Geotech Memo BW1 I-15 over UPRR Spur Trackndotprojectneon.com/Archives/reference_information...FINAL...

FINAL FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS, I-15 WIDENING OVER UNION PACIFIC RAIL ROAD SPUR TRACK (BRIDGE NO. G-941), I-15 NORTH, US-95 TO CRAIG ROAD DESIGN-BUILD PROJECT, NORTH LAS VEGAS, NEVADA

SCO/GEOTECH MEMO_BW1_ I-15 OVER UPRR SPUR TRACK.DOC 2

This technical memorandum presents NCC findings, conclusions, and foundation recommendations for the proposed I-15 widening over the Union Pacific Rail Road (UPRR) (Bridge No. G-941) to be located in Design Segment 1 of the I-15 North Corridor. Figure 1 shows the location of the bridge structure and the limits of I-15 North Corridor alignment (figures are presented at the end of this memorandum). As noted in Table 1, Segment 1 encompasses approximately 1.2 miles of roadway, extending from Station 863+50 US-95/ I-15 to Station 924+00 just south of Owens Avenue.

Project Description The existing bridges over the UPRR track were originally built in the late 1960s. The northbound (G-941 N) and southbound (G-941 S) bridges were constructed as three-span, cast-in-place, conventionally reinforced, concrete box girder structures. According to as-built plans, the bridges are supported by 45-ton, HP 12x74 steel H-piles at the abutment locations and by 10-foot by 10–foot spread footings at the piers. The existing bridge foundation information, as provided in the as-built plans, is summarized in Table 2. As-built elevations are provided in mean sea level (MSL) as presented in the as-built plans.

TABLE 2 Summary of Existing Structure Foundations

Location Foundation Type

Bottom of Pile Cap Elevation/Footing

Elevation (feet)

Minimum Pile tip Elevation

(feet)

Abutments A&C HP 10x57 2057.5 2027

Pier 1 (Southbound Bridge) Spread Footing (10 feet x 10 feet )

2035.5 NA1

Pier 2 (Southbound Bridge) Spread Footing (10 feet x 10 feet )

2034.0 NA1

Pier 3 (Northbound Bridge) Spread Footing (10 feet x 10 feet )

2032.5 NA1

Pier 4 (Northbound Bridge) Spread Footing (10 feet x 10 feet )

2035.5 NA1

Abutments B&D HP 10x57 2055.0 2027.5 1 Not Applicable

The I-15 widening will be constructed between the existing northbound and southbound bridge structures. The proposed widening of the I-15 over the UPRR bridge will be constructed as a three-span, post-tensioned, box girder structure. The proposed bridge will be located at “L-1” Line Station 870+80.11 (between Station 869+85.4 and Station 871+55.9). The proposed bridge will be approximately 20 feet wide and 164.5 feet long.

Figure 2 shows the approximate boring locations and the plan view of the bridge. The general plan and elevation of the proposed widening are presented in Figures 3A through 3C. The as-built general plan and elevation of the existing bridges are presented in Figure 4.



Geotechnical Investigation The scope of work for the geotechnical investigation task included the following:

• Reviewing information from previous geotechnical reports

• Drilling and sampling of three hollow-stem auger (HSA) borings (BW1-1, BW1-2 and BEN1-1) near the proposed bridge structure location to characterize the subsurface conditions

• Laboratory testing of selected soil samples to characterize the subsurface soils

• Reviewing regional geology and seismicity

• Evaluating the foundation type and pile capacity for widening and seismic retrofit of the existing bridges

• Preparing this foundation memorandum

Evaluation of potentially contaminated soils or groundwater was not part of this geotechnical investigation.

Review of Prior Geotechnical Investigations Prior to the current NCC study, geotechnical explorations in the project vicinity were performed by Black Eagle Consulting, Inc., (2006) as part of the preliminary investigation for this project. One boring (SB-05) was drilled in the vicinity of the proposed bridge structure. This boring was used only to confirm the lithology underneath the proposed bridge location. A downhole-hammer was used to obtain the blow counts in this boring. There is no known correction factor available to convert the downhole-hammer blow counts to Standard Penetration Test (SPT) blow counts.

In addition to the Black Eagle report, a geotechnical report of the static pile load test program performed by Kleinfelder (1996a) in the nearby test sites was also reviewed. Three out of four Kleinfelder load test sites are within or adjacent to the segment 1 alignment. The first test site was located at the core of I-15/US 95 interchange, west of I-15, south of US 95 and inside the loop ramp from south bound I-15 to east bound US 95. The second test site was located west of Martin Luther King Boulevard, south of US 95 and inside the loop ramp from south bound Martin Luther King Boulevard to east bound US 95. The third test site was located north of Washington Avenue, east of the Washington Avenue entrance ramp to the north bound I-15 and west of the I-15 property line fence. Results of these static pile load tests were used to evaluate the soil undrained shear strengths for the axial pile capacity analysis. The lithology observed at the test site locations are similar to the lithology observed along the Design Segment 1 of the I-15 North Corridor.

Geotechnical Investigation by North Corridor Constructors The NCC field investigations included drilling three HSA borings (BW1-1, BW1-2 and BEN1-1). These borings were drilled by Terracon Consultants, Inc., under subcontract to NCC, between December 26, 2007 and January 28, 2008. Borings BW1-1, BW1-2 and BEN1-1 were drilled to approximate depths of 95, 97 and 100.5 feet below existing ground surface



(bgs), respectively. The borings were approximately 8 inches in diameter and logged by a Terracon Consultants, Inc. engineer or geologist. Table 3 lists the locations and details of these borings. Approximate locations of the borings are shown on Figure 2 and the boring logs are included in Attachment 1.

Samples from each boring were retrieved at 5-foot intervals by means of SPT and modified California drive samplers using a 140-pound auto hammer system with a drop of 30 inches. Shelby tube samples of the clayey soils were obtained at each boring location. Samples were carefully stored and transported to the laboratory testing facilities. Elevations provided in this memorandum are based on the North American Vertical Datum (NAVD) of 1988, except where noted differently.

TABLE 3 Summary of Geotechnical Borings

Boring Type of

Exploration

Approximate Station “L1”

Line Offset (feet)

Elevation (feet)

Depth (feet bgs)

Groundwater Elevation

(feet)

BW 1-1 HSA 869+36 9 L 2066.8 95.5 2023.5

BW 1-2 HSA 872+73 7 R 2064.1 97 2020.1

BEN1-1 HSA 873+66 63 R 2,061.7 100.5 Not Measured

SB-05 HSA 871+18 119 R 2,038.5 100.75 Not Measured

Laboratory Testing Selected soil samples from the borings were tested for soil classification, strength characteristics, and corrosion potential. Results of the laboratory tests are presented in Attachment 2. Fine contents of the clayey soils vary from 51 to 80 percent and the plasticity index (PI) ranges from 4 to 50 percent. Peak undrained shear strengths (estimated from the unconsolidated undrained [UU] triaxial tests) of the clayey soils range from 1.5 to 9.6 kips per square foot (ksf). Fine contents of coarse grained soils vary from 13 to 49 percent.

Site Geology Regional Geologic Setting The Las Vegas Valley is characteristic of the Basin and Range province and consists of a faulted half graben, underlain by a pull-apart basin, with a major normal fault located along its eastern limit. By using geophysical data, Page et al. (2005) estimated the thickness of the sedimentary fill of the Las Vegas basin to be as much as 10,000 to 13,000 feet and to consist of Miocene through Holocene Age lacustrine, paludal, and alluvial deposits. Sediments in the Las Vegas Valley basin, from most recent to oldest, have been grouped into Basin Fill (Pliocene to Holocene), Muddy Creek Formation (Pliocene to late Miocene), and Horse Spring Formation (Miocene). Only the Pliocene to Holocene Basin Fill is present along the entire I-15 alignment under consideration in this Project. The Pliocene to Holocene Basin Fill sequence is characterized by three facies: coarse-grained alluvial fan, fine-grained fluvial and lacustrine basin fill, and blue lacustrine clay. The blue lacustrine clay is laterally extensive in the center of the basin, where it is reported to be present at depths that range



from 480 to 600 feet (Bell et al., 1992). Impermeable hard caliche horizons are pervasive in the uppermost portion of the basin fill. Generally, coarser-grained deposits are located near the base of the mountains, transitioning to finer-grained deposits towards the middle of the valley.

Surficial Geology According to the regional surficial geology map compiled by Page, et al (2005) and the geologic map prepared by Matti, et al (1987), the natural materials reported cropping out at the UPRR bridge site and nearby vicinity correspond to Holocene and late Pleistocene age Undivided Young Spring deposits (Qsy) (Figure 1). The soil borings advanced at the vicinity of the bridge encountered native clay materials with interbedded clayey sand, clayey gravel, and caliche/cemented soil layers. The soil borings advanced at the vicinity of the proposed bridge location confirmed the occurrence of this sequence at least to the maximum investigated depth of approximately 100 feet bgs.

Subsidence Land subsidence along the I-15 alignment has been reported to occur mainly along its southern portion, from Carey Avenue to the I-15/US-95 Interchange, associated with the Las Vegas Valley Central subsidence bowl. According to Bell, et al (2001 and 2002), the total maximum regional subsidence for the 1963 to 2000 period along the southern portion of I-15 occurs south of Washington Avenue and is reported to be 2.8 feet. The land subsidence decreases gradually towards the northeast, where 2- and 1-foot contour intervals are reported approximately at the projection of the intersection of the alignment with Williams Street and at the crossing with Lake Mead Boulevard, respectively.

Although up to 2.8 feet of regional subsidence is reported to have occurred immediately to the south of the Washington Avenue Bridge, regional groundwater subsidence is considered to be at a scale which should not cause damaging differential settlements to individual structures. Kleinfelder (1996b) indicates that although subsidence at the I-15/US-95 Intersection has been reported to be approximately 3 feet since the original construction survey, the relatively broad characteristics of the regional subsidence has had little apparent effect on the existing highway structures since their construction in the 1960s. Therefore, regional subsidence is not anticipated to represent a hazard for the proposed bridge widening.

Faulting According to Page, et al (2005) and Matti, et al (1987), a splay of the Cashman fault of the Las Vegas Valley Fault System (LVVFS), runs approximately parallel to I-15 between D Street and Washington Avenue to the south and Monroe Avenue to the north (Figure 1). In addition, Matti et al (1987) indicate an area containing subsidence-induced ground fissures at approximately 700 feet to the north of the Washington Avenue bridge. The approximate locations of the Cashman fault and the area of ground fissures were derived from Matti et al’s (1987) geologic map.

The Cashman fault is part of a series of linear and curvilinear north- to northeast-trending, east-dipping late Quaternary normal faults that exist in the central portion of the Las Vegas



Valley. A maximum date of 14,690 ± 570 years before present was determined by dePolo, et al (2006) for the most recent event of displacement along the LVVFS.

However, according to Hess and dePolo (2006), the most seismically prominent fault in the Las Vegas Valley is the Frenchman Mountain fault, located approximately 9.3 miles to the east, which is capable of producing a magnitude 6.6 seismic event. The Frenchman Mountain fault is a normal fault, approximately 13.7 miles long, and located near the base of Frenchman Mountain (Slemmons et al, 2001). There is no available data in the literature indicating that the LVVFS showed movements within the last 11,000 years.

Subsurface Conditions Subsurface conditions were determined mainly based on the results of the geotechnical explorations conducted by NCC in 2007 and 2008. According to data from the soil borings drilled at the Project site, the subsurface materials along the proposed bridge widening alignment consist of embankment fill material and native clayey soils. Fill material encountered in the soil borings consists of medium-dense to very dense silty sand, clayey sand, and sandy gravel. Up to approximately 30 feet of approach fill exists at the proposed bridge site. Below the fill, the subsurface consists of predominantly stiff to hard sandy clay and fat clay with interbedded caliche/cemented layers and occasional layers of interbedded silty sand, clayey gravel, and clayey sand.

Groundwater Groundwater was measured at two of the borings (BW1-1 and BW1-2) drilled for the proposed bridge. Groundwater was encountered at elevations 2,023.5 and 2,020.1 feet in Borings BW 1-1 and BW 1-2, respectively. A groundwater elevation of 2,025 feet was used for the engineering analysis.

Fluctuations in the groundwater level and soil moisture content variations should be anticipated during and after the rainy season. Irrigation of landscaped areas, nearby construction, and numerous other man-made and natural influences also could cause a fluctuation in local groundwater levels.

Engineering Strength Parameters Design soil strength parameters for SHAFT (to calculate axial pile capacity) analysis and LPILE (to calculate lateral pile capacity) analysis were developed for the proposed bridge alignment based on the laboratory data and field investigations. Undrained shear strength of clayey soils and Caliche/cemented soil layers was estimated based on the SPT blow counts using empirical relationship that was calibrated to the results of static load test program performed by Kleinfelder (1996a). The recommended geotechnical parameters and the lithology of the soil profile used in the drilled shaft analysis are summarized in Table 4. The table also presents the recommended P-Y curves for use in the LPILE program.



TABLE 4 Geotechnical Parameters, Abutment 1

Elevation (feet)

Soil Type

Recommended P-Y Curve

(As defined in LPILE)

Effective Unit

Weight (pcf)

φ (degree)

C (psf)

K (pci) ε50

2,060-2,041 SM Sand (Reese) 125 34 0 225 -

2,041-2,025 CL Stiff Clay without Free Water 120 - 5,000 2,000 0.004


2,018-2,010 CE Stiff Clay without Free Water 65 - 10,000 2,000 0.004


1,993–1,989.5 CE Stiff Clay without Free Water 65 - 10,000 2,000 0.004

1,989.5-1,978 CL Stiff Clay without Free Water 60 - 2,000 500 0.007


Geotechnical Parameters, Pier 1





1,993–1,989.5 CE Stiff Clay without Free Water 65 - 10,000 2,000 0.004

1,989.5-1,978 CL Stiff Clay without Free Water 60 - 2,000 500 0.007


Geotechnical Parameters, Pier 2




2,015-2,011.5 CE Stiff Clay without Free Water 65 - 10,000 2,000 0.004

2,011.5-1,999 CL Stiff Clay without Free Water 60 - 3,500 1,000 0.005


1,997–1,950 CL Stiff Clay without Free Water 60 - 1,500 500 0.007

Geotechnical Parameters, Abut 2

2,057.5-2,036.5 SM Sand (Reese) 125 34 0 225 -




2,015-2,011.5 CE Stiff Clay without Free Water 65 - 10,000 2,000 0.004




TABLE 4 (CONTINUED)

Geotechnical Parameters, Abut 2

Elevation (feet)

Soil Type

Recommended P-Y Curve

(As defined in LPILE)

Effective Unit

Weight (pcf)

φ (degree)

C (psf)

K (pci) ε50


1,997–1,970 CL Stiff Clay without Free Water 60 - 1,500 500 0.007 Notes: pcf = pounds per cubic foot psf = pounds per square foot pci = pounds per cubic inch CE =Caliche/cemented soil layers ε50 = Strain at which one-half of the undrained strength is developed φ=Internal friction angle Su=Undrained shear strength (cohesion) k=Soil modulus parameter

Discussion and Recommendations Seismicity Section 3.2 (Acceleration Coefficient) in Division I-A of the 17th Edition of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO, 2002) Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges states that, ”Special studies to determine site- and structure-specific acceleration coefficients shall be performed by a qualified professional” if the bridge site is located close to an ”active fault.” However, Section 2.2.3 (Fault Movements) of the National Highway Institute Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering Reference Manual (NHI Course No. 13239-Module 9) (United States Department of Transportation [USDOT], 1998) states, ”If the fault moved in the distant geologic past, during the time of a different tectonic stress regime, and if the fault has not moved in recent (Holocene) time (generally the past 11,000 years) it may be considered inactive.” Therefore, according to NHI design guidelines, the Las Vegas Valley fault system should be considered inactive with regard to bridge designs.

NCC recommends using the standard AASHTO bridge design approaches, assuming a peak ground acceleration of 0.15g. Based on the stiff soils encountered at the project site, Soil Profile Type II (AASHTO, 2002) is appropriate for the site soil conditions. The AASHTO Response Spectrum for Soil Profile Type II is recommended for the design of the bridge structure.

Corrosion Potential The corrosion potential of soil in the vicinity of the proposed bridge was evaluated. One soil sample was tested for minimum resistivity, pH, chloride content, and sulfate content. The results of these tests are presented in Table 5. Based on the current standard-of-practice in the Las Vegas area, onsite soils are considered corrosive. Proper corrosion protection should be provided for concrete and steel reinforcement.



