No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRS_Apron E_ Geotechnical Report_190623_v2.pdfJob No. 1818 S&EE S&EE REPORT OF GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED APRON E BOEING RENTON PLANT S&EE JOB NO. 1818 JUNE 24, 2019 Job No. 1818 S&EE TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................. 1 2.0 SCOPE OF WORK ............................................................................................................................................... 1 3.0 SITE CONDITIONS ............................................................................................................................................. 2 3.1 SITE HISTORY & GEOLOGY ........................................................................................................................... 2 3.2 SURFACE CONDITIONS ................................................................................................................................. 3 3.3 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS .......................................................................................................................... 3 3.4 GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS .................................................................................................................. 4 4.0 LABORATORY TEST ......................................................................................................................................... 4 5.0 ENGINEERING EVALUATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................. 5 5.1 GENERAL ........................................................................................................................................................... 5 5.2 PRELOAD ........................................................................................................................................................... 5 5.3 PILE FOUNDATION .......................................................................................................................................... 7 5.3.1 Pile Capacities .............................................................................................................................................. 7 5.3.2 Pile Settlement ............................................................................................................................................. 8 5.3.3 Pile Installation ............................................................................................................................................ 8 5.4 SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS .......................................................................................................................... 12 5.5 LATERAL EARTH PRESSURES .................................................................................................................... 14 5.6 STRUCTURAL FILL ......................................................................................................................................... 16 5.7 UNDERGROUND UTILITY CONSTRUCTION ............................................................................................. 16 5.8 DEWATERING ................................................................................................................................................. 18 5.9 PAVEMENT DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................. 18 5.10 SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS ...................................................................................................................... 19 5.11 ADDITIONAL SERVICES ............................................................................................................................. 21 6.0 CLOSURE ............................................................................................................................................................. 22 FIGURE 1: SITE LOCATION MAP FIGURE 2: SITE & BORING LOCAITON PLAN FIGURE 3: LIQUIFACTION MAP FIGURES 4-6: GENERALIZED SOIL PROFILES FIGURE 7: BLOCK WALL REINFORCEMENT FIGURES 8-10: PRELOAD SETTLEMENT AND SETTLEMENT MARKER FIGURES11-12: SOIL PARAMETERS FOR PILE ANALYSES FIGURES13-16: PILE RESPONSES TO LATERAL LOADS FIGURE 17: RESULT OF LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS APPENDIX A: FIELD EXPLORATION AND LOGS OF BORINGS APPENDIX B: LABORATORY TEST RESULTS Job No. 1818 S&EE REPORT OF GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED APRON E For The Boeing Company 1.0 INTRODUCTION The proposed Apron E is located at current S1 Lot, in the southern portion of Boeing’s Renton campus. A Site Location Map is shown in Figure 1 and a Site & Boring Location Plan is shown in Figure 2, both are included at the end of this report. The S1 Lot is currently used for vehicle parking. The project will convert the parking lot into airplane apron for post-manufacture processing. The new apron will connect the existing Apron D located to the west of S1 Lot. A new paint hangar will be constructed in the southern portion of Apron E. This hangar will accommodate two 737 planes and will have dimensions of about 225 feet by 290 feet and a maximum height of about 85 feet. The column loads will range from about 500 to 1,000 kips. A single-story utility building about 30 feet wide by 175 feet long will be constructed near the paint hangar. At the time of this report, the location and the building’s column/floor loads have not been finalized. We understand that 4 transformers, each weigh 40 kips, 2 storage tanks, each has 15,000 gallons capacity, and other equipment unknow at this time will be installed inside or near the utility building. Blast fences, about 15 feet in height, will be constructed at the north side of Apron E, and a sound wall, about 25 feet in height will be construction along the eastern border. Other onsite structures will include light-weight crew shelters and tool sheds. New underground utilities will include storm, sewer, water, power and communication lines, and vaults for water quality control. The depth of the utility lines will be around 3 to 5 feet and the depth of the vaults may range from 6 to 12 feet. Minor grading will be performed and new concrete slab will be installed. The existing fire station building located at the southwest corner of S1 lot will be demolished and a new fire station will be constructed at the north side of N. 6th Street. 2.0 SCOPE OF WORK The purpose of our investigation is to provide geotechnical parameters and recommendations for design and construction. Specifically, the scope of our services includes the following: 1. Review of available geotechnical data. 1818rpt S&EE 2 2. Exploration of the subsurface conditions at the project site by the drilling of 6 shallow borings, 3 deep boring and the installation of 2 groundwater monitoring wells. 3. Performance of liquefaction evaluations. 4. Recommendations regarding foundation support. 5. Recommendations regarding the lateral soil pressures for shoring and subsurface retaining wall design. 6. Recommendation regarding passive soil pressure for the resistance of lateral loads. 7. Recommendation regarding preload and slab design. 8. Recommendations regarding the soil parameters for seismic design. 9. Recommendations regarding underground utility construction; recommendation regarding excavation shoring, angles of temporary slope, suitability of onsite soils for structural fill, and type of suitable imported fill. 10. Recommendations regarding dewatering. 11. Recommendations regarding pavement designs. 12. Attendance of design meetings. 13. Preparation of a geotechnical report containing a site plan, a description of subsurface conditions, and our findings and recommendations. 3.0 SITE CONDITIONS 3.1 SITE HISTORY & GEOLOGY Renton Boeing plant is located at the south end of Lake Washington. During WW II, the plant area was leveled by about 3 to 7 feet thick of fill. The native soils immediately under the fill include alluvial deposits that are over 100 feet in thickness. Published geologic information (Geologic Map of The Renton Quadrangle, King County, Washington by D.R. Mullineaux, 1965) indicates that the alluvial soils are underlain by Arkosic sandstone. S&EE performed a few soil test borings in 2012 – 2013 at North Bridge site 1818rpt S&EE 3 located at the northwest corner of the plant. These borings found glacially deposited and consolidated soil (hard silt) at depths of about 150 to 170 feet. Boring data from our previous projects at the south side of Renton Airport show that the hard silt is underlain by sandstone. Seismic Hazards Seattle Fault is the prominent active fault closest to the site. The fault is a collective term for a series of four or more east-west-trending, south-dipping fault strands underlying the Seattle area. This thrust fault zone is approximately 2 to 4 miles wide (north-south) and extends from the Kitsap Peninsula near Bremerton on the west to the Sammamish Plateau east of Lake Sammamish on the east. The four fault strands have been interpolated from over-water geophysical surveys (Johnson, et al., 1999) and, consequently, the exact locations on land have yet to be determined or verified. Recent geologic evidence suggests that movement on this fault zone occurred about 1,100 years ago, and the earthquake it produced was on the order of a magnitude 7.5. Due to the close proximity of Seattle Fault, the loose subsoils at the site have high liquefaction potential during strong earthquakes. This high liquefaction susceptibility is shown in Figure 3: Preliminary Liquefaction Susceptibility Map of the Renton Quadrangle, Washington by Stephen Palmer. 