Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12567-R-GEOT-Hart Crowser-2014-09-26 Geotechnical Recommendations Report PACCAR Renton Parts Distribution Center Renton, Washington Prepared for PACCAR September 26, 2014 17946-01 Contents INTRODUCTION 1 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2 Site Description 2 Project Description 2 GENERALIZED SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 2 Site Soils 3 Groundwater 3 SEISMIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS 3 Seismic Setting 3 Seismic Design Parameters 4 Geotechnical Hazards - Soil Liquefaction 4 GEOTECHNICAL CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5 General Considerations 5 Site Preparation and Grading 6 Foundation Considerations 7 Settlement Analysis 8 Settlement Analysis Results 8 Final Preload Design and Construction Considerations 9 Settlement Monitoring Program 10 Foundations 11 Permanent Drainage Considerations 12 Perimeter Drains 12 Sub-Slab Drainage 12 Runoff Water 12 Grading and Capping 13 Pavement Subgrade Considerations 13 Structural Fill 13 Use of On-Site Soil as Structural Fill 14 Imported Structural Fill 15 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS 15 Temporary Open Cuts 15 Temporary Excavation Dewatering 15 Utility Trenching and Installation Considerations 16 Pipe and Utility Vault Bedding 16 17946-01 September 26, 2014 ii | Contents Pipe Zone Backfill 16 Utility Trench/Vault Backfill 16 Compaction Equipment 17 RECOMMENDED ADDITIONAL GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES 17 Post-Report Design Services 17 Construction Observation Services 17 FIGURES 1 Vicinity Map 2 Site and Exploration Plan 3 Generalized Subsurface Cross Section A-A’ 4 Generalized Subsurface Cross Section B-B’ 5 Settlement at end of 6-month preload period 6 Relative settlement at end of 6-month preload period 7 Relative settlement at end of 40-year building design life 8 Relative settlement over time along E-W settlement section line 9 Relative settlement over time along N-S settlement section line APPENDIX A Field Exploration Methods and Analysis APPENDIX B Laboratory Testing APPENDIX C Historical Explorations ATTACHMENT 1 Cone Penetration Test Data 17946-01 September 26, 2014 Geotechnical Recommendations Report PACCAR Renton Parts Distribution Center Renton, Washington INTRODUCTION This report presents our geotechnical engineering conclusions and recommendations for the proposed PACCAR Renton Parts Distribution Center (PDC) to be located on the PACCAR property located at North Fourth Street and Houser Way North in Renton, Washington. The PDC will be a single-story structure measuring about 400 feet by 400 feet. This introduction describes the purpose, scope, and use of this report followed by:  Site and Project Description;  Generalized Subsurface Conditions;  Seismic Design Considerations;  Geotechnical Conclusions and Recommendations;  Construction Considerations; and  Recommended Additional Geotechnical Services. The purpose of our geotechnical investigation was to assess the subsurface conditions at the site and provide geotechnical recommendations for the design and construction of the proposed PDC structure and associated site improvements. Our scope of work for this study included:  Complete two soil borings ranging from 35 to 55.5 feet deep and nine cone penetrometer test (CPT) probes near the proposed building location;  Collect soil samples and perform representative laboratory tests;  Prepare boring and CPT logs, including field test results;  Characterize general subsurface soil and groundwater conditions;  Develop seismic parameters for building foundation design, including liquefaction analysis; 17946-01 September 26, 2014 2 | PACCAR Renton Parts Distribution Center  Complete engineering analyses and provide recommendations for design of a preload, structural and slab-on-grade floor options, pavement subgrade preparation, structural fill, and general construction recommendations; and  Prepare this geotechnical engineering report. We completed this work in general accordance with our proposal for geotechnical design services dated May 7, 2014. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of PACCAR, Inc., and their design consultants for specific application to the subject project and site. This study has been performed in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices in the same or similar localities, related to the nature of the work accomplished at the time the services were performed. No other warranty, express or implied, is made. SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION Site Description The project site is located at North Fourth Street and Houser Way North in Renton, as shown on the Vicinity Map (Figure 1). The site is currently unoccupied. The site grade generally ranges from elevation about 35 to 39 feet, based on topographic information provided by Barghausen, the civil engineer and surveyor. The building location and site layout are depicted on the Site and Exploration Plan (Figure 2). Project Description Preliminary conceptual plans call for the construction of a single-story structure measuring about 400 by 400 feet, as shown on Figure 2. Preliminary conceptual foundation design plans indicate the structure will be supported by shallow foundations. Given the susceptibility of the site to liquefaction, the use of shallow foundations will likely reduce in resilience from a seismic event compared to a more traditional deep foundation system. GENERALIZED SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Soil conditions interpreted from explorations at the site, in conjunction with soil properties inferred from field and laboratory tests, formed the basis for the conclusions and recommendations contained within this report. The specific number, location, and depth of our explorations were selected in relation to the proposed site features, under the constraints of surface access, underground utility conflicts, and budget considerations. Appendix A of this report describes our field exploration procedures, and Appendix B describes our laboratory soil testing procedures. Our exploration program for this site consisted of advancing two borings and nine CPT probes to a maximum depth of about 44 feet within the footprint of the proposed building. Figure 2 depicts the approximate locations of these explorations relative to the existing site features and proposed development. Figures 3 and 4 depict the interpreted subsurface layers as engineering soil units. 17946-01 September 26, 2014 PACCAR Renton Parts Distribution Center | 3 Several CPTs encountered shallow refusal and were relocated in an attempt to achieve the desired exploration depth. These CPTs were CPT-102, -104, -105, -107, and -109. Shallow refusal is caused by hitting an obstruction such as concrete rubble. The explorations reveal subsurface conditions only at discrete locations across the project site, and actual conditions in other areas could vary. Furthermore, the nature and extent of any such variations would not become evident until additional explorations are performed or until construction activities begin. If significant variations are observed at that time, we may need to modify our conclusions and recommendations in this report to reflect the actual site conditions. Site Soils Based on the site explorations, the upper soil conditions at the site consist of about 40 feet of loose to medium dense fine silty Sand and soft to stiff sandy Silt with frequent organic material interlayered with moderately to very highly compressible organic Silt and Peat. Dense to very dense Sand and gravelly Sand was encountered in our explorations at about 43 feet deep. A more detailed depiction of these generalized site soil conditions is provided on the boring and CPT probe logs in Appendix A. Groundwater The groundwater elevation contour map for the PACCAR site (2006) for the shallow wells indicates that the groundwater ranges from elevation 35.5 feet (32 feet previous datum) at the northeast corner of the site and elevation 29.5 feet (26 feet previous datum) at the southwest corner of the site. The current vertical datum is NGVD 29, with elevations based on lidar topography. We recommend that a groundwater elevation of 29.5 feet in the southwest corner of the building within the building footprint, and 35.5 feet in the northeast corner of the property, be used for preliminary planning and design purposes. A dissipation test completed in CPT-101 in sand measured a groundwater elevation of about 28 feet. Groundwater levels presented herein were observed at the times indicated on the boring logs. Throughout the year, groundwater levels are expected to fluctuate about 2 to 3 feet in response to changing precipitation patterns, off-site construction activities, changes in site use, or other factors. SEISMIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS The site is located in a seismically active area. We understand that the seismic design of the proposed structure will be based on the 2012 International Building Code (IBC). In this section, we describe the seismic setting for the project site, provide seismic design parameters, and discuss seismically induced geotechnical hazards. Seismic Setting The seismicity of western Washington is dominated by the Cascadia Subduction Zone, in which the offshore Juan de Fuca plate is subducting beneath the continental North American plate. Three main types of earthquakes are typically associated with subduction zone environments—crustal, intraplate, 17946-01 September 26, 2014 4 | PACCAR Renton Parts Distribution Center and interplate earthquakes. The USGS earthquake database used to develop probability based seismic design parameters include all three types of earthquakes. Seismic records in the Puget Sound area clearly indicate a distinct shallow zone of crustal seismicity (e.g., the Seattle Fault) that may have surficial expressions and can extend to depths of up to 25 to 30 km. A deeper zone is associated with the subducting Juan de Fuca plate and produces intraplate earthquakes at depths of 40 to 70 km beneath the Puget Sound region (e.g., the 1949, 1965, and 2001 earthquakes) and interplate earthquakes at shallow depths near the Washington coast (e.g., the 1700 earthquake with an approximate magnitude of 9.0). Seismic Design Parameters The basis of design for the 2012 IBC is the seismic hazard associated with an earthquake with 2 percent probability of exceedance in a 50-year period, which corresponds to an average return period of 2,475 years. The IBC specifies that design ground motions should be based on the 2008 USGS Seismic Hazard Maps. Based on the probabilistic seismic hazard deaggregation available on the USGS website (http://eqhazmaps.usgs.gov/), we recommend the following parameters be used as a basis for a code-based seismic design for this site (for Site Class B, bedrock):  Maximum Considered Earthquake Spectral Response Acceleration at Short Periods, SS = 1.435 g;  Maximum Considered Earthquake Spectral Response Acceleration at 1-Second Period, S1 = 0.538 g; and  Site Class F. These bedrock seismic design parameters should be adjusted for site-specific soil conditions using the IBC Site Class adjustment factors. Based on the presence of liquefiable soils, the project site falls under Site Class F. However, for structures having a fundamental period of 0.5 second or less, the code allows the use of a site class as if no liquefaction were expected to occur for purposes of determining the site-specific spectral response accelerations. Based on the soil conditions in our explorations, we recommend using Site Class E when adjusting the mapped spectral accelerations provided above. Geotechnical Hazards - Soil Liquefaction When cyclic loading occurs during an earthquake, the shaking can increase the pore pressure in loose to medium dense saturated sand, silt, and certain low-plasticity clay, which results in liquefaction and temporary loss of soil strength. This can lead to surface settlement, lateral spreading, or slope displacement, depending on the site-specific topographical conditions. Given the presence of potentially liquefiable soil conditions in our site explorations, we performed a site-specific soil liquefaction evaluation using the procedures outlined by Idriss and Boulanger (2008), based on SPT and laboratory test data. We also evaluated the liquefaction potential using Cliq software (GeoLogismiki, v. 1.5), based on the Idriss and Boulanger (2008) empirical CPT analysis procedures. The CPT-based method provides a more layer-specific liquefaction evaluation than the 17946-01 September 26, 2014 PACCAR Renton Parts Distribution Center | 5 SPT-based method because it is based on a continuous subsurface profile rather than discrete SPT soil samples collected at 2.5- and 5-foot-depth intervals. The advantage of using both methods is that the soil samples collected in the borings can be tested for a more accurate estimate of the fines content of the sandy soil layers, which is an important parameter in the analysis. Based on the results of these analyses, we estimate that liquefaction will likely occur during a design earthquake within various layers from the top of the groundwater table to between 40 and 70 feet deep, below which the soil is believed to either be too plastic or too dense to liquefy. The anticipated post-liquefaction surface settlement for this site is estimated to range from about 3 to 12 inches. For the liquefaction analysis, we used a USGS-predicted earthquake magnitude (Mw) of 7.00, based on a 2,475-year seismic event in accordance with the current International Building Code (2012 IBC). According to the code, sites that are likely to undergo liquefaction during a design-level seismic event should be identified as Site Class F, which generally requires a site-specific ground motion analysis. Based on Site Class E soil conditions (soft soil profile), the estimated PGA for the purpose of liquefaction analysis at this site is 0.55g. Because there are zones of liquefiable material beneath the site, the building area will undergo some level of subsidence as a result of liquefaction. Because the depth to groundwater is on the order of 10 feet, the upper soils will not liquefy and will retain their integrity. This means that liquefaction should not result in a catastrophic collapse of the foundations for the building. The effects of liquefaction will cause potentially substantial building settlement. GEOTECHNICAL CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS This section of the report presents our conclusions and recommendations for the geotechnical aspects of building design and site development. Our geotechnical investigation and engineering analysis have been performed in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical practice. We have developed our conclusions and recommendations based on our current understanding of the project. If the nature or location of the project is different than we have assumed, Hart Crowser should be notified so we can confirm or modify our recommendations. General Considerations Most of the areas around the perimeter of the site are expected to remain at roughly the same grades, with finished floor elevation at 39.5 feet. With a maximum difference of about 3 feet between current ground surface elevation and planned finished footing elevation, we anticipate up to 3 feet of fill will be placed above the existing grade in some locations across the site. In our opinion, based on the assumed building loads, shallow foundations and slabs-on-grade could be used for support of the building provided that the site is treated to accommodate settlement. Pile foundations could act to carry the building loads as well, but would be susceptible to differential stiffness between the pile caps and floor slab, requiring structural connection. A pile foundation is likely to increase costs significantly. 