TABLE 5 Summary of Laboratory Corrosion Tests

Boring Sample Depth (feet) Soil Type

Minimum Resistivity (ohm-cm1) pH

Sulfate Content (ppm)

Chloride Content (ppm2)

BW 1-1 10 39 Sandy Clay 740 8.72 179 400

Notes: 1 ohm-cm = ohm-centimeters 2 ppm = parts per million

Foundation Recommendations Several foundation types were considered for support of the proposed bridge structure. These foundation types included shallow foundations and drilled shafts. Factors considered included structural demands, soil resistance capacity, differential settlement between supports, and constructability. Spread footings were considered for all support locations, but were not selected because of the anticipated differential settlement under abutment support locations and the seismic retrofit strategy at the pier locations. Therefore, NCC recommends the use of pile foundations, consisting of 36-inch-diameter drilled shafts to support the abutments and 84-inch drilled shafts to support the piers. Axial Pile Capacity The axial capacity of drilled shafts was estimated using the computer program SHAFT, Version 5.0, for Windows (Ensoft, 2003). At abutment locations, geotechnical axial capacity includes skin friction and a portion of the end bearing. End bearings developed based on pile settlement was utilized for the axial compression resistance (AASHTO, 2002). However, at pier locations, geotechnical axial capacity includes only skin friction for the large diameter piles. The allowable axial capacity is estimated with a factor of safety of 2.0 in accordance with AASHTO guidelines (AASHTO, 2002). This factor of safety can be used when a static load test is performed near or at the project site with similar soil condition. At abutment locations, axial capacity of drilled shafts was appropriately reduced in consideration of the center-to-center spacing. Approximately 60 percent of the estimated individual pile axial capacity was utilized for the maximum axial loading condition. The recommended tip elevations for each support locations are summarized in Table 6.

Pile settlements were evaluated using the load transfer method implemented in the SHAFT program. The settlement of the proposed drilled shafts under the service load is estimated to be less than 0.5 inch. Consolidation settlement of the pile group was estimated based on the equivalent footing situated at a depth of 2/3 D (D is pile length) below the bottom of the pile cap. The estimated settlement is less than 0.5 inch. Pile group effects for axial compressive loads should be considered in accordance with Section 4.6.5.2.4, Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges (AASHTO, 2002). The results of the axial capacity analyses are presented in Attachment 3.



Lateral Pile Capacity The lateral pile capacity can be evaluated using the software LPILE Plus, Version 5.0, for Windows (Ensoft, 2006). The recommended geotechnical parameters to be used in the analysis are summarized in Table 4.

To account for group action in the loading direction, the lateral capacities should be multiplied by an appropriate lateral group reduction factor as recommended in Section 4.6.5.6.1.4, Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges (AASHTO, 2002). Lateral capacities of the abutment drilled shafts were appropriately reduced in consideration of the center-to-center spacing. A P-Multiplier of 0.2 was used in the analysis to estimate the lateral capacity. In addition, the piles are not placed in a row in the direction of loading for lateral loads.

TABLE 6 Pile Data Table for the Allowable Axial Capacity

Location Pile Size and

Type

Pile Cut-off

Elevation (feet)

Allowable Axial Capacity in

Compression (kips)

Ultimate Axial Capacity in

Compression (kips)

Design Tip Elevation (feet) a, b

Abutment 1 36-inch drilled shaft

2055.2 290 580 2025

Pier 1 84-inch drilled shaft

2041.0 1100 2200 1986


2038.0 1050 2100 1983


2052.7 270 540 2019

Notes: a Design tip elevation is controlled by the compression demand

b Pile tip elevations should be adjusted based on pile cut-off elevation to provide the minimum recommended pile length.

Slope Stability Slope stability for the proposed abutment slopes (1.5H:1V) was analyzed using the computer program SLIDE, Version 5.026 (Rocscience, Inc., 2006). Drained strength parameters, which are assumed weaker than the undrained strength parameters, were used for the analysis. In addition, the following design criteria were used:

• Permanent slopes were required to have a minimum factor of safety of 1.5 for the static condition and a minimum factor of safety of 1.1 for the pseudostatic loading condition, using a horizontal earthquake loading coefficient of 0.075 (½ x Peak Ground Acceleration).

• Traffic surcharge loads were modeled as a uniform surface load equivalent to 250 psf in the slope stability analyses.



Results of the slope stability analyses indicate that the required minimum static and pseudostatic factors of safety for global stability are satisfied. However, the 1.5H:1V abutment slopes should be concrete-paved to protect against surficial instability due to erosion. The results of the slope stability analyses are presented in Attachment 3.

Lateral Earth Pressures Active and at-rest lateral earth pressure coefficients and the equivalent fluid unit weights for horizontal backfill conditions are summarized in Table 7. The values in Table 7 are based on the assumption that the walls will be backfilled with granular backfill conforming to NDOT Standard Specifications (2001).

For seismic loading conditions, the incremental seismic/dynamic earth pressure should be added to the static active earth pressure. Seismic wall pressures for cantilever walls may be estimated by the Mononobe-Okabe Method (Kramer, 1996). The recommended incremental seismic earth pressure coefficients and equivalent fluid unit weight are provided in Table 7. The at-rest incremental seismic earth pressure was estimated applying a horizontal acceleration coefficient equal to 1.5 times the peak ground acceleration (AASHTO, 2002).

TABLE 7 Summary of Lateral Earth Pressures

Earth Pressure Coefficients Equivalent Fluid Unit Weight1 (pcf)

Condition Active At-Rest Active

Seismic At-Rest Seismic Active At-Rest

Active Seismic

At-Rest Seismic

horizontal backfill 0.28 0.44 0.04 0.15 36 55 5 18

Notes: 1 The resultant static (active and at-rest) lateral earth forces act at a height of 0.33H above the wall base, and the resultant incremental seismic lateral earth pressures may be assumed to act at a height of 0.6H above the wall base, where H is the height of the wall.

The static active and at-rest lateral earth pressures have triangular distributions, with the largest load occurring at the bottom of the wall. The incremental seismic earth pressure has an inverted triangular distribution, with the largest load occurring at the top of the wall. The resultant incremental seismic lateral force may be assumed to act at a height of 0.6 H above the wall base, where H is the height of the wall.

The values in Table 7 assume that backfill materials are free-draining and, therefore, do not include hydrostatic pressures. Adequate drainage should be provided behind the walls in accordance with NDOT Standard Plans (2007). Surcharge due to normal vehicular traffic loads should be modeled as an additional 250 psf, where applicable. Uniformly distributed vertical surcharge loads should be applied as a uniform (rectangular) distributed pressure with the appropriate corresponding lateral earth pressure coefficient (active or at-rest).

If the wall is prevented from lateral movement at the top, the horizontal earth pressure approaches the value of an at-rest condition. At-rest pressure coefficients and equivalent fluid unit weights are included in Table 7.



Construction Considerations Site Preparation The site should be prepared in accordance with Section 201 of NDOT’s Standard Specifications (2001). Vegetation, trash, and other deleterious material should be removed and disposed of prior to placement of fill.

Earthwork and Fill Material Specifications All earthwork should be performed in accordance with NDOT Standard Specifications Section 203 (2001). Granular backfill should conform to NDOT Standard Specifications (2001), Section 207.02.02. Ponding and jetting of granular fill should not be allowed.

Drilled Shafts Installation Excavation and construction of the drilled shafts should be observed by a qualified geotechnical engineer or a technician under the supervision of a geotechnical engineer. The construction of the drilled shafts should be in accordance with NDOT’s Standard Specifications (2001), Section 509. Groundwater conditions should be expected during drilled shafts construction. The construction method should not result in loose or disturbed soils or voids. If caving soil conditions occur during drilled shaft installation, temporary casing should be considered. Difficult drilling conditions should be anticipated through caliche/cemented soil layers.

Because of the close spacing of drilled shafts at the abutments, drilled shafts located closer than three times the shaft diameter should be drilled after the first pile (constructed within 3 pile diameter distance) concrete is hardened as recommended in Section 509.03.16 of NDOT Standard Specifications (2001).

The bottoms of the shaft borings should be adequately cleaned of loose or disturbed materials, using a drilling bucket or an approved alternative method. The bottom 2 feet of the shaft boring should be drilled with a cleanout bucket to provide adequate removal of loose materials. Schedule 80 polyvinyl chloride (PVC) or schedule 40 steel inspection pipes should be installed in each shaft, in accordance with NDOT standard provisions, to permit cross-hole sonic testing of drilled shafts.

Temporary Excavations and Shoring Excavations should be performed in accordance with NDOT’s Standard Specifications (2001), Section 206. Trenches and temporary excavations should be excavated in accordance with Occupational Safety and Health Administration safety requirements.

Appropriate measures should be taken to prevent damage to adjacent structures, improvements, and utilities. In areas where existing structures will be within a distance equal to the height of the shoring, lateral deflections at the top of shoring should be limited to less than 1 inch.

Measures to control the impact of surface water and groundwater on the stability of temporary excavations should be employed.



Geotechnical Observation Grading operations, including excavations and fill placement, drilled shaft installation, and excavations for utility trenches should be observed by a geotechnical engineer or a technician under the supervision of a geotechnical engineer. Variations in soil and geologic conditions might be encountered during construction. To permit correlation between exploration data and actual conditions encountered during construction, a qualified geotechnical engineer, and/or engineering geologist should perform onsite review during construction.

Limitations This technical memorandum has been prepared for the exclusive use of NDOT and the NCC design team for specific application to the design and construction of the proposed I-15 over UPRR Track (Bridge No. G-941) widening in North Las Vegas, Nevada. The findings, conclusions, and recommendations presented in this technical memorandum were prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practice. No other warranty, either express or implied, is made.

The data from borings indicate subsurface conditions only at specific locations and times, and only to the depths penetrated. They do not necessarily reflect strata variation between exploration locations. Subsurface conditions and water levels at other locations might differ from those at the indicated locations. Also, the passage of time might result in changes in the conditions at these locations. If variations in subsurface conditions from those described herein are noted during construction, NCC geotechnical engineers should be notified immediately, and the recommendations in this technical memorandum should be re-evaluated.

In the event that any changes in the nature, design, or location of the planned facilities occur, the conclusions and recommendations of this technical memorandum should not be considered valid, unless the changes and conclusions of this technical memorandum are reviewed and modified or verified in writing by an NCC geotechnical engineer. NCC is not responsible for any claims, damages, or liability associated with interpretation of subsurface data by others or reuse of the subsurface data or engineering analyses without the express written authorization of NCC.

References American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2002. Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges, 17th Edition.

Bell, J. W., Price, J. G., and Mifflin, M. D. 1992. Subsidence-induced Fissuring Along Preexisting Faults in Las Vegas Valley, Nevada. Association of Engineering Geologists, Proceedings of the 35th Annual Meeting, Los Angeles, pp. 66-75.

dePolo, C. M., Bell, J. W., Boron, S., Slemmons, D. B., and Werle, J. L.. 2006. Latest Quaternary Fault Movement Along the Las Vegas Valley Fault System, Clark County, Nevada: Environmental & Engineering Geoscience, Volume XII, Number 2, pp 181-193.



Ensoft, Inc. 2003. SHAFT, Version 5.0 for Windows.

Ensoft, Inc. 2006. LPILE Plus 5.0 for Windows.

Hess, R. H., and dePolo, C. M. 2006. Loss-Estimation Modeling of Earthquake Scenarios for Each County in Nevada Using HAZUS-MH. Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology, Open File Report 06-1.

Hoit, M., M. McVay, and C. Hays. 2008. Documentation of Computer Program FB-MultiPier, Version 4.12b. Bridge Software Institute, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida. 2005.

Kleinfelder. 1996a. I-15/US 95 Load Test Program, Las Vegas, Nevada, prepared for Parsons Brinckerhoff, January 26.

Kleinfelder. 1996b., Geotechnical Investigation, I-15/U.S. 95 Interchange Reconstruction Stage 2, Bridge Design Report, Clark County, Nevada, 31-215909-001. Report Prepared for Parsons Brinkerhoff, Inc., September 16.

Kramer, S. L. 1996. Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering. Prentice-Hall International Series in Civil Engineering and Engineering Mechanics. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.

Matti, J. C., Castor, Bachhuber, F. W., Morton, S. M., and Bell, J. W.. 1987. Las Vegas NW Quadrangle Geologic Map: Prepared by the Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology Map in Collaboration with the United States Geological Survey, Scale 1:24,000.

Nevada Department of Transportation (NDOT). 2001. Standard Specifications.

Nevada Department of Transportation (NDOT). 2007. Standard plans.

Page, W. R., Lundstrom, S. C., Harris, A. G., Langenheim, V. E., Workman, J. B., Mahan, S. A., Paces, J. B., Dixon, G. L., Rowley, P. D., Burchfiel, B. C., Bell, J. W. and Smith, E. I. 2005. Geologic and Geophysical Maps of the Las Vegas 30' x 60' Quadrangle, Clark and Nye Counties, Nevada and Inyo County, California: United States Geological Survey Scientific Investigation Map SIM-2814 and Pamphlet Accompanying the United States Geological Survey Scientific Investigation Map SIM-2814.

Rocscience, Inc. 2008. 2-D Slope Stability Program for Evaluating the Factor of Safety or Probability of Failure. SLIDE, Version 5.033

Slemmons, D. B., Bell, J. W., dePolo, C. M., Ramelli, A. R., Rasmussen, G. S., Langenheim, V. E., Jachens, R. C., Smith K., and O’Donnell, J. 2001. Earthquake Hazard in Las Vegas, Nevada in Luke, B., Jacobson, E., and Werle, J., Editors, Proceedings, 36th Annual Symposium on Engineering Geology and Geotechnical Engineering, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, pp 447-459. March 28-30.

U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). 1998. Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering, NHI Course No. 13239, Module 9, Publication No. FHWA HI-99-012.

Figures

EXPLANATION

Source: Page, W. R., Lundstrom, S. C., Harris, A. G., Langenheim, V. E., Workman, J. B., Mahan, S. A., Paces, J. B., Dixon, G. L., Rowley, P. D., Burchfiel, B. C., Bell, J. W. and Smith, E. I., 2005, Geologic and Geophysical Maps of the Las Vegas 30' x 60' Quadrangle, ClarkNye Counties, Nevada and Inyo County, California: United States Geological Survey Scientific Investigation Map SIM-2814.

Proposed Road Expansion Alignment

CH2MHILL

Figure 1Site Location and Geologic MapI-15 Over UPRR Spur Track (BW-1)Bridge No.: G-941I-15 North, US-95 Interchange to Craig RoadNorth Las Vegas, Nevada

CRAIG ROAD

ALEXANDER ROAD

GOWAN ROAD

EAST CHEYENNE ROAD

CAREY AVENUE

LAKE MEAD BOULEVARD

OWENS AVENUE

WASHINGTON AVENUE

BONANZA AVENUE

VALLEY

VIEW

FAULT

CONCORD STREET

EASTERN AVENUE

DECATUR

FAULT

LAS VEGAS VALLEY FAULT SYSTEM

I-15 OVER UPRR SPUR TRACK (G-941)

D

STREET

rraveend

Typewritten Text

FIGURE 3A

rraveend

Typewritten Text

rraveend

Typewritten Text

FIGURE 3B

rraveend

Typewritten Text

FIGURE 3C

rbethapu

Typewritten Text

FIGURE 4

Attachment 1

Boring Logs

Attachment 1(a)

Boring Logs

North Corridor Constructors (2008)

GENERAL NOTES DRILLING & SAMPLING SYMBOLS: SS: Split Spoon - 1-3/8" I.D., 2" O.D., unless otherwise noted HS: Hollow Stem Auger ST: Thin-Walled Tube - 2" O.D., unless otherwise noted PA: Power Auger RS: Ring Sampler - 2.42" I.D., 3" O.D., unless otherwise noted HA: Hand Auger DB: Diamond Bit Coring - 4", N, B RB: Rock Bit BS: Bulk Sample or Auger Sample WB: Wash Boring or Mud Rotary PID: Photo Ionization Detector*

*Used mostly to detect volatile organic compounds in soil, sediment, air and water. The number of blows required to advance a standard 2-inch O.D. split-spoon sampler (SS) the last 12 inches of the total 18-inch penetration with a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches is considered the “Standard Penetration” or “N-value”. For 3” O.D. ring samplers (RS) the penetration value is reported as the number of blows required to advance the sampler 12 inches using a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches, reported as “blows per foot,” and is not considered equivalent to the “Standard Penetration” or “N-value”.

The following average energy transfer efficiencies are applicable to the Auto hammer used to obtain the soil samples.

1. Black Eagle’s Diedrich D-50 Drill Rig: 69% with a standard deviation of 3%

2. Terracon’s Diedrich D-120 Drill Rig: 81% with a standard deviation of 4%

3. WDC’s CME 85 Drill Rig: 76%

WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT SYMBOLS: WL: Water Level WS: While Sampling N/E: Not Encountered WCI: Wet Cave in WD: While Drilling N/M: Not Measured DCI: Dry Cave in BCR: Before Casing Removal AB: After Boring ACR: After Casing Removal

Water levels indicated on the boring logs are the levels measured in the borings at the times indicated. Groundwater levels at other times and other locations across the site could vary. In pervious soils, the indicated levels may reflect the location of groundwater. In low permeability soils, the accurate determination of groundwater levels may not be possible with only short-term observations.

DESCRIPTIVE SOIL CLASSIFICATION: Soil classification is based on the Unified Classification System. Coarse Grained Soils have more than 50% of their dry weight retained on a #200 sieve; their principal descriptors are: boulders, cobbles, gravel or sand. Fine Grained Soils have less than 50% of their dry weight retained on a #200 sieve; they are principally described as clays if they are plastic, and silts if they are slightly plastic or non-plastic. Major constituents may be added as modifiers and minor constituents may be added according to the relative proportions based on grain size. In addition to gradation, coarse-grained soils are defined on the basis of their in-place relative density and fine-grained soils on the basis of their consistency.

