Summary for Test 2026-09-02-97-11

Test performed: CTM 301-March 2000

Project Information

Project IdentifiersProject ID: 1002816
DEA: 022J7604
EFIS: 0221000132
DIST-CO-RTE-PM02-TRI-3-5/11
Award DateNot set
Closeout DateNot set
Work DescriptionHayfork Pavement
Location DescriptionPavement Preservation (CAPM) in Trinity County at and near Hayfork from 1.3 miles south of Morgan Hill Road to 1.2 miles north of Willow Avenue.
QA Service Level1 (Verified on 11/02/2026)

Sample Information

Sample Taken Date09/02/2026 Sample Unique Key97
Date that the sample was received by the laboratory/organization performing the testing09/02/2026 Sample typePreliminary
A brief description of the sample2 bags of Soil The quantity of what the sample constitutesExisting Subgrade for Structural Section Recommendation
From where was the sample collectedJob Site First name of sampler or witnessed byDerek
Last name of sampler or witnessed bySerna Title of sampler
Telephone number of sampler Laboratory sample identificationD80386
Linked DIME Sample ID The fabricator/manufacturer/facility nameIn Situ
Transportation Laboratory (TL) Number Inspector Lot Number from the Transportation Laboratory (TL) Form
Structure unique identifier Structure name
Bid ItemNot set

Material Information

Material TypeSoil The fabricator's/manufacturer's product name for the sample
The fabricator/manufacturer designation for the sample A detailed description of where the material sample was collected02-Tri-3-6.0 Shoulder, 0.0-1.5' depth
Where the material sample would have been placed if not sampled

Test Details

DIME Sample ID: 2026-09-02-97
DIME Test ID: 2026-09-02-97-11
Testing Lab: CT D02 - Redding Northern Regional Laboratory
Test Method: CTM 301-March 2000: Method for Determining the Resistance "R" Value of Treated and Untreated Bases, Subbases, and Basement Soils by the Stabilometer
Test Release Date: 2026-11-03

Test Results


How will the R value be determined?: By expansion pressure
Input Type: Measured
Tester's full name: Josh Murphy
Date of test: 10/27/2026
As Received Gradation, Percent Passing 3 in. sieve: no data %
As Received Gradation, Percent Passing 2 1/2 in. sieve: no data %
As Received Gradation, Percent Passing 2 in. sieve: no data %
As Received Gradation, Percent Passing 1 1/2 in. sieve: 100 %
As Received Gradation, Percent Passing 1 in. sieve: 96 %
As Received Gradation, Percent Passing 3/4 in. sieve: 92 %
As Received Gradation, Percent Passing 1/2 in. sieve: 86 %
As Received Gradation, Percent Passing 3/8 in. sieve: 81 %
As Received Gradation, Percent Passing #4 sieve: 68 %
As Received Gradation, Percent Passing #8 sieve: 58 %
As Received Gradation, Percent Passing #16 sieve: 50 %
As Received Gradation, Percent Passing #30 sieve: 44 %
As Received Gradation, Percent Passing #50 sieve: 38 %
As Received Gradation, Percent Passing #100 sieve: 33 %
As Received Gradation, Percent Passing #200 sieve: 29 %
As Used Gradation, Percent Passing 3 in. sieve: no data %
As Used Gradation, Percent Passing 2 1/2 in. sieve: no data %
As Used Gradation, Percent Passing 2 in. sieve: no data %
As Used Gradation, Percent Passing 1 1/2 in. sieve: no data %
As Used Gradation, Percent Passing 1 in. sieve: 100 %
As Used Gradation, Percent Passing 3/4 in. sieve: 100 %
As Used Gradation, Percent Passing 1/2 in. sieve: 93 %
As Used Gradation, Percent Passing 3/8 in. sieve: 88 %
As Used Gradation, Percent Passing #4 sieve: 73 %
As Used Gradation, Percent Passing #8 sieve: 62 %
As Used Gradation, Percent Passing #16 sieve: 54 %
As Used Gradation, Percent Passing #30 sieve: 48 %
As Used Gradation, Percent Passing #50 sieve: 42 %
As Used Gradation, Percent Passing #100 sieve: 36 %
As Used Gradation, Percent Passing #200 sieve: 31 %
Gravel Equivalent Factor: 1.6 in
Thickness where curve crosses the balance line: 232 in
Traffic Index: 9.4
R value: 59.5
General comments (publicly viewable) (Max 1000 characters): R=60. at equilibrium, R=62 by exudation, R=60. by expansion.

Test was verified on 11/3/2026 ✔