Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSubsoil Study for Foundation Design 10.21.2024 5020 County Road 154 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 phone: (970) 945-7988 fax: (970) 945-8454 email: kaglenwood@kumarusa.com www.kumarusa.com Office Locations: Denver (HQ), Parker, Colorado Springs, Fort Collins, Glenwood Springs, and Summit County, Colorado SUBSOIL STUDY FOR FOUNDATION DESIGN PROPOSED SHOP BUILDING PARCEL NO. 212733200374, COUNTY ROAD 233 RIFLE, COLORADO PROJECT NO. 24-7-583 OCTOBER 21, 2024 PREPARED FOR: JILL & MIKE CHRISTIANSON 2601 COUNTY ROAD 233 RIFLE, COLORADO 81650 jamchristianson@msn.com Kumar & Associates, Inc. ® Project No. 24-7-583 TABLE OF CONTENTS PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY ........................................................................... - 1 - PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION .................................................................................... - 1 - SITE CONDITIONS ....................................................................................................... - 1 - FIELD EXPLORATION ................................................................................................ - 1 - SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ..................................................................................... - 2 - FOUNDATION BEARING CONDITIONS .................................................................. - 2 - DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................ - 2 - FOUNDATIONS ........................................................................................................ - 2 - FLOOR SLABS .......................................................................................................... - 3 - UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM ......................................................................................... - 4 - SURFACE DRAINAGE ............................................................................................. - 4 - LIMITATIONS ............................................................................................................... - 4 - FIGURE 1 - LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORING FIGURE 2 - LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING FIGURE 3 - SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS TABLE 1- SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS - 1 - Kumar & Associates, Inc. ® Project No. 24-7-583 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY This report presents the results of a subsoil study for a proposed shop to be located on parcel 212733200374 along County Road 233, adjacent to 2601 County Road 233, Rifle, Colorado. The project site is shown on Figure 1. The purpose of the study was to develop recommendations for the foundation design. The study was conducted in accordance with our agreement for geotechnical engineering services to Jill and Mike Christianson dated October 7, 2024. A field exploration program consisting of one exploratory boring was conducted to obtain information on the subsurface conditions. Samples of the subsoils and bedrock 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 analyzed to 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, design recommendations and other geotechnical engineering considerations based on the proposed construction and the subsurface conditions encountered. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION The proposed shop will be a single-story structure with a slab-on-grade ground floor. Grading for the structure is assumed to be relatively minor with cut depths between about 2 to 3 feet. We assume relatively light foundation loadings, typical of the proposed type of construction. If building loadings, location or grading plans change significantly from those described above, we should be notified to re-evaluate the recommendations contained in this report. SITE CONDITIONS The subject lot was mostly undeveloped at the time of our field exploration. The site appears to have undergone some minor cut grading for equipment and trailer storage purposes. The ground surface in the proposed shop area slopes moderately down to the southwest at grades between 5 to 10%. The vegetation consists of grass, weeds, sage brush, and juniper trees. FIELD EXPLORATION The field exploration for the project was conducted on October 9, 2024. One exploratory borings was drilled at the location shown on Figure 1 to evaluate the subsurface conditions. The boring was advanced with 4-inch diameter continuous flight augers powered by a truck-mounted CME-45B drill rig. The borings were logged by a representative of Kumar & Associates, Inc. - 2 - Kumar & Associates, Inc. ® Project No. 24-7-583 Samples of the subsoils were taken with a 2-inch I.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-1586. The penetration resistance values are an indication of the relative density or consistency of the subsoils and hardness of the bedrock. Depths at which the samples were taken and the penetration resistance values are shown on the Log of Exploratory Boring, Figure 2. The samples were returned to our laboratory for review by the project engineer and testing. