Digital data for construction material sources reported by the Arizona Department of Transportation in 1977 for Maricopa County, Arizona

Metadata also available as - [Outline] - [Parseable text] - [XML]

Frequently anticipated questions:

What does this data set describe?

Digital data for construction material sources reported by the Arizona Department of Transportation in 1977 for Maricopa County, Arizona
The data set marpits1 is an ArcInfo coverage of point features representing pit locations and attribution data captured from an atlas of map sheets and pit data sheets titled "A Materials Inventory of Maricopa County [Arizona]" by the Arizona Highway Department (AHD), now named the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT), hereafter referred to as the 'Source'.
Pit locations were represented by point symbols in the Source map sheets. Points were digitized from the Source map sheets. Selected attribute data were collected from the Source pit data and map sheets. In the Source introduction it states:
    "The pit location maps show the location of all
    pits bearing Materials Services serial numbers.
    Other sources are not shown. The plotted locations
    are as close as possible to the true location
    as the scale of the map will allow."
The point attribute data, captured from the Source pit data sheets are
    "designed to show test results (sieve analysis,
    plasticity index, and abrasion) for the usable
    material within each ADOT pit."
The digital editor and digital compilers of the GIS data set made certain adjustments to the data to make them complete and usable in a GIS. These adjustments include adding points locations for records in the accompanying Source pit data sheets where no point representation existed on the Source map sheets, adding attribution data to the furthest extent possible for points on the Source map sheets without entries in the accompanying Source pit data sheets, appending a letter to the pit number of repeated (duplicate) pit numbers to make them unique and correspond one-to-one with a record in the Source pit data sheets, and adding a '-999' to represent 'No data' or 'No observation' for blank entries in the pit data sheets. Table 3 in the Open-File Report text describes the actions taken to insure data consistency and uniqueness of the individual points. An accompanying ArcInfo arc coverage called marbase of the generalized Maricopa County boundary, and generalized major roadways and generalized major hydrography of Maricopa County has been included to give a general reference of pit location in proximity to natural and man-made features.
  1. How might this data set be cited?
    Hirschberg, Douglas M. (Digital Compiler), Pitts, G. Stephen (Digital Compiler), Melcher, Henry L.(Digital Compiler), and Bliss, James D. (Digital Editor), 20010420, Digital data for construction material sources reported by the Arizona Department of Transportation in 1977 for Maricopa County, Arizona: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 01-122, U.S. Geological Survey, Tucson, AZ.

    Online Links:

