Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSoils Report for Foundation & Septic Design 07.21.2016H-PKUMAR Geotechnical Engineering 1 Engineering Geology Materials Testing 1 Environmental 5020 County Road 154 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Phone: (970) 945-7988 Fax: (970) 945-8454 Email: hpkglenwood@kumarusa.com July 21, 2016 Cuc Construction Attn: Ernesto Cuc 635 Glassier Drive Carbondale, Colorado 81623 (gm.ernesto @ hotmail.com) Office Locations: Parker, Glenwood Springs, and Silverthorne, Colorado Project No.16-7-199 Subject: Subsoil Study for Foundation Design, Proposed Metal Building, Lot 2, Coke Ovens Expansion, County Road 163 (Airport Road), Glenwood Springs, Colorado Dear Mr. Cuc: As requested, H-P/Kumar performed a subsoil study for design of foundations at the subject site. The study was conducted in accordance with our agreement for geotechnical engineering services to Cuc Construction dated July 11, 2016. The data obtained and our recommendations based on the proposed construction and subsurface conditions encountered are presented in this report. Proposed Construction: Development plans were preliminary at the time of our study. The proposed metal building will be 40 feet by 60 feet with slab -on -grade floor. The building will be located in the area of the exploratory pits shown on Figure 1. Cut depths are expected to range between about 3 to 6 feet. Foundation loadings for this type of construction are assumed to be relatively light to moderate and typical of the proposed type of construction. A retaining wall will be constructed uphill of the building into the hillside. If building conditions or foundation loadings are significantly different from those described above, we should be notified to re-evaluate the recommendations presented in this report. Site Conditions: The property is vacant of structures with the exception of some coke oven ruins. Vegetation consists of sage brush, grass and weeds on the hillside with sparse grass and weeds in the building area. The ground surface has been disturbed and graded relatively flat. A two -track dirt road previously crossed the middle of the property from south to north. The hillside above the property is northeast facing and steeply sloping down into the building area. The building area is relatively flat with a slight slope down to northeast. Numerous cobbles and boulders are visible on the hillside. Subsurface Conditions: The subsurface conditions at the site were evaluated by excavating four exploratory pits at the approximate locations shown on Figure 1. The Logs of the pits are -2 - presented on Figure 2. The subsoils encountered, below up to about 5 feet of man -placed fill, generally consist of sandy gravel and cobbles with small boulders. Topsoil and silty sandy gravel fill was encountered in Pit 1 overlying the natural sandy gravel and cobble soils. Results of gradation analyses performed on samples of the sandy gravel and the fill material (minus 5 inch fraction) obtained from the site are presented on Figure 4. No free water was observed in the pits at the time of excavation and the soils were slightly moist. Foundation Bearing Conditions: The natural granular soils are adequate for support of spread footing foundations. Man -placed fill approximately 5 feet in depth was encountered in the exploratory pits and extends across most of the building area. The fill material should be completely removed from beneath the building area and the excavation extended down to the natural soils. Structural fill such as road base or suitable processed onsite soils should be used to return the grade to design bearing levels. Structural fill placed below footing bearing level should be compacted to at least 9$ percent standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum and extend an equal distance laterally as deep below bearing level. Foundation Recommendations: Considering the subsoil conditions encountered in the exploratory pits and the nature of the proposed construction, we recommend spread footings placed on the undisturbed natural soil or compacted structural fill designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of 3,000 psf for support of the proposed metal building. The bearing soils should have low compressibility potential and