Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSubsoils Report for Foundation DesignlGn*i'ril**1'ffft:fr'Y$;*'* An Employcc Owncd Compony 5020 County Road 154 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 phone: (910)945-1988 fax: (970) 945-8454 ernail : kaglenwood@kumarusa.com www.kumarusa.com Office Locations: Denver (HQ), Parker, Colorado Springs, Fort Collins, Glenwood Springs, and Summit CounS, Colorado SUBSOIL STUDY FOR FOUNDATION DESIGN PROPOSED RESIDENCE LOT 20, FIRST EAGLES POINT, BATTLEMENT MESA 318 EAGLE RIDGE DRIVE GARFTELD COUNTY, COLORADO PROJECT NO.22-7-213 JUNE 9,2022 PREPARED FOR: TRAVIS SLAPE 10 SMOKEY HILL COURT PARACHUTE, COLORADO 81635 slape.t@tyahoo.com TABLE OF CONTENTS PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION SITE CONDITIONS. FIELD EXPLORATION SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ... FOLINDATION BEARING CONDITIONS . DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS FOUNDATIONS FLOOR SLABS LINDERDRAIN SYSTEM ..... SURFACE DRAINAGE......... LIMITATIONS.. FIGURE 1 - LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORING FIGURE 2 - LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING FIGURE 3 - GRADATION TEST RESULTS TABLE 1 - SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS 1 1 1 ..-2- ,, 2 2 aJ 4 4 -4- Kumar & Associates, lnc, @ Project No.22-7-213 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY This report presents the results of a subsoil study for a proposed residence to be located on Lot20, First Eagles Point, Battlement Mesa, 318 Eagle Ridge Drive, Garfield County, 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 you dated March 7 ,2022. An exploratory boring was drilled to obtain information on the general subsurface conditions. Samples of the subsoils obtained during the f,reld exploration were tested in the laboratory to determine their classification 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 residence will be a one-story wood-frame structure over a crawlspace with an attached llz story slab-on-grade ground floor garage, located on the lot as shown on Figure 1. Grading for the structure is expected to be relatively minor with cut depths between about 2 to 4 feet. We assume relatively light foundation loadings, typical of the proposed type of construction. If building loadings, location or grading plans change significantly frorn those described above, we should be notified to re-evaluate the recommendations contained in this report. SITE CONDITIONS The lot was vacant at the time of our field exploration and the ground surface appeared to have undergone some minor grading probably associated with the subdivision development. The terrain is relatively flat with a strong slope down to the northwest. Vegetation consisted of grasses and weeds. There were scattered cobbles on the ground surface. FIELD EXPLORATION The field exploration for the project was conducted on March 9,2022. One exploratory boring 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 boring was logged by a representative of Kumar & Associates. Kumar & Associates, lnc. @ Project No.22-7-213 1 Samples of the subsoils were taken with l%-inch and 2-inch I.D. spoon samplers. The samplers were driven into the subsoils at various depths with blows from a 14O-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. 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 refurned to our laboratory for review by the project engineer and testing. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS A graphic log of the subsurface conditions encountered at the site is shown on Figure 2. The subsoils encountered consisted of about 6 feet of medium dense, clayey to very clayey silty sand and gravel with cobbles overlying relatively dense, silty sandy gravel and cobbles with probable boulders down to the drilled depth of 8% feet. Drilling in the dense coarse granular soils with auger equipment was difficult due to the cobbles and probable boulders and drilling refusal was encountered in the deposit. Laboratory testing performed on samples obtained from the boring included natural moisture content and gradation analyses. The soils were too rocky to obtain undisturbed samples for swell-consolidation testing. Results of gradation analyses