17946-01 September 26, 2014 6 | PACCAR Renton Parts Distribution Center To help limit the settlement a shallow foundation system would be susceptible to, we recommend that a preload and surcharge program be implemented to pre-compress the site soils. Preloading works by temporarily placing weight on soil in the building area that is approximately equal to the weight of the building such that the underlying site soils are pre-compressed under this temporary load. The preload fill is allowed to stay in place long enough for the underlying soils to fully consolidate. In addition to preloading to accommodate the building weight, we will also need to accommodate the long-term, time-dependent settlement related to the organic and fine-grained soils at the site. Peat soils and fine-grained soils will tend to continue to consolidate and settle over time. This time- dependent portion of settlement can be reduced by placing additional preload weight on the building area for some period of time. This additional weight is referred to as a “surcharge.” Given the relatively high groundwater levels, groundwater seepage should be anticipated both as part of design and during site excavation. We expect that any groundwater within the upper 5 feet below ground surface (bgs) would be locally perched and the volume of water that will need to be collected and discharged will be limited and manageable. However, site excavations deeper than about 5 feet may need more extensive dewatering effort, as described in more detail in Section 6.0. Site Preparation and Grading Site preparation should provide a firm and non-yielding subgrade beneath footings, slabs-on-grade, new structural fill, and pavement sections. Initial site preparation will involve stripping existing pavement and vegetation, demolishing existing structures, removing existing foundation and floor elements, and abandoning in place or removing any underground utilities within the new building area. Generally, we recommend intercepting and diverting any potential sources of surface or near-surface water within the construction zones before stripping begins. Because the selection of an appropriate drainage system will depend on the water quantity, season, weather conditions, construction sequence, and contractor’s methods, final decisions about drainage systems are best made in the field at the time of construction. Nonetheless, we anticipate that curbs, berms, or ditches placed along the uphill side of the work areas will adequately intercept surface water runoff. After surface and near-surface water sources have been controlled, the construction areas should be cleared and stripped of all trees, bushes, sod, topsoil, debris, asphalt, and concrete. The prepared structural or pavement subgrade areas should be observed and approved by the geotechnical engineer. Generally, visible organic material (sod, humus, roots, and/or other decaying plant material), debris, and other unsuitable materials should be removed from the subgrade areas. Removal of these materials should be completed before placement of the preload fill. The prepared subgrade should be inspected for soft areas, if necessary, by proof-rolling with a fully loaded tandem- axle dump truck. Any identified soft areas should be overexcavated to firm subgrade under the supervision of a qualified inspector and backfilled with properly compacted structural fill. 17946-01 September 26, 2014 PACCAR Renton Parts Distribution Center | 7 Some of the subgrade soils revealed after stripping and cutting to subgrade elevation may consist of fine-grained, moisture-sensitive soils; care should be taken to protect these areas from rain and runoff water. Construction traffic should be avoided across moisture-sensitive subgrade soil areas during wet weather. During wet weather, we recommend that site stripping and excavation be performed using a straight-edged bucket mounted on an excavator that does not traverse the final subgrade. Partial overexcavation may be required locally if unsuitable or disturbed native soil, or if organic-rich or debris-laden fill material is encountered within new structural subgrade areas. Generally, we recommend that any existing structures such as concrete foundations, slabs, or pile foundation elements be removed from within 2 feet below the base of any new foundation, slab-on- grade, or pavement section to avoid uneven or inconsistent hard spots or ridges, which could lead to undesirable differential settlement beneath new structural elements. It may be necessary to relocate or abandon some utilities. Abandoned underground utilities should be removed or completely grouted. The ends of remaining abandoned utility lines should be sealed to prevent piping of soil or water into the pipe. Soft or loose backfill materials should be removed and backfilled according to the structural fill recommendations in this report. Coordination with the utility owners is generally required. Permanent cut and fill slopes should be adequately inclined and revegetated to minimize long-term raveling, sloughing, and erosion. A hardy vegetative groundcover should be established as soon as possible following grading to further protect slopes from water runoff erosion. We generally recommend that permanent slopes not be steeper than 2H:1V, to minimize long-term erosion and to facilitate revegetation. Final grading near the top of permanent slopes should be such that surface water is directed away from the slope face. Foundation Considerations We understand that the building will be predominantly steel frame construction with perimeter concrete stem walls about 10 feet tall. Therefore, wall loads are expected to be quite light. Interior column loads have been established with footings sized to a 2 ksf allowable stress, which was used for design of the site pretreatment (preload). Floor loads have been finalized, with an assumed 750 psf across the floor. Wall loading is typically about 1.6 kips per foot. Column loads range from 48 kips to 629 kips. Of the 629 kips, 191.5 of those are classified as a dead load. Given the potential for highly variable, liquefaction-induced settlement on the order of 3 to 12 inches across the site, we recommend that the planned building floors be pile-supported if the risk of potential floor settlement is unacceptable to PACCAR. Liquefaction mitigation approaches may be used as well. If PACCAR can accept the risk of potential floor settlement and cost of repairs, the floor may be designed as a reinforced, “floating” concrete slab-on-grade, if the structural engineer can design a reinforced concrete slab that provides adequate life and safety protection during settlement in accordance with the building code. For this approach, the floor slab subgrade should be prepared as 17946-01 September 26, 2014 8 | PACCAR Renton Parts Distribution Center described in the Structural Fill section of this report and should follow the geotechnical recommendations provided below for slab-on-grade floors. Settlement Analysis Our three-dimensional, numeric modelling settlement evaluation was performed using Settle 3D (RocScience, Inc.), a sophisticated program that is able to evaluate primary and secondary time- dependent settlement based on a series of soil strength and behavior characteristics that can vary across the three-dimensional space being analyzed. Additionally, the program allows for more detailed modelling of specific foundation and floor loading conditions across the building footprint, which in turn helps provide a more refined evaluation of potential differential settlement between structural components of the building. The output from the program is a color-coded contour map of settlement as it varies across the preload/building footprint area. The three-dimensional modelling of soil layering across the building footprint was based on both previous and current explorations, which included multiple Cone Penetrometer Test probes (CPTu) measuring in situ soil properties and several borings to collect soil samples for visual observation and laboratory testing. Several Constant Rate of Strain (CRS) consolidation tests were performed to directly measure both primary (elastic, based on effective stress analysis) and secondary (long-term organic) compression of selected soil samples. A range of soil property values were used in our computer analysis to reflect the expected natural variations even within each soil layer. For the foundation and floor loading criteria, we used the foundation layout schematic drawing provided to us by Dibble Engineers (dated August 7, 2014), which included estimated column loads and footing sizes based on 2 ksf allowable bearing pressure, along with an estimated concrete slab-on- grade floor live load of 750 psf. In addition to the total settlement contour maps, the modelling program also provides the ability to view relative settlement along critical cross-section lines at various stages of the preloading and building construction process (see attached). The cross sections allow a closer look at how different structural elements of the building are expected to settle over a long period of time and, more specifically, how much potential total and differential post-construction settlement can be expected. Settlement Analysis Results We used an iterative analysis approach to select an optimized design preload height that would reduce anticipated post-construction building settlement to a tolerable level. Generally, we found that a preload height of 11 feet will likely result in total long-term building settlement on the order of 1 or 2 inches across the building footprint. Footings will undergo more settlement than the majority of the building, with much of the settlement occurring nearly as quickly as loads are applied. Differential settlement between various column footing elements and relative to adjacent floor slab areas is anticipated to be on the order of 1 inch or less with this preload scenario. This estimated settlement includes the effects of long-term secondary consolidation within organic soil layers over a 40-year building life. 17946-01 September 26, 2014 PACCAR Renton Parts Distribution Center | 9 The three-dimensional computer analysis also revealed that settlement will be higher under the planned cluster of relatively heavily loaded footings in the northwest portion of the building, partly due to weaker soils in this area. To reduce such potential additional settlement, we recommend that a 4-foot higher preload (15 feet total) be placed over this limited area, generally from grid lines D-13/15 to I-13/15. Our preliminary analysis indicates that settlement can be reduced further in this heavily loaded building area by increasing the preload to 20 feet (i.e., 9 feet more than the 11-foot preload), if required, for structural design reasons. We can evaluate this further, upon request. To illustrate the preload design scenario and to provide more detailed settlement information for structural design, we have attached the following figures of the three-dimensional analysis results for various key preload/construction stages:  Figure 5 – Settlement at end of 6-month preload period;  Figure 6 – Relative settlement at end of 6-month preload period;  Figure 7 – Relative settlement at end of 40-year building design life;  Figure 8 – Relative settlement over time along E-W settlement section line; and  Figure 9 – Relative settlement over time along N-S settlement section line. Figure 5 settlement is referenced from the current ground surface. Figures 6 through 9 show the estimated total settlement across the preload/building footprint area relative to the rebounded ground surface following removal of the preload. The settlement shown on these plots indicate how the anticipated total and differential settlement is expected to vary across footing elements and floor slab areas over time along the selected building section line within the critical settlement area (grid line 15). The relative preload settlement shown on Figure 2 also indicates how much ground surface rebound can be expected after the preload is removed. This variable settlement reflects not only the different loading characteristics of the various footing sizes and spacing, but also local variations in soil compressibility and layering across the site. The settlement contour maps may be used to obtain similar relative building settlement estimates for other portions of the building footprint area. In reviewing the attached settlement contour maps and relative settlement plots, it should be noted that the building construction is modeled as two events. The footing loads are applied instantaneously, and the floor slab load is applied instantaneously 1 month later. Because at least some of the building loads will occur during construction and primary consolidation is expected to occur within a relatively short period (less than 2 weeks), the actual post-construction settlement experienced by the finishing elements of the building will likely be less than the upper end of our building settlement estimates. Furthermore, since the anticipated design live floor load of 750 psf will not likely be felt evenly and at the same time across the entire floor area as modeled, the actual slab total and differential settlement may be different from that estimated. Final Preload Design and Construction Considerations The preload heights discussed above include the surcharge required to reduce long-term secondary consolidation. However, a 1 foot overbuild should be added to the preload heights to account for anticipated ground settlement during preloading. Therefore, the preload design plans should indicate 17946-01 September 26, 2014 10 | PACCAR Renton Parts Distribution Center an overall preload height of 12 feet above planned finished floor level of 39.5 feet, with an additional 4 feet (16 feet total) within the locally higher preload area near the north end of the building. The existing ground surface in the building footprint area is generally around elevation 38.0 feet, with a locally lower portion near the northeast corner of the building. To provide a suitable subgrade to support the planned concrete floor section (6-inch concrete slab over 6-inch capillary break) following preload settlement and removal, we recommend that the lower 2 feet of the preload fill and all soils within 2 feet of the bottom of the slab be placed and compacted as structural fill compacted to 95 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D1557). To reduce potential differential settlement, we also recommend that all isolated column footing subgrade areas be overexcavated by 3 feet and replaced with structural fill compacted to 90 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density. We generally recommend that the full-height preload prism extend at least 10 feet beyond the building perimeter walls, with side slopes beyond that on the order of 1H:1V (Horizontal:Vertical), or flatter. To account for the possible future building expansion to the west, as well as potential shifting of the building location to the north, we further recommend that the full preload height be extended another 20 feet (total of 30 feet from building walls) on the north and west sides. This was considered in the presentation of the settlement results, as well as a previous design decision that included an extra 20 feet of preload south of the building as well. The extra preload extension to the south resulted in an increased influence area south of the building, but does not significantly alter the settlement analysis results within the building footprint. As the final building and preload layout is planned, it will be important to consider the effects of potential ground settlement beyond the edges of the preload prism on adjacent utilities and structures due to the lateral extent of the preload influence zone. The results of our computer modeling indicate that ground settlement at a distance of about 60 feet past the edge of the full-height preload prism may be on the order of 1 inch. Settlement Monitoring Program To assess the performance of the preload/surcharge fill, a settlement monitoring program will be necessary. Without settlement monitoring, the surcharges must be left in place the full time planned, and predicted post-construction building settlement would still be regarded as approximate at best. With proper instrumentation, the settlement progress can be more closely monitored, future settlement predicted with more confidence, and the basis of the design verified. Through analysis of the monitoring data, we can implement design revisions, if necessary, or remove the surcharge early, if possible. An early removal or design revision decision would be based on the settlement rate, the construction benefits, and the residual settlement predicted for the building. For the settlement monitoring program, we recommend the following steps:  Install settlement plates at strategic locations throughout the building footprint.  Install vibrating wire piezometers and magnetic settlement sensors at strategic locations. 17946-01 September 26, 2014 PACCAR Renton Parts Distribution Center | 11  Survey initial settlement plate elevations immediately after placing the plates and prior to placing any fill. Obtain readings by standard differential leveling to the nearest 0.01 foot.  