CONSISTENCY OF FINE-GRAINED SOILS

RELATIVE DENSITY OF COARSE-GRAINED SOILS

Unconfined Compressive

Strength, Qu, psf

Standard Penetration or N-value (SS)

Blows/Ft.

Consistency

Standard Penetration or N-value (SS)

Blows/Ft.

Relative Density

< 500 <2 Very Soft 0 – 4 Very Loose 500 – 1,000 2-4 Soft 5 – 10 Loose 1,001 – 2,000 4-8 Medium Stiff 11 – 30 Medium Dense 2,001 – 4,000 8-15 Stiff 31 – 50 Dense 4,001 – 8,000 15-30 Very Stiff 50+ Very Dense 8,000+ 30+ Hard

athakur

Sticky Note

MigrationPending set by athakur

athakur

Sticky Note

MigrationConfirmed set by athakur

athakur

Sticky Note

MigrationNone set by athakur

UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory TestsA Soil Classification

Group Symbol

Group NameB

Cu ≥ 4 and 1 ≤ Cc ≤ 3E GW Well-graded gravelF Clean Gravels Less than 5% finesC Cu < 4 and/or 1 > Cc > 3E GP Poorly graded gravelF

Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silty gravelF,G, H

Coarse Grained Soils

More than 50% retained

on No. 200 sieve

Gravels More than 50% of coarse fraction retained on No. 4 sieve Gravels with Fines More

than 12% finesC Fines classify as CL or CH GC Clayey gravelF,G,H

Cu ≥ 6 and 1 ≤ Cc ≤ 3E SW Well-graded sandI Clean Sands Less than 5% finesD Cu < 6 and/or 1 > Cc > 3E SP Poorly graded sandI

Fines classify as ML or MH SM Silty sandG,H,I

Sands 50% or more of coarse fraction passes No. 4 sieve Sands with Fines

More than 12% finesD Fines Classify as CL or CH SC Clayey sandG,H,I

PI > 7 and plots on or above “A” lineJ CL Lean clayK,L,M Silts and Clays Liquid limit less than 50

inorganic

PI < 4 or plots below “A” lineJ ML SiltK,L,M

Liquid limit - oven dried Organic clayK,L,M,N

Fine-Grained Soils 50% or more passes the No. 200 sieve

organic

Liquid limit - not dried < 0.75 OL

Organic siltK,L,M,O

inorganic PI plots on or above “A” line CH Fat clayK,L,M

Silts and Clays Liquid limit 50 or more

PI plots below “A” line MH Elastic SiltK,L,M

Liquid limit - oven dried Organic clayK,L,M,P organic

Liquid limit - not dried < 0.75 OH

Organic siltK,L,M,Q

Highly organic soils Primarily organic matter, dark in color, and organic odor PT Peat

A Based on the material passing the 3-in. (75-mm) sieve B If field sample contained cobbles or boulders, or both, add “with cobbles

or boulders, or both” to group name. C Gravels with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: GW-GM well-graded

gravel with silt, GW-GC well-graded gravel with clay, GP-GM poorly graded gravel with silt, GP-GC poorly graded gravel with clay.

D Sands with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: SW-SM well-graded sand with silt, SW-SC well-graded sand with clay, SP-SM poorly graded sand with silt, SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay

E Cu = D60/D10 Cc = 6010

230

DxD)(D

F If soil contains ≥ 15% sand, add “with sand” to group name. G If fines classify as CL-ML, use dual symbol GC-GM, or SC-SM.

HIf fines are organic, add “with organic fines” to group name. I If soil contains ≥ 15% gravel, add “with gravel” to group name. J If Atterberg limits plot in shaded area, soil is a CL-ML, silty clay. K If soil contains 15 to 29% plus No. 200, add “with sand” or “with

gravel,” whichever is predominant. L If soil contains ≥ 30% plus No. 200 predominantly sand, add

“sandy” to group name. M If soil contains ≥ 30% plus No. 200, predominantly gravel, add

“gravelly” to group name. N PI ≥ 4 and plots on or above “A” line. O PI < 4 or plots below “A” line. P PI plots on or above “A” line. Q PI plots below “A” line.

Form 111—6/98

TEST ABBREVIATIONS

M Moisture content

D Dry density

G Gradation

A Atterberg limits

DS Consolidated drained direct shear

T Unconsolidated undrained triaxial

U Unconfined compression

Co 1-D consolidation

S Swell potential

P Modifed proctor

R R-value

HM Harvard miniature compaction

Ch Chemical tests

CL

36

29

23

24

8

7

6

5

4

3

9.00

1

37

FILL

FILL

FILL

FILL

FILL

FILL

FILL

29.00

24.00

19.00

2

22.00

FILL - SANDY CLAY - moist, brown

FILL - SILTY SAND - trace gravel, moist, lightbrown

FILL - CLAYEY SAND - trace gravel, moist,brown

FILL - SILTY SAND - trace gravel, moist,brown

FILL - SILTY, CLAYEY SAND - with gravel,moist, light brown

- with clayey sand lenses, moist

FILL - SILTY SAND - with gravel, dry, brown

FILL - SILTY GRAVEL - with sand, dry, brown

30.0029.50

50/6"

24.5050/6"

17.00

14.50

3.50

25.50

20.00

15.50

10.50

5.505.00

3.504.00

26.00

SS

14.00

RS

RS

SS

RS

SSBS

SS

12

2.00

0.00

50/6"

9

17

11

12

10

34

50/6"

27

12

9

19

29

21

10

11

14

12

TYPE

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

REMARKS

DATE 8-inch Hollow Stem Auger64075084

12/27/07

LAB TESTS6 inchIncrements

BACKFILLED

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

SHEET 1 OF 4

STATIONOFFSETENGINEEREQUIPMENTOPERATOR

2023.5

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

SANDY CLAY - moist, hard, brown

I-15/US 95 Interchange to Craig RoadJOB DESCRIPTION

BLOW COUNT

2066.8 ft. (NAVD88)12/27/07

EXPLORATION LOG

GROUNDWATER LEVEL

PercentRecov'd

PLATE No. A-1

NO.

HAMMER DROP SYSTEM

GROUND ELEV.

USCSGroup

LOCATION

Last1 foot

END DATE

Yes

BW1-1

PROJECT No.

12/26/07

SAMPLE

Auto Hammer

869+36LT 9Wendy MontesDiedrich D-120Tim Thompson

START DATE

43.3

BORING

M

2061.8

2056.8

2051.8

2046.8

2041.8 M, D

M, D, G, A,DS

M

M, G, A

MR, P

M

12/27/07DRILLINGMETHOD

ELEV. (ft)

Interstate-15 Design Build

DATE

DEPTH(ft)

ELEV.(ft)

NV

_DO

T 7

5084

_UP

DA

TE.G

PJ

NV

_DO

T.G

DT

5/1

9/08

DEPTH (ft)

40

SC-SM

54.00

49.50

45.50

40.50

35.50

30.50

29

50/0"

32.50

68

34.00

39

14

13

12

11

10

9

SC

CALICHE

50/6"

SILTY, CLAYEY SAND - with gravel, moist,dense

CLAYEY SAND - with caliche gravel, verymoist, medium dense, white

CALICHE - dry, hard, white

- occasional partially cemented lenses, hard,light green

SANDY CLAY - moist, hard

CL

- with partially cemented lenses

- occasional partially cemented lenses, hard

SANDY LEAN CLAY - moist, very stiff, whiteto light brown

FAT CLAY - with sand, moist, stiff, brown

SANDY CLAY - moist, very stiff, light brown

60.00

57.00

54.00

47.00

43.00

- thin caliche lenses

SS

CL

RS

SS

RS

SS

RS

27

CH

CL

59.00

54.00

49.00

44.00

39.00

34.00

25

25M, D, G, A,

Co

15

43

17

14

18

50/0"

50/6"

24

10

7

23

8-inch Hollow Stem Auger

Last1 foot

USCSGroup

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

43.3DATE

START DATE

64075084

I-15/US 95 Interchange to Craig Road

12/27/07

TYPE 6 inchIncrements

BACKFILLED


SHEET 2 OF 4


REMARKS

BORING

BLOW COUNT

2066.8 ft. (NAVD88)12/27/07

EXPLORATION LOG

GROUNDWATER LEVEL

PercentRecov'd

PLATE No. A-2

NO. LAB TESTS

GROUND ELEV.

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

LOCATION

JOB DESCRIPTION

END DATE

Yes

BW1-1

PROJECT No.

12/26/07

SAMPLE

Auto Hammer


HAMMER DROP SYSTEM2023.5

2031.8

2026.8

2021.8

2016.8

2011.8

M, G, A

M

M, G, A, T

M, Ch

NV

_DO

T 7

5084

_UP

DA

TE.G

PJ

NV

_DO

T.G

DT

5/1

9/08

DRILLINGMETHOD

ELEV. (ft)DEPTH (ft)


12/27/07DATE

DEPTH(ft)

ELEV.(ft)

16

27

19

50/6"

38

42

22

21

20

19

17

65.5015

CH

CL

CALICHE

GC

CL

CH

89.00

86.00

84.00

18

77.50

FAT CLAY - with sand, moist, stiff

- with caliche gravel

SANDY CLAY - with cemented lenses, moist,stiff, white


- with caliche lenses, very dense


CLAYEY GRAVEL - with sand, very moist,medium dense

- non-cemented, stiff

SANDY CLAY - with partially cementedlenses, very moist, very stiff, white

FAT CLAY - with sand, very moist, very stiff,light green

43

83.00

60.50

74.50

68.00

62.50

87.50

86.00

80.50

74.50

71.50

70.0070.00

90.00

SS

79.00

SS

RS

RS

RS

ST

RS

ST

24

69.00

64.00

23

11

20

18

14

8

4

18

74.00

5

5

11

50/6"

12

19

8


USCSGroup

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

REMARKS

DATE

LAB TESTS

64075084

43.3

12/27/07


BACKFILLED


SHEET 3 OF 4


2023.5

- occasional partially cemented lenses, verystiff


LOCATION

BLOW COUNT

2066.8 ft. (NAVD88)12/27/07

EXPLORATION LOG

GROUNDWATER LEVEL

PercentRecov'd

PLATE No. A-3

NO.

HAMMER DROP SYSTEM

Last1 foot

BORING

JOB DESCRIPTION

END DATE

Yes

BW1-1

PROJECT No.

12/26/07

SAMPLE

Auto Hammer


START DATE

GROUND ELEV.

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

2001.8

1996.8

1991.8

1986.8

1981.8 M, G, A

M, G, A, T

NV

_DO

T 7

5084

_UP

DA

TE.G

PJ

NV

_DO

T.G

DT

5/1

9/08

DRILLINGMETHOD

- trace caliche gravel, stiff



12/27/07DATE

DEPTH(ft)

ELEV.(ft)

ELEV.(ft)

DEPTH(ft)

DATE12/27/07


DEPTH (ft) ELEV. (ft) DRILLINGMETHOD

90.50

RS118

35

33

94.00

MH

CL

4195.50

92.50

95.50

ELASTIC SILT - with sand, very moist, hard,white

SANDY CLAY - very moist, very stiff, lightbrown

- with partially cemented lenses, hard1971.8

1966.8

1961.8

1956.8

1951.8

23

LOCATION

Last1 foot

LAB TESTS

43.3

START DATE


Auto Hammer

SAMPLE

12/26/07

PROJECT No.

BW1-1

Yes

JOB DESCRIPTION

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

110

111

112

113

114

115

116

117

118

119

BORING

GROUND ELEV.

HAMMER DROP SYSTEM

NO.

PLATE No. A-4

PercentRecov'd

GROUNDWATER LEVEL

EXPLORATION LOG

12/27/072066.8 ft. (NAVD88)

BLOW COUNT

END DATE

BACKFILLED

NV

_DO

T 7

5084

_UP

DA

TE.G

PJ

NV

_DO

T.G

DT

5/1

9/08

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

110

111

112

113

114

115

116

117

118

119

2023.5


USCSGroup MATERIAL DESCRIPTION6 inch

IncrementsTYPE

12/27/07


640750848-inch Hollow Stem AugerDATE

REMARKS

SHEET 4 OF 4

4

2.90

15

50/5"

50/6"

50/6"

50/6"

50/6"

50/4"

8

7

5

9.50

3

1

2

FILL

FILL

FILL

FILL

FILL

FILL

FILL

6

30.00

FILL - SANDY CLAY - very moist, brown todark brown

- with gravel, red brown

- occasional clay lenses

FILL - SILTY SAND - trace gravel, moist,yellow brown

FILL - SILTY SAND - with gravel, moist, redbrown

FILL - SILTY SAND - with gravel, moist, redbrown

FILL - SILTY SAND - with gravel, moist, whiteto light brown

FILL - SILTY SAND - with gravel, dry, redbrown

- white to light brown

5.00

CONCRETE - 8.5 inches

5.00

27.50

22.00

15.00

11.00

7.50

4.50

0.70

25.45

20.00

14.50

24.00

FILL - SILTY SAND - with gravel, moist,brown

SS

CONC

RS

RS

SS

RS

BS

SS

SS

50/4"

19.00

14.00

9.00

4.00

2.002.00

50/5"

6

42

50/6"

29.005

12

46

50/6"

50/6"

36

24

50/6"

1/28/08

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

REMARKS

DATE 8-inch Hollow Stem Auger

Last1 foot


LAB TESTSTYPE 6 inchIncrements

BACKFILLED


SHEET 1 OF 4


2020.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

64075084

LOCATION

BLOW COUNT

2064.1 ft. (NAVD88)01/28/08

EXPLORATION LOG

GROUNDWATER LEVEL

PercentRecov'd

PLATE No. A-1

NO.

HAMMER DROP SYSTEM

USCSGroup

BORING

JOB DESCRIPTION

END DATE

Yes

BW1-2

PROJECT No.

1/27/08

SAMPLE

Auto Hammer

872+73RT 7Rick EricksonDiedrich D-120Tim Thompson

START DATE

44.0GROUND ELEV.

M

2059.1

2054.1

2049.1

2044.1

2039.1M, D

M, G, A

M, G, A

M, D

HM

M, G, A

NV

_DO

T 7

5084

_UP

DA

TE.G

PJ

NV

_DO

T.G

DT

5/2

3/08

DEPTH (ft) ELEV. (ft)


01/28/08DATE

DEPTH(ft)

ELEV.(ft)

DRILLINGMETHOD

27

55.50

49.25

45.50

39.50

35.50

30.50

25

41.00

50/3"

43.50

50/6"

32

14

13

12

11

10

9

CL

SC-SM

42

SILTY SAND - with partially cemented lenses,very moist, medium dense, light green

- occasional partially cemented lenses

SANDY CLAY - with partially cementedlenses, very moist, hard, white to light green

SILTY CLAYEY SAND - very moist, mediumdense, light green

32.50

CLAYEY SAND - with gravel, partiallycemented lenses, very moist, medium dense,light green

CALICHE


- partially cemented, moist, hard, white


- very stiff, white to light green

LEAN CLAY - with sand, trace salts, moist,very stiff, brown

FILL - SANDY CLAY - very moist, brown todark brown

60.00

55.00

52.50

44.50

- partially cemented, moist, very dense, white

SS

SC

9

RS

SS

RS

SS

RS

9

M, D, G, A,Co

CL

FILL

59.00

54.00

49.00

44.00

39.00

34.00

28

18

9

14

11

14

11

14

50/3"

9

50/6"

SM

16


Last1 foot

USCSGroup

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

44.0DATE

START DATE

64075084


1/28/08


BACKFILLED


SHEET 2 OF 4


2020.1

REMARKS

BORING

BLOW COUNT

2064.1 ft. (NAVD88)01/28/08

EXPLORATION LOG

GROUNDWATER LEVEL

PercentRecov'd

PLATE No. A-2

NO. LAB TESTS

GROUND ELEV.

LOCATION

JOB DESCRIPTION

END DATE

Yes

BW1-2

PROJECT No.

1/27/08

SAMPLE

Auto Hammer


HAMMER DROP SYSTEM

2029.1

2024.1

2019.1

2014.1

2009.1

M

M, G, A, T

M

M, G, A, T

M

NV

_DO

T 7

5084

_UP

DA

TE.G

PJ

NV

_DO

T.G

DT

5/2

3/08

DRILLINGMETHOD



01/28/08DATE

DEPTH(ft)

ELEV.(ft)

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

21

75.50

70.50

65.4565.00

60.50

3

20

12

16

M, G, A

50/5"

67.00

20

19

18

17

16

15

CH

CL

SC

8

SANDY LEAN CLAY - with caliche gravel,very moist, stiff, brown to light brown

M, G, A

SANDY FAT CLAY - very moist, soft, brown

- caliche gravel and partially cemented lenses,very moist, stiff, brown

- very moist, light brown to brown80.50


85.50

- with caliche gravel, very moist, light brown tobrown

- partially cemented, very moist, very dense,white


CLAYEY SAND - with gravel, occasionalpartially cemented lenses, very moist, loose,light green

- partially cemented, very moist, hard

SANDY FAT CLAY - with gravel, occasionalpartially cemented lenses, very moist, hard,white

90.00

87.00

75.00

84.00

- partially cemented, moist, white

SS

CH

RS

RS

SS

RS

ST

SS 2

M, D

79.00

74.00

69.00

65.00

64.00

8

5

8

16

89.00

12

7

8

5

1

36

48

7

7

50/5"

3


LAB TESTSLast1 foot

USCSGroup

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

M

DATE

872+73RT 7Rick EricksonDiedrich D-120Tim Thompson64075084


1/28/08


BACKFILLED


SHEET 3 OF 4


REMARKS

BORING

BLOW COUNT

2064.1 ft. (NAVD88)01/28/08

EXPLORATION LOG

GROUNDWATER LEVEL

PercentRecov'd

PLATE No. A-3

NO.

