🚀 go-pugleaf

Cindy Kandolf wrote:
> 
> "Considered to be clay"?  I was under the impression that geologists
> could pretty easily tell if soil was clay or not...
> 

Certainly geologists can tell whether or not an earth material is clay.
But engineers and architects usually don't ask geologists for their input.
Engineers have their own standards, based on their own sets of physical
tests, by which certain "soils" (an engineer's soil is not necessarily a
geologist's soil) are declared to be clay.  Many engineering clays have
neither clay-sized particles (one kind of clay to a geologist) nor clay
minerals (another kind of clay to a geologist), but DO have the plasticity
to be considered an engineering "clay". Parts of the U. Mass campus are 
underlain by glacially-derived rock flour which has a high proportion of
micaceous silt, which gives it the properties of an engineering "clay".
I don't know whether or not the U. Mass library is sitting on this kind of
material, but the boring logs and soil analysis for the site should be a
matter of public record.

Charles Wm. Dimmick
Certified Professional Geologist