performed on small diameter drive samples (minus I%-inch fraction) of the granular subsoils are shown on Figure 3. The laboratory testing is summarizedrn 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 natural granular soils possess moderate bearing capacity and, in general, relatively low settlement potential. The upper sand and gravel soils may tend to settle some when wetted. Spread footings bearing on the natural granular soils can be used for foundation support of the proposed residence with some risk of settlement, primarily if the bearing soils were to become wetted. Placing the footings entirely on the underlying dense coarse granular soils would provide a lower risk of settlement. DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS FOI-INDATIONS 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 granular soils. Precautions should be taken to prevent wetting of the bearing soils. Kumar & Associates, lnc. @ Project No.22-7-2'13 a-J- 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 2,000 psf. Based on experience, we expect settlement of footings designed and constrdcted as discussed in this section will be about I inch or less. There could be some additional settlement for footings bearing on the upper sand and gravel soils if the soils were to become wetted. 2) The footings should have a minimum width of 18 inches for continuous walls and 2 feel for isolated pads. - -- 3)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 atea. 4)Continuous foundation walls should be well 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 coffesponding to an equivalent fluid unit weight of at least 50 pcf for the on-site soils, excluding topsoil and oversized (plus 6 inch) rocks, as backfill. Existing fill, topsoil and any loose disturbed soils should be removed and the footing bearing level extended down to the firm natural granular soils. The exposed soils in footing area should then be moistened and compacted. A representative ofthe geotechnical engineer should observe all footing excavations prior to concrete placement to evaluate bearing conditions. FLOOR SLABS The natural granular soils, exclusive of topsoil, are suitable to support lightly loaded slab-on- grade construction. 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 well graded sand and gravel (aggregate base course) should be placed beneath floor slabs for support and to facilitate drainage. This material should consist of minus 2-inch aggregate with at least 50% retained on the No. 4 sieve and less than 2o/o passing the No. 200 sieve. s) 6) Kumar & Associates, lnc. o Project No.22-7-2'13 -4- All lrll materials for support of floor slabs should be compacted to at least 95o/o of maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. Required fill can consist of the on-site granular soils devoid of topsoil and oversized (plus 6-inch) rocks. UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM A perimeter foundation drain around shallow (less than 3 feet deep) crawlspace areas should not be needed with adequate compaction of foundation backfill and positive surface drainage is provided away from foundation walls. We recommend below-grade construction, such as retaining walls, deeper crawlspace and basement areas, 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. SURFACE DRAINAGE Positive surface drainage is an important aspect of the project to prevent wetting of the bearing soils below the building. The following drainage precautions should be observed during construction and maintained at all times after the residence has been completed: 1) Inundation ofthe 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 95o/o of the maximum standard Proctor density in pavement and slab areas and to at least 90%o 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 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, such as sod, and sprinkler heads 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 Kumar & Associates, lnc. o Project No.22-7-2'13 -5- 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 concemed about MOBC, then a professional in this special field of practice should be consulted. Our findings include extrapolation of the subsurface conditions identified at the exploratory boring and variations in the subsurface