44.0GROUND ELEV.

START DATE

LOCATION

JOB DESCRIPTION

END DATE

Yes

BW1-2

PROJECT No.

1/27/08

SAMPLE

Auto Hammer

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

HAMMER DROP SYSTEM2020.1

ELEV.(ft)

1999.1

1994.1

1989.1

1984.1

1979.1

M, G, A

M

M, G, A

NV

_DO

T 7

5084

_UP

DA

TE.G

PJ

NV

_DO

T.G

DT

5/2

3/08

DRILLINGMETHOD



01/28/08DATE

DEPTH(ft)

1969.1

1964.1

1959.1

1954.1

1949.1

M

ELEV.(ft)



01/28/08

DEPTH(ft)

DATE

CLST

RS3613

1

9

94.00

M97.00

- stiff

- with partially cemented lenses, very stiff

SANDY CLAY - trace caliche gravel, verymoist, stiff, light brown

FAT CLAY - with sand, very moist, soft, brown

95.50

93.00

CH

95.50

90.50

2223

22

97.00

JOB DESCRIPTION

DRILLINGMETHOD

USCSGroupLast

1 footLAB TESTS

44.0

START DATE


Auto Hammer

SAMPLE

1/27/08

PROJECT No.

BW1-2

NO.BLOW COUNT

2064.1 ft. (NAVD88)01/28/08

EXPLORATION LOG

GROUNDWATER LEVEL

Yes

PLATE No. A-4

END DATE

HAMMER DROP SYSTEM

GROUND ELEV.

BORING

LOCATION

PercentRecov'd


91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

110

111

112

113

114

115

116

117

118

119

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

110

111

112

113

114

115

116

117

118

119

1/28/08

REMARKS

DATE 8-inch Hollow Stem Auger


2020.1


BACKFILLED


SHEET 4 OF 4

NV

_DO

T 7

5084

_UP

DA

TE.G

PJ

NV

_DO

T.G

DT

5/2

3/08

64075084

2

80

50/4"

50/5"

50/4"

50

8

7

6

5

4

19.00

13.50

CH

ML

FILL

FILL

FILL

FILL

FILL

FILL

CONC

29.00


3

19.50

FILL - SILTY SAND with gravel, slightly moist,light brown to brown

FILL - SILTY GRAVEL with sand, dry toslightly moist, red brown

- red brown

FILL - SILTY SAND with gravel, dry to slightlymoist, brown

FILL - SILTY GRAVEL with sand, dry toslightly moist, brown

FILL - SILTY SAND with gravel, dry to slightlymoist, light brown

FILL - SILTY GRAVEL with sand, slightlymoist, brown

CONCRETE- 9 inches

30.0029.50

50/6"

22.00

10

8.50

6.00

4.00

0.75

25.00

20.50

14.80

9.85

5.004.80

14.00

28.00

SS

24.00

RS

RS

SS

RS

BS

SS

SS3

9.00

4.00

2.002.00

42

26

4

50/6"

38

50/4"

50/5"

24

8

38

17

26

25

11

50/4"

TYPE

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

REMARKS


1/23/08

LAB TESTS6 inchIncrements

BACKFILLED


SHEET 1 OF 4


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

SANDY SILT - moist, stiff, dark brown

I-15/US 95 Interchange to Craig RoadJOB DESCRIPTION

BLOW COUNT

2061.7 ft. (NAVD88)01/23/08

EXPLORATION LOG

GROUNDWATER LEVEL

PercentRecov'd

PLATE No. A-1

NO.

HAMMER DROP SYSTEM

GROUND ELEV.

USCSGroup

LOCATION

Last1 foot

END DATE

Yes

BEN1-1

PROJECT No.

1/22/08

SAMPLE

Auto Hammer


START DATE

N/M

BORING

M, G, A

2056.7

2051.7

2046.7

2041.7

2036.7

M

M

M

M, G, A

M, DS

M, D, G, A

DATE

DRILLINGMETHOD


01/23/08

DEPTH(ft)

ELEV.(ft)

NV

_DO

T 7

5084

_UP

DA

TE.G

PJ

NV

_DO

T.G

DT

5/2

1/08


50/5"

CL-ML

45.50

39.40

34.9534.50

30.50

50/6"

50/6"

50/4"

55.00

50/4"

60.00 15

14

13

12

11

109

CL

M

12

- with caliche lenses

M

M, DM, G, A

- trace caliche gravel, white to light green

49.40

- With trace caliche gravel, very moist, mediumstiff, white to light green

CH

SANDY LEAN CLAY - partially cemented,slightly moist, hard, white


- partially cemented, hard, white

SANDY SILTY CLAY with trace gravel, moist,very stiff, white to light brown


60.00

37.00

35.50

32.50

- with partially cemented lenses, hard, white

SS

CALICHE

SS

RS

RS

RSST

SS

6

59.00

54.00

49.00

44.00

39.00

34.5034.00

6

6

50/6" M, G, A, T

50/4"

10

9

50/4"

6

6

50/5"

50/6"

DATE


LAB TESTSLast1 foot

USCSGroup

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

START DATE

REMARKS


8-inch Hollow Stem Auger64075084


1/23/08


BACKFILLED


M, G, A, Co

BORING

BLOW COUNT

2061.7 ft. (NAVD88)01/23/08

EXPLORATION LOG

GROUNDWATER LEVEL

PercentRecov'd

PLATE No. A-2

NO.

N/MGROUND ELEV.

LOCATION

JOB DESCRIPTION

END DATE

Yes

BEN1-1

PROJECT No.

1/22/08

SAMPLE

Auto HammerHAMMER DROP SYSTEM

SHEET 2 OF 4

ELEV.(ft)

DEPTH(ft)

2026.7

2021.7

2016.7

2011.7

2006.7

M

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

NV

_DO

T 7

5084

_UP

DA

TE.G

PJ

NV

_DO

T.G

DT

5/2

1/08

DRILLINGMETHOD



01/23/08DATE

21

80.50

75.50

70.50

65.50

6

50/5"

3

21

9

CL

22

64.00

20

19

18

17

16

CH

CL

CH

CL

51

- very moist, green brown

- trace caliche gravel

FAT CLAY - with sand, very moist, mediumstiff, red brown

- with partially cemented lenses, hard

SANDY CLAY - very moist, stiff, light brown

FAT CLAY - with sand, very moist, soft, greenbrown

- very moist, soft, red brown

SANDY CLAY - with partially cementedlenses, very moist, stiff, brown

- with partially cemented lenses, mediumdense, brown

- partially cemented, white

84.50

- occasional partially cemented lenses, white

85.35

CLAYEY GRAVEL - with sand, occasional thincaliche lenses, moist, dense

- occasional non-cemented lenses

- partially cemented, white

SANDY LEAN CLAY with occasional partiallycemented lenses, very moist, hard, white tolight brown

90.00

86.50

82.50

79.00

75.00

89.00

- loose

RS

GC

SS

ST

SS

RS

SS

RS

1

84.5084.00

79.00

74.00

69.00

64.00

2

8

6

14

50/5"

13

3

37

3

13

2

8

2

13

3

64075084

Last1 foot

USCSGroup

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

REMARKS


START DATE


1/23/08


BACKFILLED


SHEET 3 OF 4


61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

DATE

LOCATION

BLOW COUNT

2061.7 ft. (NAVD88)01/23/08

EXPLORATION LOG

GROUNDWATER LEVEL

PercentRecov'd

PLATE No. A-3

NO.

HAMMER DROP SYSTEM

LAB TESTS

BORING

N/M

JOB DESCRIPTION

END DATE

Yes

BEN1-1

PROJECT No.

1/22/08

SAMPLE

Auto Hammer


GROUND ELEV.

1996.7

1991.7

1986.7

1981.7

1976.7

M, G, A

M

M, G, A

M

M, G, A, T

NV

_DO

T 7

5084

_UP

DA

TE.G

PJ

NV

_DO

T.G

DT

5/2

1/08

DRILLINGMETHOD



01/23/08DATE

DEPTH(ft)

ELEV.(ft)

M

1966.7

1961.7

1956.7

1951.7

1946.7

M, D


- partially cemented, white to light brown

DATE

DEPTH(ft)

ELEV.(ft)

100.50

3

4

8

4

8SANDY CLAY - very moist, very stiff, light redbrown

94.00

SS

RS

24

DEPTH (ft)

96.50

93.50

100.50

95.50

90.50

1826

4

23

CH

CL

CH

99.00


8

LAB TESTS

PROJECT No.

1/22/08

SAMPLE

Auto Hammer


N/M

END DATE

Last1 foot

USCSGroup

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

110

111

112

113

114

115

116

117

118

119

01/23/08

START DATE

BLOW COUNT

2061.7 ft. (NAVD88)01/23/08

EXPLORATION LOG

GROUNDWATER LEVEL

PercentRecov'd

BEN1-1

NO.

YesHAMMER DROP SYSTEM

GROUND ELEV.

BORING

LOCATION

JOB DESCRIPTION

PLATE No. A-4

DRILLINGMETHOD

ELEV. (ft)

NV

_DO

T 7

5084

_UP

DA

TE.G

PJ

NV

_DO

T.G

DT

5/2

1/08

BACKFILLED

REMARKS



1/23/08

6 inchIncrements


SHEET 4 OF 4


91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

110

111

112

113

114

115

116

117

118

119


TYPE

Attachment 1(b)

Boring Logs

Black Eagle Consultants, Inc. (2006)

Attachment 2

Laboratory Results

Attachment 2(a)

Laboratory Results

North Corridor Constructors (2008)

SUMMARY OF LABORATORY RESULTSI-15 OVER UPRR SPUR TRACK (G-941)

I-15 NORTH, US-95 INTERCHANGE TO CRAIG ROAD DESIGN BUILD PROJECT

S.NO Exploration No.

Depth1

(ft)Elevation

(ft) Geologic Formation Soil2 or Rock DescriptionType of

SamplingBlowCount

Field Dry Density

(pcf)

Field Moisture Content

(%)

Compaction

Grain Size (GR:SD:FN)3

(%)

Percent PassingNo. 200

Sieve

Atterberg Limits

Expansion Index

Consolidation

R-Value Sand Eq.

Corrosivity Direct Shear Test UU test

Max. Dy Density

(pcf)OMC (%)

Liquid Limit (%)

Plastic Limit (%)

Plasticity Index (%)

Undisturbed

pHMinimum Resistivity (Ohm-cm)

Sulfate Content (ppm)

Chloride Content (ppm)

Ultimate Cohesion

(psf)

Ultimate Friction Angle (deg)

Sample Type

Undrained Shear Strength

Cce Cre Peak(ksf)

Ultimate(ksf)

1

BW

1-1

0-5 2066.8 Fill Silty gravel with sand BS 362-3.5 Fill Silty gravel with sand SPT 24 1.44-5.5 Fill Silty sand with gravel Ring 23 2.9 43:44:13 13 NP NP NP

9-10.5 Fill Silty sand with gravel SPT 29 6.614-15.5 Fill Silty, clayey sand with gravel Ring 36 112.9 7.1 18:52:30 30 19 15 4 1,258 25 Ring Sample19-20 Fill Silty sand SPT 50/6" 6.1

24-25.5 Fill Silty sand Ring 84/11.5" 118.1 4.829-30.5 CL Sandy clay SPT 37 2134-35.5 CL Sandy lean clay Ring 39 106.8 12.2 1:32:67 67 45 15 30 √ √39-40.5 CL Sandy lean clay SPT 40 11.7 8.72 740 179 40044-45.5 SC-SM Silty, clayey sand with gravel Ring 68 11.5 20:41:39 39 18 14 4 5.5 5.549-49.5 CL Sandy clay SPT 50/6" 9.2

54 Caliche Ring 50/0"59-60.5 SC Clayey sand with caliche gravel SPT 29 20.8 19:32:49 49 49 22 2764-65.5 CL Sandy clay Ring 4269-70 GC Clayey gravel with sand Shelby

70-71.5 GC Clayey gravel with sand Ring 38 16.9 34:22:44 44 32 15 17 2.7 2.774-74.5 GC Clayey gravel with sand SPT 50/6"79-80.5 CL Sandy clay Ring 1984-86 CH Fat clay with sand Shelby 50.9 7:19:74 74 71 30 41

86-87.5 CH Fat clay with sand Ring 2789-90.5 CH Fat clay with sand SPT 4394-95.5 CL Sandy clay Ring 41

2

BW

1-2

2-5 2064.1 Fill Silty sand with gravel BS 129.5 9.0 782-3 Fill Silty sand with gravel SPT 50/4" 5.3 31:54:15 15 NP NP NP4-5 Fill Sandy silt with gravel Ring 50/6" 121.4 1.9

9-9.5 Fill Silty sand with gravel SPT 50/6" 4.3 19:57:24 24 NP NP NP14-14.5 Fill Sandy silt with gravel Ring 50/6"19-20 Fill Silty sand with gravel SPT 50/6" 3.2 33:52:15 15 NP NP NP

24-25.5 Fill Silty sand Ring 50/5" 112.2 11.229-30.5 Fill Sandy clay SPT 15 23.634-35.5 CL Lean clay with sand Ring 32 112.8 16.3 4:21:75 75 30 18 12 √ √39-39.5 CL Lean clay with sand SPT 50/6" 12.744-45.5 SC Clayey sand with gravel Ring 27 17.4 19:39:42 42 24 13 11 1.5 1.5

49-49.25 SC Clayey sand with gravel SPT 50/3" 5.654-55.5 SC-SM Silty clayey sand Ring 42 16.2 0:53:47 47 21 15 6 1.8 1.859-60.5 CL Sandy clay SPT 25 18.464-65 CH Sandy fat clay with gravel Shelby 32.6 15:29:56 56 51 23 28

65-65.5 CH Sandy fat clay with gravel Ring 50/5" 20.269-70.5 SC Clayey sand with gravel SPT 8 43.1 21:38:41 41 53 21 3274-75.5 SC Clayey sand with gravel Ring 16 81.5 38.279-80.5 CL Sandy lean clay with caliche gravel SPT 12 20.3 2:32:66 66 35 20 1584-85.5 CL Sandy lean clay with caliche gravel Ring 20 28.289-90.5 CH Sandy fat clay SPT 3 69.8 5:44:51 51 77 27 5094-95.5 CL Sandy clay Shelby 33.695.5-97 CL Sandy clay Ring 22 24.6

3

BE

N1-

1

2-5 2061.7 Fill Silty gravel with sand BS2-3.5 Fill Silty gravel with sand SPT 50 4.3 428 30 Remolded, Saturated4-5 Fill Silty sand Ring 50/4" 1.4 5:59:36 36 16 13 3

9-10 Fill Silty sand SPT 50/5" 1.414-15 Fill Silty sand Ring 50/4" 1.5 26:52:22 22 NP NP NP

19-20.5 Fill Silty gravel with sand SPT 80 3.124-25 Fill Silty sand with gravel Ring 50/6" 117.1 6.5 18:59:23 23 17 14 3

29-30.5 CH Fat clay with sand SPT 10 22.834-34.5 CL-ML Sandy silty clay Shelby 12.2 11:37:52 52 21 17 434.5-35 CL-ML Sandy silty clay Ring 50/5" 104.1 9.539-40.5 CL Sandy lean clay SPT 50/4" 15.244-45.5 CL Sandy lean clay Ring 12 99.3 26.4 11:27:62 62 37 23 14 √ √49-49.5 CL Sandy lean clay SPT 50/4" 11.854-55.5 CL Sandy lean clay Ring 50/6" 109.6 18.4 0:38:62 62 35 14 21 2.5 2.559-60.5 CL Sandy lean clay SPT 50/6" 17.764-65.5 GC Clayey gravel with sand Ring 51 117.5 13.7 46:32:22 22 29 18 11 9.6 9.369-70.5 GC Clayey gravel with sand SPT 9 90.474-75.5 GC Clayey gravel with sand Ring 2179-80.5 CH Fat clay with sand SPT 3 67.0 2:23:75 75 70 25 4584-84.5 CL Sandy clay Shelby 98.0 21.6

84.5-85.5 CL Sandy clay Ring 50/5"89-90.5 CH Fat clay with sand SPT 6 51.6 1:19:80 80 63 20 4394-95.5 CL Sandy clay Ring 26 63.4 45.4

