HomeMy WebLinkAboutPA2008-040_GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII*NEW FILE*
PA2008=040 Geotechnical
Investigation
i
TRANSMITTAL
Geoteehnical Engineering
Coastal Engineering DATE: August 18, 2008
Maritime Engineering
TO: Ms. Rosalinh Ung,
Planning Department
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, California 92663
PROJECT NO: 2573
REFERENCE: MARINA PARK PROJECT
Transmitted herewith is a copy of our report titled "Geotechnical Investigation, Marina
Park Project, Newport Beach, California," dated August 7, 2008.
If you have any questions, please give us a call.
TERRACOSTA CONSULTING GROUP, INC.
Sincerely,
'Atf eu
raven R. Smillie, Principal Geologist
BRECEIVED BY
RS/sr
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
AUG 27 2000
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
4455 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite 100 ♦ San Diego, California 92123-4379 ♦ (858) 573-6900 voice ♦ (858) 573-8900 fax
2601 Ocean Park Blvd, Suite 110 ♦ Santa Monica, California 90405 ♦ (310) 399-8190 voice ♦ (310) 399-8195 jae
www.terracosta.com
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
MARINA PARK PROJECT
NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA
Prepared for
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
Newport Beach, California
RECENED BY
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
AUG 271008
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
Prepared by
T$RRACOSTA CONSULTING GROUP, INC.
San Diego, California
Project No. 2573
August 7, 2008
I
t Project No.2573
August 7, 2008
UMIUMI® Mr. Mark S. Reader, P.E.
oeoteclmicamngtneerft Public Works Department
cmwiingmeeft CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
bfaname Engineering 3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, California 92663
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
MARINA PARK PROJECT
NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA
Dear I& Reader:
In accordance with your request, our Proposal No. 08018 dated March 3, 2008, and our
Professional Services Agreement dated March 25, 2008, TerraCosta Consulting Group, Inc.
(TCG) has completed a geotechnical investigation in support of the proposed Marina Park
Development project, located on Newport Harbor between 15th and 19th Streets, and north of
West Balboa Boulevard, in the City of Newport Beach, California
The accompanying report presents the results of our review of available reports, plans, literature,
our field investigation, and our conclusions and recommendations pertaining to the geotechnical
aspects of the proposed site development.
rWe appreciate the opportunity to be of service and trust this information meets your needs. If you
have any questions or require additional information, please give us a call.
Very truly yours,
TERRACOSTA CONSULTING GROUP, INC.
David B. Nevins, Project Engineer Braven R. Smillie, Principal Geologist
R.C.E. 65015 R.G.E. 2789 R.G. 402, C.E.G. 207
Walt . Cre pton, Principal
R.C.E. 23792, R.G.E. 245
WFC/DBNBRS/jg
Attachments
(6) Addressee
4455 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite 100 ♦ San Diego, California 921234379 ♦ (858) 573.6900 voice ♦ (858) 573-8900 fav
2601 Ocean Park Boulevard, Suite 110 ♦ Santa Monica, California 90405 ♦ (310) 399.8190 voice ♦ (310) 399.8195 fav
vvww.terracosta.corn ,
I
[1
1
I
1�
I
I
L.!
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
Project No. 2573
TABLE OF CONTENTS
August 7, zoos
1 INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION................................................................. I
2 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF INVESTIGATION........................................................................2
2.1
Onshore Facilities.............................................................................................................
2
2.2
Offshore Facilities (Proposed ADA Approach Piers, Floating Docks, Groin -Wall,
andBulkhead Walls).........................................................................................................
2
3 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATION.....................................................................3
3.1
Field Investigation............................................................................................................
3
3.2
Laboratory Testing............................................................................................................
4
4 GENERAL SITE CONDITIONS.................................................................................................4
4.1
Geologic Setting...............................................................................................................
4
4.2
Site Topography and Bathymetry.....................................................................................
4
4.3
Soil and Geologic Units....................................................................................................
4
4.4
Groundwater.....................................................................................................................5
5 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS..............................................................................................................5
5.1
Regional and Local Faulting.............................................................................................
5
5.2
Seismicity .........................................................................................................................
6
5.3
Geologic Hazards..............................................................................................................
6
6 CONSIDERATIONS FOR LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS.....................................................8
6.1
Site Preparation........................................................................................I........................
8
6.2
Foundation Design............................................................................................................
8
6.2.1 Mat Foundations for Restroom Facilities and Other Small Buildings .................
8
6.2.2 Deep Foundations for Sailing Center and Community Center ............................
9
6.3
Seismic Design Parameters per CBC..............................................................................
10
6.4
Concrete Flatwork and Walkways..................................................................................
11
6.5
Soil Corrosivity ...............................................................................................................11
7 CONSIDERATIONS FOR MARINA IMPROVEMENTS......................................................11
7.1
Sheet -Pile Bulkheads......................................................................................................11
7.1.1 Tieback Anchors................................................................................................13
7.2
Guide Pile Recommendations.........................................................................................
14
7.2.1 Pre -Jetting Considerations.................................................................................15
7.3
Approach Pier/Gangway Abutment Foundation Recommendations ..............................
15
7.4
Dredging.........................................................................................................................16
7.5
Shore Perpendicular Groin-Wall....................................................................................
16
8 LIMITATIONS..........................................................................................................................16
FIGURE 1
BORING LOCATION MAP
FIGURE 2
ARCHITECTURAL MASTER PLAN
FIGURE 3
CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE
FIGURE 4
ROLLER DEFLECTION
APPENDIX A
LOGS OF TEST BORINGS & CPT SOUNDINGS
APPENDIX B
LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
APPENDIX C
SUGGESTED ITEMS FOR INCLUSION IN SPECIFICATIONS FOR PILE
DRIVING
APPENDIXI)
SUMMARY CALCULATIONS
APPENDIX E
DSI PRODUCT LITERATURE
I
N:17 W7N370 R01 G owh fnwt&c
I
I
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH August 7, 2008
Project No. 2573 Page 1
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
MARINA PARK PROJECT
NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA
1 INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION
TerraCosta Consulting Group, Inc. (TCG) has performed a geotechnical investigation, and
geologic and engineering analyses for development of the Marina Park project, located on
Newport Harbor between 15th and 19th Streets, and north of West Balboa Boulevard, in the
City of Newport Beach, California (please refer to Figure 1, Vicinity Map/Boring Location
Map).
This report presents the results of our field investigation, laboratory testing, and analyses, and
provides geotechnical engineering recommendations for grading and construction of the
proposed improvements.
We understand that the principal structural elements of the project are:
• A 10,190-square-foot, two-story, steel -framed community center building;
• An 11,000-square-foot, two-story, steel -framed sailing center building (potentially
including a 60 t foot tall steel moment -frame tower);
• Two small single -story restroom structures (one of which is located approximately a
block away from the site on a separate property);
• An 800-square-foot, single -story marine services building;
• Ancillary concrete flatwork and paved parking areas designed to support all of the
above structures; and
• Offshore facilities, including 28 floating -dock boat slips, flexi-float support docks,
approach piers, a groin -wall, and bulkheads located in an area that must be dredged to
accommodate the new facilities.
The overall project layout is shown on the Architectural Master Plan, Figure 2.
INA25W"12573 R01 Gmkch4"tdc
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH August 7, 2008
Project No. 2573 Page 2
2 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF INVESTIGATION
The purpose of this investigation is to provide information to assist the City and its
consultants in evaluating the site (both onshore and offshore) for project design. In
particular, our investigation is designed to address the following geotechnical issues.
2.1 Onshore Facilities
• The geologic/geotechnical setting of the site;
• Potential geologic hazards, such as faulting and seismicity;
• General engineering characteristics of the identified soil and geologic units, including
on -site allowable soil -bearing and earth pressure values;
• Settlement estimates;
• The depth to groundwater;
• Building foundation and flatwork recommendations;
• Building setbacks for any foundation impacts from adjacent and nearby structures, if
applicable;
• Grading and earthwork recommendations; and
• Soil corrosion potential.
2.2 Offshore Facilities (Proposed ADA Approach Piers, Floating Docks, Groin -Wall,
and Bulkhead Walls)
• Geotechnical recommendations for dredging;
• Geotechnical design input for the proposed groin -wall;
• Recommendations for the lateral support of the dock -area bulkheads, including both
earth -anchor and tieback/deadman approaches;
• Geotechnical recommendations for approach pier foundations; and
• Depth and load/deflection criteria for use in guide pile design.
N:tl M73=3 ROL Owt"h Inmtdw
I
11
I
I
I
IrI-,
L
[1
II
W
I
I
I
I
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH August 7, 2008
Project No. 2573 Page 3
To further our understanding of the Marina Park Development, and to establish working
relationships with the City's team members, we attended a project kick-off meeting on April
4, 2008, and subsequently exchanged technical information with the design team.
3 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATION
3.1 Field Investigation
Our field investigation, performed May 16, 2008, included a geotechnical reconnaissance of
the site and surrounding area; drilling, sampling, and logging two 8-inch-diameter
exploratory test borings to a depth of 31.5 feet; and performing twelve continuous cone
penetration test (CPT) soundings to depths ranging from 30 feet to 50 feet. The approximate
locations of our test borings and CPT soundings are shown on the Boring Location Map
(Figure 1). Samples were obtained from the test borings using both a 2-inch O.D. Standard
Penetration Test Sampler (SPT) and a 3-inch O.D. "California Sampler." The samplers were
advanced by driving them into the soil ahead of the auger using a 140-pound hammer falling
30 inches. Samples obtained from the borings were sealed in the field to preserve in -situ
moisture, and transported to the laboratory for additional inspection and testing. The drilling
operations were observed, and the borings logged and classified, by a geologist from our
firm.
Field logs of the materials encountered in the test borings were prepared based on visual
examination of the materials, and on the action of the drilling and sampling equipment. The
descriptions on the logs are based on our field observations, sample inspection, and
laboratory test results. A Key to Excavation Logs is presented in Appendix A as Figure A-1,
and the final logs of the test borings are presented as Figures A-2 and A-3.
CPT soundings were performed at the locations of proposed structures in order to obtain
' continuous profiles of the underlying foundation soils, in correlation with data from the test
borings. Results of the CPT soundings are also included in Appendix A.
i
I
N=073= A01 a.o hInatdm
r
I
I
1
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
Project No. 2573
3.2 Laboratory Testing
August 7, 2008
Page 4
Representative soil samples obtained during our field exploration program were tested in the
laboratory to verify field classifications and to provide data for geotechnical input to the
design of project structures. The results of our laboratory tests are presented in Appendix B.
4 GENERAL SITE CONDITIONS
' 4.1 Geologic Setting
The project site is situated on the landward side of a naturally -formed coastal bar (or
"barrier") of the type formed by a transgressive sea and littoral currents at the seaward edge
of a stream delta or lagoon. The Newport Bay coastal estuary was originally formed as the
lower reach of the Santa Ana River. However, in 1915, because of severe silting that
resulted from flooding of the Santa Ana River (and also the construction of a man-made
channel), the Santa Ana River was structurally realigned and the bay is currently fed only by
San Diego Creek, which drains a comparatively small area.
' 4.2 Site Topography and Bathymetiy
Elevations across the site range from approximately 7.8 feet (NAVD 88) along West Balboa
Boulevard, ascending to almost +10 feet near the central backbone of the parcel, then back
down to about +5 feet at the U.S. bulkhead line generally along the existing shoreline. From
the U.S. bulkhead line, the nearshore bay floor slope descends at an inclination of
approximately 10:1, down to approximate elevation -10 to -12 feet along the channel limit
line.
4.3 Soil and Geologic Units
The site is underlain by hydraulic fill, bay deposits, and older alluvial deposits beyond the
depths of our deepest exploratory testing at 50 feet. These soil and geologic units are
described below in order of increasing age.
Hydraulic Fill Soils: Our test borings indicate that the project site -area is generally
underlain by from 5 to 6 feet of loose to medium dense, gray -brown, damp to wet,
' N-.WW73V373 Rol aook himetdoo
' r
I
I
1
7
I
I
I
r
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
Project No. 2573
August 7,2008
Page 5
hydraulically -placed sands and silty sands (SP/Sly, with occasional shell fragments.
It is likely that these relatively "clean" granular soils were placed as the result of
dredging during one or more phases of the development of Newport Harbor. SPT
blow counts within these artificially placed, dry to saturated sands range from 7 to 25
blows per foot.
Bay Deposits: The hydraulic fill sands are typically underlain by a 2- to 2%x-foot-
thick, soft to firm, compressible sandy silt to silty clay bay mud, which is in turn
underlain by relatively clean, medium dense, gray sands (SP/S4, with shells and
shell fragments, characteristic of Holocene -age bay deposits below an elevation of
approximately -2 to -3 feet. SPT blow counts within these clean, saturated, natural
bay deposit sands range from 13 to 24 blows per foot.
Older Alluvial Deposits: Dense to very dense, red -brown to gray, coarse "clean"
sands (SP-Sly, generally characteristic of older fluviallalluvial deposits, underlie the
project site area at elevations ranging from approximately -20 to -26 feet. Limited
blow counts within these older estuarine soils range from 37 to 38 blows per foot.
However, the CPT tip resistance in these deposits typically exceeds 300 tsf, indicating
a very dense sand.
4.4 Groundwater
Groundwater levels at the site can be expected to vary in response to tidal fluctuations.
Groundwater highs will likely approach tidal highs in the bay, and groundwater lows may
drop slightly below mean sea level. From a construction standpoint, any excavations
advanced down to within the tidal zone should be expected to experience severe caving.
5 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS
1 5.1 Regional and Local Faulting
I
We did not observe indications of faulting during our field investigation at the site, and
available geologic literature does not indicate that active faults have been mapped in the
immediate project site area. However, our review of published and unpublished maps
indicates that the site is approximately 3 km westerly of the Newport-Inglewood/Rose
N.USW73W73 R0100m hhlnmtd"
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH August 7, 2008
Project No. 2573 Page 6
' Canyon fault zone (south Los Angeles Basin segment), which generally trends north/south
' along the easterly margin of the Newport ("Upper' ) Back Bay. It is generally accepted that
movement along the Newport-Inglewood/Rose Canyon fault zone has created compressional
forces, which caused warping and tilting of the portion of crustal block underlying this area
of Orange County.
' 5.2 Seismicity
The project site is located in a moderately active seismic region of Southern California that is
' subject to moderate to strong shaking from nearby and distant earthquakes. Ground shaking
from earthquakes on 63 major active faults could affect the site. The nearest of these, the
' Los Angeles Basin segment of the Newport-Inglewood/Rose Canyon Fault, is located
approximately 3 km easterly of the site. According to the United States Geologic Survey
(USGS) Open -File Report 2008-1128, the maximum credible earthquake for this segment of
the Newport-Inglewood/Rose Canyon Fault is considered to be magnitude 7.2. During the
1933 Long Beach earthquake, a 6.4 magnitude shock was experienced offshore
approximately 2.5 miles north-northeast of the site about 30 minutes prior to the shocks that
devastated Long Beach.
fWe used both the California Geologic Survey (CGS) and the USGS Probabilistic Seismic
Hazards web sites to assess the probabilistic ground motion conditions of the site. According
to both the CGS and USGS, the peak ground acceleration for a 10 percent probability of
exceedance in 50 years is estimated to be on the order of 0.37 to 0.41g.
' 5.3 Geologic Hazards
Potential geologic hazards that may exist at the site include landslides, fault rupture, ground
shaking, liquefaction, seismic -induced settlement, lateral spreading, seiches, and tsunamis.
With respect to these potential hazards, we have the following comments:
• Landslides: No landslides have been mapped at the site. As such, it is our opinion
that the risk associated with landslides is negligible.
• Fault Rupture: No faults have been mapped across the site or inferred to cross the
site. As such, it is our opinion that the risk associated with fault rupture is low to
Nag "I '1 negligible.
' MM07=71 R01 GotwhIm tdN
I
I
II
J
I
I
I
I
11
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
Project No. 2573
August 7, 2008
Page 7
• Ground Shaking: All sites within Southern California are susceptible to ground
shaking.
• Liquefaction: Liquefaction is a potential hazard in any water -saturated, clean sandy
soils. The loose to medium dense, near -surface hydraulic fills and bay deposits
(typically above elevation -15 to -25 feet) exhibit relatively low relative densities and
consist of clean (SP/SM) soils, making these materials susceptible to seismic -induced
liquefaction and lateral spreading. The dense to very dense, older alluvial deposits
encountered below -20 to -26 feet are not susceptible to liquefaction. Spontaneous
liquefaction develops within sandy soils when they are subjected to a rapid buildup of
pore pressure, such as that caused by seismic shock, and the result of this condition
could be massive mobilization of the near -surface foundation soils and the failure
(settlement) of site -area structural improvements. It is expected that liquefaction
could be triggered at this site with a seismic acceleration of 0.20 g.
• Seismic -Induced Settlement: Ground settlements due to seismic activity results
from a densification of soils due to ground vibration, as well as by reconsolidation of
liquefied soils. For the facilities under consideration for this study, we anticipate that
the majority of the seismic ground settlements will be associated with potential
liquefaction of the upper 20-±- feet of the hydraulic fills and bay deposits. We
estimate that if these soils were to liquefy, the amount of total induced settlement
could be on the order of 1 to 4 inches.
• Seiches: As the site is located within the Newport Bay, it is our opinion that the risks
associated with seiches are moderate to high.
• Tsunamis: As the site lies on the coast, it is our opinion that the risk associated with
tsunamis is the same as all projects located along the shoreline of the City of Newport
Beach. Studies performed by Legg, Borrero, and Synolakis (2004) suggest that this
area of the coastline may be affected by both earthquake- and subaqueous landslide -
generated tsunamis with wave heights of 2+ meters and wave runup of 4+ meters. As
such, the site may be affected by a tsunami under certain critical conditions. As we
understand, the City of Newport Beach already has a tsunami contingency plan and
evacuation routes in place.
N-.WW73073 ROL G0Wh1nwtdM
' CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH August 7, 2008
Project No. 2573 Page 8
' 6 CONSIDERATIONS FOR LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS
6.1 Site Preparation
It is recommended that the entire site be scarified to a minimum depth of 12 inches, watered,
and properly recompacted to a minimum of 95 percent relative compaction, in accordance
with ASTM Test Designation D 1557. Any loose zones encountered during compaction of
the final subgrade should be overexcavated and properly recompacted to 95 percent in order
to provide the recommended subgrade density. We would recommend that the deep
' foundations for the Sailing Center and Community Center, whether driven piles or stone
columns, be completed prior to the completion of subgrade preparation.
We recommend that the existing hydraulic fill sands be compacted by a combination of
flooding and vibration using a vibratory roller, compactor, or heavy track equipment.
All site preparation and grading should be performed under the observation of the
geotechnical engineer and in accordance with Section 300, "Earthwork," of the Standard
Specifications for Public Works Construction ("Greenbook").
6.2 Foundation Design
From a geotechnical standpoint, the near -surface hydraulic fill sands are relatively competent
in nature and suitable for supporting relatively lightly loaded foundation elements assuming
sufficient confinement of the near -surface soils. However, given the potential for
liquefaction and liquefaction -induced settlements that could be on the order of 1 to 4 inches,
we recommend using a deep foundation system, or soil improvement with a mat foundation
for the Sailing Center and Community Center. We recommend that mat foundations be used
for smaller proposed buildings, including restroom facilities.
6.2.1 Mat Foundations forRestroom Facilities and Other Small Buildings
' We recommend that all mat foundations be designed by a registered civil or structural
engineer experienced in mat foundation design. We recommend a subgrade modulus of 100
pci, which has been adjusted for foundation size. We recommend that maximum allowable
' contact stresses be limited to 1,000 psf. This value should not be increased for any transient
loads, including seismic and wind loads.
N.WW73US73 aoi Q.hl m tdw
ti
[1
J' CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH August 7, 2008
Project No. 2573 Page 9
' To provide resistance for design lateral loads, we recommend that an allowable friction
coefficient of 0.45 be used between the concrete mat foundation and the underlying
recompacted sandy subgrade soils. If, for some reason, additional lateral resistance is
required, interior shear keys can be added when located a minimum of three times the depth
of the shear key in from the perimeter edge of the mat foundation. Passive pressures, if used,
should be limited to an equivalent fluid pressure of 300 pcf.
6.2.2 Deep Foundations for Sailing Center and Community Center
' Due to the potential for significant settlement due to liquefaction, we recommend that the
Sailing Center and Community Center buildings be supported on either driven piles, or on
structural mats, the latter of which should be supported by improved soil. We recommend
stone columns be used to densify the underlying soil if mats are the chosen foundations for
' the Sailing Center and Community Center. Both of these foundation alternatives are
discussed in the following paragraphs.
Pile Foundations
In order to avoid undesirable liquefaction -induced settlements, we recommend that
consideration be given to supporting all settlement -sensitive habitable structures on pile
foundations deriving their support from the dense alluvial sands encountered below elevation
' -26 feet. As indicated in Section 5.3, potentially liquefiable sands overlie these dense sands
and, under the design earthquake event, may locally liquefy down to a maximum elevation of
' about -26 feet, resulting in potential downdrag forces imposed on the upper portions of
foundation piles. We currently anticipate maximum liquefaction -induced downdrag loads
applied to 12-inch square pre -stressed concrete piles approaching 50 kips and recommend
that all pile foundations be designed to accommodate this additional seismically induced
axial downdrag load.
We recommend that 12-inch square pre -stressed concrete piles be designed for a minimum of
10 feet of embedment into the dense to very dense alluvial sands corresponding to a
' minimum design tip elevation of .35 feet. At this depth, the allowable bearing capacity of
these soils will exceed the pile's maximum design allowable capacity of 105 tons (80 tons
when subtracting out downdrag forces).
' N:=573W?3 R01 QwWh Immntdw
E�
' CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH August 7, 2008
Project No. 2573 Page 10
We anticipate that the dense alluvial sands will require limited pre jetting to achieve design
tip elevation and pre jetting shall be allowed down to elevation -30 feet. However, in all
instances, actual pile capacities and tip elevations shall be verified in the field utilizing a
' suitable pile driving formula, such as the Engineering News Record (ENR) formula.