conditions may not become evident until excavation is performed. If conditions encountered during construction appear different from those described in this report, we should be notified so that 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 verifu 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. Respectfully Submitted, Kunrar' & Associatesn Inc. David A. Noteboom, Staff Engineer Reviewed by: David A. Young, P DAYlkac b o 3 6 (,a Kumar &,Associates, lnc, 'Project No.22"7-213 EAGLE RIDGE DRIVE LOT 21 i 10 0 n APPROXIMATE SCALE-FEET 22-7 -213 Kumar & Associates LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORING Fig. 1 E : e BORING 1 LEGEND 0 GRAVEL AND SAND (GC-SC); WITH COBBLES, CLAYEY T0 VERY, CLAYEY, SILTY, MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST TO SLIGHTLY MOIST, LIGHT BROWN, CALCAREOUS. GRAVEL AND COBBLES (OC-OV); SANDY, CLAYEY, SILTY, PROBABLE BOULDERS, DENSE, SLIGHTLY MOIST, MIXED BROWN AND GRAY, CALCAREOUS. 53/6 F trJtdtL I-Fo-tdo 5 20/12 WC=4.9 +4=12 -200=58 i I I DRIVE SAMPLE, 2-INCH I.D, CALIFORNIA LINER SAMPLE, 33/6, 50/3 WC=2.0 +4=44 -200=28 DR|VE SAMpLE, 1 5/8-rNCH t.D. SPLTT SP00N STANDARD PENETRATION TEST. 10 26712DR|VE SAMPLE BLOW COUNT. INDICATES THAT 20 BLOWS 0F 14o-POUND HAMMER FALLING 30 INCHES WERE REQUIRED t TO DRIVE THE SAMPLER 12 INCHES. PRACTICAL AUGER DRILLING REFUSAL. NOTES 1 THE EXPLORATORY BORING WAS DRILLED ON MARCH 9, 2022 WITH A 4-INCH DIAMETER CONTINUOUS FLIGHT POWER AUGER. 2. THE LOCATION OF THE EXPLORATORY BORING WAS MEASURED APPROXIMATELY BY PACING FROM FEATURES SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN PROVIDED. 3. THE ELEVATION OF THE EXPLORATORY BORING WAS NOT MEASURED AND THE LOG OF THE EXPLORATORY BORING IS PLOTTED TO DEPTH. 4. THE EXPLORATORY BORING LOCATION SHOULD BE CONSIDERED ACCURATE ONLY TO THE DEGREE IMPLIED BY THE METHOD USED. 5. THE LINES BETWEEN MATERIALS SHOWN ON THE EXPLORATORY BORING LOG REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARIES BETWEEN MATERIAL TYPES AND THE TRANSITIONS MAY BE GRADUAL. 6. GROUNDWATER WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED IN THE BORING AT THE TIME OF DRILLING. 7. LABORATORY TEST RESULTS: WC = WATER CONTENT (%) (ASTM D 2216); +4 = PERCENTAGE RETAINED ON NO.4 SIEVE (ISTU O OSI:); -2OO = PERCENTAGE PASSING NO, 2OO SIEVE (ASTM D 1140). 22-7-213 Kumar & Associates LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING Fig. 2 E 5N SIEVE ANALYSISHYDROMETER ANALYSIS CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS ari, t/^' t tlri TIME READINGS 2,1 HRS 7 HRs atoo U.S. STANDARO SERIES 450 {40 t30 {16 410 lA f' i'l l ! 1 I : I I .ii "i =e t00 90 80 ?o 60 50 /ao 30 20 to o t0 20 30 10 5n 60 70 80 90 = E too .005 .009 1.127 I,125 2,O DIAMETER OF PARTICLES IN MILLIM CLAY TO SILT COBBLES GRAVEL 12 % SAND 50 % LIQUID LIMIT - PLASTICITY INDEX SAMPLE OF: Very Cloyey Silty Sond wilh Grovel SILT AND CLAY 58 % FROM:Borlngl@4' 6 t00 so ao 70 60 50 40 30 20 to 0 o t0 20 50 10 5o 60 70 80 90 100 = I I rlrt .o75 I ,o37 152 OFP INM CLAY TO SILT COBBLES GRAVEL 44 % SAND LIQUID LIMIT SAMPLE OF: Silty Sondy Grovel 28% PLASTICITY INDEX SILT AND CLAY 28 % FROM:Boringl@7' Th.s6 lesl rosulls opply only lo lho somplos whlch wers lssled. Th6 losllng roporl sholl nol be reproduc€d, €xcepl ln full, wllhoul lh€ wrlll6n qpprovql of Kumqr & Assoclqtos, lnc, Sleve onolysls losllng ls perfo.med ln occordqnce wlth ASTM D6913, ASTM 07928, ASTM C136 ond/or ASTM Dll,{0. SAND GRAVEL MEDIUM COARSE FINE COARSEFINE SIEVE ANALYSISHYDROMETER ANALYSIS U.S. STANDARD SERIES 450 4aO 43d 4t6 {tO {A 5"6" I CLEAR SOUARE OPENIilGS \/a" 3/a" 1 1/2" TIME READINGS I / I l I I I I l I /I I I r L I : l I rlI tt GRAVELSAND FINE MEDIUM COARSE FIN E COARSE 22-7 -213 Kumar & Associates GRADATION TEST RESULTS Fis.3 rcn *iffi fi'f,H:ffin'"nE; n' *' * TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS No.22-7-2'13 Very Clayey Silty Sand with Gravel Silty Sandy Gravel SOIL TYPE (osfl UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH (olol PLASTIC INDEX ATTERBERG LIMITS ("/"1 LIQUID LIMIT PERCENT PASSING NO. 200 stEVE SAND (%) GRADATION GRAVEL ("/"1 (pcfl NATURAL DRY DENS]TY (ol NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT (ft) DEPTH SAMPLE LOCATION BORING 12 44 4 1 1 58 28 30 28 4.9 2.0