99-100.5 CH Fat clay with sand SPT 8 71.5

34.0

49.0

CL679.530 106.845 60BW1-121.029.0BW1-1

0.38532

15

18

BW1-1

11.5SC-SM3937.5

12.2

14

24.0

44.0BW1-111.739.0BW1-1

0.531

4

NP6.69.0BW1-12.9SM

118.1

50.8

19

NPNP4.0BW1-11.42.0

13

7.1

9.2

BW1-16.119.0BW1-1

0.448BW1-1 112.914.0 SC-SM3019415

4.8

42

BW1-1

Borehole LiquidLimit

WaterContent

(%)

MaximumSize(mm)

Sheet 1 of 1

Dry UnitWeight(pcf)

Client: North Corridor ConstructorsProject: Interstate-15 Design BuildSite: I-15/US 95 Interchange to Craig RoadJob #: 64075084 PLATE: B-1

Depth(ft)

DerivedSaturation

(%)

DerivedVoidRatio

SUMMARY OF LABORATORY RESULTS

PlasticLimit

USCSClass-ification

4917153270.0BW1-1

SCGC

25.427224959.0BW1-1 20.8

41

TC_L

AB

_SU

MM

AR

Y 7

5084

.GP

J T

ER

RA

CO

N.G

DT

4/2

/08

%<#200Sieve

PlasticityIndex

50.9CH37.519

44307184.0BW1-1

16.974

95

1911132444.0BW1-212.739.0

34.0 0.449

17.4

112.816.3CL7612.51218

28

BW1-2

4.75

BW1-2

5164.0BW1-218.459.0BW1-216.2

42

47

SC

6152154.0BW1-25.649.0BW1-2

BW1-2

SC-SM

BW1-2NPNPNP9.0BW1-2

0.34715121.4

30

4.0SM

5.3SM1525.4NPNPNP2.01.9

SM

23.629.0BW1-20.45664112.211.224.0

193.2

241525.4NPNPNP19.0BW1-2

4.3

25.4

BW1-2

WaterContent

(%)

MaximumSize(mm)

Sheet 1 of 1

Dry UnitWeight(pcf)

BW1-2

LiquidLimit

%<#200Sieve

PlasticityIndex

24.695.5BW1-233.6

23

DerivedVoidRatio


DerivedSaturation

(%)


PlasticLimit

USCSClass-ification

Depth(ft)Borehole

69.8

5381.538.274.0BW1-2

43.1SC4125.4

94.0

21

BW1-2

69.0BW1-220.265.0BW1-232.6CH56

32

BW1-2CH511950277789.0BW1-2

100

84.0

1.00520.3CL6612.515203579.0

TC_L

AB

_SU

MM

AR

Y 7

5084

.GP

J T

ER

RA

CO

N.G

DT

4/2

/08

28.2

BEN1-1

BEN1-115.239.0BEN1-1

0.57143104.1

BEN1-1

34.5

23

12.2CL-ML5212.54172134.09.5

49.018.4CL629.521143554.0

44.011.8

37BEN1-1

99.326.4CL6212.514

29.0

BEN1-1

36

BEN1-1

NPNP14.0BEN1-11.49.0BEN1-1

19

SM

22

12.5313164.0BEN1-14.32.01.4

14

17.7

BEN1-10.39643117.16.5SM23

NP

322.8

1724.0BEN1-13.119.0BEN1-11.5SM

19

75

WaterContent

(%)

MaximumSize(mm)

Sheet 1 of 1

LiquidLimit

%<#200Sieve

PlasticityIndex

71.599.0BEN1-1

BEN1-1

Dry UnitWeight(pcf)

DerivedVoidRatio


DerivedSaturation

(%)

63.4


PlasticLimit

USCSClass-ification

Depth(ft)Borehole

GC

1.577

45257079.0BEN1-190.469.0

75

13.7

CH

227511182964.0BEN1-1

TC_L

AB

_SU

MM

AR

Y 7

5084

.GP

J T

ER

RA

CO

N.G

DT

4/2

/08

BEN1-1

89.045.494.0BEN1-151.6CH809.543

9.5

63

59.0

BEN1-10.6688598.021.684.0BEN1-1

67.0

20

0.1702.995

864

0.081

100SANDGRAVELCOBBLES

50

fine

0.216

%Sand

3

Classification WC%

4 2

10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001

20

100

80

70

60

50

30

10

0

40

90

32.2

1.5

38.765.610.376.376.08

52.6

1/2

41.132.2

PI Cc

43.7

CuPL

coarse

19.00

LL

49

4.0 ft.14.0 ft.34.0 ft.44.0 ft.59.0 ft.

NP19

D15

18

30

NP15151422

2.97.117.911.520.8

45

HYDROMETER

19.89.5037.5025.40

%Gravel

U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS

50.80

PE

RC

EN

T FI

NE

R B

Y W

EIG

HT

GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS

NP430427

14 16 20U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES

4.0 ft.

49.1Client:

Date

100

BW1-1 @BW1-1 @BW1-1 @BW1-1 @BW1-1 @


14.0 ft.34.0 ft.44.0 ft.59.0 ft.

Project No. 64075084

13.229.667.2

Project Site

6

SILTY SAND with GRAVEL SMSILTY, CLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL SC-SM

SANDY LEAN CLAY CLSILTY, CLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL SC-SM

CLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL SC

B-2

fine

PE

RC

EN

T C

OA

RS

ER

BY

WE

IGH

T

Specimen Identification


1 3/4

SIEVE ANALYSES

medium

39.1


D85 D50

10

0.0863

North Corridor Constructors

SILT OR CLAY

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

70 100 14040

43.117.80.6

March 2008

BW1-1 @BW1-1 @BW1-1 @BW1-1 @BW1-1 @

%Silt

Project:

18.7

20033/8

coarse

%Clay

D100

3

0.169

6 82

SAND

4

COBBLES

50

GRAVEL

4

WC%Classification

%Sand

fine

30

40

50

60

70

80

10

100

0100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001

90

20

1/21.5

10.810.49

21.9

coarse

7.1

LL PL Cu70.0 ft.

40

14 16 20 30

D15

18.7

PE

RC

EN

T FI

NE

R B

Y W

EIG

HT

84.0 ft.3271

1530

16.950.9

PI Cc

37.50

17


%Gravel

U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS HYDROMETER40

19.00

100

3/4

SIEVE ANALYSES64075084 Date

BW1-1 @BW1-1 @

Project Site I-15/US 95 Interchange to Craig Road

70.0 ft.84.0 ft.

33.6

Client:

March 2008

6

CLAYEY GRAVEL with SAND GC

1



fine

PE

RC

EN

T C

OA

RS

ER

BY

WE

IGH

T

44.5

FAT CLAY with SAND CH

SILT OR CLAY

Project: Interstate-15 Design Build

D85 D50

10

Project No.


%Clay

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

medium

70 100 140

74.2

B-3

BW1-1 @BW1-1 @

D100

20033/8

coarse

%Silt

6 8

1.5920.6011.076

SAND

4

COBBLES

50

fine

0.100

3 2

%Sand

Classification WC%

4

GRAVEL100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001

20

90

80

70

60

50

30

10

0

40

100

52.2

1.5

8.825.8810.030.156.26

56.5

1/2

20.838.8

PI Cc

53.9

CuPL

coarse

19.00

LL

24

2.0 ft.9.0 ft.

19.0 ft.34.0 ft.44.0 ft.

NPNP

D15

30

30

NPNPNP1813

5.34.33.216.517.4

NP

HYDROMETER

3.725.4012.5019.00

%Gravel


25.40

PE

RC

EN

T FI

NE

R B

Y W

EIG

HT


NPNPNP1211


9.0 ft.

B-2Date

100

BW1-2 @BW1-2 @BW1-2 @BW1-2 @BW1-2 @

Project Site

2.0 ft.

19.0 ft.34.0 ft.44.0 ft.


14.724.214.875.5

I-15/US 95 Interchange to Craig RoadMarch 2008

6

SILTY SAND with GRAVEL SMSILTY SAND with GRAVEL SMSILTY SAND with GRAVEL SM

LEAN CLAY with SAND CLCLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL SC

Client:

BW1-2 @

fine

PE

RC

EN

T C

OA

RS

ER

BY

WE

IGH

T



1 3/4

SIEVE ANALYSES

medium

41.7

D85 D50

10

0.0767

0.0757

North Corridor ConstructorsProject:

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

SILT OR CLAY

70 100 14040

31.319.333.0

200

BW1-2 @BW1-2 @BW1-2 @BW1-2 @

%SiltD100


19.6

33/8

coarse

%Clay

Classification WC%

%Sand

4

GRAVELfine

50

COBBLES

0.01SAND

4 6 8

2

0.080

0.122

3

1

80

0

10

20

30

40

50

70

90

100

0.0010.110

60

100

28.7

1.5

0.184.868.210.46

coarse

53.4

1/2

38.131.844.2

PI Cc

4.60.50

PLLL

4.75

Cu

77

54.0 ft.64.0 ft.69.0 ft.79.0 ft.89.0 ft.

2151

D15

35

30

1523212027

16.232.643.120.369.8

53

HYDROMETER

25.4025.4012.5019.00

%Gravel


2.5

PE

RC

EN

T FI

NE

R B

Y W

EIG

HT


628321550


Project Site

41.4

Client:

Date

100

BW1-2 @BW1-2 @BW1-2 @

SIEVE ANALYSESBW1-2 @


54.0 ft.64.0 ft.69.0 ft.79.0 ft.89.0 ft.


46.6

BW1-2 @

March 2008

6

SILTY, CLAYEY SAND SC-SMSANDY FAT CLAY with GRAVEL CH

CLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL SCSANDY LEAN CLAY CL

65.7

fine

PE

RC

EN

T C

OA

RS

ER

BY

WE

IGH

T



1 3/4

SANDY FAT CLAY CH

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

56.1

SILT OR CLAY


D85 D50

10


medium

70 100 14040

0.015.220.5

D100

51.2

B-3

BW1-2 @BW1-2 @BW1-2 @BW1-2 @BW1-2 @

%Silt

20033/8

coarse

%Clay

SAND

0.2190.3320.167

84 6

COBBLES

50

Classification

3 2

fine

WC%

4

GRAVEL

%Sand

6

100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.0010

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

36.4

1.5

2.308.916.042.542.82

58.912.50

58.7

coarse

26.8

PI Cc

52.2

LL Cu

1/2

19.00

PL134.0 ft.

14.0 ft.24.0 ft.34.0 ft.44.0 ft.

16NP17

37

30

NP141723

1.41.56.512.226.4

21

PE

RC

EN

T FI

NE

R B

Y W

EIG

HT

19.0012.5012.50

%Gravel

U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES HYDROMETER

D15


3NP3514

14 16 20U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS

24.0 ft.

Date

100

BEN1-1 @BEN1-1 @BEN1-1 @BEN1-1 @BEN1-1 @

Project Site I-15/US 95 Interchange to Craig RoadB-2

14.0 ft.

34.0 ft.44.0 ft.


35.921.823.552.3

4.0 ft.

March 2008

SILTY SAND SMSILTY SAND with GRAVEL SMSILTY SAND with GRAVEL SM

SANDY SILTY CLAY CL-MLSANDY LEAN CLAY CL

Client:

fine

PE

RC

EN

T C

OA

RS

ER

BY

WE

IGH

T



1 3/4

SIEVE ANALYSES

BEN1-1 @

100


D85 D50

10


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

61.8

70

14040

5.226.017.811.211.4

medium

200

BEN1-1 @BEN1-1 @BEN1-1 @BEN1-1 @

%SiltD100

Project:

SILT OR CLAY

33/8

coarse

%Clay

GRAVEL

Classification WC%

4

%Sand

1432.9

fine

3.253

50

1SAND

4 6 8

2

0.043

3

100

90

10

20

30

40

50

60

80

100

0.0010.010.110

70

0

COBBLES

0.12

1/2

coarse

1.5

37.84

0.11

38.132.323.018.6

PI

0.15

1.81.6

LL PL Cu

70

Cc

30

D15

54.0 ft.64.0 ft.79.0 ft.89.0 ft.

16

29

14

63

14182520

18.413.767.051.6

35

9.5075.009.509.50

5.15

20U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS HYDROMETER

PE

RC

EN

T FI

NE

R B

Y W

EIG

HT


21104543

%Gravel

BEN1-1 @

11.8

SIEVE ANALYSESClient:

Date

100

BEN1-1 @

3/4

BEN1-1 @

1

Project Site I-15/US 95 Interchange to Craig Road

54.0 ft.64.0 ft.79.0 ft.89.0 ft.


45.8BEN1-1 @

6

SANDY LEAN CLAY CLCLAYEY GRAVEL with SAND GC


75.3

fine

PE

RC

EN

T C

OA

RS

ER

BY

WE

IGH

T




27.8


D85 D50

10

0.020133.7


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

medium

70 100 14040

March 2008

10.1

79.9

B-3

BEN1-1 @BEN1-1 @BEN1-1 @BEN1-1 @

SILT OR CLAY

D1000.4

20033/8

coarse

%Clay

%Silt

CH

Specimen Identification PI

LIQUID LIMIT

CL-ML

PL

60

40

20

0

100

120

LL

80

140

100806040200

SILTY, CLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL(SC-SM)

BW1-1

PLASTICITY

INDEX

FAT CLAY with SAND(CH)

CLAYEY GRAVEL with SAND(GC)

CLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL(SC)

13

SANDY LEAN CLAY(CL)

BW1-1

SILTY SAND with GRAVEL(SM)

74

44

49

39

67

SILTY, CLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL(SC-SM)

MH


BW1-1

BW1-1

ML

CL

BW1-1

BW1-1

BW1-1

41

44.0ft

32

49

18

45

19

NP

84.0ft

30

59.0ft

34.0ft

14.0ft

4.0ft

ATTERBERG LIMITS RESULTS

Classification%Fines

TC_A

TTE

RB

ER

G_L

IMIT

S 7

5084

.GP

J T

ER

RA

CO

N.G

DT

3/2

5/08

70.0ft

14

17

27

4

30

4

NP

3071

22

15

15

NP

15

CL-ML

CH

2.0ft


Classification%FinesSpecimen Identification

LIQUID LIMIT

PI

80

60

40

20

0

0

19.0ft

34.0ft

PL

100

14012010080604020

LL

LEAN CLAY with SAND(CL)

BW1-2

PLASTICITY

INDEX

SANDY FAT CLAY(CH)

SANDY LEAN CLAY(CL)


SANDY FAT CLAY with GRAVEL(CH)

9.0ft


BW1-2




51

66

41

56

47

42

SILTY, CLAYEY SAND(SC-SM)


BW1-2

ML

BW1-2

CL

BW1-2

BW1-2

BW1-2

BW1-2

BW1-2

BW1-2

24

MH

30 76

77

35

53

51

24

NP

NP

NP

NP

89.0ft

79.0ft

69.0ft

64.0ft

54.0ft

44.0ft

21

NP

TC_A

TTE

RB

ER

G_L

IMIT

S 7

5084

.GP

J T

ER

RA

CO

N.G

DT

3/2

5/08

15

50

15

32

28

6

11

12

NP

15

27

20

21

23

15

13

18

NP

NP

NP

CL-ML

CH

Classification%FinesSpecimen Identification PI

LIQUID LIMIT

60

40

20

0

100

140

14.0ft

PLLL

80

120100806040200


BEN1-1

PLASTICITY

INDEX



CLAYEY GRAVEL with SAND(GC)

SANDY LEAN CLAY(CL)


SANDY SILTY CLAY(CL-ML)BEN1-1


SILTY SAND(SM)

80

75

22

62

62

52

SANDY LEAN CLAY(CL)

ML


BEN1-1

MH

BEN1-1

CL

BEN1-1

BEN1-1

BEN1-1

BEN1-1

BEN1-1

36

NP

23

63

70

29

35

37

17

16

89.0ft

79.0ft

64.0ft

54.0ft

44.0ft

34.0ft

24.0ft

TC_A

TTE

RB

ER

G_L

IMIT

S 7

5084

.GP

J T

ER

RA

CO

N.G

DT

3/2

5/08

21

20

4.0ft

43

45

11

21

14

4

3

3

22

25

18

14

23

17

14

NP

13

NP

Project Name: Tested by: A. Santos Date: 01/20/08Project No: 64075084 Checked by: J. Ward Date: 01/29/08Boring No.: BW1-1 @ 45 ft. Sample Type: RingsSample No.: N/A Depth(ft): 44Sample Description:

1 2.4082 2.4103 2.414

Average 2.4111 5.0152 5.0353 5.027

Average 5.026

829.500.00

1076.60976.40108.102.7020.150.045

11.54 76.47123.5 20.150.364 96.6285.6 14.53

* Stress values have been corrected for membrane effects

Minor principal total stress (psi) Major principal total stress (psi) Axial strain (%)

Moisture Content (%)Dry Density (pcf)Void Ratio% Saturation

Specific Gravity (assumed)Confining Pressure (psi)Rate of Deformation (in/min)

Deviator stress (psi)

Diameter (in)

Height (in)

Sample Properties At Failure*

Weight of Container (g)

I-15 Design Build

Weight of Sample + Tube / Rings (g)Weight of Tube / Rings (g)Weight of Wet Sample + Container (g)Weight of Dry Sample + Container (g)