We recommend that our firm observe the driving of all piles. Continuous records of pile
driving operations should be kept and any field changes reviewed with the structural
engineer. Typical guide specifications for pile driving are attached in Appendix C, and may
' be used as an aid in preparation of job specifications.
Stone Columns with Mat Foundations
' As an alternative to conventional deep foundations, in -situ ground improvement may also be
performed to densify the near -surface liquefiable soils and to improve pore pressure
dissipation resulting from seismic shaking. We consider stone columns to be a viable
altemative to mitigating the potential for seismically induced liquefaction and the associated
' ground settlements that should be expected during the design seismic event. Thirty to 36-
inch-diameter stone columns placed in a typical 7-foot triangular pattern, extending to a
depth of approximately 30 feet, should provide sufficient increased soil stiffness to mitigate
' the potential for seismically induced liquefaction and ground settlements. This in -situ
densification occurs by advancing a large electric or hydraulic vibrator to the desired depth
with use of water or air jetting to assist penetration to the design depth. After penetration,
the vibrator is partially withdrawn and the hole created by the vibrator filled with a charge of
stone. The vibrator is again lowered into the stone, displacing the stone both radially and
downward into the surrounding soil, thereby causing displacement of the soil over and above
that created by the initial penetration of the vibrator. In this way, a compact column of stone
interlocked with the surrounding ground is built up to the ground surface.
As indicted in Section 6.2.1, we recommend that foundations for the proposed marina
buildings, if supported on stone columns, be supported by a structural concrete mat
foundation, which in turn would be supported by the stone column densified subgrade soils.
6.3 Seismic Design Parameters per CBC
The California Building Code (CBC) requires a site -specific seismic response analysis for
' any site that is considered liquefiable. However, based on ASCE Standard ASCE/SEI 7-05,
' N:12512573U573 a010m4chlnmtdw
P
' CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH August 7, 2008
Project No. 2573 Page 11
' if the proposed structures have a fundamental period of vibration equal to or less than 0.5
' seconds, site -specific analysis is not required and response spectra can be determined using
the equivalent site class for non -liquefiable soil. In this particular case, we recommend using
' the Site Class D characterization for stiff soil. For this site class, we recommend using
spectral accelerations of 1.252 and 0.711 for periods of 0.2 and 1.0 seconds, respectively.
' 6.4 Concrete Flatwork and Walkways
We recommend that areas to receive concrete flatwork and walkways be prepared in general
' accordance with Section 301-1 of the Greenbook Specifications. We recommend that
subgrade soils be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches, and compacted to a minimum
' relative compaction of 95 percent. Additional subgrade preparation may be necessary in
those areas where flatwork and walkways may be subject to vehicle loading and should be
' evaluated on a case -by -case basis.
6.5 Soil Corrosivity
The results of corrosivity testing of the near -surface soils indicate a soil pH of 7.0 and 40
years to perforation for a 16 gauge metal culvert. Test results are included in Appendix B.
7 CONSIDERATIONS FOR MARINA IMPROVEMENTS
7.1 Sheet -Pile Bulkheads
It is our understanding that the subject sheet -pile walls will be pre -stressed, pre -cast, concrete
panels and that those panels will be installed in a sequence as generally shown on Figure 3.
At the contractor's option, we would anticipate that the sheet -pile bulkheads would be
installed in a partially excavated trench and then jetted to near grade. Jetting may be
pemutted down to within 1 foot of design rip elevation, and then driven the last foot.
Concrete sheets should use tongue -and -groove connections and should have jet tubes cast
into the pile. The tongue -and -groove connection should be cast in such a way to allow
installation of a 1%z-inch-diameter pipe (after driving) into the oversized groove. A high-
pressure water jet should be used to initially flush out any debris from within the joint. Each
joint should then be pressure grouted to protect against possible loss of the soil backfill out
throughjoints.
I
N'.WU570U570 A01 Deottth lnvntdw
1
F
' CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH August 7, 2008
Project No.2573 Page 12
' As shown on Figure 3, we recommend installation of the Sailing Center foundations prior to
installation of the interior marina bulkhead anchors to avoid potential conflicts between the
tiebacks and piles or stone columns.
We have used Shoring Suite Version 8, by CivilTech, Inc. for design of the bulkhead walls.
Based on the results of our CPT data and borings, we have selected an active earth pressure
' coefficient of 0.31, and a passive earth pressure coefficient of 3.2, reduced to 2.25, to ensure
a factor of safety of 1.5 with regard to passive toe failure. We examined the shore -parallel
' Sailing Center bulkhead (+9 elevation, plan datum) with and without seismic loading, as well
as the interior marina bulkhead walls (+10 elevation, plan datum) with H2O vehicle loading
adjacent to the wall edge without seismic loading, and with seismic loading (without the H2O
' surcharge). We have also assumed a 4-foot tidal lag in front of the bulkhead wall. We have
neglected the presence of the sloping passive toe in front of the bulkhead walls, as these
' sloping toes can be partially or completely scoured out as the result of boats backing into or
out of their docks. Summary calculations are provided in Appendix D.
' Our analyses indicate that the critical design case for both the Sailing Center bulkhead wall
and the interior marina bulkhead walls is the seismic loading condition under a design
seismic acceleration of 0.20 g. For this condition, we have also increased the design
acceleration by 50 percent to take into consideration the lack of deformation exhibited by
rigid structures (Xanthakos, 1995).
1
As indicated in Sections 5.2 and 5.3, the design seismic event has a peak ground acceleration
with a 10 percent probability of exceedance in 50 years estimated to be on the order of 0.37
to 0.41 g. Moreover, for the site conditions, localized liquefaction is anticipated with site
accelerations exceeding 0.2 g, with massive liquefaction and lateral spreading affecting the
upper 20± feet with site accelerations approaching 0.4 g. Under these conditions, the
bonded zone of the tiebacks would yield, and the liquefied bulkhead backfill would then
overload and fail the now -cantilevered 22-foot-high bulkhead. As the bulkhead is not a
habitable structure, to our knowledge, there is no lode mandate to design for the 0.4 g
seismic event. However, if desired, the bulkhead could be designed to resist the maximum
seismic event by densifying the liquefiable bulkhead backfill materials, as well as the bonded
zone for the tieback anchors. This liquefaction mitigation can be achieved through the use of
stone columns, treating the zone extending roughly 70 feet back from the bulkhead. If this
were to be considered, however, we anticipate that it may be more economical to use deep
N:12$W73V573 ROI G.hImaLdo
[1
1
[1
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH August 7, 2008
Project No. 2573 Page 13
soil mixing adjacent the back of the bulkhead, which should be able to mitigate the maximum
design seismic event with a soil mixed zone possibly 30 feet in width.
As such, we recommend the following design parameters for the walls:
Sailing Center Bulkhead Wall
Top Elevation:
Minimum Embedment:
Minimum Tip Elevation:
Maximum Design Moment:
Required Top -of -Wall Lateral Restraint:
Interior Marina Bulkhead Walls
Top Elevation:
Minimum Embedment:
Minimum Tip Elevation:
Maximum Design Moment:
Required Top -of -Wall Lateral Restraint:
1 7.1.1 Tieback Anchors
+9, plan datum
17 feet
-29 feet, plan datum
84 kip-ft
9.4 kips/lineal foot
+10, plan datum
18 feet
-30 feet, plan datum
96 kip-ft
10.3 kips/lineal foot
We understand that deadman anchors would attach to the bulkhead within the pile cap at
about elevation +9 feet (+8 feet for the Sailing Center bulkhead wall). Assuming
conventional deadman anchors were used, these anchors would extend a minimum of 7 feet
below grade and run continuously behind the bulkhead. Since deadman anchors cannot
encroach onto the adjacent easterly parcel, and 7-foot-deep continuous deadman anchors will
1 likely pose significant construction difficulties, we understand that it ha been agreed to use
post -grouted soil anchors to restrain all site bulkheads.
' Post -grouted soil anchors on tiebacks offer several significant advantages �n that effective
corrosion protection is assured, convenient preloading is possible, and construction conflicts
1 with the Sailing Center deep foundations are minimized
In this regard, we anticipate that tieback anchors would be installed on 8 to 10 foot centers.
1 For these conditions, we recommend a minimum unbonded length of 40 feet, and a minimum
bonded length of 30 feet. As indicated, we also recommend that the tieback anchors be
1 N.U3W71\2573R01Gwn h1a,.tda
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH August 7, 2008
Project No. 2573 Page 14
' installed at an inclination of 4 to 1 (horizontal to vertical), resulting in the tieback depth at the
' easterly edge of the Sailing Center building near elevation +1.5 foot.
We recommend that tiebacks be installed with the use of a casing drill, such as a Klemm,
' which enables advancing a cased hole to the full design embedment depth. The anchor
would then be inserted into the cased hole, grouted, and then the casing removed, enabling
' the straightforward installation of tieback anchors in clean sands that would otherwise cave
into any drilled hole.
We recommend the use of DYWIDAG Systems International (DSI) anchors, with Type C
double -corrosion protection. DSI product literature is provided in Appendix E.
7.2 Guide Pile Recommendations
As we understand, guide piles for the proposed marina docks will utilize round pre -stressed
concrete piles designed to accommodate maximum lateral design loads on the order of 2 to 4
' kips. The outer shore -parallel 200-foot-long public side tie visitor dock will also be
restrained by round guide piles. We also understand that this dock may incorporate a wave
attenuation structure, which may ultimately result in lateral design loads on the order of 8 to
12 kips.
' In order to evaluate the structural requirements and load deformation characteristics of the
proposed concrete guide piles, we have used the elastic theory approach developed by
Matlock and Reese (1962). A condensed version of this approach is outlined in the
' NAVFAC Design Manual DM 7.02, Chapter 5, Section 7. A copy of this design section is
included with our calculation package (Appendix D). We have also used a coefficient of
variation of soil modulus of 15 pci for the medium dense to very dense sand deposits, which
extend well below the depth of interest.
Ultimate lateral load capacity was also evaluated using the approach developed by Broms
(1965), which follows the general approach developed by Matlock and Reese.
' We have used a roller assembly design load elevation of +10.0 feet (plan datum) and a
dredge bottom elevation of -12 feet. For this loading condition, we have calculated guide
' pile deflections for 144nch, 164nch, 20-inch, and 24-inch round, prestressed concrete piles
' N:@T357317577 R0100techb"tdcc
CITY -OF NEWPORT BEACH August 7, 2008
Project No. 2573 Page 15
' for the marina docks and the visitor dock. Figure 4 presents the load -deflection relationship
' for each pile size.
When using the Matlock and Reese solution, in order to minimize guide pile deflections and
account for variabilities in subsurface soil conditions, we recommend a minimum
embedment depth of 4T or 4(EI/f)"5. The recommended minimum embedment depth for
' various pile diameters is also summarized in Figure 4. Calculations are also attached.
7.2.1 Pre -Jetting Considerations
' Based on the subsurface data obtained from our borings, the relatively clean dense sands will
require pre jetting to reach the required design tip elevation. To maximize the lateral load
capacity and minimize the deformation and response to lateral loads, jetting should be
terminated approximately 2 feet from the design tip elevation, and the last 2 feet driven to aid
in redensifying the soils disturbed by jetting. We would suggest the use of a minimum
50,000 foot-pound capacity pile hammer to achieve design tip elevations within the medium
' dense to dense alluvial soils.
The jetting of piles, and particularly if contemplated to be used to advance the piles down to
design rip elevations, should be done using internal jet pipes, and jet volumes and velocities
should be limited to the minimum flow needed to advance the piles. In this regard, it is
important to recognize that excessive jetting will tend to enlarge the hole and significantly
reduce the lateral load capacity of the soil. The proper jetting technique is to use a low -
volume, low-pressure flow of water through the internal jet pipe while repeatedly lifting and
' dropping the pile to displace the dense sands beyond the pile tip and expel the sands up the
annulus of the jetted hole without excessively disturbing the surrounding dense sands. The
' proper jetting technique essentially allows the lifting and repeated dropping of the pile to
redensify the sand as the pile is advanced into the dense underlying sands.
7.3 Approach Pier/Gangway Abutment Foundation Recommendations
' We understand that the interior marina will be accessed by a single ADA-compliant
gangway, approximately 80-feet long. We further understand that the gangway will be
attached to a square concrete abutment supported by both the southerly and easterly
' bulkheads, along with a single round concrete pile positioned on the outward edge of the
abutment centered between the gangway hinge assembly. We recommend a minimum
N:1=7012570 ROI G okali tdw
I041
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH August 7, 2008
Project No.2573 Page 16
' design pile tip elevation of -25 feet, plan datum. Jetting, if desired, may be allowed down to
elevation -20 feet. We recommend an allowable axial capacity of 40 kips for a 16-inch-
diameter pile. We have not considered lateral loading for this condition; however, additional
' design criteria can be provided, if desired.
7.4 Dredging
As we understand, other consultants have provided recommendations regarding the
environmental processing of dredged materials. With regard to geotechnical considerations,
' it should be noted that there is a 2- to 3-foot-thick layer of clayey material near elevation +1
to +2 feet (plan datum) that may affect the dredging and disposal operations. With the
exception of this relatively thin layer of soil, all of the other on -site materials consist of
granular sands and would likely be suitable as beach -quality sand fill. All of the near -surface
soils may be dredged using conventional dredge equipment.
' 7.5 Shore Perpendicular Groin -Wall
As we understand, a shore perpendicular groin -wall is also proposed to accommodate deep -
water access adjacent the westerly floating dock. We would suggest that the load
' deformation and structural requirements for this shore -parallel bulkhead be designed utilizing
the elastic theory approach developed by Matlock and Reese and described in Section 7.2.
' Although the same coefficient of variation of soil modulus would apply in this area, the
Matlock and Reese design assumes isolated piles, with soil bridging providing an
approximately threefold increase in passive resistance restraining the isolated pile. Thus,
' when using the NAVFAC design manual for design of the shore perpendicular groin -wall, a
coefficient of variation of soil modulus of 5 pci should be used to account for the continuous
' shore perpendicular groin -wall.
8 LIMITATIONS
Coastal engineering and the earth sciences are characterized by uncertainty. Professional
' judgments presented herein are based partly on our evaluation of the technical information
gathered, partly on our understanding of the proposed construction, and partly on our general
' experience. Our engineering work and judgments rendered meet the current professional
standards. We do not guarantee the performance of the project in any respect.
I
N.WW7353373 R010.h hhwatdw
I
' CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH August 7, 2008
Project No.2573 Page 17
' We have investigated only a small portion of the pertinent soil and geologic conditions at the
' subject site. The opinions and conclusions made herein were based on the assumption that
the soil and geologic conditions do not deviate appreciably from those encountered during
' our field investigation. We recommend that a soil engineer from our office observe
construction to assist in identifying soil conditions that may be significantly different from
those assumed in our design. Additional recommendations may be required at that time.
I
J
I
I
I
I
NAM257112577 a0l G"o chD"tdm
1
n
t
I
1
n
F
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH August 7, 2008
Project No.2573 Page 18
REFERENCES
ASTM Standard D 1557, "Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Compaction Characteristics
of Soil Using Modified Effort," ASTM Intemational, West Conshohocken, PA,
www.astm.ore.
American Society of Civil Engineers, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other
Structures, ASCE Standard ASCE/SEI 7-05, including Supplement No. 1 and Errata
Broms, B.B., 1965, "Design of Laterally Loaded Piles," in Journal of the Soil Mechanics and
Foundations Division, American Society of Civil Engineers, Vol. 91, No. SM3, May
1965, pp. 79-99.
Fuscoe Engineering, June 6, 2008, Preliminary Topographic Survey, Marina Park.
Legg, M.R, and J.C. Borrero and C.E. Synolakis, C.E., 2004, Tsunami hazards associated
with the Catalina fault in southern California: Earthquake Spectra, vol. 20, p. 917-
950.
Matlock, H., and L.C. Reese, 1962, "Generalized Solutions for Laterally Loaded Piles," in
Transactions of the American Society of Civil Engineers, Vol. 127, Part 1, Paper No.
3370, pp. 1220-1251.
Public Works Standards, Inc., 2006, Greenbook: Standard Specifications for Public Works
Construction, Building News, Inc.
U.S. Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, 1986, Foundations
and Earth Structures, NAVFAC DM 7.02.
Xanthakos, P.P., 1995, Bridge Substructure and Foundation Design, Prentice Hall, New
Jersey.
N.USU57312573 AOI 0.hInmtdo
1
.
3
u i
B
1
1
t
CP%2 CPT-3
W eAYRVE
cPrS
1:
Mr-4
/�—.
J
l
yll
r
I {
a I(
t
1_-
I
Y
�E
,vEKmazrnAaxrNA
�
-
M06FfEArGME PANK
4
r'_ t� w I
'
� 'o-;..
' �.•
= ILA ,I-� I �
Ii�' -
WTI
.1-
il,F
-
I
In I
` y I
Fit:
A
NEWPORT BEACH
L.ILry
N.
PROJECT
u«.
rx„ua e,•I SiAY -
�,
�1 1 w
ti
p
G tam 20X 4000VIC/N/TYMAP
-
FEET
1 "'- �f
.-8+7LSL71i8LY0
T
Y
5
�f
iD
r
1 gf.
rs A-`A� ¢B t➢ M
-
Bose Map reproduced from City of Newport Beach Marina Park
Moster Pion. Base Photo token from Google Earth image 2008,
GEG6VO
5-2
s APPROX/MQTE SOR/NG 4"l7ON
CPT-I2
i APPR0X/M4iECPTt0a4770N
7EMWAXI rA CG LLTM GFJCKP clauNE w�EN
END« g Ara eel DtMi9
APPROX SC.QLF• SAN Cl-NW. CA aaea bill Elf-EYUD
'rr_,00• MN VT NAM MOROi NUNBEN
IAMR/A FM
C" OF NFRISM BLACK 2FM
7MWS G(AWa 094W-ECDMffY, PAGEflf"1 BORING LOCATION MAP
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
R.dlead firie
�mM'. �!E EASMQ
aeaW aU
area
BYIYlisaO l.M
n n :,r.,.,
- Im
it
Beat
voYeynap Corns 17)
E"a Bean,
i �Cr.,_ lawNOpen %aY Aru _%j
Bb
F&
Am
City or mmpod Bomc — — -- —
sNeg c«>mr Dock,
9
�. ekss�uCOlntlRE7EaUEE7r�tE74
a a�csracivGxaz+navvars%esrnswcaviu
R ENCIl417E27O3fEETOfAbtlFRGfG dt7{4£ENSNEETHIES
OAi✓Tii(1mum
ARLWO.OID I
d0
-IZO
O&MVAIER&K4WAVAi47DWIVE7W"SWEMNUV7OMMO94OW
oil i
i m m m m m m m m m m = = � m m m m
O 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
DEFLEWON- INCHES
Apr..
All"
"5AS,,X*
*"Smw xR
t1.
AWZEWM
WZVPM*
f �w
14
71.5
ml
Z"
646
18
•30
16
1146
a7.5
3.70
6.17
20
-32
20
23"
174.4
7.25
5."
23
-M
24
M7.3
a35.5
1370
6L/8
27
-39
Oa4rA2 AvsAwAvf vz4twEYvmnYu4mr
I
1
1
1
1
APPENDIX A
1 LOGS OF TEST BORINGS & CPT SOUNDINGS
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
F
i
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
i
LOG OF TEST BORING
ECTNAME
P2573 NUMBER
BORING
MARINA PARK
2573
LEGEND
SITE LOCATION
START FINISH
SHEET NO.
Newport Beach CA
1 5/16/2008 5/16/2008
1 1 of 2
DRILLING COMPANY DRILLING METHOD
LOGGED BY
CHECKED BY
i Hollow Stem Auger
G. Spaulding
LLINGEQUIP DRIMENT BORING DIA. (In) TOTAL DEPTH (R)
GROUND ELEV (R) DEPTHELEV. GROUNDWATER (R
Marl B5 8 40
n/a
SAMPLI G METHOD
NOTES
140-lb hammer/ 30-inch drop
V
v
Z
a
Z
zw
FZc
}
w
O
O
<
a
w
¢¢
y 0
Z�
Lu
:3
y v
w
F
_
°d 0
DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION
w
0
0
❑
¢
¢
O
wpm
it
w
of
a.
❑
KEY TO EXCAVATION LOGS
WATER TABLE MEASURED AT TIME OF DRILLING
OTHER TESTS
CC Confined Compression PI Plasticity Index
CL Chloride Content R Resistivity
CS Consolidation RV R-Value
DS Direct Shear SA Steve Analysis
6
El Expansion Index HO Hydrometer
GS Grain Size Analysis SF Sulfate
LC Laboratory Compaction SG Specific Gravity
pH Hydrogen Ion SW Swell
PENETRATION RESISTANCE (BLOWS/ft)
Number of blows required to advance the sampler 1 foot.
California Sampler blow counts can be converted to equivalent SPT blow
counts by using an end -area conversion factor of 0.67 when using a
140-pound hammer and a 30-Inch drop.
10
SAMPLE TYPE
1
C ("California Sampler"} An 18-Inch-tong, 2-1/24nch I.D., 3-Inch O.D.,
C
thick-walled sampler. The sampler is lined with eighteen 2-3/84nch I.D.
brass rings. Relatively undisturbed, Intact soil samples are retained In the
brass rings.
S ("SPT')-a.k.a. Standard Penetration Test, an 184nch4ong, 2-inch
2
O.D.,1-3/8-Inch I.D. drive sampler.
B
3
B ("Bulk')-a.k.a. Bulk Sack Sample, a disturbed, but representative
In large
15
sample obtained from a specific depth Interval placed a plastic
bag.
PB ("Plastic Bag") -A disturbed, but representative sample obtained
P
4
from a specific depth Interval placed'In a small sealable plastic bag.
(CONTINUED)
THIS SUMMARY APPLIES ONLY AT THE LOCATION
TerraCosta Consulting Group, Inc.
OF THIS BORING AND ATTHE TIME OF DRILLING.
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS MAY DIFFER AT OTHER
FIGURE A-1 a
4455 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite 100
LOCATIONS AND MAY CHANGE ATTHISLOCATION
WITH THE PASSAGE OFTIME. THE DATA
San'Diego,California 92123
PRESENTED IS A SIMPLIFICATION OF THE ACTUAL
CONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED.