3.2 SURFACE CONDITIONS The project site is bordered to the north by N. 6th Street, to the west by Apron D, to the south by Renton Memorial Stadium and to the east by Logan Ave N. Currently, the site is occupied by the S1 parking lot for Boeing employees. The surface conditions consist of asphalt paving with some landscaping surrounded by curbs and a concrete sidewalk in the northwest corner. The ground surface elevations vary from 24.5 feet to 27.5 feet. The asphalt is 2.5 to 3 inches thick and in relatively good conditions, except some minor cracking near underground utilities. There are storm water catch basins throughout the parking lot and street lights in the landscaping areas. The Boeing fire station is located in the southwest corner of the lot. 3.3 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS We obtain the subsurface conditions at the site by the drilling of 9 soil test borings, B-1 through B-9. Borings B-1 to B-3 were drilled in the southern portion of the site to a depth of 150 feet, whereas B-4 to B- 9 were drilled in the northern portion of the site to depths of 20 to 30 feet. The locations of these borings are shown in Figure 2. The boring logs are included in Appendix A of this report. Based on the boring data, the subsurface conditions at the project area include fill soils over alluvial 1818rpt S&EE 4 deposits. The fill is 5 feet in thickness except at B-7 where only 3 feet of fill was found. The fill is moderately to well-compacted pitrun (a mix of sand and gravel), except at B-7 where well-compacted recycled concrete is present. This fill is underlain by young/unconsolidated alluvium to depths of 70 to 75 feet. Below these depths the soils become older/consolidated alluvium which extends to the maximum exploration depth of 150 feet. These stratifications are depicted in Figures 4 to 6. In general, the young alluviums are soft/loose and include interbedded silt, silty sand and sand. Pockets and layers of dense soils exist in the young alluvium, as well as lenses of peat and organic rich soils. The older alluviums are firm/dense and include thick (15 to 30 feet) layers of sand and gravel. The 3 deep borings are terminated in a very dense layer of sand and gravel. 3.4 GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS A groundwater monitoring well was installed in Borings B-1 and B-7. We measured groundwater depths from December 2018 to March 2019 and the results are presented in the table below. The groundwater depth fluctuated from 7.7 feet to 8.4 feet with the highest in March. Boring Number Surface Elevation (ft) Depth (ft) Elevation (ft) B-1 27.1 7.8 to 8.4 19.3 to 18.7 B-7 24.4 7.7 to 8.3 16.7 to 16.1 4.0 LABORATORY TEST Selected soil samples were transported to our sub-contracted soil laboratory, HWA in Bothell, WA for engineering property tests. The tests include sieve analyses, Atterberg Limits, and consolidation. The test results were utilized in our seepage flow evaluation, liquefaction-potential determination, and settlement calculations, respectively. The results are included in Appendix B. 1818rpt S&EE 5 5.0 ENGINEERING EVALUATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 GENERAL 1. The subsurface soils at the site include soft and loose, un-consolidated alluvial soils from near ground surface to depths of 70 to 75 feet. Other than occasional pockets and layers of dense soil, the young alluviums have low shear strength, high compressibility, and they are prone to liquefaction during severe earthquakes. As such, these soils are not suitable for shallow foundations of significant loads. We thus recommend deep foundations for the support of the paint hangar. We have considered augercast piles and driven pipe piles. We believe close-ended, driven pipe piles will be most cost‐effective as they have relatively high capacity and low downdrag loads. Shallow foundations including spread footings and mats are recommended for the support of light-weight structures such as blast fence, sound wall, crew shelters, utility shed, etc. 2. The results of our settlement analyses show maximum settlements of about 4 to 6 inches under hangar’s floor load. We believe this settlement is excessive and thus recommend preload to pre- induce the ground settlement. To avoid elevated downdrag forces on piles the preload should be conducted prior to pile installation. The utility building may house heavy equipment. As such, we recommend that preload be considered for this building. Some heavy equipment may be installed outside the utility building. We recommend that preload be considered for areas to support transformers, above ground storage tanks, and any other equipment that has a total load greater than 20 kips. 3. Liquefaction can result in sand boils and uneven ground settlements that will threaten the slab-on- grade. As such, reinforcements in slab-on-grade should be considered. Details of our recommendations are presented in the following sections. 5.2 PRELOAD The preload program should begin by breaking the asphalt pavement into pieces of less than 10 feet by 10 feet in size. This will promote uniform ground settlement and avoid bridging effect over non-uniform subgrade reaction. The preload should consist of non-structural fill soil or concrete ecology blocks. The former should be at least 7 feet in thickness and have a minimum in-place density of 120 pcf (pounds per cubic feet). The fill 1818rpt S&EE 6 should be compacted to the extent that the material can support the construction equipment. The surface should be graded for surface drainage. The preload should have 1.5H:1V side slopes and the edge/top of the slope should extend at least 15 feet beyond the building perimeters. To reduce preload footprint, side slopes can be replaced with geogrid reinforced block walls. In this case, the edges of the wall should be at least 15 feet beyond the building perimeters. A sketch showing geogrid reinforcement is shown in Figure 7. If the option of concrete ecology blocks is chosen, the blocks should be stacked to 6 feet high. A 6-inch gap should be allowed between block walls, and the gap filled with sand. The purpose of this gap is to prevent uneven contact pressure at the ground surface if the top of blocks tilt and wedge. Figures 8 and 9 show the results of preload settlement analyses. We expect that total settlement under the preload will be about 6 inches and will take about 8 to 10 weeks to reach maturity. Figure 9 also shows that at a distance of 27 feet from the edge of preload, the ground settlement will reduce to 1/2 inch and become negligible beyond. A total of 3 ground settlement monitoring markers should be installed in the preload area prior to the placement of preload fill or concrete blocks. A sketch showing the settlement marker is included in Figure 10. One of these markers should be placed near the center of the preload, the other two placed from the edges of preload a distance about 1/4 of the preload width/length. The movement of the settlement markers should be surveyed initially (prior to the placement of preload), once every day for the first 5 days, and once every week thereafter. The survey results should be transmitted to our office within 24 hours. We will determine the termination of the preload period upon theoretical (about 90%) maturity is reached. Subgrade Preparation for Slab-On-Grade: Upon preload completion the preload soil or concrete blocks, and broken asphalt pavement should be removed. The subgrade should then be excavated to allow for a 12-inch- thick slab base course. The excavated subgrade should then be thoroughly compacted by a vibratory roller weighing at least 10 tons. The roller should make at least 4 passes (back and forth is one passes) in each perpendicular direction. Any soft, wet or organic soils encountered at the subgrade should be over-excavated. The over-excavation should be backfilled with the base course material stated below. The subgrade preparation should be monitored by a site inspector from our office. Base course material should consist of well-graded crushed rock or a blend of commercial rock products conforming to WSDOT specifications for Crushed Surfacing, Specification 9-03.9(3). The base course should have adequate moisture contents at the time of placement and be compacted to a firm and unyielding condition using a mechanical compactor approved by our site inspector. 1818rpt S&EE 7 Slab-On-Grade Design: Concrete slab-on-grade can be designed using a subgrade reaction modulus of 200 pounds per cubic inch (pci). If thickened edges are to be installed, the slope at the thickened edges should be 2H:1V or flatter. 5.3 PILE FOUNDATION As previously mentioned, we believe that close-ended, driven pipe piles will be the most cost‐effective foundation system for the support of the proposed paint hangar. Steel pipe is a good choice for driven piles given their flexibility in relation to cutting and splicing pile sections. To provide adequate capacities, we recommend that the piles be embedded at least 20 feet into the load bearing layer. We estimate that the pile length will be about 90 to 100 feet. Actual pile lengths will depend on driving resistance and other factors, and may need to be adjusted in the field after initial piles are installed; see Section 5.3.3.1 for more details. We further recommend that steel, driven pipe piles have a ½-inch minimum wall thickness and the piles be spaced at least 3 pile diameters ON CENTER. Filling the pile with concrete is not necessary from the geotechnical standpoint. 