low post -construction foundation settlement. Footings should be a minimum width of 16 inches for continuous walls and 2 feet for columns. The existing fill and loose disturbed soils within the excavation should be removed or moistened and compacted. Exterior footings should be provided with adequate cover above their bearing elevations for frost protection. Placement of footings at least 36 inches below the exterior grade is typically used in this area. Continuous foundation walls should be reinforced top and bottom to span local anomalies such as by assuming an unsupported length of at least 10 feet. Foundation walls acting as retaining structures should also be designed to resist a lateral earth pressure based on an equivalent fluid unit weight of at least 45 pcf for the on-site granular soil as backfill. A representative of the geotechnical engineer should observe all footing excavations and test structural fill for compaction prior to concrete placement to evaluate bearing conditions. A sliding coefficient of 0.50 and equivalent fluid unit weight of 450 pcf can be used to resist lateral loads on retaining walls. Floor Slabs: The natural on-site soils, exclusive of topsoil, are suitable to support lightly to moderately loaded slab -on -grade construction. The existing fill material should be removed from beneath floor slab areas. To reduce the effects of some differential movement, floor slabs should be separated from all bearing walls and columns with expansion joints which allow unrestrained vertical movement. Floor slab control joints should be used to reduce damage due to shrinkage cracking. The requirements for joint spacing and slab reinforcement should be established by the designer based on experience and the intended slab use. A minimum 4 inch layer of relatively well graded sand and gravel such as road base should be placed beneath interior slabs for support. This material should consist of minus 2 inch aggregate with less than 50% passing the No. 4 sieve and less than 12% passing the No. 200 sieve. -3 - All fill materials for support of floor slabs should be compacted to at least 95% of maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. Required fill can consist of the on- site granular soils devoid of vegetation, topsoil and oversized rock. The existing fill material containing debris and may not be suitable for slab support. Underdrain System: Although free water was not encountered during our exploration, it has been our experience in the area that local perched groundwater can develop during times of heavy precipitation or seasonal runoff. Frozen ground during spring runoff can create a perched condition. We recommend below -grade construction, such as retaining walls be protected from wetting and hydrostatic pressure buildup by an underdrain system. The drains should consist of drainpipe placed in the bottom of the wall backfill surrounded above the invert level with free -draining granular material. The drain should be placed at each level of excavation and at least 1 foot below lowest adjacent finish grade and sloped at a minimum 1% to a suitable gravity outlet. Free -draining granular material used in the underdrain system should contain less than 2% passing the No. 200 sieve, less than 50% passing the No. 4 sieve and have a maximum size of 2 inches. The drain gravel backfill should be at least 11/2 feet deep. Surface Drainage: The following drainage precautions should be observed during construction and maintained at all times after the metal building has been completed: 1) Inundation of the foundation excavations and underslab areas should be avoided during construction. 2) Exterior backfill should be adjusted to near optimum moisture and compacted to at least 95% of the maximum standard Proctor density in pavement and slab areas and to at least 90% of the maximum standard Proctor density in landscape areas. Free -draining wall backfill should be capped with about 2 feet of the on-site, finer graded soils to reduce surface water infiltration. 3) The ground surface surrounding the exterior of the building should be sloped to drain away from the foundation in all directions. We recommend a minimum slope of 6 inches in the first 10 feet in unpaved areas and a minimum slope of 3 inches in the first 10 feet in pavement and walkway areas. The uphill retaining wall should direct surface runoff around the building. 4) Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all backfill. Limitations: This study has been conducted in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering principles and practices in this area at this time. We make no warranty either express or implied. The conclusions and recommendations submitted in this report are based upon the data obtained from the exploratory pits excavated at the locations indicated on Figure 1 and to the depths shown on Figure 2, the proposed type of construction, and our experience in the area. Our services do not include determining the presence, prevention or possibility of mold or other biological contaminants (MOBC) developing in the future. If the client is concerned about MOBC, then a professional in this special field of practice should be consulted. Our findings include interpolation and extrapolation of the subsurface conditions identified at the exploratory pits and variations in the subsurface conditions may not become evident until excavation is performed. If conditions encountered during construction appear different from -4 - those described in this report, we should be notified at once so re-evaluation of the recommendations may be made. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use by our client for design purposes. We are not responsible for technical interpretations by others of our information. As the project evolves, we should provide continued consultation and field services during construction to review and monitor the implementation of our recommendations, and to verify that the recommendations have been appropriately interpreted. Significant design changes may require additional analysis or modifications to the recommendations presented herein. We recommend on-site observation of excavations and foundation bearing strata and testing of structural fill by a representative of the geotechnical engineer. If you have any questions or if we may be of further assistance, please let us know. Respectfully Submitted, H -P 4- KU AR Louis Eller Reviewed by: Steven L. Pawlak, P.E : *I 1 62 22 1 ]( LEE/ksw owl `Wr"9 ;441...* cp, attachments Figure 1 — Lo :_ •loratory Pits Figure 2 — Logs of Exploratory Pits Figure 3 — Legend and Notes Figure 4 — Gradation Test Results 1 WjA PAN 'Ours isALWer&MCAP 'PIIS 3933' 50' X SO TR:AA10J1AR IWGAs3S/EGilf33 ACC ESs EAsemerr ALUMW1UMCAF TELT 89]r PROPERTY I+OU',DAR7 l DCE OF PAVED COUNTY ROAD r r•APr•Pr—� Jo. r PM 50 0 50 100 APPROXIMATE SCALE -FEET 17'43.31 3075.36 •• 663.43 C - 881,63 CE S 3316'S8'E 17'43 .l •� �., R 303 v. L � 849.72 C • 64..30 C1 - P44 32•36 3d' W `.� 5E7 X 50 Tl1ANGULAA h1GSESS iCESS ACCESS EASEPAENt WATER vALVE (MP vEm Fin (V? DUET X STAND !r! (TY? 'E\ loo R W 16-7-199 H-P-KUMAR rair G I (^SLerrr t4Pgl' 1Ri[r.1Ni r ttrormQt• LOGS OF EXPLORATORY PITS Figure 1 Depth - Feet LLC 0 • • 0 5 10 PIT 1 PIT 2 -1+4=67 -200=3 \ f PIT 3 PIT 4 Note: Explanation of symbols presented on Figure 3. 0 5 10 16-7-199 H-P== LOGS OF EXPLORATORY PITS Figure 2 LEGEND: CI • e NOTES: Topsoil; organic sandy silt and clay, firm, slightly moist, dark brown. Gravel (gm); sandy, silty, cobbles, dense, slightly moist, red, rounded rock. Gravel, cobbles and boulders (gm-gp); slightly silty, sandy, dense, slightly moist, reddish brown, rounded rock. Fill; silty sandy gravel with cobbles, loose to medium dense, slightly moist, mixed dark brown, reddish brown and gray, contains coal ash and bricks. Disturbed bulk sample. 1, Exploratory pits were excavated on July 13, 2016 with a trackhoe. 2, Locations of exploratory pits we,e measured approximately by pacing from the client designated building area, 3. Elevations of exploratory pits were not measured and the logs of exploratory pits are drawn to depth. 4. The exploratory pit locations should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the method used. 5. The lines between materials shown on the exploratory pit logs represent the approximate boundaries between material types and transitions may be gradual. 