

C o
4J
TO
CM _
PA
oo
2
LA CA
^
2
-3"
PA
CA
-a
c o
+
_J
u o
U
cu i_
3
cr LU
3
LA LA
co
i
CO MO LA
_i
^
V
O o o
1
o
PA
O
1
"
o
1
CM
0)
TO
a;
C o
in
i/i
_l _J
.
r~. vjO
a.
yi/i
u o
c o
in U> 0) l_
O
1
en JCM
r-.
a> L.
o LA
o
i
^ vO CO CO
FM
CA
co co co
CM
.
2
*- *
CA
CM
-3-
+
^
^-.
PA
Ol

o
2
~
O
v'
+
O o
0)
o
1
"
'
2
_
0)
CA 00 PA
1
3 -a
cr LU
^-^
U
c_>
l/l
>
o * o o
II
-3-

ii
-3"
PA PA
o o O
o
cn
-3-
o
II
O O
II
o o o o
II
PA PA
-3"
O o o
II
vO
o
P~

II
sO
o
II
CM
PA LA
*
CM
II
LA
o
l_
L.
o
u
C_)
O
II
o o
1
uo
cn
II
m
0) i_
o
(->
uo
r- p-~
o o
-a-
L.
O
<_>
cj
CJ
oo
CM CM
en
0)
a:
u_
O
>
1. TO
CM TO cC
en LA oo
pa pa co
ao co
r-
r^
r^
vO PA p^
-3"
CM
-3"
1 i i
CM
CM
p^
CA CO
r^
r--
CO
OO
o
u>
3
i/i
c c

0)
o
o
l_
l_
ou
cn
m
TO
4-1
4-1
CA C
-J co
c
33
o -o <4- C 2 TO
jC
in TO
<o
C O
TO i-
4-1
O3>
> m 3 O 2 -o Q. 3 c CJ
TO
< o
57
o u
n)
in 
a
0) !_
c o
a.
i_
3
cr
u-
o
1/1
cn
LA
LA OO CO CA
a) i_
4-1
o
I/) I/)
to
LA -T
CM CM
o
CM T3
o o
4-1
>
U) ui
<D i_
0)
<D !_
13
ai
-
in in 4-
c o u o c
v0)
o o o
II
o o o o
II
o o o o
I
3
cr
3 >
LA
cn
Cn
to
CM flj a:
O LA
CA CA sO

c
fll
c
in in
i
CO
c E in 3 3 U to

<
oj
(TJ
fO
a.
3 O O Q.
TO
_l
0)
53
o
1/1
1_ 0)
.
(1)
C
co
S c
D
n
E
1
t-
pa
NO
CM
CM
CN(
<->
U
c/>
.
TJ
ro
-^
J
CO
U Q O E V
ui
4J
T3
j:
4-1
L.
^3
<*-
e
E x
TO
^
i_
TO
TO
O
in
*->
a.
3
c
oo
o CO
CO la en
CM
PA MO
>
4-1
m
-
TO
-o
4->
0)
4->
CM
C
H)
Q.
n c i_ o
a.
o PA
PA
C
L.
O.
o
a) i_
vO CO
CM
CA
OO
4->
T3
i)
*->
-3"
vO CA cn
PA
in
-T
o
"
u-
pa
O 3 b c
4J
4-1
o
+
CA CO cn
CM
Cn
c
TO
C o
UI
1/1
-3"
f
1
3
_l
+
O
Ol
a
0) i_
Q.
TJ
u
L-
C
to
c/>
en
OJ
X m F
-o ?LTV
3 ^ pm
*
*"-^
O")
O O LA
CM
PA
+
_J
CA LA
CM
cn
TO

0)
+
^~"^
T3

PA OO vO
PA
X ID E
"O >-
X ID E
PA
CM CM
o O
cn
""
.
TO
4-J
CM
Q.
c o 3
ui
u-
UI
PA
l
o
!
PA CO
LA r~
-3-
-3-
TO
O
I
O
I
LA
LA pa
o o
-o
TO
SO cn
-3-
ui
r o
TO
II
II
II
co vO
CM
II
-o
11
o
I
X E
ID
PA
CM
O-
0-
lu
c O
in
</>
X TO E
tj >O-
TJ
X
ID
cn
E
>-
cn
a.
Q.
Q.
-3"
tj
o X cn (D O E
4) L.
4->
TJ TJ
TO
4J
!_
>-
O m c <
4-1
3
TJ
 ui
jr
UI in
d) UI
J3
TO
m -
ID
X ID E
x
ID
tc
U-
O
>1to
X
TO
c
-
-o
E
E 3
OJ


QJ
*J TO
L.
Q.
flj
ID
cn
CO
>-
X ID E
>-
TO
3 C u
ui ui

o.
E
-O J-
cn
in OJ L.
0)
O
l_
i_
E
OJ
cn
CJ i-
in
a)
_
in
ID
<
00
<
Q.
.E
(D
3 3
ID 0)
4J
ui
J)
a c O
.c
r-
-2
-*
ID
Q.
to L.
ui
U O
# #
L.
a>
j-i
CO
cc
w-
"O
tu
co
o z
59
DISCUSSION OF STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
Soi
Var iabi
ty
The statistical
results presented
in
the preceding
engineer to make cerChapter will enable the geotechnical The resulting data also tain es t ma tes of soil properties. may be expected for indicate that the range of values which particular parameter appears to vary with the a given soil
i
physical
property which
is
being measured and the population
from which the soil

soil
has been sampled.
Nevertheless, some
than others. properties are inherently more variable
regions and the The grouping of soils by physiographic
suggests that the origin of their parent materials further improved for predicability of some soil properties can be and certain combinations of some independent variables
groups of soils, but not others.
those combinations of soil
A
specific listing of
parameters and soil groups proin
viding the best reduction
the degree of variability, would
Exthemselves. show combinations as variable as the data by case basis and pected values must be determined on a case
Figures
Al
through Al8 of Appendix

The range,
95
have been prepared for
this purpose.
percent confidence interval,

is
and mean of each soil

i
parameter under discussion
shown
these
Fi
gures
Predictions and Correlat ions
Consolidation Test Results

The plasticity chart shown
the consolidation
test
in
Figure
indicates that
results are for soils which are
plasticity (59 mostly inorganic clays of low to medium (25 samples). samples) and silts of medium compressibility high adjusted coFrom Table 9 it can be seen that a very
was found to efficient of multiple determination of 0.856
exist between
and
w
p
and
for all
p
the
test data
is
Since the prediction equation contains

not of much practical
use.
c>
this
equation
The R* values for the remaining

the equation
C
p
three equations for

that the variation
and
c
C
for
C
r
all
indicate
in
and
can be explained with the
use of simple and easily determined soil
properties.
Figure
the indicates that the soils collected from
all of which are Wabash Lowland are inorganic clays almost
of
low to medium plasticity and an equal
number of silts of
medium compressibility.
The R* values are slightly greater
tota values o f the equations derived from the than the R, a

da ta
.
Soils
investigated
in
the Crawford
Upland are also
me dium plastic
inorganic clays and medium compressible
silts
(Figure 9).
Prediction equations similar to those of

Soils derived from
the Wabash Lowland have been generated.
largest group outwash and alluvial deposits constitute the

of samples collected for the prediction of
C
and
c
C
f
but
61
ALL SAMPLES
N=96
x UJ a
80
--
o
en CL
HO
--
HO
80
LIQUID LIMIT
WABASH LOWLAND CN=29)
X LU Q
i
80
>1
i
CJ
1
HO-
f/
I 1
CD a: _j Q_
QLrML^
J
1
HO
l:[QUID
80
120
LIMIT
FIGURE
9 PLASTICITY CHARTS FOR
CONSOLIDATION
TEST DATA
62
CRAHFQRD UPLAND
N=28
X LU o
~z.
80
>1
1
HO
s&/ >^s
+ yS
(mh)-(oh)
hCO cr
Q_
'
++^
:
-i
icc-ml
r-
^^ p*^
HO
--
i
1
80
120
LIQUID LIMIT
GUTWASH AND ALLUVIAL DEPOSITS CN=63)
LU
a
>I
80
--
u
CO (X
HO
--
HO
80
LIQUID LIMIT
FIGURE
CONTINUED
63
no adequate models
for
C p
were found.
model
Among the models de-
veloped,
the most
in
C
useful
explains 84 percent of the

initial
is
variation
and
involves only the

for
void
ratio.
in
The plasticity chart ure

9
these soils
also shown
Fig-
The majority of the soils
investigated above
(96
sam(63
ples) were derived from outwash and alluvial
deposits
samples).
It
will
be
left as an exercise
if
for
further re-
searchers to determine
good prediction models can be deIn-
veloped within the other physiographic regions within

diana and
if
the grouping of soils

in
by
parent material
areas
would also result
regression equations as good as those
developed for outwash and alluvial deposits.
Unconfined and Compressive Strength Test Results

The results from 356 unconfined compressive strength
tests were collected and predictions were attempted.

initial
all
An
attempt was made to develop regression equations for

and
the soils
selected soil groupings.

a
Later, an attempt
was made to develop
series of regression equations for the
logarithm of unconfined compressive strength and liquidity

index at various
No
levels of natural moisture content
(**5)q
adequate relationships were developed for the total

or
data
for
û
data of soils taken from most of the physio-
graphic regions or parent material areas.
Acceptable regression equations were generated for

soils derived from lacustrine deposits using the
logarithm
Sk
of unconfined
of the compressive strength and the square
natural
dry density
(Table 10).
Two prediction equations
values of 0-756 and 0.750 were also developed with R* limited to the Calumet when the lacustrine deposits were
Lacus trine Plain.
B oth
models also contained only the

a
square of the natural dry density;
higher
value was
a
obtained when
was applied directly without
the
logarithmic
transformation.
Plain and derived
The soils taken from the Calumet

from lacustrine deposits are
in
Lacustrine
in
identified
the plasticity charts shown
Figure 10.
Test Results Compaction and California Bearing Ratio

A
total
of
138 sets of data were collected
from stanthe
tests. dard Proctor compaction tests and CBR
For
for
total
generated data, no reliable equations co uld be

densities, dent variables of maximum dry or wet
ture content or the CBR value at
imum dry density and more simp le
100 or
the depen
i
optimum mo
95
percent of max-
independent variables
found between opti(R
g
very high correlation, as expected, was
density mum moisture content and maximum dry

For the physiographic
0.89*0.
areas
compaction test results, which contained at least 20 sets of those soils deonly the Valparaiso Morainal Section and
rived from residuum of
limestone bedrock, displayed any
densities, optimum relationship between maximum dry and wet

m oisture
content (and their logarithmic transformations) Reasonably high R a values and simpler independent variables.
65
CALUMET LACUSTRINE PLAIN
N=40
X a
-z.
1
80
>hi
+
-H-
<?/
is
i
1
40
CD CE _J a_ +Q
y
HO
s^
(mh)-(oh)
1__
80
120
LIQUID LIMIT
LACUSTRINE DEPOSITS (N=H8]
X LU a
80
@
-
>i
>^
yS
(MH)-(oh)
1
HO
V
CO CE
Q_
'
:jc-c/@ 1
it
4?
40
80
120
L [QUID LIMIT
FIGURE
10 PLASTICITY
CHARTS FOR UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH DATA
66
prediction models. were obtained for the acceptable

remarkably high
2 R a
value of 0.972 was
found
for
the
correla-
content and tion between optimum moisture
the
independent
densities for soils of variables of maximum dry and wet The plasticity charts for the Valparaiso Morainal Section.
been soils from which these models have
formulated, are
shown
in
Figure 11.
No
relationships were found to exist with
values
and the independent greater than O.k for the CBR test data The collection of additional variables presented in Table 8. throughout the entire test data representative of soils
state will determine
if
prediction equations can be form-
utilized and preulated for CBR test data using the methods
sented within this report.
This will
also be left as an
exercise for future researchers.
67
VALPARAISO MORAINAL AREA (N=26)
X LU a
i
80
>j
40
-
J^
y/4(mhHoh)
1
CO cc _J Q_
MS
J
1
40
80
120
LIQUID LIMIT
RESIDUUM-LIMESTONE BEDROCK (N=22)
X LU Q
>I
i
80
40
CO
<x
a_
:ci3^'
40
80
120
LIQUID LIMIT
PLASTICITY CHARTS FOR COMPACTION
FIGURE
II
TEST DATA
(A
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The
research results may be summarized as follows:

1.
computerized, user-oriented,
information
storage and retrieval system for geological,

pedological and geotechnical engineering
inis
formation has been developed.
The system
flexible, so that changes can be made easily

as
ly
2.
the
requirements of users become more clear-
defined.
complete instructional User's Manual
has
been
prepared, compatible with the present requirements and needs of the

Commission and the Joint Highway Research

Project at Purdue University.
3.
Suggestions for standardizing the reporting

and
collection of new data have been made. facilitate efficient

information from
The computerized data bank should and economical

the State of
handling of geotechnical
Soils
Indiana.
a
information which was essen-
tially "lost" after
project was completed, can now be
utilized for future highway projects and

data bank should be maintained by the
improvements.
for all
The
ISHC
potential
users
69
The application of statistical
methods to the geois
technical data stored to January 1978
promising.
However, no soil
group studied can be said to produce
overall, better correlation equations than others,

and parent matergrouping of soils by physiographic regions justified for some depenial areas certainly appears to be
of soils. dent variables and for certain groups
From the
preliminary constatistical analysis to date, the following

clusions are
1. d
rawn
The prediction of compression
index
(C
and
compression ratio
measures
Soils
is
(C
from more simple soil

a
reasonable on
state-wide basis.
investigated within the Wabash Lowland and

regions also
C
the Crawford Upland physiographic
produce regression equations for
and
C
r
with relatively high correlation coefficients.

Further, equations generated for soils derived
from outwash and alluvial
deposits also are
statistically significant for the prediction

of
2.
C
but not
for the prediction of
Prediction of the unconfined compressive

strength analysis
in
(q is
)
,
by
the method of regression
not
possible for soils found withPlain,
the Tipton Till
Scottsburg Lowland,
Crawford Up-
Mitchell
Plain, Wabash
Lowland,
land, and soils derived
from residuum of silt-
stone, shale, and sandstone;
residuum of
70
limestone bedrock;
consin age glacial
ial
thin
loess over
loamy Wis-
till;
and outwash and alluv-
deposits.
q
Acceptable regression models

from the Calumet Lacustrine
for
of soils
dePlain and soils derived from lacustrine
posits have been developed.

of maximum dry density The prediction K
maximum wet density (y

ure content
(w
max moistand optimum

a
(y d
opt
is
s
max not possible on

i
stateinde-
wide basis from the
mp er- to-de t e rm ne
statistical pendent variables studied and the
methods used.
the soils
Adequate prediction equations for
investigated from the Valparaiso Mor
ainal
the logArea have been found to exist for

,
arithms of y d
max max transformations), and w Qpt
Ym
(and
.
their
logarithmic
_
Soils der.ved from
produced aderesiduum of limestone bedrock also

for the quate regression equations, but only and w Qpt and the simpler-tologarithms of y d max Mo acceptable determine independent variables.
Tipton Till models were found for soils of the

of siltPlain and soils derived from residuum loess deposits stone, shale, and sandstone; thin till; and soils over loamy Wisconsin age glacial
classified as CL and CH
in
the Unified Soil

in
Classification System and A-4, A-6, and A-7

the AASHTO system.
71
k.
The prediction of
the
soaked CBR
is
not
pos-
within this sible with the methods and data used

study.
ilar
to
The grouping
of
soils
into
units
sim-
those of the compaction
test
data does
in-
not offer any
improvement with the set of

investigated.
in
dependent variables
As
sufficient data
is
collected
the future from all

the need
to study
the physiographic and parent material
areas,
will groups of soils which are more closely related
be de-
termined.
These areas should

soil
include pedologic soil
assoc-
iation areas,
t
series, soil
horizons, and combinations,
hereof
72
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH
This study has briefly
ve
s t
ga ted
he me
hod of
regression analysis to develop meaningful
correlations and
parameters from
predictions of difficult to determine soil

more readily attainable soil
measures.
The following are
suggested for future research.

1.
Statistical
techniques other than regression
analysis may prove to be more appropriate to

study soil
variability, and may lead to betmodels.
ter statistical
cal
Bayesian statisti-
decision theory has recently been under
development and provides mathematical models

for making engineering decisions
in
the face
of uncertainty.
2.
The analysis of variance
(ANOVA)
technique
should be investigated.
The independent
variables
in
ANOVA models may be qualitative
(physiographic region, parent material, sampling procedure,
etc.)
and may provide

in
insight
into factors often overlooked tical

3.
the statis-
study of soils.
The collection of new soils data should con-
tinue from private and public sources.
For
73
those soil
properties for which no acceptable
models are generated, the need to study groups

of soils other
than
those
investigated within
The ped-
this
research should be determined.
ological
p
grouping of soils data appears most
rom
ng
the
k.
The feasibility of contractors using
geo-
technical data bank should be studied.

5.
The feasibility of incorporating
into the data
bank the
location of bore holes by state
plane coordinates should be investigated.

This would enable
a
user of the system to pre-
cisely locate the position from which each

sample has been taken.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
7^
BIBLIOGRAPHY
976) Azzouz, A.S., Krizek, R.J. and Corotis, R.B. Compressibility, Soil of "Regression Analysis Soils and Foundations, Vol. 16, No. 2, June,
(
pp.
19-29.
\l
"The Belcher, D.J., Gregg, L.E. and Woods, K.B. (19*3) CharacFormation, Distribution and Engineering Project teristics of Soils," Joint Highway Rese arch The the State Highway Commission of India na Bul"Engineering Experiment Station - Engin eering letin No. 87, Purdue University, January, 389 PPthe Calif' Black, W.P.M. (1962) "A Method of Estimating Soils 'ornia Bearing Ratio of Cohesive DecernVol. 12, No ticity Data," Geotechn que
i
3-
ber,
A.
pp.
27\-2W.
1
i
C ass Burmister, D.M. (19*0) "Practical Methods for the Con ication of Soils," Proceedings of th e Purdue ference on Soil Mechanics and Its App lications, Purdue University, September, pp. 129-139-
f-
5.
Clauss,
Bank.ng K.A. (1975) "Material or Terrain Data Sym3rd Roads," at the National Data Bank for Storage, Data posium on Terrain Evaluation and Johannesburg, South Africa, February, 9 PP-
6.
to Clauss, K.A. and Vail, J.W. (1975) "A New Approach Materials Data Banking for Road Construction, Proceedings of the 6th Regional Conferen ce for Africa, Durban, South Africa, Vol. 1, September,
pp.
7.
11-19.
Cozzolino, V.M. (1961) "Statistical Forecasting of Compression Index," Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and F oundation Vol. 1, pp. 51-53Par s Eng neer ng
i
8.
Crawford, R.A., Thomas, J.B. and Stout, M.Jr. (1972) "Computerized Soil Test Data for Highway Design, Physical Research Section, South Dakota Department of Highways, Pierre, South Dakota, 2k pp.
751
9.
Davidson, D. T. and Gardiner, W. P. (19*49) "Calculation of Standard Proctor Density and Optimum Moisture Content from Mechanical Analysis, Shrinkage Factors, and Plasticity Index," HRB Proceedings Vol. 29, pp. b^^-he>l.
,
10.
Deen, R. C. (1967) "Highway Construction in Windblown Silts in Western Kentucky," Division of Research, Kentucky Department of Highways, January.
,
11. Draper, N. and Smith, H. (1966) Applied Regression Analysis John Wiley and Sons, Inc., kOl pp.
12.
Elnaggar, H. A. and Krizek, R. J. (1970) "Statistical Approximation for Consolidation Settlement," Highway Research Board, No. 323 , pp. 87-96.
(13.)
Franzmeir, D. P., Sanders, F. W. and Zachary, A. L. (1975) Key to Soils in Indiana , Department of Agronomy, Purdue University and USDA Soil Conservation Service, February, 26 pp.
(1971) "Statistical Geotechnical Properties of Glacial Lake Edmonton Sediments," Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Applications of Statistics and Probability to Soil and Structural Engineering , Peter Lumb , Editor, Hong Kong University Press, September, pp. 203-228.
Ik. Fredlund, D. G. and Dahlman, A. E.
19. Galloway, H. M. , Yahner, J. E., Srinivasan, G. and Franzmeir, D. P. (1975) User's Guide to the General Soil Maps and Inter-
pretative Data for Counties of Indiana , 27 pp.