1
i LOG OF TEST BORINGECTNAME PROJECT NUMBER BORING
MARINA PARK 2573 LEGEND
SITE LOCATION START FINISH SHEETNO.
Newport Beach CA 5/16/2008 1 5/16/2008 1 2 of 2
DRILLING COMPANY DRILLING METHOD LOGGED BY CHECKED BY
Greco Drillino Hallow Stem Au er G. S auldin
DRILLING EQUIPMENT BORING DIA. (in) TOTAL DEPTH (R) GROUND ELEV (R) DEPTHELEV. GROUND WATER (R
Mad 85 8 40 -T n/a
SAMPLING METHOD NOTES
140-Ib hammer / 30-Inch drop
LU Zw >>
0O z Fad N ¢v, xc�
E a y O Ow 3 y F ¢ p DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION
w N O O Ir
ip Lu Lu Co N a im
KEY TO EXCAVATION LOGS
(CONTINUED)
NOTES ON FIELD INVESTIGATION
Borings were advanced using a truck -mounted Mari B5 drill rig with an
8-Inch hollow -stem auger.
Standard Penetration Tests (SPT) and California Samplers were used to
25 obtain soil samples. The SPT and California Samplers were ddven into
the sell at the bottom of the borings with a 140-pound hammer falling 30
Inches. When the samplers were withdrawn from the boring, the samples
were removed, visually classified, seated In plastic containers, and taken
to the laboratory for detailed Inspection.
Free groundwater was encountered in the borings as shown on the logs.
Classifications are based upon the Unified Soil Classification System and
Include color, moisture, and consistency. Field descriptions have been
modified to reflect results of laboratory Inspection where deemed
appropriate.
I 30
1
35
d
1 u
p
1
THIS SUMMARY APPLIES ONLYATTHE LOCATION
TerraCosta Consulting Group, Inc. OF THIS BORING AND AT THE TIME OF DRILLING.
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS MAY DIFFER AT OTHER
` 4455 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite 100 LOCATIONS AND MAY CHANGE AT THIS LOCATION FIGURE A-1 b
WITH THE PASSAGE OF TIME. THE DATA
San Diego, California 92123 PRESENTED IS A SIMPLIFICATION OF THE ACTUAL
CONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED.
1 k
i
LOG OF TEST BORING
PROJECT NUMBER
BORING
MARINA PARK
2573
B•1
SITE LOCATION
START FINISH
SHEET NO.
Newport Beach CA
5/16/2008 5/16/2008
1 of 2
DRILLING COMPANY DRILLING METHOD
LOGGED BY
CHECKED BY
i Hollow Stem Au er
G. Spaulding
DIULLINO EQUIPMENT BORING DIA.(in) TOTAL DEPTH (R)
GROUND ELEV (R)
DEPTHELEV. GROUND WATER(A
Marl M5 8 31.5
1 n/a
'
BAWL NO METHOD
NOTES
140-lb hammer / 30-inch drop
z
c.
z
Co
'
O
wn
°do
DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION
Q
a
zNO
0..
v~i...
Fz-NW
a
y�
Wpm
OF
0:
W
coN
a
0
HYDRAULIC FILL
SAND to Silty SAND (SP/SM)loose to medium dense, gray -brown, dry,
;.';
;•
with occasional shell fragments
- Becomes medium dense, moist
6
.•.:'
. ':
C1
25
SA
'•'
•'.
2
24
SA
i ,.
; ,'
BAY DEPOSITS
Medium SAND (SP/SM) medium dense, grey, wet, with shell fragments
�
15
'r,
1
3
is
SA
HD
1�
J
:.
THIS SUMMARY APPLIES ONLY AT THE LOCATION
WF
Terracosta Consulting Group, Inc,
OF THIS BORING AND AT THE TIME OF DRILLING.
4455 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite 100
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS MAY DIFFER AT OTHER
LOCATIONS AND MAY CHANGE AT THIS LOCATION
FIGURE A-2 a
WITH THE PASSAGE OF TIME. THE DATA
San Diego, California92123
PRESENTED IS A SIMPLIFICATION OF THE ACTUAL
COND171ONS ENCOUNTERED.
i
PROJECT NAVE
LOG OF TEST BORING MARINA PARK 1 2573TNUMBER 1BB-1
W�r.9*11-i
v
O
Z
OZc
}}
C
w
O
c
x
W
O
a
w
F
q
L y
Co
wo v
D
v
w
F gW
_U
Q. O
DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION
'Q
OF
O
j
G
N
wwin
K
w
w
a
o
5 1 15 1 1 1 SA
6 37
dense, gray, wet
Groundwater encountered at approximately 10 feet at lime of excavation.
THIS SUMMARY APPLIES ONLY AT THE LOCATION
TerraCosta Consulting Group, Inc. OF THIS BORING AND AT THE TIME OF DRILLING.
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS MAY DIFFER AT OTHER
4455 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite 100 LOCATIONS AND MAY CHANGE ATTHIS LOCATION FIGURE A-2 b
WITH THE PASSAGE OF TIME. THE DATA
San Diego, California 92123 PRESENTED IS A SIMPLIFICATION OF THE ACTUAL
CONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED.
LOG OF TEST BORING
ECTNAME
PROJECT NUMBER
BORING
1
O
N
1
MARINA PARK
2573
B-2
SITE LOCATION
START FINISH
SHEET NO.
Newport Beach CA
5/16/2008 5/1612008
1 of 2
DRILLING COMPANY DRILLING METHOD LOGGED BY
CHECKED BY
Hollow Stem Au er G. Spaulding
DRILLI OEQUIPMENT BORING DLA, (In) TOTAL DEPTH (R)
GROUND ELEV (R)
DEPTHELEV.GROUND WATER (R
Marl B5 8 31.5
� nla
9AMPLINO METHOD
NOTES
140-Ib hammer! 30•Inch drop
o.
z
Oz
C
z��
-e�D
ww �
DESCRIPTION AND
iO
1
PROJECT NAME
LOG OF TEST BORING 1F7573TNUMBER 11BORING
MARINA PARK 1
2
z
a
z
Fzc^
�
w
v
F
n
Q
N O
z
wp n
n
°
LUy
LU
y
Sc�
a o
DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION
IL
r~i_r
O�
Q
<
N
wpm
W
w
ar
a
4 1 14 1 1 1 SA
5 I S 3-
rwD��&M
dense, red -brown, wet
Groundwater encountered at depth of approximately 6.5 feet at time of
excavotfon.
.
TerfaCosta Consulting Group, Inc.OF
4455 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite 100
THIS SUMMARY APPLIES ONLY AT THE LOCATION
THIS BORING AND AT THE TIME OF DRILLING.
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS MAY DIFFER AT OTHER
LOCATIONS AND MAY CHANGE AT THIS LOCATION
WITH THE PASSAGE OF TIME. THE DATA
FIGURE A-3 b
San Diego, California 92123
PRESENTED IS A SIMPLIFICATION OF THE ACTUAL
CONDI7ONS ENCOUNTERED.
GREGG DRILLING & TESTING, INC.
- GEOTECMUCAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL INVESTIGATION SERVICES
May 19, 2008
' Terra Costa Consulting Group
Attn: Bob Smille
4455 Murphy Canyon Road
San Diego, CA 92123
' Subject: CPT Site Investigation
Marina Park
Balboa Peninsula, California
GREGG Project Number: 08-206SH-
' Dear Mr. Smille: - -
The following report presents the.results of GREGG Drilling & Testing's Cone Penetration Test
investigation for the above referenced site. The following testing services were performed:
I
FL
1
I�
I
I
1
Cone Penetration Tests (CPTU)
2
Pore Pressure Dissipation Tests (PPD)
® -
3
Seismic Cone Penetration Tests (SCPTU)
❑ -
4
5
Resistivity Cone Penetration Tests (RCPTU)
UVOST,LaserInduced, Fluorescence (UVOST)
❑
❑
6
Groundwater Sampling (GWS)
❑
7
Soil Sampling (SS)
❑
8
Vapor Sampling (VS)
El
9
Vane Shear Testing (VST)
❑
101
SPT Energy Calibration (SPTE)
❑
A list of reference papers providing additional background on the specific tests conducted is
provided in the bibliography following the text of the report. If you would like a copy of any of
these publications or should you have any questions or comments regarding the contents of this
report, please do not hesitate to contact our office at (562) 427-6899.
Sincerely,
GREGG Drilling &Testing, Inc.
Peter Robertson
Technical Operations
2726 Walnut Ave • Signal HID, California 90755 a (562) 427-6899 • FAX (562) 427-3314
OTHER OMCFS: SANFRANCISCO • HOUSTON • SOUTH CAROLINA
% w .aroggdd1Hnc.00m
M M M lM
� I� e i� I)♦ Ili i� l� l� lip il♦ � � � i>•
GREGG DRILLING & TESTING, INC.
GEOTEMINICAL AND ENVIROMMMfAL INVESTIGATION SERVICES
Cone Penetration Test Sounding Summary
-Table 1-
CPT Sounding
Identification
Date
Termination Depth
(Feet)
Depth of Groundwater
Samples (Feet)
Depth of Soil Samples
(Feet)
Depth of Pore Pressure
Dissipation Tests (Feet)
CPT-01
5 16 08
50
-
-
-
CPT-02
5 16 08
50
-
-
-
CPT-03
5 16 08
50
-
-
-
CPT-04
5 16 08
30
-
-
-
CPT-05
5 16 08
34
-
-
-
CPT-06
5 16 08
50
-
-
-
CPT-07
5/16/08
35
-
-
-
CPT-08
5 16 08
30
-
-
-
CPT-09
5 16 08
30
-
-
-
CPT-10
5/16 08
1 30
-
-
22
CPT-11
5 16 08
47
-
-
-
CPT-12
5 16 08
43
-
-
-
2726 Walnut Ave • Signal Hill, California 90755 • (562) 427-6899 • FAX (562) 4273314
OTHER OFFICES: SANFRANCISCO • HOUSTON• SOUTH CAROLINA
mvw.menedri[1inv com
1
Cone Penetration Testing Procedure
' �MIIIII (CPT)
Gregg Drilling carries out all Cone Penetration Tests (CPT) using an integrated
i electronic cone system, Figure CPT. The soundings were conducted using a 20 ton
capacity cone with a tip area of 15 cm2 and a friction sleeve area of 225 cm2. The cone
is designed with an equal end area friction sleeve and a tip end area ratio of 0.80.
' The cone takes measurements of cone
bearing (q,), sleeve friction (f.,.) and
penetration pore water pressure (tr,) at 5-
cm intervals during penetration to provide scO seal
a nearly continuous hydrogeologic log. 1 Electric cable for signal transmission
' CPT data reduction and interpretation is Water seal
performed in real time facilitating on -site
decision making. The above mentioned Friction bad cell
' parameters are stored on disk for further —Friction sleeve
analysis and reference. All CPT
soundings are performed in accordance —Inclinometer (.&lv)
I .
with revised (2002) ASTM standards (D
5778-95).
The cone also contains a porous filter
element located directly behind the cone 'I —Tip load cell
tip (u,), Figure CPT. It consists of porous l
1 plastic and is 5.Omm thick. The filter
element is used to obtain penetration pore
pressure as the cone is advanced as well
as Pore Pressure Dissipation Tests «—Water seal
(PPDT's during appropriate — soilseal
) spauses In �i pore pressure transducer
penetration. It should be noted that prior Filter
to penetration, the element is fully �/
saturated with silicon oil under vacuum \ r/—Conerp
pressure to ensure accurate and fast V
' dissipation.
Figure CPT
When the soundings are complete, the test holes are grouted using a Gregg support rig.
The grouting procedures generally consist of pushing a hollow CPT rod with a "knock
out" plug to the termination depth of the test hole. Grout is then pumped under pressure
as the tremie pipe is pulled from the hole. Disruption or further contamination to the site
' is therefore minimized.
I
[1
1
EGG Cone Penetration Test Data & Interpretation
The Cone Penetration Test (CPT) data collected from your site are presented in graphical
form in the attached report. The plots include interpreted Soil Behavior Type (SBT) based on
the charts described by Robertson (1990). Typical plots display SBT based on the non -
normalized charts of Robertson et al (1986). For CPT soundings extending greater than 50
feet, we recommend the use of the normalized charts of Robertson (1990) which can be
displayed as SBTn, upon request. The report also includes spreadsheet output of computer
calculations of basic interpretation in terms of SBT and SBTn and various geotechnical
parameters using current published correlations based on the comprehensive review by
Lunne, Robertson and Powell (1997). as well as recent updates by Professor Robertson. The
interpretations are presented only as a guide for geotechnical use and should be carefully
reviewed. Gregg Drilling & Testing Inc. do not warranty the correctness or the applicability of
any of the geotechnical parameters interpreted by the software and do not assume any
liability for any use of the results in any design or review. The user should be fully aware of
the techniques and limitations of any method used in the software.
Some interpretation methods require input of the groundwater level to calculate vertical
effective stress. An estimate of the in -situ groundwater level has been made based on field
observations and/or CPT results, but should be verified by the user.
A summary of locations and depths is available in Table 1. Note that all penetration depths
referenced in the data are with respect to the existing ground surface.
Note that it is not always possible to clearly identify a soil type based solely on q,, j,., and u,.
In these situations, experience, judgment, and an assessment of the pore pressure
dissipation data should be used to infer the correct soil behavior type.
FddlanRado (%), Rf
Figure 5BT
(After Robertson, eta/., 1986)
ZONE
SET
1
Sensitive, fine grained
2
Organic materials
3
Clay
4
Silty clay to clay
S
Clayey silt to silty clay
6
Sandy silt to clayey silt
7
Silty sand to sandy silt
a
Sand to silty sand
9
Sand
10
Gravel sand to sand
11
'�� Very stiff fine grained'
12
Sand to clayey sand -
*over consolidated or cemented
I
1
11
11
Pore Pressure Dissipation Tests (PPDT)
Pore Pressure Dissipation Tests (PPDT's) conducted at various intervals measured
hydrostatic water pressures and determined the approximate depth of the ground water
table. A PPDT is conducted when the cone is halted at specific intervals determined by
the field representative. The variation of the penetration pore pressure (u) with time is
measured behind the tip of the cone and recorded by a computer system.
Pore pressure dissipation data can be interpreted to provide estimates of:
• Equilibrium piezometric pressure
• Phreatic Surface
• In situ horizontal coefficient of consolidation (ch)
• In situ horizontal coefficient of permeability (kh)
In order to correctly interpret
the equilibrium piezometric
pressure and/or the phreatic
' surface, the pore pressure
must be monitored until such
time as there is no variation in
pore pressure with time,
Figure PPDT. This time is
commonly referred to as troo,
the point at which 100% of the
excess pore pressure has
dissipated.
A complete reference on pore
pressure dissipation tests is
presented by Robertson et al.
1992.
A summary of the pore
pressure dissipation tests is
summarized in Table 1.
ME
(i Xd
suno.e
Pore Pressure (u)
measured here
pwnc - Q O of Car
arofg �
[Wow - rteaa or waver
Water Table Calculation
Hwater = scone - Hwater
where Hwater = Ue (depth units)
Usetul Conversicn Factors: ipsl = 0.704m = 2.31 feet (water)
l taf = 0.958 bar - 12.3 psi
1m=3.28feet
Figure PPDT
t GREGG DRILLING & TESTING, INC.
- GEOTECHNICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL INVESTIGATION SERVICES
' Bibliography
Lunne, T., Robertson, P.K. and Powell, J.J.M., "Cone Penetration Testing in Geotechnical Practice"
E & FN Spon. ISBN 0 419 23750,1997
Roberston, P.K., 'Soil Classification using the Cone Penetration Test°, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 27,
' 1990 pp.151-158.
Mayne, P.W., "NHI (2002) Manual on Subsurface Investigations: Geotechnical Site Characterization", available
through www.ce.gateGh.edu/—cieosys/Faculty/Mayne/i)apersfindex.html Section 5.3, pp.107-112.
Robertson, P.K., R,G. Campanella, D. Gillespie and A. Rice, 'Seismic CPT to Measure In -Situ Shear Wave Velocity",
' Journal of Geotechnical Engineering ASCE, Vol.112, No. 8,1986
pp.791-803.
Robertson, P.K., Sully, J., Woeller, D.J., Lunne, T., Powell, J.J.M., and Gillespie, D.J., "Guidelines for Estimating
Consolidation Parameters in Soils from Piezocone Tests", Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 29, No. 4,
August 1992, pp. 539-550.
' Robertson, P.K., T. Lunne and J.J.M. Powell, "Geo-Environmental Application of Penetration Testing', Geotechnical
Site Characterization, Robertson & Mayne (editors),1998 Balkema, Rotterdam, ISBN 90 5410 939 4 pp 35-47.
Campanella, R.G. and I. Weemees,'Development and Use of An Electrical Resistivity Cone for Groundwater
Contamination Studies, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 27 No. 5,1990 pp. 557-667.
DeGroot, D.J. and A.J. Lutenegger, 'Reliability of Soil Gas Sampling and Characterization Techniques% International
Site Characterization Conference - Atlanta, 1998.
Woeller, D.J„ P.K. Robertson, T.J. Boyd and Dave Thomas, 'Detection of Polyaromatic Hydrocarbon Contaminants
Using the UVIF-CPT', 531d Canadian Geotechnical Conference Montreal, QC October pp. 733-739, 2000.
Zemo, D.A., T.A. Delfino, J.D. Gallinatti, V.A. Baker and L.R. Hilpert, "Field Comparison of Analytical Results from
' Discrete -Depth Groundwater Samplers' BAT EnviroProbe and QED HydroPunch, Sixth national Outdoor Action
Conference, Las Vegas, Nevada Proceedings,1992, pp 299-312.
Copies of ASTM Standards are available through www.astm.orc
2726 Walnut Ave • Signal Hill, California 90755 • (562) 427-6899 • FAX (562) 4273314
OTHER OFFICES: SANFRANCISCO - HOUSTON ° SOUTH CAROLINA
www Rmggdrillina.eom
m m ! m m m m m m m ! m m m m am m
EVTERRA COSTA Site: MARINA PARK Engineer: B. SMILLE
Sounding: CPT-01 Date: 6/16/2008 07:10
qt (tsf) fs (tsf) u (psi) Rf (°A) SBT
0 500 0 5 -5 25 0 5 0 12
0 i I I I I I 1 I I I i
I n�rrrrrrT �. H
Max Depth50-033 (ft)
Avg. Interval. 0.328 (ft)
SBT: Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 1990)
= a m m m m m W m = = m= m m= m om m
GREGG � TERRA COSTA Site: MARINA PARK Engineer: B. SMILLE
Sounding: CPT-02 Date: 6/1612008 08:02
0 Qt (tsf) 500 0 fs (tsf) 5 5 U (psi) 25 D Rf (aib} 5 D SBT
L
6
0
V Max Depth %033 (ft)
Avg. Interval: 0.328 (ft)
Sand
Sana
t
a
H
� -1
� yr
� sae
Sub
SBT: Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 1990)
� TERRA COSTA Site: MARINA PARK Engineer: B. SMILLE
- Sounding: CPT-03 Date: fill 6/200808:24
L
2
L]
at (tsf)
fs (tsf)
u (psi)
�II
�l
Rf (%)
S BT
1111111111111
Max. Depth: 50.033 (ft)
Avg. Interval. 0 328 (ft)
iT: Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 1990)
EGG TERRA COSTA Site: MARINA PARK Engineer: B. SMILLE
Sounding: CPT-04 Date: 6/1612008 08:66
0 cit (tsf) 500 I
0
fs (fsf)
u (psi)
50- 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Max. Depths 30.020 (ft)
Avg. Interval. 0.328 (ft)
Rf (%)
�,aatse
SBT
sw
SBT: Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 1990)
GREGG TERRA COSTA Site: MARINA PARK Engineer: B. SMILLE
- Sounding: CPT-06 Date: 6/16/2008 09:14
g1(tsf) fs (tsf) u (psi) Rf (%) SBT
0 500 0 5 •5 25 0 5 0 12
0
I
V V Max. Depth: 33.957 (ft)
Avg. Interval. 0.328 (ft)
SBT: Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 1990)
TERRA COSTA
at list)
is (fsf)
Site: MARINA PARK Engineer: B. SMILLE
Sounding: CPT-06 Date: 6116/2008 09:33
u (psi)
it
S BT
12
San -.
Ea" E Ley 33r..3
Elk
E3RC
S"a
n
I
S3rG
Max. Depth.- 50.033 (ft)
Avg. Interval. 0.328 (ft)
SBT: Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 1990)
TERRA COSTA
qt (tsf)
fs (tsf)
5 5 U (psi)
Site: MARINA PARK
Sounding: CPT-07
Rf (%}
25 0
Engineer: B. SMILLE
Date: 6/161200810:30
SBT
F3T5
sma a Spy wed
Max. Depth: 35.269 (ft)
Avg Interval. 0.328 (ft)
SBT: Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 1990)
UKUSU
� TERRA COSTA Site: MARINA PARK Engineer: B. SMILLE
- Sounding: CPT-08 Date: 61161200810:69
0 500
0
- 5
u (psi) Rf (%) o SBT
12
°aDd S sty s amY
ss"
G.
are
II IIII
IIII II11111111111.