  2. What geographic area does the data set cover?
    West_Bounding_Coordinate: -113.4
    East_Bounding_Coordinate: -111.1
    North_Bounding_Coordinate: 34.0
    South_Bounding_Coordinate: 32.5
  3. What does it look like?
  4. Does the data set describe conditions during a particular time period?
    Calendar_Date: 1977
    1974 to 1977
  5. What is the general form of this data set?
    Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: map
  6. How does the data set represent geographic features?
    1. How are geographic features stored in the data set?
      This is a Point data set. It contains the following vector data types (SDTS terminology):
      • Point (916)
    2. What coordinate system is used to represent geographic features?
      Grid_Coordinate_System_Name: State Plane Coordinate System 1927
      SPCS_Zone_Identifier: 3176
      Scale_Factor_at_Central_Meridian: 0.9999
      Longitude_of_Central_Meridian: -111 55 00
      Latitude_of_Projection_Origin: 31 00 00
      False_Easting: 152400.30480
      False_Northing: 0
      Planar coordinates are encoded using coordinate pair
      Abscissae (x-coordinates) are specified to the nearest 65.249909375
      Ordinates (y-coordinates) are specified to the nearest 65.249909375
      Planar coordinates are specified in Feet
      The horizontal datum used is North American Datum of 1927.
      The ellipsoid used is Clarke 1866.
      The semi-major axis of the ellipsoid used is 6378206.4.
      The flattening of the ellipsoid used is 1/294.98.
  7. How does the data set describe geographic features?
        1  AREA                4    12     F      3
        5  PERIMETER           4    12     F      3
        9  MARPITS1#           4     5     B      -
       13  MARPITS1-ID         4     5     B      -
       17  PITNUM              5     6     C      -
       22  ORDER               4     5     I      -
       26  MAP                 2     3     C      -
       28  QTR                 2     3     C      -
       30  SEC                 2     3     C      -
       32  TWP                 3     4     C      -
       35  RNG                 3     4     C      -
       38  HI_CLASS            4     5     C      -
       42  MATERIAL           30    31     C      -
       72  PI                  4     5     C      -
       76  ABR_500             4     5     I      -
       80  SWELL_24            7     8     N      2
       87  THR_QTR             4     5     I      -
       91  NUM_4               4     5     I      -
       95  NUM_8               4     5     I      -
       99  NUM_40              4     5     I      -
      103  NUM_200             4     5     I      -
      107  SOURCE              4     4     I      -
     (items automatically generated by ArcInfo not detailed)
     PITNUM -The pit number of the location.
     ORDER -The ascending numeric order of the pit number.
     MAP -The map sheet (from Source) of the pit.
     QTR -Public Land Survey quarter-section or half-section of
          the pit location.  nw = northwest, ne = northeast,
          sw = southwest, se = southeast, w2 = western-half,
          n2 = northern-half and so on.
     SEC -Public Land Survey section of the pit location.
     TWP -Public Land Survey township of the pit location.
     RNG -Public Land Survey range of the pit location.
     HI_CLASS -Highest classification for material found in the pit.
               The following are the highest class designations for
               test data representing at least half or more of the
               total depth of the pit:
               MA--mineral aggregate
               AB--aggregate base
               SM--select material
               BR--borrow, no limits set
               CM--cover material (no specification provided)
               SB--special backfill (no specification provided)
               SS--subgrade seal
     MATERIAL -Material types (clay, sand, gravel, caliche, etc.
               Abreviations used for various materials found in
               each pit: [Classification scheme includes a mix of
               material types (ash, caliche, cinder, clay) and
               classification of material by size (boulders, silty)]
               ASH--ash; AND--andesite; BLDR--boulders;
               BST--basalt, malpais; CAL--caliche; CDR--cinders;
               CGM--conglomerate; CKR-clinkers; CLY--clay;
               COB--cobbles; DEC--decomposed; DIRT--dirt;
               GTE--granite; GVL--gravel; GYP--gypsum; LAV--lava;
               LOM--loam; LST--limestone; PUM--pumice; RCK--rock;
               RHY--rhyolite; SH--shale; SLT--silt; SLTY--silty;
               SND--sand; SS--sandstone; TRAV--travertine
             *Note that many of these abbreviations may not be
              found in the data as this list is applicable to data
              for all counties for which data has been collected.
     PI -(Plasticity Index) A measure of sensitivity that aggregate
         has to moisture change and is important when aggregate is
         used in Portland cement or asphalt concrete. White (1991,
         p. 13-42) defines PI as "the difference in the Atterberg
         liquid limit and plastic limit moisture contents." It is a
         value without a unit.  A PI of 4 is the maximum allowed as
         stipulated in American Society of Testing Material (ASTM)
         test D 3515 for materials used in asphalt concrete mixtures
         (White, 1991). The Arizona Highway Department (1972) used
          several PI standards.  These include ones where PI was not
         detected or was to be less than 5 or 10 depending on
         aggregate classification.  Testing was to be executed in
         accordance with the requirements of American Association
         of State Highway and Transportation Officers T 90
         (AHD, 1972).  Maximum allowable PI values are dependent on
         which of the 50 categories of aggregate types are in effect.
         When testing determined no PI, a "NP" (no plasticity) was
         entered in the ADOT (1977) table. The Open-File Report
         authors have changed all these "NP" to zero and entered
         -999 when fields were without values.
     ABR_500 -Los Angeles (LA) abrasion test (500 rotations).
              The test used to evaluate the resistance of a coarse
              aggregate to degradation by abrasion and impact is the
              Los Angeles abrasion test (Meyer and Zeinak 1991).
              In accordance with ADOT (1990, p. 718) standard
              specifications "the percent of wear of coarse aggregate
              at 500 revolutions, when tested in accordance with the
              requirements of American Association of State Highway
              Transportation Officials (AASHTO) test T 96, shall not
              exceed 40."  The same requirement is also specified for
              the class of aggregate 1 to 4 for material used in
              subbases and bases (ADOT, 1990, p. 140).  The detail of
              Los Angeles abrasion testing procedures may have
              changed so the results found in this data release may
              not be consistent with current specifications.
              Los Angeles abrasion test results are found in just 8
              percent of the pits listed in the inventory.
     SWELL_24 -Volume change--swell (24 hours).
               Data are available giving maximum 24-hour volume
               change (AHD, 1972).  Procedures and standards
               applicable at the time of the test are not given in
               the inventory but likely may have been AASHTO 101,
               Method B (AHD, 1972, Table 703-1 and 704-1).  These
               specifications set the maximum allowed volume increase
               to 0.06.  This is the maximum for all classes of
               mineral aggregate and one class of aggregate used for
               cover materials and slurry seal.
     THR_QTR -Percent material passing the 3/4 inch sieve. Materials
              passing the 3/4 inch mesh sieve are 19 mm or less.
     NUM_4 -Percent material passing the no. 4 sieve. Materials
            passing the no. 4 mesh sieve are 4.75 mm or less.
     NUM_8 -Percent material passing the no. 8 sieve. Materials
            passing the no. 8 mesh sieve are 2.338 mm or less.
     NUM_40 -Percent material passing the no. 40 sieve. Materials
             passing the no. 40 mesh sieve are 0.42 mm or less.
     NUM_200 -Percent material passing the no. 200 sieve. Materials
              passing the no. 200 mesh sieve are less than 0.074 mm.
     SOURCE  -Numeric value that relates to marpits1.ref look-up
              table giving information on the Source.
    Entity_and_Attribute_Detail_Citation: none