16.
General Soils Maps and Interpretation Tables for the Counties of Indiana (1971), Agricultural Experiment Station/Cooperative Extension Service, Purdue University and Soil Conservation Service, U. S. Department of Agriculture, November.
(1973) "Retrieval and Use of Geotechnical Information," Ohio River Valley Soil Seminar, Geotechnics in Transportation Engineering October,
,
17. Hagerty, D. J., Schmitt, N. G. and Pfalzer, W. J.
PP. 1-9.
18. Hampton, D.
(1961) "Statistical Analysis of Soil Variability," Joint Highway Research Project Report No. 12 , Purdue University, May, 115 pp.
19. Hampton, D.
Yoder, E. J. and Burr, I. W. (1962) "Variability of , Engineering Properties of Brookston and Crosby Soils," HR3 Proceedings , Vol. Ul, pp. 621-6^9.
76
20
21
22
23
James
"Atterberg Limit Tests for Quantitative Earthwork Control," Civil Eng neer ng a fied No. 7*+6, September, Publ ic Works Review, Vol. 63 pp. 1005-1006.
P.M.
(1968)
2k.
Jumikis, A.R.
(N.J.)
(1958) "Geology and Soils of the Newark Metropolitan Area," Jou rna of the So Foundations Division, ASCE, Vol. and r-ounaatii Mechanics ana k\ pp. \bHb, May, 41 Paper 1646, Proc. 8*4, No. SM2, 84,
1
i
25.
Kog ure, K. and Ohira, Y. (1977) "Statistical Forecasting of Compressibility of Peaty Ground," Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Vol. \k, No. k, November, pp. 562-570.
26
Kreig,
R.A. (1977) "Terrain Analysis for the TransAlaska Pipeline," Civil Engineering, Vol. ^7, No. 7, July, pp. 61-65-
27
28
Kre
Kr
i
R.A
(1977)
Personal
R.B. K.ts.
Communication, October.
Corotis, zek., R.J., K.J., torotis,
H.H. (1977) ana El-Moursi, and ti-noursi, n.n. Measured and Predicted f "Probabilistic Analysis of Settlements," Canadian Geotechnical Journ al Vol. \k, No. 1, February, pp. 3 3
, 1 ,
29
Legget, R.F. (1973) Cities and Geol ogy 505" 506 Book Co., Inc.^ pp
.
McGraw-Hill
30
Lille Regional Laboratory (1971) "Establishment of a Card Index for Borings and Tests," Ministry Public Works, Paris, January.
Liu, T.K.
and Thornburn, T.H. (1965) "Engineering Index Properties of Some Surficial Soils in Illinois," Bulletin No ^77, University of Illinois, College of Engineering, Engineering Experiment Station,
.
31.
pp.
i 1 i
32
Lumb
Soils," ty of Natura (1966) "The Var iabi % No. Journal, Vol. No Canadian Geotechnical Journal. 2, Vol 3 May, pp. lk-31.
P.
1
.
. ,
77
33-
Lumb,
"Application of Statistics in Soil Mechanics," in I.K. Lee (Ed.), Soil Mechanics-New Horizons American Elsevier Publishing Company, Inc., pp.
P.
(
1
9 7^
i4-1 11
3*4.
Lundin,
S.E., Stephansson, 0. and Zetterlund, P. (1973) "Geoteknisk Databank," Rapport R70, National Swedish Building Research Institute, 158 pp.
35.
Malott, C.A. (1922) "The Physiography of Indiana," Handbook of Indiana Geology, Indiana Department of Conservation, Pub. 21, part 2.
Map of the Soil Associations of Indiana (1977) CooperPu rdue Un ver s ty in a t ve Extens ion Serv ce Cooperation with the State Soil and Water Conservation Committee, Indiana Dept. of Natural Reand the Soil Conservation Service, U.S.D.A. sources
i i
36.
37
McKittrick, D.P. (1965) "Subsurface Investigation for Indiana High ways," Joint Highway Research Project Report No. 20, Purdue University, September,
T/T
38.
pp
Michigan State Highway Department (1952) "Field Manual of Soil Engineering," 3rd Edition, August, 3^8 pp.
Moran,
39.
Proctor, Mueser and Rutledge (1958) "Study of Deep Stabilization by Vertical Sand Drains," Bureau of Yards and Docks, Department of the Navy, Contract No. N0Y-88812.
Soil
40.
National
Institute for Transport and Road Research (1976) "Geotechn ca and Soil Engineering Mapping for Roads and the Storage of Materials Data," Technical Pretoria, Recommendations for Highways, Draft TRH2 South Africa, July, 3h pp.
i
1
41.
Neter,
J. and Wasserman, W. tical Models, Richard
D.
(197*0 Appl ied Irwin, Inc.,
inear Stat 842 pp.

,
s-
kl
Nie,
K. N.H., Hull, C.H., Jenkins, J.G., S te nbrenne r and Bent, D.H. (1975) Statistical Package for the 2nd Edition, McGraw-Hill Book Social Sciences b75 Co. o. 675 pp. pp
,
,
i
Y. (1956) "A Brief Note on sh da _f Soil," Journal of the Soil o

,
Compression Index Mechanics and FounSM3,
dations DivTsTon, ASCE, Vol. 82, No. ]k pp. July Paper 1027
,
,
Proc.
kk.
Osterberg, J.0. (1972) Personal Communication between Osterberg and Azzouz et al.
78
i5.
Peck,
R.B. (19^0) "Sampling Methods and Laboratory Tests for Chicago Subway Soils," Proceed ngs of the Purdue Conference on Soil Mechanics and its Applipp~! A0- 50 Purdue University, September cations
i
A6
Peck,
R.B. and Reed, W.C. (195M "Engineering Properties University of Chicago Subsoils," Bui let in No. A 23 Engineering Engineering, of College Illinois, of Experiment Station, 62 pp.
,
k7
Redon,
"Computerized Inventory of Soil Profiles Throughout Algeria," National Laboratory of Public Works and Buildings, Algeria, September.
J. P.
(1972)
A8.
Ring, G.W.
Sallberg, J.R. and Collins, W.H. (1962) "Correlation of Compaction and Classification Test Data," HRB Bui let in 325 January, pp. 55-75
Ill,
-
19.
Rizkallah, V. and El Nimr, E. (1975) "Applicability of Regression Analysis in Soil Mechanics with the Help of Data Banks," Application of Statistics and Probability in Soil and Structural Engineering, 2nd International Conference, Aachen, F.R. Germany, Vol 2, pp. ^23-^38.
.
50.
Roberts, W.S. (1976) "Regionalized Feasibility Study of Purdue Cold Weather Earthwork," M. S C. E. Thes s University, May 190 pp. (Also, Special Report 76-2 Cold Regions Research and Engineering LabHanover, New Hampshire, July, 1976) ora tory
.
i
51.
Rowan, W.H.
and Graham, W.W. (1948) "Proper Compaction Eliminates Curing Period in Constructing Fills," Vol. 18, No. 7, July, pp. Civil Engineering 50-51.
,
Sisiliano, W.J. (1970) "A Regional Approach to Highway Soils Considerations in Indiana," Joint Highway Research Project Report No. 18, Purdue University, September, 223 PP
53.
Skempton, A.W. (\3hk) "Notes on the Compressibility of Clays," Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society Vol of London 100, pp. 119-135.
5k
Soil
(1958-present), United States DepartSurvey Manua ment of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service.
1
55.
Sowers, G.B. (1970) Introductory Soil Mechanics and Founda t ions, 3rd Edition, The Macmillan Company, Collier Macmillan Limited, p. 102.
73
56
Kentucky, Spradling, 0. (1976) "A Soils Data System for Division of Research, Bureau Research Report kk\ of Highways, Kentucky Department of Transportation,
,
58 57.
pp.
Highway Stokstad, O.L. (19*40) "Soil Type as a Factor in Conference Purdue Engineering," Proceedings of the on Soil Mechanics and its Applications, Purdue 371-381 pp~l September U n v e r s ty
i
i
58.
59-
Szendrei, M.E.
(1977)
Personal
Communication, February.
Terzaghi, K. and Peck, R.B. (1967) Soil Mechanics in Engineering Practice, 2nd Edition, John Wiley
and Sons,
Inc.,
p.
73-
60.
Thornburn, T.H., Hagerty, D.J. and Liu, T.K. (1970) "Engineering Soil Report: Will County, Illinois, University of Illinois, College of Bulletin 501 Engineering, Engineering Experiment Station,
,
195 PP.
61
Thornburn, T.H., Liu, T.K. and Misiaszek, E.T. (1970) "Enginnering Soil Report: DeWitt County, Illinois, Bui letin 505, Univers ty of Illinois, College of Engineering, Engineering Experiment Station, 103
i
pp.
62
Thornburn, T.H., Morse, R.K. and Liu, T.K. (1966) "Engineering Soil Report: Livingston County, Illinege Co no s ois," Bui letin ^82 University of of Engineering, Engineering Experiment Station,
,
I
128 pp.
63
Tomlinson, M.J. and Francis, H.W.A. (1973) "Site Investigation for Motorways," The Highway Engineer, Vol. XX, No. 6, June, pp. 23~33-
6A
Transportation Research Board (1976) "Acquisition and Use of Geotechnical Information," Syn thes s of Highway Practice 33, National Coopera t ve H ghway Research Program, National Research Council,
i i
Wash ngton
i
D.
C,
^0
pp
65
United States Department of Agriculture (1971) Guide for Interpreting Engineering Uses of Soils, Soil Conservat ion Serv ce November 8~7 PP
i
66.
Valent,
"Long-Term Stress-Strain Behavior of a Seafloor Soil," Technical Note No. N- 1515, Cons t ruct ion Nava Civil Engineering Laboratory Battalion Center, California, 51 pp.
P.J.
(1978)
80F
67.
ProperVan Rooyen, M. (1967) "Intercorrelation of Engineering Conference nal Regio Uth ties of Soil," Proceedings of the for Africa on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering Cape Town, pp. 20 3-208.
,
68. Witczak, N. W.
(1970) "A Generalized Investigation of Selected Highway Design and Construction Factors by Regional ^Geomorphic Units Within the Continental United States," Ph.D. Thesis Purdue University, January, 396 pp.
,
69. Wlaschin, J. B. (1978)
"Soils Bore Log Program," Draft presented
at 3rd Annual Southwest Geotechnical Engineers Conference, Albuquerque, Mew Mexico, March.
70. Woods, K. B. and Litehiser, R. R. (1938)
"Soil Mechanics Applied to Highway Engineering in Ohio," Bulletin 99 îo State University, Engineering Experiment Station.
.
Wiley and Sons, 71. Theil, Henri (1971) "Principles of Econometrics", N. Y. p. 178.
APPEND CES
I
81
APPENDIX A
Dis trihutional
Characterization of Soil
Properties
The following Figures graphically

35% confidence
illustrate the range

the soil
interval
and
the mean of
parameters
physiographic regions and based upon grouping the soils by

parent material areas.
82
10
o m
1
UJ
>
O
jfl
H o
2 z
O
< 0-
to CO
o
CO CO
2 Ul O o
.o a.
2 U CJ
Ll
z
writ
into
-10.
0.
<?
x8.
z o _i < o
<->tu-
" 5
UJ
o
-v-
3*-UJ<o
lis
LU tt
uiiiu
er _j hi
8_.
OoflO
<
<JLU
IO
w*-<z
Kc/xnifl
(_o^
O o
tr LU j-
o
V
I
CM
m a
T
t
r?
8 _:_J
I
I
o O
>
UJ 55
o < < x o
8 o
9 o 2
z o
CD
8 H
Ul
cr co
8 K
.o
Z u
a.
e>
IE
CO
-}_i
-"
<3
(DO coz i-< K-l
UJ
a:
O* uq
Z3
s< oa
xz
la.
OQ U.Z *< <_i

tea.
xz
55 _j
UjZ
ujcr
<r CEZ
<_l
s* 53
JO<
u_ia.
2<< _|ITUJ <OCC >5<
<in9
<<UJ
zuo
O
Ll
N0I938
OIHdVdSOISAHd
33
91
T
i
LlI
>
o CO
10
UJ
CO
o
si si
C/>
o
co
s i" z
Li a-
2
UJ CJ cc LU Q_ U_
0>
111
-J -J
<3
->

ft co en 30 Ul <UI
JO
<
x> coz>k^
OCflO
en
CO 10 Ul
,_
lw
S!
UJO
01 >z
DO
-g
LU_Ui
ÛJ
ro
<C0_l -<;-
z *8_
*<r9 Ouj x>-i
3>-uJco o>to_io
co*-<z vu-'x<
cr to toco
coô
cr _icd
i=0=J
-1VIM31VH
lN3yVd
O o
!5
cc LU ICJ
rO
a a
UJ
.-
r!
I
>
X
r
h-
UJ
<s>
< < x u
_l
uiS
a c
z
85
J*
.o o"
z
'T
en vO
< z o D CD
CC
CO
< S
_
o IO
.c
!-
Z X
UJ a.
H Q
CJ
.5
<
LU
s
CO
UJ cc
3_ mo coz
i-<
(-=!
-J_J
5 <z
cr
UJ
<s
Si
ia.
o*
CD -J
Z3
Z_l 00.
S<
xz
51
oo u-z
<_i
era. 03
C0<
a xz
UJ?
ujct
35
-10.
s* 13
<< iCTUJ >5<
<co9
<<UJ
3.
oz
ZCJCJ
ICO
N0I93H
OIHdVbOOISAHcf
B4
01 cm
O
I I
I
o
I
I
LLl
,
>
O O
cvj
in
2
*
o
? < a.
o O CM
o w o o
O 2
in
en
2
CO >-
z
Ui _l_l
4
X>co
cnD<-")
Z)
<s
JO.
< in
2 t=>0)0) oo OQ.
<
UJ
UJ*1
0eo
co CO bl
=! y.
"
UJ
UJ
*^ K<Q.
oaso
<n
ujo
v8_j
z<J-j
z o _l < 3C-CT z Ouj
=JO -
UJ
OHlJO
2ûJcn
10,C
UJ
-JO
Û
-0o*"IVIM31VW 1N3UW
trcococo
cr-im
UJ
cr UJ CL
Q
-a
CO
!M
CM en
UJ
Si
cr
CM
CO
r
a.
< co
H
S
z o
cr
z <UJ
O o
CM
< o o
cr
8|
\-
_e
UI a.
m H Q
cr
<
e cr
CO
3_ COO
"I
ô-
-O
< CO
coZ l-< l-J
o* oo CO-I
5 <z s<
tr_i
cr
xz
SO.
oo u.z
<_i
era.
IZ
co<
tf]$
z
t-cr
tall-
<"
UJ-=
_l _l
tucr_
UJ cr
X-I
2co 7
oo.
zr
So *-j
<<_!
CJ
= P JO<
JO.
2<< _ictuj <ocr >I<
<C0
*_lCO
*:3(zou <<UJ
z
i- a.
o
u_
N0I93M
0IHdVa9OISAHd
35
to
O
10
7.
UJ
O 0> O
CO
f-
T
Id
>
UJ CO
>
UJ CO
o CM
<
</)
R 0J
co
en
o o <r
Q-
2 H Z Ul o tr
uj CL
u.
<
l/lO 1-
z
>-2 UJO
" G =1UJ
1
Ui
r
Z
<2
_l_l _I0_
in
0)
coco 30 Ul <UJ
_io
oOl 3-Jz
1
3 5
gfSs
JES=!
<-jco -<Q-
*ô
3 W
OCQO
xo
i"d*P
z a:o_i
>-oJt-
15-2 2-uj
9 \. o o
"S o
Z 4
/I
<r
UJ
Ul
<
10
o
v>
\-
g
CD
5
u.
s in
<n
c2
cr
cn
Q
9
1
1
1
<
i-ir UJt-
CO
2 I
Zo <z
.
< CO
i S3
2< 8s! Z3
xz
t _i
20.
i
<J3
era.
b0<
xz 2* *
< _1
2io
O JO. N0I93U OIHdVaSOISAHd
JO< << _J
z Z3D-
5? 0l<<
z %>-o <co
ujcr
UJ cr
*:3>-
<oir
_i(tuj
>2<
zoo <<UJ
E -I
X-JCQ
u.
66
IS CM
2
(TV
U5
CM
o
T
I
I
< V-
o 5
a.
<
to 1
i
UJ
(/I
z
u
<3
-J_l -10.
4
I><"
oio*1-<Q.
-<(/>
z
>-z UJO >-o_i
1-
cc" t-t
</>w
uj<
o _l-2
2,^ _UJ</> i-o>
.0
z o _l <
kO=J
tJuj
<
tn
30 ^r 0*H
<
UJ aLUiUI
a: -i to
C/) C/l
tviaaivw
iN3yw
o o < N
cr UJ
u.
cd CM 0)
<7>
m
pa
o
cm
in 2 mU-_l
n
<n
y 
CM
& 8S
< 2 Q
m
_i
'
_3
a lO
JO
CM
EC
^
o
CE
<!
(/>
H Q
<
UJ
5
go! Z=>
CE
XZ
OQ
cca.
a xz co<x
o m
Ul5
t-cc Ull-
1<
UJCC_
8|
5*
*_1
O -JCL So. 03 N0I93 OIHdVHSOISAHd
3* JU< <<_!
a<< _io:uj <95 >s<
2o *3ZUu <<w
UJ cr
o
(-0.
u.
87
o M
I
8 3 e
UJ
5
en
h-i
in
in
l_ muj 3 Q _J
*uz 3>-
2 UJ u
o: uj Ol
<a
<
in
-10.
l-OO.
fl
,in
-JO
8ZUI
5d
1VI831VW
iglN38Vd
5-
Uli< X
",*
is 3& ox
UJ_U(
u.
S5
N
cr UJ
o
o
T
T
i
s s s
.o
IB
< tr 
a<
N0I93H
OIHdVHOOISJkHd
u_
8 8
(NJ
<J>
to
8
T
o
.o
2 z
u a.
u g
$
I-
UJ
cnfc
-i -i
u
tnu)
!><n (not
ua. <UJ
>z
t-_l
01
k Z O -I <
to UJ
u
u.
UJ
jq.
OcOQ
UJ
xo
"1VIH31VW
i-oSi-
Oujt-od
u I< Koocncn
Dt-y<n Ocn_) Q <n'-<r J
Pi
OljD
UJ
a:
a: UJ Q.
UJ
_aD
!N3Vd
5 N
o
a: UJ
T
!
(7>
cr UJ
T
1
,c
o < cc < x u
O
2
in tn
1
.
u,
z z <
O
T
o
I-
-<!
I
1
s
o IT
is
1
1
lO
:1
_J_
a 5Z
00.
I
1
m H co Q
q:
z
<_) a> <o *-i
5s oo OJ-J
Z3
XZ *5
go U.Z
CEO.
a xz tf)<
OT
t-x
UJ(3E<n
ujZ
in.
33i _io< <<_J ujq.
S< <? s<< _i<tuj < oir >5<
<
55 i-a.
UJ 01
5ki 5C3tZUO <<U

i. _lfl
N0I93M OIHdVHOOISAHd
o
u_
39
s
1
10 (0
io
co
cu
? z
in
01
cr
UJ o.
I
I
< 5
t-Oi
CO (O
V
iuos
io3
luT
,_
l
O u H Z UJ u
cr
_J
co
3 ZUJ o2
<Z
coco
:
cf
-j as
a: to
nviaaivw
N3MVd
U.
O z o < N
cr
rO
o
o
<J>
CD
ri
a.
CM
IO IM
tr
o CO
o o
i0 IO *
< x o 3
CD cr h-
0)
O io s
a:
o -I
-I
o U
Ui
<
Ui
o 3
z O UJ * o
a:
cm IO
H-
s
a
<r (O
_l _J
111
Q
CO
UI
<
UJ cr
< CO
CJO
CO-I
24 ac_i oa. ZD
xz 2i
20.
_l
go u.z
<
xz <
CO
ujZ. ujcr
_1
<lo2
03
13
ZOO <
oz
O
u.
<UJ *_jco
N0I93H
OIHdVaOOISAHd
90
o o
?
-J
o
3
o
I
2
_j
g
VI
w
2'
en
-I
_i
oO
z*8. -uitn
1-0*1-
<2
in
lrt</)
no Ul <UI
>-z UIO
l-<0.
o DO -Ul ul
O
in*
Ul Ul <r_i<Ei
*<ri
-IO
OcOO
<i/)_i
<z
v)
UJ
P3
d*>-
JQ
tf>
1VIM31VW
N3HVd
o z o
< N
or
lJ
u < < x o
0-
<
_l
U3
IS
1M
r!
T
k.
Z
Ul
^ 2
Ul
o -
< z o H
ga
o u. z o
o: h-
Q
<
Ixl
(S IE
za
a a
<2
<
-10.
uo 01-1
s< 5-
iz
So.
oo *<
era.
xz tn<
<
_i
Uli
uio:.-
i-o: UJt-
Z3
03
,3
<< _l O_l0_
OD_lO<
< 0.<<
_io:ui <oi >5<
*3izoo <<U)
O
S5
cr 13
K_IU)
NOI03H OIHdVUSOISAHd
91
o
T
.8
a o
CO <
b!
I 1
* 1
1
*
i
1
-1
UJ
in
<
m|
z
CO
1
<n
<2
-i_i -10.
< in
mm 30 UQ.
ino 1<-Jn
.-
*^ < a.
oito
J-'Z >z uo vm a:R o i" UJ <m-i -o* di^ t- _i ivmaivw 1N3HW
oOin
JZ DO
5*2 tJuj
>-o=;
oin
m^ < z
(Tin
mm
< 2 O H
<
Z
.o CO
CD
L4
^ I
H a o <
or Z>
cr
o en
"I
-JQ.
<
Si
Zo <z z< oa. zo

IX -I
So iXz
iz "<
^>3<n
I<
<Olt
_jQtUJ
"tz
< in
<<UJ x_im
UjZ
zuu
oz
=_j
i-a.
O
u.
OJ0. * -J U3 N0I93M OIHdVdSOISAHd
92
in
01
O
a
o
to
>J3
X
UJ
o z o
X UJ Q
>-
T <
-J 0-
O
\
r
i
\ i
lO
<
o _l
*0C
uj z ii 5
<2
Hi UJ _l_l _io-
<
V)
S i-t Old) 30 oo.