Max. Depth. 30.020 (ft)
Avg Interval. 0.328 (ft)
Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 1990)
L
d
G
TERRA COSTA
Ut (tsf)
Site: MARINA PARK
Sounding: CPT-09
i0 0 fS (tsf) 5 5 U (psi) 25 0 Rf (%) 5
Engineer: B. SMILLE
Date: 61161200811:22
Max Depth: 30-020 (ft)
Avg. Interval. 0.328 (ft)
SBT: Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 1990)
EG
E TERRA COSTA Site: MARINA PARK Engineer: B. SMILLE
- Sounding: CPT-10 Date: 6116/200811:39
0 500
fs (is[)
U (psil
SBT
12
Max. Depth: 30.020 (ft)
Avg. Interval. 0.328 (ft)
SBT: Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 1990)
M= M = = m W m r = m M m= m= r
Max Depth: 47.080 (ft)
Avg- Interval. 0.328 (ft)
SBT: Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 1990)
m W w= W w= m= r = = ■■r m m w
t
n
u
TERRA COSTA
qt (tsf)
a 0
Site: MARINA PARK
Sounding: CPT-12
fs (tsf) u (psi) Rf (�)
Engineer: B. SMILLE
Date: 61161200812:31
Max Depth 43307 (ft)
Avg. Interval. 0.328 (ft)
SBT: Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 1990)
� TERRA COSTA Site: MARINA PARK Engineer: B. SMILLE
- Sounding: CPT-01 Date: 6116/2008 07:10
o qt (tsf) sao o is (tsf) s o Rf (%) s o N.,(blows/ft)1ao o SBT
12
9
V Max. Depth 50.033 (ft)
Avg. Interval. 0328 (ft)
S3rd i .My vd
Sxnx ''
Sari S sjgy saax
SBT: Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 1990)
EGG TERRA COSTA Site: MARINA PARK Engineer: B. SMILLE
- Sounding: CPT-02 Date: 5/16/2008 08:02
a qt (tsf)
500
is (Is IF)
—r-T-F-F-F-1
Ven (blows/fl
SBT
W4
ears
d
9ar6
Max Depth 50.033 (f )
Avg. Interval. 0.328 (ft)
SBT: Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 1990)
m m m m = = = = m m m= m= m r
Max. Depth: 50.033 (ft)
Avg. Interval. 0.328 (ft)
SBT. Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 1990)
� = = m m m m r m m m m m m m s m m m
Max. Depth: 30.020 (ft)
Avg. Interval. 0.328 (ft)
SBT: Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 1990)
r r r �■r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r
EGG TERRA COSTA Site: MARINA PARK Engineer: B. SMILLE
Sounding: CPT-06 Date: 6/1612008 09:14
L
n
d
0 Qt (tsf) 500
fs (tsf) Rf (%) Nso (blows/ft)
5 0 5 0 100 i
I I I I I 1 1 I 1
Max Depth: 33.957 (ft)
Avg. Interval. 0.328 (ft)
SBT: Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 1990)
w m= m ! m= m m= m= m m= m m
§REGG � TERRA COSTA Site: MARINA PARK Engineer: B. SMILLE
- Sounding: CPT-06 Date: 6116/2008 09:33
n
0 qt (tsf) 500
+V Max Depth: 50.033 (ft)
Avg. Interval. 0-326 (ft)
IFo (blows/I
S BT
_: •: d stlY sand
SW
SBT: Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 1990)
r• = = = m m m= m m= m is m = = m
� TERRA COSTA Site: MARINA PARK Engineer: B. SMILLE
Sounding: CPT-07 Date: 611612008 10:30
o qt (tsf) 500 o fs (tsf) o Rf (%) e o N6o (blows/ft)1oa o SBT12
9
L
G
U
Q
1
2
3
4
F
VV Max. Depth: 35.269 (ft)
Avg Interval. 0-328 (ft)
SBT: Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 1990)
GREGG TERRA COSTA Site: MARINA PARK Engineer: B. SMILLE
- Sounding: CPT-08 Date: 6/1612008 10:69
t
a
V
0
JV Max Depth: 30.020 (ft)
Avg. Interval. 0 328 (f )
fs (tst)
Rf (%)
77—r
Isn (blowslt
SBT
'BT: Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 1990)
Max. Depth. KOH (ft)
Avg Interval. 0.328 (ft)
SBT: Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 1990)
GREGG
TERF A COSTA Site: MARINA PARK Engineer: B. SMILLE
� f�RI-� �.r .7 N1 Sounding: CPT-10 Date: 6/1612008 11:39
at (tsf)
(tsf) RfM N,,n(blows/ft) SBT
0 0 12
Max. Depth: 30.020 (ft)
Avg Interval. 0.320 (ft)
Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 1990)
GREGG
TERRA COSTA Site: MARINA PARK Engineer: B. SMILLE
Sounding: CPT-11 Date: 51161200812:10
o gt(tsf) 500 o fs(tsf) s o Rf(%) e o Nfio(blows/ft)1aa o SBT
0 nr a. y4.lrv.
l
S 9 A} SdM
10 :.... _..... ..._... .. _._.... _. _.
sad i
20 .... _. _..... ..... .............. ...._ _.. ..._7 .._ ..........
I
1
L 1
p 1
SaW
Max. Depth: 47.080 (ft)
Avg Interval. 0.328 (ft)
SBT: Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 1990)
= = = m m ! = = m = m = m m m = =
gREG � TERRA COSTA Site: MARINA PARK Engineer: B. SMILLE
Sounding: CPT-12 Date: 6116/200812:31
o qe (tsf) eoo o fs (tsf) 5 u Rf (%) e o N60 (blowslft)100 o SBT
12
=uAdhr vuk
Max Depth 43307 (ft)
Avg. Interval. 0.328 (ft)
SBT: Soil Behavior Type (Robertson 1990)
�— iiii■ l- A=— —_ —�■ —_�_AEW -M——bM--=rl
I
EGG GREGG DRILLING $ TESTING sounding: Depth: 22.146 22.146
Pore Pressure Dissipation Test Site: MARINA PARK
Engineer. G. SPAULDING
61
n
1
v
0 100 200 300 400
Time (seconds)
500
I
i
�J
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Lj
J
1
1
1
1
LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
1
Particle
Size Distribution
Report
(O CJ N � '• n \ �
SQL Y. II i it X i[
it it
100
I
I..;
i
Oo
I
I-
70,
1
1
111
40
n.
I
30
I
20
IIjI
'
�
i:i
II
.10
1
O
0.01
0.001
0.1
100 10
1
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
%+31.
%Gravel
Coarse Fine
%Sand
Coarse Medium Fine
_
S(It
%Fines _
Clay
0.0
0.0
1.0
4,0 39.0 49.7
6.3
PERCENT
SPEC. PASS?
Material Description
SIEVE
SIZE
FINER
PERCENT , (X=NO)
(Lab #19844)
0.375"
100.0
#4
99.0
RIO
95.0
Atterbera Limits
#20
81.0
PL=
LL=
P1=
#40
56.0
#100
20.0
Coefficients
#200
6.3
D85= 0.9950
D60= 0.4701
D50= 0.3650
D30= 0.2109
D15= 0.1208
D10= 0.0930
Cu= 5.05
Cc= 1.02
Classification
USCS=
AASHTO=
Remarks
1
As received moisture content=15.9%
1
(no specification provided)
Sample Number: Bl-1 Depth: 5'
Date: 5/29/08
MACTEC, Inc.
Client: TerraCosta Consulting Group, Inc.
'
Project: #2573 Marina Park
'
San Die o California
Pro'ectNo: 5014-07-0012.25
Figure #19844
Tested By:
Valles/Stacy
Checked By: Collins
1
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION TEST DATA
Client: TerraCosta Consulting Group, Inc.
Project: #2573 Marina Park
Project Number: 5014-07-0012.25
Depth: 5' Sample Number: 131-1
Material Description: (Lab #19844)
Date: 5/29/08
Testing Remarks: As received moisture content=15.9%,
Tested by: Valles/Stacy Checked by: Collins
Sieve Test Data
Sieve
Opening
Percent
Size
Finer
0.375"
100.0
#4
99.0
#10
95.0
#20
81.0
#40
56.0
#100
20.0
#200
6.3
Fractional Components
5130/2008 1
Cobbles Gravel
Coarse Fine Total
Sand _
Fines _
Silt CIS Total
Coarse
Medium
Fine
Total
0.0 1 0.0
1.0
1.0
4.0
39.0 J
49.7
1 92.7
6.3
D10 D16
D20
D30
D50
D60 D80
D85
D90
D95
0.0930 ; 0.1208
0.1500
0:2109
0.3650
0.4701 0.8209
0.9950
1.2932
2.0000
Fineness � C
TE
1.84 5.05
MACTEC, Inc.
0
Particle
Size Distribution
Report
00
19e
..
.LQ..
I
I1�1
I
I.
I.
III I
80
70
Nil
Z
50W
I
Of
30
' I
20
i
10
I
0
0.01
0.001
100 10
t
0.1
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
%Gravel
%Sand—
%Fines
+3"_
%Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
_Fine
silt
I Clay
0.0
0.0
0.0
I.0
18.0
78.2
1
1.8
1 1.0
SIEVE
PERCENT
SPEC.`
PASS?
Material Description
SIZE
FINER
PERCENT
(X=NO)
(Lab 1/19845)
#4
100.0
#10
99.0
#20
95.0
Limits
#40
81.0
PL=
_Atterherg
LL=
P1=
#100
29.0
#200
2.8
Coefficients
D85= 0.4834
D60= 0.2643
D50= 0.2192
D30= 0.1528
D15= 0.1137
D10= 0.1008
Cu= 2.62
Cc= 0.88
Cjassification
USCS= SP
AASHTO=
Remarks
As received moisture content=24.6%
(no specification provided)
Sample Number: BI-2 Depth: 10'
Date: 5/29/08
'
MACTEC, Inc.
Client: TerraCosta Consulting Group, Inc.
[--
Project: 92573 Marina Park ,
San o, California
Project No: 5014-07-0012.25
_ _
Fi ure �19845__],
-Die
Tested By: Valles ___
Checked By: Collins
.__ _..
I
11
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
J
I
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION TEST DATA
Client: TcrraCosta Consulting Group, Inc,
Project: #2573 Marina Park
Project Number: 5014-07-0012.25
Depth: 10' Sample Number: B1-2
Material Description: (Lab #19845)
Date: 5/29/08
USCS Classification: SP
Testing Remarks: As received moisture conlent=24.6%>
Tested by: Valles Checked by: Collins
Sieve Test Data
Sieve
Opening
Percent
Size
Finer
#4
100.0
#10
99.0
#20
95.0
#40
81.0
#100
29.0
#200
2.8
Hydrometer Test Data
Hydrometer test uses material passing #10
Percent passing #10 based upon complete sample = 99.0
Weight of hydrometer sample=116.88
Hygroscopic moisture correction:
Moist weight and tare = 33.95
Dry weight and tare = 33.92
Tare weight = . 20.67
Hygroscopic moisture = 0.2%
Table of composite correction values:
Temp., deg. C: 18.0 19.8 21.6 27.7
Comp corr • -8 0 -7.0 -6.0 -5.0
Meniscus correction only = 0.0
Specific gravity of solids = 2.65
Hydrometer type = 152H
Hydrometer effective depth equation: L = 16.294964
- 0.164 x Rm
Elapsed Temp. Actual
Corrected
Eff.
Diameter
Percent
Time (min.) (deg. C.) Reading
Reading
K
Rm
Depth
(mm.)
Finer
1.00 19.8 11.0
4.0
0.0137
11.0
14.5
0.0521
3.4
2.00 19.8 10.0
3.0
0.0137
10.0
14.7
0.0370
2.5
5.00 19.5 10.0
2.8
0.0137
10.0
14.7
0.0235
2.4
15.00 19.7 9.0
1.9
0.0137
9.0
14.8
0.0136
1.7
30.00 19.7 9.0
1.9
0.0137
9.0
14.8
0.0096
1.7
60.00 19.8 9.0
2.0
0.0137.
9.0
14.8
0.0068
1.7
120.00 20.0 8.0
1.1
0.0136
8.0
15.0
0.0048
0.9
250.00 20.2 8.0
1.2
0.136
8.0
15.0
0.0033
1.0
1440.00 19.6 8.0
0.9
0.0137
8.0
15.0
0.0014
0.8
MACTEC, Inc.
5/30/2008
I
I
I
11
ii
I
I
I
C
F
1
I
u
Fractional 10onigweFnts,
Cobbles
Gravel
Coarse Fine Total
_ Sand _
Coarse Medium Fine Total
Fines
Silt
-Clay Total
0.0 0.0
0.0
0.0
1.0 18.0
78.2
1 97.2 1.8
1.0 2.8
�10
D15 D20
D30
D50
�60
D85
D90
�95
O.1003
0.1137 b.1264
0.1528
0.2t92 0.2643
_ _180
0.4130
0.4834
0.5980
0.8500
Fineness
Modulus
Cu
Cc
1.18
1 2.62
1 0.88
MACTEC, Inc.
r
Particle Size Distribution Report
o00
10080
1 III
70
MW 50
Z ;I
Z 50-
LLl
,
a I
30
20
11
11
0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0. 01
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
+3" %Gravel %Sand %Fines
____Coarse_ Fine Coarse Medium Fine __ Silt ...... clay
0.0 0.0 1
,0 1.0 I 34.0 63.2 0.3 0.5
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC,' PASS? Material Description
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO) (Lab #19846)
0.375" I.0
99
#4 99.0
#10 98.0 Atterberg Ljrnits
920 91.0 PL= NV LL= Pi= NP
#40 .0
12
#100 12.0 Coefficients
#200 0.8 D85= 0.6900 D80= 0.3937 D50= 0.3276
i D30= 0.2267 D15= 0.1631 D10= 0.1408
Cu= 2.80 Cc= 0.93
Classification
i USCS= SP AASHTO=
i
' Remarks
As received moisture content=19.7"/0
(no specification provided)
Sample Number: BI-3 Depth: 15' Date: 5/29/08
MACTEC, Inc. Client: TerraCosta Consulting Group, Inc.
Project: #2573 Marina Park
■ San Diego, California Project No: 5014-07-0012.25 Figure #19846
Tested By: Valles__ . __, Checked By: Collins __
r
r
! _J
1
I
11
r
I
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION TEST DATA
5/3012008
Client: TerraCosla Consulting Group, Inc.
Project:112573 Marina Park
Project Number: 5014-07-0012.25
Depth: 15' Sample Number: B1-3
Material Description: (Lab #19846)
Date: 5/29/08 PL: NV Ph NP
USCS Classification: SP
Testing Remarks: As received moisture content-19.7%
Tested by: Valles Checked by: Collins
Sieve Test Data
Sieve
Opening Percent
Size Finer
0.375" 100.0
#4 99.0
#10 98.0
#20 91.0
#40 64.0
#100 12.0
#200 0.8
Oydrometer Test' Data
Hydrometer test uses material passing #]0
Percent passing #10 based upon complete sample = 98.0
Weight of hydrometer sample=117.61
Hygroscopic moisture correction:
Moist weight and tare = 33.08
Dry weight and tare = 33.04
Tare weight = 20.68
Hygroscopic moisture =0.3%
Table of composite correction values:
Temp., deg. C: 18.0 19.8 21.6 27.7
Comp. corr.: -8.0 -7.0 -6.0 -5.0
Meniscus correction only = 0.0
Specific gravity of solids = 2.65
Hydrometer type= 152H
Hydrometer effective depth equation: L = 16.294964 - 0.164 x Rm
Elapsed Temp. Actual Corrected
Eff.
Diameter
Percent
Time (min.) (deg. C.) Reading Reading K Rm
Depth
(mm.)
Finer
1.00 1919 8.0 1.1 0.0137 8.0
15.0
0.0529
0.9
2.00 19.9 8.0 1.1 0.0137 8.0
15.0
0.0374
0.9
5.00 19.8 8.0 1.0 0.0137 8.0
15.0
0.0237
0.8
15.00 19.7' 8.0 0.9. 0.0137 8.0
15.0
0.0137
0.8
30.00 19.8 8.0 1.0 0.0137 8.0
15.0
0.0097
0.8
60.00 19.8 8.0 1.0 0.0137 8.0
15.0
0.0068
0.8
120.00 20.0 7.5 0.6 0.0136 7.5
15.1
0.0048
0.5
250.00 20.3 7.5 0.8 0.0136 7.5
15.1
0.0033
0.7
1440.00 19.6 7.5 0.4 0.0137 7.5
15.1
0.0014
0.3
MACTEC, Inc.
r
I
1
J
t
1
1
1
I
1
1
r
r
I
Fractl6nal• C6hlp6hehts
Cobbles
0.0
Gravel_ _
Coarse Fine Total
0.0 1.0 1.0
Sand _
Fines
Coarse
Medium
Fine
_Total
99.2
Silt
Clay Total
1.0
34.0 63.2
0.3
0.5 0.8
C10
C15
C20 I C30 C50
C60
C80
C85
' C90
C95
0.1408
O.1631
0.1841 0.2267 0.3276
0.3937
0.6023
0.6900
0.8160
1.0624
Fineness
Modulus
Cu
Cc
1.70
2.80
0.93
MACTEC, Inc.
1
I
lI
I
r
I
F,
I
I
I
r
I
I
1
I
I
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION TEST DATA
Client: TcrraCosta Consulting Group, Inc.
Project: #2573 Marina Park
Project Number: 5014-07-0012.25 .
Depth: 20' Sample Number: B14
Material Description: (Lab #19847)
Date: 5/29/08 PL: NV PI: NP
USCS Classification: SP
Testing Remarks: As received moisture content=20.0%
Sieve Test Data
Sieve
Opening
Percent
Size
Finer
#4
100.0
#10
99.0
#20
93.0
#40
63.0
#I00
14.0
#200
4.0
Fractional, Components
5/30/2008 1
Cobbles -- -- • Gravel Sand I Fines
Coarse Flne Total Coarse Medtum Fine Total Silt Clay Total
0.0 0.0 0.0 ' 0.0 1.0 36.0 59.0 96.0 4.0
D10
0.1266
D15
0.1552
D20
D30 D50
D60
D80
D85 D90 D95
0.6693 0.7674 1. 1.0568
0.1797
0.2270 0.3346
0.4020
0.5956
Fineness
Modulus
Cu
Cc
1.01
1.66
3.18
MACTEC, Inc.
I
1
Ll
Ll
1
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION TEST DATA
Client: TerraCosta Consulting Group, Inc.
Project: #2573 Marina Park
Project Number: 5014-07-0012.25
Depth: 25' Sample Number: B1-5
Material Description: SP (Lab #19848)
Date: 5/29/08 PL: NV PI: NP
USCS Classification: SP
Testing Remarks: As reveived moisture content=l8.5%
Tested by: Sancha/Stacy Checked by: Collins
Sieve Test,Data
Sieve
Opening
Percent
Size
Finer
0.5"
100.0
0.375"
97.0
#4
- 95.0
#10
90.0
#20
79.0
#40
50.0
#100
9.0
#200
2.0
Fractional Components
5130/2008
Gravel
Sand Fines
Cobbles .
Coarse
0.0 0.0
Fine
5.0
Total
5.0
Coarse Medium
Fine Total Slit
Clay
Total
5.0 1; 40.0
1 48.0 93.0
2.0
D10
D15
D20 i D30
D50
EE60
D80
D85 D90
D95
0.1567
1 0.1874
1 0.2166 0.2771
0.4250
1 0.5239
1 0.8814
1 1.1243
` 2.0000
1 4.7500
Fineness
Modulus
L Cu
Cc
2.23
1 3.34
1 0.94
MACTEC, Inc.
10C
9C
8C
7C
6C
5C
4C
3C
2C
iC
C
Particle Size Distribution Report
2 _ E ! e. o e o 0 0 0 0 0
I
-
--
-
-
LI
I
I
I I
i
i
,
i
i
i
i
1
I
I
'
I
I
1
1UU lu
%+31.1 ---- '-I '
SIEVE
SIZE
PERCENT
FINER
SPEC!
PERCENT
PASS?
(X=NO)
0.75"
100.0
0.5"
96.6
0.375"
95.0
#4
89.0
#10
82.0
#20
64.0
#40
37.0
i
#100
12.0
4200
I 4.9
(no specification provmea)
Sample Number: B2-1 Depth: 5'
MACTEC, Inc.
-nun.
a.... _ ..
45.0
Material Description
SP (Lab#]9849)
tterbero Limits
PL= NV LL= . PI= NP
Coefficients
D85= 2.7828 D60= 0.7598 D90= 0.5902
D30= 0.3453 D15= 0.1824 D10= 0.1281
Cu= 5.93 Cc= 1.23
Classification
USCS= SP AASHTO=
eemarks
As received moisture content --I 1.1%
Client: TerraCosm Consulting Group, Inc.
Project: #2573 Marina Park
Date: 5/30/08
Tested By: Valles/Stacy___ Checked By: Collins
ie '
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION TEST DATA
Client: TerraCosta Consulting Group, Inc.
Project: #2573 Marina Park
Project Number: 5014-07-0012.25
Depth: 5' Sample Number: B2-1
Material Description: SP (Lab #19849)
Date: 5130108 PL: NV PI: NP
USCS Classification: SP
Testing Remarks: As received moisture content --I 1.1%
Tested by: Valles/Stacy Checked by: Collins
Sieve Test=Data
Sieve
Opening
Percent
Size
Finer
0.75"
100.0
0.5"
96.0
0.375"
95.0
#4
89.0
#10
82.0
#20
64.0
#40
37.0
#100
12.0
#200
4.9
Fractional Components
6116/2008
Gravel
Sand
Fines
Cobbles
Coarse
I Fine
Total
Coe'r-se7 Medium
I Fine
Total
Slit
Clay
Total
0.0
0.0
11.0
11.0
7.0 45.0
1 32.1
84.1
4.9
D10
D15
D20 D30
D50
D60
D80
D85 D90
D95
0.1281
1 0.1824
1 0.2360 0.303
0.5902
0.7598
1.7060
2.7828 5.2834 I 9.5250
Fineness
Modulus
Cu
Cc
2.71
. 5.93 1.23
MACTEC, Inc.
�I
LI
1
1
I
�J
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION TEST DATA
Client: TerraCosla Consulting Group, Inc.
Project: #2573 Marina Park
Project Number: 5014-07-0012.25
Depth: 10-1 V Sample Number: 132-2
Material Description: SP (Lab #19850)
Date: 5/29/08 PL: NV PI: NP
USCS Classification:. SP
Testing Remarks: As received moisture content --I 9.0%
Tested by: Sancha/Stacy Checked by: Collins
Sieve Test Data
Sieve
Opening
Percent
Size
Finer
0.375"
100.0
#4
99.0
#10
89.0
#20
59.0
#40
20.0
#100
3.0
#200
0.5
Fractional Components
5/30/2008 1
Cobbles Gravel Sand Fines
Coarse Fine Total Coarse Medium Fine Total Silt Clay _Total
0.0 1 0.0• 1.0 LO 10.0 1 69.0 j 19.5 j 98.5 0.5 -'
D10
D15
D20
D30
D50
D60
D80
I D85 D90 D95
0.3133
1 0.3737
0.4250
0:5181
0.7255
0.8662
1.4066
1.6791 : 2.1030
2.8913
Fineness
Modulus
Cu
Cc
2.84
2.77
0.99
MACTEC, Inc.
r
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
n
I
I
I
I
I
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION TEST DATA
Client: TerraCosta Consulting Group, Inc.
