Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSubsoil Study for Foundation Design 03.28.2022lcn f,tntn & lssociaics,lnc." Geotechnical and Materials Engineers and Envimnmental Scientisls An Emdoycc Ormcd Compony 5020 County Road 154 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 phone: (970) 945-7988 fax: (970) 945-8454 email: kaglenwood@kumarusacom www.kumarusa.com Office tncations: Denver (HQ), Parker, Colorado Springs, Fort Collins, Glenwood Springs, and Summit Cormty, Colorado SUBSOIL STUDY FOR T'OUNDATION DESIGN PROPOSED RESIDENCE LOT 3, MINEOTA ESTATES MINEOTA DRIYE GARX'.IELD COUNTY, COLORADO PROJECT NO.22-7-121 MARCH 28,2022 PREPARED FOR: JESUS H. SALINAS P.O. BOX 1799 GLENWOOD SPRTNGS, COLOBADO 81601 salinas i esus23@smail.com SITE CONDITIONS. ............ - I - TABLE OF CONTENTS PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION FIELD EXPLORATION SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS FOUNDATION BEARING CONDITIONS .. DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS FOI-INDATIONS ... FOUNDATION AND RETAINING WALLS UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM SURFACE DRAINAGE..................... LIMITATIONS. FIGURE 1 - LOCATION OF DGLORATORY BORINGS FIGURE 2 - LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGURE 3 - LEGEND AND NOTES FIGURE 4 - SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS TABLE 1- SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS I 1 ., L- .-2- .t FLOOR SLABS J aJ 4 5 6 6 7- Kumar & Associates, lnc. o Projec{ No.22:I-121 PURPOSE AI\D SCOPE OF'STUDY This report presents the results of a subsoil study for a proposed residence to be located on Lot 3, Mineota Estates, Mineota Drive, Garfield County, Colorado. The project site is shown on Figure 1. The purpose of the study was to develop recommendations for foundation design. The study was conducted in accordance with our agreement for geotechnical engineering services to Jesus H. Salinas, dated January 14,2022. A field exploration program consisting of exploratory borings was conducted to obtain information on the subsurface conditions. Samples of the subsoils obtained during the field exploration were tested in the laboratory to determine their classification, compressibility or swell and other engineering characteristics. The results of the field exploration and laboratory testing were analyzedto develop recommendations for foundation types, depths and allowable pressures for the proposed building foundation. This report summarizes the data obtained during this study and presents our conclusions, recofitmendations and other geotechnical engineering considerations based on the proposed construction and the subsurface conditions encountered. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION Design plans for the lot were in progress at the time of our study. The proposed building will be single-story above crawlspace with a slab-on-grade garage,located as shown on Figure 1, and cut into the north sloping terrain. Excavation for the building is expected to range between about 2 to 6 feet below the existing ground surface. For the pu{pose of our analysis, foundation loadings for the structure were assumed to be relatively light and typical of the proposed type of construction. If building loadings, location or grading plans are significantly different from those described above, we should be notified to re-evaluate the recommendations contained in this report. SITE CONDITIONS The buildin g arcawas vacant and appeared mostly natural. The proposed residence site had been staked and the snow of around one foot deep had been plowed along the driveway and in the building area. The ground surface slopes gently to strongly down to the north at grades between about 5 to |Yo through the driveway and building arca. Vegetation generally consisted of native grass and weeds with scattered sage brush. Kumar & Associates, lnc. @ Projec{ No.22-7-121 n FIELD EXPLORATION The field exploration for the project was conducted on January 26,2022. Two exploratory borings were drilled at the locations shown on Figure I to evaluate the subsurface conditions. The borings were advanced with 4-inch diameter continuous flight auger powered by a truck- mounted CME-458 drill rig. The borings were logged by a representative of Kumar & Associates, Inc. Samples of the subsoils were taken with a 2-inchl.D. spoon sampler. The sampler was driven into the subsoils at various depths with blows from a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches. This test is similar to the standard penetration test described by ASTM Method D-l586. The penetration resistance values are an indication of the relative density or consistency of the subsoils. Depths at which the samples were taken and the penetration resistance values are shown on the Logs of Exploratory Borings, Figure 2. The samples were returned to our laboratory for review by the project engineer and testing. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Graphic logs of the subsurface profiles encountered at the site are shown on Figwe 2. Below about I foot of topsoil, the subsoils consist of very stiff to hard, silty sandy clay to clayey sand with scattered gravel. Clay soils like those encountered in the borings can possess an expansion potential when wetted. Laboratory testing performed on samples obtained during the field exploration included natural moisture content and density and finer than sand size gradation analyses. Swell-consolidation testing performed on relatively undisturbed drive samples of the clay soils, presented on Figure 4,indicate low compressibility under relatively light surcharge loading and moderate to high expansion potential when wetted under a constant light surcharge. The laboratory testing is summarized in Table l. No free water was encountered in the borings at time of drilling and the subsoils were slightly moist. FOT]NDATION BEARING CONDITIONS The clay soils encountered at the site possess an expansion potential when wetted under light loading. Shallow foundations placed on the expansive soils similar to those encountered at this site can experience movement causing structural distress if the clay is subjected to changes in moisture content. Surface runoff, landscape irrigation, and utility leakage are possible sources of water which could cause wetting. Footings placed on a minimum 3 feet of compacted structural fill such as road base could be used to reduce but not eliminate the risk of movement and Kumar & Associates, lnc. o Proiect No.22-7-121 -J- building distress. A lower movement risk foundation would be to support the foundation with piers or piles which penetrate the expansive materials and place the bottom of the piers in azotte of relatively stable moisture conditions at around 25 feet or greater depth. Presented below are recommendations for footings placed on compacted structural fill. If a deep foundation is desired, we should be contacted for additional recommendations. DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS FOIINDATIONS Considering the subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory borings and the nature of the proposed construction, the building can be founded with spread footings placed on compacted structural fi li. The design and construction criteria presented below should be observed for a spread footing foundation system. 1)Footingsplacedonatleast3feetof"@lshouldbedesigned for an allowable bearing pressure o?000 pt The fill should extend laterally out from the edge of the footing at least lYzfeet on both sides. Structural filIused below the foundation should be a relatively well graded granular material such as CDOT Class 6 road base compacted to at least 98oh of standard Proctor density. 2) Based on experience, we expect initial settlement of footings designed and constructed as discussed in this section will be up to about 1 inch. There could be additional movement of around I inch depending on the depth the bearing soils are wetted. 3) The footings should have a minimum width of 16 inches for continuous footings and24 inches for isolated Pads' 4) Continuous foundation walls should be heavily reinforced top and bottom to span local anomalies and limit the risk of differential movement. One method of analysis is to design the foundation wall to span an unsupported length of at least 12 feet. Foundation walls acting as retaining structures should also be designed to resist a lateral earth pressure as discussed in the "Foundation and Retaining Walls" section of this rePort. 