Extend settlement plate rods during fill placement by coupling pipes together. A survey reading should be made immediately before and after the pipe extension is installed.  Survey and establish a series of benchmarks outside the area of settlement influence; we estimate that a minimum distance of 300 feet is sufficiently far away from the preload site to obtain reliable survey readings.  Include settlement-sensitive utilities within 25 feet of the toe of the preload fill in the monitoring program. Depending on survey readings, preload/surcharge may need to be removed upon the recommendation from the geotechnical engineer.  Obtain readings three times per week during the first two weeks. After the first two weeks, the frequency may be reduced to twice per week. After four weeks, the frequency may be reduced further, to once per week, but only upon the recommendation of the geotechnical engineer reviewing the survey data.  Retain Hart Crowser to review the settlement plate data on a regular basis. This will allow us to make recommendations regarding placement of additional fill and preload duration. Foundations Once preloading has been completed, the building can be founded on shallow footings and slabs-on- grade. We recommend the following design parameters:  Footings can be designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure equal to 2,000 psf, with allowance for a one-third increase for transient loads.  Lateral loading may be resisted with an ultimate equivalent fluid unit weight of 175 pcf acting as passive resistance against vertical facing of footings, neglecting the upper 2 feet of soil. We recommend a static factor of safety against translation equal to 1.5.  Lateral loading may be resisted by sliding friction between the slab and subgrade using an ultimate coefficient of friction of 0.30 when placed on well-compacted granular fill. We recommend a static factor of safety against translation equal to 1.5.  All footings should have a minimum width equal to 24 inches and the bottoms of the footings should be at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent grade.  The upper soils at the site are loose and may be unsuitable for direct support of the footings. We recommend providing an allowance for overexcavation below the footings and replacement with densely compacted fill. Two feet of overexcavation and backfill should be allowed for in all areas 17946-01 September 26, 2014 12 | PACCAR Renton Parts Distribution Center for all footings. The actual required depth will depend on conditions encountered and, therefore, the need for overexcavation should be assessed in the field on a footing-by-footing basis.  Slabs-on-grade can be used for support of the floor slab provided the upper 24 inches of subgrade have been recompacted to 95 percent of the maximum modified Proctor dry density. This may require some overexcavation and some moisture conditioning and recompacting of the site soils. This earthwork will be greatly simplified by conducting these operations during extended periods of dry weather.  Slabs can be designed using a modulus of subgrade reaction equal to 250 pci (based on a 1- by 1-foot plate).  Slabs should be underlain by at least 6 inches of free-draining sand to act as a capillary break. Permanent Drainage Considerations Given the presence of near-surface groundwater at the site, we recommend that the proposed building have a permanent drainage system to minimize the risk of moisture problems. We offer the following recommendations and comments for drainage design and construction. Perimeter Drains We recommend that the building be encircled with a perimeter drain system to collect seepage. The drain should consist of a minimum 4-inch-diameter perforated PVC pipe, enveloped by 6 inches of drainage material on all sides. The drainage material should consist of a free draining, well-graded sand and gravel (as specified in the Pipe and Utility Vault Bedding section). All drainage pipes should be installed near the footing base level and should be sloped to gravity drain away from the footings and should be hydraulically connected to a suitable discharge outlet point. Clean-outs should also be installed for maintenance purposes. Sub-Slab Drainage Based on the static groundwater level in our site explorations (about 10 feet deep), we do not at this time anticipate the need for a sub-slab drainage system, provided that perimeter drains are installed as described above to collect locally perched groundwater seepage. However, if groundwater conditions are different from those described in this report are encountered during construction, Hart Crowser should be notified so we can reevaluate sub-slab drainage requirements. Slabs should be underlain by at least 6 inches of free-draining sand to act as a capillary break Runoff Water Roof runoff and surface water runoff should not discharge into the perimeter drain system. Rather, these sources should discharge into separate tight-line pipes and be routed away from the building to a storm drain or other appropriate location. 17946-01 September 26, 2014 PACCAR Renton Parts Distribution Center | 13 Grading and Capping Final site grades should slope downward away from the building so that runoff water will flow to suitable collection points, rather than ponding near the building. Ideally, the area surrounding the building would be capped with concrete, asphalt, or low-permeability (silty) soils to reduce surface water infiltration. Pavement Subgrade Considerations Site pavement is expected to consist of either Asphaltic Concrete (AC) or Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) for light to moderate traffic loading. Based on the site explorations, the upper fill soils generally consist of loose to dense Sand, and silty Sand. These near-surface site soils are generally considered suitable for pavement subgrade support, given proper subgrade preparation during construction (see the Structural Fill section). Within pavement areas, the near-surface soil exposed by the removal of surficial organics should be compacted to a minimum density of 95 percent of the maximum dry density using the modified Proctor method (ASTM D-1557). Then the subgrade should be proof-rolled with a loaded dump truck or heavy compactor to verify a firm and yielding subgrade condition. Any localized zones of yielding subgrade should be overexcavated to a maximum depth of 12 inches and replaced with a suitable structural fill material (granular subbase course). Alternately, a suitable geofabric may be used to stabilize the soft subgrade and minimize silt migration into the pavement section, based on a field evaluation of subgrade conditions. Localized soft areas may require more extensive preparation. Any structural fill within the upper 2 feet of the subgrade level should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D-1557); fill material below this 2-foot depth should be compacted to at least 90 percent. We recommend that a Hart Crowser representative be retained to verify the condition of the subgrade, granular subbase, and crushed rock base course before each successive layer is placed. Placement of this subgrade should occur as part of the preload fill placement. Structural Fill Structural fill is recommended beneath footings, slabs-on-grade, and pavement sections. The suitability of soil used for structural fill depends primarily on its grain size distribution and moisture content when it is placed. As the fines content (that soil fraction passing the U.S. No. 200 Sieve) increases, soil becomes more sensitive to small changes in moisture content. Soil containing more than about 5 percent fines (by weight) cannot be consistently compacted to a firm, unyielding condition when the moisture content is more than 2 percentage points above or below optimum. Structural fill must also be free of organic matter and other debris. For fill placement during wet-weather site work, we recommend using clean fill, which refers to soil that has a fines content of 5 percent or less (by weight) based on the minus 3/4-inch fraction. We make the following general recommendations about structural fill. 17946-01 September 26, 2014 14 | PACCAR Renton Parts Distribution Center  Place and compact all structural fill in lifts with a loose thickness no greater than 8 to 10 inches. If small, hand-operated compaction equipment is used to compact structural fill, fill lifts should not exceed 4 to 6 inches in loose thickness, depending on the equipment used.  The maximum particle size within the fill should be limited to two-thirds of the loose lift thickness.  Compact structural fill to a minimum of 90 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D 1557 test procedure. Within 2 feet below pavement subgrades and within full depth below footings and slabs-on-grade, structural fill should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent.  Control the moisture content of the fill to within 2 percent of the optimum moisture content based on laboratory Proctor tests. The optimum moisture content corresponds to the maximum attainable Proctor dry density.  In wet subgrade areas, clean material with a gravel content (material coarser than a U.S. No. 4 sieve) of at least 30 to 35 percent may be necessary to bridge the weaker subsoils.  A representative number of in-place density tests should be performed on structural fill in the field to verify adequate compaction. Use of On-Site Soil as Structural Fill We provide the following recommendations for reuse of on-site soil as structural fill material.  Sand, and silty Sand. We anticipate that most of the granular shallow soil may be reused as general structural fill, provided that all organic material and other unsuitable debris is removed. It should be noted, however, that some of the existing fill soil is silty and, therefore, moisture sensitive and difficult to compact during wet site conditions. Moisture conditioning (i.e., drying) of the site soil may be necessary to achieve adequate compaction.  Silt, clayey Silt, and Peat. Some of the shallow material may consist of fine-grained material such as Organic Silt or Peat. These fine-grained soils do not appear to be suitable for reuse as structural fill at their present moisture content. This soil may only become suitable for reuse during a period of dry weather if it can be aerated to reduce moisture content. Note that this fine-grained soil is extremely moisture-sensitive and is not likely to be suitable for use as structural fill during wet conditions. However, the silt may be suitable in non-structural fill areas, where a lower compaction may be feasible. Peat may not be used as structural fill. We recommend that any excavated soil intended for reuse be stockpiled separately and reviewed by the on-site geotechnical engineer or geologist for suitability. Such stockpiles should be protected with plastic sheeting to prevent them from becoming overly wet during rainy weather. The existing soil is not suitable for use as free-draining material. 17946-01 September 26, 2014 PACCAR Renton Parts Distribution Center | 15 Imported Structural Fill Imported structural fill should be a well-graded sand with a low fines content, and free of organic and unsuitable materials. Generally, the requirements of the imported structural fill for most applications should consist of well graded sand and gravel with less than five percent fines based on the minus 3/4-inch fraction and with at least 30 percent coarser than a US No. 4 sieve. CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS The following sections provide our recommendations for site-specific construction considerations. Temporary Open Cuts All temporary soil cuts for excavations greater than 4 feet deep should be adequately sloped back to prevent sloughing and collapse, in accordance with Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) guidelines. If temporary sloping is not feasible based on site spatial constraints, the excavation sides should be supported by internally braced shoring systems (trench box, etc.). Appropriate temporary slope inclinations will ultimately depend on the actual soil and groundwater seepage conditions exposed in the cuts at the time of construction. It is the responsibility of the contractor to ensure that the excavation is properly sloped or braced for worker protection, in accordance with OSHA guidelines. Generally, according to these guidelines, loose granular soil and soft cohesive soil (Type C soils) require a maximum cut slope inclination of 1.5H:1V, while a maximum slope inclination of 1H:1V is typically allowed for dense granular or medium stiff to stiff cohesive soils (Type B soils). If groundwater seepage is encountered within the excavation slopes, the cut slope inclination may have to be flatter than 1.5H:1V. We make the following additional recommendations for temporary excavation slopes.  Protect the slope from erosion with plastic sheeting for the duration of the excavation to minimize surface erosion and raveling.  Limit the maximum duration of the open excavation to the shortest time period possible.  Place no surcharge loads (equipment, materials, etc.) within 10 feet of the top of the slope. Temporary Excavation Dewatering The groundwater level was observed at a depth of about 8 to 12 feet at the time of our site explorations. For relatively shallow site excavations, which may encounter perched seepage, we anticipate that an internal system of ditches, sump holes, and pumps will be adequate to temporarily dewater the excavations. However, site excavations deeper than about 8 feet may encounter the static groundwater table, for which more significant dewatering efforts may be needed. Dewatering site excavations should be the responsibility of the contractor. The contractor should consider the effects that dewatering may have on the surrounding ground conditions and subsequent settlement and lateral ground movement. 17946-01 September 26, 2014 16 | PACCAR Renton Parts Distribution Center For most construction applications, the contractor will likely want the groundwater table to be at least 1 foot below the bottom of the excavation to avoid soil disturbance from seepage forces and protect the native subgrade at the base of the excavation. Depending on the soil conditions, ditching and sumping may be an effective method of controlling the groundwater if the bottom of the excavation is at or near the groundwater table. However, in cases where the bottom of the excavation is more than about 2 to 3 feet below the groundwater table, it will likely be more effective to use a wellpoint system as a means of controlling the groundwater. If this is the case, the contractor should be required to develop, and submit for review, a site-specific dewatering plan for deeper excavations. Utility Trenching and Installation Considerations General utility installation recommendations are provided in this section of the report. It should be noted that these may be superseded by local municipal utility installation requirements. Pipe and Utility Vault Bedding Generally, imported structural fill is required for bedding. The bedding layer thickness should be at least 6 inches. In the case that unsuitable subgrade soils (such as very soft or organic soil) are encountered at the base of excavation, the thickness of the bedding materials should be increased by at least 1 foot. Close to or below the groundwater level, a layer of quarry spalls or clean crushed rock may be required within overexcavated areas to stabilize the trench base prior to placement of the bedding material. The bedding materials should meet the WSDOT 9-03.12(3) requirements except that the amount passing the No. 200 sieve should be less than 5 percent (based on the minus 3/4-inch fraction). The bedding materials should be compacted to 90 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density. Pipe Zone Backfill The pipe zone extends from the top of bedding to 6 inches above the top of the pipe. Structural fill within this zone should meet the specific gradation requirements associated with the utility being installed and should be placed in lifts and compacted to 90 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density. Utility Trench/Vault Backfill The recommendations for the utility trench backfill above the pipe backfill zone depend on the location and depth of the backfill. In structural areas, the upper 2 feet of backfill below the pavement section should consist of clean on-site or import structural fill, placed in lifts not exceeding 8 inches in loose thickness and compacted to a minimum of 95 percent. Below the upper 2 feet, on-site soil can be used for backfill and should be compacted to a minimum 90 percent. In non-settlement-sensitive areas, on-site soil can be used with minor compaction effort. Note that many municipal standards for construction work within right-of-way areas require 95 percent density, based on the standard Proctor test (ASTM D-698). This requirement is generally equivalent to about 90 percent compaction using the more stringent modified Proctor criteria (ASTM D-1557). 