Who produced the data set?

  1. Who are the originators of the data set? (may include formal authors, digital compilers, and editors)
    • Hirschberg, Douglas M. (Digital Compiler)
    • Pitts, G. Stephen (Digital Compiler)
    • Melcher, Henry L.(Digital Compiler)
    • Bliss, James D. (Digital Editor)
  2. Who also contributed to the data set?
    The authors wish to thank Michelle Perez for helping in the capture of the attribution data and Richard Ahern, Arizona State Land Department, for reviewing the data presented in the marpits1 data set with the data in the Source pit data sheets.
  3. To whom should users address questions about the data?
    James D. Bliss
    U.S. Geological Survey
    520 N. Park Ave., Suite 355
    Tucson, AZ

    (520) 670-5502 (voice)
    (520) 670-5571 (FAX)

Why was the data set created?

U. S. Geological Survey scientists desired to have the data presented in the Source in a digital format to use in GIS and spreadsheet software programs for aggregate models and aggregate assessment.

How was the data set created?

  1. From what previous works were the data drawn?
    Source (source 1 of 1)
    Materials Services, Arizona Department of Transportation, Highway Division, 1977, A Materials Inventory of Maricopa County (Arizona): Arizona Materials Inventory none, Reproduction Section, Arizona Department of Transportation, Phoenix, Arizona.

    Type_of_Source_Media: paper
    Source_Scale_Denominator: 176306
    Source_Contribution: pit locations and attributes
  2. How were the data generated, processed, and modified?
    Date: 1997 (process 1 of 5)
    Data from the Source pit data sheets were entered into an Microsoft Excel spreadsheet.
    The Source map sheets of pit locations consisted of 11 sheets bound in an atlas. Since the data was to be captured via a digitizer tablet, photocopies were made of the each of the Source map sheets. The digitizer was coordinated to within a RMS error of 0.004 for each digitizing session.
    At least four tic locations were determined and labeled on each map photocopy. The Source map sheets did not always have known locations to use for control points (tics), requiring that a control point be added along a known longitude-latitude line or State-Plane grid line.
    Pit locations on the Source map sheet were digitized on-center of the pit location symbol or in some cases very slightly off- center (see the logical consistency section), and the pit number was attributed. If a pit number was used more than once a letter was appended to make each pit number unique. Table 3 in the Open-File Report text describes the actions taken to insure data consistency and uniqueness of the individual points.
    Each of the digital data sets of the Source map sheets were transformed into a common projection then joined together to form one data set for the county.
    Date: 2000 (process 2 of 5)
    Check plots were produced for each map sheet data set to proof for locational fidelity to the maps and to proof for pit number attributional correctness. Corrections and additions were made as needed.
    Date: 22-Nov-2000 (process 3 of 5)
    First draft of metadata created by D. M. Hirschberg using FGDCMETA.AML ver. 1.2 05/14/98 on ARC/INFO data set marpits1
    Date: 2001 (process 4 of 5)
    Downloaded SDTS-DLG data 1:2,000,000 of boundaries, roadways, and hydrography from USGS web site to create base map data layer. Created an ArcInfo coverage and coded arcs as needed.
    Date: 03-Jan-2001 (process 5 of 5)
    Creation of original metadata record Person who carried out this activity:
    U.S. Geological Survey
    Attn: Robin A. Fields
    GIS Lab coordinator
    520 N. Park Ave, Suite 355
    Tucson, AZ

    (520) 670-5511 (voice)
    (520) 670-5571 (FAX)
  3. What similar or related data should the user be aware of?