5) Exterior footings and footings beneath unheated areas should be provided with adequate soil cover above their bearing elevation for frost protection. Placement of foundations at least 36 inches below the exterior grade is typically used in this area. 6) Prior to the footing construction, the topsoil, required clay sub-excavation depth and loose or disturbed soils should be removed from footing areas. The exposed soils should then be moistened and compacted prior to placing structural fill. Kumar & Associates, Inc. o Project No.22-7-121 -4- A representative of the geotechnical engineer should evaluate compaction of structural fill on a regular basis and observe all footing excavations prior to concrete placement for bearing conditions. FOUNDATION AND RETAINING WALLS Foundation walls and retaining structures which are laterally supported and can be expected to undergo only a slight amount of deflection should be designed for a lateral earth pressure computed on the basis of an equivalent fluid unit weight of at least 60 pcf for backfill consisting of the on-site fine-grained soils and at least 45 pcf for backfill consisting of imported granular materials. Cantilevered retaining structures which are separate from the buildings and can be expected to deflect sufficiently to mobilize the full active earth pressure condition should be designed for a lateral earth pressure computed on the basis of an equivalent fluid unit weight of at least 50 pcf for backfill consisting of the on-site fine-grained soils and at least 40 pcf for backfill consisting of imported granular materials. All foundation and retaining structures should be designed for appropriate hydrostatic and surcharge pressures such as adjacent footings, traffic, construction materials and equipment. The pressures recommended above assume drained conditions behind the walls and a horizontal backfrll surface. The buildup of water behind a wall or an upward sloping backfill surface will increase the lateral pressure imposed on a foundation wall or retaining structure. An underdrain should be provided to prevent hydrostatic pressure buildup behind walls. Backfill should be placed in uniform lifts and compacted to at least 90% of the maximum standard Proctor density at near optimum moisture content. Backfill placed in pavement areas should be compacted to at leastglYo of the maximum standard Proctor density. Care should be taken not to overcompact the backfill or use large equipment near the wall since this could cause excessive lateral pressure on the wall. Some settlement of deep foundation wall backfill should be expected even if the material is placed correctly and could result in distress to facilities constructed on the backfill. The lateral resistance of foundation or retaining wall footings will be a combination of the sliding resistance of the footing on the foundation materials and passive earth pressure against the side of the footing. Resistance to sliding at the bottoms of the footings can be calculated based on a coefficient of friction of 0.40. Passive pressure of compacted backfill against the sides of the footings can be calculated using an equivalent fluid unit weight of 350 pcf. The coefficient of friction and passive pressure values recommended above assume ultimate soil strength. Suitable factors of safety should be included in the design to limit the strain which will occur at the ultimate strength, particularly in the case of passive resistance. Fill placed against 7) Kumar & Associates, lnc. @ Projed No.22-7-121 5 the sides of the footings to resist lateral loads should be compacted to at least 95% of the maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. FLOOR SLABS The on-site soils possess an expansion potential and slab heave could occur if the subgrade soils were to become wet, similar to that in footing areas. Slab-on-grade construction can be used in less movement sensitive slabs, such as the garage, provided precautions are taken to limit potential movement and the risk of distress to the building is accepted by the owner. A positive way to reduce the risk of slab movement, which is commonly used in the are4 is to construct structurally supported floors over crawlspace and is recommended for living areas of the residence. Where slab-on-grade is used, we recommend at least 2 feet of relatively well graded granular material such as CDOT Class 6 road base be placed below floor slabs to help mitigate the expansion potential. To reduce the effects of some differential movement, nonstructural floor slabs should be separated from all bearing walls and columns with expansion joints which allow unrestrained vertical movement. Interior non-bearing partitions resting on floor slabs should be provided with a slip joint at the bottom of the wall so that, if the slab moves, the movement