Project: #2573 Marina Park
Project Number: 5014-07-0012.25
Depth: 20' Sample Number: B2-4
Material Description: SP (Lab #19851)
Date: 5/29/08 PL: NV PI: NP
USCS Classification: SP
Testing Remarks: As rcccivcd moisture content=16.6%
Tested by: Stacy/Valles Checked by: Collins
Sieve Test,Data
Sieve
Opening
Percent
Size
Finer
0.75"
100.0
0.5"
99.0
0.375"
99.0
#4
98.0
#10
89.0
#20
68.0
#40
30.0
#100
5.0
#200
1.4
Fractional Components
5130/2008 1
Gravel
Sand
Fines
Cobbles ECoarse I Fine
Total
Coarse Medium liFine
Total
Silt Cla
Total
0.0 0.0 2.0 2.0
9.0 59.0 ; 28.6
1 96.6
1.4
D10
D15
D20
0.3334
D30
D50
D60
D80
1.2022
D85
L1.5276
D90 D95
0.2250 1
0.2827
0.4250
0.6087
0.7253
2.1549 1 3.2640
Fineness
Modulus_ Cu Cc
2 .6 1 3.22 1.11
MACTEC, Inc.
to(
9C
8C
7C
s0
so
4C
30
2C
10
C
Particle Size Distribution Report
2 R 2- O S V N .
-
I
I
�
�
I
1
•II
'
1
i
1
1
1
I
I
II
iuu
I % Gravel
aka +3 i
Coarse
0.0 0.0
lu l
GRAIN SIZE -
% Sand
?ine Coarse Medium
SIEVE
SIZE
PERCENT
FINER
SPEC!
PERCENT
PASS?
(X=NO)
#4
100.0
#10
98.0
#20
90.0
#40
47.0
#100
5.0
#200
2.2
i
.. (no specification provided)
Sample Number: B2-6 Depth: 30'
MACTEC, Inc
is
V.1 V.V1
% Fin
Fine I Slit
44.8 2.2
Material Description
SP (Lab #19852)
Atterbera Limits
PL= W
LL= PI= NP
Coefficients
D85= 0.7628
D60= 0.5147 D50= 0.4448
D30= 0.3171
D15= 0.2237 D10= 0.1901
Cu= 2.71
Cc= 1.03
USCS= SP
_Classification
AASHTO=
Remarks
As received moisture
content--19.8%
Client: TerraCosta Consulting Group, Inc.
Project: #2573 Marina Park
Date: 5/29/08
Tested By: Stacy/Sancha Checked By: Collins --
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION TEST DATA
Client: TerraCosta Consulting Group, Inc.
Project: i#2573 Marina Park
Project Number: 5014-07-0012.25
Depth: 30' Sample Number: 132-6
Material Description: SP (Lab #19852)
Date: 5/29/08 PL: NV PI: NP
USCS Classification: SP
Testing Remarks: As received moisture content --I 9.8%
Tested by: Stacy/Sancha Checked by: Collins
Sieve Test Data
Sieve
Oper'__ e .
Si;
i
1
i
#
K.
E
Fin(
Mot
2
5/30/2008 1
' LABORATORY REPORT
Telephone (619) 425-1993 Fax 425-7917 Established 1928
CLARKS'ON LABORATORY AND SUPPLY I N C.
3.10 Trousdale Dr. Chula Vista, Ca. 91910 www.clarksonlab.com
ANALYTICAL AND CONSULTING CHEMISTS
Date: August 7, 2008
' Purchase Order Number: 2573
Sales Order Number: 93846
Account Number: TERC
To:
Terra Costa Consulting Group
4455 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite 100
San Diego, Ca 92123
Attention: Gregory Spaulding
Laboratory Number: 503412 Customers Phone: 858-573-6900
Fax: 858-573=8900
Sample Designation:
' One soil sample received on 08/07/08, taken on 08/07/08
from Marina Park Project# 2573 marked as HA-1 @ 2-41.
I
I
I
Analysis By California Test 643, 1993, Department of Transportation
Division of Construction, Method for Estimating the Service Life of
Steel Culverts.
PH 7.0
Water Added (ml)
10
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
Resistivity (ohm -cm)
49000
35000
24000
18000
14000
12000
11000
13000
15000
40 years to perforation for a 16 gauge metal culvert.
52 years to perforation for a 14 gauge metal culvert.
72 years to perforation for a 12 gauge metal culvert.
93 years to perforation for a 10 gauge metal culvert.
113 years to perforation for a 8 gauge metal culvert.
Water Soluble Sulfate Calif. Test 417
Water Soluble Chloride Calif. Test 422
Laura Torres
LT/ram
0.002-t
0.002%
1
I
APPENDIX C
SUGGESTED ITEMS FOR
INCLUSION IN SPECIFICATIONS FOR PILE DRIVING
u
I
I
I
1
I
1
1
I
J
APPENDIX C
SUGGESTED ITEMS FOR
INCLUSION IN SPECIFICATIONS FOR PILE DRIVING
1.0 SCOPE
Furnish and install piling, complete, as shown and specified.
2.0 GENERAL
A. Code Requirements - Per (Uniform Building Code) (Standard Specifications for
Public Works Construction), and other applicable regulations; strictest requirements
govern.
B. Qualification - Piling subcontractor shall be qualified and experienced in this work.
He shall present to Owner evidence of past successful installations of similar types of
projects.
C. Resnonsibility - Owner shall accept no responsibility for the driveability of piles as
shown and specified.
D. Grading - Necessary clearing, excavating, and filling shall be done by the General
Contractor.
E. Pile Locations - Staked out pile locations shall be protected from damage or
movement. Cost for replacing moved or damaged stakes shall be borne by the
Contractor under this section of work.
F. Available Data - Records of the borings made at this work site are available at the
Owner's office. These records pertain to conditions at the boring locations.
Contractors are expected to make a personal inspection of the site and to otherwise
satisfy themselves as to the conditions affecting the work. No claims for extra
compensation or extension of time shall be allowed on account of subsurface
conditions inconsistent with the data given.
G. Pile Depth - All piles shall be advanced to the tip elevations shown on the plans.
Piles stopped at lesser depths shall be cause for rejection. (See Section 5.0,
Installation).
H. Inspection - The Owner's representative shall inspect the placement of all piles. At
least one week's notice shall be given before the first pile is driven.
1
i
I
I
I
3.0 MATERIALS
Concrete Piles
A. Concrete - Minimum 28-day compressive strength: (5,000) psi.
B. Prestressing Strand - ASTM-(A416), uncoated (7) wire cold drawn type; ultimate
stress (250,000) psi.
C. MId Reinforcing - ASTM-(A15), intermediate grade.
ID. Wire for Special Reinforcing - ASTM-(A82), cold drawn wire.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
J
Steel Sheet Piles
A. Steel sheet piles shall conform to normal material specifications: ASTM
A328, ASTM A572 Grades 42 through 55.
4.0 HANDLING OF PILES
All piles shall be handled with care to avoid damage. Damage to any pile prior to driving
shall be cause for immediate rejection.
5.0 INSTALLATION
A. General - Drive the first four piles at selected locations shown to the tip elevations
shown on the plans. The indicator piles shall be driven with the same size and type of
hammer to be used for driving the production piles. Indicator piles will be selected
from permanent piles. Driving criteria will be established during construction by the
Geotechnical Engineer on the basis of the first piles before additional piles are driven.
Each pile shall be marked at one -foot intervals along its length to facilitate recording
of penetration resistance. Drive each pile without interruption, until design depth is
attained. If unforeseen causes arise, only by written permission shall deviation from
this procedure be allowed. Refusal driving criteria will be determined by the
Geotechnical Engineer during construction.
All piles shall' be placed at the locations specified on the contract drawings.
B. Record of Driving - Kept by Piling Inspector selected and paid for by Owner.
1. Reference - All piles per numbering system.
2. Dimensions - Include elevation of tip and butt before and after cutting off.
3. Driving Resistance - Complete record with number of blows required to drive
each foot for full length of each pile.
J
n
' 4. Time - Include time of starting, completion, interruptions (if any), and
condition of pile after driving.
L�J
LJ
I
I
I
I
F
I
At Completion of Work - Contractor shall famish accurate drawing showing
locations of piles as driven.
C. Location - All piles shall be placed at the locations specified on the contract drawing.
No pile shall be driven more than 3 inches in horizontal dimension from its design
location.
D. Alignment - Do not exceed 2 percent maximum deviation from vertical over any
section of length. Keep pile center at cut-off within 3 inches of design location.
Pulling piles into position will not be permitted. The Contractor shall provide
substitute piles where driven piles exceed specified tolerances; all correction costs
shall be paid for by Contractor under this section, including any structural redesign,
additional materials, and labor required for pile caps.
E. Heave Checks - Make on selected piles as directed by the Geotechnical Engineer.
Check heave by measuring length and checking elevation on each pile immediately
after it has been driven; recheck elevations and length after all adjacent piles have
been driven. Redrive piles, where tips heaved more than '/2 inch from original
elevation. When pile heave is encountered, continue heave check and redriving until
assured that pile heave does not occur.
F. Damaged Piles
General - Any pile driven into a previously driven pile automatically rejects
both piles. Leave all pile heads sound; repair or replace damaged or defect;
replace as directed with a substitute pile at no expense to the Owner. Do not
drive piles damaged or suspected of damage until inspected and approved.
All correction costs shall be paid for by Contractor including structural
redesign, additional materials, and labor required for pile caps.
2. Driving Damage - Development of tension cracks, spall, or chips in the
concrete within the pay length shall be cause of rejection.
G. Hard Driving - Difficult driving may be experienced within the stiff clays and
formational sand deposits encountered above the design tip elevation of piles in the
western portion of the site. All piles shall be driven to the design tip elevation unless
specifically approved otherwise in writing by the Geotechnical Engineer at the time
of construction.
r
i
I
1
r
I
J
LI
I
1
I
H. Jetting is permitted for both isolated concrete piles and concrete sheets only as
follows:
Jetting shall be limited to the use of internal manifolded pipes cast into the pile and
shall use, to the extent practical, a low volume and low pressure water source. The
proposed jet pipe configuration and pile installation procedures should be reviewed
by the owner's representative prior to approval. Jetting, under approved conditions, is
permitted down to within 2 feet of plan tip elevation for piles providing lateral
resistance only.
Jetting is not allowed within five feet of plan tip elevation for axially -loaded piles.
I. Predrilling - Predrilling will be allowed for piles, but shall in no case extend to within
5 feet of the final tip elevation of any piles for support of structures. The diameter of
a predrilled hole shall not exceed 10 inches. Predrilling is not recommended for piles
required for uplift capacity.
J. Driving Equipment - Use approved type as generally used in standard pile driving
practice. Use driving hammers of such size and type which are able to consistently
deliver effective dynamic energy to the piles and which operate at manufacturer's
recommended speeds and pressures. Pile hammer shall have a minimum rated energy
of 50,000 foot-pounds per blow for 14-inch round piles.
Hammers developing greater energies or sonic hammers may be used upon written
authorization of the Geotechnical Engineer. It shall be demonstrated that the
proposed hammer will adequately drive the pile to the required depth without damage
to the pile. Swing leads will not be permitted, use fixed leads or other suitable means
for holding pile firnily in position and in alignment with the hammer. Vertical piles
shall be plumb before driving. Special precautions shall be taken to insure against
leading away of piles from the plumb or true position. Use suitable anvils or cushions
of approved design, depending on type of pile, to prevent damage to pile. Care shall
be taken during driving to prevent and correct any tendency of piles to twist, rotate, or
walk.
6.0 DRIVING CRITERIA
Reduction of Hammer Energy for Prestressed Piles - When prestressed piles have settled into
the ground under their own weight and the weight of the hammer, and the point of the pile is
passing through soft soil so that there is little resistance, there is a possibility that longitudinal
tensile stress will be set up in the pile shaft by the elastic shock waves traveling up and down
the pile. For such driving conditions, the first hammer blows delivered to the pile shall have
a lesser energy by reducing the stroke of the hammer. When the top of the pile is being
driven to the final depth, the full length of the stroke and the full rated energy of the hammer
shall be used to develop final driving resistance.
1
I
r
1
1
1
r
I
F1
1
I
1
1
7.0 CLEANUP
Keep construction and storage areas free from waste material, rubbish, and debris resulting
from this work.
8.0. PAYMENTS
A. General - Provide lump sum bid based on total pile length as shown based on length
from cut-off to estimated pile tip elevation shown on drawings.
B. Measurement - Based on total effective length of piles in place. Effective length of
individual piles measured from tip elevation to cut-off line.
C. Payment for Lineal Footage - In excess of that based upon the estimated pile tip
elevation, when such excess is authorized, will be made on a unit price basis. Include
such unit prices in the Bid.
D. Credit for Undriven Lineal Footage - Short of that based upon the estimated pile tip
elevation will be made on a unit price basis. Include such unit price in the Bid.
9.0 SUBMITTALS BY CONTRACTOR:
A. General - For PILING, submit following in accordance with GENERAL
CONDITIONS and SPECIAL CONDITIONS.
B. Prestressed Pile Design - Submit design calculations, prepared by a licensed engineer
showing all pickup points and basis of design.
C. Reinforcing - Submit two copies of manufacturer's certificates of mill test reports for
all reinforcing steel used.
D. Shop Drawings - Submit for approval by Structural Engineer. Show location of
pickup points.
E. Guarantee - As specified.
F. Pile Driving Hammer - Submit description of proposed hammer, including
manufacturer, type, model number, operating specifications, and hammer cushion,
pile cushion data for review and approval by Geotechnical Engineer.
G Load Test - Submit description of equipment and arrangement and set up of any load
test for review and approval by the Geotechnical Engineer.
1
r
1
1
LI
D
L
J
10.0 PILE TYPES NOT SPECIFIED
A. General - Consideration will be given to pile types other than those shown or
specified. If Contractor proposes to use a type other than those shown, he shall
submit to Owner for review a description of the pile and shall demonstrate by
calculations and other corroborating evidence on the ability of the pile to sustain
required loads. Contractor shall familiarize himself with all loading criteria.
B. Prequalification - Review proposed system with Owner and obtain written
authorization before submitting proposal.
C. Engineering Design - Prepare revised foundation plans at no cost to Owner; plans to
be prepared and stamped by licensed civil engineer. Comply with all local
jurisdictional codes.
D. Pile Tests - If, in the opinion of the Owner, pile load tests are required to confirm the
load bearing capacity, the costs of such test or tests shall be borne by Contractor.
E. Pile Cans - If the proposed alternate pile system results in increase in size and
reinforcing of pile caps from those shown, said increases shall be made at no expense
to the Owner.
SUMMARY CALCULATIONS
I
I
1
1
r
1 � �
i
1
1
' SHEET -PILE AND
GUIDE -PILE CALCULATIONS
1 MARINA PARK PROJECT
NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA
1
1 August 7, 2008
i
1
1
� ' QgOEESS/pN
co m�
1 Plo. 5015 A
it Erl ��3o�a1 �
civn.
OF CA1
i
�1
.1
11
�1
i
r
Marina Park +9 Seawall
' Depth(ft)
0 1 --------------- ---------------- --
5 '
10
,
15
,
20
25
30
35
40 0 1 ksf
' I I eShoringSulte> CIVILTECH SOFTWARE USA www.civiltechsottware.com
' Licensed to DBN TerraCosta Consulting Group
Date: 8/6/2008 File Name: UNTITLED
Wall Height=21.0 Pile Diameter-1.0 Pile Spacing=1.0
ACTIVE SPACE: Z depth Spacing
1 0.00 1.00
' 2 21.00 1.00
PASSIVE SPACE: Z depth Spacing
1 21.00 1.00
PILE LENGTH: Min. Embedment=15.93, Min. Pile Length=36.93
MOMENT IN PILE: Max, Moment=67.59 at Depth of 17.15
' VERTICAL BEARING CAPACITY: Vertical Loading=0.0, Resistance=53.4, Vertical Factor of Safety=999.00
Request Embedment for Vertical Loading=0.0
Request Total Pile Length=21.0
I
PILE SELECTION:
Request Min. Section Modulus = 34.1 in3/feet, Fy= 36 ksi = 248 MPa, Fb/Fy=0.66
-> Piles meet Min, Section Requirements: • Top Deflection is shown in (in)
L6 (-0.06) SPZ26 (-0.17) CZ128 (-0.17) 6M (405) CZ128 (-0.17)
6H (-0.05) RZ11 (-0.18) H155 (-0.19) PZ32 (-0.18) BZ20.7L (-0.17)
CZ141 (-0.16) CZ148 (-0.15) 4N (-0.14) FSPZ25 (-0.15)
BRACE FORCE: Strut, Tieback, Plate Anchor, and Deadman
Fixed
IUNITS: Length/Depth - ft, Force - kip, Moment - kip-ft, Pressure - ksf, Pres. Slope - kip/W, Deflection - in
1
n
i
I
I
I
Ll
I
I
Marina Park +9 Seawall
0.30 g
Deepth(ft)
-5
-10
-15
- 20
- 25
- 30
- 35
40 0 1 ksf
I I
45
<ShoringSulte> CIVILTECH SOFTWARE USA www.ciViltechsoftware.com
' Licensed to DBN TerraCosta Consulting Group
Date: 8/612008 File Name: UNTITLED
Wail Helght=21.0 Pile Diameter=1.0 Pile Spacing=1.0
ACTIVE SPACE:
Z depth
Spacing
1
0.00
1,00
2
21.00
1.00
'
PASSIVE SPACE:
Z depth
Spacing
' PILE LENGTH: Min. Embedment=16.62, Min. Pile Length=37.62
MOMENT IN PILE: Max. Moment=83.22 at Depth of 16.62
VERTICAL BEARING CAPACITY: Vertical Loading=0.0, Resistance=54.7, Vertical Factor of Safety=999.00
Request Embedment for Vertical Loading=0.0
Request Total Pile Length=21.0
PILE SELECTION:
Request Min. Section Modulus = 42.0 In3/feet, Fy= 36 ksi = 248 MPa, Fb/Fy=0.66
-> Piles meet Min. Section Requirements: Top Deflection is shown in (in)
4N (-0.17) FSPZ25 (-0.18) PZ38 (-0.18) BZ26 (-0.15) AZ26 (-0.12)
H175 (-0.16) PZ35 (-0.14) H215 (-0.13) BZ32 (-0.12) FSPZ32 (-0.13)
PZ40 (-0.10) 5RU3 (-0.14) AZ36 (-0.08) BZ37 (-0A1)
' BRACE FORCE: Strut, Tieback, Plate Anchor, and Deadman
No & Type Depth Angle Total Horiz. Vert L free Fixed Length
' 1. Tieback 1.0 0.0 9A 9A 0.0 16.8 3,0
CI'
Marina Park +10 Seawall
Deepth(ft)
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
0 1 ksf
I I
<ShoringSuite> CIVILTECH SOFTWARE USA www.ciAltachsoftware.com
' Licensed to DBN TerraCosta Consulting Group
Data. 8/4/2008 File Name: UNTITLED
Wall Height=22.0 Pile Diameter-1.0 Pile Spacing=1.0
tACTIVE
SPACE:
Z depth
Spacing
1
0.00
1.00
2
22.00
1.00
PASSIVE SPACE:
Z depth
Spacing
tPILE LENGTH: Min. Embedment=16.53, Min. Pile Length=38.53
MOMENT IN PILE: Max. Moment=76.23 at Depth of 17.94
' VERTICAL BEARING CAPACITY: Vertical Loading=0.0, Resistance=55.6, Vertical Factor of Safety=999.00
Request Embedment -for Vertical Loading=0.0
Request Total Pile Length=22.0
' PILE SELECTION:
Request Min. Section Modulus = 25.4 in3/feek Fy= 36 ksi = 248 MPa, Fb/Fy=1
-> Piles meet Min. Section Requirements: Top Deflection is shown in (in)
SZ222 (-0.29) SZ24 (-0.27) SZ24A (-0.25) SZ25 (-0.26) CZ114RD (-0.24)
3N(M) (-0.28) PZ27 (-0.26) PLZ23 (-0.23) BZ16A (426) RZ10 (-0.28)
134N (-0.26) PZ27 (-0.25) SZ17 (-0.26) SPZ23 (-0.23)
' BRACE FORCE: Strut, Tieback, Plate Anchor, and Deadman
No. & Type Depth Angle Total Horiz. Vert. L_free Fixed Length
1. Tieback 1.0 0.0 6.8 6.8 0.0 17.6 2.2
1
I
1
1
1
1
Deepth(ft)
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
-40
- 45 L
Marina Park +10 Seawall
With H 20 Loading
0 1 ksf
<ShoringSuite> CIVILTECH SOFTWARE USA www.clviltechsoftware.com
Licensed to DBN TerraCosta Consulting Group
Data. 8/6/2008 File Name: C:1Project Fllest2500-2599\2573 Marina ParklrnplO.sh8
Wall Height=22.0 Flip Diameter-1.0 Pile Spacing=1.0
ACTIVE SPACE: Z depth Spacing
1 0.00 1.00
2 22.00 1.00
PILE LENGTH: Min. Embedment=16.55, Min. Pile Length=38.55
MOMENT IN PILE: Max, Moment--76.79 at Depth of 17,90
VERTICAL BEARING CAPACITY: Vertical Loading=0.0, Resistance=55.6, Vertical Factor of Safety=999.00
Request Embedment for Vertical Loading=0.0
Request Total Pile Length=22.0
PILE SELECTION:
Request Mtn. Section Modulus = 25.61n3/feet, Fy= 36 ksl = 248 We, Fb/Fy=1
-> Piles meet Min. Section Requirements: Top Deflection Is shown in (in)
SZ222 (-0.29) SZ24 (-0.27) SZ24A (-0.26) SZ25 (-0.26) CZ114RD (-0.24)
3N(M) (-0.29) PZ27 (-0.26) PLZ23 (-0.24) BZ16.4 (-0.27) RZ10 (-0.28)
134N (-0.27) PZ27 (-0.26) BZ17 (-0.26) SPZ23 (-0.23)
BRACE FORCE: Strut, Tieback, Plate Anchor, and Deadman
Nn. &Tvne Depth Anale Total Horiz.