Unconsolidated-Undrained TriaxialCompression Test on Cohesive Soils

ASTM D 2850

White silty, clayey sand with gravel (SC-SM)g (with CaCO3, strong reaction to HCl)

Stress - Strain Curve

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0Axial Strain (%)

Dev

iato

r St

ress

(ps

i)

At end of test x = 14.92, y = 76.31

PLATE: B-8


1 2.4202 2.4183 2.421

Average 2.4201 5.3082 5.3033 5.304

Average 5.305

848.300.00

1055.90919.40110.402.7031.250.045

16.87 37.04113.4 31.250.486 68.2993.7 15.08






Diameter (in)

Height (in)



I-15 Design Build



ASTM D 2850

Yellowish white clayey gravel with sand (GC)s (with CaCO3, strong reaction to HCl)


0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

40.0

0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0Axial Strain (%)

Dev

iato

r St

ress

(ps

i) At end of test x = 15.08,y = 37.04

PLATE: B-9


1 2.4152 2.4123 2.411

Average 2.4131 4.9492 4.9453 4.947

Average 4.947

785.400.00

1021.20885.80108.802.7020.10.045

17.43 20.38112.7 20.100.495 40.4895.0 15.16






Diameter (in)

Height (in)



I-15 Design Build



ASTM D 2850

Very light olive clayey sand with gravel (SC)g (with CaCO3, strong reaction to HCl)


0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0Axial Strain (%)

Dev

iato

r St

ress

(ps

i)

At end of testx = 15.16,y = 20.38

PLATE: B-7

Project Name: Tested by: A. Santos Date: 02/25/08Project No: 64075084 Checked by: J. Ward Date: 02/28/08Boring No.: BEN1-1 @ 55 ft. Sample Type: RingsSample No.: N/A Depth(ft): 55Sample Description:

Note: height-to-diameter ratio = 1.891 2.4002 2.4023 2.403

Average 2.4021 4.5432 4.5433 4.546

Average 4.544

701.400.00

1006.20866.50107.702.7025.00.045

18.41 34.60109.6 25.000.537 59.6092.6 15.41






Diameter (in)

Height (in)



I-15 Design Build


Yellow sandy lean clay s(CL) (with CaCO3, strong reaction to HCl)


ASTM D 2850


0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

40.0

0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0Axial Strain (%)

Dev

iato

r St

ress

(ps

i)

At end of testx = 15.41,y = 34.60

PLATE: B-8

Project Name: Tested by: A. Santos Date: 02/25/08Project No: 64075084 Checked by: J. Ward Date: 02/28/08Boring No.: BEN1-1 @ 65 ft. Sample Type: RingsSample No.: N/A Depth(ft): 65Sample Description:

Note: height-to-diameter ratio = 1.9151 2.3992 2.3983 2.400

Average 2.3991 4.5962 4.5963 4.596

Average 4.596

1211.70483.40928.00829.40106.902.7029.20.045

13.65 133.02117.5 29.200.434 162.2285.0 8.49



ASTM D 2850

Yellow clayey gravel with sand (GC)s (with CaCO3, strong reaction to HCl)


I-15 Design Build




Diameter (in)

Height (in)





0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

140.0

0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0Axial Strain (%)

Dev

iato

r St

ress

(ps

i) At end of testx = 15.23,y = 129.84

PLATE: B-9


1 2.4002 2.4013 2.405

Average 2.4021 5.0222 5.0223 5.020

Average 5.021

809.900.00

1057.50925.80110.202.7025.00.045

16.15 25.59116.8 25.000.443 50.5998.4 15.14



ASTM D 2850

White silty, clayey sand (SC-SM) (with CaCO3, strong reaction to HCl)


I-15 Design Build




Diameter (in)

Height (in)





0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0Axial Strain (%)

Dev

iato

r St

ress

(ps

i)

At end of testx = 15.14,y = 25.59

PLATE: B-8

2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000

DIRECT SHEAR TEST

2,000

ULT

IMA

TE S

HEA

R S

TREN

GTH

, psf 2,500

0

500

1,000

500

2,000

1,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

0 1,000

1,500

Sample Condition


14.0 ft

NORMAL STRESS, psf

BW1-1 @

Project: Interstate-15 Design BuildLocation: I-15/US 95 Interchange to Craig RoadClient: North Corridor ConstructorsProject No.: 64075084 PLATE: B-5

4.3 1382 1258

Initial DryDensity (pcf)

Final MoistureContent (%)

Peak FrictionAngle (degree)

PeakCohesion (psf)

UltimateCohesion (psf)

Ring sample 112.9 2524

TC_D

IRE

CT_

SH

EA

R 7

5084

.GP

J T

ER

RA

CO

N.G

DT

4/1

/08

Ultimate FrictionAngle (degree)

2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000

DIRECT SHEAR TEST

2,000

ULT

IMA

TE S

HEA

R S

TREN

GTH

, psf 2,500

0

500

1,000

500

2,000

1,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

0 1,000

1,500

Sample Condition


2.0 ft

NORMAL STRESS, psf

BEN1-1 @


14.3 428 428


Final MoistureContent (%)

Peak FrictionAngle (degree)

PeakCohesion (psf)

UltimateCohesion (psf)

Remolded, Saturated 115.7 3030

TC_D

IRE

CT_

SH

EA

R 7

5084

.GP

J T

ER

RA

CO

N.G

DT

4/1

/08

Ultimate FrictionAngle (degree)

BW1-1 @

8

9

10

psf2000

6

106.8

5

Ring sample19.3112.612.2

10 100

Inundation at

7

105

0

1

2

3

4

TC_C

ON

SO

L_S

TRA

IN 7

5084

.GP

J T

ER

RA

CO

N.G

DT

4/1

/08


1,000


CONSOLIDATION TEST

AX

IAL

STR

AIN

, %

PRESSURE, psf

34 ft.

Specimen ID NotesFinal WaterContent (%)

Final DryDensity (pcf)

Initial WaterContent (%)

10,000

0.425

0.430

0.435

0.440

0.445

0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0

Square Root of Time (min^0.5)

Dia

l Rea

ding

(inc

h)

Time Reading @ 4.0 ksfBW1-1 @ 34.0 ft.

PLATE: B-7

BW1-2 @

8

9

10

psf2000

6

112.9

5

Ring Sample15.5119.516.3

10 100

Inundation at

7

105

0

1

2

3

4

TC_C

ON

SO

L_S

TRA

IN 7

5084

.GP

J T

ER

RA

CO

N.G

DT

4/1

/08


1,000


CONSOLIDATION TEST

AX

IAL

STR

AIN

, %

PRESSURE, psf

34 ft.




10,000

0.390

0.395

0.400

0.405

0.410

0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0


Dia

l Rea

ding

(inc

h)

Time Reading @ 4.0 ksfBW1-2 @ 34.0 ft.

PLATE: B-6

BEN1-1 @

16

18

20

psf2000

12

99.3

10

Ring Sample21.8109.026.4

10 100

Inundation at

14

105

0

2

4

6

8

TC_C

ON

SO

L_S

TRA

IN 7

5084

.GP

J T

ER

RA

CO

N.G

DT

4/1

/08


1,000


CONSOLIDATION TEST

AX

IAL

STR

AIN

, %

PRESSURE, psf

44 ft.




10,000

0.280

0.285

0.290

0.295

0.300

0.305

0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0


Dia

l Rea

ding

(inc

h)

Time Reading @ 4.0 ksfBEN1-1 @ 44.0 ft.

PLATE: B-7

I-15 Design Build Project

Terracon Project No.: 64075084

R-Value Test Results

Segment 1

Boring No. R Value

BW1-1 36

BW1-2 78

144

126

128

130

132

134

136

138

146

150


148

142

102

124

140

104

106

122

108

110

112

114

116

118

120

100

pcf

Test Method

Optimum Water Content

Source of MaterialDescription of Material

Curves of 100% Saturationfor Specific Gravity Equal to:

TEST RESULTS

Maximum (optimum) Dry Unit Weight

HA

RV

AR

D M

INIA

TUR

E 7

5084

SW

ELL

.GP

J T

ER

RA

CO

N.G

DT

5/5

/08

0 5 10 15 20 25

BW1- 2 2.0 ft

9.0

MOISTURE-DENSITY RELATIONSHIP

Silty Sand with Gravel

%

WATER CONTENT, %

DR

Y U

NIT

WE

IGH

T, p

cf

2.80

2.70

2.60

Nev T101 E

129.5

Attachment 2(b)

Laboratory Results

Black Eagle Consultants, Inc. (2006)

Attachment 3

Results of Analyses

Axial Pile Capacity Analyses

Foundation Recommendation BW1, I-15 Widening over UPRR Spur Track

Pile Data Table (10/17/08)

Location Pile Size and

Type

Pile Cut-off

Elevation (feet)

Allowable Axial Capacity in

Compression (kips)

Ultimate Axial Capacity in

Compression (kips)

Design Tip Elevation

(feet) a


2054.9 290 580 2025


2041.0 1100 2200 1986


2038.0 1050 2100 1983


2052.4 270 540 2019

Notes: a Pile tip elevations should be adjusted based on pile cut-off elevation to provide the minimum recommended pile length.

VERTICALLY LOADED DRILLED SHAFT ANALYSIS PROGRAM SHAFT VERSION 5.0 (C) COPYRIGHT ENSOFT,INC. 1989,1995,1998,2001,2003 I-15 D/B, BW-1, UPRR Over Track 801, Piles @ Abutment 1, D=3 ft PROPOSED DEPTH = 35.0 FT ---------------- NUMBER OF LAYERS = 4 ------------------ WATER TABLE DEPTH = 35.0 FT. ------------------- FACTOR OF SAFETY APPLIED TO THE TOTAL ULTIMATE CAPACITY = 2.00 ------------------------------------------------------- FACTOR OF SAFETY APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE BASE CAPACITY = 2.00 ------------------------------------------------------ SOIL INFORMATION --------------- LAYER NO 1----SAND AT THE TOP SKIN FRICTION COEFFICIENT- BETA = 0.120E+01 UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.000E+00 INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.340E+02 BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00 SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.125E+03 MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11 DEPTH, FT = 0.000E+00 AT THE BOTTOM SKIN FRICTION COEFFICIENT- BETA = 0.912E+00 UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.000E+00 INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.340E+02 BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00 SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.125E+03 MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11 DEPTH, FT = 0.190E+02 LAYER NO 2----CLAY AT THE TOP

STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR-ALPHA = 0.464E+00 END BEARING COEFFICIENT-Nc = 0.700E+01 UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.500E+04 INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.000E+00 BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00 SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.120E+03 MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11 DEPTH, FT = 0.190E+02 AT THE BOTTOM STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR-ALPHA = 0.464E+00 END BEARING COEFFICIENT-Nc = 0.700E+01 UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.500E+04 INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.000E+00 BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00 SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.120E+03 MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11 DEPTH, FT = 0.420E+02 LAYER NO 3----CLAY AT THE TOP STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR-ALPHA = 0.550E+00 END BEARING COEFFICIENT-Nc = 0.700E+01 UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+05 INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.000E+00 BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00 SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.125E+03 MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11 DEPTH, FT = 0.420E+02 AT THE BOTTOM STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR-ALPHA = 0.550E+00 END BEARING COEFFICIENT-Nc = 0.700E+01 UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+05 INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.000E+00 BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00 SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.125E+03 MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11 DEPTH, FT = 0.500E+02 LAYER NO 4----CLAY AT THE TOP STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR-ALPHA = 0.535E+00 END BEARING COEFFICIENT-Nc = 0.700E+01 UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.350E+04 INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.000E+00 BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00

SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.120E+03 MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11 DEPTH, FT = 0.500E+02 AT THE BOTTOM STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR-ALPHA = 0.535E+00 END BEARING COEFFICIENT-Nc = 0.700E+01 UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.350E+04 INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.000E+00 BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00 SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.120E+03 MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11 DEPTH, FT = 0.670E+02 DRILLED SHAFT INFORMATION ------------------------- DIAMETER OF STEM = 3.000 FT. DIAMETER OF BASE = 3.000 FT. END OF STEM TO BASE = 0.000 FT. ANGLE OF BELL = 0.000 DEG. IGNORED TOP PORTION = 5.000 FT. IGNORED BOTTOM PORTION = 3.000 FT. AREA OF ONE PERCENT STEEL = 10.180 SQ.IN. ELASTIC MODULUS, Ec = 0.360E+07 LB/SQ IN VOLUME OF UNDERREAM = 0.000 CU.YDS. PREDICTED RESULTS ----------------- QS = ULTIMATE SIDE RESISTANCE; QB = ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE; WT = WEIGHT OF DRILLED SHAFT (FOR UPLIFT CAPACITY ONLY); QU = TOTAL ULTIMATE RESISTANCE; QBD = TOTAL ALLOWABLE LOAD USING A FACTOR OF SAFETY APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE; QDN = TOTAL ALLOWABLE LOAD USING FACTORS OF SAFETY APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE SIDE RESISTANCE AND THE ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE. LENGTH VOLUME QS QB QU QBD QDN QU/VOLUME (FEET) (CU.YDS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS/CU.YDS) 9.0 2.36 4.13 33.44 37.58 20.85 18.79 15.95 10.0 2.62 8.85 35.96 44.80 26.82 22.40 17.11 11.0 2.88 14.12 38.47 52.59 33.35 26.29 18.26 12.0 3.14 19.92 40.98 60.91 40.41 30.45 19.38 13.0 3.40 26.24 43.50 69.74 47.99 34.87 20.49 14.0 3.67 33.06 69.09 102.15 67.61 51.08 27.87 15.0 3.93 40.36 97.44 137.80 89.08 68.90 35.09

16.0 4.19 48.12 128.48 176.60 112.36 88.30 42.16 17.0 4.45 56.33 148.95 205.27 130.80 102.64 46.12 18.0 4.71 64.96 159.06 224.03 144.49 112.01 47.53 19.0 4.97 74.01 159.06 233.07 153.54 116.54 46.85 20.0 5.24 83.46 159.06 242.52 162.99 121.26 46.31 21.0 5.50 93.29 159.06 252.35 172.82 126.18 45.90 22.0 5.76 103.49 159.06 262.56 183.03 131.28 45.58 23.0 6.02 114.42 159.06 273.49 193.96 136.74 45.41 24.0 6.28 125.35 159.06 284.42 204.88 142.21 45.26 25.0 6.55 136.28 159.06 295.35 215.81 147.67 45.12 26.0 6.81 147.21 159.06 306.28 226.74 153.14 44.99 27.0 7.07 158.14 159.06 317.20 237.67 158.60 44.87 28.0 7.33 169.07 159.06 328.13 248.60 164.07 44.76 29.0 7.59 180.00 159.06 339.06 259.53 169.53 44.65 30.0 7.86 190.93 159.06 349.99 270.46 175.00 44.56 31.0 8.12 201.86 159.06 360.92 281.39 180.46 44.47 32.0 8.38 212.79 159.06 371.85 292.32 185.93 44.38 33.0 8.64 223.72 159.06 382.78 303.25 191.39 44.30 34.0 8.90 234.65 159.06 393.71 314.18 196.86 44.23 35.0 9.16 245.58 159.06 404.64 325.11 202.32 44.15 TOP LOAD TOP MOVEMENT TIP LOAD TIP MOVEMENT ton IN. ton IN. 0.3403E+00 0.1510E-03 0.3491E-01 0.1000E-03 0.3403E+01 0.1510E-02 0.3491E+00 0.1000E-02 0.8508E+01 0.3776E-02 0.8726E+00 0.2500E-02 0.1702E+02 0.7551E-02 0.1745E+01 0.5000E-02 0.2554E+02 0.1133E-01 0.2618E+01 0.7500E-02 0.3413E+02 0.1511E-01 0.3491E+01 0.1000E-01 0.8558E+02 0.3781E-01 0.8726E+01 0.2500E-01 0.1454E+03 0.7191E-01 0.1745E+02 0.5000E-01 0.1870E+03 0.1034E+00 0.2618E+02 0.7500E-01 0.2217E+03 0.1342E+00 0.3491E+02 0.1000E+00 0.2882E+03 0.2962E+00 0.7304E+02 0.2500E+00 0.3181E+03 0.5531E+00 0.1064E+03 0.5000E+00 0.3276E+03 0.8060E+00 0.1267E+03 0.7500E+00 0.3415E+03 0.1059E+01 0.1407E+03 0.1000E+01 0.3577E+03 0.3663E+01 0.1576E+03 0.3600E+01

Ultimate Skin Friction (tons)

I-15 D/B, BW-1, UPRR Over Track 801, Piles @ Abutment 1, D=3 ft

Dep

th (

ft)

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 2400

24

68

1012

1416

1820

2224

2628

3032

3436

38

Dia=3 ft

Axial Load (tons)


Settl

emen

t (in

)

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 4000

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

11.

21.

41.

61.

82

2.2

2.4

2.6

2.8

33.

23.

43.

63.