17946-01 September 26, 2014 PACCAR Renton Parts Distribution Center | 17 Compaction Equipment Generally we recommend that hand-operated compaction equipment be used within 12 inches of any pipe, catch basin, or similar structure to reduce risk of damage. More than 12 inches from pipe and structures, it is common to use a vibratory plate compactor attached to a backhoe (i.e., hoepack), or even a self-propelled roller. The contractor should be responsible for selecting appropriate compaction equipment and adjusting the lift thickness and moisture content of the backfill as needed to assure adequate compaction and avoid damage to the pipe. In general, heavy mechanical compaction equipment should not be allowed over the pipeline until the backfill is at least 2 feet above the top of the pipe. For hand-operated compaction equipment, the loose lift thickness should not exceed 4 to 6 inches. RECOMMENDED ADDITIONAL GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES Recommendations discussed in this report should be reviewed and modified as needed during the final design stages of the project. We also recommend that geotechnical construction observation be incorporated into the construction plans. The following sections present our recommended post- report geotechnical engineering services specific to this project. Post-Report Design Services We recommend that Hart Crowser be afforded the opportunity to review geotechnical aspects of the final design plans and specifications to confirm that our recommendations were properly understood and implemented in the design. We will be available to discuss these issues with the design team as the design develops and as needed. Specifically, we recommend the following additional design services:  Provide geotechnical engineering support to the civil/structural engineer during preparation of project plans and specifications; and  Prepare geotechnical review letters in response to geotechnical plan review comments by the building department as part of the permitting process. Construction Observation Services Because the future performance and integrity of the structural elements of the project will depend largely on proper site preparation, drainage, fill placement, and construction procedures, monitoring and testing by experienced geotechnical personnel should be considered an integral part of the construction process. The purpose of our observations is to verify compliance with design concepts and recommendations, and to allow design changes or evaluation of appropriate construction methods in the event that subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to the start of construction. Consequently, we recommend that Hart Crowser be retained to provide the following construction support services: 17946-01 September 26, 2014 18 | PACCAR Renton Parts Distribution Center  Review geotechnical-related construction submittals from the contractor to verify compliance with the construction plans and the recommendations of this report.  Attend a pre-construction conference with the contractor to discuss important geotechnical- related construction issues.  Observe all exposed footing, pavement, and slab-on-grade subgrades after completion of stripping and overexcavation to confirm that suitable soil conditions have been reached and to determine appropriate subgrade compaction methods.  Observe the construction of the preload to confirm its conformance with the geotechnical design recommendations and the construction plans.  Observe the installation of all perimeter drains, wall drains, and capillary break layers to verify their conformance with the construction plans.  Monitor the placement of all structural fill and test the compaction of structural fill soil to verify confirm conformance with the construction specifications.  Monitor and test utility backfill.  Provide assistance with any other geotechnical considerations that may arise during the course of construction. L:\Jobs\1794601\Final Report\PACCAR Geotechnical Final Report.docx 17946-01 September 26, 2014 N 0 2000 4000 Scale in Feet Figure1794601-003.dwg09/19/14EAL17946-01 9/14 Renton, Washington PACCAR Parts Distribution Center 1 Vicinity Map Source: Base map prepared from ArcGIS Online, 2014. Project Site CPT-103CPT-107CPT-104CPT-108CPT-109CPT-106OSP-8DCPT-101CPT-102CPT-105LW-14SB-102HC-2B-101GT-7OW-4DLW-13DGPR-7MW-3IGPR-8CPT-2CPT-1CW-3DAA'B B'N0100200Scale in FeetFigure1794601-004.dwg09/22/14EAL 17946-019/14Renton, WashingtonPACCAR Parts Distribution Center2Site and Exploration PlanGarden Avenue NN 4th StreetHouser Way NCPT-101B-101Boring (Hart Crowser)Cone Penetrometer Test (Hart Crowser)Historical ExplorationExploration Location and NumberCW-3DSource: Aerial photograph from ArcGIS Online, 2014.Proposed BuildingAA'Approximate Cross SectionLocation and Designation 02550Elevation in Feet AWest-25-50-7502550A'East-25-50-75HC-2(37')GT-7(21')CPT-107(128')CPT-109(91')CPT-108(22')-100-100CPT-106(17')(Shifted 26.5' Efor visual clarity)01002003000024681020304050400010020030000246810400500010020030040002468010203040010020030000246810400500(qt)(SBT)(qt)(SBT)(qt)(SBT)(qt)(SBT)?????????????????????????????????Very dense, trace to slightly silty,gravelly SAND and sandy GRAVELMedium stiff tohard CLAY tosilty CLAY????Dense to very dense SAND,GRAVEL, and silty SANDIntermixed soft to stiff silty SAND toloose, to medium dense SAND withorganic materialIntermixed soft to stiff silty SAND toloose, to medium dense SAND withorganic materialIntermixed soft to stiffsilty SAND to loose, tomedium dense SANDwith organic materialIntermixed soft to stiff silty SAND toloose, to medium dense SAND withorganic materialIntermixed soft to stiff siltySAND to loose, tomedium dense SANDwith organic materialIntermixed very highlycompressible SILTand PEATDense to very dense SAND,GRAVEL, and silty SAND050100Scale in FeetFigure1794601-005.dwg09/25/14EAL 17946-019/14Renton, WashingtonPACCAR Parts Distribution Center3Generalized Subsurface Profile A-A'Exploration Number(Offset Distance)Exploration LocationWater LevelStandard Penetration Resistance inBlows per FootHC-2(37')9123456789101112Sensitive fine grainedOrganic soilClayClay & silty clayClay & silty claySandy silt & clayey siltSilty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sandSandSandVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soil010020030000246810400500CPT-109(91')(qt)(SBT)Soil Behavior Type (SBT)Note:Contacts between soil units are based upon interpolationbetween borings and represent our interpretation ofsubsurface conditions based on currently available data. 02550Elevation in Feet BSouthwest-25-5002550B'Northeast-25-50-75-75CPT-103(5')HC-2(70')CPT-107(93')(Shifted 9' SEfor visual clarity)CPT-106(104')(Shifted 46' NEfor visual clarity)GT-7(32')CPT-105(119')CPT-109(24')(Shifted 52' NEfor visual clarity)B-101(10')CPT-101(3')(Shifted 28.5' NEfor visual clarity)-100-10001002003004000102030405002468010020030040002468010203040010020030001020300246801002003000024681020304050010020030000246810400500010020030000246810400500(qt)(SBT)(qt)(SBT)(qt)(SBT)(qt)(SBT)(qt)(SBT)(qt)(SBT)Cluster Cone 2Very dense, trace to slightly silty,gravelly SAND and sandy GRAVELMedium stiff tohard CLAY tosilty CLAYDense to very dense SAND,GRAVEL, and silty SANDIntermixed soft to stiff silty SAND toloose, to medium dense SAND withorganic material??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????Intermixed soft to stiffsilty SAND to loose, tomedium dense SANDwith organic materialDense to very dense SAND,GRAVEL, and silty SANDVery highlycompressibleorganic SILTIntermixed soft to stiffsilty SAND to loose, tomedium dense SANDwith organic materialIntermixed soft to stiff silty SANDto loose, to medium denseSAND with organic materialDense to very dense SAND,GRAVEL, and silty SANDIntermixed soft tostiff silty SAND toloose, to mediumdense SAND withorganic materialIntermixed very highly compressibleSILT and PEATVery highly compressibleorganic SILTIntermixed soft to stiff silty SAND toloose, to medium dense SAND withorganic material050100Scale in FeetFigure1794601-005.dwg09/25/14EAL 17946-019/14Renton, WashingtonPACCAR Parts Distribution Center4Generalized Subsurface Profile B-B'Exploration Number(Offset Distance)Exploration LocationWater LevelStandard Penetration Resistance inBlows per FootHC-2(37')9123456789101112Sensitive fine grainedOrganic soilClayClay & silty clayClay & silty claySandy silt & clayey siltSilty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sandSandSandVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soil010020030000246810400500CPT-109(91')(qt)(SBT)Soil Behavior Type (SBT)Note:Contacts between soil units are based upon interpolationbetween borings and represent our interpretation ofsubsurface conditions based on currently available data. Note: 17946-01 09/14 Figure PACCAR Parts Distribution Center Renton, Washington Settlement at end of 6-month preload period 5 (1) Illustrated Settlement is for the proposed building location as of September 24, 2014 only. (2) Settlement contours are the anticipated deformation values at the current ground surface following 6 months of the spedified preloading.BJE 09/25/14 L:\Projects\Jobs\1794601\Final Report\Figures/Figures.xlsx Note: 17946-01 09/14 Figure PACCAR Parts Distribution Center Renton, Washington Relative settlement at end of 6-month preload period 6 (1) Illustrated Settlement is for the proposed building location as of September 24, 2014 only. (2) Reformation contours showthe anticipated settlement at the ground surface following the removal of the preload. (3) The contours represent the calculated rebound from preload removal.BJE 09/25/14 L:\Projects\Jobs\1794601\Final Report\Figures/Figures.xlsx Note: 17946-01 09/14 Figure PACCAR Parts Distribution Center Renton, Washington Relative settlement at end of 40-year building design life 7 (1) Illustrated Settlement is for the proposed building location as of September 24, 2014 only. (2) Reformation contours showthe anticipated settlement at the ground surface following the removal of the preload. (3) Calculated deformations are based on fully loaded 2 ksf footings.BJE 09/25/14 L:\Projects\Jobs\1794601\Final Report\Figures/Figures.xlsx Note: 17946-01 09/14 Figure PACCAR Parts Distribution Center Renton, Washington Relative settlement over time along E-W settlement section line 8 (1) Illustrated Settlement is for the proposed building location as of September 24, 2014 only. (2) Reformation contours showthe anticipated settlement at the ground surface following the removal of the preload. (3) Calculated deformations are based on fully loaded 2 ksf footings.BJE 09/25/14 L:\Projects\Jobs\1794601\Final Report\Figures/Figures.xlsx0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 Total Settlement (in)Distance (ft) Distance vs. Total Settlement Removal of Preload (Month 6)Add Footings (Month 7)Footing Settlement (Month 7.5) Add Floor Slab (Month 7.5)1 Month After Construction 40 Years After Construction Note: 17946-01 09/14 Figure PACCAR Parts Distribution Center Renton, Washington Relative settlement over time along N-S settlement section line 9 (1) Illustrated Settlement is for the proposed building location as of September 24, 2014 only. (2) Reformation contours showthe anticipated settlement at the ground surface following the removal of the preload. (3) Calculated deformations are based on fully loaded 2 ksf footings.BJE 09/25/14 L:\Projects\Jobs\1794601\Final Report\Figures/Figures.xlsx0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 Total Settlement (in)Distance (ft) Distance vs. Total Settlement Removal of Preload (Month 6)Add Footings (Month 7)Footing Settlement (Month 7.5)Add Floor Slab (Month 7.5)1 Month After Construction 40 Years After Construction APPENDIX A Field Exploration Methods and Analysis 17946-01 September 26, 2014 APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATION METHODS AND ANALYSIS This appendix documents the processes Hart Crowser used in determining the nature and quality of the soil and groundwater underlying the project site addressed by this report. The discussion includes information on the following subjects:  Explorations and Their Location;  Mud Rotary Borings;  Standard Penetration Test (SPT) Procedures;  Shelby Tubes; and  Cone Penetrometer Probes. Explorations and Their Location Subsurface explorations for this project include mud rotary borings and cone penetration tests. The exploration logs within this appendix show our interpretation of the drilling (probing/excavation), sampling, and testing data. The logs indicate the depth where the soils change. Note that the change may be gradual. In the field, we classified the samples taken from the explorations according to the methods presented on Figure A-1 - Key to Exploration Logs. This figure also provides a legend explaining the symbols and abbreviations used in the logs. Location of Explorations. Figure 2 shows the location of explorations, located by GPS with a horizontal datum of WA Sate Plane North. The ground surface elevations at these locations were interpreted from elevations shown on the site plans by Barghausen, dated May 5, 2014 The measurement method used determines the accuracy of the location and elevation of the explorations. Mud Rotary Borings With depths ranging from 35 to 55.5 feet below the ground surface, two mud rotary borings, designated B-101 and B-102, were drilled from June 16, 2014, to June 17, 2014. The borings used an approximately 5-7/8-inch-diameter tri-cone bit and were advanced with a truck-mounted drill rig subcontracted by Hart Crowser. The drilling was continuously observed by an engineering geologist from Hart Crowser. Detailed field logs were prepared of each boring. Using the Standard Penetration Test (SPT), we obtained samples at 2-1/2- to 5-foot-depth intervals of interest and collect undisturbed samples with a modified shelby tube. The boring logs are presented on Figures A-2 through A-3 at the end of this appendix. Standard Penetration Test Procedures This test is an approximate measure of soil density and consistency. To be useful, the results must be used with engineering judgment in conjunction with other tests. The SPT (as described in ASTM D-1586) was used to obtain disturbed samples. This test employs a standard 2-inch outside diameter split-spoon sampler. Using a 140-pound autohammer, free-falling 30 inches, the sampler is driven into 17946-01 September 26, 2014 A-2 | PACCAR Renton Parts Distribution Center the soil for 18 inches. The number of blows required to drive the sampler the last 12 inches only is the Standard Penetration Resistance. This resistance, or blow count, measures the relative density of granular soils and the consistency of cohesive soils. The blow counts are plotted on the boring logs at their respective sample depths. Soil samples are recovered from the split-barrel sampler, field classified, and placed into water-tight jars. They are then taken to Hart Crowser's laboratory for further testing. In the Event of Hard Driving Occasionally very dense materials preclude driving the total 18-inch sample. When this happens, the penetration resistance is entered on logs as follows: Penetration less than 6 inches. The log indicates the total number of blows over the number of inches of penetration. Penetration greater than 6 inches. The blow count noted on the log is the sum of the total number of blows completed after the first 6 inches of penetration. This sum is expressed over the number of inches driven that exceed the first 6 inches. The number of blows needed to drive the first 6 inches are not reported. For example, a blow count series of 12 blows for 6 inches, 30 blows for 6 inches, and 50 (the maximum number of blows counted within a 6-inch increment for SPT) for 3 inches would be recorded as 80/9. Shelby Tubes To obtain a relatively undisturbed sample for classification and testing in fine-grained soils, a 3-inch- diameter thin-walled steel (Shelby) tube sampler was pushed hydraulically below the auger (as described in ASTM D 1587) using a piston type sampling method. The tubes were sealed in the field and taken to our laboratory for extrusion and classification. Cone Penetrometer Probes We used a cone penetrometer to probe the subgrade soils for this study. Completed by Insitu Engineering, the probes, designated CPT-101 through CPT-109, were advanced to depths ranging from 2 to 43.64 feet below the ground surface from June 16, 2014, to June 18, 2014. This figure also shows the classification method used to develop the soil behavior index represented on the individual logs for classification purposes. The piezocone is arranged to measure the following parameters, which are used for the soil classification:  Tip resistance, Qc in tsf (resistance to soil penetration developed at the cone tip);  Friction resistance, Fs in tsf (resistance to soil penetration developed along the friction sleeve); and  Pore water pressure behind the cone tip, Ubt in psi. The system is mounted on a tracked truck which provides the necessary reaction for the applied loads. 