6. No free water was encountered in the pits at the time of excavating. Fluctuation in water level may occur with time. 7. Laboratory Testing Results: +4 = Percent retained on the No, 4 sieve -200 = Percent passing No. 200 sieve 16-7-199 H-P�KUMAR LEGEND AND NOTES Figure 3 100 10 ao 70 40 SO 40 10 70 10 KYapoki TER ANALYSTS 1 a ±11 • 001 .0�7 100 70 30 0 .7-02 .900 S'EVE ANALYSIS 111 .0111 .077 Ars .1• • A 171 AN1.1■ 7? 31, a 77 07 14 1.1 707 177 DIAMETER OF PARTICLES IN MILLIMETERS 157 10 20 70 1D 30 40 70 S0 00 100 00 CLAY TO SILT SAND GRAVEL FINE I MEDIUM ]COARSE FINE 1 COARSE COBBLES GRAVEL 67 X LIQUID LIMIT SAMPLE OF: Sandy Grays! with Cobbles SAND NYDROI.a CT[R ANALYSIS 14 717 7 IMS 1'oC 0C40*.0 31 % PLASTICITY INDEX SILT AND CLAY 3 X FROM: PR 1 0 5'-5' SIEVE ANALYSIS Y.5. 7rAu0440 1101[7 Gx.a SOYAIL 01.70,001 n 1 Lar.. 4477 Iwl. 1100 H0 440 470 al■ 1,10 41 94 ./.' 71.E r 1/2' .401 0011 L l0 10 20 7s 40 AO AO 70 00 110 f 1 1 111 1 1 _1 1 1 111 I 1 7 1 1 1 111 100 Orf A77 ,070 .16a .290 ..00 1.10 7 74 . 7 . 5 to 70.1 7A7 177 700 DIAMETER OF PARTICLES IN MILLIMETERS 102 CLAY TO SILT SAND GRAVEL GRAVEL 75 X UOUID LIMIT FINE I MEDIUM [COARSE FINE I COARSE SAND 20 X PLASTICITY INDEX SAMPLE OF: Slightly Silly Sandy Gravel FROM: PII 3 0 2' — 3' with Cabbies (FBI) SILT ANO CLAY 5 % I11s.1 1411 04101 VOW/ Q.Ir l0 SS.. .Ompl.s .hkh oars 111r.d. Ths r.1Hnq ?.pail oho? n01 pa 010redO040. 140041 (1 000. 1.)101441 1114 .111114 approve'? of OYmor ■ A..elloh.. ln.. Sl.'. *noires 1.1010 h perfeenl.d 111 .,Condom. +0101 A5111 0127, AS7U C135 end/or ASTu 01110. COBBLES 16-7-199 H-P-KUMAR r. 7o,Ktiti,_ I Ev).1Ir..rr41 I LA 41,7(11.;71 7 )117 1.1:1:11,7171.:7.11 iiuu:r.^.vnt.11 LOGS OF EXPLORATORY PITS Figure 4 PERC HOLE 1 N: E: 80954.3297 PROPOSED OUILp1NO ..... ROAD} PARC HCL "�- N:49508.2678 E: 80964.8569 -� p,Cpos8b aRIVE wAr PRO DbE10'--ADH FIELD Iftr PROPOSED DRIVE WA �..� • • x X 15 0 15 " pppRoyaggE SCALE-fEET 14 lam*!er r 16-7-1999.031.101air u' Env re"rui s,. 3374 LOGS OF EXPLORATORY PITS Figure 1 0_ m S `1 +4:53 - -1 -200=13 PROFILE PIT 2 0 5 10 Note- Explanation of symbols presented on Figure 3- a A 1 a LEGEND: 6. NOTES: Fill: silty sandy gravel with cobbles. loose to medium dense, slightly moist, mixed dark brown. reddish brown and gray, contains coal ash and bricks. Gravel (GM -GP); sandy, slightly lo silty. ccbbles, dense, slightly moist, brown, rounded rock, Disturbed bulk sample. 1. Exploratory pits were excavated on October 3. 2016 with a trackhoe. 2. The exploratory pits were located by the client. 3. Elevations of exploratcry pits were not measured and the logs of exploratory pits are drawn to depth. 4. The exploratory pit locations should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the method used. 5_ The lines between materials shown on the exploratory pit logs represent the approximate boundaries between material Types and transitions may be gradual. 6. No free water was encountered in the pits at the time of excavating. Fluctuation in water level may occur with time. 7. Laboratory Testing Results: .l-4 G Percent retained on the No. 4 sieve -200 Percent passing No. 200 sieve t0 50 70 w OD 410 70 20 10 GRAVEL S3 % LIQUID LIMIT SAMPLE OF: Silty Sandy Grovel with Cabbies SAND 34 PLASTICITY INDEX SILT ANC CLAY 13 % FROM: Profit* Pit t 0 7.-0. 0 10 20 70 10 0 00 1h•tr 1.11 1rlolt1 92511 .dtr i Ih• f0np1 1 ..434„t...R 4391 e{ 4961094csd• ltafln0 . pII1 h0R10u1 1t*. ..151an 01121101 In Sf s1. '. 1t70Ci &d1. Ise 0112140191 s 04 KY1,.1 A r 10:.57. in W4...4 ar.11fst011h 1►37 19072. 7.5{!1 (5 36 eceaN 61.4' � .. LOGS OF EXPLORATORY PITS HYO FDLUCTC5 ANALYSIS SfCYE ANALYSIS 14 Mal 13 WA run .L4.O+1rr3 t 11113 41 WI. 50501 111.144 .1+4?, 411.+1 1150 1.00 Lt l 1.5. 0740Aa7 5(01(3 170 1.0 #10 0(1 I10J9 1 1 LA] 1 L r 01 • 1 1/5' LLIL 0.045 50019,1 4308.1117 0/a- 1 I/ ' s. -r- j I 4 1 1 I! l 1 1 L 1 1 1 f 1 1 f i t It I 01 .303 .005 .095 .015 .937 .0 DIAIIETTR 5 .100 .000 .150 1 t0 7.3{ 1, 7 OC PARTICLES iM MILLIMETERS 9.5 10 361 79.7 171 1.0 107 I. CLAY TO SILT SAND GRAVEL COBBLES FIN( I MEDIUM !COARSE FINE J COARSE GRAVEL S3 % LIQUID LIMIT SAMPLE OF: Silty Sandy Grovel with Cabbies SAND 34 PLASTICITY INDEX SILT ANC CLAY 13 % FROM: Profit* Pit t 0 7.-0. 0 10 20 70 10 0 00 1h•tr 1.11 1rlolt1 92511 .dtr i Ih• f0np1 1 ..434„t...R 4391 e{ 4961094csd• ltafln0 . pII1 h0R10u1 1t*. ..151an 01121101 In Sf s1. '. 1t70Ci &d1. Ise 0112140191 s 04 KY1,.1 A r 10:.57. in W4...4 ar.11fst011h 1►37 19072. 7.5{!1 (5 36 eceaN 61.4' � .. LOGS OF EXPLORATORY PITS