How reliable are the data; what problems remain in the data set?

  1. How well have the observations been checked?
    Attribution data captured from the Source pit data sheets were compared to the Source to check for typographical errors. Hard copy maps were produced with the pit number labeled for each pit location and manually checked.
    Pit locations were infrequently found to have legal descriptions in the Source pit data sheets inconsistent with the displayed pit location on the Source map sheets. No attempt was made to update the legal descriptions shown in the Source pit data sheets.
  2. How accurate are the geographic locations?
    Maps prepared using the digitized points overlain on the Source map sheets on a light table and suggest that the locational accuracy for the digitized points is no better than 2 millimeters (1175 feet or 358 meters at scale). Plots of the pit locations over a Public Land Survey sections GIS data set available form the Arizona State Land Department produced maps to display pit locations within PLSS sections. The result showed consistent locational fidelity between pit location and PLSS quarter-section in the digital data as compared to the Source.
  3. How accurate are the heights or depths?
  4. Where are the gaps in the data? What is missing?
    All pit locations depicted on the Source map sheets or with a record in the Source pit data sheets were captured.
  5. How consistent are the relationships among the observations, including topology?
    Point features present. Points were digitized at the center of each symbol representing a pit location on the Source map sheet. Where two or more pit number labels pointed to the same symbol a point was added for each of the labels, thus some points will overlap when displayed at the scale at which the data were digitized (1:176,306). In some cases one of the points may have been digitized slightly off-center.

How can someone get a copy of the data set?

Are there legal restrictions on access or use of the data?
Access_Constraints: none
These data are not to be used at scales greater than 1:176,306. Any data sets or hardcopies utilizing these data sets shall clearly indicate their source. If the user has modified the data in any way he or she is obligated to describe the types of modifications he or she has performed. User specifically agrees not to misrepresent these data sets, nor to imply that changes he or she made were approved by the U.S. Geological Survey or the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT).
  1. Who distributes the data set? (Distributor 1 of 1)
    U.S. Geological Survey Information Services
    Open-File Reports, Box 25286
    Denver, CO

    1-303-202-4200 (voice)
    1-303-202-4693 (FAX)
  2. What's the catalog number I need to order this data set? USGS OFR 01-122
  3. What legal disclaimers am I supposed to read?
    The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) provides these geographic data "as is." The USGS makes no guarantee or warranty concerning the accuracy of information contained in the geographic data. The USGS further makes no warranties, either expressed or implied as to any other matter whatsoever, including, without limitation, the condition of the product, or its fitness for any particular purpose. The burden for determining fitness for use lies entirely with the user. Although these data have been processed successfully on computers at the USGS, no warranty, expressed or implied, is made by the USGS regarding the use of these data on any other system, nor does the fact of distribution constitute or imply any such warranty.
    In no event shall the USGS have any liability whatsoever for payment of any consequential, incidental, indirect, special, or tort damages of any kind, including, but not limited to, any loss of profits arising out of use of or reliance on the geographic data or arising out of the delivery, installation, operation, or support by USGS.
    These data are not meant to be used or displayed at any scale larger than 1:176,306 (e.g. 1:100,000 or 1:24,000).
  4. How can I download or order the data?

Who wrote the metadata?

Last modified: 05-Feb-2016
Metadata author:
Peter N Schweitzer
USGS Midwest Area
Collection manager, USGS Geoscience Data Clearinghouse,
Mail Stop 954
12201 Sunrise Valley Dr
Reston, VA

703-648-6533 (voice)
703-648-6252 (FAX)
Metadata standard:
FGDC Content Standards for Digital Geospatial Metadata (FGDC-STD-001-1998)

This page is <>
Generated by mp version 2.9.48 on Tue Jul 03 20:05:32 2018