17946-01 September 26, 2014 PACCAR Renton Parts Distribution Center | A-3 The electric piezocone penetrometer test procedure involves hydraulically pushing a series of cylindrical rods into the soil at a constant rate of 2 centimeters per second and subsequently monitoring soil and pore fluid response near the conical tip. The cylindrical rod at the bottom of the drill string houses the pressure transducer and load cells which, during probing, measure the parameters indicated above. To be useful, the results must be used with engineering judgment in conjunction with other tests, preferably the SPT procedure, which allows soil sample collection for direct comparison purposes. Tests were performed in general accordance with procedures outlined in ASTM D 3441, Standard Method for Deep, Quasi-Static, Cone and Friction-Cone Penetration Tests of Soil. The cone system is mounted on a truck or bulldozer to provide the necessary reaction for the applied loads. The cone tip has a surface area of about 10 square centimeters (cm2) and an angle of 30 degrees from the axis. The friction sleeve has a surface area of about 150 cm2. Prior to testing, a plastic filter element, which has been saturated under vacuum in glycerin, is placed behind the cone tip. This filter element transmits pore pressures to the transducer. Load cells measure end resistance on the tip and frictional resistance on the friction sleeve. As the cone penetrates the soil, measurements are continuously recorded on a portable computer at depth increments of about 5 centimeters. The classification method used to develop an interpreted soil profile is based on normalized parameters provided by the piezocone, as there are no soil samples collected with a penetrometer system of this type. The relationship between the cone tip resistance and friction ratio, which has been normalized for soil overburden stresses, can be established to predict soil behavior (Jeffries and Davies, 1991 and 1993). This relationship has been applied to the soil classification chart developed by Robertson as reported in Lunne et al., 1997 (refer to Figure A-1 [Sheet 2/2]) according to the following equation: 22)]log(3.15.1[)]}1(log[3{FBQlqc⋅++−⋅−= Where: Ic = Soil behavior index Q = Normalized cone tip resistance vo vorqQ'σ σ−= qT = Corrected cone tip resistance σVO = Total overburden stress σ’VO = Effective overburdens stress Bq = Normalized pore pressure voT q q uBσ− ∆= F = Normalized friction ratio 17946-01 September 26, 2014 A-4 | PACCAR Renton Parts Distribution Center %100⋅−= voT sfq fR σ fS = Sleeve friction The data provided by Insitu Engineering for these cones is included in Attachment 1. 17946-01 September 26, 2014 6/14 Figure A-1 17946-01 Key to Exploration Logs Sample Description Very soft Soft Medium stiff Stiff Very stiff Hard ApproximateShear Strengthin TSF 0.125 0.25 0.5 1.0 0.25 0.5 1.0 2.0 Laboratory Test Symbols Density/Consistency SAND or GRAVEL Density Very loose Loose Medium dense Dense Very dense Soil descriptions consist of the following: Density/consistency, moisture, color, minor constituents, MAJOR CONSTITUENT, additional remarks. StandardPenetrationResistance (N)in Blows/Foot 0 4 10 30 SILT or CLAY Consistency to to to to >50 Liquid LimitNaturalPlastic Limit Classification of soils in this report is based on visual field and laboratoryobservations which include density/consistency, moisture condition, grain size, andplasticity estimates and should not be construed to imply field nor laboratory testing unless presented herein. Visual-manual classification methods of ASTM D 2488were used as an identification guide. GS CN UU CU CD QU DS K PP TV CBR MD AL PID CA DT OT Groundwater Seepage(Test Pits) Sampling Test Symbols to to to to to >30 <0.125 to to to to >2.0 Trace Slightly (clayey, silty, etc.) Clayey, silty, sandy, gravelly Very (clayey, silty, etc.) 5 12 30 12 30 50 <5 - - - Water Content in Percent Little perceptible moisture Some perceptible moisture, likely below optimum Likely near optimum moisture content Much perceptible moisture, likely above optimum Soil density/consistency in borings is related primarily to the Standard Penetration Resistance. Soil density/consistency in test pits and probes isestimated based on visual observation and is presented parenthetically on thelogs. 4 10 30 50 StandardPenetrationResistance (N)in Blows/Foot 2 4 8 15 30 0 2 4 8 15 Moisture Dry Damp Moist Wet Estimated PercentageMinor Constituents 1.5" I.D. Split Spoon Shelby Tube (Pushed) Cuttings Grab (Jar) Bag Core Run 3.0" I.D. Split Spoon Grain Size Classification Consolidation Unconsolidated Undrained Triaxial Consolidated Undrained Triaxial Consolidated Drained Triaxial Unconfined Compression Direct Shear Permeability Pocket Penetrometer Approximate Compressive Strength in TSF Torvane Approximate Shear Strength in TSF California Bearing Ratio Moisture Density Relationship Atterberg Limits Photoionization Detector Reading Chemical Analysis In Situ Density in PCF Tests by Others Groundwater Level on Date or (ATD) At Time of Drilling Groundwater Indicators Sample Key 2350/3"S-1 SampleNumber Blows per6 inches 12 Sample RecoverySample Type KEY SHEET 1794601-BL.GPJ HC_CORP.GDT 9/25/14LETTERGRAPH SYMBOLSMAJOR DIVISIONS SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART PT OH CH MH OL CL ML SC SM SP COARSEGRAINEDSOILS SW TYPICALDESCRIPTIONS WELL-GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL -SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NOFINES POORLY-GRADED GRAVELS,GRAVEL - SAND MIXTURES, LITTLEOR NO FINES SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVEL - SAND -SILT MIXTURES GC GM GP GW CLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVEL - SAND -CLAY MIXTURES WELL-GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLYSANDS, LITTLE OR NO FINES POORLY-GRADED SANDS,GRAVELLY SAND, LITTLE OR NOFINES SILTY SANDS, SAND - SILTMIXTURES CLAYEY SANDS, SAND - CLAYMIXTURES INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINESANDS, ROCK FLOUR, SILTY ORCLAYEY FINE SANDS OR CLAYEYSILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TOMEDIUM PLASTICITY, GRAVELLYCLAYS, SANDY CLAYS, SILTY CLAYS,LEAN CLAYS ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC SILTYCLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS ORDIATOMACEOUS FINE SAND ORSILTY SOILS INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGHPLASTICITY ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TOHIGH PLASTICITY, ORGANIC SILTS PEAT, HUMUS, SWAMP SOILS WITHHIGH ORGANIC CONTENTS CLEANGRAVELS GRAVELS WITHFINES CLEAN SANDS (LITTLE OR NO FINES) SANDS WITHFINES LIQUID LIMITLESS THAN 50 LIQUID LIMITGREATER THAN 50 HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS NOTE: DUAL SYMBOLS ARE USED TO INDICATE BORDERLINE SOIL CLASSIFICATIONS GRAVELANDGRAVELLY SOILS (APPRECIABLEAMOUNT OF FINES) (APPRECIABLEAMOUNT OF FINES) (LITTLE OR NO FINES) FINEGRAINEDSOILS SANDANDSANDYSOILS SILTSANDCLAYS SILTSANDCLAYS MORE THAN 50%OF MATERIAL ISLARGER THANNO. 200 SIEVESIZE MORE THAN 50%OF MATERIAL ISSMALLER THANNO. 200 SIEVESIZE MORE THAN 50%OF COARSEFRACTIONPASSING ON NO.4 SIEVE MORE THAN 50%OF COARSEFRACTIONRETAINED ON NO.4 SIEVE SH-1 SH-2 SH-3 SH-4 SH-4A ATD AL SP SM/ML PT-OH 1 inch of Sod over very gravelly, fine SAND with occasional cobble. (Loose to soft), moist to wet, gray, silty tovery silty, fine SAND to sandy SILT withfrequent organic material. 1- to 1.5-foot-thick layer of organic SILT. (Soft), wet, dark brown PEAT with interbedded sandy, organic SILT layers. Bottom of Boring at 35.0 Feet. Started 06/17/14. Completed 06/17/14. 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 50+ 100+ Depthin Feet 20 60 0 10 20 40 80 Water Content in Percent 30 Boring Log B-101 LABTESTS STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE Sample Blows per Foot Drill Equipment: CME 850/Track/Mud RotaryHammer Type: SPT w/140 lb Autohammer/Shelby Tube Hole Diameter: 6 inchesLogged By: W. McDonald Reviewed By: C. Valdez 0 40 GraphicLog Soil DescriptionsUSCSClass Location: N 181715 E 1303607Approximate Ground Surface Elevation: 37 Feet Horizontal Datum: WA State Plane NorthVertical Datum: NGVD29 17946-01 Figure A-2 6/14 1/2 1. Refer to Figure A-1 for explanation of descriptions and symbols.2. Soil descriptions and stratum lines are interpretive and actual changes may be gradual.3. USCS designations are based on visual manual classification (ASTM D 2488) unless otherwisesupported by laboratory testing (ASTM D 2487). 4. Groundwater level, if indicated, is at time of drilling (ATD) or for date specified. Level may vary with time.NEW BORING LOG 1794601-BL.GPJ HC_CORP.GDT 9/25/14228 SH-4B AL35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 50+ 100+ Depthin Feet 20 60 0 10 20 40 80 Water Content in Percent 30 Boring Log B-101 LABTESTS STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE Sample Blows per Foot Drill Equipment: CME 850/Track/Mud RotaryHammer Type: SPT w/140 lb Autohammer/Shelby Tube Hole Diameter: 6 inchesLogged By: W. McDonald Reviewed By: C. Valdez 0 40 GraphicLog Soil DescriptionsUSCSClass Location: N 181715 E 1303607Approximate Ground Surface Elevation: 37 Feet Horizontal Datum: WA State Plane NorthVertical Datum: NGVD29 17946-01 Figure A-2 6/14 2/2 1. Refer to Figure A-1 for explanation of descriptions and symbols.2. Soil descriptions and stratum lines are interpretive and actual changes may be gradual.3. USCS designations are based on visual manual classification (ASTM D 2488) unless otherwisesupported by laboratory testing (ASTM D 2487). 4. Groundwater level, if indicated, is at time of drilling (ATD) or for date specified. Level may vary with time.NEW BORING LOG 1794601-BL.GPJ HC_CORP.GDT 9/25/14 SH-1 SH-2 S-1 SH-3 SH-4 993 ATD GS GP ML SP-SM OH PT-OH 2 inches of Sod over GRAVEL. (Soft to medium stiff), moist, brown SILT based on cuttings and drill action. Medium dense, wet, dark gray, slightlygravelly, slightly silty SAND with wood debris. (Soft), wet, gray, slightly sandy to sandy, organic SILT. 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 50+ 100+ Depthin Feet 20 60 0 10 20 40 80 Water Content in Percent 30 Boring Log B-102 LABTESTS STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE Sample Blows per Foot Drill Equipment: CME 850/Track/Mud RotaryHammer Type: SPT w/140 lb Autohammer/Shelby Tube Hole Diameter: 6 inchesLogged By: W. McDonald Reviewed By: C. Valdez 0 40 GraphicLog Soil DescriptionsUSCSClass Location: N 181668 E 1303229Approximate Ground Surface Elevation: 37 Feet Horizontal Datum: WA State Plane NorthVertical Datum: NGVD29 17946-01 Figure A-3 6/14 1/2 1. Refer to Figure A-1 for explanation of descriptions and symbols.2. Soil descriptions and stratum lines are interpretive and actual changes may be gradual.3. USCS designations are based on visual manual classification (ASTM D 2488) unless otherwisesupported by laboratory testing (ASTM D 2487). 4. Groundwater level, if indicated, is at time of drilling (ATD) or for date specified. Level may vary with time.NEW BORING LOG 1794601-BL.GPJ HC_CORP.GDT 9/25/14 S-3 S-4 S-5 S-6 3 0 4 30 2 9 6 32 4 9 9 38 GS AL AL AL GS PT-OH GW-GM Interbedded moist, dark brown to black PEAT and medium stiff to very stiff, slightly gravelly,very sandy, organic SILT. (cont'd) 6 inches of gray, fine to medium SAND. 6 inches of gray, fine to medium SAND. Very dense, wet, gray, slightly silty, sandyGRAVEL. Bottom of Boring at 55.5 Feet. Started 06/16/14. Completed 06/16/14. 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 50+ 100+ Depthin Feet 20 60 0 10 20 40 80 Water Content in Percent 30 Boring Log B-102 LABTESTS STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE Sample Blows per Foot Drill Equipment: CME 850/Track/Mud RotaryHammer Type: SPT w/140 lb Autohammer/Shelby Tube Hole Diameter: 6 inchesLogged By: W. McDonald Reviewed By: C. Valdez 0 40 GraphicLog Soil DescriptionsUSCSClass Location: N 181668 E 1303229Approximate Ground Surface Elevation: 37 Feet Horizontal Datum: WA State Plane NorthVertical Datum: NGVD29 17946-01 Figure A-3 6/14 2/2 1. Refer to Figure A-1 for explanation of descriptions and symbols.2. Soil descriptions and stratum lines are interpretive and actual changes may be gradual.3. USCS designations are based on visual manual classification (ASTM D 2488) unless otherwisesupported by laboratory testing (ASTM D 2487). 4. Groundwater level, if indicated, is at time of drilling (ATD) or for date specified. Level may vary with time.NEW BORING LOG 1794601-BL.GPJ HC_CORP.GDT 9/25/14142>>>> APPENDIX B Laboratory Testing Program 17946-01 September 26, 2014 APPENDIX B LABORATORY TESTING PROGRAM A laboratory testing program was performed for this study to evaluate the basic index and geotechnical engineering properties of the site soils. Both disturbed and relatively undisturbed samples were tested. The tests performed and the procedures followed are outlined below. Soil Classification Field Observation and Laboratory Analysis. Soil samples from the explorations were visually classified in the field and then taken to our laboratory where the classifications were verified in a relatively controlled laboratory environment. Field and laboratory observations include density/consistency, moisture condition, and grain size and plasticity estimates. The classifications of selected samples were checked by laboratory tests such as Atterberg limits determinations and grain size analyses. Classifications were made in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification (USC) System, ASTM D 2487, as presented on Figure B-1. Water Content Determinations Water contents were determined for most samples recovered in the explorations in general accordance with ASTM D 2216, as soon as possible following their arrival in our laboratory. Water contents were not determined for very small samples nor samples where large gravel contents would result in values considered unrepresentative. The results of these tests are plotted at the respective sample depth on the exploration logs. In addition, water contents are routinely determined for samples subjected to other testing. These are also presented on the exploration logs. Atterberg Limits We determined Atterberg limits for selected fine-grained soil samples. The liquid limit and plastic limit were determined in general accordance with ASTM D 4318-84. The results of the Atterberg limits analyses and the plasticity characteristics are summarized in the Liquid and Plastic Limits Test Report, Figures B-2 and B-3. This relates the plasticity index (liquid limit minus the plastic limit) to the liquid limit. The results of the Atterberg limits tests are shown graphically on the boring logs as well as where applicable on figures presenting various other test results. 200-Wash Three samples were subjected to a modified grain size classification known as a 200-wash. The samples were washed through the No. 200 mesh sieve to determine the relative percentages of coarse- and fine-grained material in the samples. The tests were performed in general accordance with ASTM D-1140. The results are presented on Figure B-2. That point represents the percentage of the sample finer than the No. 200 sieve. 