5.3.1 PILE CAPACITIES Tables 1 to 3 below summarize the pile capacities. The allowable downward loads include a safety factor of 2 and have subtracted the downdrag loads of 90 and 120 kips for the 18-inch and 24-inch piles, respectively. These allowable downward capacities can be increased by 1/3 when considering the transient loads such as wind seismic forces. The allowable upward capacity includes a safety factor of 1.5. TABLE 1: Capacity of 18-inch Pile (kips) Pile Length 1 (feet) Ultimate Downward Capacity (Static) Allowable Downward Capacity (Downdrag Subtracted) Allowable Upward Capacity (Static) 2 Allowable Upward Capacity (Liquefaction) 3 90 625 165 145 140 100 680 250 160 155 1Pile Length measured from ground surface 2Soil parameters for static state are included in Figure 11 3Soil parameters for liquefaction condition are included in Figure 12 1818rpt S&EE 8 TABLE 2: Capacity of 24-inch Pile (kips) Pile Length (feet) Ultimate Downward Capacity (Static) Allowable Downward Capacity (Downdrag Subtracted) Allowable Upward Capacity (Static) Allowable Upward Capacity (Liquefaction) 90 980 270 225 165 100 1,050 310 250 185 TABLE 3: Lateral Capacity (kips, with liquefaction) Pile Diameter (inch) ½-inch Top Deflection 1-inch Top Deflection 18 15 25 24 25 40 Pile responses (deformation, moment and shear) to lateral loads are shown in Figures 13 to 16. Group effect for lateral capacity reduction should apply. That is, the capacity of the trailing pile should be reduced by 60% when spaced at 3 pile diameters. Group action diminishes at a pile spacing of 7 pile diameters and the reduction can be lineally interpreted in between. Additional lateral resistance can be obtained from the passive earth pressure against pile caps and grade beams. For soils above and below groundwater table the passive pressure can be estimated using equivalent fluid densities of 250 and 125 pounds per cubic feet (pcf), respectively. These values include a safety factor of 1.5. 5.3.2 PILE SETTLEMENT Pile settlement will result from elastic compression of the piles and the supporting soils. Our analyses show that the total settlement under the allowable loads will be on the order of 1/2 to 3/4 inch. 5.3.3 PILE INSTALLATION Steel pipe piles should be driven with a pile hammer that can deliver sufficient driving energy to achieve capacity and embedment but not overstress the steel. The choice of hammer should be evaluated as discussed later in this section. Based on the boring data, we anticipate penetration depths to refusal may vary significantly from one pile cap to another and even between piles in the same cap. For piles in large groups, we recommend installation from the center and work outward. 1818rpt S&EE 9 Heavy-duty hammers can produce high production rates but can also damage piles. To reduce potential for damage, the pile driving stresses should be kept sufficiently below the yield stress of the steel. We recommend a maximum driving stresses at 90 percent of the steel yield stress (FHWA 2005). Pile driving stresses can be measured indirectly in the field using a dynamic pile driving analyzer (PDA) or estimated using a wave equation computer program (WEAP). Our previous pile‐driving experience suggests it is often difficult to drive thin‐walled pipe piles. Based on this we recommend minimum wall thickness of 1/2 inch and piles of at least 60 kips per square inch (ksi) yield stress steel. As parts of the bid package, the pile contractor should perform a drivability study based on their intended hammers. The purpose of the study is to establish the pile acceptance criteria and ensure the proposed driving system will not overstress the piles. The study should include details of the hammers and results of WEAP analyses. The contractor should submit a drivability study report to the design team for review and approval no later than 14 days prior to driving the pilot or production piles. The report of drivability study should include at least the followings: 1. An assessment of the proposed hammer driving system’s ability of driving the pile to the ultimate capacity (see Tables 1 and 2). 2. The expected stress levels in the piles at the maximum expected hammer energy and any recommended limitations on hammer energy or fuel settings to ensure the pile stresses do not exceed 90% of the pile yield stress. 3. A pile inspector’s charts showing hammer stroke (ft) or energy versus pile penetration rate (blows/inch). 5.3.3.1 PILOT PILE PROGRAM After the drivability study report is approved, we recommend that a pre‐production pilot pile program be performed. The purposes of this program include the followings: • Confirmation of the required pile wall thickness, pile steel grade, and pile tip construction required to achieve the ultimate pile capacity. • Confirmation of the pile lengths and embedment into the bearing layer required to achieve capacities across the site. 1818rpt S&EE 10 • Optimization of pile driving equipment and procedures to achieve capacity and not damage piles nor existing structures. The contractor may consider the use of vibratory hammer for driving through the upper 50 feet of loose soils, then impact hammer thereafter. The choice of hammer may affect the production rate, and should be the decision by the contractor. The pilot pile program can potentially save budget and time by reducing uncertainty in pile lengths required to achieve capacities and avoid unnecessary splicing. In general, the number of pilot piles may range from 5% to 10% of the production piles. The actual number will depend on the installation results and should be finalized/modified by the design team. The pilot piles can be used as production piles if they reach the required capacity, are not damaged, and have at least 20 feet of embedment into the bearing soils. At the time of pilot pile installation, the contractor should provide details of driving equipment including hammer model, hammer cushion, cap weight and pile cushion. The contractor should also retain a subconsultant for the performance of dynamic pile testing for each pilot pile. Dynamic pile testing includes instrumenting each pile with gages so pile driving analyzer (PDA) can be used to record stresses in the steel during driving and the estimated total pile capacity can be obtained. After PDA testing during initial driving and re-striking the piles, the subconsultant should also perform CAse Pile Wave Analysis Program (CAPWAP) for the estimations of side and toe pile capacities. All pilot piles should be driven to refusal which is tentatively be defined as 15 blows per inch for the last 4 inches of driving. This refusal criterion may change depending on hammer used and PDA results. The pile re-strike should be performed for all pilot piles after at least 72 hours from initial installation. Ground vibration and Noise: Ground vibration is typically not a problem for structures that are over 100 feet away. However, if the owner would like to evaluate the vibration effects (or lack of), the pile contractor should use geophones to measure ground vibrations in the area surrounding the pile during driving to determine the vibration amplitude and the rate of decay in amplitude with distance from the driving location. The geophones are typically arranged in an array, generally in the direction of existing structures, with initial distances from the driven pile of approximately 25, 50, and 75 feet. If necessary, separate geophones can be installed on nearby structures of interest. At owner’s direction, the contract may need to monitor the noise level during pile driving. 1818rpt S&EE 11 5.3.3.2 PILE OBSTRUCTION Buried timber piles often found at Renton plant. Old footings or slab may also present below the ground surface. Shallow obstruction can be removed by excavation, whereas deeper obstruction may need relocation of the pile. In this event, the structural engineer should be informed and provide replacement pile location. 5.3.3.3 DRIVEN PILE FIELD CAPACITY VERIFICATION We recommend verifying the pile capacity in the field based on a dynamic pile driving formula used in conjunction with the data from the pilot pile program. The WSDOT pile driving formula has the following form: Rn = 6.6 × Feff × E × Ln(10N) where: Rn = ultimate bearing resistance, in kips Feff = hammer efficiency factor E = developed energy, equal to W times H, in ft-kips W = weight of ram, in kips H = vertical drop of hammer or stroke of ram, in feet N = average penetration resistance in blows per inch for the last 4 inches of driving Ln = the natural logarithm, in base “e” Both theoretical considerations and pile installation experience indicate that the pile capacity during and just after installation (resistance to driving) is less than the long‐term static pile capacity. This occurs because the vibration from driving induces liquefaction in the nearby soils, and thus reduce their shear strength. These strength losses during driving are usually regained in a few days after initial driving. We recommend that piles that have lower than the recommended ultimate capacity be re-driven 12 to 24 inches after a minimum waiting period of 72 hours. The long-term ultimate pile capacity should be estimated using the blow counts in the first 3 inches, after the pile hammer reaches its intended maximum driving force. 