<UJ
_lO
(A
U.
>-z
l-a.
0<flO
31-uJin
S>-.
xo
iviaaivw
I-O?*-
r> i-o
ujdx<
<z
II
CEtntnm
iN3vd
O z o N
rX
UJ
01
o rO
< X o
_J
2 <
in
O to
CM
O K
o _
10
X O
< z Q
m
cr h-
I u z
T
I
I/)
<
-J Q.
<J
o
Q
UJ cr
t 1
UJ
o
i/>
-j
<5
<z 2<
<
in
oo
u _j N0I93M OIHdVeiOOlSAHd
oo U.Z *< < iro03

-J
o IZ <
a>
-I
i-ae Ult-
JJ
z 33_IU< << a. _1
2in
ot<i< < o<r
jXU >2<
uz z <m2 ^3K zuu

< <tuJ
sc-jcn
uj
-I
z
**
u.
33
s ID
o
ID
>-
u o <
Z
t
!
UJ
<
z
</)
<2
<
Ul
IU -l_l -JO.
pp WOO 30 OO.
JUI
!>tn
>-Z wo
l-<0.
JQ
*-.
z
UJ
_lO
O00Q
t-o>-
l-O:
ortnm
_ UJ
w)
u.
-iviaaivw
iroavd
< N
q:
Ito
si
in u.
u < < I
< z o
o
or UI CD
2
Z 2<
H
t-o.
o
u.
NOI03M 0IHdvy90ISAHd
9*
o
Bad
UJ
O K* z o
T
o o
IT
o
2
< CE 3 <
3 H < o
UJ cr
3
z
UJ
<
PS into OO oa <UJ
x >cn
S-J55
uj**
UJ
UJ
ID
>-z UJO
z o J <
UJ 2 3Z o DO en Ssljo
3*-uj
-fc:
III
z=8.
XO
tnH-<
o*lN3MWd "1VIM31VA
x>-i 1-OJ
ui^r <
ctenf
en
o o
q:
u.
I I
OH *Z UJ
>
ft Ui
03
o o
oj
o o
CC
o
i-
-UJ
3 t
</j
a
o u
a>
o CM
T
oO 5
x
m
tr
(f)
_
7
'
O ~
I
* <n
en
a
2
^
1
Q
ro
<
y^z <m2 *I3 1zoo <I<UJ
x _Jcn
r
<5
<<
MITCHELL
CRAWF0RC
LOWLAND
CALUMET
O* OO
OO. Z=>
cc_i
UPLAND
WABASH
PLAIN
CL<< _)CCUJ < oir
oz
t-0.
q: z>
>2
NOI93y OIHdVHSOISAHd
95
NUMBER OF SAMPLES124
ALL SAMPLES
RANGE
MITCHELL
PLAIN
95 7.
CONFIDENCE
INTERVAL
116
^CRAWFORD
Ul UPLAND
MtAN
118
LOWLAND
5 WABASH
O g
2
IT
CALUMET
PLAIN
TIPTON TILL PLAIN
40
JlacuCLSTRINfc
93
30
40
30
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
130
NATURAL DRY DENSITY,
PCF
NUMBER OF SAMPLES-7
ALL SAMPLES
524
RANGE
LACUSTRINE
^DEPOSITS
< K UJ
<0UTWASH SAND
ALLUVIAL
95 7.
CONFIDENCE
INTERVAL
1
A
r
MEAN
232
^DEPOSITS
Ul
5 THIN LOESS 2 OVER LOAMY

WISCONSN
TILL
49
RESIDUUMLIMESTONE BEDROCK
30
88
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
no
120
130
NATURAL DRY DENSITY, PCF
FIGURE AI4 DISTRIBUTIONAL CHARACTERIZATION OF NATURAL DRY DENSITY
96
ALL SAMPLES
178
WABASH LOWLAND
26
VALPARAISO MORAINAL
AREA
26
TIPTON TILL PLAIN
62
O UJ
cr
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
-
o
X Ol < cr o > i Q.
ALL SAMPLES
MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY, PCF MAXIMUM WET DENSITY, PCF
o
NUMBER OF SAMPLES178
RANGE
WABASH LOWLAND
VALPARAISO
MORAINAL
AREA
TIPTON TILL PLAIN

5
10
15
20
25
30
35
OPTIMUM
MOISTURE
CONTENT, PERCENT
FIGURE AI5 DISTRIBUTIONAL CHARACTERIZATION OF COMPACTION TEST DATA
97
?!
-2
o
CM
o o
lit
a.
t<n
o
2
s p 0. o
z
uj
>-z
to
I u QW jQ
<o>Qr co
luj
I- uKn
lis J^
-?
fj
z
totn

<(-
-Jul
uj
HI
o
tn _j
__ t/icr
I-
z> CD
l-O
Si
-JO.
<
lSgg -JO _l*t=
25
I|| ^
uj
5 S "J -
-iviusiwi iN3avd
Y
RANGE
ALL SAMPLES
-
148-
o o
Ixl
NUMBER OF SAMPLES^
/-MEAN
WA8ASH LOWLAND
23
cc
I a. <
CO >-
95%
TIPTON TILL PLAIN
A
9
CONFIDENCE
INTERVAL
60
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
39
42
45
SOAKED CBR 100% MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY
SOAKED
CBR
95
MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY
ALL SAMPLES
M
OUTWASH 8 ALLUVIAL
DEPOSITS
-' 48
<
CC
Ixl
---
,25
< THIN 2 OVER

KTILL
UJ
LOESS LOAMY
1
1

36
WISCONSIN
z e <
.+_
RESDUUMSILTSTONE, SHALE,
SANDSTONE
,25
RESIDUUMLIMESTONE
BEDROCK
24
12
15
18
24
27
30
33
SOAKED CBR -100% SOAKED CBR- 95%
MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY
36
39
42
45
FIGURE AI6 DISTRIBUTIONAL CHARACTERIZATION OF SOAKED CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO
93
NUMBER OF
ALL SAMPLES
SAMPLES
RANGE
MITCHELL
PLAIN
95%
CRAWFORD UPLANO
CONFIDENCE
INTERVAL
79
K
I
MEAN M
WABASH LOWLAND
i
85
56
CALUMET
LACUSTRINE
PLAIN
TIPTON TILL PLAIN

10
2.0
3.0
63
5.0
UNCONFINED
COMPRESSIVE
70 60 STRENGTH. TSF
60
90
381
ALL
SAMPLES
55
,
LACUSTRINE
< DEPOSITS s
Id
5 OUT WASH
8 ALLUVIAL
165
H Z
!r
DEPOSITS
THIN LOESS
<OVER
LOAMY
WISCONSN
TILL
-<30
RESIDUUM
LIMESTONE BEDROCK
LO
58
ZO
10
40
SO
60
70
80
9-0
UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH, TSF
FIGURE AI7 DISTRIBUTIONAL CHARACTERIZATION OF
UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH
MEAN
ALL SAMPLES
NUMBER OF SAMPLES
116
Z o o
LU
E
RANGE
O X a. < tr o o
Jn j 0.
CRAWFORD UPLAND
95 7.
CONFIDENCE INTERVAL
42
WABASH LOWLAND
0.4
0.8
1-2
'
20
e
2 4
2 8
3 2
INITIAL VOID RATIO,
MEAN tMn
NUMBER i'ui"">-"
OF
SAMPLES
ALL
SAMPLES
-. 103
RANGE
g o UJ
E
CRAWFORD UPLANO
95
28
X Q. < K O 2 >
CONFIDENCE
INTERVAL
WABASH LOWLAND
29
0.1
0.2
.
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
Q7
COMPRESSION
INDEX, C c
FIGURE AI8 DISTRIBUTIONAL CHARACTERIZATION OF
CONSOLIDATION
TEST DATA
USER'S MANUAL
101
USER'S MANUAL
roduc t on
i
The User's Manual and

F
is
presented as Appendices
B,
C,
D,
E,
and
is
to be
used
in
conjuction with the computerized

Appendix
in
B
storage and retrieval system.
includes
des-
cription of the variables included
the data bank.

item are used
is
The
variable names associated with each data

throughout the manual whenever this
enced.
information
refer-
Appendix
includes
listing of the codes assigned

from
be recorded to those variables which cannot directly
subsurface investigation reports.
Appendix
contains the
for each data formats, card locations, and column locations
item.
Appendix
contains the listing of the programs used

data to the data bank;
is
to add additional
to check data
input
errors where this
possible; and to use the Statistical
Sciences
(SPSS)
F
program for data mancontains examples of
ipulation and management.

the use of the geotechnical
If
Appendix
data bank.
the data are available for
inclusion into the data

Input Form
system,
(|)IF),
this
information
k.
is
recorded on the Data
Figure
Some information will

be
not be available
for soil
and these spaces will
left blank.
For example,
102
modern agricultural samples taken from counties for which no

soil
survey reports are available,
the
soil
series name,
(from
bedrock horizon, slope class, erosion class, depth to

the soil
survey), depth to seasonal
high water table, drain-
age class, permeability,
flood potential,
frost-heave sus-
ceptibility, shrink-swell
not be filled.
All
potential, and pH data spaces will
numeric data will

is It
be
gh t-
us
ed
The F-type
format for numeric data

are not to be
fixed,
is
therefore decimal
points
included.
suggested that leading zeros

(for example,
also be included to minimize punching errors
beginning
string of numbers
in
the wrong column).
Alphaand
numeric information, such as boring number,

laboratory number, may be recorded
it
is
line number,
in
any columns.
However,
suggested that such alpha-numeric information be left-
justified.
APPENDIX
USER'S MANUAL:
PART
Description of Data Items

Part
the
I
of the User's Manual

is
contains
description of
in
Information which
presently being stored

and each card
If
is
the data
bank.
Six cards are used,
consecutively
is
numbered from one to six.

for the
a
no
is
information
available
particular card
(which
usually the case for card 6),

be
identification number will

be maintained
in
recorded,
and
this card
will
its
proper sequence.
see Figure h,
re-
Referring to the Data Input Form (DIF),

the variable SEQNUM
(located
in
the upper left corner)
assigned by the fers to the sequence number automatically

computer to
the total
It is
a
soil
sample.
This number ranges
from
to
number of samples contained within the data bank.

a
recorded on the DIF after

a re
i
listing of the newly

This
entered data
tion number
rece ved for verification.
identifica-
is
automatically present whenever the data are
processed, may be accessed by referring to SEQNUM, and may

be used as any other variable
in
the processing of data.
104
VARIABLE NAME
CARD1
DESCR PTI ON
I
The first column of each card
within
data set,
containing
sixcards per data set, contains the card number.

The
number
(1)
is
always
recorded
for this variable.
COUNTY
The county from which the soil
sample has been taken

corded here.
coded and
ly
in
is
re-
County names are
listed alphabeticalII.
is
Part
HOLENO
unique number
assigned
sequentially to each hole withi
each county
SAMPNO
Numbers are assigned sequentially to each sample retrieved

f
rom each hole.
The variables COUNTY, HOLENO

and SAMPNO,
from the
(l.D.
identifiNo.)
cation number
is
which
recorded
in
columns 2-10 of
Use
the
remaining five cards.

l.D.
of the
No.,
along with
a
the card number, assigns
unique ten digit number to
105
each data card.
This
is
con-
venient for internal

ing.
bookkeep-
DISTRI
The State of
Indiana
is
divided
into six highway districts,
which have been coded.

DATEYR
The year
in is
which the sample

recorded here.
show the
last
For
is
was taken
The two columns
two -digits of the year.
example, the year 1965

resen ted as
(
rep-
65
DATEMO
The month was taken
in
which the sample
is
recorded here
in
code
DATEDA
The day of the month on which

the sample was taken
is
re01
corded here,
reported as
through 31TOWN
The township of the public land
survey within the state

co rded here
is
re-
TOWND
The north-south direction of
the
townsh
RANGE
The
is
coded
is
range within the State
reco rded here
106
RANG
The east-west direction of the
range
is
coded.
is
SECTIO
The section number
recorded
here
For example,
if
soil
sample has
3
been
taken from township

range
R2W,
2
North,
2k
West,
Sec.
section
,
(T3N,
Ik)
(03)
(1)
will
will Part
be entered be entered
II
for TOWN,
for TOWNDI
(see
for codes
(02)
assigned to
will
(2)
directions),
be enbe
tered for RANGE,
will
entered for RANGDI, and

will
be entered
(2k)
for SECTIO.
PROJPR PR0JN0 PROJPA PROJMI
These four variables make up

the project number,
consisting
parenthe-
of
sis
prefix, number,
and mileage.
CONTPR C0NTN0
These two variables make up

the contract number,
ing of
a
consista
prefix and
number.
a
ROADPR R0ADN0 ROADSU

BORING
The road number contains

fix,
a
pre-
number and
suffix.
A unique alpha-numeric
boring
number
is
assigned to each bor-
ing within each project.
107
ASSOC
The soil
association name, repa

a
resenting
scape with
natural
soil
land-
characteristic
topography and repeating pattern of soil
types,
1
is
8
coded assoc
here.
There are
soil
Jation types
the State of
identified within
Indiana.
The soil
association
Soil
is
taken
from the General
Maps,
contained
in
Reference (16),
prepared for each county.

A
user's guide
is
also avail(15).
able;
see Reference
is
REPEAT
This column
used to
indicate
index
the source of the soil
properties
(liquid
limit,
plastic limit and plasticity

index)
reported.
(1)
in
Column 80
inal
indicates that orig-
data are reported for the

A
(2)
index properties.
indi-
cates that
special
test
(compaction, strength, or consolidation) was performed on

soil
a
sample but the index
108
properties were not determined.

However,
the
index properties
a
were reported for

of by
soil
sample
the same
a
type
(as
indicated
a
laboratory number) at
different depth within the same

hole.
If
a
the
index properties
from
soil
sample of the same

from
a
type taken
different
a
hole have been

is
reported,
(3)
reco rded
This flag
is
for statistical
analyses purposes,
i.e.,
A
fre-
quency distributions.
biased
estimate of the frequency of

the
index properties would reif
sult
the
results of
single
test were used more than once.
Therefore when
(2)
or
(3)
was
recorded the data were not used

in
a
frequency distribution.
(2)
is
CARD2
The number
ed
always record-
for this variable.

(see
re-
D2
The identification number
description on Card
co rded
.
1)
is
"l
STATNO
The station number on the cen-
terline or baseline,
used
to
reference the location of the

sample hole,
to
is
recorded here
foot.
the nearest
EXAMPLE:
Station 195^
P_
2h
1 1 I
ft
OFFSET
The distance from the centerline or baseline to the sample
hole
is
recorded here
If
to
the
nearest foot.
has been
the sample
removed from the centhe offset

is
terline,
as
reported
(0000).
is
OFFDI
The direction of the offset
coded
LINE1 LINE2
The alpha-numeric
ine number
description
is
recorded here.
is
The description
fied.
left justi-
The line number has been
broken up into two variables

since the maximum field length
allowable
is
eight, and an
appropriate description could

contain up to ten characters.
SOURCE
The source of the
Is
information
coded.
The names of the
10
consulting firms and of the

Division of Materials and Tests,
ISHC performing
the
labora-
tory tests and/or roadway borings
are recorded.
SAMPTY
The method of removing the
sample from the hole

LABNO
The
to
j
is
coded.
laboratory number assigned

the
i
soil
i
sample
is
left
ust
ed
GRDSUR
The ground surface elevation of

the top of the boring
is
re-
corded to the nearest tenth of

a
foot.
DEPTHT
The depth to the top of the
sample
es
t
is
entered to the neara
tenth of
foot
DEPTHB
The depth to the bottom of the
sample
is
entered to the neara
est tenth of
foot
SPT
The value of the Standard Pene-
tration Test for the depth from
which the sample has been removed

PHYSIO
is
recorded here.
Indiana
is
The State of
divided
into eleven physiographic units,
each being assigned
code.
The
Northern Moraine and Lake Region

is
further subdivided
.
into five
areas
See Figure
SERIES
Soils which have been derived from similar parent materials

and have horizons of similar
origin, character, and arrangement

in
i
the soil
a
profile,
series.
char-
acter ze
soil
The location of each sample
hole
tural
is
found on an agricul-
soil
survey map
(5Mis
The soil
series name
sub-
sequently identified and the

code
is
recorded
The identification of the soil
series from
soil
survey map
requires the determination of

the exact position from which
the sample has been taken.
This
is
very difficult since

in
slight error
scaling can
in
cause an error
the
identifi-
cation of the correct series.
Since the parent material
(see
PARENT below)
is
determined
12
once the soil

the error
is
series
is
found,
if
compounded
is
carelessness
CARD3
The number
not
is
eliminated.
(3)
always re-
corded for this variable.

ID3
The
identification number
.
is
recorded
PARENT
Twelve parent material

have been diana.
areas
In-
identified within
The parent material
types can be
the soil
identified once
is
series
found by re-
ferring to the booklet, "Key

to
So
of
nd iana"
(13).
The soil
series
formed within
is
each parent material
listed
within this booklet for easy

identification.
material
soil
in
The parent
coded.
If
name
is
the
series has been developed
more than one parent materarea,

the parent material
ial
judged to be most characteristic

of the area
in
question
is
re-
ported
HORIZO
simple profile will display
each of three horizons,
13
designated as A,
The typical
B,
in
and
C.
range
depth of
each horizon, along with the
USDA textural classification,

is
given within the specific

soil
agricultural
for
survey report
The depth from
the county.
which the sample was removed

and
the textural
in
description
profile
provided
the soil
borings, will
the horizon
help determine
the sample.
If
for
is
the sample
taken
from
depth
intermediate between two
horizons, the horizon judged

to be most
representative
is
reported.
coded
SLOPE
.
The horizon name
is
The slope
(topographic) class
ser-
characteristic of the soil

ies
is
identified from the soil

in
mapping unit
soil
an agricultural
survey report.
The class
intervals have been coded.