17946-01 September 26, 2014 B-2 | PACCAR Renton Parts Distribution Center Constant Rate of Strain Consolidation Test (CRS) The one-dimensional consolidation test provides data for estimating settlement. The test was performed in general accordance with ASTM D 4186. A relatively undisturbed, fine-grained sample was carefully trimmed and fit into a rigid ring with porous stones placed on the top and bottom of the sample to allow drainage. Vertical strains were then applied continuously to the sample in such a way that the sample was allowed to partially consolidate under the given strain rate. Measurements were made of the compression of the sample (with time), the total stress upon the sample, and the excess pore pressure at the base of the sample throughout the test. Rebound was measured during the unloading phase. In general, an excess pore pressure ratio of 3 percent is targeted during loading, with an allowance of up to 15 percent without significant worry for strain rate effects. For selected tests, a constant load was applied which was left in-place for an extended period of time to record secondary consolidation characteristics. The test results plotted in terms of axial strain and coefficient of consolidation versus applied load (stress) are presented on Figures B-4 through B-20. 17946-01 September 26, 2014 C H C H A Li n e O H PtC L C L C L - M L O L M H M L or O L M H or O H SRF Grain Size (B-1).cdr 3/06 Fine-Grained Soils Coarse-Grained Soils Size of Opening In Inches 1230062004100428011/2601403/430205/8101/23/81/410820640460321.8.6.4100.3200.2.06.06.081.04.04.03.03.02.02.01.01.008.008.006.006.004.004.003.003.002.002.001.001Number of Mesh per Inch (US Standard)Grain Size in Millimetres COBBLES GRAVEL SAND SILT and CLAY Coarse-Grained Soils Fine-Grained Soils Grain Size in Millimetres G W M L G P G M G C S W S P S M S C Clean GRAVEL <5% fines Clean SAND <5% finesGRAVEL with >12% fines SAND with >12% fines GRAVEL >50% coarse fraction larger than No. 4 Soils with Liquid Limit <50% SAND >50% coarse fraction smaller than No. 4 Coarse-Grained Soils >50% larger than No. 200 sieve Fine-Grained Soils >50% smaller than No. 200 sieve ** G W and S W & 1<_ <_3 D >4 for G W60 D >6 for S W10 (D )30 2 DX D10 60 G M and S M Atterberg limits below A line with PI <4 G P and S P Clean GRAVEL or SAND not meeting requirements for G W and S W G C and S C Atterberg limits above A Line with PI >7 *Coarse-grained soils with percentage of fines between 5 and 12 are considered borderline cases requiring use of dual symbols. D , D , and D are the particles diameter of which 10, 30, and 60 percent, respectively, of the soil weight are finer.10 30 60 Soils with Liquid Limit >50% SILT SILTCLAY CLAYOrganic Organic Highly Organic Soils 60 50 40 30 20 10 00 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Liquid LimitPlasticity Index60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Unified Soil Classification (USC) System Soil Grain Size 317946-01 Figure B-1 6/14 B-101 SH-1 7.0 SM very silty SAND B-101 SH-2 23.0 B-101 SH-3 31.0 B-101 SH-4 33.0 B-101 SH-4A 34.7 39 32 38.2 ML SILT B-101 SH-4B 34.9 NP NP 227.9 PT Peat B-102 SH-1 17.0 B-102 SH-2 20.6 B-102 S-1 22.5 6.7 85.6 7.7 24.2 SP-SM slightly gravelly, slightly silty SAND B-102 SH-3 29.0 B-102 SH-4 31.0 ML sandy SILT B-102 S-3 39.0 7.6 40.9 51.6 89 46 88.4 OH slightly gravelly, very sandy SILT B-102 S-4 44.0 43 31 48.9 ML SILT B-102 S-5 49.0 177 128 141.7 OH organic SILT B-102 S-6 54.0 64.0 29.7 6.4 8.2 GW-GM slightly silty, sandy GRAVEL USCSGroup Symbol Soil DescriptionLiquidLimitPlasticLimit WaterContent (%) Borehole DepthSampleID % Fines% Sand% Gravel TABLE B-2: SUMMARY OF LABORATORY RESULTS CLIENT PACCAR PROJECT NUMBER 17946-01 PROJECT NAME PACCAR Renton Parts Distribution Center PROJECT LOCATION Renton, WA SELECT SUMMARY WITH DESC MOD01 - GINT STD US LAB.GDT - 9/25/14 15:23 - J:\DRAFTING\JOBS\17946\17946-01\1794601-BL.GPJ 177 ML or OL 70 7 30 90 110 60 Dashed line indicates the approximate upper limit boundary for natural soils 10 Remarks: Figure B- 3 39 NP 89 43 177 Organic Content: 6.8% Organic Content: 54.1% Organic Content: 16.8% Organic Content: 5.1% Organic Content: 32.0% 52 PL 50 Source: B-101 Source: B-101 Source: B-102 Source: B-102 Source: B-102 -200 7 NP 43 12 49 32 NP 46 31 128 USCS 30 20 10 PI Project:PACCAR Renton Parts Distribution Center Location:Renton, WA Depth: 34.7 Depth: 34.9 Depth: 39 Depth: 44 Depth: 49 17946-01 CL or OL ML or OL MH or OH Project:PACCAR Renton Parts Distribution Center 40 PLASTICITY INDEX50 Source: B-101 Source: B-101 Source: B-102 Source: B-102 Source: B-102 -200 Location:Renton, WA USCS SILT Peat slightly gravelly, very sandy SILT SILT organic SILTPLASTICITY INDEX39 NP 89 43 177 Organic Content: 6.8% Organic Content: 54.1% Organic Content: 16.8% Organic Content: 5.1% Organic Content: 32.0% 52 CL or OL Liquid and Plastic Limits Test Report 6/14 70 90 110 60 ML PT OH ML OH LIQUID LIMIT 10 Remarks: MH or OH SILT Peat slightly gravelly, very sandy SILT SILT organic SILT Location + Description LIQUID LIMIT 4 LL PLLocation + Description 30 7 4 CH or O H Dashed line indicates the approximate upper limit boundary for natural soils Client:PACCAR 50 40 30 20 10 PILL 50 7 NP 43 12 49 32 NP 46 31 128 CH or O H Client:PACCAR Sample No.: SH-4A Sample No.: SH-4B Sample No.: S-3 Sample No.: S-4 Sample No.: S-5 ATTERBERG LIMITS 1794601-BL.GPJ HC_CORP.GDT 9/25/14 CL-ML CL-ML Depth (ft)Before After LL PL PI 8 27.90 27.57 PT σ'vo (psf)Casagrande Height (inches)1.00 850 2200 3400 1200 Diameter (inches)2.50 Weight (ounces)4390.49 Total Unit Weight (pcf)120.19 Degree of Saturation (%)96.37 Void Ratio (e0)0.773 Job Number: 17946-01 07/14 Figure Very silt sand Initial Specimen Properties PACCAR Renton, WA Description USCS W.C. (%)Atterberg Limits Preconsolidation Pressure (psf) Strain Energy Min/Max Sample Quality Designation Axial strain, void ratio, and coefficient of consolidation versus logarithm of vertical effective stress for B-101 SH-1 CRS B-4 Sample Preparation and Comments: The specimen test was an intact soil sample which was extracted from the sampling tube by cutting and delaminating a section of the sample tube. The test was run with a room temperature between 73 and 76 degrees Fahrenheit. Terzaghi et al. (1996) C Very good to excellent Lunne et al. (1997)BJE 09/25/14 L:\Projects\Jobs\1794601\Final Report\Appendix B/B101 SH1.xlsx1.9 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.60 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000 Void RatioAxial Strain (%)Effective Stress (psf) 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000Cv (ft^2/day)Effective Stress (psf) Depth (ft)Before After LL PL PI 8 27.90 27.57 PT σ'vo (psf)Casagrande Height (inches)1.00 850 2200 3400 1200 Diameter (inches)2.50 Weight (ounces)4390.49 Total Unit Weight (pcf)120.19 Degree of Saturation (%)96.37 Void Ratio (e0)0.773 Job Number: 17946-01 07/14 Figure Very silt sand W.C. (%)Atterberg Limits Description USCS Preconsolidation Pressure (psf)Initial Specimen Properties Strain Energy Min/Max Sample Quality Designation Terzaghi et al. (1996)Lunne et al. 1997 C Very good to excellent Sample Preparation and Comments: The specimen test was an intact soil sample which was extracted from the sampling tube by cutting and delaminating a section of the sample tube. The test was run with a room temperature between 73 and 76 degrees Fahrenheit. PACCAR Renton, WA Axial strain and void ratio versus vertical effective stress for B-101 SH-1 CRS B-5BJE 09/25/14 L:\Projects\Jobs\1794601\Final Report\Appendix B/B101 SH1.xlsx1.9 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.60 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 Void RatioAxial Strain (%)Effective Stress (psf) 1 10 100 1,000 10,000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000M (ksf)Effective Stress (psf) Primary Loading Unload-Reload Depth (ft)Before After LL PL PI 8 27.90 27.57 PT σ'vo (psf)Casagrande Height (inches)1.00 850 2200 3400 1200 Diameter (inches)2.50 Weight (ounces)4390.49 Total Unit Weight (pcf)120.19 Degree of Saturation (%)96.37 Void Ratio (e0)0.773 Job Number: 17946-01 07/14 Figure C Very good to excellent Sample Preparation and Comments: The specimen test was an intact soil sample which was extracted from the sampling tube by cutting and delaminating a section of the sample tube. The test was run with a room temperature between 73 and 76 degrees Fahrenheit. PACCAR Renton, WA Void ratio versus logarithm of hydraulic conductivity B-101 SH-1 CRS B-6 Preconsolidation Pressure (psf)Initial Specimen Properties Strain Energy Min/Max Sample Quality Designation Terzaghi et al. (1996)Lunne et al. 1997 Very silt sand W.C. (%)Atterberg Limits Description USCS BJE 09/25/14 L:\Projects\Jobs\1794601\Final Report\Appendix B/B101 SH1.xlsx0.66 0.68 0.7 0.72 0.74 0.76 0.78 0.8 0.01 0.1 1 10 100Void RatioHydraulic Conductivity (ft/day) Depth (ft)Before After LL PL PI 8 27.90 27.57 PT σ'vo (psf)Casagrande Height (inches)1.00 850 2200 3400 1200 Diameter (inches)2.50 Weight (ounces)4390.49 Total Unit Weight (pcf)120.19 Degree of Saturation (%)96.37 Void Ratio (e0)0.773 Job Number: 17946-01 07/14 Figure Very silt sand W.C. (%)Atterberg Limits Description USCS Preconsolidation Pressure (psf)Initial Specimen Properties Strain Energy Min/Max Sample Quality Designation Terzaghi et al. (1996)Lunne et al. 1997 C Very good to excellent Sample Preparation and Comments: The specimen test was an intact soil sample which was extracted from the sampling tube by cutting and delaminating a section of the sample tube. The test was run with a room temperature between 73 and 76 degrees Fahrenheit. PACCAR Renton, WA Axial strain, void ratio, and coefficient of consolidation versus logarithm of vertical effective stress for B-101 SH-1 CRS B-7BJE 09/25/14 L:\Projects\Jobs\1794601\Final Report\Appendix B/B101 SH1.xlsx-3.0E-03 -2.0E-03 -1.0E-03 0.0E+00 1.0E-03 2.0E-03 3.0E-03 4.0E-03 5.0E-03 6.0E-03 7.0E-03 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000 Strain Rate (%/sec)Effective Stress (psf) -0.15 -0.1 -0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000 Pressure Ratio (%)Effective Stress (psf) Depth (ft)Before After LL PL PI 24 211.78 144.19 PT σ'vo (psf)Casagrande Height (inches)1.00 1500 2700 3000 3000 Diameter (inches)2.50 Weight (ounces)2640.19 Total Unit Weight (pcf)72.28 Degree of Saturation (%)98.05 Void Ratio (e0)4.061 Job Number: 17946-01 07/14 Figure Axial strain, void ratio, and coefficient of consolidation versus logarithm of vertical effective stress for B-101 SH-2 CRS B-8 Sample Preparation and Comments: The specimen test was an intact soil sample which was extracted from the sampling tube by cutting and delaminating a section of the sample tube. The test was run with a room temperature between 73 and 76 degrees Fahrenheit. Terzaghi et al. (1996) C Very good to excellent Lunne et al. (1997) Cohesive Peat Initial Specimen Properties PACCAR Renton, WA Description USCS W.C. (%)Atterberg Limits Preconsolidation Pressure (psf) Strain Energy Min/Max Sample Quality Designation initials MM/DD/YY location\filename.xls1.9 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.60 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000 Void RatioAxial Strain (%)Effective Stress (psf) 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000 1000000 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000Cv (ft^2/day)Effective Stress (psf) Depth (ft)Before After LL PL PI 24 211.78 144.19 PT σ'vo (psf)Casagrande Height (inches)1.00 1500 2700 3000 3000 Diameter (inches)2.50 Weight (ounces)2640.19 Total Unit Weight (pcf)72.28 Degree of Saturation (%)98.05 Void Ratio (e0)4.061 Job Number: 17946-01 07/14 Figure C Very good to excellent Sample Preparation and Comments: The specimen test was an intact soil sample which was extracted from the sampling tube by cutting and delaminating a section of the sample tube. The test was run with a room temperature between 73 and 76 degrees Fahrenheit. PACCAR Renton, WA Axial strain and void ratio versus vertical effective stress for B-101 SH-2 CRS B-9 Preconsolidation Pressure (psf)Initial Specimen Properties Strain Energy Min/Max Sample Quality Designation Terzaghi et al. (1996)Lunne et al. 1997 Cohesive Peat W.C. (%)Atterberg Limits Description USCS initials MM/DD/YY location\filename.xls1.9 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.60 5 10 15 20 25 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 Void RatioAxial Strain (%)Effective Stress (psf) 1 10 100 1,000 10,000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000M (ksf)Effective Stress (psf) Primary Loading Unload-Reload Depth (ft)Before After LL PL PI 24 211.78 144.19 PT σ'vo (psf)Casagrande Height (inches)1.00 1500 2700 3000 3000 Diameter (inches)2.50 Weight (ounces)2640.19 Total Unit Weight (pcf)72.28 Degree of Saturation (%)98.05 Void Ratio (e0)4.061 Job Number: 17946-01 07/14 Figure C Very good to excellent Sample Preparation and Comments: The specimen test was an intact soil sample which was extracted from the sampling tube by cutting and delaminating a section of the sample tube. The test was run with a room temperature between 73 and 76 degrees Fahrenheit. PACCAR Renton, WA Void ratio versus logarithm of hydraulic conductivity B-101 SH-2 CRS B-10 Preconsolidation Pressure (psf)Initial Specimen Properties Strain Energy Min/Max Sample Quality Designation Terzaghi et al. (1996)Lunne et al. 1997 Cohesive Peat W.C. (%)Atterberg Limits Description USCS initials MM/DD/YY location\filename.xls1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000Void RatioHydraulic Conductivity (ft/day) Depth (ft)Before After LL PL PI 24 211.78 144.19 PT σ'vo (psf)Casagrande Height (inches)1.00 1500 2700 3000 3000 Diameter (inches)2.50 Weight (ounces)2640.19 Total Unit Weight (pcf)72.28 Degree of Saturation (%)98.05 Void Ratio (e0)4.061 Job Number: 17946-01 07/14 Figure Cohesive Peat W.C. (%)Atterberg Limits Description USCS Preconsolidation Pressure (psf)Initial Specimen Properties Strain Energy Min/Max Sample Quality Designation Terzaghi et al. (1996)Lunne et al. 1997 C Very good to excellent Sample Preparation and Comments: The specimen test was an intact soil sample which was extracted from the sampling tube by cutting and delaminating a section of the sample tube. The test was run with a room temperature between 73 and 76 degrees Fahrenheit. PACCAR Renton, WA Axial strain, void ratio, and coefficient of consolidation versus logarithm of vertical effective stress for B-101 SH-2 CRS B-11initials MM/DD/YY location\filename.xls-3.0E-03 -2.0E-03 -1.0E-03 0.0E+00 1.0E-03 2.0E-03 3.0E-03 4.0E-03 5.0E-03 6.0E-03 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000 Strain Rate (%/sec)Effective Stress (psf) -0.6 -0.5 -0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000 Pressure Ratio (%)Effective Stress (psf) Depth (ft)Before After LL PL PI 24 211.78 144.19 PT σ'vo (psf)Casagrande Height (inches)1.00 1500 2700 3000 3000 Diameter (inches)2.50 Weight (ounces)2640.19 Total Unit Weight (pcf)72.28 Degree of Saturation (%)98.05 Void Ratio (e0)4.061 Job Number: 17946-01 07/14 Figure C Very good to excellent Sample Preparation and Comments: The specimen test was an intact soil sample which was extracted from the sampling tube by cutting and delaminating a section of the sample tube. The test was run with a room temperature between 73 and 76 degrees Fahrenheit. PACCAR Renton, WA Axial strain versus creep test logarithm of time for B-101 SH- 2 CRS B-12 Preconsolidation Pressure (psf)Initial Specimen Properties Strain Energy Min/Max Sample Quality Designation Terzaghi et al. (1996)Lunne et al. 1997 Cohesive Peat W.C. (%)Atterberg Limits Description USCS BJE 09/25/14 L:\Projects\Jobs\1794601\Final Report\Appendix B/B101 SH2.xlsx0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 1 10 100 1000 10000 Axial Strain (%)Creep Time 3 (min.) Depth (ft)Before After LL PL PI 34 116.05 74.66 OL σ'vo (psf)Casagrande Height (inches)1.00 2000 2700 3000 3000 Diameter (inches)2.50 Weight (ounces)2995.12 Total Unit Weight (pcf)81.99 Degree of Saturation (%)97.38 Void Ratio (e0)2.634 Job Number: 17946-01 07/14 Figure Axial strain, void ratio, and coefficient of consolidation versus logarithm of vertical effective stress for B-101 SH-4 CRS B-13 Sample Preparation and Comments: The specimen test was an intact soil sample which was extracted from the sampling tube by cutting and delaminating a section of the sample tube. The test was run with a room temperature between 73 and 76 degrees Fahrenheit. Terzaghi et al. (1996) C Good to fair Lunne et al. (1997) Organic Silt Initial Specimen Properties PACCAR Renton, WA Description USCS W.C. (%)Atterberg Limits Preconsolidation Pressure (psf) Strain Energy Min/Max Sample Quality Designation BJE 09/25/14 L:\Projects\Jobs\1794601\Final Report\Appendix B/B101 SH4.xlsx1.9 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.60 5 10 15 20 25 30 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000 Void RatioAxial Strain (%)Effective Stress (psf) 1 10 100 1000 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000Cv (ft^2/day)Effective Stress (psf) Depth (ft)Before After LL PL PI 34 116.05 74.66 OL σ'vo (psf)Casagrande Height (inches)1.00 2000 2700 3000 3000 Diameter (inches)2.50 