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS A graphic log of the subsurface conditions encountered at the site are shown on Figure 2. Below about ½ foot of topsoil, the subsoils consist of about 16½ feet of loose to medium dense silt and sand overlying very hard sandstone bedrock that extended down to the maximum explored depth of 20 feet. Drilling in the hard bedrock with auger equipment was difficult and drilling refusal was encountered in the deposit. Laboratory testing performed on samples obtained from the borings included natural moisture content and gradation analyses. Results of swell-consolidation testing performed on relatively undisturbed drive samples, presented on Figure 3, indicate moderate compressibility under conditions of loading and wetting. The laboratory testing is summarized in Table 1. No free water was encountered in the boring at the time of drilling and the subsoils were slightly moist. FOUNDATION BEARING CONDITIONS The silt and sand soils encountered at typical shallow foundation depth possess low bearing capacity and moderate settlement potential. Spread footings bearing on the natural soils should be feasible for support of the proposed shop with a risk of post-construction settlement. The risk of settlement is primarily if the bearing soils become wetted and care should be taken in the surface grading and drainage around the shop to prevent the soils from becoming wet. A lower risk of settlement would be to remove a depth (typically 2 to 3 feet) of the soils and replace with moisture controlled and compacted structural fill below footings. Presented below are recommendations for spread footings bearing on the natural soils. If recommendations for spread footings bearing on compacted structural fill are desired, we should be contacted. DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS FOUNDATIONS Considering the subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory boring and the nature of the proposed construction, we recommend the building be founded with spread footings bearing on the natural soils. - 3 - Kumar & Associates, Inc. ® Project No. 24-7-583 The design and construction criteria presented below should be observed for a spread footing foundation system. 1) Footings placed on the undisturbed natural granular soils should be designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 1,200 psf. Based on experience, we expect settlement of footings designed and constructed as discussed in this section will be about 1 inch or less. There could be some additional post-construction settlement on the order of 1 to 2 inches, primarily if the bearing soils were to become wetted. 2) The footings should have a minimum width of 18 inches for continuous walls and 2 feet for isolated pads. 3) 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 exterior grade is typically used in this area. 4) Continuous foundation walls should be reinforced top and bottom to span local anomalies such as by assuming an unsupported length of at least 12 feet. Foundation walls acting as retaining structures should also be designed to resist a lateral earth pressure corresponding to an equivalent fluid unit weight of at least 55 pcf. 5) All existing fill, topsoil and any loose or disturbed soils should be removed and the footing bearing level extended down to firm natural soils. The exposed soils in footing area should then be moistened and compacted. If water seepage is encountered, the footing areas should be dewatered before concrete placement. 6) A representative of the geotechnical engineer should observe all footing excavations prior to concrete placement to evaluate bearing conditions. FLOOR SLABS The natural on-site soils, exclusive of topsoil, are suitable to support lightly loaded slab-on-grade construction. The soils are typically compressible when wetted. 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 should be placed beneath floor slabs for support. This material should consist of minus 2-inch aggregate with at least 50% retained on the No. 4 sieve and less than 12% passing the No. 200 sieve. 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. - 4 - Kumar & Associates, Inc. ® Project No. 24-7-583 UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM It is our understanding that the proposed finished floor elevation at the lowest level is at or above the surrounding grade. Therefore, a foundation drain system is not required. It has been our experience in mountainous areas 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 (if any) be protected from wetting and hydrostatic pressure buildup by an underdrain and wall drain system. If the finished floor elevation of the proposed structure is revised to have a floor level below the surrounding grade, we should be contacted to provide recommendations for an underdrain system. All earth retaining structures should be properly drained. SURFACE DRAINAGE The following drainage precautions should be observed during construction and maintained at all times after the shop 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. 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 paved areas. Free-draining wall backfill should be capped with about 2 feet of the on-site soils to reduce surface water infiltration. 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 5 feet from foundation walls. 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 boring drilled at the location indicated on Figure 1, 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 Kumar & Associates Kumar & Associates Kumar & Associates TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS Project No. 24-7-583 SAMPLE LOCATION NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT NATURAL DRY DENSITY GRADATION PERCENT PASSING NO. 200 SIEVE ATTERBERG LIMITS UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH SOIL TYPE BORING DEPTH GRAVEL SAND LIQUID LIMIT PLASTIC INDEX (%) (%) (ft) (%) (pcf) (%) (%) (psf) 1 2 2.1 101 41 Silt and Sand 4 3.6 97 Sandy Silt 9 5.8 101 Sandy Silt