' Deepth(ft)
5
10
15
20
25
' 30
' 35
40
' 45 L
Marina Park +10 Seawall
0.30 g
0 1 ksf
<ShoringSulte> CIVILTECH SOFTWARE USA www.civiltechsoftware.com
Licensed to DBN TerraCosta Consulting Group
Date: 8/6/2008 File Name: C:\Project FilesN2500-2599X2573 Marina Parkl3g.sh8
Wall Height=22.0 Pile Diameter=1.0
Pile Spacing=1.0
'
ACTIVE SPACE: Z depth
Spacing
1 0.00
1.00
2 22.00
1.00
'
PASSIVE SPACE: Z depth
Spacing
PILE LENGTH: Min. Embedment=17.36, Min. Pile Length=39.36
MOMENT IN PILE: Max. Moment=95.41 at Depth of 17.39
VERTICAL BEARING CAPACITY: Vertical Loading=0.0, Resistance=57.2, Vertical Factor of Safety=999.00
Request Embedment for Vertical Loading=0.0
Request Total Pile Length=22.0
tPILE SELECTION:
Request Min. Section Modulus = 48.2 in3/feet, Fy= 36 ksi = 248 MPa, Fb/Fy=0.66
-> Piles meet Min. Section Requirements: Top Deflection is shown in (in)
BZ26 (-0.18) AZ26 (-0.15) H175 (-0.19) PZ35 (-0.17) H215 (-0.15)
BZ32 (-0.15) FSPZ32 (-0.15) PZ40 (-0.12) 5RU3 (-0.16) AZ36 (-0.10)
BZ37 (-0.13) FSPZ36 (-0.12) BZ42 (-0.11) FSPZ45 (-0.10)
tBRACE FORCE: Strut, Tieback, Plate Anchor, and Deadman
Nn R Tvna rlenth Angle Total Horiz. Vert. L free Fixed Length
m m= m= m m= m m m m m r = m m r
Laterally Loaded Pile M s-Marina Park
-e105108
Ctradar Gt9de RlesvdL/F4
Reese S Matlock solution-DM7.02
Poe Moment oflnertia,l4: in"
1886
_
Pfle Diameter, D (m):
14.00
Pile Modulus.E
31000000
ultimate [at( calm
reE Brom'S1964
Sol Modul f
15.00
PuIt=0.b-m&d D'L^3"K
+L 'for
UN2
Unsupported CanhleveredHeight
H :
2200
Pult=fN -M /salde
D "0
forLfi>4
Death of Emhedm L (III:
1
18.00
Soil ., d tees
32
Solidensi
60
F_ffedive Depth, T m :A4.16
-
Put
328
Lon Pile
P_ffecWe th.T ft:
Pu
1s.61
short PUs
Lateral Loa P
feverartn
2700
Note: Use the smatlerOftie tvm
Load Induced Mane M
325
Atso note:
to abtain the ultimate
p
for a Ion le
Embedment Depth Ratb. Ur
d,Mtotal
IO
77.5
you must balanm
E15 and
L13 to obtaln
the cmect
answer
lllll/l!!!/!1/lI/II/llll/l/1/lIllfll/l!/1111!!11/111//11117/Illllll!/l/I//O/!/!1ll/lllllll/!/l//ll/!/11/!!!/l/
Coma utation
of Variation
in So0 Muced
Momentwith
Lrr=4
Depth.TI
Depth,ftl
Fmm
F t
Mm
Mat
Mahal
F81er Bendm
Po
000
0.00
1.000
0.000
54.56
O.OD
54.56
12430
025
1.08
0.992
0240
64.12
258
56.70
2525
0.50
216
0.970
0A67
5292
5.01
-57.93
2560
0.75
324
0.98
0.627
50.52
6.73
5725
2550
1.00
433
0.859
0.732
46.87
7.85
54.72
2437
125
5.41
0.753
0.767
41.08
823
49.31
2196
150
6.49
0 ti40
0.747
34.92
8.02
4293
1912
-
-
Com utationof
Pde Delamationwlm
Lrr=4
Depth. T
Depth, It
Fdm
Fd
DEF.m
DEF. t
OEFtot-
SLOPE
To of Pile
Def m
0.00
0 00
1.56
2.60
0.49
0.16
0.64
"
0.01186740
-
6.46
"
025
1.08
1.18
207
0.36
0.13
0.49.
0.01062344
050
216
0.82
1.65
0.25
0.10
M35"
0.009196604
NOTETo of 0e deflection
is the combination
of.
0.75
324
0.52
1.30
0.15
0.08
0.23"
0.00693808
Ground sudhw deflection
DEF tot"
PLUS
0.64"
1.0n
4.33
0.30
0.97
0.08
0.06
0.14"
0.005439049
Deflected 0eduetoa ular4m tlonon slo "Ht
PLUS
1.25
5.41
0.12
0.67
0.03
0.04
0.07"
0.002796966
Deflectetl ile due iD bath PL^3f3E1
150
649
0.03
044
001
0.03
0.03"
where:L=leverarm
m i r m m m m m m m m m m m _m Imm m
Laterally Loaded P8eAro1 -Marko Park-8/O5f08
CPaIarGWde WeswU?=4
Reese & Matlock solution - DM7A2
Pile Momemaf Inertia.
3217
Rie D'ameter D m :
16.00
t
Pile Modulus E
3000000
Ultlmale lateral so9mOCItY
ME Bmm's
1964
1
1
Soil Modulus f(
15.00
Pu97-0.5•soi-den' DMP3•
L) for
Lfr<2
Umuppoited Carditevered Helght, H M.
22.00
Puk=N +0.54P/sol4densl
for Lfi>4
Depth of Embedment L :
20.00
VIIIIIIIIIIII
I
Soil phl. clegreas
32
1
Soi dens
60
EOedveDepth,T m:
57.77
PW
4.85
Lon Pile
Effective th, T :
4.61
I
PW
24.78
short Pile
Lateral LoK P
3.70
leverafm 1
22.00
Note: USettle StoeffErofthetwo
Load Induced Moment M
61.40
Kp i
325
Also note:
to obtain the ultimate
capacity
fora long pite,
ErnbedrnerttDepth Ratio. LR:
4.15
' tl otal p ft •
115.6
you mustbalance
E15 and
L13 to obtain
the correctansver
Coon utation
of Variation
In Sal Oviuced
Momemw8h
L/r=4
Depth.Tf
Depth.ftl
FrrirrrI
F t
MmI
Mall
WISH
Fiber Bmcrm ,Fib
0.00
0.001
I.GmI
0.0001
81A01
0001
81AO
2429
025
1.2DI
0.9921
02401
80.751
4271
85.1121
2537
0.50
241
0.970
0.467
76.96
8.32
17.261
2604
0.75
3.61
0.926
0.627
75.38
11.17
86.54
2583
1.00
4.81
0.8591
9.7321
69.921
13.041
87961
2476
125
6.021
0.7531
.7671
61291
13.661
74.961
2237
150
7.221
0.6401
0.7471
52.101
13311
65AOI
1952
..... ..... .............................
._..__..__._.-_.___._.__.__.._..___._.___........_._._.
Comporation
of We Deformation
with
Lfr=4
Depth, T
Depth, R
Prim
Fdp
DEFm
DEF. t
DEFto "
I SLOPE
Top of Pile
Def m
0.00
0.00
1.56
2.50
0.63
0.18
0.71
"
1 0.01177281
6.17'
0.25
120
1.16
2.07
0.39
0.15
0.54
"
1 0 01045982
0.60
241
0.82
1.65
027
0.12
0.39'
0009132189
NOTE: Top of ple deflection
is the combination
of.
0.75
3.61
0.52
1.30
0.16
0.10
0.26"
0.006923528
Ground surface detledion
DEF toL"
PLUS
1
0.71"
1.00
4.81
0.30
0.97
0.09
0.07
0.16"
0.005449051
Deflected vile duetoa ularmtation On ,SIo •HL
PLUS
3.11"
1.25
6.02
0.12
0.67
0.03
0.05
0.08
"
0.002841365
Deflected Pile due to load PL-3/3EI
1.50
722
0.03
0.44
0.01
0.03
0.04"
Where L=leverann
m
Laterally Loaded Pile Ls -Marina Park
-6r05r0a
Cvalar Guide Has vrlLlf=4
Reese & Ma80rk sdu0on- EXW.O2
_
I
Pile Moment of hands,l 4
i
7854
_
Pile Diameter D 1n:
2D.00
Pile Modulus E
3 DOD 000
Uldnate lateral soil mpacfty
re . erom's
1954
Soli Modulus t
16.00
Pult-0.6"soldens "L^3"K
+L for
Ur42
Unwipported CantileveredHeight H it:
22.00
PuG-?uV +0.54(P/W
WDIKoY051
fortfT>4
Depth of Embedment L ft •
1
23.00
Sol Ohl.d
32
Sol a
6D
EfiectiveD 0l T
69.06
I
Pull his)
9.47
Plle
EJferlive M,T ft',
5.75
I
Pulllki
43.99
shod Pile
Lateral Load.P
725
leverann 1
22.00
Note: Usethesma0erofthetwo
Load Induced Fdament, M
159b0
325
Also note:
to ablain the ultimate capacity
fora long Pile,
EmbedinentlDerithRatin, L/i:
4.00
Id tat
IO
2325
u must balance
E15 and L13 to obtain
the comad
answer
nnnnuurnnurrnuunnnmmuuunumnnnunnnnnnnnnunnuuunnunnnnmuu
coal
Son of Variation
in Sol Induced
Moment
with L/F=4
Depth.T
Denth.ft
Fmm
F t
mml
M t
mlotall
Fiber Bendin ,Fb
fmil
000
0.00
1.000
0.000
159.50
000
159.50
2437
025
1.44
0.992
0240
15822
10.01
16824
2570
0.60
288
0.970
0.467
154.72
1948
174.20
2862
D75
4.32
0.928
0.627
147.70
28.18
173.85
2658
1.00
5.75
0.859
0.732
137.01
30 541
167.551
2560
1.25
7.19
0.753
0.767
120.10
32.001
15ZIll
2324
1.60
8.63
0.640
0.747
102.081
31.171
133.251
2036
Comoutation
of Pile Deformation
with L/r=4
Depth. TI
Depth. I'll
Fdm
Fdp
DEF.m
DEF. t
DEFto '
SLOPE
Top of Pile
Def n
0.0D
0.001
1.56
2-60
0.60
025
0.86"
0.01170813
5.84"
0.26
1.44
1.16
207
0.45
021
0.66"
0.011143860
0.60
288
0.82
1.65
0.31
0.17
0.48
"
0.009097804
NOTE Top of pile deflection is the combination
-M
of:
0.75
4.32
0.52
1.30
0.19
0.13
0.32"
O.OD69595
Ground surface tleflectiortDEF tot"
PLUS
1
0.86"
1.00
6.75
0.30
0.97
0.10
0.10
0.20
"
0.005516017
Deflected pile due to angular rotation only, slo "HL
PLUS
3.09.
1.25
7.19
0.12
0.67
0.04
0.07
0.10"
0.002946886
Deflected pile due to loam PL^313E1
1.89"
1.60
8.63
0.03
0.44
0.01
0.04
0.05"
where: L=leverarm
r m m m m m m m m m m m m
m m sm
Lateraily Loaded PBe -Madna Park-6lOSf08
Circular G Wde Piles vdUr=4
Reese&Matlock solution -DM7.02
_
I I
Pile tdomentof Nedra I ur"4:
16286
Pile Diameter D n :
24.00
Pile hlodWus E i :
3 000 000
Ultimate lateral sail capacity
ref. Bmm's
1964
SoBModulus,f
15.00
PuIt=G.S•soil 'L^g
+L for
LITQ
Unsupported Cantilevered Height H ft:
22.00
P0IM +0.54P/soMMSi
•D•
forLflM
De th ofEmberknent,
L
27.00
SOB phL tl
32
Soo
60
Effective T
79.90
Pu
17.75
Lo He
EffacUm De th,T ft:
6.66
P
78.43
short PBe
Lateral Load,P
13.70
leverann
22DO
Note: Usetheertle0erofthetwo
Load Induced Moment ft:
SMAO
325
Also note:
foabtain the ultimate
capacity
fora long ple.
Pmbedm"n[Deth Rats Lli:
4.05
tlMtotalb
447.3
must balance
Ely and
L13 to obtain
the coneCtanswer
f!/!//1/!!//!/1!/Ill1111!ll!/1/I!/I//!//1/Ill/rill/!l//!111111/1//f/11/ll//I!ll1!/1111111i1/1111!!llllll//!/l!1
ComputaHonoWariatIm
Insoll Induced Momentvath
LR=4
Depth.T
De th.ft
Firm r Fpt
Min
Mpt
Mtotal
Fiber Bendi
Fb
0.00
B.001
1.000, O.Gool
3OIA01
0.00
301AG
2665
_
025
1.66
0.9Wl 0.240
298.99
21.89
320.88
2837
0.50
3.33
0.970 OAS71
292.361
42.60
334.96
2962
0.75
4.99
0.926 0.627
279.101
5720
=29
2973
_
1.09
666
0.859 0.732
25B.Sol
65.78
32568
2880
125
8.32
0.7531 0.7671
226.951
69.97
296.92
2625
1.50
9.99
0.6401 0747
19290
66.14
261.04
2308
Com
tionof Pfle Deformation
wdh Ur=4
I
D T
Depth, III
Film
Pulp
DEFrn
DEF.
DEF tot"
i SLOPE
To of PBe
Del in
0.00
0.00
156
2.50
0.74
0.36
1.09
•
1 0.01776292
025
1.66
1.76
207
0.54
0.30
0.84
•
0.01141461
0.50
3.33
0.82
1.65
0.38
024
0.61"
0.009932853
NOTE To of pile deflection
is thewmbinaOon
of
0.75
4.99
0.52
1.30
023
0.19
0.41
"
0.007658796
Ground surface deflection
DEF tot"
PLUS
1.09
•
1.00
6.66
0.30
0.97
0.12
0.14
0.26"
0.006107636
Deflected due to an Warmtationa ,slo 'HL
PLUS
337"
125
6.32
0.12
0.67
0.04
0.10
0.14
"
0.003330721
Deflected a due to bath PL"3/3EI
1.72
"
1.50
999
0.03
0.44
0.01
0.06
0.07
"
where: L�everann
I
I
M
r
Foundations &
Earth Structures
DESIGN MANUAL 7.02 -
REVALIDATED BY CHANGE 1 SEPTEMBER 1986
Section 7. LATERAL LOAD CAPACITY
1. DESIGN CONCEPTS. A pile loaded by lateral thrust and/or moment at its
top, resists the load by deflecting to mobilize the reaction of the surround-
__iag_soil.__The_magn1tude and distribution of the resisting. -pressures -are a ---- ----
function of the relative stiffness of pile and soil.
Design criteria is based on maximum combined stress in the piling, allow-
able deflection at the top or permissible bearing on the surrounding soil.
Altbough 1/4-inch at the pile top is often used as a limit, the allowable
lateral deflection should be based on the specific requirements of the
structure.
7.2 234
lI
2. DEFORMATION ANALYSIS - SINGLE PILE.
a. General. Methods are available. (e.g., Reference 9 and Reference 31,
Non -Dimensional Solutions for Laterally Loaded Piles, with Soil Modulus
1 Assumed Proportional to Depth, by Reese and Matlock) for computing lateral
pile load -deformation based on complex soil conditions and/or non -linear soil
stress -strain relationships. The COM 622 computer program (Reference 32,
' Laterally Loaded Piles: Program Documentation, by Reese) has been documented
and is widely used, Use of these methods abould only be considered when the
soil stress -strain properties are well understood.
' Pile deformation and stress can be approximated through application
of several simplified procedures based on idealized assumptions. The two
basic approaches presented below depend on utilizing the concept of coeffi-
cient -of lateral subgrade reaction. It is assumed that the lateral load does
not exceed about 1/3 of the ultimate lateral load capacity.
b. Granular Soil and Normally to Slightly-Ove_r_consolidated Cohesive
Soils. Pile deformation can be estimated asaumiag that the coefficient of
subgrade reaction, Rh, increases linearly with depth in accordance with:
fz
1 Kh` D
where: Kh - coefficient of lateral subgrade reaction (tons/ft3)
f a coefficient of variation of lateral subgrade reaction
(tons/ft3)
z a depth (feet)
t
1
1
1
1
I
D ® width/diameter of loaded area (feet)
Guidance for selection of f is given in Figure 9 for fine-grained and
coarse -grained soils.
c. Heavily Overconsalidated Cohesive Soils. For heavily overconsoli-
:, dated.hard._cohesive soils, the coefficient of lateral subgrade reaction can
be assumed to be constant with depth. The methods presented in Chapter 4
can be used for the analysis, 4 varies between 35c and 70c (units of
--force/length3) where c is the uffdrained shear strength. -
d, Loading Conditions. Three principal loading conditions are illus-
trated with t►e ea i procedures in Figure 10, using the influence diagrams
of Figure 11, 12 and 13 (all from Reference 31). Loading may be limited by
allowable deflection of pile top or by pile stresses.
Cue 1. Pile with flexible cap or hinged end condition. Thrust and
moment are applied at the top, which is free to rotate. Obtain total deflec-
tion, moment, and shear lu the pile by algebraic sum of the effects of thrust
and moment, given in Figure 11.
7.2-235
i
70
GO
ZQN
r
w
1
0
UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH Q Sf T
70
60
STIFF
STIFF
VERY S77hF
4
I
2
3
I
I
I
! f :
OOEFFidETIT Of VARIATION
WITH OEPIH.USED
IN ANALYSIS
Of LATERALSU8GRA9E
OFLATERALL.Y LOADED
REACTION
PI
�
c
r
CASE I. FLEXIBLE CAP, ELEVATED POSITION
CONDITION
LOAD T
GROUND LINE
DESIGN PROCEDURE
pT
HOREACH PN.E+
FOR DEFINITION OF PARAMETERS SEE FIGURE 12
P a �
L COMPUTE RaATWE STIFFNESS FACTOR.
T = I tI TVS
H
M = PH
2. sa T CURVE FOR PROPER T W FIGURE 11.
M
3. OHIAIN COEFFICIENTS FS.FjAiFV ATOEPTHS DESIRED.
_ 40�r'L
4. COMPUTE OFFLBC OKUDMENT AND SHEAR AT
p
'
ORFD DEPTHS U m FORMULAS OF F GURE 11.
E: I
L
r
NOTE: "f.. VALUES FROM FIGURE 9 AND CONVERT
-MLBAN3
a = NUMBER OF PILES
PO$iT
CASES. PILES WITH RIGID CAP AT GROUND SURFACE
PT '
P
L PROCEED AS IN STEP I.CASE I .
—�
2. COM PUM DERICflON AM MDMENTAT DESIRED
F
DEPTHS USING COEFFICIENTS F3,FM AND -
1
FORMULAS OF FIGURE 12.
1
3. MAXIMUM SHEAR OODURS AT 70P OF PILE
IT
AND EQUALS P = - PT INEACHPILE.
L
r
CASEX. RIGID CAP, ELEVATED POSITION
OFJ7.f3CTE0
PoS t1
L ASSUME A HINGE AT POINT A WITH A BALANCING
L
MOMENT M APPLIED AT POINT A.
2. COMPUTE SLOPE 62 ABOVE GROUND AS A FUNCTION
OF M FROM CHARACTERISTICS OF SLVERSTRUCTURE.
1
3. COMPUTE SLOPE 61 FROM SLOPE COEFFICIENTS-
OF FIGURE 13 AS FOLLOWS:
H
-
-
62
6l'F6(�)�-FO i EI U
-
M I
4. EQUATE 61 s 6p AND SOLVE FOR VALUE OF M.
P
�-.
I
S. KNOWING VALUES OF P ANDNO M. SOLVE FOR DEFLECTION.
SHEAR,AMOMENT AS IN CASE I.
P M
NOTE 2 IF GROUND SIR If= AT PILE LOCATION IS
L
INCLINED. LAAD PTAKEN BY EACH PILE IS
1
PROPORTMNALTO I/HO3.
FIGURE 10
Design Procedure for Laterally Loaded Piles
7.2-237
tt■tt t>, � r, s _•jt�■s I•!� � -� t>, t>, t>s t>, tt� � - tom. � : t� tom'.- t», - ttt>,
n�nee, t —c—=sue 2 =
.................
�, ,r k
ENRON
MINIMEMPAVIsom
ZONE mompAprdom 1I■// ■l-UN/// SIN 1 0MM
DEFLECTION
Fg "-QI� MOMENT COEffICIENT, fM �� vA 1
SHEAR COEFFICIENT, F
FIGURE 11
-uenee Values for Pile with Applied Lateral Load and Moment
(Case I. Flexible Cap or Hinged End Condition)
' Case II. Pile with rigid cap fixed against rotation at ground sur-
face. Thrust is applied at the top, which must maintain a vertical tangent.
Obtain deflection and moment from influence values of Figure 12.
Case III. Pile with rigid cap above ground surface. Rotation of
Pile top depends on combined effect .of superstructure and resistance below
ground. Express rotation as a function of the influence values of Figure 13
-and determine moment at pile top. Knowing thrust and moment applied at pile
top, obtain total deflection, moment and shear in the pile by algebraic sum of
' the separate effects from Figure 11.
3. CYCLIC LOADS.
Lateral subgrade coefficient values decrease to about 25% the initial value
due toycyclic loading for soft/loose soils and to about 50% the initial value
for stiff/dense soils.
4. LONG-TERM LOADING. Long-term loading will increase pile deflection tor-
t responding to a decrease in lateral subgrade reaction. To approximate this
condition. reduce the.subgrade reaction values to 25X to SOX of their initial
value for stiff clays, to 20% to 30% for soft clays, and to 80X to 90X for
sands.
5: ' ULT7MATE'LOAD CAPACITY - SINGLE PILES. A laterally loaded pile can fail
by exceeding the strength of the surrounding soil or by exceeding the bending
moment capacity of the pile resulting in a structural failure. Several met -
..hods are available for estimating the ultimate load capacity.