1818rpt S&EE 12 5.4 SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS We recommend that spread footings be used for the support of blast fence, sound wall, and utility building; and mat foundation be used for the support of crew shelter, storage shed, and similar light-weight structures. Details of our recommendations are presented below. Subgrade Improvement for Blast Fence and Sound Wall A very soft to soft silt is present at depths of 3 to 5 feet from the ground surface. This material has a high compressibility. To mitigate the potential uneven settlement from such compressibility, we recommend that a geo-grid reinforced gravel raft be installed at the base of the footings. This raft should be 2 feet in thickness and include two layers of geogrid, one placed at the bottom and one at the mid-height of the raft. The edges of the raft should be extended 2 feet beyond the edges of the footing. The geogrid should be Tensar TriAx or equivalent. The geogrid should be placed without wrinkles and have a minimum 12 inches overlap. The gravel should consist of well-graded crushed rock or a blend of commercial rock products conforming to WSDOT specifications for Crushed Surfacing, Specification 9-03.9(3). The rock should have adequate moisture content (+/- 2% from optimum) at the time of placement. The material should be placed in 6-inch thick lifts and each lift be compacted by at least 4 passes (back-and-forth is one pass) of a vibratory plate compactor that weighs at least 800 pounds. Note that very soft to soft soils exist near the footing subgrade. Heavy compactors are not suitable as they may destabilize subgrade. Prior to the construction of the gravel raft, all loose soil cuttings should be removed from the subgrade. If wet or organic soils are present at the subgrade, they should be removed by over-excavation. The over- excavation should be backfilled with compacted crushed rock. The subgrade preparation and gravel raft construction should be monitored by a site inspector from our office. Bearing Capacity: For blast fence and sound wall we recommend that spread footings be designed with an allowable bearing load of 1,500 pounds per square feet (psf). This value includes a safety factor of at least 2. Since the stress zone under the footings include non-granular silt, we recommend no increase of capacity for transient loads including engine blast, wind and seismic loads. 1818rpt S&EE 13 For utility building we recommend that spread footings be designed with an allowable bearing load of 3,000 pounds per square feet (psf). This value includes a safety factor of at least 2. Since the building footprint will be preloaded, we recommend 1/3 increase of capacity for transient loads. Settlement: Footings designed with above capacities may experience a maximum total settlement on the order of 3/4 inch and differential settlement of 1/4 to 1/2 inches in 25 feet horizontal span. Lateral Resistance: Lateral resistance can be obtained from the passive earth pressure against the footing sides and the friction at the contact of the footing bottom and bearing soil. The former can be obtained using an equivalent fluid density of 250 pounds per cubic foot (pcf), and the latter using a coefficient of friction of 0.5. These values include a safety factor of 1.5. Frost Protection and Minimum Width: Exterior footings should be founded at least 18 inches below the adjacent finished grade to provide protection against frost action. Footing width should be at least 18 inches to facilitate construction. Footing Drain: We do not expect any subsurface flow near the bottom of the footings. Therefore, no footing drain is necessary. Mat Foundation Load-supporting mats in non-preload and preloaded areas can be designed using a subgrade reaction modulus of 100 and 150 pounds per cubic inches (pci), respectively. We recommend that mats be underlain by a 6- inch thick crushed rock base course. The crushed rock should have an adequate moisture content (+/- 2% from optimum) at the time of placement, and be compacted to a firm and non-yielding condition using a compactor that weighs at least 800 pounds. Prior to the base course placement, all loose soil cuttings should be removed from the subgrade. If wet or organic soils are present at the subgrade, they should be removed by over-excavation. The over-excavation should be backfilled with compacted crushed rock. The subgrade preparation and base course construction should be monitored by a site inspector from our office. Again, if thickened edges are to be installed, the slope between the slab and thickened edges should be 2H:1V or flatter. 1818rpt S&EE 14 5.5 LATERAL EARTH PRESSURES Lateral earth pressures on retaining walls or permanent subsurface walls, and resistance to lateral loads may be estimated using the following recommended soil parameters: Soil Density (PCF) Equivalent Fluid Unit Weight (PCF) Coefficient of Friction Active At-rest Passive 125 45 55 200 0.5 Note: 1) Hydrostatic pressures are not included in the above lateral earth pressures. A 60% reduction should apply to the passive pressure for below groundwater table condition. 2) Lateral earth pressures are appropriate for level structural fill placed behind and in front of walls. The active case applies to walls that are permitted to rotate or translate away from the retained soil by approximately 0.002H, where H is the height of the wall. This would be appropriate for a cantilever retaining wall. The at-rest case applies to unyielding walls, and would be appropriate for walls that are structurally restrained from lateral deflection such as basement walls, utility trenches or pits. SURCHARGE INDUCED LATERAL LOADS Additional lateral earth pressures will result from surcharge loads from floor slabs or pavements for parking that are located immediately adjacent to the walls. The surcharge-induced lateral earth pressures are uniform over the depth of the wall. Surcharge-induced lateral pressures for the "active" case may be calculated by multiplying the applied vertical pressure (in psf) by the active earth pressure coefficient (Ka). The value of Ka may be taken as 0.4. The surcharge-induced lateral pressures for the "at-rest" case are similarly calculated using an at-rest earth pressure coefficient (Ko) of 0.6. 1818rpt 15 S&EE SEISMIC INDUCED LATERAL LOADS For seismic induced lateral loads, the dynamic force can be assumed to act at 0.6 H above the wall base and the magnitude can be calculated using the following equation: Pe = 14H Where Pe = seismic-induced lateral load in psf H = wall height in feet BACKFILL IN FRONT OF RETAINING WALLS Backfill in front of the wall should be structural fill. The material and compaction requirements are presented in Section 5.6. The density of the structural fill can be assumed to be 130 pounds per cubic feet. BACKFILL BEHIND RETAINING WALLS Backfill behind the wall should be free-draining materials which are typically granular soils containing less than 5 percent fines (silt and clay particles) and no particles greater than 4 inches in diameter. The backfill material should be placed in 6 to 8-inch thick horizontal lifts and compacted to a firm and non-yielding condition. Care must be taken when compacting backfill adjacent to retaining walls, to avoid creating excessive pressure on the wall. DRAINAGE BEHIND RETAINING WALLS Unless the wall is designed to support hydrostatic pressure, rigid, perforated drainpipes should be installed behind retaining walls. Drainpipes should be at least 4 inches in diameter, covered by a layer of uniform size drain gravel of at least 12 inches in thickness, and be connected to a suitable discharge location. An adequate number of cleanouts should be installed along the drain line for future maintenance. 1818rpt 16 S&EE 5.6 STRUCTURAL FILL Structural fill should be used for utility backfill, and in areas that will support loads such as slab, pavement, walkway, etc. Structural fill materials should meet both the material and compaction requirements presented below. Material Requirements: Structural fill should be free of organic and frozen material and should consist of hard durable particles, such as sand, gravel, or quarry-processed stone. The existing onsite fill soils are suitable on a selective basis; and its suitability should be confirmed by a site inspector from our office. The native soils below the existing fill are not suitable for structural fill. Suitable imported structural fill materials include silty sand, sand, mixture of sand and gravel (pitrun), recycle concrete, and crushed rock. All structural fill materials should be approved by an engineer from our office prior to use. Please note that: 1) Flowable CDF (Control Density Fill) is considered an acceptable structural fill. The material should have a minimum compressive strength of 150 psi; 2) Recycled concrete often has a fines content exceeding 20%, making the material sensitive to moisture. As such, the material may be difficult to use in wet winter months. Placement and Compaction Requirements: Structural fill should be placed in loose horizontal lifts not exceeding a thickness of 6 to 12 inches, depending on the material type, compaction equipment, and number of passes made by the equipment. Structural fill should be compacted to a firm and non-yielding condition. The native soils near the ground surface are soft and loose, and groundwater is shallow. Therefore, compaction requirements using conventional method such as 95% Proctor is not be suitable for the project site. Our experience at Apron A upgrade shows that such compaction requirement could lead to disturbance to the subgrade soils and resulted in uneven settlement of the underground utilities. We thus recommend performance base requirements including appropriate compaction equipment, moisture content, lift thickness, number of passes, and approval by our onsite inspector. 