EROS 10
The erosion phase of the soil
series
is
identified from the

a
mapping unit located on

s u
soil
rvey map.
11*1
Codes have been assigned to
each erosion phase.
BEDRKS
If
the depth
to
bedrock
is
less
than
fifteen feet from the

the value will
ground surface,
be
If
reported
a
in
the soil
is
is
survey.
range of values
the average depth
report-
ed, ed
recorda
to the
.
nearest tenth of
foot
BEDRKB
If
bedrock was encountered dur-
ing
drilling or sampling and

in
is
noted
the soil
log,
profile of
informa-
the boring
this
tion
est
is
recorded to the neara
tenth of
foot.
WATERS
The depth to the seasonal
high
the
is
water table
soil
is
reported
in
survey if this depth
within six feet from the

ground surface.
A
range of
values
is
normally reported
is
and the average value
re-

a
foot
WATERC WATERF
The depth to water reported

the drill
in
logs at the completion
15
of drilling
is
recorded for
The
final
the variable WATERC.
or 2k hour
is
reading, whichever
in
reported
the
logs,
is
recorded for WATERF.
Both
depths are rounded to the tenth

of
a
foot
soil
DRAIN
Natural
drainage classes
Once the soil have
have been coded.
series and parent material

been
identified, the drainage

type
characteristic of the soil

can be determined
to Soils
from the "Key

(13)-
of
Indiana"
PERMEA
Numerical
ranges have been
assigned to rate soil

ity and
permeabil-
these have been coded.

in
The range
the soil
soil
permeability for
if
series
found
in
the
survey for the county be-
ing considered.
FLOOD
Those soils subject to flooding

or which have
a
ponded or
perched water condition are in-
dicated
in
the soil
soil
survey.
is
The typical
condition
coded
16
FROST
Three classes of frost potential
have been defined,

high.
i.e.,
low, medium and
These
are based on United States
Department of Agriculture soil

texture classes or the classes
in
the Unified
soil
classifica-
tion system.
ions have been
Further subdivisrequired and
have subsequently been coded.
SHRINK
Qualitative definitions of
shrink-swell
ported
in
behavior are resurveys and
the soil
these have been assigned ranges
which have subsequently been

coded
PH
.
The pH reaction range typical

for the soi
i
series
survey.
given
the so
Each
a
range has been assigned

If
a
code.
wide range of pH values
have been reported, overlapping

the coded
ranges, no
be
informa.
tion will
recorded
GRAD
The percent soil
by weight
passing the following sieve

sizes
is
reported to the nearest
17
ten th of
percent:
GRAD01 GRAD02 GRAD03 GRADOA GRAD05

CARD** Dk
I
1/2 inch inch Ilk inch 1/2 inch 3/8 inch

1
Between GRAD05 and GRAD06,
the
number
CARD*4
{k)
is
reported for
and
the
I
identification
numbe r for
DA
GRAD06 GRAD0 7 GRAD08 GRAD09 GRAD10

SAND SILT CLAY COLLOI DS
No. No. No. No. No.
10
kO
200 270
The percent sand,

and colloids
silt,
clay
re-
by weight are

a
percent.
Percent sand has
presented some problems due to
inconsistencies
by the numerous
in
reporting
consulting
a
firms.
Accordingly,
sub-
program was written to calculate the percent sand based upon
percent passing No.
10
sieve
200
minus percent passing No.

sieve
LL PL
PI
(SAND
GRAD07
GRAD09).
Liquid limits and plastic

limits are reported
to
in
addition
the plasticity
index.
18
Non-plastic soils have been

assigned
a
code
(-010).
The
percentages are rounded to the

nearest tenth.
SL
The shrinkage
to
limit
is
recorded
a
the nearest
If
a
tenth of
per-
cent.
special
a
test has
soil
been performed on
and
sieve analysis and/or index
property test has not been run,

the results
from the sieve

index property
sam-
analysis and/or
determination of the soil

ple with
the
same laboratory
be
number will
this sample.
reported for
See discussion
under REPEAT.
LOSS IG
The percent weight
loss
for the
determination of organic content
(loss on
ignition test)
is
reported to the nearest tenth

of
a
pe rcen
CARD5
The number
te red
(5)
is
always en-
ID5
The identification number
is
recorded
NATMC
The natural
moisture content
is
15
rounded to the nearest tenth

of
a
pe rcen
NATWD NATDD
The natural wet density and

natural
dry density are
re-
corded to the nearest tenth.

The units are pounds per cubic
foot
.
SPECGR
If
the results from
triaxial
re-
or consolidation test are
ported for
soil
sample,
is
the
specific gravity
given. This
is
usually
rounded to the
thousand place.
TEXTUR
The textural
classification as
the soil
reported
in
profile
survey has been coded.

ORGANI
The relative amount of organic
matter (as determined from

loss on
ignition test or visual

is
identification)
COLOR
coded.
The color of the soil
sample
is
based on the moist condition
coded
TESTEF
The type of compaction test and
compactive effort applied to the

sample are recorded
If
in
code.
is
the compactive effort
20
not
typical,
the value
is
re-
corded under the comments

section of the data
Figure
k
.
input
form,
MAXDD MAXWD
Both the maximum dry density

(MAXDD)
and
the maximum wet
density (MAXWD) are recorded

to the nearest
tenth of
pound per cubic foot.
OPTIMC
The optimum moisture content the nearest tenth of

is
a
to
percent
recorded
CBRUN1 CBRUN2 CBRS01 CBRS02
The value of the CBR number
is
recorded to the nearest tenth

of
a
percent.
CBRUNl
and
CBRUN2 represent the unsoaked
values at 100 percent and 95
percent maximum dry density,
respectively.
CBRS01
and
CBRS02 represent the soaked
values at 100 percent and 95 percent maximum dry density,
respectively.
QUSTR
The unconfined compressive
strength to the nearest hundredth of

is
a
ton
per square foot
entered here.
AASHT01
UNIF1
Gl
program to calculate both the
AASHTO (including group index,

Gl)
and Unified classifications
has
in
been written and

Part
IV
included
of the User's Manu-
al.
The names have been coded.
The variable names are AASHTO,

Gl
and
UNIF.
If
one of the variables used to
classify the soil

reported (i.e.,
type was not
liquid limit,
plastic limit, percent passing

No.
k,
No.
10,
it
No.
is
40,
or No.
200 sieve),
to classify
not
possible
with the
sam-
the But
soil
if
computer.
the soil
ple had been visually classified

in
the
laboratory and reprofile
ported within the soil
survey,
provision has been
incorporated to include this
information
in
the data system.
The two variables, AASHT01
and
UNIF1, have been created

this purpose,
and
for
the appro(see
priate code
is
entered
22
Part
not
for
codes)
possible for the computer

the
soil
to generate
classifiinformain
cation name and this

tion has not
the
been reported
laboratory,
be
these two
a
items
(-8)
will will
left blank and
automatically be assigned
to
to these variables
indicate
that
they are unknown.

(6)
is
CARD6
I
The number
The
entered.
is
D6
identification number
.
recorded
QUSTA
The failure strain

to
a
reported
the nearest
hundredth of
if
percent
is
entered
an
unconfined compressive strength

test has been
run.
TYPE
Codes have been assigned to

the various
types of strength
tests
STRENGTH
The failure strength

to
reported
a
the nearest hundredth of
ton
per square foot
is
entered.
STRAIN
The failure strain reported to

a
percent
is
recorded.
123
CONFPRES
The confining pressure
is
en-
tered to the nearest hundredth

of
a
pound per square
inch.
is
COHES ION ANGLE
If
Mohr failure envelope

in
included
results,
the strength
test
the
intercept to the
a
nearest hundredth of
ton
per
square foot, and the strength

angle to the nearest tenth of
a
degree,
is
recorded.
Strength parameters from totalstress circles will

be
reported
POREPRES
When
saturated strength test
with pore pressure measurements

is
presented
in
subsurface
investigation report, the pore
pressure at failure will
be
recorded to the nearest hun-
dredth of
inch.
pound per square
MAJOR
The major principal
stress at
failure will
be
recorded to
a

per square foot
EO EF
ton
The
initial
(EO)
is
and
final
(EF)
void ratio
reported to the
nearest thousandth.
124
SO SF
The
initial
(SO)
and
final
is
(SF)
degree of saturation
to
entered
a
the nearest
tenth of
per-
cent.
PO PC
The overburden pressure

and preconsol
(PC)
is
i
(PO)
dat ion pressure
entered to the nearest

a
tenth of
Total
CC CR
ton per square

be
foot.
stresses will
reported
(CC)
is
The compression
index
and
recompression index (CR)
rounded to the nearest thousandth.

CV
The coefficient of consolidation

is
in
square feet per month
rounded to the nearest

t
hund red
125
APPENDIX
USER
MANUAL:
PART
Cod
ng
System
Information which cannot be directly recorded has been

codified to make the system compatible with computerized
storage and retrieval.
code will
and
be used.
Whenever the data are accessed, the

contain the code
The printed output will
the description
in
(value label).
Such
labels are partic-
ularly helpful
included
As
in
documenting output and have therefore been

listed
in
the
SPSS programs
Part
IV.
additional
codes are required
(in
particular, for
SOURCE and SAMPTY), they can be added to the system.
VARIABLE NAME
CODE
1
.
COUNTY
DESCRIPTION
Adams
Al len
r t ho omew Benton B ackford Boone
CODE
17. 18. 19. 20.
21
.
DESCRIPTION
Dekalb
awa re Dubois El khart
De
1
2. 3. k. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.
Ba
10.
1
12. 13.
rown Carrol Cass CI ark Clay CI n ton

B
1 i
Crawford
Da v ess Dea rbo rn
i
U.
15. 16.
22. 232k. 25. 26. 27. 28. 2930.

31
Fayette Floyd
Foun tain
F
ran
in
Decatur
32.
Fulton Gibson Grant Greene ton Ham Hancock Harrison Hendri cks
i 1
126
VARIABLE NAME
CODE
3334. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40.
41
.
COUNTY
I
(Continued)
CODE
6364. 6566. 67. 68. 69. 70.
71
DESCR PT ION
Hen ry Howa rd Hunt ngton
i
DESCRIPTION
Pi ke
Jackson Jasper
Jay
42. 4344. 45. 46. 4748. 4950.

51
Jefferson Jennings Johnson Knox Kosc usko Lagrange

i
Lake
LaPorte Lawrence
Mad son Mar on Marshal Mart n
i
i
52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 5960.

61
.
am Mon roe
M
i
i
Montgomery Morgan Newton Noble

Oh io
Orange Owen
Pa rke
62.
Perry
72. 73. 74. 7576. 7778. 7980. 81. 82. 8384. 85. 86. 87. 88. 8990. 91. 92. 93.
Porter Posey Pulaski Putnam Rando ph Ripley Rush Joseph St Scott

1
Shel by
Spencer Starke Steuben

Su
1
1
i
van
Switzerland Ti ppecanoe
T
pton Union
i
Vanderburgh
Ve rm V go
i
on
Wabas h Warren
Wa
r r
i
ck
Washington Wayne
Wei s Wh te Whi 1 ey State of
1
i
Kentucky
VARIABLE NAME
CODE
1 .
D1STRI
DESCRIPTION
Crawf ordsv Fort Wayne Greenf e LaPorte Seymou r V ncennes
1 1
2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
127
VARIABLE NAME
CODE
1
.
DATEMO
DESCRI PT ION
2. 3k. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.
January February March

April May June July Augus
10.
1
1 .
12.
Septembe r October November December

TOWNDI
DESCRI PTION
VARIABLE NAME
CODE
1 .
2.
North South
RANGDI
VARIABLE NAME
CODE
1 .
DESCRI PTION
East West
2.
VARIABLE NAME
CODE
99
SECTIO
DESCRIPTION
Special Land Grant refer to map of area
VARIABLE NAME
CODE
1 .
ASSOC
DESCRI PTION
2.
3. k.
.
5. 6. 7. 8. 9.
10.
Eel-Martinsvi le-Genesee Genesee- Ross-Shoal s Wakeland-Stendal-Haymond Genesee-Shoal s-Eel Haymond-Nol in-Petrol ia Genesee-Eel-Stendal-Pope Huntington-Wheel ing-Markham Huntington-Lindside Haymond-Wakel and Al ida-Delrey-Whi taker
1
23
VARIABLE NAME
CODE
1
1
ASSOC
(cont nued
i
DESCRI PTI ON
12. 13. \k. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19-
Bono- Ma umee -Warners Chelsea-Hi lsdale-Oshtemo

1
Conrad-Wooten-Weiss Door-Tracy-Quinn
Door- Lyd ck E s ton-Wea Dubois -Otwe
i
20.
21
.
22. 23. 2k. 26. 27. 28. 30. 31. 32. 33. 3*. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. ko.
h\
.
Fox-Martinsvi le-Aluvi Fox-Nineveh-Ockley Fox- Rodman Fu ton- Rimer-Mil ford- Ren sselaer Homer-Sebewa-Gi ford Maumee-Gi ford-Rensselaer Maumee- Newton Martinsvil le-Belmore-Fox Martinsvi le-Whi taker Mahalasvi le-Whi taker Mi ford-Montgomery-Rensselaer McGary Neg ey- Parke Osh temo-B ronson Oakvil le-Plainfield-Tawas Osh temo- Fox Ockl ey-Wes 1 and Ockl ey-Wea
1
1 1
Ock ey- Fox

1
kl. kl. kk. hS.

1*6.
kl. k8. kS. 50.

51
.
53. 5k. 55. 56. 5758. 59. 61. 62. 63.
Plainfield-Brems-Morrocco Plainfield-Tyner-Oshtemo PI ai nf ield-Watseka Plainfield-Chelsea Pat ton-Henshaw Pat ton-Lyles -Hens haw Peoga-Bartle-Hosmer Parke-Miami-Negley Rensselaer-Montgomery Rensselaer-Darroch Rensselaer-Whi taker Vincennes-Zipp-Ross Vol inia-Dickinson Wea-C rane Warsaw-El ston-Fox
Westl and-S eeth
1
Weinbach-Sciotovi le Weinbach-Wheel ing Crosier-Brookston -Corwin B rooks ton-Ode Blount-Morley-Pewamo Blount- Pewamo Riddles-Miami-Crosby
1 1
129
VARIABLE NAME
CODE
64. 6566. 67. 6970. 71. 72. 73. 74. 76. 7778. 7980.
81
.
ASSOC (Continued)
DESCRI PTI ON
Crosby-Brookston El ot t-Markham-Pewamo F ncas t e-Ragsda Hoytsvi le-Nappanee Parr-Miami Pa r r-Corw n

1
i i 1 1 i
sdal Randol ph-H Reesvi le-Ragsdal

i
e
e
Raub-Ragsdale Ragsda e-S de -Hennep Rus se

1 i 1
-Zen a Russe Miami-Metea-Cel ina

1
1
i
82. 83. 84. 85. 86. 87. 88. 8990.

91
Miami-Ososso-Riddles Miami-Crosby-Metea Miami-Russel 1-Fincastle Miami- Fox-M ton Miami- Crosby Miami-Hennepin Miami-Fox-Martinsville
i
Mor ey1 1
oun
Muskingum-Shadeland-Highgap
-Cha Imers Ode Sidel 1-Parr Hennep n- Rodman
i
92. 93. 95. 96. 98. 99. 100.

101
.
Avonburg-Clermont C nc nnat -H ckory Cincinnati-Rossmoyne-Hickory

i
nc nna
i
-Ava
Cincinnati-Ava-Al ford Crider-Hagerstown-Frederick Crider-Frederick Corydon-Weikert-Berks Fai rmount-Swi tzerland

G
102. 103. 04 105. 106. 107. 108. 109.

1 . 1
ray ford
1
i
Lawrence-Bedford-Crider Ti s t- Johnsburg Wellston-Zanesville-Berks Berks-Gi Ipin-Weikert

Zanesvi le-Wel lston Mucks-Peats Alford Bloomfield-Princeton-Ayrshi re Hosme r va-Ava Iva Hosmer-Cinci nnat Lyl es-Ayrsh re-Princeton Princeton-Ayrshire-Bloomfield Princeton- Fox
1
I
10.
111. 112. 113114. 115.

1
16.
HO
VARIABLE NAME
CODE
1
.
REPEAT
DESCRI PTI ON
2. 3.
Original Index Properties Index Properties Repeated from Same Hole Index Properties Repeated from Different Hole
VARIABLE NAME
CODE
1 .
OFFDIR
DESCRI PTI ON
Left Right Cen ter
2. 3-
ne
VARIABLE NAME
NOTE:
SOURCE
OEA
is
an open
is
a
CONSULTANT
CODE
1
end agreement: consultants report
DESCRIPTION
Indiana State Highway Commission American Testing and Engineering Company (OEA) American Testing and Engineering Company (Consu tant The H. C. Nutting Company (OEA) The H. C. Nutting Company (Consultant) Pittsburg Testing Laboratory (OEA) Pittsburg Testing Laboratory (Consultant) Westenhoff and Novick, Inc. (OEA) Westenhoff and Novick, Inc. (Consultant) Stokely and Associates (OEA) Stokley and Associates (Consultant) Soil Testing Services, Inc. (OEA) Soil Testing Services, Inc. (Consultant)
1
2. 3-
A.
5.
6.
7. 8.
9-
10.
1 1
.
12. 13. \k. 1516. 17. 18. 19-
Geo-Surveys (OEA) Geo-Surveys (Consultant) Testing Service Corporation (OEA) Testing Service Corporation (Consultant) (OEA) Hurst-Rosche Engineers of Indiana, Inc Inc. Indiana, of Engineers Hurst-Rosche
(Con
s u
1
tan t
20.
21
.
Homer Homer
22. 232k. 25.
Chastain and Associates (OEA) Chastain and Associates (Consultant) L. E. Gregg and Associates (OEA) L. E. Gregg and Associates (Consultant) Harold S. Shaffer (OEA) Harold S. Shaffer (Consultant)
L. L.
131
VARIABLE NAME
CODE
1
.
SAMPTY
DESCRI PT ION
2. 3A. 5. 6. 78. 9. 10.

1
1 .
Shelby Tube Split S poon Den son Sampler Continuous Flight Auger Hand Auge r Jar Bag Rock Core Piston Samp e r ow Stem Auger Ho Power Auger
i 1
VARIABLE NAME
CODE
1
.
PHYSIO
DESCRI PTION
2. 3. k. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.
10.
1
12. 13.
Plain Upland Dearborn Muscatatuck Regional Slope Scottsburg Lowland Norman Upland Mitchell Plain Crawford Upland Wabash Lowl and Calumet Lacustrine Section Valparaiso Moraine Kankakee Lacustrine Section Maumee Lacustrine Section Steuben Morainal Section
Ti pton
Till
VARIABLE NAME
CODE
10.
SERIES
DESCRIPTI ON
Ade
Ad
r
i
CODE
150. 160. 170. 180. 190. 200. 210.
DESCRI PTI ON
Bedford
Bell mo re
20. 30. ko. 50. 60. 70. 80. 90. 100.