Weight (ounces)2995.12 Total Unit Weight (pcf)81.99 Degree of Saturation (%)97.38 Void Ratio (e0)2.634 Job Number: 17946-01 07/14 Figure C Good to fair Sample Preparation and Comments: The specimen test was an intact soil sample which was extracted from the sampling tube by cutting and delaminating a section of the sample tube. The test was run with a room temperature between 73 and 76 degrees Fahrenheit. PACCAR Renton, WA Axial strain and void ratio versus vertical effective stress for B-101 SH-4 CRS B-14 Preconsolidation Pressure (psf)Initial Specimen Properties Strain Energy Min/Max Sample Quality Designation Terzaghi et al. (1996)Lunne et al. 1997 Organic Silt W.C. (%)Atterberg Limits Description USCS BJE 09/25/14 L:\Projects\Jobs\1794601\Final Report\Appendix B/B101 SH4.xlsx1.9 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.60 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 Void RatioAxial Strain (%)Effective Stress (psf) 1 10 100 1,000 10,000 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000M (ksf)Effective Stress (psf) Primary Loading Unload-Reload Depth (ft)Before After LL PL PI 34 116.05 74.66 OL σ'vo (psf)Casagrande Height (inches)1.00 2000 2700 3000 3000 Diameter (inches)2.50 Weight (ounces)2995.12 Total Unit Weight (pcf)81.99 Degree of Saturation (%)97.38 Void Ratio (e0)2.634 Job Number: 17946-01 07/14 Figure C Good to fair Sample Preparation and Comments: The specimen test was an intact soil sample which was extracted from the sampling tube by cutting and delaminating a section of the sample tube. The test was run with a room temperature between 73 and 76 degrees Fahrenheit. PACCAR Renton, WA Void ratio versus logarithm of hydraulic conductivity B-101 SH-4 CRS B-15 Preconsolidation Pressure (psf)Initial Specimen Properties Strain Energy Min/Max Sample Quality Designation Terzaghi et al. (1996)Lunne et al. 1997 Organic Silt W.C. (%)Atterberg Limits Description USCS initials MM/DD/YY location\filename.xls1.5 1.7 1.9 2.1 2.3 2.5 2.7 0.001 0.01 0.1 1Void RatioHydraulic Conductivity (ft/day) Depth (ft)Before After LL PL PI 34 116.05 74.66 OL σ'vo (psf)Casagrande Height (inches)1.00 2000 2700 3000 3000 Diameter (inches)2.50 Weight (ounces)2995.12 Total Unit Weight (pcf)81.99 Degree of Saturation (%)97.38 Void Ratio (e0)2.634 Job Number: 17946-01 07/14 Figure C Good to fair Sample Preparation and Comments: The specimen test was an intact soil sample which was extracted from the sampling tube by cutting and delaminating a section of the sample tube. The test was run with a room temperature between 73 and 76 degrees Fahrenheit. PACCAR Renton, WA Axial strain, void ratio, and coefficient of consolidation versus logarithm of vertical effective stress for B-101 SH-4 CRS B-16 Preconsolidation Pressure (psf)Initial Specimen Properties Strain Energy Min/Max Sample Quality Designation Terzaghi et al. (1996)Lunne et al. 1997 Organic Silt W.C. (%)Atterberg Limits Description USCS initials MM/DD/YY location\filename.xls-6.0E-03 -4.0E-03 -2.0E-03 0.0E+00 2.0E-03 4.0E-03 6.0E-03 8.0E-03 1.0E-02 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000 Strain Rate (%/sec)Effective Stress (psf) -3 -2.5 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000 Pressure Ratio (%)Effective Stress (psf) Depth (ft)Before After LL PL PI 34 39.41 31.17 OH σ'vo (psf)Casagrande Height (inches)1.00 1900 2200 3000 3000 Diameter (inches)2.50 Weight (ounces)4060.78 Total Unit Weight (pcf)111.17 Degree of Saturation (%)97.95 Void Ratio (e0)1.058 Job Number: 17946-01 07/14 Figure Axial strain, void ratio, and coefficient of consolidation versus logarithm of vertical effective stress for B-102 SH-4 CRS B-17 Sample Preparation and Comments: The specimen test was an intact soil sample which was extracted from the sampling tube by cutting and delaminating a section of the sample tube. The test was run with a room temperature between 73 and 76 degrees Fahrenheit. Terzaghi et al. (1996) D Poor Lunne et al. (1997) Oganic Silt Initial Specimen Properties PACCAR Renton, WA Description USCS W.C. (%)Atterberg Limits Preconsolidation Pressure (psf) Strain Energy Min/Max Sample Quality Designation initials MM/DD/YY location\filename.xls1.9 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.60 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000 Void RatioAxial Strain (%)Effective Stress (psf) 1 10 100 1000 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000Cv (ft^2/day)Effective Stress (psf) Depth (ft)Before After LL PL PI 34 39.41 31.17 OH σ'vo (psf)Casagrande Height (inches)1.00 1900 2200 3000 3000 Diameter (inches)2.50 Weight (ounces)4060.78 Total Unit Weight (pcf)111.17 Degree of Saturation (%)97.95 Void Ratio (e0)1.058 Job Number: 17946-01 07/14 Figure D Poor Sample Preparation and Comments: The specimen test was an intact soil sample which was extracted from the sampling tube by cutting and delaminating a section of the sample tube. The test was run with a room temperature between 73 and 76 degrees Fahrenheit. PACCAR Renton, WA Axial strain and void ratio versus vertical effective stress for B-102 SH-4 CRS B-18 Preconsolidation Pressure (psf)Initial Specimen Properties Strain Energy Min/Max Sample Quality Designation Terzaghi et al. (1996)Lunne et al. 1997 Oganic Silt W.C. (%)Atterberg Limits Description USCS initials MM/DD/YY location\filename.xls1.9 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.60 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 Void RatioAxial Strain (%)Effective Stress (psf) 1 10 100 1,000 10,000 100,000 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000M (ksf)Effective Stress (psf) Primary Loading Unload-Reload Depth (ft)Before After LL PL PI 34 39.41 31.17 OH σ'vo (psf)Casagrande Height (inches)1.00 1900 2200 3000 3000 Diameter (inches)2.50 Weight (ounces)4060.78 Total Unit Weight (pcf)111.17 Degree of Saturation (%)97.95 Void Ratio (e0)1.058 Job Number: 17946-01 07/14 Figure D Poor Sample Preparation and Comments: The specimen test was an intact soil sample which was extracted from the sampling tube by cutting and delaminating a section of the sample tube. The test was run with a room temperature between 73 and 76 degrees Fahrenheit. PACCAR Renton, WA Void ratio versus logarithm of hydraulic conductivity B-102 SH-4 CRS B-19 Preconsolidation Pressure (psf)Initial Specimen Properties Strain Energy Min/Max Sample Quality Designation Terzaghi et al. (1996)Lunne et al. 1997 Oganic Silt W.C. (%)Atterberg Limits Description USCS initials MM/DD/YY location\filename.xls0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1Void RatioHydraulic Conductivity (ft/day) Depth (ft)Before After LL PL PI 34 39.41 31.17 OH σ'vo (psf)Casagrande Height (inches)1.00 1900 2200 3000 3000 Diameter (inches)2.50 Weight (ounces)4060.78 Total Unit Weight (pcf)111.17 Degree of Saturation (%)97.95 Void Ratio (e0)1.058 Job Number: 17946-01 07/14 Figure Oganic Silt W.C. (%)Atterberg Limits Description USCS Preconsolidation Pressure (psf)Initial Specimen Properties Strain Energy Min/Max Sample Quality Designation Terzaghi et al. (1996)Lunne et al. 1997 D Poor Sample Preparation and Comments: The specimen test was an intact soil sample which was extracted from the sampling tube by cutting and delaminating a section of the sample tube. The test was run with a room temperature between 73 and 76 degrees Fahrenheit. PACCAR Renton, WA Axial strain, void ratio, and coefficient of consolidation versus logarithm of vertical effective stress for B-102 SH-4 CRS B-20initials MM/DD/YY location\filename.xls-1.5E-03 -1.0E-03 -5.0E-04 0.0E+00 5.0E-04 1.0E-03 1.5E-03 2.0E-03 2.5E-03 3.0E-03 3.5E-03 4.0E-03 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000 Strain Rate (%/sec)Effective Stress (psf) -0.3 -0.25 -0.2 -0.15 -0.1 -0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000 Pressure Ratio (%)Effective Stress (psf) APPENDIX C Historical Explorations 17946-01 September 26, 2014 APPENDIX C HISTORICAL EXPLORATIONS In addition to the explorations and laboratory test results presented in Appendices A and B, previous soil explorations and laboratory tests by Hart Crowser and others were used to gain an understanding of the subsurface conditions at the site. The locations of the explorations by others included in this appendix are shown on Figure 2. These logs and laboratory tests are presented for reference only and Hart Crowser is not responsible for their accuracy or completeness. 17946-01 September 26, 2014 3 2 16 17 2 4 4 2 4 3 5 2 2 6 7 13 4 3 3 4 GS 8 AL 9 19 3 5 3 6 5 5 5 8 4 8 6 8 ATD 126 5 NEW BORING LOG 1794600-BL.GPJ HC_CORP.GDT 4/25/13221 80 4020100 60 Depth in Feet 50+ B S-1 S-2 S-3 S-4 S-5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 0 1/3 4/13 1. Refer to Figure A-1 for explanation of descriptions and symbols. 2. Soil descriptions and stratum lines are interpretive and actual changes may be gradual. 3. USCS designations are based on visual manual classification (ASTM D 2488) unless otherwise supported by laboratory testing (ASTM D 2487). 4. Groundwater level, if indicated, is at time of drilling (ATD) or for date specified. Level may vary with time. Figure A-2 17946-00 Location: See Figure 2. Approximate Ground Surface Elevation: Feet Horizontal Datum: Vertical Datum: USCS Class Soil Descriptions Water Content in Percent 40 100+ Drill Equipment: Hollow Stem Auger Hammer Type: SPT w/140 Hammer/Rope & Cathead Hole Diameter: 6 inches Logged By: W. McDonald Reviewed By: B. Blanchette Blows per FootSample STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE LAB TESTS Boring Log HC-1 30 Graphic Log Loose, wet, gray, silty, fine SAND to SAND with scattered organic material. Medium dense, wet, gray, sandy GRAVEL, trace silt. Grades to medium dense. Driller started adding mud to auger. 2-inch PEAT layer.S-6 Medium dense, moist, dark gray to black, gravelly, silty SAND to sandy SILT. (FILL) 20 8 inches of Sod over (medium dense), wet, brown, gravelly, silty SAND. Stiff, moist, brown to gray, organic SILT to sandy SILT with scattered organic material and peat layers. Loose, moist to wet, gray, fine to medium SAND with slightly silty to silty, fine sand and peat seams and layers. SM/ML ML OL SP SM GP SM SM/ML SM A 6-inch PEAT layer. ST-1 S-11 S-10 S-9 S-8 S-7 S-12 Medium dense, moist to wet, gray to brown, very silty, fine SAND with sandy SILT and peat lenses. 11 7 6 7 26 17 23 30 15 Medium dense, moist to wet, gray to brown, very silty, fine SAND with sandy SILT and peat lenses. (cont'd) 7 GP ML SP 8 CL GP SC CL-ML SM/ML AL SP 9 7 8 50/6'' 18 35 50/6''NEW BORING LOG 1794600-BL.GPJ HC_CORP.GDT 4/25/13S-13 ML 19 60 Water Content in Percent SP 40 Abundant organic material. 0 30 20 Depth in Feet 100+ 50+45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 10 Graphic Log 2/3 4/13 1. Refer to Figure A-1 for explanation of descriptions and symbols. 2. Soil descriptions and stratum lines are interpretive and actual changes may be gradual. 3. USCS designations are based on visual manual classification (ASTM D 2488) unless otherwise supported by laboratory testing (ASTM D 2487). 4. Groundwater level, if indicated, is at time of drilling (ATD) or for date specified. Level may vary with time. Figure A-2 17946-00 Location: See Figure 2. Approximate Ground Surface Elevation: Feet Horizontal Datum: Vertical Datum: Soil Descriptions 400 Drill Equipment: Hollow Stem Auger Hammer Type: SPT w/140 Hammer/Rope & Cathead Hole Diameter: 6 inches Logged By: W. McDonald Reviewed By: B. Blanchette Blows per FootSample STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE LAB TESTS Boring Log HC-1 20 USCS Class (Medium dense), sandy GRAVEL to gravelly SAND. Very stiff, moist, gray, sandy SILT with trace gravel. 21 Medium dense to stiff, moist, gray-brown, clayey, fine to medium SAND to sandy CLAY. No recovery. Possibly pushing large gravel. Stiff, moist, gray to brown, silty CLAY with abundant organic material. S-14 Hard, moist, gray-brown SILT to CLAY. 80 Dense to very dense, moist to wet, brown, fine to coarse, sandy GRAVEL to gravelly SAND. Dense to very dense, wet, brown, fine to coarse SAND with trace gravel. Grades to fine to medium SAND with trace gravel. 5 S-15 S-16 S-17 S-18 S-19 S-20 13 3 6 4 15 12 S-21 Dense to very dense, moist, gray, slightly silty, fine SAND. S-22 SP-SM NEW BORING LOG 1794600-BL.GPJ HC_CORP.GDT 4/25/13Very stiff, moist, gray, sandy SILT with trace gravel. (cont'd) Bottom of Boring at 101.0 Feet. Started 04/07/13. Completed 04/07/13. S-23 S-24 5 15 26 8 23 50/6'' 26 9 Boring Log HC-1 LAB TESTS 30 USCS Class Graphic Log 17946-00 40 ML STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE 0 Sample Blows per Foot Drill Equipment: Hollow Stem Auger Hammer Type: SPT w/140 Hammer/Rope & Cathead Hole Diameter: 6 inches Logged By: W. McDonald Reviewed By: B. Blanchette Soil Descriptions 60 3/3 4/13 Depth in Feet 50+ Location: See Figure 2. Approximate Ground Surface Elevation: Feet Horizontal Datum: Vertical Datum: 100+20 1. Refer to Figure A-1 for explanation of descriptions and symbols. 2. Soil descriptions and stratum lines are interpretive and actual changes may be gradual. 3. USCS designations are based on visual manual classification (ASTM D 2488) unless otherwise supported by laboratory testing (ASTM D 2487). 4. Groundwater level, if indicated, is at time of drilling (ATD) or for date specified. Level may vary with time. 0 10 20 4090 95 100 105 110 115 120 125 130 135 80 Water Content in Percent Figure A-2 3 2 7 4 21 8 3 4 14 3 22 3 3 7 4 17 8 2 8 15 2 MH 3 SM SP-SM ML SP A AL GS AL 3 4 3 7 1 3 4 3 ATD 295 NEW BORING LOG 1794600-BL.GPJ HC_CORP.GDT 4/25/13S-1 S-9 0 6020 Depth in Feet 100+ 50+0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 SP 20 S-5 ST-1 S-8 S-7 B S-4 S-3 S-2 40 S-6 Blows per Foot 1/3 4/13 1. Refer to Figure A-1 for explanation of descriptions and symbols. 2. Soil descriptions and stratum lines are interpretive and actual changes may be gradual. 3. USCS designations are based on visual manual classification (ASTM D 2488) unless otherwise supported by laboratory testing (ASTM D 2487). 4. Groundwater level, if indicated, is at time of drilling (ATD) or for date specified. Level may vary with time. Figure A-3 17946-00 Location: See Figure 2. Approximate Ground Surface Elevation: Feet Horizontal Datum: Vertical Datum: USCS Class Soil DescriptionsGraphic Log 40 10 80 Water Content in Percent 0 Drill Equipment: Hollow Stem Auger Hammer Type: SPT w/140 Hammer/Rope & Cathead Hole Diameter: 6 inches Logged By: W. McDonald Reviewed By: B. Blanchette 30 Boring Log HC-2 LAB TESTS STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE Sample 6-inch silt zone. Driller started adding mud to auger. ST-2 SM Soft, moist, gray, sandy SILT with PEAT layers. 4-inch peat layer. PT-OH Loose, moist, gray, silty to very silty, fine SAND with trace peat. ML Loose, wet, gray, slightly silty to silty, fine SAND with PEAT laminations. Medium stiff, moist, brown PEAT with organic SILT layers. 6 inches of Sod over (medium dense), moist, brown, gravelly SAND. Loose to medium dense, wet, gray, gravelly SAND to sandy GRAVEL, trace silt. Dense, moist, brown, slightly silty, gravelly SAND. (FILL) Medium dense, wet, gray, silty, fine SAND. Medium stiff, moist, gray, slightly sandy SILT with scattered organic material. SM Medium stiff to stiff, moist, gray to black, gravelly, sandy SILT with scattered organic material. (FILL) 4 10 3 10 ST-4 2 S-12 ST-3 GP SP-SM S-11 S-10 4/13 6 10 8 6 9 21 16 Soil Descriptions 2/3 3 1. Refer to Figure A-1 for explanation of descriptions and symbols. 2. Soil descriptions and stratum lines are interpretive and actual changes may be gradual. 3. USCS designations are based on visual manual classification (ASTM D 2488) unless otherwise supported by laboratory testing (ASTM D 2487). 4. Groundwater level, if indicated, is at time of drilling (ATD) or for date specified. Level may vary with time. Figure A-3 17946-00 Location: See Figure 2. Approximate Ground Surface Elevation: Feet Horizontal Datum: Vertical Datum:NEW BORING LOG 1794600-BL.GPJ HC_CORP.GDT 4/25/135 6 7 4 26 4 21 9 9 6 14 6 5 USCS Class Graphic Log 4 111 S-13 4S-14 S-21 Depth in Feet 100+ 50+45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 7 60 0 S-15 S-16 S-17 S-18 S-19 S-20 400 Drill Equipment: Hollow Stem Auger Hammer Type: SPT w/140 Hammer/Rope & Cathead Hole Diameter: 6 inches Logged By: W. McDonald Reviewed By: B. Blanchette Blows per FootSample STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE LAB TESTS Boring Log HC-2 20 Water Content in Percent 80 40201030 6-inch peat layer. 