5.7 UNDERGROUND UTILITY CONSTRUCTION 5.7.1 TEMPORARY CUTS When temporary excavations are required during construction, the contractor should be responsible for the 1818rpt 17 S&EE safety of their personnel and equipment. The followings cut angles are provided only as a general reference: Open cuts shallower than 3 feet may be cut vertically. For cuts over 3 feet and shallower than 5 feet, the cut should be sloped at 1H:1V or flatter. Cuts over 5 feet in depth or below groundwater table may need to be 1.5H:1V or flatter. For a combination of open cut and shoring, benching in the upper 2 to 4 feet works well in the past as it lessens the overburden pressure and facilitates backfill. The benches should have a 1:1 ratio for bench height and width. To avoid bank caving, the height of each bench should be limited to 2 feet. 5.7.2 SHORING DESIGN Excavation shoring will be required at locations of space constraint. As a starting point, we recommend the following soil parameters for the design. We should review the design and provide recommendations for necessary adjustments. Soil’s total unit weight:115 and 130 pcf (pounds per cubic feet) for native soils and existing fill, respectively Soil’s buoyant unit weight: 45 and 60 pcf for silt and sand, respectively. Active soil pressure: 45 pcf, equivalent fluid density, above groundwater table Active soil pressure: 20 pcf, equivalent fluid density, below groundwater table Passive soil pressure: 200 pcf, equivalent fluid density, above groundwater table (include 1.5 safety factor) Passive soil pressure: 70 pcf, equivalent fluid density, below groundwater table (include 1.5 safety factor) Imbalanced hydrostatic pressure should be added to the active side. A 2-foot over-excavation at the passive side should be considered in the design. 5.7.3 UTILITY SUBGRADE PREPARATION All loose soil cuttings should be removed prior to the placement of bedding materials. Wet and loose subgrades should be anticipated. The contractor should make efforts to minimize subgrade disturbance, especially during the last foot of excavation. Note that subgrade disturbance in wet and loose soil is inevitable, and subgrade stabilization is necessary in order to avoid re-compression of the disturbed zone. Depending on the degrees of disturbance, the stabilization may require a layer of quarry spalls (2 to 4 inches or 4 to 8 inches size crushed rock). Based on our experience at Apron D, when compacted by a hoepac or the dynamic force of the excavator’s bucket, a 12 to 18 inches thick layer of spalls would sink into the loose and soft soils, interlock and eventually form a stable subbase. A chocker stone such as 5/8” x 1-1/4” clean crushed rock should be installed over the quarry spalls. This stone should be at least 4 inches in thickness and should be compacted to a firm and non-yielding condition by a mechanical compactor that 1818rpt 18 S&EE weighs at least 800 pounds. In the event that soft silty soils above groundwater table are encountered at subgrades, the subgrade should be over-excavated for a minimum of 6 inches. A non-woven geotextile having a minimum grab tensile strength of 200 pounds should be installed at the bottom of the over- excavation and the over-excavation backfilled with 1-1/4” minus crushed rock. The material should have adequate moisture and be compacted to a firm a non-yielding condition using a mechanical compactor approved by our site inspector. 5.7.4 BEARING CAPACITY AND SUBGRADE MODULUS Subgrade so prepared should have an allowable bearing capacity of 1,500 psf (pounds per square feet), and a subgrade modulus of 50 pci (pounds per cubic inches). The bearing capacity includes a safety factor of 3. Total settlement under these loads should be on the order of 1/4 to 1/2 inch. 5.8 DEWATERING Dewatering will be required for excavations deeper than the groundwater table. Based on our experience at Apron D, we believe that for excavations shallower than 8 to 9 feet, dewatering may be achieved using local sumps. The contractor should install sumps at locations and spacing that are best fitted for the situation. To facilitate drainage, the sump holes should be at least 2 feet below the excavation subgrade. If possible, the granular backfill around the sump should make hydraulic connection with the crushed rock or quarry spalls placed for subgrade stabilization. For dewatering deeper than 9 feet, our experience at Aprons A and D has shown that wellpoints installed to a depth of about 25 feet and spaced at 5 to 8 feet can draw down groundwater to depths of about 15 to 18 feet below ground surface. The boring data reveal that the majority of the water-bearing soils above the depth of 20 feet are low permeability silt or moderate to low permeability silty fine sand. Wellpoints installed in these soils can expect low discharge rates, about 1/2 to 2 gallon per minute (gpm) per well. The exception to this is the fine to medium sand encountered at Boring B-5. This soil has a moderate permeability, and wellpoints installed in this soil may experience about 5 gpm per well. 5.9 PAVEMENT DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS We recommend that all pavement subgrades be proof-rolled to identify areas of soft, wet, organic, or unstable soils. Proof-rolling should be accomplished with a heavy (10-ton) vibratory roller, front-end- 1818rpt 19 S&EE loader, or loaded dump truck (or equivalent) making systematic passes over the subgrade while being observed by a site inspector from our office. In areas where unstable and/or unsuitable subgrade soils are observed, these soils should be over-excavated a minimum 12 inches. Additional over-excavation depth may be required to remove buried debris, organic or very soft soil. Woven geotextile having a minimum 200 pounds grab tensile strength may be necessary for additional subgrade stabilization. The geotextile should be placed with 12-inch overlaps and all wrinkles removed. The over-excavation should be monitored by an inspector from our office. Our inspector will provide recommendations regarding the final depth of over-excavation and the preparation of the over-excavated subgrade. The over-excavation should then be backfilled with pavement base course material. The material should have adequate moisture content, and be compacted to a firm and non-yielding condition by a compactor approved by our site inspector. After proof-rolling, the top 12 inches of the subgrade should be thoroughly compacted to a firm and non- yielding condition. The subgrade soil should have adequate moisture content (within +/-2% from optimum) at the time of compaction. Concrete slab-on-grade in preloaded and non-preloaded areas can be designed with a subgrade reaction modulus of 100 and150 pci (pounds per cubic inches), respectively. Asphalt pavements constructed over proof-rolled and compacted subgrades, as specified above, can be designed with a CBR (California Bearing Ratio) value of 12. A typical standard-duty (lightweight) pavement section that was used on similar projects at the plant consists of 3 inches of Class B asphalt over 6 inches of base course. A heavy- duty pavement section could consist of 6 inches of Class B asphalt over 12 inches of base course. A concrete pavement section could consist of 8 inches of reinforced concrete over 6 inches of base course. Base course under pavements should consist of well-graded crushed rock; well-graded recycle concrete; or a blend of commercial rock products conforming to WSDOT specifications for Crushed Surfacing, Specification 9-03.9(3). The base course should have adequate moisture content (within +/-2% from optimum) and be compacted to a firm and unyielding condition. 5.10 SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS SITE CLASS AND SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS We have evaluated the geotechnical-related parameters for seismic design in accordance with 2015 IBC. The spectral responses were obtained from USGS website using a latitude of 47.48867 degrees and 1818rpt 20 S&EE a longitude of -122.208023 degrees. The values for Site Class B (rock) are: SS = 1.444 g (short period, or 0.2 second spectral response) S1 = 0.541 g (long period, or 1.0 second spectral response) Using the boring data, we determined that the subsoils correspond to Site Class E (“Soft Clay Soil”). The site coefficient values are used to adjust the mapped spectral response acceleration values to get the adjusted spectral response acceleration values for the site. The recommended Site Coefficient values for Site Class E are: Fa = 0.9 (short period, or 0.2 second spectral response) Fv = 2.4 (1.0 second spectral response) The Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) is 0.595g. SEISMIC HAZARDS Liquefaction during strong seismic events is the primary geotechnical hazard at the site. This is a condition when vibration or shaking of the ground results in the excess pore pressures in saturated soils and subsequent loss of strength. Liquefaction can result in ground settlement or heaving. In general, soils that are susceptible to liquefaction include saturated, loose to medium dense sands and soft to medium stiff, low-plasticity silt. The evaluation of liquefaction potential is complex and is dependent on many parameters including soil’s grain size, density, and ground shake intensity, i.e., Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA). We have performed liquefaction analyses using a computer program, Lique-Pro. Figure 13 shows the results of the analysis. These results indicate that a ground settlement on the order of 10 inches may occur and the liquefaction zone may extend to a depth of 70 feet. We believe that the proposed preload may reduce the ground settlement to about 5 to 7 inches. This liquefaction-induced settlement may result in severe damage to slab-on-grade. As the piling penetrates the liquefaction zone, impacts to the hangar building should be minimal. 