1
an
Alford Algiers
Al ida
Berks
Bi rds
Alii son Arm es bu rg

i
Aubbeenaubbee
Ava
Avonbu rg
Ayr Ay rsh re Bart e
i
10.
120. 130.
HO.
Baxter
220. 230. 2A0. 250. 260. 270. 280.
oomf e ount Bonn e Bono Boones bo ro Boye r Brady

B
1
Bl
rems
Bronson B rooks ton
132
VARIABLE NAME
CODE
290. 300. 310. 320. 330. 340. 350. 360. 370. 380. 390. 400. 410. 420. 430. 440. 450. 460. 470. 480. 490. 500. 510. 520. 530. 540. 550. 560. 570. 580. 590. 600. 610. 620. 630. 640. 650. 660. 670. 680. 690. 700. 710. 720. 730. 740. 741, 742. 750.
SERIES
(Continued)
CODE
760. 770.
771
.
DESCRI PTION Burg n Burns de Camden Carl isle

i i
DESCRIPTION
Fu
1
ton
1
Cas co Cat in
1
GeneseeLoam S t Genes seeUrban Land

i
Ce
na
Cha me rs Chel sea

1
Cincinnati CI a rence
CI e
rmon
Colyer Conover Conrad Corw n

i
Cory
Corydon Coupee Crane

Cr der
i
Crosby Cros e
i
Cuba Dana Da r roch Del Rey D ck nson Door Dowag ac Dubo s

i
i
i
Dunning Eden
Eden ton Edwa rds
Eel
E
1
k
1
nsonv
El El
iott ston Evansv Fab us Fa rmoun t F ncas 1 Flanagan Fo resman Loam t Fox-S
i 1 1
i i
780. 790. 800. 810. 820. 830. 840. 850. 860. 870. 880. 890. 900. 910. 920. 930. 940. 950. 960. 970. 980. 990. 1000. 1010. 1020. 1030. 1040. 1050. 1060. 1070. 1080. 1090. 100. 1110. 120. 130. 1 140. 1150. 160. 170.
1 1 1 1 1
Gi
G
i
ford
t
1
1
Gilpin
na
enha Granby Gray fo rd Guthrie Hage r s town Hanna

Gl
Has
n s
Haubstadt Haymond Hennepin Hen s haw

cko ry High Gap Hill sdal e Home r Hoopes ton Hosme r Houg h ton Hoy tv
H
i i
Huntington
Hun ts v ona
I I I
pa va va
Jasper Jennings Johnsburg Jules Ka amazoo

1
Ke rs ton
Kings Kokomo Landes
Lawrence Lenawee
L
L
i
nd
de
1
1
i
1 1
80.
nkv Long o
i
i 1 1
Fox-Loam Fox-Urban Land Frede rick
190. 1200. 1210.
Lorenzo Lowe Lucas

1
1
I
">
J J
'
VARIABLE NAME
CODE
1220. 1230. 1240. 1250. 1260. 1270. 1280. 1290. 1300. 1310. 1320. 1330. 1340. 1350. 1360. 1370. 1380. 1381 1390. 1400. 1410. 1420. 1430. 1440. 1450. 1460. 1470. 1480. 1490. 1500. 1510. 1520. 1530. 1540. 1550. 1560. 1570. 1580. 1590. 1600. 1610. 1620. 1630. 1640. 1650. 1660. 1670. 1680. 1690.
.
SERIES
(Continued)
CODE
1700 1710 1720 1730 1740 1750 1760 1770 1780 1790 1800 1810 1820 1830 1840 1850 i860 1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 I960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030
DESCRI PTION
Lyd
Ly
1
i
DESCRI PTI ON
Petrol
i
ck
1 i
es
1
1
Pewamo
Pike P nhook
i
Maha as v Ma rkham
Ma rk and Ma rt nsv
1
i i
11
Mart sco Mas s e Ma ther ton

i
Plainf iel d Piano Pope Princeton Proctor

Q_u
i
Maumee McGary Medway

Mel lott
nn
1
Merm Me tamora
i 1
Me tea
t Mi ami -S M am -U r ban Mi ford sdale Mi Mi ton
i 1 i
1
Ragsda Rahm Rando ph Ra rden Raub Rawson

1
Loam Land
Rees v
Rensselaer Riddles
me r Rob n son
R
i
Mon tor Mon tgome ry Mon tmo renc Mor 1 ey

i
Rockcas Rodman
Ross Ros smoyne
Morocco
Mu ren Mus k ngum Mus sey
i
Runnymede
Rush Russel Clair St Sa ranac
1
.
Nappanee
Neg ey Newa rk
1
Newton
N
i
Saugatuck Sc otov Sebewa

i i
chol son
neveh
1 i
No
n
1
Oakvi le Ockl ey
Octagon
Odel Osh temo Otwel Owos so Pa ms
1 1
2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100

21 10
Sewa rd Shadel and

Sh
i
ps he
1
Shoa Sidel S eeth Sloan Sparta

1
S t a r
ks
1
Parke Parr Patton

Pek
i
Peoga
2120 2130 2140 2150 2160 2170 2180
Steff enda S ck S tone Stoy

1
i
St rol e Sunbu ry
Switzerland
13*
VARIABLE NAME
CODE
2190. 2200. 2210. 2220. 2230. 2240. 2250. 2260. 2270. 2280. 2290. 2300. 2310. 2320. 2330. 2340. 2350. 2360. 2370. 2380.
2390".
SERIES
(continued)
CODE
2440. 2450. 2460. 2470. 2480. 2490. 2500. 2510. 2520. 2530. 2540. 2550. 2560. 2570. 2580. 2590. 2600, 2700 2800 2900 3000 3100 3200 3300 3400
DESCRI PT ION
Swy ge r Sy van
1
DESCR PT ON
I
I
Wea
We ke r We nbach We s ton Wes 1 and
i
i
Tagga Tama
Ted row
Tilsit T ppecanoe
i
To edo
1
ng Whee Wh taker Wh t son

1
i i
Toronto Tracy Trapp s t

i
Troxel Tyne r Un on town

i
Wi bur ette Wi Wi nga t Woodme re

1 1 1
Woo pe r Wynn
1
V V
go
Xen
a
i
ncennes
1
i
Zanes v
Zi pp
Vo
n
1
a
1
Wake and Wallkil Warners

Wa r saw
Bo
row
i
2400. 2410. 2420. 2430.
Wasep Washtenaw
i
Urban Land Land Al uv a Gravel P Gullied Land Strip Mine

1
1
i
Wat seka
Wauseon
PARENT
DESCRI PTI0N
So
i
Cut and Fill Made Land
VARIABLE NAME
CODE
1 .
2. 34. 5.
Soils f Soils formed Soils formed Soils f rmed

ti
1 1
rmed rmed
in in in in
i
lacustrine deposits outwash and alluvial deposits eolian sand deposits thick loess deposits oamy Wi scons n age g ac a
i i 1
6.
7.
Soils formed
till
in
clayey Wisconsin age glacial
8. 9-
10.
11.
12.
Soils formed in thin loess deposits over loamy Wi scons n age glacial till s fo rmed in moderately thick loess deposSo oamy Wisconsin age glacial till over t s Soils formed in moderately thick loess deposllinoian till or clayey paleosols t s over formed in residuum from siltstone, shale s So and sandst one bedrock Soils formed in residuum from limestone bedrock Soils formed in residuum from soft calcareous mes tone shale and
i
i
135
VARIABLE NAME
CODE
I
HORI ZO
DESCRI PT ION
A
B
2. 3k.
ROCK
SLOPE
DESCRI PTION
Level or nearly level 0-2 percent slopes 2-6 percent slopes 6-12 percent slopes 12-18 percent slopes 18-25 percent slopes
VARIABLE NAME
CODE
1 .
2. 3k. 5. 6. 78.
25-35 percent slopes Greater than 35 percent slopes
VARIABLE NAME
CODE
1
.
EROSIO
DESCRI PTI ON
2. 3.
None-s light Eroded (Moderate) Seve re
VARIABLE NAME
-010
WATERC, WATERF
Dry
VARIABLE NAME
CODE
1
.
DRAIN
DESCRI PTION
2. 3. A.
Well, Somewhat Excessive, Moderately Wei Somewhat Poorly Poorly and Very Poorly
1
Excessive
VARIABLE NAME
CODE
1 .
PERMEA
DESCRIPTION
Ve ry si ow
S
1
NUMERICAL RANGE (inches per hour)

(less than
.
06)
2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.
ow
1
Moderate Moderate Moderate!

Rap
i
y y
d
ow
i
Rap
d
i
Very Rap
(0.06-0.2) (0.2-0.63) (0.63-2.0) (2.0-6.0) (6.0-20.0) (More than 20.0)
136
VARIABLE NAME
CODE
1
.
FLOOD
DESCRI PT ION
2.
None Perched,
Ponded,
Hazard, or Common
VARIABLE NAME
CODE
1 .
FROST OR SHRINK
DESCRI PTION
2.
34. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9-
Very Low Very Low-Low Low Low-Mode rate Moderate (subject to) Moderate-H gh (severe) H gh High-Very High Very High
i
i
VARIABLE NAME
CODE
1 .
PH
DESCRIPTION
Ext reme y acid Very s t rong y acid St rong y acid Med urn acid SI ightly acid Neutral Mildly al ka ne Moderately alkaline S t rong y alkaline Very s t rong y
1
pH
range)
2.
3If.
5. 6.
7. 8. 9.
10.
(Below 4.5) (4-5-5.0) (5-1-5.5) (5.6-6.0) (6.1-6.5) (6.6-7-3) (7.4-7.8) (7.9-8.4) (8.5-9-0) (Above 9-0)
ka
ne
PI
VARIABLE NAME
CODE
LL,
PL AND
DESCRI PTION
-010
Non-pl as
SL
soils
VARIABLE NAM E
CODE
10
DESCRI PTION Non- plastic soils
137
VARIABLE NAME
CODE
1
TEXTUR
DESCRI PTI ON
Sand
2. 34. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.
Sand-Trace Gravel Sand-Little Gravel Sand-Some Gravel

Sand and Gravel Sandy Loam Sandy Loam-Trace Gravel Sandy Loam-Little Gravel Sandy Loam-Some Gravel Sandy Loam and Gravel Loam Loam-Trace Gravel Loam-Little Gravel Loam-Some Gravel Loam and Gravel Si ty Loam Silty Loam-Trace Gravel Si ty Loam-Little Gravel Si ty Loam-Some Gravel Si ty Loam and Gravel Silt Silt-Trace Gravel Silt-Little Gravel S t-Some G rave Silt and Gravel Sandy Clay Loam Sandy Clay Loam-Trace Gravel Sandy Clay Loam-Little Gravel Sandy Clay Loam-Some Gravel Sandy Clay Loam and Gravel Clay Loam Clay Loam-Trace Gravel Clay Loam-Little Gravel Clay Loam-Some Gravel Clay Loam and Gravel Ity ay Loam lty ay Loam-Trace Gravel lty ay Loam- Little Gravel lty ay Loam-Some Gravel lty ay Loam and Gravel Sandy ay Sandy ay-Trace Gravel Sandy ay- Little Gravel Sandy ay-Some Gravel Sandy ay and G rave
1 1 1 1 i
10.
1 1
12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19-
20.
21
.
22. 232k. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. ^3. 44. 45. 46. 47, 48. 49.
Si 1 ty Si ty Si lty Si lty
1
ay
ay-Trace Gravel ay-L 1 1 e Grave ay-Some Gravel

i 1
138
VARIABLE NAME
CODE
50.
51
TEXTUR (Continued)
DESCRI PTION
S
i
ty
Clay and Grave
Clay
52. 53. Sk. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 636k. 6566. 6768. 69. 70.
71
Clay-Trace Gravel Clay-L t tl e Gravel Clay-Some Gravel Clay and Gravel Grave Sandy Gravel
i
Gravel y Sand Sand and Gravel Coprogenous Earth tomaceous Earth D Fibr ic Materia Fragmental Material Hemi c Mater ia Ice or Frozen So Marl Muck Mucky Peat
1
Oxide-Protected Weathered Bedrock Partially Decomposed Organic Matter

Peat Sapric Material Undecomposed Organic Matter Unweathered Bedrock Weathered Bedrock, Saprolite, or Grus Comp ex
1
I
72. 737*.
75. 76. 77.
nappl
cab
VARIABLE NAME
CODE
1
ORGANI
DESCRIPTI ON
No Organic Material Trace (1-10$ Organic Matter) Little (1.1-20$ Organic Matter) Some (21-35$ Organic Matter) And (36-50$ Organic Matter)
2. 3k. 5.
VARIABLE NAME
CODE
1 .
COLOR
DESCRIPTI ON
2. 3. k. 5. 6.
Bluish Gray Bl ack

B B
rown rown s h Yell ow Dark Brown Da rk Bluish Gray

i
139
VARIABLE NAME
CODE
7. 8. 9.
COLOR (Cont nued)

i
DESCRI PTI ON
10.
1 1
12. 13. 14. 1516. 17. 18. 19-
20.
21
.
22. 2324. 25. 26. 27. 28. 2930. 31. 32. 33. 3^. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. ^7. 48. 4950.
51
.
Dark Gray Dark Grayish Brown Dark Green sh Gray Da r k Olive Dark 01 ve Gray Dark Red Dark Reddish Brown Dark Reddish Gray Dusky Red Dark Yellowish Brown G ray s h B rown Green sh Gray Grayish Green G reen Gray Light Bluish Gray Light B rown Light Brown sh Gray Light Greenish Gray Light Gray Light Olive B rown Light 01 ve Gray Light Red Light Reddish Brown Light Yel owi sh Brown 01 ve B rown
i i i i i
01 ive 01 ve 01 ve
i
Gray
Yel
1
ow
Pale B rown Pale G reen Pale 01 ive Pale Red Pale Yel low Pinkish Gray Pink Pinkish White Redd sh Black Reddish B rown
i
Red
.
Reddish Gray
Redd
i
sh
Yel low
52. 5354. 55.
Strong Brown Very Dark Brown Very Dark Gray Very Dark Grayish Brown Very Dark Red Very Pale Brown Very Dusky Red
UO
VARIABLE NAME
CODE
56. 57. 58. 5960.
COLOR (Continued)
DESCRIPTION
Weak Red
Whi Yel Yel Yel
te lowi sh lowi sh low
Brown
Red
VARIABLE NAME
CODE
1
.
TESTEF
DESCRI PTION
2.
3.
Standard Procto Standard Procto

Ene rgy
12400 ft-lb/cu.ft. See DIF for Compactive
Standard Procto
G
i
Compactive Energy Not

12^00 ft-lb/cu.ft. 56000 ft-lb/cu.ft. 56300 ft-lb/cu.ft. See DIF for Compactive
ven
i
k. 5. 6. 7. 8.
9.
10.
1
1 .
12.
Modified Procto Mod f ed Procto Mod f ed Procto Modified Procto Energy Mod f ed Procto G ven 15-Blow Compact ion: 15-Blow Compact ion: - B ow Compact ion: Energy 5- B ow Compact ion:
i i
i

7^00 ft-lb/cu.ft. 7800 ft-lb/cu.ft. See DIF for Compactive
ven
i
13lit.
15.
16. 17. 18. 19.
20.
21
.
22.
See DIF For Mechanical Knea ding Compactor: Compact ve En ergy Compactive Knea ding Compactor: Mechan ca Energy Not G ven See DIF For Ha rva rd M n a tu re Apparatus: Compactive En ergy Compactive Harvard Mi n a t u re Apparatus: Energy Not Gi ven See DIF for Compactive Energy Hveem Method Compactive Energy Not Given Hveem Method See DIF for Compactive Tab bratory V Energy Compactive Energy Not Given Vibratory Table See DIF for Compactive Compres s on Mac hine: Energy Compactive Energy Not Comp ress on Mac hine: Given
i
HI
AASHTO (AASHT01)
DESCRI PTION
VARIABLE NAME
CODE
1
2. 3k. 5. 6. 78. 9.
A-l-A A-1-B A-2-4 A-2-5 A-2-6 A-2-7

A-3 A-A A-5 A-6 A-7-5
10.
11
.
12. 13.
A-7-6
A-8
.
VARIABLE NAME
CODE
1
UNI
(UNIF1
DESCRIPTION
CL CH
2. 34. 5. 6.
7-
CL-CH
ML OL
8. 910.
1 1 .
ML-OL ML-CL CL-OL ML-OL OR CL

MH OH
12. 1314. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19.
20
21
.
MH-OH MH-CH CH-OH MH-OH OR CH ML-MH OL-OH MH-OH OR ML-OL Any combi ination of fine -g ra ned soil CL-ML
i
22. 232k. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30.
GM GC
GM-GC
SM
SC
SM-SC
GW OR GP' t=G SW OR SP" L*=S
G*-GM G*-GC
\U1
VARIABLE NAME
CODE
31. 32. 33Zh. 35.
UNIF (UNIF1)
DESCRI PTION
(Continued)
G*-GM OR G* S*-SM s*-sc S*-SM OR S* sc

PT
*GW and GP, and SW and SP have been combined and coded as This has been necessary since grain respectively. G and S, size curves are rarely presented within subsurface investigation reports and the gradational characteristics cannot be determined, that is, the uniformity coefficient, Cu, and the coefficients of curvature, Cc.
VARIABLE NAME
CODE
1
.
TYPE
DESCRI PTION
2.
3.
Unconsolidated Undrained Triaxial Test Consolidated Undrained Triaxial Test - Not Saturated Consolidated Undrained Triaxial Test - Sat urated
D
i
k. 5.
rect Shea
Consolidated Drained Triaxial Test
1*3
APPENDIX
USER'
MANUAL:
PART
Formats, Card and Column Locations FORMAT

Fl .0
VARIABLE NAME
CARD1
CARD LOCATION
COLUMN LOCATION
1
COUNTY
F2.0
2-3
HOLENO
SAMPNO
DISTRI
F5.0 F2.0
Fl .0
4-8
9-10
12
DATEYR
DATEMO
F2.0
U-15
17-18
20-21
F2.0 F2.0 F2.0

Fl .0
DATEDA
TOWN
23-24
26
TOWNDI
RANGE
RANGDI
F2.0
Fl .0
28-29
31
SECTIO PROJPR
PROJNO
F2.0
A3
33-3^
36-38 39-43
F5.0
A3
PROJPA
PROJMI
44-46 47-49
51-53
F3.0
A3
CONTPR
}kk
VARIABLE NAME
CONTNO
FORMAT
F5.0
A2
F3 .0
Al
CARD LOCATION
COLUMN LOCATION
5A-53
60-6!
ROADPR ROADNO
ROADSU
62-64
65
BORING
A8
67-74 76-78
80
2
1
ASSOC
REPEAT
CARD2
ID2
F3.0
Fl .0
Fl .0
F9-0 F7-0 FA.O

Fl .0
2
2 2 2
2-10
12-18
STATNO
OFFSET
OFFDI
LINE1
LI
R
20-23
25
27-3*4
A8
A2
F2 .0 F2 .0
2 2
2 2
NE2
35-36 38-39 41-42

44-51
SOURCE
SAMPTY
LABNO
A8
F5.1 F4.1
F4.1
F2 .0
2 2 2 2 2 2 2
3
3
GRDSUR
DEPTHT
DEPTHB
SPT
PHYS 10
SERI ES
53-57
59-62
64-67 69-70
72-73 75-78
1
F2.0
F^.O
Fl .0
CARD3
ID3
F9.0
F2 .0
2-10
12-13
PARENT
1*5
VARIABLE NAME
HORIZO
SLOPE
FORMAT
F1 .0
Fl .0
CARD LOCATION
3
COLUMN LOCATION
15 17
EROSIO
BEDRKS
19
Fl .0
3
21
-23
F3.1
25-28
BEDRKB
F4.1
F2.
1
WATERS
30-31
3
WATERC
Fk.1
F4.
1
33-36
3
WATERF
DRAIN
38-41
3
A3
Fl .0
Fl .0
3
PERMEA
FLOOD FROST
45
3
Fl .0 Fl .0
47
3
49
3
SHRINK
PH
Fl .0
51
3
F2.0
F4.
1
53-54
3
GRADOl
56-59
3
GRAD02 GRAD03
61-64
F4.1
3
F4.1
F4.1 F4.1
Fl .0
66-69
3
GRADOl GRAD05
CARD4
ID4
71-74
3
76-79
3
1
F9-0
F4.
1
2-1
l
GRAD06
12-15
1
GRAD07 GRAD08
GRAD09 GRADIO
F4.1
7-20
Fk.)
Fk.
1
22-25
4
27-30
4 4
F4.1
32-35
\Uf,
VARIABLE NAME
SAND
S
1
FORMAT
Fk.\
Fk.
I
CARD LOCATION
k k k k
COLUMN LOCATION
37-^0 k2-hS
LT
CLAY
F4.1
F4.1
Fk.
1
COLL
LL
PL
PI
52-55
57-60 62-65 67-70

72-7^
Fif.l
h
k k
Fk.
SL
F3.1
LOSSIG
CARD5
ID5
F3.1
Fl .0
h 5
5 5 5 5
76-78
1
F9.0
FA.l
FA.
1
2- 10
NATMC
12-15
1
NATWD NATDD
7-20
F4.1
FA.
22-25
SPECGR
5
5
5
27-30
32-33
35
TEXTUR
ORGANI
F2.0
Fl .0
COLOR
F2.0
F2.0
F4.1 F4.1 F3.1
37-38
ko-k]
TESTEF
MAXDD
5
5
5
hl-hS
48-51
MAXWD OPTIMC
CBRUN1
5 5 5 5 5
53-55 57-59
61-63
F3-1
F3.
1
CBRUN2
CBRSOl
F3.
65-67
69-71
CBRS02
F3.1
I*7
VARIABLE NAME
QUSTR
AASHT01
UNIF1
FORMAT
F3.
1
CARD LOCATION
5
COLUMN LOCATION
73-76 77-78 79-80
1
F2.0
5
5
F2.0
Fl .0
CARD6
1
06
F9-0
FA. 2
Fl .0
6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6
6
2-10
12-15
17
QUSTA
TYPE
STRENGTH
STRAIN
FA.
FA. 2
FA.
18-21
22-25
CONFPRES
COHES ION
26-29
30-32
33-35
F3.2
F3.1
FA. FA. 2 FA.
FA.
3
ANGLE
POREPRES
36-39
A0-A3
MAJOR
EO EF
A5-A8
A9-52
6 6
6
SO SF
PO
PC
FA.l
FA.l
FA.
2
53-56
57-60
6 6 6
6 6
61-6A
FA. 2
65-68
69-72
73-76
CC
FA.
.
CR
CV
FA. FA.
77-80
T.8
APPENDIX
USER'S MANUAL:
PART
IV
Computer Programs
The computer programs are used for data management and
manipulation.
All
programs are written for use on the CDC
6500 system at Purdue University.
H9
PROGRAM NUMBER
THE FOLLOWING PROGRAM WILL ADD MEW DATA TO THE EXISTING DATA FILE.
12345. ABC, CM15000, L1OO00. T25. P20, TU8000, TC200, TP1 PASS= REQUEST (SO I LDAT. 1414, UP=. WRITE) REWIND (SOILDAT) SKIPF, SOILDAT, 1. BKSPR, SOILDAT, 1. COPYBF,, SOILDAT. 7/8/9
DATA CARDS
6/7/8/9
150
PROGRAM NUMBER 2
INPUT DATA FOR CARD PUNCHINC THE PURPOSE OF THIS PROGRAM IS TO CHECK NEW WITH THE FOLLOWING -AUDIT* DETECTED ONLY THOSE ERRORS WHICH CAN BE ERRORS PROGRAM WILL BE REPORTED. _
12345, ABC, CM77000,L10000.T25,P20,TU4000.
PASS* -SOIL DATA FOR DAYBAN. (SPSS) COMMON SPSS. 7/8/8