84

Curve #1

athakur

Line

athakur

Line

Calculations for Allowable Base Resistance:

1. Ultimate Base Resistance = 159 tons (Based on SHAFT Analysis) 2. Mobilized settlement at Ultimate Load of (245 tons) 490 Kips =0.18 inch

(Based on SHAFT) 3. The CIDH pile is assumed to be rigid and deformations are neglected for this

calculation.

ofbaseSettlement4. (0.18/36)* 100 =0.5%

Diaofbase 5. Normalized Base Transfer =0.3

(Based on Figure 11.9, FHWA-IF-99-025; Shown below) 6. End Bearing = 0.3 * Ultimate End Bearing

= 0.3*159 = 47.7 tons 7. End Bearing =47.7 tons 8. Total Allowable Axial Capacity = (245+47.7)=292.7~290 kips

Settlement of Base

Dia ase meter of B

Note:- Pile is modeled in SHAFT from the ground surface. Based on design plans, the pile cut-off elevation is 5 feet below ground surface; hence this length should be deducted from the estimated pile length by SHAFT program.

athakur

Line

athakur

Line

BW-1_Pier1_Sfit.sfo VERTICALLY LOADED DRILLED SHAFT ANALYSIS PROGRAM SHAFT VERSION 5.0 (C) COPYRIGHT ENSOFT,INC. 1989,1995,1998,2001,2003

I-15 D/B_BW-1_Pier 1_D=7 ft

PROPOSED DEPTH = 55.0 FT ----------------

NUMBER OF LAYERS = 6 ------------------

WATER TABLE DEPTH = 16.0 FT. -------------------

FACTOR OF SAFETY APPLIED TO THE TOTAL ULTIMATE CAPACITY = 2.00 ------------------------------------------------------- FACTOR OF SAFETY APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE BASE CAPACITY = 2.00 ------------------------------------------------------

SOIL INFORMATION ---------------

LAYER NO 1----CLAY

AT THE TOP

STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR-ALPHA = 0.464E+00 END BEARING COEFFICIENT-Nc = 0.700E+01 UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.500E+04 INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.000E+00 BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00 SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.120E+03 MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11 DEPTH, FT = 0.000E+00

AT THE BOTTOM


LAYER NO 2----CLAY

AT THE TOP

STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR-ALPHA = 0.550E+00 END BEARING COEFFICIENT-Nc = 0.700E+01 UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+05 INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.000E+00

Page 1

BW-1_Pier1_Sfit.sfo BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00 SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.125E+03 MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11 DEPTH, FT = 0.230E+02

AT THE BOTTOM


LAYER NO 3----CLAY

AT THE TOP


AT THE BOTTOM


LAYER NO 4----CLAY

AT THE TOP


AT THE BOTTOM

STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR-ALPHA = 0.550E+00 END BEARING COEFFICIENT-Nc = 0.700E+01 UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+05

Page 2

BW-1_Pier1_Sfit.sfo INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.000E+00 BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00 SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.125E+03 MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11 DEPTH, FT = 0.515E+02

LAYER NO 5----CLAY

AT THE TOP


AT THE BOTTOM


LAYER NO 6----CLAY

AT THE TOP


AT THE BOTTOM


DRILLED SHAFT INFORMATION -------------------------

Page 3

BW-1_Pier1_Sfit.sfo

DIAMETER OF STEM = 7.000 FT. DIAMETER OF BASE = 7.000 FT. END OF STEM TO BASE = 0.000 FT. ANGLE OF BELL = 0.000 DEG. IGNORED TOP PORTION = 10.000 FT. IGNORED BOTTOM PORTION = 7.000 FT. AREA OF ONE PERCENT STEEL = 55.425 SQ.IN. ELASTIC MODULUS, Ec = 0.360E+07 LB/SQ IN VOLUME OF UNDERREAM = 0.000 CU.YDS.

PREDICTED RESULTS -----------------

QS = ULTIMATE SIDE RESISTANCE; QB = ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE; WT = WEIGHT OF DRILLED SHAFT (FOR UPLIFT CAPACITY ONLY); QU = TOTAL ULTIMATE RESISTANCE; QBD = TOTAL ALLOWABLE LOAD USING A FACTOR OF SAFETY APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE; QDN = TOTAL ALLOWABLE LOAD USING FACTORS OF SAFETY APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE SIDE RESISTANCE AND THE ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE.

LENGTH VOLUME QS QB QU QBD QDN QU/VOLUME (FEET) (CU.YDS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS/CU.YDS) 18.0 25.66 25.50 634.63 660.13 342.81 330.06 25.73 19.0 27.09 51.00 619.99 670.99 361.00 335.50 24.77 20.0 28.51 76.51 599.81 676.31 376.41 338.16 23.72 21.0 29.94 102.01 574.02 676.03 389.02 338.01 22.58 22.0 31.36 127.51 542.58 670.09 398.80 335.04 21.37 23.0 32.79 153.01 505.44 658.45 405.73 329.23 20.08 24.0 34.21 178.51 466.60 645.11 411.81 322.55 18.86 25.0 35.64 204.01 433.36 637.38 420.70 318.69 17.88 26.0 37.06 229.52 405.68 635.20 432.36 317.60 17.14 27.0 38.49 255.02 383.54 638.56 446.79 319.28 16.59 28.0 39.92 280.52 366.93 647.45 463.99 323.73 16.22 29.0 41.34 306.02 355.86 661.88 483.95 330.94 16.01 30.0 42.77 331.52 350.33 681.85 506.69 340.93 15.94 31.0 44.19 392.01 350.33 742.33 567.17 371.17 16.80 32.0 45.62 452.49 350.33 802.82 627.65 401.41 17.60 33.0 47.04 512.97 350.33 863.30 688.14 431.65 18.35 34.0 48.47 573.46 350.33 923.78 748.62 461.89 19.06 35.0 49.89 633.94 378.01 1011.95 822.94 505.97 20.28 36.0 51.32 694.42 407.53 1101.95 898.19 550.98 21.47 37.0 52.74 754.91 438.90 1193.81 974.36 596.90 22.63 38.0 54.17 815.39 472.11 1287.50 1051.45 643.75 23.77 39.0 55.60 835.97 470.44 1306.41 1071.19 653.20 23.50 40.0 57.02 856.55 468.16 1324.71 1090.63 662.36 23.23 41.0 58.45 877.13 465.28 1342.41 1109.77 671.21 22.97 42.0 59.87 897.71 454.42 1352.13 1124.92 676.06 22.58 43.0 61.30 918.28 435.57 1353.86 1136.07 676.93 22.09 44.0 62.72 938.86 408.74 1347.60 1143.23 673.80 21.48 45.0 64.15 959.44 373.92 1333.36 1146.40 666.68 20.79 46.0 65.57 980.02 340.92 1320.94 1150.48 660.47 20.14 47.0 67.00 1000.60 309.72 1310.32 1155.46 655.16 19.56 48.0 68.43 1021.18 280.33 1301.51 1161.34 650.76 19.02 49.0 69.85 1041.76 258.30 1300.05 1170.90 650.03 18.61 50.0 71.28 1062.33 257.84 1320.17 1191.25 660.09 18.52 51.0 72.70 1082.91 265.68 1348.59 1215.75 674.29 18.55

Page 4

BW-1_Pier1_Sfit.sfo 52.0 74.13 1103.49 281.81 1385.30 1244.40 692.65 18.69 53.0 75.55 1124.07 298.89 1422.96 1273.52 711.48 18.83 54.0 76.98 1144.65 316.92 1461.57 1303.11 730.78 18.99 55.0 78.40 1165.23 335.90 1501.13 1333.18 750.56 19.15

RESULT FROM TREND (AVERAGED) LINE

TOP LOAD TOP MOVEMENT TIP LOAD TIP MOVEMENT ton IN. ton IN. 0.8025E+00 0.1281E-03 0.3159E-01 0.1000E-03 0.8025E+01 0.1281E-02 0.3159E+00 0.1000E-02 0.2006E+02 0.3204E-02 0.7898E+00 0.2500E-02 0.4012E+02 0.6407E-02 0.1580E+01 0.5000E-02 0.6018E+02 0.9611E-02 0.2369E+01 0.7500E-02 0.8025E+02 0.1281E-01 0.3159E+01 0.1000E-01 0.2010E+03 0.3204E-01 0.7898E+01 0.2500E-01 0.4024E+03 0.6410E-01 0.1580E+02 0.5000E-01 0.6006E+03 0.9612E-01 0.2369E+02 0.7500E-01 0.7076E+03 0.1252E+00 0.3159E+02 0.1000E+00 0.1158E+04 0.2924E+00 0.7898E+02 0.2500E+00 0.1275E+04 0.5485E+00 0.1432E+03 0.5000E+00 0.1310E+04 0.8008E+00 0.1762E+03 0.7500E+00 0.1313E+04 0.1052E+01 0.2060E+03 0.1000E+01 0.1333E+04 0.8457E+01 0.3329E+03 0.8400E+01

Page 5

kradhakr

Text Box

1. End bearing is not considered for axial capacity. 2. Sloping ground above the UPRR Spur track level is not considered for skin friction.

Ultimate Skin Friction (tons)D

epth

(ft

)

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 12000

510

1520

2530

3540

4550

5560

Dia=7 ft


epth

(ft

)

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 120

510

1520

2530

3540

4550

550 Dia=7 ft

kradhakr

Text Box

I-15 D/B_BW-1_I-15 Over UPRR Track 801_Pier 1_D-7ft

Axial Load (tons)Se

ttle

men

t (in

)

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 14000

0.5

11.

52

2.5

33.

54

4.5

55.

56

6.5

77.

58

8.5

9

Curve #1

kradhakr

Line

kradhakr

Line

kradhakr

Text Box


BW-1Pier 2_s retro.sfo VERTICALLY LOADED DRILLED SHAFT ANALYSIS PROGRAM SHAFT VERSION 5.0 (C) COPYRIGHT ENSOFT,INC. 1989,1995,1998,2001,2003

I-15 Over UPRR _Pier 2, Pile Dia = 7 ft

PROPOSED DEPTH = 55.0 FT ----------------

NUMBER OF LAYERS = 8 ------------------

WATER TABLE DEPTH = 13.0 FT. -------------------

FACTOR OF SAFETY APPLIED TO THE TOTAL ULTIMATE CAPACITY = 2.00 ------------------------------------------------------- FACTOR OF SAFETY APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE BASE CAPACITY = 2.00 ------------------------------------------------------

SOIL INFORMATION ---------------

LAYER NO 1----SAND

AT THE TOP

SKIN FRICTION COEFFICIENT- BETA = 0.120E+01 UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.000E+00 INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.340E+02 BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00 SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.120E+03 MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11 DEPTH, FT = 0.000E+00

AT THE BOTTOM

SKIN FRICTION COEFFICIENT- BETA = 0.120E+01 UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.000E+00 INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.340E+02 BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00 SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.120E+03 MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11 DEPTH, FT = 0.150E+01

LAYER NO 2----CLAY

AT THE TOP

STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR-ALPHA = 0.550E+00 END BEARING COEFFICIENT-Nc = 0.700E+01 UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.250E+04 INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.000E+00 BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00 SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.120E+03

Page 1

BW-1Pier 2_s retro.sfo MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11 DEPTH, FT = 0.150E+01

AT THE BOTTOM


LAYER NO 3----CLAY

AT THE TOP


AT THE BOTTOM


LAYER NO 4----CLAY

AT THE TOP


AT THE BOTTOM

STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR-ALPHA = 0.550E+00 END BEARING COEFFICIENT-Nc = 0.700E+01 UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.250E+04 INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.000E+00 BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00

Page 2

BW-1Pier 2_s retro.sfo SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.120E+03 MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11 DEPTH, FT = 0.230E+02

LAYER NO 5----CLAY

AT THE TOP


AT THE BOTTOM


LAYER NO 6----CLAY

AT THE TOP


AT THE BOTTOM


LAYER NO 7----CLAY

AT THE TOP

STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR-ALPHA = 0.550E+00 END BEARING COEFFICIENT-Nc = 0.700E+01

Page 3

BW-1Pier 2_s retro.sfo UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+05 INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.000E+00 BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00 SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.125E+03 MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11 DEPTH, FT = 0.390E+02

AT THE BOTTOM


LAYER NO 8----CLAY

AT THE TOP


AT THE BOTTOM


DRILLED SHAFT INFORMATION -------------------------

DIAMETER OF STEM = 7.000 FT. DIAMETER OF BASE = 7.000 FT. END OF STEM TO BASE = 0.000 FT. ANGLE OF BELL = 0.000 DEG. IGNORED TOP PORTION = 7.000 FT. IGNORED BOTTOM PORTION = 7.000 FT. AREA OF ONE PERCENT STEEL = 55.425 SQ.IN. ELASTIC MODULUS, Ec = 0.360E+07 LB/SQ IN VOLUME OF UNDERREAM = 0.000 CU.YDS.

Page 4

BW-1Pier 2_s retro.sfo

PREDICTED RESULTS -----------------

QS = ULTIMATE SIDE RESISTANCE; QB = ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE; WT = WEIGHT OF DRILLED SHAFT (FOR UPLIFT CAPACITY ONLY); QU = TOTAL ULTIMATE RESISTANCE; QBD = TOTAL ALLOWABLE LOAD USING A FACTOR OF SAFETY APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE; QDN = TOTAL ALLOWABLE LOAD USING FACTORS OF SAFETY APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE SIDE RESISTANCE AND THE ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE.

LENGTH VOLUME QS QB QU QBD QDN QU/VOLUME (FEET) (CU.YDS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS/CU.YDS) 15.0 21.38 15.12 482.22 497.34 256.23 248.67 23.26 16.0 22.81 30.24 482.33 512.57 271.41 256.28 22.47 17.0 24.23 45.36 480.97 526.34 285.85 263.17 21.72 18.0 25.66 60.48 478.18 538.66 299.57 269.33 20.99 19.0 27.09 75.60 467.10 542.70 309.15 271.35 20.04 20.0 28.51 90.73 447.71 538.44 314.58 269.22 18.89 21.0 29.94 151.21 427.37 578.58 364.90 289.29 19.33 22.0 31.36 211.69 406.04 617.73 414.71 308.86 19.70 23.0 32.79 272.18 383.66 655.83 464.00 327.92 20.00 24.0 34.21 332.66 366.95 699.61 516.14 349.81 20.45 25.0 35.64 393.14 355.86 749.01 571.07 374.50 21.02 26.0 37.06 408.26 378.01 786.27 597.27 393.13 21.21 27.0 38.49 423.38 407.53 830.91 627.15 415.46 21.59 28.0 39.92 438.51 398.62 837.12 637.81 418.56 20.97 29.0 41.34 453.63 388.86 842.49 648.06 421.24 20.38 30.0 42.77 468.75 378.27 847.01 657.88 423.51 19.81 31.0 44.19 529.23 366.83 896.06 712.65 448.03 20.28 32.0 45.62 589.71 354.56 944.27 766.99 472.14 20.70 33.0 47.04 650.20 334.06 984.26 817.23 492.13 20.92 34.0 48.47 710.68 305.34 1016.02 863.35 508.01 20.96 35.0 49.89 731.26 279.15 1010.41 870.83 505.20 20.25 36.0 51.32 751.84 255.47 1007.31 879.57 503.65 19.63 37.0 52.74 772.42 234.31 1006.73 889.57 503.37 19.09 38.0 54.17 793.00 215.68 1008.68 900.84 504.34 18.62 39.0 55.60 813.57 199.57 1013.14 913.36 506.57 18.22 40.0 57.02 834.15 191.51 1025.66 929.91 512.83 17.99 41.0 58.45 854.73 191.51 1046.24 950.49 523.12 17.90 42.0 59.87 875.31 191.51 1066.82 971.07 533.41 17.82 43.0 61.30 895.89 191.51 1087.40 991.64 543.70 17.74 44.0 62.72 916.47 191.51 1107.98 1012.22 553.99 17.66 45.0 64.15 937.05 191.51 1128.56 1032.80 564.28 17.59 46.0 65.57 957.63 191.51 1149.14 1053.38 574.57 17.52 47.0 67.00 1018.11 191.51 1209.62 1113.86 604.81 18.05 48.0 68.43 1078.59 191.51 1270.10 1174.35 635.05 18.56 49.0 69.85 1087.66 191.51 1279.18 1183.42 639.59 18.31 50.0 71.28 1096.74 191.51 1288.25 1192.49 644.12 18.07 51.0 72.70 1105.81 191.51 1297.32 1201.57 648.66 17.84 52.0 74.13 1114.88 191.51 1306.39 1210.64 653.20 17.62 53.0 75.55 1123.95 191.51 1315.47 1219.71 657.73 17.41 54.0 76.98 1133.03 191.51 1324.54 1228.78 662.27 17.21 55.0 78.40 1142.10 191.51 1333.61 1237.86 666.81 17.01

RESULT FROM TREND (AVERAGED) LINE

TOP LOAD TOP MOVEMENT TIP LOAD TIP MOVEMENTPage 5

BW-1Pier 2_s retro.sfo ton IN. ton IN. 0.6721E+00 0.1228E-03 0.1801E-01 0.1000E-03 0.6721E+01 0.1228E-02 0.1801E+00 0.1000E-02 0.1680E+02 0.3071E-02 0.4503E+00 0.2500E-02 0.3361E+02 0.6142E-02 0.9006E+00 0.5000E-02 0.5041E+02 0.9213E-02 0.1351E+01 0.7500E-02 0.6721E+02 0.1228E-01 0.1801E+01 0.1000E-01 0.1682E+03 0.3071E-01 0.4503E+01 0.2500E-01 0.3368E+03 0.6143E-01 0.9006E+01 0.5000E-01 0.5044E+03 0.9215E-01 0.1351E+02 0.7500E-01 0.5955E+03 0.1205E+00 0.1801E+02 0.1000E+00 0.9714E+03 0.2840E+00 0.4503E+02 0.2500E+00 0.1054E+04 0.5380E+00 0.8167E+02 0.5000E+00 0.1075E+04 0.7894E+00 0.1005E+03 0.7500E+00 0.1069E+04 0.1040E+01 0.1175E+03 0.1000E+01 0.1049E+04 0.8441E+01 0.1898E+03 0.8400E+01

Page 6

kradhakr

Text Box

1. End bearing is not considered for axial capacity. 2. Sloping ground above the UPRR Spur track level is not considered for skin friction.


epth

(ft

)

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 12000

510

1520

2530

3540

4550

5560

Dia=7 ft

kradhakr

Text Box


Axial Load (tons)Se

ttle

men

t (in

)

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 11000

0.5

11.