1818rpt 21 S&EE 5.11 ADDITIONAL SERVICES We recommend the following additional services during the construction of the project: 1. Review design plans to confirm that our geotechnical recommendations are properly implemented in the design. 2. Review contractor’s submittals. 3. Response to contractor’s RFI. 4. Construction monitoring services. The tasks of our monitoring service will include the followings: 4.1 Monitoring preload construction; review preload progress and determination the maturity of preloading. 4.2 Review and approval of pile contractor’s drivability report. 4.3 Monitoring pilot piles installation. We will record the blow counts during initial driving, pile restrikes, and hammer energy; review of contractor’s PDA testing during initial driving and re-strike; review of the contractor’s CAse Pile Wave Analysis Program (CAPWAP) for the estimations of side and toe pile capacities. 4.4 Monitoring production piles installation. Our representative will evaluate the contractor’s operation and collect and interpret the installation data. We will confirm the predetermined penetration depth, monitor variations in subsurface conditions, and determine the required penetration depths. 4.5 Monitoring gravel raft, footing and mat foundation constructions. 4.6 Monitor proof-rolling for pavement subgrade, provide recommendations for subgrade stabilization, if needed. 4.7 Observe and approve subgrade preparation for concrete apron and mat foundation, provide recommendations for subgrade stabilization, if needed. 1818rpt 22 S&EE 4.8 Monitor the installation of underground utilities; observation of subgrade preparation and recommendations regarding subgrade stabilization. 4.9 Observe and approve structural fill material, its placement and compaction. Our representative will confirm the suitability of the fill materials, perform field density tests, and assist the contractor in meeting the compaction requirements. 4.10 Monitoring subgrade preparation for slab-on-grade. 4.11 Recommendation regarding construction dewatering. 5. Preparation and distribution of field reports. 6. Other geotechnical issues deemed necessary. 6.0 CLOSURE The recommendations presented in this report are provided for design purposes and are based on soil conditions disclosed by the available geotechnical boring data. Subsurface information presented herein does not constitute a direct or implied warranty that the soil conditions between exploration locations can be directly interpolated or extrapolated or that subsurface conditions and soil variations different from those disclosed by the explorations will not be revealed. The recommendations outlined in this report are based on the assumption that the project plan is consistent with the description provided in this report. If the plan is changed or subsurface conditions different from those disclosed by the exploration are observed during construction, we should be advised at once so that we can review these conditions, and if necessary, reconsider our design recommendations. LOGAN AVEEXIT 5 900 515 900 EXIT 4 EXIT 4A 405 405 167 EXIT 4B 405 169 167 D9 D40 D35 D30 EXIT 2B From Issaquah From Bellevue 4-04 Medical Clinic Safety LK WASHINGTON BLVD N From Seattle LAKE WASHINGTON Boeing Employees Flying Association RA I N I E R A V E N 4-41 4-20 4-21 4-69 4-402 4-78 4-77 4-79 4-71 4-42 4-45 Apron D 5-27 5-403 5-288 9 7 1 16 17 15 12 13A 14 10-18 GARDEN AVE N N EVA NEDRAGEVA KRAPN 8TH ST 11 10-16 10-13 4-89 4-88Badge Office 10-20 10-80 Hub 4-17 4-90 4-75 4-81 4-82 4-83 4-86 Renton Airport From I-5 From Longacres Park From Kent and Auburn From Enumclaw Apron A Apron BRAINIER AVE N AIRPORT WAY RE N T O N A V E S S 3RD ST S 2ND ST Renton Stadium 5-09 5-02 S U N S E T B L V D W BENSON RD S M. L . K I N G J R W A Y S SW 10TH S T OAKESDALE AVE SW SW 19TH ST SW 16TH ST DNOMYAR WS EVA WS EVA DNILTALBOT RD S EVA NIAM HOUSER WAY N LOGAN AVE N CEDAR RIVER N 1 S T S T BRONSON W AY N S 4TH ST N 3RD ST N 4TH ST N NEDRAG S EVA TTENRUBLOGAN AVE S SW 7TH ST GRADY WA Y S W N EVA YROTCAFMONSTER RD 5-50 5-51 N EVA SMAILLIW7-206 Triton Tower Two 7-207 Triton Tower Three From Seattle 5-08 Washington – Renton North 8th and Park Avenue North, Renton, WA 98055 N 5TH ST N 6TH ST N 8TH ST 5-45 Revised 03-09 Boeing North Bridge Boeing South Bridge 7-244 Rivertech Corporate Center HOUSER WAY BYPASS Copyright 2009© The Boeing Company. All rights reserved.PARK AVE N WELLS AVE N POWELL AVE SW NACHES AVE 4-95Shed 4-96GuardShack Employee gates AMS Turnstile gates Fence lines Boeing property General parking Restricted parking Bus stop Helistop 51 52 53 54 55 51 52 53 54 55 A B C D E F A B D E F C D44 D41 D4 D32 Figure 3 5.650.10.15.654003002001000-1000100200300400Total Settlement (in) 0.00 0.57 1.14 1.71 2.28 2.85 3.42 3.99 4.56 5.13 5.70max (stage): 5.65 inmax (all): 5.65 inAnalysis DescriptionSettlementCompanyS&EEDrawn ByC. J. ShinFile NameSurcharge 255x310 with pt84 ksfR4.s3zDate3/2/19ProjectApron D Expansion and Paint Hangar SETTLE3D 3.020 APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATION AND LOGS OF BORINGS We obtain the subsurface conditions at the site by the drilling of 9 soil test boring, B-1 through B-9. These borings were drilled on December 1 through 5, 2019. The locations of these borings are shown in Figure 2. The test borings were advanced using both truck-mounted drill rig. A representative from S&EE was present throughout the exploration to observe the drilling operations, log subsurface soil conditions, obtain soil samples, and to prepare descriptive geologic logs of the exploration. Soil samples were taken at 2.5- and 5-foot intervals in general accordance with ASTM D-1586, "Standard Method for Penetration Test and Split-Barrel Sampling of Soils" (1.4” I.D. sampler). The penetration test involves driving the samplers 18 inches into the ground at the bottom of the borehole with a 140 pounds hammer dropping 30 inches. The numbers of blows needed for the samplers to penetrate each 6 inches are recorded and are presented on the boring logs. The sum of the number of blows required for the second and third 6 inches of penetration is termed "standard penetration resistance" or the "N-value". In cases where 50 blows are insufficient to advance it through a 6 inches interval the penetration after 50 blows is recorded. The blow count provides an indication of the density of the subsoil, and it is used in many empirical geotechnical engineering formulae. The following table provides a general correlation of blow count with density and consistency. DENSITY (GRANULAR SOILS) CONSISTENCY (FINE-GRAINED SOILS) N-value < 4 very loose N-value < 2 very soft 5-10 loose 3-4 soft 11-30 medium dense 5-8 medium stiff 31-50 dense 9-15 stiff >50 very dense 16-30 very stiff >30 hard After drilling, the test borings were backfilled with bentonite chips and the surface is patched with quick set concrete. The boring logs are included in this appendix. A chart showing the Unified Soil Classification System is included at the end of this appendix. A groundwater monitoring well was installed in Borings B-1 and B-7. The well in B-1 has a one-inch diameter screen pipe from depths of 30 to 45 feet and solid pipe from 30 feet to the ground surface. The well in B-7 has a one-inch diameter screen pipe from depths of 15 to 30 feet and solid pipe from 15 feet to the ground surface. 0 10Depth (feet)Inches DrivenInches RecoveredBlows/6"Sample DepthSurface condition: Asphalt Job No. 1818 USCS Symbols5 15 20 Client: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Drilling Date: Drilling Contractor: The Boeing Company Mud rotary advanced by truck-mount drill rig SPT sampler driven by 140-lb auto hammer December 5, 2018 Holocene DrillingDry Density (pcf)/Moisture Content (%)Fines Content (%) 20 30Depth (feet)Inches DrivenInches RecoveredBlows/6"Sample DepthSurface condition: Asphalt Job No. 1818 USCS Symbols25 35 40 Client: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Drilling Date: Drilling Contractor: The Boeing Company Mud Rotary advanced by truck-mount drill rig SPT sampler driven by 140-lb auto hammer December 5, 2018 Holocene DrillingDry Density (pcf)/Moisture Content (%)Fines Content (%) 40 50Depth (feet)Inches DrivenInches RecoveredBlows/6"Sample DepthSurface condition: Asphalt Job No. 1818 USCS Symbols45 55 60 Client: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Drilling Date: Drilling Contractor: The Boeing Company Mud Rotary advanced by truck-mount drill rig SPT sampler driven by 140-lb auto hammer December 5, 2018 Holocene DrillingDry Density (pcf)/Moisture Content (%)Fines Content (%) 60 70Depth (feet)Inches DrivenInches RecoveredBlows/6"Sample DepthSurface condition: Asphalt Job No. 1818 USCS Symbols65 75 80 Client: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Drilling Date: Drilling Contractor: The Boeing Company Mud Rotary advanced by truck-mount drill rig SPT sampler driven by 140-lb auto hammer December 5, 2018 Holocene DrillingDry