The method presented in Reference 33, Lateral Resistance of Piles in Cohesive
' Soils; by,:Broms,.,provides,a simple procedure for estimating ultimate lateral
capacity of piles.
' 6. fGROUP ACTION. Group action should be considered when the pile spacing in
the direction of loading is less than 6 to 8 pile diameters. Group action can
be evaluated by reducing the effective coefficient of lateral subgrade reac-
tion in.•the,direction of loading by a reduction factor R (Reference 9) as fol-
lows:
1
I
,l
r
Pile Spacing in Subgrade Reaction
Direction of Loading Reduction Factor
---D - Pile Diameter - - R
D 1.00
6D 0.70
4D 0.40
3D 0.25
•7e2-241
k-
' Figure 9. Pile Grose -Coupling Stiffnees,3ys
' he authors. This recommendation and
remits of the correlation for clay are
shown in Figure 11. Only the upper five
' i.amet=s of soils (soil type and ground
ster)'ased to be considered in
usage of the presented design charts.
1
-1
1
1
1
1
1
1
@_ of Avoroaoli. There are
swexal simplifying assumptions in the
i nseated'approach. The coefficient f is
not an intrinsic soil parameter. The
scommendations for f presented is Figures
3 and 11 are appropriate for piles in
cypioal highway bridge foundations (i.e.
smaller piles). Furthermore, the embedment
ffect has not been taken into account in
he procedure. Therefore the recommenda-
oions are conservative and appropriate for
shdlow embedment conditions (say less than
Although correlations for the coefficient
f man be conducted for other conditions
's.g., larger piles and bigger embedment
spths), the additional complexity negates
-as merits of the use of simplified linear
elastic solutions. For such cases, cam-
'ater solutions, which can readily accomo-
ite nonlinear effects and more general
aandary oonditione, are recommended.
W Pn
q
o
/ ll
e.cno■.war .
fl' 7P Or sO .M y.
beat WOK- Sam
(AReMrO'eeil� Ya alUr itsson, 19031
GN
�a
20 40
Relative Density. D, ( mmt)
Figure 10. Recommendations for
Coefficient f £or Sands
(Notes 1 LS/IN3 s 0.27 N/cm3)
0
0.
eased on corrrerqllation of maillnear pile
crate onstMin)
Natlock's soft clay
tperrttq
t
�
1D�
Q ltaa+')
Pe'�•
rr.metrn M o�nwuW sakrtlaW
(2) Rarw(wa.ae.
I
61i�
(h) H� dd Mood
1. 2. 8. 4. S.
Cohesion (W)
Comparison to Caltrans Practice. The Figure 21. Recommendations of
Dove procedure can be compared to the Coefficient f for Clays
..tactice adopted by Caltrana. In Caltrans (Notes 1 LS/iN3 - 0.27 Woe)
ird Bridge Engineering Conference, Denver, Colorado, March 10-13, 1991
.,r more information, contact Earth Mechanics, Inc., Fountain Valley, CA
714) 848-9204
I..1
APPENDIX E
DSI PRODUCT LITERATURE
DS!
` c rk"'h,
a r
f�U
"A 'aEof
1.
It
n<
F
T '
h fl
4isrF yiwx�''N r w r
cur `�..
I
nroTEM IS INI ""Itij4eyrfi,.T s�?$hIN
3.'d N S. *-, 4, II..,i '✓3. 5 :LX ; v_
L DYWIDAG Threadbar Rock -and Soil Anchors
E
I
I
I
II
I
CJ
I
Dywidag Systems International was a pioneer in
the development of rock and soil anchor systems
and technology, Today DSI is a world leader in this
,field with an outstanding reputation of product
quality and customer service. The double corro-
sion protected THREADBAR® anchor is universally
recognized.as the "standard" for anchor perfor-
mance and corrosion protection. DSI Is dedicated
to the "advancement of the "State -of -the -Art" for
rock and soil anchors and stands ready to support
you during the design, planning and construction
'of your project. When questlons arise, contact your
nearest DSI representative.
One Source for Bar,and Strand Anchors
DSI offers a complete line of THREADBARS' and
muitistrand anchors designed for both temporary
The DSi Advantage
As a full service organization, DSI is prepared to '
supply design assistance and practical field know-
how. This service can also be used -to optimize the
design process by helping to select the anchor
system best suited to meet specific project
requirements. ,
The regional warehouse and fabricating centers
strategically located throughout North America,
coupled with an extensive network of local
sales/service centers, provide prompt, reliable -
response to customer needs, Most orders can be
supplied from Inventory with short lead time,.
To minimize site labor and to optimize quality con-'
trol, a variety of shop prefabricating services are'
available for both bar and strand anchors, In many
cases the anchors can be delivered to the site
ready for Immediate installation without the need
for site assembly. The application of corrosion pro-
tection grouting at the job site can also be mini-
mized and, in many cases, completely eliminated,
saving time and money,
In some locations both supply and installation,
Including drilling services, are available.for any
size project.
or permanent use, manufactured from materials
best suited to meet the needs of your project.
THREADBAM Anchors are available in 1" (26 mm),
1-1/4" (32mm),*and 1-3/e (36mm) nominal diame-
ter, in lengths up to 60 feet (18.3 m) without cou-
plers, with a guaranteed minimum ultimate tensile
stress of 150 or 160 ksl (1034 or 1103 MPa)',
Multlstrand Anchors manufactured from 0.6° dia.
(15,2 mm) 270k (1861 -MPa) strand are available in
sizes up to 61 strands, Larger anchors are avail-
able but system components are not stocked.
Rock Bolts and Soil Nails manufactured from ASTM
A615 grade 60 are produced in sizes ranging from
46 up to, and including, #11 grade 75 bars.
Special steels for high impact, seismic and low
temperature applications can be made available
on special order,
_;;`µel,,-�,,; ,•,' �$ !
+kC OPUAATOTI.MWARM
samgbraok (CNagaJ,IL�
is DIVISION OINSION NEIOOUARARS•
aFABRICATION CENTERS
SALES,OFFICE
Ailln&N TX
BalikiM;MO TOckar(AlMKI8),GA
saworo k1CMay):IL.....
BallnOkrooklL
'
•Bolin4brook IL �OCgaryTA M
FaM.111 •
F. .. NJ'
•GraMunollon CO'
'. • Long,Bnch'CA '
• •.Loos
Bwclb CA ' •
•' Jaboft,, Ph,
^•'AckMir(Alknlq, CA.".
. .....
- TWIN
(A&nWl•DA • ';••'Ufif0Nn(OwvaT),CO
•.unwraf(RRfonro), ON_
',
.'• 6U�rA/11VV�aRCOWJ)
"•
BC
NISNBoalun,NN
68rta�1(�arCffiaf; BC
... .. -
r.Conwrd'acwgtol,ON,•.
Orenga FZkA
BnlaC�ara1CA'-
894100.1YA
•
Whatever your needs you can count on DSI for
quality from start to finish. The dedication of our
staff to quality and service will help you complete
your project successfully and on time.
I
[1
1
t
I
I
C
I
I
1
1
I
I
Applications
Prestressed rock and soil anchors have become
an important tool for the geotechnical engineer.
Their safe -and reliable use in both permanent and
temporary applications is accepted throughout
the world.
So#Anchors are pressure grouted anchors,
"Installed in either cohesive or non -cohesive soil or
loose rock. The anchors transfer forces Into the
''ground by means of a steel tendon and a well
defined grout body. In the free stressing length the
anchor remains free to move.
Soli anchors are generally used to:
-anchor support structures for excavations such as
-sheet pile walls, soldier piles and lagging, drilled
piles and slurry walls,
-counteract uplift forces in structures subjected to
buoyancy and -lateral loads.
•trahsfer exte'rriaPfordes td`the ground; e.g„wind, .
earthquake.
•stabilize eccentrically loaded foundations.'
• stabilize material or excavated slopes.
DSI
Rock Anchors are post -tensioned tendons installed
in drilled holes for which at least the entire bond
length is located in rock. The anchor force is trans-
mitted to the rock by bond between the grout body
and the rock. Rock anchors can remain unbonded
in the free stressing length allowing the anchor to
be checked and retensioned at any time. In such
cases, adequate corrosion protection for the
stressing anchorage and the free stressing length
must be provided. On the other hand, the free
stressing length can also be fully grouted after the
anchor has been stressed, in which case force
adjustment is no longer possible.
Rock anchors are generally used to:
•anchor external forces and uplift forces,
-anchor retaining walls.
-stabilize eccentrically loaded foundations, slopes,
rock walls and cuts.
*stabilize underground excavations and mines.
*increase the stability of dams,
it t 4i
'I��..:,,..J'n'
i � �°: "r:`
�t'4, 'J N•',�, �Nf )I.�, a'n'W
..itiS 1
rfi�l"•g�k
{Y S 'F�'I
.'. 1� f t 4
X�}- �i?�'4 f�iYi �"wk•^!1't<�}�.!",y4j
1K.t'i5<n+ttt
v f)'vi+f {r•`` •L' 39 / Fri''�iiti
'o''f%•'�,�+1.J:'�, y ICYSZ'+`�rt4l"'n. �;54'.'r'SiP%tyl .
i tfY`;1,.F fr ij
iixr• RAG 1 �„ �. i..
i
Fnn.•kr...,^t11 :.:��.Ll�bJ'rv.C�ustkle�r�4..o
4'AI
v.��x''.,�1�y>. P _:}lt
..•
,ii�tr.r. '1r-�,,,y /f Of'.d:i+i^.i5iJ3;!'a'}'`��.�l:,yll�r.�
iA, !, ..
::. �t�;lyiv��/''(i'%:il, toil
V` ,1i,4,i,�•,
fy:y,},•i}d, •, `y
e,nf "4,,'.; ��'al;
rp• �i£", �.r.>ftY
,. .:)';
it
n •r�. y Kn Li "
'it
�('��, ��..�• y� �� Yx�;�,eC� Q :..',
�vl�
,�i'���
.
• •:.• ;t v` `
t-:,t 1 •1.. ) k i% i.
fjtAy%.:.. �i,��S'.��M.�,�
,�
��
p
�if
�n S P r
.�•f� �_,,SNi
��riciiunv
'ie.�� r5�y.i i•��F' Y���"
tin „ �y.,,� ;� ��h',^..:
�'F. 'tivN. `�, p{� {�. y��
i'..i.i7
,.f(3}.r �mti, °+"p%til
.'%v vG `:i.f �+r. 'ij•. ! .iR/AS :`r
;i
Y e�
� 5n:aiA'{..
!' S
:'fi:l.
�• r
.1:�`. At- x �3�e�ln�{S'F�:e'12�i'e:��i •:Sa; F�
1
q, �YYr.I
!
STEAMS . A RM"I'lERNAMPONAL
Threadbar® Anchors
'The Dywidag Threadbar Rock and Soil Anchor
System is manufactured In the United States and
Canada exclusively by Dywidag.Systems
International:'
!
!
J
F
!
Simple and Rugged
The threadbar has a'continuous rolled -on pattern
of deformationsalong its entire length which allows
anchorage hardware or couplers to thread onto the
bar at any point. The coarse thread is almost inde-
structible under normal job site conditions.
Positive Anchorage
The bar is anchored using a threaded•nut which,
unlike a wedge type anchorage, Is,not liable to be
loosened when the anchor force is reduced due to
possible ground movements. In addition, the
threaded nut anchorage has a known overload
capacity, which cannot•be duplicated by a wedge
type anchorage without the utilization of elaborate
and expensive details.
Easy to Stress
The reliable and compact threaded nut anchorage
;has almost no anchor set. Its. hemispherical shape
easily accommodates the small angular misalign-
ments between bar and anchorage due to con-
struction tolerances. Lightweight, durable
equipment makes stressing, restressing and
adjusting the anchor load up or down easy to do.
Easy to Check'Actual-Prestress Load
and Restress
— The•threaded-designimakes it -possible -to -make a
!lift off test and/or -adjust the anchor load at any time
during the service life of the anchor. Corrosion pro-
tection can be, maintained at all times.
.!
n
!
Easy to Splice
The continuous thread makes it possible to extend
the threadbar to any length, simplifying transporta-
tion and installation. Extending the bar beyond the
stressing end to connect to another structural
member is also a simple operation.
DSI reserves the right to change the design or details of Its
products Wlhout notice, specific information for lob details and
drawings should be obtained from your DSI Sales Engineer.
High Bond Strength
The deformation pattern provides excellent bond
between the bar and cement grout making it
possible to reliably transfer anchor prestress load
Into the grout without the need for additional
mechanical devices. The narrow spacing of the
deformations assures close crack spacing in the
surrounding grout and therefore smaller crack
widths which will not degrade the corrosion
protection.
Removable
The threadbar can be removed after destressing
the anchor by unscrewing the unbonded portion of
the bar from a coupler or out of an embedded end
anchorage. Bars with end anchors and sleeved
within the bond length can be completely removed.
This is especially important where temporary
anchors are installed below adjacent properties
and must be removed after use.
Easy to install
Because of their inherent stiffness and rugged-
ness, threadbar anchors can be easily installed in
any position, Including upward. It is particularly
easy to install a bar anchor in a pre -grouted hole.
Public school No. 48, New York City Board of Education,
Manhattan. Permanent DCP anchors extended to support
subsequent retaining wall,
I
Insurance Against Anchor Failure
In cohesive and other poor soils, a proven and
reliable DSI post -grouting system cambe used to
increase the capacity of an anchor. The'use of this
system can make the difference between an
anchor that works and one that does not.
Corrosion Protection Options
A wide variety of corrosion protection options are
available to choose from depending upon the '
,expected length of service and the aggressiveness
of, the environment,
Unprotected Anchors
-'Unprotected anchors are'used for temporary
applications. The free stressing length is unpro-
tected while the bond length is embedded in the
cement grout body. Unprotected anchors may be
subject to corrosion, However; the relatively large
diameter and solid cross section of the Dywidag
threadbar offers more corrosion resistance tOan
smaller diameter high strength, prestressing steel
elements with a larger surface area.
Single Corrosion,Protected Anchors SCP
Single corrosion protected anchors are used for
temporary anchors and sometimes for permanent
anchors in non -aggressive rock or soil. A polyethyl-
ene sheathing covers the free stressing length. The
threadbar,is,coated with a corrosion, inhibitor
'before the' polyethylene sheathing is installed. The
bond length is covered with cement grout.
DS/
Double Corrosion Protected Anchors'DCP
Double corrosion protected anchors are recom-
mended for anchors with a long service life and for
an environment where aggressive materials or
stray electrical currents are expected.
A corrugated high strength PVC sheathing with
plastic end caps is installed over the full length of
the anchor. The annular space between threadbar
and PVC is fully grouted before the anchor Is
installed. To accommodate the bar elongation
during stressing, a short length of threadbar is left
free of the corrugated sheathing under thestress-
ing anchorage. A steel pipe welded to the anchor
plate and filled with corrosion preventive com-
pound or grout protects -the free end of the bar
against corrosion.
A smooth plastic sheathing is installed over the
corrugated sheathing in the stressing length. This
allows the tendon to elongate during stressing.
The corrugated plastic sheathing acts as a protec-
tive membrane preventing intrusion of any corro-
sive substances, The cement grout around the
threadbar provides corrosion protection by embed-
ding the bar in an alkaline environment. The
threadbar deformations minimize the width and
control the distribution of any cracks that develop
In the free stressing length, fully maintaining the
• protective action of the grout cover.
A protective plastic or steel cap filled with a corro-
sion preventative compound is installed over the
anchor nut after stressing, completing the full
--encapsulation-of the anchor -tendon. The cap,is---
removable for checking and/or adjusting the force
level in the anchor tendon at any time in the future.
Some important notes about the safe handling of high
strength steel for prestfessing.
1. Do not damage surface of steel,
2. Do not weld or burn so that spark's or hot slag will
touch any particle of steel which wjll be under stress.
3, Do not use any part of steel as a ground connection
for welding,
4. Do not use steel that has'been kinked or contains a
sharp bend.
Disregarding these Instructions may cause failure of
steel during stressing.
-_ .-. ._ •Ye •. ._+. .�•y-, ;�yr.s , •r..a.�.,.�ti�..•ya2�a�., ,6 <l.
.'c{.. r•..:t ± iL:FY4o,.� Pfi"cl E CL: Ca f"?rY.5 %l...`•:"sr"^c
DYWIDAG Threadbar Anchors with Single Corrosion Protection
BASIC TYPE VARIATIONS GROUTING
FEW
ANCHOR NUr -
PLASTIC OR
STEEL CAP
«, AHCFIOR PLATE M011.0
ANGLE CONCRETE OR
cMMATING STEEL SLFMT
' BEARING AID FOR STRESSM
WEDGE WASHER ANCHORAGE
SMOOTH
PLASTIC
' MTHING .
I COUW FOR 'FIXED COMER FOR
REMOVABLE AN= OIFFIUT INSTALLATION
col;amous
--
- -- - — - — - -- — ---
- — - -- - ---
--- 7HiEAORAR - - -- �.
1
IELASTIC CENTRALIZER 7MADED am nu FOR POST -GROUTING OJiO 9 TIES FOR
FOR CAM CENTRALIZER FOR SOIL ANCHORS SYSTEM FOR ROCK ANCHORS
DRILL HOLES DRILL HOLES IN ROCK CHSIVE SOIL
6
i
I DYWIDAG Threadhar Anchors with Double corrosion Protection
�l
J
I
I
1
I
Cl
BASIC TYPE
VARIATIONS
GROUTING
lour '
ANM NUT
PLASTIC OR
STEEL CAP
�
ATIM PLATE
1
�..
CORROSION
CMIATIVE
OWOOU
THiEADBAR
ANGLE
COWMAHNG
WEAGE sHER�ANCHORAfE
CONCRETE OR
STEEL SLPPOHT
CEA�M fa29UT �;
PIASA.STIC
=7
ffATHRTG
SPUCE IN ME
PACO
CORRUGATED
STRESSING LENGTH
OR On LENGTH
PVC SHEATHING
OROUT CAP
ELASTIC CENTIMUM
DRILL CASED MIS
SEi WAL
arIMA N ROOCK
FLIM TWE FOR
SOIL ANCtIo@s
POST-MMING
WIVE-SOIL'�HCR3
t4W 7LEE FOR
I
I
I
I
1
1
1
STEMS WTERKUHONAL
DYWIDAG, Bar Rock and Soil Anchors
Prestressing Steel Properties - ASTM A722
Anchor --
Size
Ultimate
Stress
k
Crass
Section
Area
Ultimate
Strength
(fan A,.)
Prasirassing Force
Nomlmal
Weight
(bar only)
Maximum
Bar
Diameter
0.80 & Ara
0.70 fm AM
0.001w An
In
mm
kst .
We
in'
mmt
kips
kN •
kips
I kN
kips
kN
kips
kN
pit
kp/m
In
mm
150
1030
0.85
548•
127.5
567
102.0
454.
89.3
' 397
76.5
340
3.01
4.48
120
30.5
1
26
160"'
f100
0.85
548•
.135.0
605
108.8
485
952
423
81.6
363
3.01
4.4B
1.20
30.5
11h
32
150
1036
1.25
806
f187.5
834
150.0
662
131.3
584
112.5
500
1 4.39
6.54
1.46
37.1
180"
1100
1.25
808
707
140.0
623
120.0
534
4.39
6,54
1.46
37.1
150
1030
1.58
•1018
189.6
839
165.9
738
142.2
633
5.56
828
1.63
41.4
1'/e
36
160"
11Q0
1.58
1018
C200.O890160.9
202.3
899
177.0
.787
151.7
675
5.56
8.28
1.63
41.4
1'h
40
150
1030
2.62
1690.
320
1423
280
-1245
240
1068
9.23
13.74
2.00
51,0
Steel Stress Levels
Dywldag Bars may be stressed to the allowable limits
ofACi 318. The maximum jacking stress (temporary)
may not exceed 0,80 fpa, and the transfer stress (lock -
off) may notsxceed 0.70 fpu.
The final effective (working) prestress level depends
on the specific applicatiori, installatlon procedure,
stressing sequence and the rigidity of the structural
system. In the absence of a detailed analysis of the
Hardware Dimensions
-Avallabla on opodal ardor.
structurat system, 0.60 fpa may be used as an approxi-
mation of the effective (working) prestress level..
Dywidag Bars maybe used individually or in multiples
depending upon the magnitude of force requirements
or upon drilling considerations.
Actual IoSs calculations -require structural design Infor-
mation not normally present on contract documents.
Bar
in
mm
In
mm
In
mm •
In
Diameter'
1
26
1114
32
1'/4
35
1'A
Anchor Plate Size
5x5xl.25
4x6,5xl.25
- 130x130x32
100x165x32
Wx1.50
5x8x1.5
160x160x38
f30x200x3B
7x7,5x1.75
TxUxl.76
189X190x25A
130MU45
Wx-2.26
rNutExtenslon
a
1.675
50.0
2.5
.5
2.75
70
2.875
t
Min, Bar Protection --b
3 '
78.2
3.5
88,9
4.00
100
3.625
Coupler Length o
6.5
140
6.76
170
8.625
220
8.76
Coupler Dlameler d
2
00.0
2.376
60.325
2.625
67
3.125
a 1---
b COUPLER
arrrrrrrr�
Minimum Anchor Diameter
Corrosion ProleFllon
Nominal
Bar
Diameter
Without
81nD1$ 1
Double
Without
Coupler
With
Coupler
Without'
Coupler
With
Coupler
Without:
I Coupler
With
Coupler
in
mm
In
mm
M
mm
In
mm
In
mm
In
mm
In
mm
1
26
120
30.5
2,000
50.00
1.625
41.28
2,125
53.98
2.375
60.33
2,500
63.60
1'/4
32
1.48
$7.1
2.376
00.00
1,875
47.63
2.600
63,50
2,076
73.03
3.125
79.38
1%
36
1.63
41.4
2.750
67.00
2,000
60.80
2,875
73.03
2,875
73.03
3.125
79.38
•11h
46•
2
60.8
3.125
79.38
2.5
63.5
3.25
82.55
3.5
88.9
4.125
105
8
2
I
71
F
1
I
1
1
1
1
J
P
1
DYWIDAG Anchor Design
The spacing, inclination, length and the load
applied of each anchor depend on the local soil or
rock conditions. The available drilling equipment
and the structural capacity of the other support ele-
ments, such as wales, lagging or a concrete retain-
ing wall, may dictate the capacity and configuration)
of anchors. A factor of safety of 1.5 to 2.5 should
be utilized in anchor design.