cannot be transmitted to the upper structure. This detail is also important for wallboards, stairways and door frames. Slip joints which will allow at least 1%-inches of vertical movement are recommended. Floor slab control joints should be used to reduce damage due to shrinkage cracking. Slab reinforcement and control joints 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 immediately beneath interior slabs-on-grade. This material should consist of minus 2-inch aggregate with less than 50% passing the No. 4 sieve and less than l2oh passing the No. 200 sieve. Required fill beneath slabs should consist of a suitable imported granular material, excluding topsoil and oversized rocks. The fill should be spread in thin horizontal lifts, adjusted to at or above optimum moisture content, and compacted to at least95Yo of the maximum standard Proctor density. All vegetation, topsoil and loose or disturbed soil should be removed prior to filIplacement. The above recommendations will not prevent slab heave if the expansive soils underlying slabs- on-grade become wet. However, the recoflrmendations will reduce the effects if slab heave occurs. All plumbing lines should be pressure tested before backfilling to help reduce the potential for wetting. Kumar & Associates, lnc, o Proiect No.22-7-121 -6- TINDERDRAIN SYSTEM Although groundwater was not encountered during our exploration, it has been our experience in the area and where clay soils are present that local perched groundwater can develop during times of heavy precipitation or seasonal runoff. Frozen ground during spring runoff can create a perched condition. Therefore, we recommend below-grade construction, such as deep crawlspace areas, be protected from wetting by an underdrain system. The drain should also act to prevent buildup of hydrostatic pressures behind foundation walls. Crawlspaces less than 4 feet and the slab-on-grade garage areas should not require an underdrain with proper surface grading and drainage as recommended below. The underdrain system should consist of a drainpipe surrounded by free-draining granular material placed at the bottom of the wall backfill. The drain lines should be placed at each level of excavation and at least I foot below lowest adjacent finish grade, and sloped at a minimum lVo grade to a suitable gravity outlet. Free-draining granular material used in the drain system should consist of minus 2-inchaggregate with less than50Yo passing the No. 4 sieve and less than2Yo passing the No. 200 sieve. The drain gravel should be at least lYz feet deep. SURFACE DRAINAGE The following drainage precautions should be observed during construction and maintained at all times after the building has been completed: 1) Excessive wetting or drying of the foundation excavations and underslab areas should be avoided during construction. Drying could increase the expansion potential of the clay soils. 2) Exterior backfill should be adjusted to near optimum moisture and compacted to at least 95o/o of the maximum standard Proctor density in pavement areas and to at least 90% of the maximum standard Proctor density in landscape areas. Free- draining wall backfill should be covered with filter fabric and capped with about 2 feet of the on-site 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 12 inches in the first 10 feet in unpaved areas and a minimum slope of 3 inches in the first l0 feet in paved areas' 4) Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all backfill. 5) Landscaping which requires regular heavy irrigation should be located at least 10 feet from foundation walls. Consideration should be given to use of xeriscape to reduce the potential for wetting of soils below the building caused by inigation. Kumar & Associates, Inc. @ Project No.22-7-121 -7 - 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 zubmitted inthis report are based uponthe data obtained from the exploratory borings drilled at the locations indicated on Figure l, the proposed type of construction and our experience in the area. Our services do not include deterrrining the presenoe, prevention or possibility of mold or other biological contaminants (MOBC) developing in the future. If the client is concemed about MOBC, then a professional in this special field of ptastice should be consulted. Our findings include interpolation and extrapolation of the subsurface conditions idbntified at the exploratory borings and variations in the subsurface