RUN NAME UARIABLE LIST
THE
STATE OF
INDIANA*
INPUT FORMAT
COMMENT
N OF CASES IF
IF IF
IF
**** SOIL DATA CHECK DATEDA. TOWN, , DATEYR, DATEMO. DISTRI SAMPNO, HOLENO. COUNTY, CARD1, PROJMI CONTPR. PROJPA. PROJNO, TOWNDI . RANGE, RANGDI SECTIO, PROJPR, CARD2, ID2, REPEAT, ASSOC, BORING, ROADSU, CONTNO, ROADPR, ROADNO, LABNO, GRDSUR, SAMPTY, SOURCE, LINE2, , LINE1 OFFDIR, OFFSET, STATNO, DEPTHT, DEPTHB. SPT, PHYSIO, SERIES, CARD3, ID3, PARENT, HORIZO. SLOPE, EROSIO, BEDRKS, FROST, SHRINK, PH, BEDRKB, WATERS, WATERC, WATERF, DRAIN, PERMEA, FLOOD, SILT. CLAY, SAND, GRAD01 TO GRAD05,CARD4,ID4,GRAD0S TO GRAD10, SPECGR, NATDD, NATWD, NATMC. COLL, LL, PL, PI , SL, LOSSIG, CARDS, ID5, CBRUN2, CBRUN1 OPTIMC, MAXWD, MAXDD, TESTEF, TEXTUR, ORGANI, COLOR, IDE, CARDS. , UNIF1 AASHTOl QUSTR, CBRS02, CBRSOl , QUSTA, TYPE. STRENGTH, STRAIN, CONFPRES, COHESION, ANGLE, POREFRES, MAJOR, EO, EF, SO, SF, PO, PC, CC, CR, CU (F1.0.F2.0,F5.0,F2=0,1X,F1.0.1X.F2.0,1X.F2.0.1X,F2.0.1X,F2.0, 1X,F1.0.1X,F2.0. 1X.F1.0,1X,F2.0,1X,A3,F5.0,A3,F3.0.1X.A3. .0, 1FS.0. IX, F5.0. 1XA2,F3.0,A1, 1X.A8. 1X.F3.0, 1X.F1.0/F1 IX. A8, 1X.F2.0, 1X.F2.0. 1X,F1.0,1X.AS,A2. F7.0, 1X.F4.0. ,1,1X,F4.1,1X.F4.1.1X.F2.0.1X.F2.0.1X,F4.0/F1.0.F3.0,1X, F5. IX. 1X.F2.1, F2.0, 1X.F1.0, 1X.F1.0, 1X.F1.0, 1X.F3.1, 1X.F4.1. 1X.F1.0. 1X.F1.0, 1X.F1.0, 1X.F1.0, 1X.F4.1, 1X.F4.1, 1X.F1.0, 1X.F2.0.1X,F4.1,1X,F4.1,1X,F4.1.1X,F4.1.1X.F4.1/F1.0.F9.0.1X, 1X.F4.1, F4.1, 1X.F4.1, 1X.F4.1, 1X.F4.1, 1X.F4.1, 1X.F4.1, 1X.F3.1/ 1X.F3.1, 1X.F4.1, 1X,F4.1, 1X.F4.1, 1X.F4.1, 1X.F4.1, F1.0,FS.O,1X,F4.1,1X,F4.1,1X,F4.1,1X,F4.3,1X.F2.0.1X,F1.0,1X, F2.0,1X,F2.0,1X,F4.1.1X,F4.1,1X,F3.1,1X,F3.1,1X,F3.1.1X,F3.1. 1X.F3.1. 1X,F4.2,F2.0,F2.0/F1.0.F9.0,1X. F4.2, 1X,F1.0,3F4.2,F3.2,F3.1.2F4.2,1X, 2F4.3,2F4.1,2F4.2,2F4.3,F4.2) THE NUMBER OF CASES (N OF CASES) WILL COINCIDE WITH RUN THE NUMBER OF SAMPLES BEING UERIFIED IN A PARTICULAR 70 (CARD1 NE 1 OR CARD2 NE 2 OR CARD3 NE 3 OR CARD4 NE 4 OR CARD5 NE 5 OR CARDS NE S) REPORT. =1 REPORT. =2 (ID2 NE ID3 OR ID3 NE ID4 OR ID4 NE ID5 OR IDS NE IDS) GT 12 DATEMO OR LT SO) OR (DISTRI GT 6 OR (DATEYR GT 78 GT 15 OR DATEDA GT 31 OR TOWN GT 38 OR TOWNDI GT 2 OR RANGE OR RANGDI GT 2 OR ASSOC GT 11G OR REPEAT GT 3) REPORT. =10 (OFFDIR GT 3 OR SOURCE GT 25 OR SAMPTY GT 11 OR PHYSIO GT 13
. ,
,
151
IF IF IF IF IF IF
IF
IF IF
IF
IF
IF IF
IF
IF IF IF
OR SERIES GT 3400) REPORT. =20 (OFFDIR EQ 3 AND OFFSET ME 0) REPORT. =21 AMD LE 10 AMD ORGAMI ME 2) REPORT. =22 (LOSSIG GT (LOSSIG GT 10 AMD LE 20 AMD ORGAMI ME 3) REPORT. =23 (LOSSIG GT 20 AMD LT 35 AMD ORGAMI ME 4) REPORT. =24 (LOSSIG GT 35 AMD ORGANI ME 5) REPORT. =25 (PARENT GT 12 OR HORIZO GT 3 OR SLOPE GT 8 OR EROS 10 GT 3 OR DRAIN GT 4 OR PERMEA GT 7 OR FLOOD GT 2 OR FROST GT 9 OR SHRINK GT 5 OR PH GT 10) REPORT. =30 (GRADOl GT 100 OR GRAD02 GT 100 OR GRAD03 GT 100 OR GRAD04 GT 100 OR GRAD05 GT 100 OR GRADOG GT 100 OR GRAD07 GT 100 OR GRAD08 GT 100 OR GRAD09 GT 100 OR GRAD10 GT 100 OR SAND GT 100 OR SILT GT 100 OR CLAY GT 100 OR COLL GT 100) REPORT. =35 (LL GT 130 OR PL GT 100 OR PI GT 85 OR SL GT 55 OR LOSSIC GT GO) REPORT. =40 (NATMC GT 125 OR NATUD GT 140 OR NATDD GT 135 OR SPECGR GT 2.79 OR TEXTUR GT 77 OR ORGANI GT 5 OR COLOR GT GO OR TESTEF GT 22 OR MAXDD GT 135 OR MAXUD GT 150 OR OPTIMC GT 40 OR CBRUN1 GT 25 OR CBRUN2 GT 25 OR CBRSOl GT 45 OR CBRS02 GT 25 OR OUSTR GT 4.5 OR AASHTOl GT 13 OR UNIF1 GT 35) REPORT. =50 (QUSTA GT 20 OR TYPE GT 4 OR STRENGTH GT 11 OR STRAIN GT 20 OR COHESION GT 1.5 OR ANGLE GT 40) REPORT. =55 (EO GT 1.5 OR EF GT 1.0 OR SO GT 100 OR SF GT 110 OR PO GT 2 OR PC GT 7.0 OR CC GT .El OR CR GT .5) REPORT. =G0 (DEPTHT GT DEPTHB) REPORT. =70 (GRADOl LT GRAD02 OR GRAD02 LT GRAD03 OR GRAD03 LT GRPD04 OR GRAD04 LT GRAD05 OR GRAD05 LT GRADOG OR GRADOG LT GRAD07 OR GRAD07 LT GRAD08 OR GRAD08 LT GRAD09 OR GRAD09 LT GRAD10) REPORT. =80 (LL NE -1 AND PL ME -1 AND PI NE -1 AND ((PI ME (LL-PD) OR (PL GT LL))) REPORT. =90 (NAXDD GT MAXUD) REPORT. =100 (CBRUN1 LT CBRUN2 OR CBRSOl LT CBRS02) REPORT. =200 (EO LT EF OR SO GT SF OR PO GT PC OR CC LT CR) REPGRT.=300
READ INPUT DATA
DATA CARDS
FINISH G'7/8/9
152
PROGRAM NUMBER 3
IN CONJUNCTION THE FOLLOUING IS A LISTING OF THE SPSS PROGRAM BEING USED OF RAU LISTING A MANIPULATIONS-INCLUDING DATA FOR SYSTEM SPSS THE UITH PROCEDURES. SPSS THE OF ANY DATA AND THE PROCESSING OF DATA WITH
FILE NAME RUN NAME UARIABLE LIST
PROG
INPUT MEDIUM INPUT FORMAT
UAR LABELS
'*** SOIL DATA FOR THE STATE OF INDIANA COUNTY, HOLENO, SAMPNO, DISTRI DATEYR, DATEMO, DATEDA, TOWN. TOWNDI RANGE, RANGDI. SECT 10. PROJPR, PROJNO. PROJPA. PROJMI CONTPR. CONTNO. ROADPR. ROADNO, ROADSU. BORING. ASSOC, REPEAT, STATNO. OFFSET, OFFDIR, LINE1 , LINE2. SOURCE. SAMPTY, LABNO, GRDSUR, DEPTHT, DEPTHB, SPT. PHYSIO, SERIES, PARENT, HORIZO, SLOPE, EROSIO. BEDRKS. BEDRKB, WATERS, WATERC. WATERF. DRAIN. PERMEA. FLOOD. FROST. SHRINK. PH. GRAD01 TO GRAD10. SAND. SILT, CLAY, COLL, LL, PL, PI. SL.LOSSIG. NATMC. NATWD. NATDD, SPECGR, TEXTUR, ORGANI COLOR, TESTEF, MAXDD. MAXWD, OPTIMC, CBRUN1 CBRUN2, CBRS01 , CBRS02, QUSTR, AASHT01 . UNIF1, QUSTA, TYPE, STRENGTH, STRAIN, CONFPRES, COHESION, ANGLE, POREPRES, MAJOR, EO, EF, SO. SF, PO. PC. CC, CR, CU S0IL1 (1X,F2.0,F5.0,F2.0,1X.F1.0,1X,F2.0,1X,F2.0, 1X,F2.0, 1X.F2.0. 1X.F1.0, 1X.F2.0. 1X,F1.0,1X.F2.0. IX, A3,F5.0, A3.F3.0. IX, A3, F5.0, 1X,A2,F3.0,A1, IX. A8. 1X.F3.0, 1X.F1.0/ 11X.F7.0, 1X.F4.0, 1X.F1.0, IX, A8.A2, 1X,F2.0, 1X.F2.0, IX, A8, 1X.F4.1, 1X,F4.1. 1X.F2.0, 1X.F2.0, 1X.F4.0/ 1X.F5.1, 11X,F2.0, 1X.F1.0, 1X.F1.0. 1X.F1.0, 1X.F3.1. 1X.F4.1. 1X.F2.1, 1X.F4.1, 1X.F4.1, 1X.F1.0, 1X.F1.0, 1X.F1.0. 1X.F1.0, 1X.F1.0, 1X.F2.0. 1X,F4.1, 1X.F4.1, 1X.F4.1, 1X.F4.1, 1X.F4.1/ UX, F4.1, 1X.F4.1, 1X,F4.1, 1X.F4.1, 1X.F4.1, 1X.F4.1. 1X.F4.1. 1X.F4.1, 1X.F4.1. 1X.F4.1, 1X.F4.1, 1X.F4.1, 1X.F3.1. 1X.F3.1/ 11X.F4.1, 1X.F4.1, 1X.F4.1. 1X.F4.3, 1X.F2.0, 1X.F1.0, 1X.F2.0. 1X.F2.0. 1X.F4.1. 1X.F4.1. 1X.F3.1. 1X.F3.1, 1X.F3.1, 1X.F3.1. 1X.F3.1. 1X.F4.2,F2.0.F2.0/ 11X F4.2, IX. Fl.O, 3F4.2.F3.2. F3.1.2F4.2, 1X.2F4.3,2F4.1,2F4.2,2F4.3,F4.2) COUNTY COUNTY/HOLENO HOLE NUMBER/SAMPNO SAMPLE NUMBER/DATEYR YEAR TAKEN FROM HOLE/DATEMO MONTH TAKEN FROM HOLE/DATEDA DAY TAKEN FR OM HOLE/TOWN TOWNSHIP/TOWNDI TOWNSHIP-DIRECTION/RANGE RANGE/ RANGDI RANGE-DIRECTION/SECTIO SECTION/ PROJPR PROJECT NUMBER-PREFIX/PROJNO PROJECT NUMBER/ PROJPA PROJECT NUMBER-PARENTHESIS/PROJMI PROJECT NUMBER-MILE/ CONTPR CONTRACT NUMBER-PREFIX/ CONTNO CONTRACT NUMBER/ DISTRI DISTRICT/ ROADPR ROAD NUMBER-PREFIX/ROADNO ROAD NUMBER/ ROADSU ROAD NUMBER-SUFFIX/BORING BORING NUMBER/ASSOC SOIL ASSOCIA T I ON/REPEAT DATA REPEAT/ STATNO STATION NUMBER/OFFSET OFFSET/OFFDIR OFFSET-DIRECTION/ LINE1 TO LINE2=LINE NUMBER/SOURCE SOURCE OF INFORMATION/ SAMPTY SAMPLE TYPE/LABNO LAB NUMBER/ GRDSUR GROUND SURFACE ELEUATION/DEPTHT DEPTH TO TOP OF SAMPLE/ DEPTHB DEPTH TO BOTTOM OF SAMPLE/PHYSIO PHYSIOGRAPHIC UNIT/ SPT N UALUE OF SPT/ PARENT PARENT MATERIAL/ SERIES SOIL SERIES NAME/
. , . ,
153
RECODE UALUE LABELS
EROSIO EROSION CLASS/ SLOPE SLOPE CLASS/ HORIZQ HORIZON/ BEDPKB DEPTH TO BEDROCK-BO SURUEY/ BEDROCK-SOIL BEDRKS DEPTH TO RING LOG/WATERS DEPTH-SEASONAL HIGH UATER TABLE-SOIL SURUEY/ WATERC WATER DEPTH AT COMPLETION/WATERF WATER DEPTH FINAL OR 24 H OURS/DRAIN NATURAL SOIL DRAINAGE/PERMEA PERMEABILITY/ FLOOD FLOODING POTENTIAL/ FROST POTENTIAL FROST ACTION/ SHRINK SHRINK-SWELL POTENTIAL/ PH REACTION-PH/ GRAD01 PERCENT PASSING 1 1-2** SIEUE/ GRAD02 PERCENT PASSING 1** SIEUE/ GRAD03 PERCENT PASSING 3-4** SIEUE/ GRAD04 PERCENT PASSING 1-2** SIEUE/ GRAD05 PERCENT PASSING 3-8** SIEUE/ GRADOS PERCENT PASSING NO. 4 SIEUE/ GRAD07 PERCENT PASSING NO. 10 SIEUE/ GRAD08 PERCENT PASSING NO. 40 SIEUE/ GRAD09 PERCENT PASSING NO. 200 SIEUE/ GRAD10 PERCENT PASSING NO. 270 SIEUE/ SAND PERCENT SAND/ SILT PERCENT SILT/CLAY PERCENT CLAY/COLL PERCENT COLLOIDS/ PI PLASTICITY INDEX/ PL PLASTIC LIMIT/ LL LIQUID LINIT/ LOSSIG LOSS ON IGNITION/ SL SHRINKAGE LIMIT/ NATWD NATURAL WET DENSITY/ NATMC NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT/ SPECGR SPECIFIC GRAUITY/ NATDD NATURAL DRY DENSITY/ ORGAN I ORGANIC CONTENT/ TEXTUR TEXTURAL CLASSIFICATION/ COLOR COLOR/ MAXDD MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY/ TESTEF TEST-EFFORT IDENTIFIER/ OPTIMC OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT/ MAXWD MAXIMUM WET DENSITY/ CBRUN1 UNSOAKETJ CBR-100 MAXDD/ CBRUN2 UNSOAKED CBR-95 MAXDD/ CBRSOl SOAKED CBR-100 MAXDD/CBRS02 SOAKED CBR-35 MAXDD/ QUSTR UNCONFINED COMPRESSIUE STRENGTH-TSF/ QUSTA FAILURE STRAIN-PERCENT/ TYPE TYPE OF STRENGTH TEST/STRENGTH FAILURE STRENGTH/ STRAIN FAILURE STRAIN/CONFPRES CONFINING PRESSURE/ ANGLE FAILURE ANGLE/POREPRES PORE PRESSURE AT FAILURE/MAJOR MAJOR PRINCIPAL STRESS/EO INITIAL UOID RATIO/EF FINAL UOID RATIO/SO IN ITIAL DEGREE OF SATURATION/SF FINAL DEGREE OF SATURATION/PO OUERB URDEN STRESS/PC PRECONSOLIDATION PRESSURE/CC COMPRESSION INDEX/ CR RECOMPRESSION INDEX/CU COEFFICIENT OF CONSOLIDATION AASHT01.UNIF1 (BLANK=S33S)/ SAND (BLANK=933) COUNTY (-0) UNKNOWN (Ol)ADAMS (02) ALLEN (03) BARTHOLOMEW (4) BENTON (OS)BLACKFORD (OG)BOONE (07)BROWN (08)CARROLL (03)CASS (lO)CLARK (ll)CLAY (12)CLINT0N (13)CRAWF0RD (14)DAUIESS (15)DEARB0RN (lG)DECATUR (17)DEKALB (18)DELAWARE (13)DUB0IS (20)ELKHART (2DFAYETTE (22)FL0YD (23)F0UNTAIN (24)FRANKLIN (25)FULT0N (2E) GIBSON (27) GRANT (28) GREENE (23) HAMILTON (30) HANCOCK (3DHARRIS0N (32)HENDRICKS (33)HENRY (34)H0WARD (35) HUNTINGTON (3G) JACKSON (37) JASPER (38) JAY (33) JEFFERSON (40) JENNINGS (4DJ0HNS0N (42)KN0X (43)K0SCIUSK0 (44)LAGRANGE (45)LAKE (4S)LAP0RTE (47)LAWRENCE (48)MADIS0N (43)MARI0N (50)MARSHALL (5DMARTIN (52)MIAMI (53)M0NR0E (54) MONTGOMERY (55)M0RGAN (5S)NEWT0N (57)N0BLE (58)0HI0 (53)0RANGE (GO)OWEN (GDPARKE (G2)PERRY (G3)PIKE (G4)P0RTER (G5)P0SEY (G6)PULASKI (G7)PUTNAM (G8)RAND0LPH (G3)RIPLEY (70)RUSH (7DST. JOSEPH (72)SC0TT (73)SHELBY (74)SPENCER (75)STARKE (7G)STEUBEN (77)SULLIUAN (78) SWITZERLAND (73) TIPPECANOE (80)TIPTON (8DUNI0N (82)UANDERBURGH (83)UERMILLI0N (84)UIGO (85)WABASH (8G)WARREN (87)WARRICK (88)WASHINGT0N (83)WAYNE (90)WELLS (3DWHITE (32)WHITLEY (93)STATE OF KENTUCKY/
15*
DISTRI (-O)UNKNOWN ( 1 )CRAWFORDSUILLE (2)F0RT WAYNE (3)GREENFIELD (4)LAP0RTE (5)SEVnOUR (S)UINCENNES/ DATEMO (-O)UNKNOWN (Ol)JANUARY (02)FEBRUARY (03)MARCH (04)APRIL (05)MAY (OG)JUNE (07)JULY (08)AUGUST (09)SEPTEMBER (lO)OCTOBER (ll)NOUEMBER (12) DECEMBER/ TOWNDI (-0) UNKNOWN (l)NORTH (2)S0UTH/ RANGDI (-O)UNKNOWN (l)EAST (2)WEST/ ASSOC (-0) UNKNOWN (1) EEL-MARTINSU-GENESSE (2) GENESEE-ROSS-SHOALS (3) WAKELAN-STEN DA-HAYMO (4) GENESEE-SHOALS-EEL (5) HAYMON-NOLIN-PETROLI (6) GENESE-EEL-STEND-POPE (7) HUNTING-WHEELI-MARKH (8) HUNTINGTON-LINDSIDE (9) HAYMOND-WAKELAND (10) ALIDA-DELREY-WHITAKE (11) BONO-MAUMEE -WARNERS (12) CHELS-HILLSDAL-OSHTE (13) CONRAD-UOOTEN-WEISS (14) DOOR-TRACY-QUINN (15) DOOR-LYDICK (IS) ELSTON-WEA (17) DUBOIS-OTU ELL (18) FOX-MART I NSU I LL-ALUU (13) FOX-NINEUEH-OCKLEY (20) FOX-RO DMAN (21) FULT-RIM-MILF-RENSSEL (22) HOMER-SEBEWA-GILFORD (23) MA UME-GILFOR-RENSSEL (24) MAUMEE-NEWTON (2S) MARTINSUIL-BELMO-FOX (27) MARTINSUILLE-WHITAKE (28) MAHALASUILL-WHITAKER (30)MILF-MONT GOM-RENSSEL (31) MCGARY (32) NEGLEY-PARKE (33) OSHTEMO-BRONSON (34) OAKUIL-PLAINFIE-TAWA (35) OSHTEMO-FOX (35) OCKLEY-WESTLAND (39) PAILNFIE-BREM-MORROC (40) P (37) OCKLEY-WEA (38) OCKLEY-FOX LAINFIE-TYNER-OSHTE (41) PLAINFIELD-WATSEKA (42) PLAINFIELD-CHELS EA (43) PATTON-HENSHAW (44) PATTON-LYLES-HENSHAW (45) PEOGA-BARTL E-HOSMER (4B) PARKE-MIAMI-NEGLEY (47) RENSSELAER-MONTGOMER (48) RENSSELAER-DARROCH (4S) RENSSELAER-WHITAKER (50) UINCENNE5-ZIPP-R OSS (51) UOLINIA-DICKINSON (53) WEA-CRANE (54) WARSAW-ELSTON-fOX (55) WESTLAND-SLEETH (56) WEINBACH-SCIOTOUILLE (57) UEINBACH-WHEE LING (58) CROSIER-BROOKSTON (59) BROOKSTO-ODELL-CORWI (SI) BLOUNT -MORLEY-PEWAMO (B2) BLOUNT-PEWAMO (63) RIDDLES-MIAMI-CROSBY (64) CROSBY-BROOKSTON (65) ELLIOT-MARKHAM-PEWAM (66) FINCASTLE-RAGSDAL E (67) HOYTSUILLE-NAPPANEE (69) PARR-MIAMI (70) PARR-CORWIN (71) RANDOLPH-HILLSDALE (72) REESUILLE-RAGSDALE (73) RAUB-RAGSDALE (74) RAGSDALE-SIDELL (76) RUSSELL-HENNEPIN (.77) RUSSELL-XENIA (80) MIAMI-C (79) MIAMI-OSOSSO-RIDDLES (78) MIAMI-METEA-CELINA ROSBY-METEA (81) MIA-RUSSEL-FINCASTLE (82) MIAMI-FOX-MILTON (83) MIAMI-COSBY (84) MI AM I -HENNEPIN (85) MIAMI-FOX-MARTINSUIL (86) MO RLEY-BLOUNT (87) MUSKIN-SHADELA-HIGHG (88) ODELL-CHALMERS (89) SI DELL-PARR (90) HENNEPIN-RODMAN (91) AUONBURG-CLERMONT (92) CINCIN NATI-HICKORY (93) CINCINNA-ROSSMO-HICK (95) CINCINNATI-AUA (96) C INCINNAT-AUA-ALFORD (98) CRID-HAGERSTO-FREDER (99) CRIDER-FREDERI CK (100) CORYDON-WEIKERT-BERK (101) FAIRMOUNT-SWITZERLAN (102) GR AYFORD (103) LAWRENC-BEDFORD-CRID (104) TILSIT- JOHNSBURG (105) WE LLST-ZANESUIL-BERK (106) BERKS-GILPIN-UEIKERT (107) ZANESUILLE-WE LLSTON (108) MUCKS-PEATS (109) ALFORD (110) BLOOMFI-PRINCE-AYRSH (111) HOSMER (112) IUA-AUA (113) HOSMER-CINCINNAT-IUA (114) LYLE -AYRSHIR-PRINCET (115) PRINCET-AYRSH-BLOOMF (116) PRINCETON-FOX/ REPEAT (DORIGINAL DATA (2)DATA FROM SAME HOLE (3)DATA-DIFFERENT HOLE/ OFFDIR (-O)UNKNOWN (l)LEFT (2)RIGHT (3)CENTERLINE/ SOURCE (-O)UNKNOWN (ODSTATE (02)ATEC-0EA (03)ATEC-CONSULTANT (04)NUTTING-OEA (05)NUTTING-CCNSULTANT (06)PITTSBURG TEST-OEA (07)PITTSBURG TEST-CONS (08)WESTENHOFF-NOU-OEA (09)WESTENHOFF-MOU-CONS (lO)STOKLEY-OEA (ll)STOKLEY-CONSULTANT (12)STS-0EA ( 13)STS-C0NSULTANT (14)GE0 SURUEYS-OEA (15)GE0 SURUEYS-CONSULT. (lS)TESTING SERUICEOEA (17)TESTING SERU ICE-CONSULT. (18)HURST-R0SHE-0EA (19)HURST-R0 SHE-CONSULT. (20)CHASTAIN-OEA (2DCHASTAIN-C0NSULTANT
155
(22)GREGG-0EA (23) GREGG-CONSULTANT (24)SHAFER-0EA ( 25 SHAFER-CONS ULTANT/ SAMPTY (-O)UNKNOWN (Ol)SHELBY TUBE (02)SPLIT SPOOM (03)DENISON SAMPLER (04)COMT. FLIGHT AUGER (05)HAND AUGER (OG)JAR (07)BAG (08)ROCK CORE (09)PISTON SAMPLER (lO)HOLLOU STEM AUGER (ll)POWER AUGER-MACHINE' PHYSIO (-O)UNKNOWN (l)TIPTON TILL PLAIN (2)DEARB0RN UPLAND (3)MUSCATATUCK REGIONAL SLOPE (4)SC0TTSBURG LOULAND (5)N0RMAN UPLAND (G)MITCHELL PLAIN (7)CRAWF0RD UPLAND (8)WABASH LOWLAND (9)CALUMET LACUSTRINE ( 10 VALPARAISO MORAINE (ll)KANKAKEE LACUSTRINE (12)MAUMEE LACUSTRINE (13)STEUBEN MORAINA L/ SERIES (-O)UNKNOWN (10)ADE (20)ADRIAN (3OALF0RD (40)ALGIERS (80)AUBBEENAUBBEE (GO)ALLISON (70)ARMIESBURG (50)ALIDA (130)BARTLE ( 120)AYRSHIRE (lOO)AUONBURG (HO)AYR O0)AUA (170)BERKS (150)BEDF0RD U40)BAXTER ( 1SO)BELLMORE (210)B0NNIE (190)BLO0MFIELD (20O)BLOUNT (180)BIRDS (250)BRADY (230)BOONESBORO (240)BOYER (220)BONO (290)BURCIN (270)BRONSON (280)BROOKSTON (260)BREMS (330)CASCO (320)CARLISLE (300)BURNSIDE (310)CAMDEN (370)CHELSEA (340)CATLIN (350)CELINA (3G0)CHALMERS (410)C0LYER (390)CLARENCE (380 CINCINNATI C 400) CLERMONT (4G0)CORYD (440)CORUIIN (450) CORY (420)CONOUER (430) CONRAD (500)CROSBY (4S0)CRIDER (470)COUPEE (480)CRANE ON (540)DARROCH (550)DEL RAY (510)CROSIER (520)CUBA (530)DANA (GOO)D (580)DOWAGIAC (590)DUBOIS (5G0)DICKINSON (570)DOOR (G40)EEL (GIO)EDEN (G20)EDENTON (G30) EDWARDS UNNING (680)EUANSUILLE (G70)ELSTON (G50)ELKINSONUILLE (GGO)ELLIOTT (710)FINCASTLE (720)FLANAGAN (G90)FABIUS (700)FAIRMOUNT (730)FORESMAN (740)FOX-SILT LOAM (741 )FOX-LOAM (742) FOX-URBAN LAN D (750 FREDERICK (7G0)FULTON (770)GENESEE-SILT LOAM (77DGENESEEURBAN LAND (780)GILFORD (790)GILPIN (800)GINAT (810)GLENHALL (840)GUTHRIE (850) HAGERSTOWN (820)GRANBY (830)GRAYFORD (880)HAUBSTADT (890)HAYMOND (900) (8G0)HANNA (870)HASKINS (930)HIGH GAP (940)HIL HENNEPIN (910)HENSHAW (920)HICKORY (970)HOSMER (980)HOUGHTO (950) HOMER (9G0)HOOPESTON LSDALE (1020) (990)HOYTUILLE (lOlO)HUNTSUILLE N (1000) HUNTINGTON (1050)JASPER ( 10G0) JENNINGS IONA (1030)IPAUA (1040)IUA (1090)KALAMAZOO (HOO)KERSTON (1070)JOHNSBURG (1080)JULES (lllO)KINGS (1120)K0K0MO (1130)LANDES (1140)LAWRENCE (1150)LENAWEE (1170)LINKUILLE (1180)LONGLOIS (HGO)LINDSIDE (1190)LORENZO (1200)L0WELL ( 1220)LYDICK (1230) (1210)LUCAS LYLES (1240)MAHALASUILLE ( 12GOMARKLAND ( 1250)MARKHAM (1300)MATHER (1270)MARTINSUILLE (1280)MARTISCO (1290)MASSIE TON (1310)MAUMEE ( 1340)MELLOTT (1320)MCGARY (1330)MEDWAY (1350)MERMILL (13G0)METAM0RA (1370)METEA ( 1380)MIAMI-SILT L OAM (138DMIAMI-URBAN LAND (1390)MILF0RD (1410)MILTON (1400)MILLSDALE ( 1420)MONITOR (1430) MONTGOMERY (1440)MONTMORENCI (1450)MORLEY (14G0)MOROC CO (1470)MUREN (1480)MUSKINGUM (1490)MUSSEY ( 1500)NAPPANE E (1510)NEGLEY (1520)NEWARK (1530)NEWTON (1540)NICHOLSON (1550)NINEUEH (15G0)NOLIN (1570)OAKUILLE (1580)0CKLEY (1590)OCTAGON (lGOO)ODELL ( 1G10)OSHTEMO (1G20)OTWELL (1G30)OWOSSO (1G40)PALMS (lGGO)PARR (1G70)PATT (1G50)PARKE (1G80)PEKIN ON (1G90)PEOGA (1700)PETROLIA (1710)PEWAMO (1720)PIKE (1730)PINHOOK (1?40)PLAINFIELD (1750)PLANO (17G0)POPE (1770)PRINCET0N (1780)PROCTOR (1790)QUINN (1800)RAGSDALE (1810)RAHM (1820) RANDOLPH (1830)RARDEN
)
156
1870 )RENSSEl_AER ( 1860)REESUILLE (1850)RAWSON (1840)RAUB ( 1910 JROCKCASTLE ( 1900)ROBINSON (1890)RIMER (1880)RIDDLES 1950)RUNNYMEDE 1940)ROSSMOYNE ( (1930)ROSS (1920)R0DMAN 1990)SARANAC (1980)ST. CLAIR (1970)RUSSELL (19GO)RUSH (2030 )SEUAPD (2020)SEBEWA (2010)SCIOTOUILLE (2000)SAUGATUCK (2070)SIDELL (20S0)SHOALS (2050)SHIPSHE (2040)SHADELAND (2110)STARKS (2100)SPARTA (2090)SL0AN (2080)SLEETH (2150)STOY (2140)ST0NELICK (2130)STENDAL (2120)STEFF (2180)SWITZERLAND (2190)SWYGERT (2170)SUMBURY (21G0)STR0LE (2240) (2230)TEDR0W (2220) TAMA (2210)TAGGART (2200)SYLUAN (2280) (2270)TOROMTO (2260) TOLEDO (2250) TIPPECANOE TILSIT (2320)UNION (2310)TYNER (2300)TROXEL (2290)TRAPPIST TRACY (2360)WAKEL (235OU0LINIA (2340)UINCENNES (2330)UIGO TOWN (2400)UASEP (2390)WARSAW (2380)WARNERS (2370)WALLKILL AMD (2440)UEA (2430)WAUSEON (2420)WATSEKA (2410) WASHTENAW I (2480)UESTLAND (2470)WELLSTON (24G0)WEINBACH (2450)WEIKERT (2520)WILBUR (2510)WHITSON (2500)WHITAKER (2490) WHEELING (25G0)WOOLPER (2550)WOODriERE (2540)WINGATE (2530)WILLETTE (2G00)ZIPP (2590)2ANESUILLE (2580)XENIA (2570)WYNN (2900)ALLUUIAL LAND (2700)BORROW PIT (2800)URBAN LAND (3100)GULLIED LAND(3200)5TRIP MINE (3000)GRAUEL PIT (3300)CUT AND FILL (3400)NADE LAND/ PARENT (-O)UNKNOWN (l)LACUSTRINE DEPOSITS (2)0UTWASH AND ALLUUIAL DEPOSITS (3)E0LIAN SAND DEPOSITS (4)THICK LOESS DEPOSITS (5)L0AMY WISCONSIN TILL (G)CLAYEY WIS. TILL (7)THIN LOESS-LOAMY WIS TILL (8)THICK LOESS-LOAM WIS TILL (9)THICK LOESS-ILL TILL (10) RESIDUUM-SI. ST SH SS (ll)RESIDUUM-LS BEDROCK LS/ ( 12) RES CALCAREOUS SH H0RI20 (-O)UNKNOWN (1)A HORIZON (2)B HORIZON (3)C HORIZON (4)D HORIZON/ SLOPE (-0) UNKNOWN (l)LEUEL-NEARLY LEUEL (2)0-2 (3)2-G (4)6-12 (5)12-18 (G) 18-25 (7)25-35 (8)35+/ EROSIO (-O)UNKNOWN (DNONE-SLIGHT (2)M0DERATE-ER0DED (3)SEUERE/ WATERC (-0) UNKNOWN (-l)DRY/ WATERF (-0) UNKNOWN (-l)DRY/ DRAIN (-O)UNKNOWN ( DWELL-EXCESSIUE (2)M0DERATELY WELL (3)S0MEWHAT POORLY (4)POORLY-UERY POORLY/ PERMEA (-O)UNKNOWN (l)LESS THAN .06 (2).0G-.2 (3). 2-. 63 (4). 63-2. (5)2.0-6.0 (6)6.0-20 (7)GREATER THAN 20/ FLOOD (-O)UNKNOWN (l)NONE (2)PERCHED-P0NDED-HAZARD/ FROST (-O)UNKNOWN (DUERY LOW (2)UERY LOW-LOW (3)L0W (4)L0W-M0DE RATE (5)M0DERATE (6)M0DERATE-HIGH (7)HIGH (8)HIGH-UERY HIGH (9)UERY HIGH/ SHRINK (-O)UNKNOWN (DUERY LOW (2)UERY LOW-LOW (3)L0W (4)L0W-MODE RATE (5)M0DERATE (6) MODERATE-HIGH (7)HIGH (8)HIGH-UERY HIGH (9)UERY HIGH/ (-O)UNKNOWN (Ol)BELOW 4.5 (02)4.5-5.0 (03)5.1-5.5 (04)5.6-6. PH (05)6.1-6.5 (06)6.6-7.3 (07)7.4-7.8 (08)7.9-8.4 (09)8.5-9.0 (lO)ABOUE 9.0/ LL.PL.PI.SL (-O)UNKNOWN (-l)NOT PLASTIC/ TEXTUR (-0) UNKNOWN (l)SAND (2)SAND-TRACE GRAUEL (3)SAND-LITTLE GR AUEL (4)SAND-S0ME GRAUEL (5)SAND AND GRAUEL (6) SANDY LOAM (7)SANDY LOAM-TRACE GRAUEL (8)SANDY LOAM-LITTLE GRAUEL (9)SANDY LOAM-SOME GRAUEL (10) SANDY LOAM AND GRAUEL (ll)LOAM (12) LOAM-TRACE GRAUEL ( 13)L0AM-LITTLE GRAUEL (14)L0AM-S0ME GRAUEL (15)L0AM AMD GRAUEL (16)SILTY LOAM (17)SILTY LOAM-TRACE GRAUEL (18)SILTY LOAM-LITTLE GRAUEL (19)SILTY LOAM-SOME GRAUEL (20)SILTY LOAM AND GRAUEL
( ( (
157
(2DSILT (22)SILT-TRACE GRAUEL (23)SILT-LITTLE GRAUEL