Density (pcf)/Moisture Content (%)Fines Content (%) 80 90Depth (feet)Inches DrivenInches RecoveredBlows/6"Sample DepthSurface condition: Asphalt Job No. 1818 USCS Symbols85 95 100 Client: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Drilling Date: Drilling Contractor: The Boeing Company Mud Rotary advanced by truck-mount drill rig SPT sampler driven by 140-lb auto hammer December 5, 2018 Holocene DrillingDry Density (pcf)/Moisture Content (%)Fines Content (%) 100 110Depth (feet)Inches DrivenInches RecoveredBlows/6"Sample DepthSurface condition: Asphalt Job No. 1818 USCS Symbols105 115 120 Client: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Drilling Date: Drilling Contractor: The Boeing Company Mud Rotary advanced by truck-mount drill rig SPT sampler driven by 140-lb auto hammer December 5, 2018 Holocene DrillingDry Density (pcf)/Moisture Content (%)Fines Content (%) 120 130Depth (feet)Inches DrivenInches RecoveredBlows/6"Sample DepthSurface condition: Asphalt Job No. 1818 USCS Symbols125 135 140 Client: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Drilling Date: Drilling Contractor: The Boeing Company Mud Rotary advanced by truck-mount drill rig SPT sampler driven by 140-lb auto hammer December 5, 2018 Holocene DrillingDry Density (pcf)/Moisture Content (%)Fines Content (%) 140 150Depth (feet)Inches DrivenInches RecoveredBlows/6"Sample DepthJob No. 18181 USCS Symbols145 155 160 Client: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Drilling Date: Drilling Contractor: The Boeing Company Mud rotary advanced by truck-mount drill rig SPT sampler driven by 140-lb auto hammer December 5, 2018 Holocene DrillingDry Density (pcf)/Moisture Content (%)Fines Content (%) 0 10Depth (feet)Inches DrivenInches RecoveredBlows/6"Sample DepthSurface condition: Asphalt Job No. 1818 USCS Symbols5 15 20 Client: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Drilling Date: Drilling Contractor: The Boeing Company Mud rotary advanced by truck-mount drill rig SPT sampler driven by 140-lb auto hammer December 4, 2018 Holocene DrillingDry Density (pcf)/Moisture Content (%)Fines Content (%) 20 30Depth (feet)Inches DrivenInches RecoveredBlows/6"Sample DepthSurface condition: Asphalt Job No. 1818 USCS Symbols25 35 40 Client: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Drilling Date: Drilling Contractor: The Boeing Company Mud Rotary advanced by truck-mount drill rig SPT sampler driven by 140-lb auto hammer December 4, 2018 Holocene DrillingDry Density (pcf)/Moisture Content (%)Fines Content (%) 40 50Depth (feet)Inches DrivenInches RecoveredBlows/6"Sample DepthSurface condition: Asphalt Job No. 1818 USCS Symbols45 55 60 Client: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Drilling Date: Drilling Contractor: The Boeing Company Mud Rotary advanced by truck-mount drill rig SPT sampler driven by 140-lb auto hammer December 4, 2018 Holocene DrillingDry Density (pcf)/Moisture Content (%)Fines Content (%) 60 70Depth (feet)Inches DrivenInches RecoveredBlows/6"Sample DepthSurface condition: Asphalt Job No. 1818 USCS Symbols65 75 80 Client: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Drilling Date: Drilling Contractor: The Boeing Company Mud Rotary advanced by truck-mount drill rig SPT sampler driven by 140-lb auto hammer December 4, 2018 Holocene DrillingDry Density (pcf)/Moisture Content (%)Fines Content (%) 80 90Depth (feet)Inches DrivenInches RecoveredBlows/6"Sample DepthSurface condition: Asphalt Job No. 1818 USCS Symbols85 95 100 Client: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Drilling Date: Drilling Contractor: The Boeing Company Mud Rotary advanced by truck-mount drill rig SPT sampler driven by 140-lb auto hammer December 4, 2018 Holocene DrillingDry Density (pcf)/Moisture Content (%)Fines Content (%) 100 110Depth (feet)Inches DrivenInches RecoveredBlows/6"Sample DepthSurface condition: Asphalt Job No. 1818 USCS Symbols105 115 120 Client: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Drilling Date: Drilling Contractor: The Boeing Company Mud Rotary advanced by truck-mount drill rig SPT sampler driven by 140-lb auto hammer December 4, 2018 Holocene DrillingDry Density (pcf)/Moisture Content (%)Fines Content (%) 120 130Depth (feet)Inches DrivenInches RecoveredBlows/6"Sample DepthSurface condition: Asphalt Job No. 1818 USCS Symbols125 135 140 Client: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Drilling Date: Drilling Contractor: The Boeing Company Mud Rotary advanced by truck-mount drill rig SPT sampler driven by 140-lb auto hammer December 4, 2018 Holocene DrillingDry Density (pcf)/Moisture Content (%)Fines Content (%) 140 150Depth (feet)Inches DrivenInches RecoveredBlows/6"Sample DepthJob No. 18181 USCS Symbols145 155 160 Client: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Drilling Date: Drilling Contractor: The Boeing Company Mud rotary advanced by truck-mount drill rig SPT sampler driven by 140-lb auto hammer December 4, 2018 Holocene DrillingDry Density (pcf)/Moisture Content (%)Fines Content (%)16 29 31 18 6 20 26 24 18 16 22 27 29 18 9 SP 0 10Depth (feet)Inches DrivenInches RecoveredBlows/6"Sample DepthSurface condition: Asphalt Job No. 1818 USCS Symbols5 15 20 Client: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Drilling Date: Drilling Contractor: The Boeing Company Mud rotary advanced by truck-mount drill rig SPT sampler driven by 140-lb auto hammer December 3, 2018 Holocene DrillingDry Density (pcf)/Moisture Content (%)Fines Content (%) 20 30Depth (feet)Inches DrivenInches RecoveredBlows/6"Sample DepthSurface condition: Asphalt Job No. 1818 USCS Symbols25 35 40 Client: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Drilling Date: Drilling Contractor: The Boeing Company Mud Rotary advanced by truck-mount drill rig SPT sampler driven by 140-lb auto hammer December 3, 2018 Holocene DrillingDry Density (pcf)/Moisture Content (%)Fines Content (%) 40 50Depth (feet)Inches DrivenInches RecoveredBlows/6"Sample DepthSurface condition: Asphalt Job No. 1818 USCS Symbols45 55 60 Client: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Drilling Date: Drilling Contractor: The Boeing Company Mud Rotary advanced by truck-mount drill rig SPT sampler driven by 140-lb auto hammer December 3, 2018 Holocene DrillingDry Density (pcf)/Moisture Content (%)Fines Content (%) 60 70Depth (feet)Inches DrivenInches RecoveredBlows/6"Sample DepthSurface condition: Asphalt Job No. 1818 USCS Symbols65 75 80 Client: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Drilling Date: Drilling Contractor: The Boeing Company Mud Rotary advanced by truck-mount drill rig SPT sampler driven by 140-lb auto hammer December 3, 2018 Holocene DrillingDry Density (pcf)/Moisture Content (%)Fines Content (%) 80 90Depth (feet)Inches DrivenInches RecoveredBlows/6"Sample DepthSurface condition: Asphalt Job No. 1818 USCS Symbols85 95 100 Client: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Drilling Date: Drilling Contractor: The Boeing Company Mud Rotary advanced by truck-mount drill rig SPT sampler driven by 140-lb auto hammer December 3, 2018 Holocene DrillingDry Density (pcf)/Moisture Content (%)Fines Content (%) 100 110Depth (feet)Inches DrivenInches RecoveredBlows/6"Sample DepthSurface condition: Asphalt Job No. 1818 USCS Symbols105 115 120 Client: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Drilling Date: Drilling Contractor: The Boeing Company Mud Rotary advanced by truck-mount drill rig SPT sampler driven by 140-lb auto hammer December 3, 2018 Holocene DrillingDry Density (pcf)/Moisture Content (%)Fines Content (%) 120 130Depth (feet)Inches DrivenInches RecoveredBlows/6"Sample DepthSurface condition: Asphalt Job No. 1818 USCS Symbols125 135 140 Client: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Drilling Date: Drilling Contractor: The Boeing Company Mud Rotary advanced by truck-mount drill rig SPT sampler driven by 140-lb auto hammer December 3, 2018 Holocene DrillingDry Density (pcf)/Moisture Content (%)Fines Content (%) 140 150Depth (feet)Inches DrivenInches RecoveredBlows/6"Sample DepthJob No. 1818 USCS Symbols145 155 160 Client: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Drilling Date: Drilling Contractor: The Boeing Company Mud rotary advanced by truck-mount drill rig SPT sampler driven by 140-lb auto hammer December 3, 2018 Holocene DrillingDry Density (pcf)/Moisture Content (%)Fines Content (%)20 37 35 18 6 24 29 38 18 12 20 26 30 18 14 SP 0 10Depth (feet)Inches DrivenInches RecoveredBlows/6"Sample DepthSurface condition: Asphalt Job No. 1818 USCS Symbols5 15 20 Client: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Drilling Date: Drilling Contractor: The Boeing Company Hollow stem auger advanced by truck-mount drill rig SPT sampler driven by 140-lb auto hammer December 1, 2018 Holocene DrillingDry Density (pcf)/Moisture Content (%)Fines Content (%) 0 10Depth (feet)Inches DrivenInches RecoveredBlows/6"Sample DepthSurface condition: Asphalt Job No. 1818 USCS Symbols5 15 20 Client: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Drilling Date: Drilling Contractor: The Boeing Company Hollow stem auger advanced by truck-mount drill rig SPT sampler driven by 140-lb auto hammer December 1, 2018 Holocene DrillingDry Density (pcf)/Moisture Content (%)Fines Content (%) 0 10Depth (feet)Inches DrivenInches RecoveredBlows/6"Sample DepthSurface condition: Asphalt Job No. 1818 USCS Symbols5 15 20 Client: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Drilling Date: Drilling Contractor: The Boeing Company Hollow stem auger advanced by truck-mount drill