conditions may not become evident until excavation is performed. If conditions encountered during construction appear to be different from 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 shouldprovide continued consultation and field services during constructionto review and monitor the imptementation of our recommendations, and to verify that the recommendations have been appropriately interpreted. Significant design changes may require additional analysis or modifications of the recommendations presenfed herein. We recommend on-site observation of excavations and foundation bearing strata and testing of structural fill by a representative of the geotechnical engineer. Respectfully Submitte4 Kumar & Associates, Inc. Steven L. Pawlak" Reviewed by: O ! Daniel E. Hardin, P.E. SLP/kac Cc: J. Catib€r Constnrction - Jose Ganzalez(jose(@jcaliberconstruction.com) Kumar & Associates, lnc.to Project No.22-7-121 I N s I ! e Mrf,8,?r"3ry \ ---\/--/ \ -/\,/ e - - 30.oo -No. 5 Rel -- - 3 ---I ---Q-s6a7 5508 60.00 30_m' 5509 56Jc 56II ! No. 5 Rebar Sile B€nchmtrk tls.= 5607-O5 hopGed Divsay 56ta 56t3 56r4 vbI4 hopsed lf,ach Fictd Surs s6/6 56t) RING 1 561a 56J9 56a0 56al 56ae 5623 56e, 56a5 231 .43 Proposed Hitus RI q;NG1 Ju *:e, $o-*o S"- $_JA :rr,"6. s6.: G g.? 5635'Jv 5636 5637Lot 3 14.17 Acres t 423.4s 50 0 APPROXIMATE SCALE-FEET 22-7 -121 Kumar & Associates LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS Fig. 1 E I t BORING 1 EL. 5624' BORING 2 EL. 5628' 0 0 32/12 WC=4.8 DD=1 1 7 34/ 12 WC=6.5 DD=116 -2QO=75 5 5 57 /12 35/12 10 34/12 WC=8.5 DD= 1 20 10 38/12 WC=7.3 DD= 1 08 -200=95 FIJ lr.ll! I-F(L blo 15 15 FItl LJ LL IIF(L IJo 82/12 30/12 WC=5.4 DD=1 18 20 20 83/12 WC=4.8 DD= 1 29 -2OO=51 35/12 25 25 50 3030/6, 5O/5 22-7 -121 Kumar & Associates LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS Fig. 2 E !! I ! e I I E r N TOPSOIL; ORGANIC SANDY SILT AND CLAY, FIRM, BROWN. CLAY AND SAND (CL-SC); SILTY, SCATTERED GRAVEL, VERY STIFF TO HARD, SLIGHTLY MOIST, LIGHT BROWN, CALCAREOUS AND POROUS TRACES, LOW PLASTICITY. DRIVE SAMPLE, 2-INCH I.D. CALIFORNIA LINER SAMPLE 32/12 DRIVE SAMPLE BLOW COUNT. INDICATES THAT 52 BLOWS OF A 140-POUND HAMMER FALLING 30 INCHES WERE REQUIRED TO DRIVE THE SAMPLER 12 INCHES. NOTES 1. THE EXPLORATORY BORINGS WERE DRILLED ON JANUARY 26, 2022 WITH A 4-INCH DIAMETER CONTINUOUS_FLIGHT POWER AUGER. 2. THE LOCATIONS OF THE EXPLORATORY BORINGS WERE MEASURED APPROXIMATELY BY PACING FROM FEATURES SHOWN ON THE SITE PI.AN PROVIDED. 5. THE ELEVATIONS OF THE EXPLORATORY BORINGS WERE OBTAINED BY INTERPOLATION BETWEEN CONTOURS ON THE SITE PLAN PROVIDED. 4. THE EXPLORATORY BORING LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS SHOULD BE CONSIDERED ACCURATE ONLY TO THE DEGREE IMPLIED BY THE METHOD USED. 5. THE LINES BETWEEN MATERIALS SHOWN ON THE EXPLORATORY BORING LOGS REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARIES BETWEEN MATERIAL TYPES AND THE TRANSITIONS MAY BE GRADUAL. 6. GROUNDWATER WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED IN THE BORINGS AT THE TIME OF DRILLING. 7. LABORATORY TEST RESULTS: WC = WATER CONTENT (%) (ASTM D2216); DD = DRY DENSITY (PCt) (ASTM D2216); _2OO= PERCENTAGE PASSING NO. 2OO SIEVE (ASTM Dl140). 22-7 -121 Kumar & Associates LEGEND AND NOTES Fig. 3 e 5! Br3.tt> SR .E E1 SAMPLE OF: Very Sondy Silty Cloy FROM:Boringl@2.5' WC = 4.8 %, DD = 117 pcf EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE UPON WETTING 3 |s JJ bJ =tn I z.o F o Joazoo 2 1 o 1 -2 -3 t.0 PRESSURE - KSF 10 r00 5 4 JJ lrJ =a I z.o F o -Joaz.o C) 5 2 1 0 -1 -2 PRESSURE _ KSF l0 100 SAMPLE OF: Very Sondy Silly Cloy FROM: Boring2fJ- 1O' WC = 8.5 %, DD = 120 pcf h ln opDlwl d lna Ml EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE UPON WETTING 22-7-121 Kumar & Associates SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 4 l(+AHrffi[*Tfffin'$:'i*'" TABLE 1 SUIJIMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS No.22-7-12'l Very Sandy Silty Clay with Gravel Very Sandy Silty Clay Slightly Sandy Silty Clay Very Sandy Silty Clay with Gravel Sandy Silty Clay Very Sandy Silty Clay SOIL TYPE (psfl UNCONFINED COMPRESST\IE STRENGTH iLIMITS PLASTIC INDEX {o/.) ATTERBEf (o/ol LIQUID LIMIT 75 93 15 PERCENT PASSING NO. 200 slE\rE(:/"1 SAND GRADATION (/"1 GRAVEL 118 108 t29 tt6 r20 (pcfl NATURAL DRY DENSITY rt7 6.3 8.5 5.4 4.8 7.3 4.8 lo/ol NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT 2% 01 51 (ft) DEPTH 2% 10 20 2 SAMPLE LOCATION BORING 1