(24)SILT-S0ME GRAUEL (25)SILT AMD GRAUEL (2GJSANDY CLAY LOAM (27) SANDY CLAY LOAM-TRACE GRAUEL (28) SANDY CLAY LOAM-LITTLE GRAUE L (29)SANDY CLAY LOAM-SOME GRAUEL (30)SANDY CLAY LOAM AMD GRAUEL (3DCLAY LOAM (32)CLAY LOAM-TRACE GRAUEL (33)CLAY LOAM-LITTLE CRA UEL (34) CLAY LOAM-SOME GRAUEL (35) CLAY LOAM AMD GRAUEL (3G)SILTY CLAY LOAM (37)SILTY CLAY LOAM-TRACE GRAUEL (38)SILTY CLAY LOAM-LITTLE GRAUEL (33)SILTY CLAY LOAM-SOME GRAUEL (40)SILTY CLAY LOAM AMD GRAUEL (4DSAMDY CLAY (42)SANDY CLAY-TRACE GRAUEL (43)SAMDY CLAY-LITTLE GRAUEL (44) SANDY CLAY-SOME GRAUEL (45) SANDY CLAY AND GRAUEL (4G)SILTY CLAY (47)SILTY CLAY-TRACE GRAUEL (48)SILTY CLAY-LITTLE GRAUEL (49)SILTY CLAY-SOME GRAUEL (50)SILTY CLAY AND GRAUEL (5DCLAY (52) CLAY-TRACE GRAUEL (53) CLAY-LITTLE GRAUEL (54) CLAY-SOME GRAUEL (55) CLAY AND GRAUEL (5G) GRAUEL (57) SANDY GRAUEL (58)GRAUELLY SAND (59) SAND AND GRAUEL (GO)COPROGENOUS EARTH (Gl)DIATOMACEOUS EARTH (G2)FIBRIC MATERIAL (G3) FRAGMENT AL MATERIAL (G4)HEMIC MATERIAL (65) ICE OR FROZEN SOIL (GG)MARL (67) MUCK (68) MUCKY PEAT (69) OX I DE-PROTECT. WX BR (7DPEAT (72)SAPRIC MATERIAL (70)PART. DECOM ORG MATL (73)UNDEC0M ORG MATL (74)UNWEATHERED BEDROCK (75)WX BR.SAPROLITE.GRUS (76)C0MPLEX (77) INAPPLICABLE/ ORGANI (-O)UNKNOUN (l)NO ORGANIC MATL (2)TRACE (3)LITTLE (4)S0ME (5) AND/ COLOR (-O)UNKNOWN (Ol)BLUISH GRAY (02)BLACK (03)BROWN (04)BROWNISH YELLOW (05)DARK BROWN (06)DARK BLUISH GRAY (07)DARK GRAY (08)DARK GRAYISH BROWN (09)DARK GREENISH GRAY (10)DARK OLIUE (ll)DARK OLIUE GRAY (12)DARK RED (13)DARK REDDISH BROWN (14)DARK REDDISH GRAY (15)DUSKY RED (1G)DARK YELLOWISH BROWN (17)GRAYISH BROWN (18)GREENISH GRAY (19)GRAYISH GREEN (20)GREEN (2DGRAY (22)LIGHT BLUISH GRAY (23)LIGHT BROWN (24)LIGHT BROWNISH GRAY (25)LIGHT GREENISH GRAY (2G)LIGHT GRAY (27)LIGHT OLIUE BROWN (28)LIGHT OLIUE GRAY (29)LIGHT RED (30)LIGHT REDDISH BROWN (3DLIGHT YELLOWISH BR. (32)0LIUE BROWN (33)0LIUE (34)0LIUE GRAY (35)0LIUE YELLOW (36)PALE BROWN (37)PALE GREEN (38)PALE OLIUE (3S)PALE RED (40)PALE YELLOW (4DPINKISH GRAY (42)PINK (43)PINKISH WHITE (44)REDDISH BLACK (45)REDDISH BROWN (4G)RED (47)REDDISH GRAY (48)REDDISH YELLOW (49)STR0NG BROWN (50)UERY DARK BROWN (5DUERY DARK GRAY (52)U. DK. GRAYISH BROWN (53)UERY DARK RED (54)UERY PALE BROWN (55)UERY DUSKY RED (5G)WEAK RED (57) WHITE (58)YELL0WISH BROWN (59)YELL0WISH RED (60) YELLOW/ TESTEF (-O)UNKNOWN (01 )STANDARD-12400 (02) STANDARD-SEE DIF (03)STANDARD-NOT GIUEN (04)MODIFIED-12400 (05)MODIFIED-56000 (0G)MODIFIED-56300 (07)MODIFIED-SEE DIF (08)MODIFIED-NOT GIUEN (09)15 BLOW-7400 (10)15 BLOW-7800 (11)15 BLOW-SEE DIF (12)15 BLOW-NOT GIUEN ( 13)KNEADING-SEE DIF (14)KNEADING-N0T GIUEN (15)HARUARD MIN-SEE DIF (16)HARUARD MIN-NOT GIUEN ( 17)HUEEM-SEE DIF ( 18)HUEEM-N0T GIUEN (19)UIBRAT0RY-SEE DIF (20)UIBRATORY-NOT GIUEN (2DC0MPRESSI0N-SEE DIF (22) COMPRESS I ON-NOT GIUEN/ TYPE (-0) UNKNOWN (DUU TEST (2)CU TEST-UNSATURATED (3)CU TEST-SATURATED (4)DIRECT SHEAR (5)CD TEST/ HOLENO.SAMPNO.DATEYR.DATEDA, TOWN, RANGE, SECTIO TO BORING, STATNO. OFFSET, LINE1,LINE2,LABN0 TO SPT.BEDRKS TO WATERS, GRAD01 TO COLL. LOSSIG TO SPECGR.MAXDD TO QUSTR.QUSTA, STRENGTH TO CU (-0) UNKNOWN
158
MISSING UALUES COUNTY TO QUSTR.QUSTA TO CU (-0)/ THE FOLLOWING SERIES OF -IF- STATEMENTS COMPUTE BOTH COMMENT THE AASHTO AND UNIFIED CLASSIFICATION CODES-FOR THOSE PROGRAMS NOT REQUIRING EITHER OF THESE TUO CLASSIFICATIONS. THESE STATEMENTS SHOULD BE OMITTED (TEXTUR EQ 67 OR G8 OR 70 OR 71 OR 73 OR GO OR 62) AASHT0=13 IF (GRAD09 GE 35.5 AND LL GE 40.5 AND PI GE 10.5 AND PI GT (LL-30)) IF AASHT0=12 (GRAD03 GE 35.5 AND LL GE 40.5 AND PI GE 10.5 AND PI LE (LL-30)) IF AASHTO=ll CGRAD09 GE 35.5 AND LL LT 40.5 AND PI GE 10.5) AASHTO=10 IF (GRAD09 GE 35.5 AND (LL GE 40.5 OR EQ -1) AND PI LT 10.5) IF AASHTO=09 (GRAD09 GE 35.5 AND LL LT 40.5 AND PI LT 10.5) AASHT0=08 IF (GRAD09 LT 35.5 AND LL GE 40.5 AND PI GE 10.5) AASHTO=06 IF (GRAD09 LT 35.5 AND LL LT 40.5 AND PI GE 10.5) AASHTO=05 IF (GRAD09 LT 35.5 AND (LL GE 40.5 OR EQ -1) AND PI LT 10.5) IF AASHTO=04 (GRAD09 LT 35.5 AND LL LT 40.5 AND PI LT 10.5) AASHTO=03 IF (GRAD08 GE 50.5 AND GRAD09 LT 10.5 AND (LL EQ -1 OR PL EQ -1 IF OR PI EQ -1)) AASHTO=07 (GRAD08 LT 50.5 AND GRAD09 LT 25.5 AND PI LT 6.5) AASHT0=02 IF (GRAD07 LT 50.5 AND GRAD08 LT 30.5 AND GRAD09 LT 15.5 IF AND PI LT 6.5) AASHTO=01 (TEXTUR EQ 67 OR 68 OR 70 OR 71 OR 73 OR 60 OR 62) AASHT0=13 IF (AASHTO NE 05 OR 06) IF GI=RND( (GRAD09-35)( .2+.005(LL-40) )+.01(GRAD09-15)(PI-10) (AASHTO EQ 05 OR 06) GI=RND( .01(GRAD09-15)(PI-10) IF (PL EQ -1 OR LL EQ -1 OR GI LT 0) GI=0 IF ASSIGN MISSING GI (-8) (TEXTUR EQ 67 OR 68 OR 70 OR 71 OR 73 OR 60 OR 62) UNIF=35 IF (GRAD09 GE 50 AND (PI GT (.73(LL-20) ) AND 7) AND LL LT 50) IF UNIF=01 (GRAD09 GE 50 AND PI GT ( .73(LL-20) ) AND LL GT 50) UNIF=02 IF (GRAD09 GE 50 AND PI GT ( .73(LL-20) ) AND LL EQ 50) UNIF=03 IF (GRAD09 GE 50 AND (PI LT ( .73(LL-20) ) OR 4) AND LL LT 50 AND IF (ORGANI EQ 1 OR 2)) UNIF=04 (GRAD09 GE 50 AND (PI LT ( .73(LL-20) ) OR 4) AND LL LT 50 AND IF (ORGANI EQ 4 OR 5)) UNIF=05 (GRAD09 GE 50 AND (PI LT ( .73(LL~20) ) OR 4) AND LL LT 50 AND IF ORGANI EQ 3) UNIF=0G (GRAD09 GE 50 AND (PI EQ ( .73(U_-20) ) AND GT 7) AND LL LT 50 AND IF (ORGANI EQ 1 OR 2)) UNIF=07 (GRAD09 GE 50 AND (PI EQ ( .73(LL-20) ) AND GT 7) AND LL LT 50 AND IF (ORGANI EQ 4 OR 5)) UNIF=08 (GRAD09 GE 50 AND (PI EQ ( .73(LL-20) ) AND GT 7) AND LL LT 50 AND IF ORGANI EQ 3) UNIF=09 (GRAD09 GE 50 AND PI LT ( .73(LL-20) ) AND LL GT 50 AND IF (ORGANI EQ 1 OR 2)) UNIF=10 (GRAD09 GE 50 AND PI LT ( .73(LL-20) ) AND LL GT 50 AND IF (ORGANI EQ 4 OR 5)) UNIF=11 (GRAD09 GE 50 AND PI LT ( .73(LL-20) ) AND LL GT 50 AND ORGANI EQ IF 3) UNIF=12 (GRAD09 GE 50 AND PI EQ ( .73(LL-20) ) AND LL GT 50 AND IF (ORGANI EQ 1 OR 2)) UNIF=13 IF (GRAD09 GE 50 AND PI EQ ( .73(LL-20) ) AND LL GT 50 AND (ORGANI EQ 4 OR 5)) UNIF=14 (GRAD09 GE 50 AND PI EQ ( .73(LL-20) ) AND LL GT 50 AND ORGANI EQ IF
159
3) UNIF=15
(GRAD09 GE 50 AMD PI LT ( .73(LL-20) ) AND LL EQ 50 AMD (ORGANI EQ 1 OR 2)) UMIF=1G (GRAD09 GE 50 AMD PI LT ( .73(LL-20) ) AMD LL EQ 50 AMD IF (ORGAMI EQ 4 OR 5)) UNIF=17 (GRAD09 GE 50 AMD PI LT ( .73(LL-20) ) AMD LL EO 50 AMD ORGAMI EQ IF 3) UNIF=18 (GRAD09 GE 50 AMD PI EQ ( .73(LL-20) ) AMD LL EQ 50) UMIF=19 IF (GRAD09 GE 50 AMD (PI GE ( .73(LL-20) ) AMD LE 7 AMD GE 4)) IF UNIF=20 (GRAD09 LT 50 AMD GRADOG LE 50 AMD GRAD09 GT 12 AMD (PI LT IF (.73(LL-20)) OR 4)) UNIF=21 (GRAD09 LT 50 AMD GRADOG GT 50 AMD GRAD09 GT 12 AMD (PI LT IF (.73(LL-20)) OR 4)) UMIF=24 (GRAD09 LT 50 AMD GRADOG LE 50 AMD GRAD09 GT 12 AMD (PI GT IF (.73<LL-20)) AMD 7)) UMIF=22 (GRAD09 LT 50 AMD GRADOG GT 50 AMD GRAD09 GT 12 AMD (PI GT IF (.73(LL-20)) AMD 7)) UMIF=25 (GRAD09 LT 50 AMD GRADOG LE 50 AMD GRAD09 GT 12 AMD ((PI EQ IF (.73(LL-20))) OR (PI GT ( .73(LL-20) ) AMD LE 7 AMD GE 4))) UMIF=23 (GRAD09 LT 50 AMD GRADOG GT 50 AMD GRAD09 GT 12 AMD ((PI EQ IF (.73(LL-20))) OR (PI GT ( .73(LL-20) ) AMD LE 7 AMD GE 4))) UNIF=26 (GRAD09 LT 50 AMD GRADOG LE 50 AMD GRAD09 LT 5) UMIF=27 IF (GRAD09 LT 50 AMD GRADOG GT 50 AMD GRAD09 LT 5) UNIF=28 IF (GRAD09 LT 50 AMD GRADOG LE 50 AMD (GRAD09 GE 5 AMD LE 12) AMD IF (PI LT (.73(LL-20)) OR 4)) UMIF=29 (GRAD09 LT 50 AMD GRADOG LE 50 AMD (GRAD09 GE 5 AMD LE 12) AMD IF (PI GT (.73(LL-20)) AMD 7)) UMIF=30 (GRAD09 LT 50 AMD GRADOG LE 50 AMD (GRAD09 GE 5 AMD LE 12) AMD IF ((PI EQ (.73(LL-20))) OR (PI GT (.73(LL-20)) AMD LE 7 AMD GE 4))) UMIF=31 (GRAD09 LT 50 AMD GRADOG GT 50 AMD (GRAD09 GE 5 AMD LE 12) AMD IF (PI LT (.73(LL-20)) OR 4)) UMIF=32 (GRAD09 LT 50 AMD GRADOG GT 50 AMD (GRAD09 GE 5 AMD LE 12) AMD IF (PI GT (.73(LL-20)) AMD 7)) UMIF=33 (GRAD09 LT 50 AMD GRADOG GT 50 AMD (GRAD09 GE 5 AMD LE 12) AMD IF ((PI EQ (.73(LL-20))) OR (PI GT (.73(U_-20) ) AMD LE 7 AMD GE 4))) UMIF=34 (TEXTUR EQ G7 OR G8 OR 70 OR 71 OR 73 OR GO OR G2) UMIF=35 IF IF (AASHT01 ME 9999) AASHT0=AA5HT01 (UMIF1 NE 9999) UMIF=UMIF1 IF IF (SAMD EQ 999) SAND=-0 IF (SAMD ME 999) SAMD=GRAD07-GRAD09 ASSIGN MISSING AASHTO. UMIF (-8) UAR LABELS GI GROUP INDEX'AASHTO AASHTO CLASSIFICATIONAJMIF UNIFIED CLASSIFI CATION UALUE LABELS GI (-8) MISSING DATA/ AASHTO (-O)UNKNOUN (l)A-l-A (2)A-1-B (3)A-2-4 (4)A-2-5 (5)A-2-6 (G)A-2-7 (7)A-3 (8)A-4 (9)A-5 (10)A-S (1DA-7-5 (12)A-7-6 (13)A-8/ UNIF (-O)UNKNOWN (Ol)CL (02)CH (03)CL-CH (04)ML (05)OL (OG)ML-OL (07)ML-CL (08)CL-OL (09)ML-OL OR CL (10)MH (ll)OH (12)MH-0H (13)MH-CH (14)CH-0H (15)MH-0H OR CH (lG)ML-MH (17)0L-0H (18)MH-0H OR ML-OL (19)ANY COMBINATION (20)CL-ML (2DGM (22)GC (23)GM-GC (24)SM (25)SC (2G)SM-SC (27)GU OR GP=G (28)SU OR SP=S (29)G-GM (30)G-GC (3DG-GM OR G-GC (32)S-SM
IF
160
COMMENT
COMMENT
N OF CASES PRINT FORMATS
(33)S-SC <34)S-SM OR S-SC (35)PT THE ABOUE STATEMENT IS THE LAST STATEMENT WHICH SHOULD BE OMITTED IF THE AASHTO AND UNIFIED CLASSIFICATIONS ARE NOT REQUIRED THE NUMBER OF CASES (N OF CASES) WILL COINCIDE WITH THE NUMBER OF SAMPLES CONTAINED WITHIN THE DATA BANK AT THE TIME OF PROCESSING 2508 SPECGR.EO,EF,CC,CR (3)/ QUSTR. OUST A, STRENGTH TO COHESION. POREPRESS. MAJOR, PO. PC, CU C2)/ GRDSUR TO DEPTHB, BEDRKS TO WATERF, GRAD01 TO NATDD.MAXDD TO CBRS02, ANGLE, SO, SF (1VPROJPR, PROJPA,CONTPR,ROADPR,ROADSU TO BORING. LINE1, LINE2. LABNO (A)
READ INPUT DATA PROG SAUE FILE FINISH G'7/8/3
161
PROGRAM NUMBER 4
THIS PROGRAM HILL ACCESS THE MAGNETIC TAPE ONTO UHICH DATA IS STORED FROM PROG1 AMD THE SPSS PROGRAM CREATED IN PR0G3 AND PLACE THE NEU SPSS FILE ONTO A HEM MAGNETIC TAPE. THIS SPSS FILE IS TO BE USED IN PROCESSING INFORMATION STORED WITHIN THE GEOTECHNICAL DATA BANK.
12345. ABC. TP2. P20. TC200. TU38000. CM77000. T350
PASS= PFILESCGET.PR0G3) REQUESTCS0IL1.1414) COMMON (SPSS) SPSSC I=PRQG3. D=SOILl S=PROG) REQUEST ( TAPE 1 580 . WR I TE . UP=* ) COPYBF (PROG. TAPE. RB. RA) RETURN(SOILl) G/7/8'9
. . .
162
APPENDIX
USER'S MANUAL:
The user
is
PART
referred to the discussion under Data