52

2.5

33.

54

4.5

55.

56

6.5

77.

58

8.5

9

Curve #1

kradhakr

Line

kradhakr

Line

kradhakr

Text Box


VERTICALLY LOADED DRILLED SHAFT ANALYSIS PROGRAM SHAFT VERSION 5.0 (C) COPYRIGHT ENSOFT,INC. 1989,1995,1998,2001,2003 I-15 Over UPRR Track 801 (Bridge No. G-941), Abutment 2, Pile Dia = 3 fe PROPOSED DEPTH = 38.5 FT ---------------- NUMBER OF LAYERS = 7 ------------------ WATER TABLE DEPTH = 32.5 FT. ------------------- FACTOR OF SAFETY APPLIED TO THE TOTAL ULTIMATE CAPACITY = 2.00 ------------------------------------------------------- FACTOR OF SAFETY APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE BASE CAPACITY = 2.00 ------------------------------------------------------ SOIL INFORMATION --------------- LAYER NO 1----SAND AT THE TOP SKIN FRICTION COEFFICIENT- BETA = 0.120E+01 UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.000E+00 INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.340E+02 BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00 SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.120E+03 MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11 DEPTH, FT = 0.000E+00 AT THE BOTTOM SKIN FRICTION COEFFICIENT- BETA = 0.881E+00 UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.000E+00 INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.340E+02 BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00 SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.120E+03 MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11 DEPTH, FT = 0.210E+02 LAYER NO 2----CLAY AT THE TOP

STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR-ALPHA = 0.550E+00 END BEARING COEFFICIENT-Nc = 0.700E+01 UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.250E+04 INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.000E+00 BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00 SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.120E+03 MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11 DEPTH, FT = 0.210E+02 AT THE BOTTOM STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR-ALPHA = 0.550E+00 END BEARING COEFFICIENT-Nc = 0.700E+01 UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.250E+04 INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.000E+00 BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00 SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.120E+03 MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11 DEPTH, FT = 0.325E+02 LAYER NO 3----CLAY AT THE TOP STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR-ALPHA = 0.550E+00 END BEARING COEFFICIENT-Nc = 0.700E+01 UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+05 INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.000E+00 BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00 SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.125E+03 MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11 DEPTH, FT = 0.325E+02 AT THE BOTTOM STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR-ALPHA = 0.550E+00 END BEARING COEFFICIENT-Nc = 0.700E+01 UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+05 INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.000E+00 BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00 SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.125E+03 MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11 DEPTH, FT = 0.375E+02 LAYER NO 4----CLAY AT THE TOP STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR-ALPHA = 0.550E+00 END BEARING COEFFICIENT-Nc = 0.700E+01 UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.250E+04 INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.000E+00 BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00

SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.120E+03 MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11 DEPTH, FT = 0.375E+02 AT THE BOTTOM STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR-ALPHA = 0.550E+00 END BEARING COEFFICIENT-Nc = 0.700E+01 UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.250E+04 INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.000E+00 BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00 SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.120E+03 MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11 DEPTH, FT = 0.425E+02 LAYER NO 5----CLAY AT THE TOP STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR-ALPHA = 0.550E+00 END BEARING COEFFICIENT-Nc = 0.700E+01 UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+05 INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.000E+00 BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00 SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.125E+03 MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11 DEPTH, FT = 0.425E+02 AT THE BOTTOM STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR-ALPHA = 0.550E+00 END BEARING COEFFICIENT-Nc = 0.700E+01 UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+05 INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.000E+00 BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00 SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.125E+03 MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11 DEPTH, FT = 0.460E+02 LAYER NO 6----CLAY AT THE TOP STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR-ALPHA = 0.535E+00 END BEARING COEFFICIENT-Nc = 0.700E+01 UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.350E+04 INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.000E+00 BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00 SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.120E+03 MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11 DEPTH, FT = 0.460E+02

AT THE BOTTOM STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR-ALPHA = 0.535E+00 END BEARING COEFFICIENT-Nc = 0.700E+01 UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.350E+04 INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.000E+00 BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00 SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.120E+03 MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11 DEPTH, FT = 0.585E+02 LAYER NO 7----CLAY AT THE TOP STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR-ALPHA = 0.550E+00 END BEARING COEFFICIENT-Nc = 0.700E+01 UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+05 INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.000E+00 BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00 SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.125E+03 MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11 DEPTH, FT = 0.585E+02 AT THE BOTTOM STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR-ALPHA = 0.550E+00 END BEARING COEFFICIENT-Nc = 0.700E+01 UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+05 INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.000E+00 BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00 SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.125E+03 MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11 DEPTH, FT = 0.605E+02 DRILLED SHAFT INFORMATION ------------------------- DIAMETER OF STEM = 3.000 FT. DIAMETER OF BASE = 3.000 FT. END OF STEM TO BASE = 0.000 FT. ANGLE OF BELL = 0.000 DEG. IGNORED TOP PORTION = 5.000 FT. IGNORED BOTTOM PORTION = 3.000 FT. AREA OF ONE PERCENT STEEL = 10.180 SQ.IN. ELASTIC MODULUS, Ec = 0.360E+07 LB/SQ IN VOLUME OF UNDERREAM = 0.000 CU.YDS. PREDICTED RESULTS

----------------- QS = ULTIMATE SIDE RESISTANCE; QB = ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE; WT = WEIGHT OF DRILLED SHAFT (FOR UPLIFT CAPACITY ONLY); QU = TOTAL ULTIMATE RESISTANCE; QBD = TOTAL ALLOWABLE LOAD USING A FACTOR OF SAFETY APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE; QDN = TOTAL ALLOWABLE LOAD USING FACTORS OF SAFETY APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE SIDE RESISTANCE AND THE ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE. LENGTH VOLUME QS QB QU QBD QDN QU/VOLUME (FEET) (CU.YDS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS/CU.YDS) 9.0 2.36 3.97 33.44 37.41 20.69 18.71 15.88 10.0 2.62 8.49 35.96 44.45 26.47 22.22 16.98 11.0 2.88 13.55 38.47 52.02 32.79 26.01 18.06 12.0 3.14 19.12 40.98 60.11 39.62 30.05 19.13 13.0 3.40 25.19 43.50 68.69 46.94 34.35 20.18 14.0 3.67 31.74 46.01 77.75 54.75 38.88 21.21 15.0 3.93 38.75 48.53 87.27 63.01 43.64 22.22 16.0 4.19 46.20 56.18 102.38 74.29 51.19 24.44 17.0 4.45 54.07 64.03 118.11 86.09 59.05 26.53 18.0 4.71 62.36 72.01 134.37 98.37 67.19 28.51 19.0 4.97 71.05 77.10 148.15 109.60 74.08 29.78 20.0 5.24 80.12 79.53 159.65 119.89 79.83 30.49 21.0 5.50 89.56 79.53 169.09 129.33 84.55 30.75 22.0 5.76 99.35 79.53 178.89 139.12 89.44 31.05 23.0 6.02 109.49 79.53 189.02 149.26 94.51 31.39 24.0 6.28 119.96 79.53 199.49 159.73 99.75 31.75 25.0 6.55 126.44 79.53 205.97 166.21 102.99 31.47 26.0 6.81 132.92 79.53 212.45 172.69 106.23 31.21 27.0 7.07 139.40 79.53 218.93 179.17 109.47 30.97 28.0 7.33 145.88 122.65 268.53 207.20 134.26 36.63 29.0 7.59 152.36 171.92 324.28 238.32 162.14 42.71 30.0 7.86 158.84 227.35 386.19 272.52 193.10 49.16 31.0 8.12 165.32 264.30 429.63 297.47 214.81 52.93 32.0 8.38 171.80 282.78 454.58 313.19 227.29 54.25 33.0 8.64 178.28 239.67 417.95 298.12 208.98 48.37 34.0 8.90 184.76 190.39 375.16 279.96 187.58 42.14 35.0 9.16 191.24 134.96 326.21 258.73 163.10 35.60 36.0 9.43 197.72 98.01 295.73 246.73 147.87 31.37 37.0 9.69 223.65 79.53 303.18 263.41 151.59 31.29 38.0 9.95 249.57 122.65 372.21 310.89 186.11 37.41 39.0 10.21 275.49 171.92 447.41 361.45 223.70 43.81 TOP LOAD TOP MOVEMENT TIP LOAD TIP MOVEMENT ton IN. ton IN. 0.3332E+00 0.1533E-03 0.3773E-01 0.1000E-03 0.3332E+01 0.1533E-02 0.3773E+00 0.1000E-02 0.8329E+01 0.3831E-02 0.9432E+00 0.2500E-02 0.1666E+02 0.7663E-02 0.1886E+01 0.5000E-02 0.2499E+02 0.1149E-01 0.2829E+01 0.7500E-02 0.3340E+02 0.1533E-01 0.3773E+01 0.1000E-01 0.8373E+02 0.3836E-01 0.9432E+01 0.2500E-01

0.1429E+03 0.7299E-01 0.1886E+02 0.5000E-01 0.1845E+03 0.1050E+00 0.2829E+02 0.7500E-01 0.2188E+03 0.1362E+00 0.3773E+02 0.1000E+00 0.2895E+03 0.3003E+00 0.7894E+02 0.2500E+00 0.3229E+03 0.5589E+00 0.1150E+03 0.5000E+00 0.3355E+03 0.8128E+00 0.1369E+03 0.7500E+00 0.3506E+03 0.1067E+01 0.1521E+03 0.1000E+01 0.3680E+03 0.3671E+01 0.1704E+03 0.3600E+01

Ultimate Skin Friction (tons)


Dep

th (

ft)

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 2400

24

68

1012

1416

1820

2224

2628

3032

3436

38

Dia=3 ft

Axial Load (tons)


Settl

emen

t (in

)

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 4000

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

11.

21.

41.

61.

82

2.2

2.4

2.6

2.8

33.

23.

43.

63.

84

Curve #1

athakur

Line

athakur

Line

athakur

Line

Calculations for Allowable Base Resistance:

1. Ultimate Base Resistance = 79 tons (Based on SHAFT Analysis) 2. Mobilized settlement at Ultimate Load of (245 tons) 490 Kips =0.28 inch

(Based on SHAFT) 3. The CIDH pile is assumed to be rigid and deformations are neglected for this

calculation.

ofbaseSettlement4. (0.28/36)* 100 =0.77%

Diaofbase

5. Normalized Base Transfer =0.45

(Based on Figure 11.9, FHWA-IF-99-025; Shown below) 6. End Bearing = 0.45* Ultimate End Bearing

= 0.45*79 = 35.55 tons 7. End Bearing =35.55 tons 8. Total Allowable Axial Capacity = (245+35.55)*(2/2)=280 kips~270 kips

Settlement of Base

Dia ase meter of B

Note:-

Pile is modeled in SHAFT from the ground surface. Based on design plans, the pile cut-off elevation is 5 feet

below ground surface; hence this length should be deducted from the estimated pile length by SHAFT program.

athakur

Line

athakur

Line

Lateral Earth Pressures

Project: I-15 Design/BuildSegment 1:UPRR Spur Track 213 (Bridge No. G-941)Project No.: 362104.DE.GT.S1.FC

Performed By: J. BarkerDate: 5/20/2008

Page 1 of 2

Lateral Earth Pressure - Flat Backfill

Back slope β 0deg:= Wall Batter θ 90deg:= Angle of Wall Friction δ 0deg:=

Internal friction of granular backfill φ' 34deg:=

Unit weight of granular backfill γbackfill 125pcf:=

At-rest earth pressure coefficient Ko 1 sin φ'( )−:= Ko 0.44=

Active earth pressure coefficient

Kasin θ φ'+( )2

sin θ( )2 sin θ δ−( )⋅ 1sin φ' δ+( ) sin φ' β−( )⋅

sin θ δ−( ) sin θ β+( )⋅+

⎛⎜⎝

⎞⎟⎠

2

⋅

:= Ka 0.28=

Passive earth pressure coefficient Kp 3.45:= (AASHTO 2002, Figure 5.5.2C)

Active Dynamic Pressure Coefficients

Horizontal acceleration coefficient kh 0.075:= (1/2*PGA)

(AASHTO 2002, 6.4-3)Vertical acceleration coefficient kv 0:=

ψ atankh

1 kv−

⎛⎜⎝

⎞⎟⎠

:= ψ 4.289 deg= Wall Slope θ 0deg:=

Dynamic and static active earth pressure coefficient

KAEcos φ' θ− ψ−( )2

cos ψ( ) cos θ( )2⋅ cos δ θ+ ψ+( )⋅ 1sin δ φ'+( ) sin φ' β− ψ−( )⋅

cos δ θ+ ψ+( ) cos β θ−( )⋅+

⎛⎜⎝

⎞⎟⎠

2

⋅

:= KAE 0.33=

Dynamic active earth pressure coefficient

ΔKAE KAE 1 kv−( )⋅ Ka−:= ΔKAE 0.04=

Project: I-15 Design/BuildSegment 1:UPRR Spur Track 213 (Bridge No. G-941)Project No.: 362104.DE.GT.S1.FC

Performed By: J. BarkerDate: 5/20/2008

Page 2 of 2

At-Rest Dynamic Pressure Coefficients

Horizontal acceleration coefficient kh 0.225:= (1.5*PGA)

(AASHTO 2002, 6.4-3)Vertical acceleration coefficient kv 0:=

ψ atankh

1 kv−

⎛⎜⎝

⎞⎟⎠

:= ψ 12.68 deg= Wall Slope θ 0deg:=

Dynamic and static at-rest earth pressure coefficient

KAEcos φ' θ− ψ−( )2

cos ψ( ) cos θ( )2⋅ cos δ θ+ ψ+( )⋅ 1sin δ φ'+( ) sin φ' β− ψ−( )⋅

cos δ θ+ ψ+( ) cos β θ−( )⋅+

⎛⎜⎝

⎞⎟⎠

2

⋅

:= KAE 0.43=

Dynamic at-rest earth pressure coefficient

ΔKAE KAE 1 kv−( )⋅ Ka−:= ΔKAE 0.15=

1.5201.520

W

250.00 lb/ft2

1.5201.520

Material: CalicheUnit Weight: 125 lb/ft3Cohesion: 200 psfFriction Angle: 32 degreesWater Surface: Water Table

Material: Clay1Unit Weight: 120 lb/ft3Cohesion: 200 psfFriction Angle: 28 degreesWater Surface: Water Table


Abutment 1 Slope Stability Analysis; I-15 Design-Build. I-15 Over UPRR Spur Track

Material: FillUnit Weight: 120 lb/ft3Cohesion: 100 psfFriction Angle: 34 degrees

Safety Factor0.0000.2500.5000.7501.0001.2501.5001.7502.0002.2502.5002.7503.0003.2503.5003.7504.0004.2504.5004.7505.0005.2505.5005.7506.000+

2175

2150

2125

2100

2075

2050

2025

2000

-75 -50 -25 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175

1.3291.329

W

250.00 lb/ft2

1.3291.329

Material: FillUnit Weight: 120 lb/ft3Cohesion: 100 psfFriction Angle: 34 degrees

Material: Clay1Unit Weight: 120 lb/ft3Cohesion: 200 psfFriction Angle: 28 degreesWater Surface: Water TableMaterial: Caliche

Unit Weight: 125 lb/ft3Cohesion: 200 psfFriction Angle: 32 degreesWater Surface: Water Table


Abutment 1 Pseudostatic Slope Stability Analysis; I-15 Design-Build, I-15 Over UPRR Spur Track

Safety Factor0.0000.2500.5000.7501.0001.2501.5001.7502.0002.2502.5002.7503.0003.2503.5003.7504.0004.2504.5004.7505.0005.2505.5005.7506.000+

2175

2150

2125

2100

2075

2050

2025

2000

-75 -50 -25 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175

0.075

Date post:	29-Aug-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

Geotech Memo BW1 I-15 over UPRR Spur Trackndotprojectneon.com/Archives/reference_information...FINAL...

Documents