rig SPT sampler driven by 140-lb auto hammer December 1, 2018 Holocene DrillingDry Density (pcf)/Moisture Content (%)Fines Content (%) 0 10Depth (feet)Inches DrivenInches RecoveredBlows/6"Sample DepthSurface condition: Asphalt Job No. 1818 USCS Symbols5 15 20 Client: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Drilling Date: Drilling Contractor: The Boeing Company Hollow stem auger advanced by truck-mount drill rig SPT sampler driven by 140-lb auto hammer December 1, 2018 Holocene DrillingDry Density (pcf)/Moisture Content (%)Fines Content (%) 20 30Depth (feet)Inches DrivenInches RecoveredBlows/6"Sample DepthJob No. 18181 USCS Symbols25 35 40 Client: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Drilling Date: Drilling Contractor: The Boeing Company Hollow stem auger advanced by truck-mount drill rig SPT sampler driven by 140-lb auto hammer December 5, 2018 Holocene DrillingDry Density (pcf)/Moisture Content (%)Fines Content (%)19 15 11 18 12 8 16 18 18 18 7 9 8 18 12 t 18 11 18 16 5 3 3 16 14 17 0 10Depth (feet)Inches DrivenInches RecoveredBlows/6"Sample DepthSurface condition: Asphalt Job No. 1818 USCS Symbols5 15 20 Client: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Drilling Date: Drilling Contractor: The Boeing Company Hollow stem auger advanced by truck-mount drill rig SPT sampler driven by 140-lb auto hammer December 1, 2018 Holocene DrillingDry Density (pcf)/Moisture Content (%)Fines Content (%) 0 10Depth (feet)Inches DrivenInches RecoveredBlows/6"Sample DepthSurface condition: Asphalt Job No. 1818 USCS Symbols5 15 20 Client: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Drilling Date: Drilling Contractor: The Boeing Company Hollow stem auger advanced by truck-mount drill rig SPT sampler driven by 140-lb auto hammer December 1, 2018 Holocene DrillingDry Density (pcf)/Moisture Content (%)Fines Content (%) APPENDIX B LABORATORY TESTS Selected soil samples were transported to our sub-contracted soil laboratory, HWA in Bothell, WA for engineering property tests. The tests include sieve analyses, Atterberg Limits, and consolidation. The results are included in this appendix. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.0010.010.1110 SYMBOL Gravel % 3"1-1/2"PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT#4 #200 Sand % (SW-SM) Grayish brown, well graded SAND with silt and gravel (SP-SM) Very dark gray, poorly graded SAND with silt Fines % Coarse #60#40#20 Fine Coarse 14 30 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS 50 SAMPLE 35.0 - 35.0 22.5 - 22.5 #10 30 CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL- ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES SAND 1 0.00050.005 CLAY B-1 B-7 SILT 3/4" GRAVEL 0.05 5/8" 70 #100 0.5 50 Medium Fine 3/8" 5 PI 90 10 % MC LL PL DEPTH ( ft.) PARTICLE-SIZE ANALYSIS OF SOILS METHOD ASTM D6913/D7928 49.4 86.9 11.2 11.9 39.3 1.2 2011-025 T300PROJECT NO.: HWAGRSZ 2011-025 T300.GPJ 1/7/19 FIGURE: MLT for Soil & Environmental Engineers, Inc. Apron D Expansion 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 20 40 60 80 100 % MC LL CL-ML MH SAMPLEPLASTICITY INDEX (PI)SYMBOL PL PI 50.0 - 50.0 120.0 - 120.0 23 24 36 33 LIQUID LIMIT, PLASTIC LIMIT AND PLASTICITY INDEX OF SOILS METHOD ASTM D4318 CL (CL) Dark gray, lean CLAY (CL) Dark gray, lean CLAY 2 15 13 CH CLASSIFICATION % Fines LIQUID LIMIT (LL) B-2 B-3 ML 38 37 DEPTH (ft) 2011-025 T300PROJECT NO.: HWAATTB 2011-025 T300.GPJ 1/7/19 FIGURE: MLT for Soil & Environmental Engineers, Inc. Apron D Expansion Tested By: DW Checked By: SEG CONSOLIDATION TEST REPORT Cv(ft.2/day)0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 Applied Pressure - ksf 0.1 1 10Void Ratio0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 Natural Dry Dens.LL PI Sp. Gr. USCS AASHTO Initial Void Saturation Moisture (pcf)Ratio 86.6 % 46.2 % 70.8 2.65 ML 1.413 Gray, SILT (ML) 2011-025 Soil & Environmental Engineers, Inc. Apron D Expansion 3 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Project No.Client:Remarks: Project: Source of Sample: B-1 Depth: 24 Figure Tested By: DW Checked By: SEG CONSOLIDATION TEST REPORT Cv(ft.2/day)0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 Applied Pressure - ksf 0.1 1 10Percent Strain25 22 19 16 13 10 7 4 1 -2 -5 Natural Dry Dens.LL PI Sp. Gr. USCS AASHTO Initial Void Saturation Moisture (pcf)Ratio 86.6 % 46.2 % 70.8 2.65 ML 1.413 Gray, SILT (ML) 2011-025 Soil & Environmental Engineers, Inc. Apron D Expansion 4 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Project No.Client:Remarks: Project: Source of Sample: B-1 Depth: 24 Figure Dial Reading vs. Time Project No.: Project: Source of Sample: B-1 Depth: 24 Load No.= Load= D0 = D50 = D100 = T50 = Cv @ T50 2.215 ft.2/day Ca = 0.001 Load No.= Load= D0 = D50 = D100 = T50 = Cv @ T50 0.550 ft.2/day Ca = 0.002 2011-025 T300 Apron D Expansion 1 0.13 ksf 0.0000 0.0026 0.0053 0.22 min. 2 0.25 ksf 0.0065 0.0079 0.0094 0.88 min. 5Dial Reading (in.)0.0065 0.0060 0.0055 0.0050 0.0045 0.0040 0.0035 0.0030 0.0025 0.0020 0.0015 Elapsed Time (min.) 0.1 1 10 100 1000 Dial Reading (in.)0.0106 0.0102 0.0098 0.0094 0.0090 0.0086 0.0082 0.0078 0.0074 0.0070 0.0066 Elapsed Time (min.) 0.1 1 10 100 t 4t FigureHWA GeoSciences Inc. Dial Reading vs. Time Project No.: Project: Source of Sample: B-1 Depth: 24 Load No.= Load= D0 = D50 = D100 = T50 = Cv @ T50 0.599 ft.2/day Ca = 0.003 Load No.= Load= D0 = D50 = D100 = T50 = Cv @ T50 0.374 ft.2/day Ca = 0.004 2011-025 T300 Apron D Expansion 3 0.50 ksf 0.0114 0.0140 0.0167 0.80 min. 4 1.00 ksf 0.0220 0.0263 0.0307 1.25 min. 6Dial Reading (in.)0.021 0.020 0.019 0.018 0.017 0.016 0.015 0.014 0.013 0.012 0.011 Elapsed Time (min.) 0.1 1 10 100 1000 t 4t Dial Reading (in.)0.0360 0.0345 0.0330 0.0315 0.0300 0.0285 0.0270 0.0255 0.0240 0.0225 0.0210 Elapsed Time (min.) 0.1 1 10 100 1000 t 4t FigureHWA GeoSciences Inc. Dial Reading vs. Time Project No.: Project: Source of Sample: B-1 Depth: 24 Load No.= Load= D0 = D50 = D100 = T50 = Cv @ T50 0.209 ft.2/day Ca = 0.006 Load No.= Load= D0 = D50 = D100 = T50 = Cv @ T50 0.145 ft.2/day Ca = 0.010 2011-025 T300 Apron D Expansion 5 2.00 ksf 0.0376 0.0446 0.0517 2.15 min. 6 4.00 ksf 0.0594 0.0683 0.0773 2.94 min. 7Dial Reading (in.)0.0600 0.0575 0.0550 0.0525 0.0500 0.0475 0.0450 0.0425 0.0400 0.0375 0.0350 Elapsed Time (min.) 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000 t 4t Dial Reading (in.)0.089 0.086 0.083 0.080 0.077 0.074 0.071 0.068 0.065 0.062 0.059 Elapsed Time (min.) 0.1 1 10 100 1000 t 4t FigureHWA GeoSciences Inc. Dial Reading vs. Time Project No.: Project: Source of Sample: B-1 Depth: 24 Load No.= Load= D0 = D50 = D100 = T50 = Cv @ T50 0.169 ft.2/day Ca = 0.013 Load No.= Load= D0 = D50 = D100 = T50 = Cv @ T50 0.124 ft.2/day Ca = 0.011 2011-025 T300 Apron D Expansion 7 8.00 ksf 0.0863 0.1003 0.1144 2.34 min. 8 16.00 ksf 0.1275 0.1457 0.1639 2.87 min. 8Dial Reading (in.)0.135 0.130 0.125 0.120 0.115 0.110 0.105 0.100 0.095 0.090 0.085 Elapsed Time (min.) 0.1 1 10 100 1000 t 4t Dial Reading (in.)0.20 0.19 0.18 0.17 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.10 Elapsed Time (min.) 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000 t 4t FigureHWA GeoSciences Inc. Dial Reading vs. Time Project No.: Project: Source of Sample: B-1 Depth: 24 Load No.= Load= D0 = D50 = D100 = T50 = Cv @ T50 0.199 ft.2/day Ca = 0.015 2011-025 T300 Apron D Expansion 9 32.00 ksf 0.1711 0.1909 0.2108 1.59 min. 9Dial Reading (in.)0.230 0.225 0.220 0.215 0.210 0.205 0.200 0.195 0.190 0.185 0.180 Elapsed Time (min.) 0.1 1 10 100 1000 t 4t FigureHWA GeoSciences Inc. Tested By: DW Checked By: SEG CONSOLIDATION TEST REPORT Cv(ft.2/day)0 1 2 3 4 5 Applied Pressure - ksf 0.1 1 10Void Ratio0.68 0.72 0.76 0.80 0.84 0.88 0.92 0.96 1.00 1.04 1.08 Natural Dry Dens.LL PI Sp. Gr. USCS AASHTO Initial Void Saturation Moisture (pcf)Ratio 92.5 % 34.9 % 85.1 2.65 ML 1.000 Olive gray, SILT with sand (ML) 2011-025 Soil & Environmental Engineers, Inc. Apron D Expansion 10 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Project No.Client:Remarks: Project: Source of Sample: B-1 Depth: 41.5 Figure Tested By: DW Checked By: SEG CONSOLIDATION TEST REPORT Cv(ft.2/day)0 1 2 3 4 5 Applied Pressure - ksf 0.1 1 10Percent Strain17 15 13 11 9 7 5 3 1 -1 -3 Natural Dry Dens.LL PI Sp. Gr. USCS AASHTO Initial Void Saturation Moisture (pcf)Ratio 92.5 % 34.9 % 85.1 2.65 ML 1.000 Olive gray, SILT with sand (ML) 2011-025 Soil & Environmental Engineers, Inc. Apron D Expansion 11 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Project No.Client:Remarks: Project: Source of Sample: B-1 Depth: 41.5 Figure Tested By: DW Checked By: SEG CONSOLIDATION TEST REPORT Cv(ft.2/day)0.8 1.1 1.4 1.7 2 2.3 Applied Pressure - ksf 0.1 1 10Void Ratio0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 Natural Dry Dens.LL PI Sp. Gr. USCS AASHTO Initial Void Saturation Moisture (pcf)Ratio 88.7 % 48.2 % 70.7 2.65 ML 1.439 Olive gray, SILT (ML) 2011-025 Soil & Environmental Engineers, Inc. Apron D Expansion 12 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Project No.Client:Remarks: Project: Depth: 11.5 Figure Tested By: DW Checked By: SEG CONSOLIDATION TEST REPORT Cv(ft.2/day)0.8 1.1 1.4 1.7 2 2.3 Applied Pressure - ksf 0.1 1 10Percent Strain27 24 21 18 15 12 9 6 3 0 -3 Natural Dry Dens.LL PI Sp. Gr. USCS AASHTO Initial Void Saturation Moisture (pcf)Ratio 88.7 % 48.2 % 70.7 2.65 ML 1.439 Olive gray, SILT (ML) 2011-025 Soil & Environmental Engineers, Inc. Apron D Expansion 13 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Project No.Client:Remarks: Project: Depth: 11.5 Figure