for
a
Processing and the SPSS text (^2)

control
description of the
cards which may be used for data processing.
Example Problems
Examp
1
Existing soils data from Tippecanoe County (code 79)

are desired for the preliminary design of
a
highway
in
the
in
northeast corner of the county.
The area
is
included
Township 2k North and Range

includes:
West.
Information required
compaction test data; California bearing ratio

samples were retypes according
test data; and depths from which the soil
moved.
to
Additionally, the frequency of soil
the AASHTO soil
classification system
is
desired.
The
program deck setup would be:
163
TP1 12345. ABC. CM150000. L10000. T350 P20. TU38000. TC200.

.
PASS= "SOIL DATA FOR DAYBAN. REQUEST (TAPE. 1580) COPYBF (TAPE. PROG) REWIND(TAPE) RETURN (TAPE) REWIND (PROG) COMMON (SPSS) SPSS(G=PROG) 7/8/9
SELECT"" IF
THE
STATE OF
INDIANA*
LIST CASES
FREQUENCIES FINISH G/7/8/9
EQ 5 (COUNTY EQ 79 AND TOWN EQ 24 AND TOWNDI EQ 1 AND RANGE 2) AND RANGDI EQ C ASES=2508/UARIABLES=TESTEF,MAXDD.MAXWD.OPTIMC.CBRS01.CBRSO2. DEPTHT.DEPTHB INTEGER=AASHTO (1.13)
Examp
researcher at
a
prestigious Midwestern University
suspects that
relationship exists between the coefficient

(CC)
of consolidation
and
the
initial
void
ratio
(E0)
of
soils found within the State of
Indiana.
The following deck
setup would produce
plot of the coefficient of consolida-
tion versus the initial

PASSSOIL DATA FOR THE DAYBAN. REQUEST (TAPE. 1580) COPYBF (TAPE, PROG) REWIND (TAPE) RETURN (TAPE) REWIND(PROG) COMMON (SPSS) SPSS(G=PROG) 7/8/9 PROG GET FILE CC WITH EO SCATTERGRAM FINISH G/7/8/9
void
ratio:
12345, ABC. CM150000, L10000. T350, P20, TU38000, TC200, TP1
STATE OF
INDIANA-
a
DC
I
o a o Q
Q
DC UJ
>

Development of Com 00 Gold

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Development of Com 00 Gold

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

SCHOOL OF

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE

COMPUTERIZED GEOTECHNICAL DATA BANK FOR THE STATE OF NDIANA RECEIVED

TECHNICAL REPORT STANDARD TITLE P* r.r

Tillo and Subtitle

Performing O'goniiotion Cod*

Performing Orgon.iotion Report No

HPR-PL-1 (15) Part

Type of Report ond Period Co*

Nome ond Addrel-

Sponioring Agency Code

soils data, computer, data storage, data retrieval,

(of 'hit report)

DATA BANK FOR THE STATE OF INDIANA

J. F. McLaughlin, Director Joint Highway Research Project

Michael, Associate Director Joint Highway Research Project

Altschaeffl 0. M. Bevilacqua W. L. Dolch R. L. Eskew G. D. Gibson W. H. Goetz M. J. Gutzwiller

Hallock E. Hancher R. Hoover F. Marsh D. Miles L. Owens T. Satterly

Scholer B. Scott C. Sinha A. Venable E. Wood J. Yoder R. Yoder

Goldberg Gary D Graduate Instructor in Research

Joint Highway Research Project

cooperation with the

Purdue University West Lafayette, Indiana June 1 1978

Digitized by the Internet Archive

2011 with funding from

LYRASIS members and Sloan Foundation;

The author wishes to express his sincere appreciation

Professors C.W. Lovell and R.D. Miles for their assistance

the Joint Highway Research

Project of Purdue University, The

Indiana State Highway

Commission, and the Federal Highway Administration for their

McCabe for his review of the statistical methods of this

thanks are due to Mr. Mark Nye, Mr.

and especially Mr.

Robert Ringholz, for their assistance

Direct Use of Raw Data

Methods of Data Reduction

DEVELOPMENT OF THE GEOTECHNICAL DATA BANK

Data Management and Manipulation

DISCUSSION OF STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Predictions and Correlations

Consolidation Test Results

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH

Distributional Characterization Propert es of So

APPENDIX APPENDIX APPENDIX

Formats, Card and Column Locat ions

Counties with Modern Soil pleted Since 1958

Comparison of the Coefficient of Variation of Soil Properties Among Soil Groupings.

Values for All Samples for Unconfined ComN=3 56 pressive Strength (q y

Values for q u of Soils Derived from Lacustrine Deposits (N = 8)

Values for q of Soils from the Calumet Lacustrine Plain (N=40)

max max Morainal Valparaiso the from Soils

Summary of Regression Equations for Prediction of Unconfined Compressive Strength (q u

Physiographic Units Based on Present TopModified from Malott (35) ography.

Regions of Indiana Reference (36))

Classification of Soil Samples in Accordance with Unified Soil Classification System

Classification of Soil Samples in Accordance with AASHTO Soil Classification System

Distributional Characterization of Percent Passing No. 10 Sieve

Distributional Characterization of Percent Passing No. 200 Sieve

Distributional Characterization of Percent

Distributional Characterization of Liquid

Distributional Characterization of Plasticity ndex