For rock anchors, the shear stress on the rock
socket perimeter is used to size the bond length.
For soil anchors, the bond length is generally
assumed Qn the basis of experience and site test-
ing. Field testing should always be conducted to
verify design assumptions.
Pull out tests verify that the bond capacity of the
threadbar in grout exceeds the recommendations
of ACI 318. The threadbar grout interface does not
control the bond length. Bond in cohesive soils can
be considerably Increased using the Dywidag
Postgrouting System.
The stressing length depends on the assumed fail-
ure plane and/or the size of the rock or soil mass
necessary to resist the anchor force. A minimum
stressing length of 15 ft. is recommended, -so that
small movements in the retaining system will not
result iri a major loss of prestress force.
Dywidag Anchor Installation
Selection of the drilling method depends on the
number of anchors, the composition of the soil or
rock, availability of equipment and the required
diameter. of, the hole. The selection of the tools and
techniques should be left to the discretion of the.
drilling contractor where practical. The depth of the
bore hole should be, based on site tests.
The diameter of the bore hole should exceed the
maximum diameter of the anchor by at least 1 K. if
centering devices are used, larger• holes are
required.
Grouting
For rock anchors, bore holes should be pressure..
tested to determine water leakage before the
anchors are installed. Consolidation grouting,
redrilling and retesting are required where water
seepage is excessive.
After the anchor is Installed in the bore hole, the
bond length is grouted. Rock anchors and anchors
in cohesive soils are generally grouted without
pressure. Soil anchors in loose granular material
are pressure grouted while the drill casing or auger
is withdrawn.
Dywidag Postgrouting may be used for the installa-
tion of anchors in cohesive soils and non -cohesive
soils. This technique permits additional grouting
operations after the primary grout has cured. Using
a series of valves in a prepiaced grout pipe, grout
can repeatedly be injected under high pressure.
Regrouting displaces the previously injected grout
and Increases the anchor capacity. .
Stressing
In stressing, an electrically
powered hydraulic jack with
built-in socket wrench llghtens
the anchor nut. The Jack fits ;•
over a pull rod designed to
thread onto the threadbar
extension protruding from the
anchor nut. Elongation of the
anchor can be measured directly or can be moni-
tored by a counter on the jack. Hydraulic pressure
is measured by a gauge on the hydraulic pump.
Discrepancies of more than. 10% between elonga-
tion and gauge reading should be Investigated. Lift
off readings should be taken to determine the
applied prestress force. Movement of the structural
system must be considered.
Testing
Prior to the installation of any production anchors,
test anchors should be installed'to verify all design
assumptions, including anchor length. Test
anchors should be proof stressed to 80% of the
guaranteed ultimate strength of the Dywidag
Threadbar. After 24 or more hours, readings may
be required on selected anchors to determine
creep behavior.
All production anchors should also be proof
stressed but the load need not be held for an
extended period.
IJ
' DYWIDAG Multistrand Anchors
r
1
11
I�
I�
I
I
I
I
DSI's Multistrand Rock and Soil Anchor System is
based on the proven prestressing technology of
the Dywidag Post -Tensioning System and decades
of experience in anchor technology. The system is
extremely versatile and can be adapted to meet
almost any project requirement.
Large Forces
Although there is no theoretical limit to the capacity
of a multistrand anchor, practical considerations
such as drill hole size and the availability of mater-
ial handling equipment limit the size of an anchor
to 61-0.6" (15,2mm) dia, strands. Larger anchors
can be manufactured but the practicality and eco-
nomics of their use should be thoroughly evaluated
before they are incorporated into a design. Very
large anchors should be avoided in order to assure
a satisfactory force redistribution in case of an
anchor failure.
Long Lengths
No theoretical length limit exists, however, practical
drilling and material handling considerations must
be considered.'For shop fabrication, the practical
limit is dictated by total anchor weight.
Small Bending Radius
Strand anchors can easily be coiled to fit on a flat
bed truck and are well suited for installation where
work space is limited.
Corrosion Protection Options -
A wide variety of corrosion protection options are
available to choose from, depending upon the
expected length of service and the aggressiveness
of the environment,
Single Corrosion Protection (SCP) (Type A)
SOP Anchors are used for temporary applications
and sometimes for permanent applications in non -
aggressive environments. In the bond length,
cement grout covers the bare strand. The protec-
tion in the free stressing length depends upon
whether single stage or two stage grouting is used.
For single stage grouting, the free stressing length
of each strand is coated with a layer of corrosion
preventative grease over which is extruded a tough
seamless layer of polyethylene. Grease never
10
comes in contact with the grout in the free stress-
ing length so the bond strength is not affected. For
two stage grouting, the grease and PE coating can
be omitted. DSI does not recommend the use of
bare strand in the free stressing length where the
free stressing length remains uhgrouted.
Double Corrosion Protection DCP.(Type E)
DCP Anchors are used for permanent applications
in aggressive or uncertain environments. The strand
bundle in the bond length Is grouted Into a corru-
gated PE or PVC duct while the individual strands
in the free stressing length are greased and
sheathed in polyethylene. Quality control.may be
enhanced by pregrouting the bond length under
factory conditions. Drill hole size and cost are
significantly influenced by the clearance required
by the outer PE duct.
Stewart Mountain Dam, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. Permanent
anchors consisting of 22 and 28 epoxy coated strands. .
1
I
n
Ll
J
1
1
I
I
1
Double Corrosion Protection DCP (Type C)
Corrosion protection for the anchor tendon can be
Improved by extending the outer corrugated PE or
PVC duct over the free stressing length. In this
case, pregrouting of the anchor inside the plastic
duct is not recommended because of difficulties
which might be encountered during transportation
and placing.
Double Corrosion Protection DCP (type D)
The ideal protection for strand anchors is one in
which the strand is totally and permanently pro-
tected from the time of manufacture throughout its
life. Such protection is provided by epoxy coating
the individual strands both externally and Internally.
Flo -bond Flo -file is a rugged, thermally bonded
polymer coating that offers maximum corrosion
protection, with a bond strength that exceeds that
of bare strand. When two stage grouting Is used,
no additional corrosion protection is required even
In applications where the free stressing length will
remain ungrouted for an extended period of time.
The Dywidag wedge anchor -for epoxy coated
strand bites through the coating Into the strand,
developing 100% of its nominal ultimate tensile
strength, Corrosion protection provided by the
epoxy is not cgmpromised by the wedge.
Although the cost of epoxy coated strand is higher
than bare strand, the total cost of the Installed
anchor is reduced by eliminating the outer corru- -
gated plastic duct. This makes it possible to mini-
mize the drill hole size, thereby reducing the cost of
drilling and grouting.
Double Corrosion Protectlon'DCP (Type E)
For anchors •in which single stage grouting Is
•desirable, the free stressing length of epoxy coat-
ed strand anchors can be coated with a lubricat-
ing grease and encased in a seamless extruded
PE sheath.
Multistrand Prestressing Steel Properties - ASTM A416
Anchor
Size
Nominal
Cross Section
Area
Nominal
Weight
(bare strand)
Ultimate
Strength
(Fru Are)
Prestressing Force
0.80 Fru Apo
0.70 FPu Apo
0.60 FPu Ara
In'
mm'
pit
kg/m
kipsP782
kips
kN
kips
kN
kips
kN
3 -0.6
0.65
420
2.20
3.27
175.8
140.6
625
123.0
547
105.5
489
4 -0t
0.87
560
3.00
4.46
234.4
187.E
834
164.1
730
140.6
626
5 -0.8
1.09
700
9.70
5.51
293.0
• 234.4
1,043
205.1
912
175.8
782
8 -0.8
1.30
840
4.4q
6.55
361.6
281.3
1,251
240.1
1,b95
211.0
938
7 -0.6
1.62
1 980
6.20
7.74
4102
1,625
326.2
1,460
1 2BT2
1,277
248,2
1,095
8 -0.6
1.74 '
1,120
5.90
8.78
468.8
2,085
375.0
1.688
328.1
1,400
281.3
1,251
9 -0.6
1.95
1,260
6.70
9.97
627.4
2,346
421.9
1,877
369.2
1,642
•316.4
1,408
12 -0.6
2.60
1,680
8.90
13.24
703.2
3,128
562.6
2,603
492.3
2,190
422.0
1,877
16 -0.6
3.26
2,100
11.10
16.62
879.0
3,910
703.2
3,128
616.3
2,737
627.4
2,346
19 -0.8
4.12
2,660
14.10
20.98
1,113.4
4,963
890,7
3,962•
779.4
3,467 ,
668.0
2,912
27 -0.6
6.86
3,780
20.00
29.76
1,582,2•
7,038
1,265.8
5,e31
1,107.6
4,927
949.4
4,223
37 -0.6
8.03
6,180
27.40
40.78
2,169.2
9,645
1,734.6
7,716
1,617.8
6,751
1,301.0
5.787
46 -0.6
10.41
6,720
35.to
62.83
2,812.8
12,512
2,250.2
10,009
1,968.9
8,758
1,687.7
7,607
54 -0,6
1112
7,560
39.90
59.38
3,164.4
14,076
2,531.5
11,261
2,215.1
9,863
1,898.6
4,446
61 -0.6
13.24
8,540
45.10
67.12
3,574.6
15,901
2,859.7
12,721
2,802.2
11,131
2,144.8
9,540
11
1
BYISYTIIEEn
1 wwimr. Multistrand Anchors Types (Corrosion Protection Options)
1 kF
1
{
1\� �� GR UT' TUBE
GREASE & PE i {
SHEATHING
SHEATHING PE
'PE ORGPVC DUCT I N
1\fir BARE STRAND �\ {PRE -GROUTING �\IN
OPTIONAL]
1 N. ��% CENTRALIZING \ `/ CENTRALIZERS
SPACERS PROVIDE 1/2NN
PROVIDE 1/2' OF GROUTNN
OF GROUT , COVER ,
COVER N
A (S C
' SCP DCP DCP
SINGLE STAGG SINGLE STAGE SINGLE STAGE
1
12
1
Stressing Anchorages '
The prestressing force in each strand is mainta)nd
by individual 3-part wedges. The wedge segments
grip the strand by means of tooth shaped threads
'which are forced Into the surface of the strand
wires as the wedge is drawn Into the wedge hole.
Unless provisions are made to allow the wedge to
'move further Into the wedge hole (reduced friction
force F) in response to Increases in the strand
force V, the wedge teeth will fail in bending and
shear resulting in strand slips and anchor failure.
For this reason 081 recommends that wedges for.
strand anchors, in which the free stressing length
remains unbonded, be.seated at the highest possi-
ble force (0,8 fpu), Subsequent adjustment in anchor
force should be made by adding or removing shims.
Using this technique the wedge teeth will remain
securely embedded in the strand. This is particu-
larly important in applications where anchor load is
r
likely to increase with time due to superposition of
external loads or seismic activity.
' ... •S : :4i ^1t..rr1�Y:lrcp_•;:4<.
• . fi �Yk; hl,l• in7.+i.1
"' .t,+ rT,'i`�t'� ",aa l,',f 6i.,..n„.�iw
�;
✓;N'r _ .!<v�a.eNyt>.K:!. »n.4,•'ivr•.(. `,, t•vs�t.. .F;:i<l•.�{�•,iri
max. h c .!' ,i. ll.•'iy 'U' Y5 6, 4 Tl r'J•li • .rr, •'
•rt + P
.>rn . • fir. �,>... -r.
�; , i. "'.N: ,pie y�lrPm Nv. (1r,iiA ..tM1V{i..i'i�3�:{:•�.*� y.:,�:::.}':i: l'
_'.-. ��..L�S• ti"a'•a-01•oa �aH. >
..
,;Csr,"L,.•. i�p�
'+fir )• '• 5r1. 99 �''•
'�i ;. : i' ' j•,;i ^y, y,r�y;, �t s M, 9"
• �S T t
r '') 31 :j•:':,?i!"i;D;`•; e4$i��,
'•••"'•
a.; .. , � �7"+�
a % t- { .�S �.'�i�'�-q hI ii Kt. ry i ;','P t'X'i• t `S,•{,,.:Y+.y
`
�Y.y�-, (Sw Y i t.} M1 '�, ��h
)� }�' C aM� t-.' ,a,•;, ° {� '�'ek. v; 'A.�, .'�.,rt,,•.
7" 'ib v�4, D`. � % 3dsk.} fp�nl aA,.•�;,, YIM„•.
�• ',. �•r.'°
� ti`F,r v �•,,,.r4��.,t.�•,
' ,� :i i•1 .'a (• �X:?A ��4�Sfl ,RRj%1a+'�'�
.,.. `if. Y
( I. 5t .tl`5� 'i,a fir•:
}+rR �•.: `J••f�, a ,�Y'-���- r 1` >ar� '�''�3,5w
•v' 7+Y xYRt
� '
IS lrY��Fy1.�"Gfi.P•2i,•4 yh
.r''M" >Y,: �''t1r i't�`,••,t3�/7v 1 Y,
:., •+.:i •Y ire• . . 5+„ t'!r°i!E; , '.f S9 u�
S ', 4• 'Y+
• :?ir,', .a<",.
is S ,l��t'•' •F! k1 :nY'iIq'R 'sYAif^�f.nd_H .frf`." rfi'r�,- r,R_S•e'ft:�+'v,• r.!<`
, $ t �,{» {' �. idr n, y.• ;,...: ; rx[':. �j..r
t '. '-'ftl^.. d. T.r..�,j,4ySirt, +�. t; ;, ,:,r. r:'v'. .a..%::: • .
; � •; .. r
_ is '' w >•. 4' '`P`
• „' ''�: � i1'Y 1(.. (y' 91 • ,A ( 4l j ti( ,i.
•�}�'''.'S."
p.0p! _t�+ ,l t; S4h �A n• 1. ,„.;• .� ,: , r s>,r:,•: • /.. ;
3'^ � 1 � •(1 �5 b��',L�i::Pfi'd.�9•LhK' . S..^. � (i{i`/r. t{l{i•I:,�4✓
� 'i •.
..•df(, w i
' r. N-.. { �,..:"t• ,tw,rv+ -: ad,M
.:".•i.'.,ti'„iL;'v,`.�.ui�"•r,,:t,y�h�'••�o.�il.'�."$�•.,.,3!+t.le�-'Yn�i;;ci:_.:.+`:+�••S`<"J
J 1t %M1; ,Ye.,M,�,i
f (,(^ .µ i:.. rt'' iti,%'44;5;i�Y'+{'i5:�;:rtlSti;. �:,Yn):%=yciK`�',�r,-,•'S
`:�,a;??.`; •Tcy`:.;
cr S`.:-?cninq.:.N•7 n. w,•:;u
SYSTEMS A, B, 8 C
ANCHORAGE SIZE
4-0.6-
6-0.6-
8-0.8-
11-0.6-
14-0.6-
18-0.6-
25-0.6-
34-0.6-
54-0.8-
WEDGE PLATE
OA
4.50/114,3
5.3WIS0.7
6251168.8
7,00/177,8
8.00/203.2
8.75/222.3
10.50/266.711.50/292.114.001365.6
B
1.80/46.7
220/56.0
2.38160.5
270/68,6
3A2179.2
3.62191.9.
4.62/114.8
4.62/117.3
BA142.7
C x C
825/209.6
10.00/214.0
12.00/304,8
13.501342.9
16,50/393.7
18,00/4572
21.00/533.4
25:00/635.0
30.001762.0
BEARING PLATE
0
1,19/302
1,38/35,1
1.60/38:1
1.75/44.5
2.00150.8
2,38/60.5
2.75/69.9
3650/68.9
4.0Q/101,6
0E
3.30/83.8
4,00/101.6
4.iIM21.9
5.40/137.2
6:20/157.5
6.62/168.1
735/196.9
8,75I222.3
11.2.W85.8
TRUMPET
L(MIN•)
14.01355.E
18,0/406,4
20.0/508.0
23.0/584.2
28,0/660.4
'28,0r111,2
34.0/863.0
40.0/1018,0
44,0/1117.8
SYSTEMS D S: E
ANCHORAGE SIZE
4-0,6-
8-0.6-
11-0.6-
14-0,6-
25-0,6-
34-0,8-
5470,6.
OA
5.00/127.0
7.00/177.8
8.00/203.2
9.001228.6
12.00/304.8
13.00/330.2
16.001406.4
WEDGE PLATE
8
2.38/60.5
2.38/60.5
2,75169.9
3.12/79.2
4.52/114.8
4.62A17.3
5.62042.7
OX0
8.50/216.9
12,50/317.5
14.00/355.0
18,00/406.4
22.001448.8
25.001635.0
30.00002.0
BEARING PLATE
D
1,25/3118
1.50/38A
1.75/4465
1,88/47.8
2.76/69.9
3.50/88.9
4.00/101.6
OE
4.00/101.6
5.191131.8
6.00/152.4
6.76/171.5
10,12i257.010.25/260.413.00/330.2
TRUMPET
L(MIN,)
17.0/431,8
23.01584,2
1 27,0/6B568
29.0/7.36.6
37.0/939,8
143.0/1092.2
47.OJ11A3.8
NOTE: Bearing ode design based on A36 steel loaded to 95% of guts
14
DIMENSIONS: Inch/mm
DSI
TRUMPET
-CORRUGATED
PE OR PVC DUCT
(PRE -GROUTING ]FREE
OPTIONAL) §411�. STRESSING
GIST ROUTTUBE�EPDXY COATED LENGTI9
-GREASE & PE y �. �. GREASE6 PE
SHEATHING �� *�� ' SHEATHED
\ STRANDCOATED
\ . 2ND STAGE
\� GROUT TUBE �EPDXY COATED
L STRAND
-CENTRALIZERS / / CENTRALIZING CENTRALIZING BOND
PROVIDE
OUT /2. ` SPACERS / SPACERS LENGTH
COVER PROVIDE 1/2' PROVIDE 1/2'
COVEROF O� COVER OF UT
D E ANCHOR TYPE
DCP DCP CORROSION PROTECTION
TWO STAGE SINGLE STAGE GROUTING
13
11
I
' Uncoiler
' For projects where anchor placement by overhead
crane is impractical, DSI can provide a hydraulic
powered uncoller. A unique feature of the Dywidag
Uncoiler is the adjustable hub which simplifies the
' process of placing the anchor in the uncoller. If
necessary, the uncoiler can be used to remove the
anchor from the drill hole. Use of the uncoller, both
' in installation and/or removal, will reduce the risk of
damage to the tendon.
PJ
IJ
I
DS17.5 Ton Uncoller
Stressing
For installation and stressing efficiency, most
DYWIDAG jacks for multi -strand anchors are
equipped with internal strand guide tubes with
automatic strand gripping and releasing devices.
These features make jack installation a fast, one-
step operation with small wedge seating loss.
Far safety, all jacks feature a check valve which
holds the pressure in the unlikely event of
hydraulic failure, For reliability, the jacks are
equipped with special devices for power seating
all wedges simultaneously. Jacks also allow
bleed -back to achieve full utilization of the
maximum allowable stresses in.the anchor,
A hydraulic connection and a pressure gauge are
provided for all tensioning jacks.
The hydraulic pumps used in conjunction with the
jacks can be operated by remote control..
Jack chairs are provided where wedge plate lift off
during anchor testing is antisipated.
Is
Restressable Systems
Rams for
Anchor Stressing
NOTE: Detailed operating and
safety Instructions are provided
with all stressing unite, Read and
understand these Instructions
before operating equipment.
.. �2t1Vp.0'.'rEN40N0':
311
MAX
DS/
,JI u.'r tizo�f .
O ttlOW TENM4N5
�TEN&YMPPs00MM
- " a6.19%1:6'iE11gOM4-20-0y0.0.7Et81aM6
'.�: � NORCCA1NSe0TONN -: ,79a1TON
' DYWII ar-SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL
n
1
I
1
1
1
1
Spacers
The purpose of a spacer is to help insure that
grout surrounds each strand for corrosion pro-
tection and for bond strength development.
Designers should specify the desired distance
between spacers (typically 7' —101.
Centralizers
Centralizers are placed over the assembled
strand bundle in order to maintain the required
spacing between the anchor and the bore hole
so that an adequate thickness of grout (mink
mum 0,5') surrounds the anchor. A wide variety
of centralizers are available depending upon the
anchor type
Typical spacers and centralizers.
DYWIDAG-SYSTEMS
INTERNATIONAL,
USA INC.
Corporate Headquarters
South Central Division
Pvco
North Centel Division
320 Mammon Drive
1801 North Drive
Arlington, TX 7y0001
Bolingbrook, IL60440
Tel (81 485.3333
Fax 465.3889
Foax((850) 87-110 7
(017)
Western Division
East Division
2164 South Street
'North
15 Industrial Road
Fairfield NJ 07004
Long -Beach, CA 90805
Tel $6911 631.6181
f
Fax 631-2667
is
Fax((973) 26.9222 9292
South East Division
America Division
Latin6Road
ifi Industrial Road
'
4732 Stone Drive
Tucker,
I �
FairfieldNJNJ 07004'
Tel
(9 276.0249
)Q)491-3790
3)
Fax (770) 938.1219
Visit Our Wdreits:
E.mall:
www.dywideg-systeme.com dsiemerk:e@dslemeries.com
Occoquan Dam,
Fairfax County
Water Authority.
Permanent tie
down anchors
40-54 epoxy
coated strands.
Los Angeles Public Library. Permanent tle backs using
epoxy coated strand.
DYWIDAG-SYSTEMS
INTERNATIONAL,
CANADA LTD.
Eastern Division
85 Bowes Road, Unit X5
Concord, ON L4K 1 H5
Tel (905 8694962
Fax(90 889.2148
Western Division
10433 961h Avenue, Ste. 103
Surrey, )8)C V4N 4C4
Feaix((604)88 8 5008
DYWIDAG-SYSTEMS
INTERNATIONAL,
ASiA-PACIFIC
Cc rate Headquarters
25 Padllo Hlghway�
Bennetts preen, NSW 2290
Australia
Tel 4612 4948 9D99
Fax+612 4948 4087
iZW2M