2-inch peat layer. SP-SM CL Medium dense, moist, gray, silty, fine SAND with scattered organic material and PEAT layers. Dense, moist to wet, gray, slightly silty SAND with occasional gravel. Dense, moist, gray SAND with fine, silty, sand interbeds. (cont'd) SM SP AL ST-5 9 5 6 GP 2-inch peat layer. Medium stiff to hard, moist, gray, silty CLAY with occasional fine sand seams. Medium dense, moist, gray, silty, fine SAND with organic Silt and Peat layers. (Dense), wet, slightly silty, sandy GRAVEL. SM 4090 95 100 105 110 115 120 125 130 135 50+ 100+ Depth in Feet 20 60 0 STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE LAB TESTS Boring Log HC-2 301020 NEW BORING LOG 1794600-BL.GPJ HC_CORP.GDT 4/25/13S-22 80 3S-23 S-24 S-25 S-26 14 4 4 16 16 19 3 19 36 37 15 38 50/5'' 40SP CL Medium stiff to hard, moist, gray, silty CLAY with occasional fine sand seams. (cont'd) Very dense, moist, gray, fine SAND with trace silt and gravel. Very dense, moist to wet, brown, sandy GRAVEL. Bottom of Boring at 111.5 Feet. Started 04/05/13. Completed 04/05/13. Water Content in Percent 17946-00 3/3 4/13 1. Refer to Figure A-1 for explanation of descriptions and symbols. 2. Soil descriptions and stratum lines are interpretive and actual changes may be gradual. 3. USCS designations are based on visual manual classification (ASTM D 2488) unless otherwise supported by laboratory testing (ASTM D 2487). 4. Groundwater level, if indicated, is at time of drilling (ATD) or for date specified. Level may vary with time. Figure A-3 GP Location: See Figure 2. Approximate Ground Surface Elevation: Feet Horizontal Datum: Vertical Datum: 0 USCS Class Sample Drill Equipment: Hollow Stem Auger Hammer Type: SPT w/140 Hammer/Rope & Cathead Hole Diameter: 6 inches Logged By: W. McDonald Reviewed By: B. Blanchette Blows per Foot 40 Graphic Log Soil Descriptions ATTACHMENT 1 Cone Penetration Test Data 17946-01 September 26, 2014 Hart Crowser - PACCAR Operator: Pemble Sounding: CPT-101 Cone Used: DDG1263 CPT Date/Time: 6/16/2014 10:43:30 AM Location: Paccar Renton Job Number: 17946-01 Maximum Depth = 43.64 feet Depth Increment = 0.164 feet *Soil behavior type and SPT based on data from UBC-1983 Tip Resistance Qt TSF 40000 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Depth(ft) Pore Pressure Pw PSI 30-10 Friction Ratio Fs/Qt (%)100 Soil Behavior Type* Zone: UBC-1983 1 sensitive fine grained 2 organic material 3 clay 4 silty clay to clay 5 clayey silt to silty clay 6 sandy silt to clayey silt 7 silty sand to sandy silt 8 sand to silty sand 9 sand 10 gravelly sand to sand 11 very stiff fine grained (*) 12 sand to clayey sand (*) 120 SPT N* 60% Hammer 700 Pressure(psi) Time: (seconds) Paccar Hart Crowser - PACCAR Operator Pemble Sounding: CPT-102 Cone Used: DDG1263 CPT Date/Time: 6/16/2014 9:40:36 AM Location: Paccar Renton Job Number: 17946-01 Maximum Pressure = 5.061 psi 1 10 100 1000 2 3 4 5 6 Selected Depth(s) (feet) 20.013 Hart Crowser - PACCAR Operator: Pemble Sounding: CPT-102 Cone Used: DDG1263 CPT Date/Time: 6/16/2014 9:40:36 AM Location: Paccar Renton Job Number: 17946-01 Maximum Depth = 21.98 feet Depth Increment = 0.164 feet *Soil behavior type and SPT based on data from UBC-1983 Tip Resistance Qt TSF 40000 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Depth(ft) Pore Pressure Pw PSI 30-10 Friction Ratio Fs/Qt (%)100 Soil Behavior Type* Zone: UBC-1983 1 sensitive fine grained 2 organic material 3 clay 4 silty clay to clay 5 clayey silt to silty clay 6 sandy silt to clayey silt 7 silty sand to sandy silt 8 sand to silty sand 9 sand 10 gravelly sand to sand 11 very stiff fine grained (*) 12 sand to clayey sand (*) 120 SPT N* 60% Hammer 700 Hart Crowser - PACCAR Operator: Pemble Sounding: CPT-102B Cone Used: DDG1263 CPT Date/Time: 6/16/2014 10:21:25 AM Location: Paccar Renton Job Number: 17946-01 Maximum Depth = 2.79 feet Depth Increment = 0.164 feet *Soil behavior type and SPT based on data from UBC-1983 Tip Resistance Qt TSF 40000 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Depth(ft) Pore Pressure Pw PSI 30-10 Friction Ratio Fs/Qt (%)100 Soil Behavior Type* Zone: UBC-1983 1 sensitive fine grained 2 organic material 3 clay 4 silty clay to clay 5 clayey silt to silty clay 6 sandy silt to clayey silt 7 silty sand to sandy silt 8 sand to silty sand 9 sand 10 gravelly sand to sand 11 very stiff fine grained (*) 12 sand to clayey sand (*) 120 SPT N* 60% Hammer 700 Hart Crowser - PACCAR Operator: Pemble Sounding: CPT-102C Cone Used: DDG1263 CPT Date/Time: 6/16/2014 10:27:34 AM Location: Paccar Renton Job Number: 17946-01 Maximum Depth = 2.13 feet Depth Increment = 0.164 feet *Soil behavior type and SPT based on data from UBC-1983 Tip Resistance Qt TSF 40000 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Depth(ft) Pore Pressure Pw PSI 30-10 Friction Ratio Fs/Qt (%)100 Soil Behavior Type* Zone: UBC-1983 1 sensitive fine grained 2 organic material 3 clay 4 silty clay to clay 5 clayey silt to silty clay 6 sandy silt to clayey silt 7 silty sand to sandy silt 8 sand to silty sand 9 sand 10 gravelly sand to sand 11 very stiff fine grained (*) 12 sand to clayey sand (*) 120 SPT N* 60% Hammer 700 Hart Crowser - PACCAR Operator: Pemble Sounding: CPT-103 Cone Used: DDG1263 CPT Date/Time: 6/18/2014 9:03:22 AM Location: Renton Job Number: 17946-01 Maximum Depth = 36.94 feet Depth Increment = 0.164 feet *Soil behavior type and SPT based on data from UBC-1983 Tip Resistance Qt TSF 40000 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Depth(ft) Pore Pressure Pw PSI 30-10 Friction Ratio Fs/Qt (%)100 Soil Behavior Type* Zone: UBC-1983 1 sensitive fine grained 2 organic material 3 clay 4 silty clay to clay 5 clayey silt to silty clay 6 sandy silt to clayey silt 7 silty sand to sandy silt 8 sand to silty sand 9 sand 10 gravelly sand to sand 11 very stiff fine grained (*) 12 sand to clayey sand (*) 120 SPT N* 60% Hammer 700 Hart Crowser - PACCAR Operator: Pemble Sounding: CPT-104 Cone Used: DDG1263 CPT Date/Time: 6/16/2014 12:05:47 PM Location: Paccar Renton Job Number: 17946-01 Maximum Depth = 2.46 feet Depth Increment = 0.164 feet *Soil behavior type and SPT based on data from UBC-1983 Tip Resistance Qt TSF 40000 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Depth(ft) Pore Pressure Pw PSI 30-10 Friction Ratio Fs/Qt (%)100 Soil Behavior Type* Zone: UBC-1983 1 sensitive fine grained 2 organic material 3 clay 4 silty clay to clay 5 clayey silt to silty clay 6 sandy silt to clayey silt 7 silty sand to sandy silt 8 sand to silty sand 9 sand 10 gravelly sand to sand 11 very stiff fine grained (*) 12 sand to clayey sand (*) 120 SPT N* 60% Hammer 700 Pressure(psi) Time: (seconds) Paccar Hart Crowser - PACCAR Operator Pemble Sounding: CPT-104B Cone Used: DDG1263 CPT Date/Time: 6/16/2014 12:13:29 PM Location: Paccar Renton Job Number: 17946-01 Maximum Pressure = 17.968 psi 1 10 100 1000 10000 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Selected Depth(s) (feet) 27.067 Hart Crowser - PACCAR Operator: Pemble Sounding: CPT-104B Cone Used: DDG1263 CPT Date/Time: 6/16/2014 12:13:29 PM Location: Paccar Renton Job Number: 17946-01 Maximum Depth = 26.57 feet Depth Increment = 0.164 feet *Soil behavior type and SPT based on data from UBC-1983 Tip Resistance Qt TSF 40000 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Depth(ft) Pore Pressure Pw PSI 30-10 Friction Ratio Fs/Qt (%)100 Soil Behavior Type* Zone: UBC-1983 1 sensitive fine grained 2 organic material 3 clay 4 silty clay to clay 5 clayey silt to silty clay 6 sandy silt to clayey silt 7 silty sand to sandy silt 8 sand to silty sand 9 sand 10 gravelly sand to sand 11 very stiff fine grained (*) 12 sand to clayey sand (*) 120 SPT N* 60% Hammer 700 Pressure(psi) Time: (seconds) Paccar Hart Crowser - PACCAR Operator Pemble Sounding: CPT-104C Cone Used: DDG1263 CPT Date/Time: 6/18/2014 11:28:52 AM Location: Renton Job Number: 17946-01 Maximum Pressure = 15.325 psi 1 10 100 1000 10000 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 Selected Depth(s) (feet) 27.067 Hart Crowser - PACCAR Operator: Pemble Sounding: CPT-104C Cone Used: DDG1263 CPT Date/Time: 6/18/2014 11:28:52 AM Location: Renton Job Number: 17946-01 Maximum Depth = 31.82 feet Depth Increment = 0.164 feet *Soil behavior type and SPT based on data from UBC-1983 Tip Resistance Qt TSF 40000 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Depth(ft) Pore Pressure Pw PSI 30-10 Friction Ratio Fs/Qt (%)100 Soil Behavior Type* Zone: UBC-1983 1 sensitive fine grained 2 organic material 3 clay 4 silty clay to clay 5 clayey silt to silty clay 6 sandy silt to clayey silt 7 silty sand to sandy silt 8 sand to silty sand 9 sand 10 gravelly sand to sand 11 very stiff fine grained (*) 12 sand to clayey sand (*) 120 SPT N* 60% Hammer 700 Hart Crowser - PACCAR Operator: Pemble Sounding: CPT-105 Cone Used: DDG1263 CPT Date/Time: 6/18/2014 9:57:00 AM Location: Renton Job Number: 17946-01 Maximum Depth = 0.49 feet Depth Increment = 0.164 feet *Soil behavior type and SPT based on data from UBC-1983 Tip Resistance Qt TSF 40000 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Depth(ft) Pore Pressure Pw PSI 30-10 Friction Ratio Fs/Qt (%)100 Soil Behavior Type* Zone: UBC-1983 1 sensitive fine grained 2 organic material 3 clay 4 silty clay to clay 5 clayey silt to silty clay 6 sandy silt to clayey silt 7 silty sand to sandy silt 8 sand to silty sand 9 sand 10 gravelly sand to sand 11 very stiff fine grained (*) 12 sand to clayey sand (*) 120 SPT N* 60% Hammer 700 Hart Crowser - PACCAR Operator: Pemble Sounding: CPT-105B Cone Used: DDG1263 CPT Date/Time: 6/18/2014 10:00:05 AM Location: Renton Job Number: 17946-01 Maximum Depth = 0.49 feet Depth Increment = 0.164 feet *Soil behavior type and SPT based on data from UBC-1983 Tip Resistance Qt TSF 40000 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Depth(ft) Pore Pressure Pw PSI 30-10 Friction Ratio Fs/Qt (%)100 Soil Behavior Type* Zone: UBC-1983 1 sensitive fine grained 2 organic material 3 clay 4 silty clay to clay 5 clayey silt to silty clay 6 sandy silt to clayey silt 7 silty sand to sandy silt 8 sand to silty sand 9 sand 10 gravelly sand to sand 11 very stiff fine grained (*) 12 sand to clayey sand (*) 120 SPT N* 60% Hammer 700 Hart Crowser - PACCAR Operator: Pemble Sounding: CPT-105C Cone Used: DDG1263 CPT Date/Time: 6/18/2014 10:03:13 AM Location: Renton Job Number: 17946-01 Maximum Depth = 2.30 feet Depth Increment = 0.164 feet *Soil behavior type and SPT based on data from UBC-1983 Tip Resistance Qt TSF 40000 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Depth(ft) Pore Pressure Pw PSI 30-10 Friction Ratio Fs/Qt (%)100 Soil Behavior Type* Zone: UBC-1983 1 sensitive fine grained 2 organic material 3 clay 4 silty clay to clay 5 clayey silt to silty clay 6 sandy silt to clayey silt 7 silty sand to sandy silt 8 sand to silty sand 9 sand 10 gravelly sand to sand 11 very stiff fine grained (*) 12 sand to clayey sand (*) 120 SPT N* 60% Hammer 700 Hart Crowser - PACCAR Operator: Pemble Sounding: CPT-105D Cone Used: DDG1263 CPT Date/Time: 6/18/2014 10:10:26 AM Location: Renton Job Number: 17946-01 Maximum Depth = 20.18 feet Depth Increment = 0.164 feet *Soil behavior type and SPT based on data from UBC-1983 Tip Resistance Qt TSF 40000 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Depth(ft) Pore Pressure Pw PSI 30-10 Friction Ratio Fs/Qt (%)100 Soil Behavior Type* Zone: UBC-1983 1 sensitive fine grained 2 organic material 3 clay 4 silty clay to clay 5 clayey silt to silty clay 6 sandy silt to clayey silt 7 silty sand to sandy silt 8 sand to silty sand 9 sand 10 gravelly sand to sand 11 very stiff fine grained (*) 12 sand to clayey sand (*) 120 SPT N* 60% Hammer 700 Hart Crowser - PACCAR Operator: Pemble Sounding: CPT-106 Cone Used: DDG1263 CPT Date/Time: 6/18/2014 9:30:02 AM Location: Renton Job Number: 17946-01 Maximum Depth = 42.68 feet Depth Increment = 0.164 feet *Soil behavior type and SPT based on data from UBC-1983 Tip Resistance Qt TSF 40000 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Depth(ft) Pore Pressure Pw PSI 30-10 Friction Ratio Fs/Qt (%)100 Soil Behavior Type* Zone: UBC-1983 1 sensitive fine grained 2 organic material 3 clay 4 silty clay to clay 5 clayey silt to silty clay 6 sandy silt to clayey silt 7 silty sand to sandy silt 8 sand to silty sand 9 sand 10 gravelly sand to sand 11 very stiff fine grained (*) 12 sand to clayey sand (*) 120 SPT N* 60% Hammer 700 Hart Crowser - PACCAR Operator: Pemble Sounding: CPT-107 Cone Used: DDG1263 CPT Date/Time: 6/18/2014 11:00:28 AM Location: Renton Job Number: 17946-01 Maximum Depth = 3.61 feet Depth Increment = 0.164 feet *Soil behavior type and SPT based on data from UBC-1983 Tip Resistance Qt TSF 40000 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Depth(ft) Pore Pressure Pw PSI 30-10 Friction Ratio Fs/Qt (%)100 Soil Behavior Type* Zone: UBC-1983 1 sensitive fine grained 2 organic material 3 clay 4 silty clay to clay 5 clayey silt to silty clay 6 sandy silt to clayey silt 7 silty sand to sandy silt 8 sand to silty sand 9 sand 10 gravelly sand to sand 11 very stiff fine grained (*) 12 sand to clayey sand (*) 120 SPT N* 60% Hammer 700 Hart Crowser - PACCAR Operator: Pemble Sounding: CPT-107B Cone Used: DDG1263 CPT Date/Time: 6/18/2014 11:10:33 AM Location: Renton Job Number: 17946-01 Maximum Depth = 20.70 feet Depth Increment = 0.164 feet *Soil behavior type and SPT based on data from UBC-1983 Tip Resistance Qt TSF 40000 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Depth(ft) Pore Pressure Pw PSI 30-10 Friction Ratio Fs/Qt (%)100 Soil Behavior Type* Zone: UBC-1983 1 sensitive fine grained 2 organic material 3 clay 4 silty clay to clay 5 clayey silt to silty clay 6 sandy silt to clayey silt 7 silty sand to sandy silt 8 sand to silty sand 9 sand 10 gravelly sand to sand 11 very stiff fine grained (*) 12 sand to clayey sand (*) 120 SPT N* 60% Hammer 700 Hart Crowser - PACCAR Operator: Pemble Sounding: CPT-108 Cone Used: DDG1263 CPT Date/Time: 6/16/2014 11:30:41 AM Location: Paccar Renton Job Number: 17946-01 Maximum Depth = 34.45 feet Depth Increment = 0.164 feet *Soil behavior type and SPT based on data from UBC-1983 Tip Resistance Qt TSF 40000 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Depth(ft) Pore Pressure Pw PSI 30-10 Friction Ratio Fs/Qt (%)100 Soil Behavior Type* Zone: UBC-1983 1 sensitive fine grained 2 organic material 3 clay 4 silty clay to clay 5 clayey silt to silty clay 6 sandy silt to clayey silt 7 silty sand to sandy silt 8 sand to silty sand 9 sand 10 gravelly sand to sand 11 very stiff fine grained (*) 12 sand to clayey sand (*) 120 SPT N* 60% Hammer 700 Hart Crowser - PACCAR Operator: Pemble Sounding: CPT-109 Cone Used: DDG1263 CPT Date/Time: 6/18/2014 10:29:03 AM Location: Renton Job Number: 17946-01 Maximum Depth = 2.62 feet Depth Increment = 0.164 feet *Soil behavior type and SPT based on data from UBC-1983 Tip Resistance Qt TSF 40000 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Depth(ft) Pore Pressure Pw PSI 30-10 Friction Ratio Fs/Qt (%)100 Soil Behavior Type* Zone: UBC-1983 1 sensitive fine grained 2 organic material 3 clay 4 silty clay to clay 5 clayey silt to silty clay 6 sandy silt to clayey silt 7 silty sand to sandy silt 8 sand to silty sand 9 sand 10 gravelly sand to sand 11 very stiff fine grained (*) 12 sand to clayey sand (*) 120 SPT N* 60% Hammer 700 Hart Crowser - PACCAR Operator: Pemble Sounding: CPT-109B Cone Used: DDG1263 CPT Date/Time: 6/18/2014 10:36:15 AM Location: Renton Job Number: 17946-01 Maximum Depth = 4.43 feet Depth Increment = 0.164 feet *Soil behavior type and SPT based on data from UBC-1983 Tip Resistance Qt TSF 40000 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Depth(ft) Pore Pressure Pw PSI 30-10 Friction Ratio Fs/Qt (%)100 Soil Behavior Type* Zone: UBC-1983 1 sensitive fine grained 2 organic material 3 clay 4 silty clay to clay 5 clayey silt to silty clay 6 sandy silt to clayey silt 7 silty sand to sandy silt 8 sand to silty sand 9 sand 10 gravelly sand to sand 11 very stiff fine grained (*) 12 sand to clayey sand (*) 120 SPT N* 60% Hammer 700 Hart Crowser - PACCAR Operator: Pemble Sounding: CPT-109C Cone Used: DDG1263 CPT Date/Time: 6/18/2014 10:44:46 AM Location: Renton Job Number: 17946-01 Maximum Depth = 4.43 feet Depth Increment = 0.164 feet *Soil behavior type and SPT based on data from UBC-1983 Tip Resistance Qt TSF 40000 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Depth(ft) Pore Pressure Pw PSI 30-10 Friction Ratio Fs/Qt (%)100 Soil Behavior Type* Zone: UBC-1983 1 sensitive fine grained 2 organic material 3 clay 4 silty clay to clay 5 clayey silt to silty clay 6 sandy silt to clayey silt 7 silty sand to sandy silt 8 sand to silty sand 9 sand 10 gravelly sand to sand 11 very stiff fine grained (*) 12 sand to clayey sand (*) 120 SPT N* 60% Hammer 700