Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRS_Southport_West_Geotechnical_Report_MSPR_220130_v1 www.haleyaldrich.com REPORT ON SOUTHPORT WEST OFFICE EXPANSION MASTER SITE PLAN APPROVAL PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT RENTON, WASHINGTON by Haley & Aldrich Seattle, Washington for SECO Development, Inc. Renton, Washington File No. 0203113-002 January 2022 HALEY & ALDRICH3131 ELLIOTT AVENUE SUITE 600 SEATTLE, WA 98121 206.324.9530 www.haleyaldrich.com REPORT ON SOUTHPORT WEST OFFICE EXPANSION MASTER SITE PLAN APPROVAL PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT RENTON, WASHINGTON PREPARED FOR SECO DEVELOPMENT, INC. RENTON, WASHINGTON PREPARED BY: Alessandra Hossley, P.E. Project Geotechnical Engineer Haley & Aldrich, Inc. REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY: Brice Exley, P.E. Principal Geotechnical Engineer Haley & Aldrich, Inc. PRELIM IN A RY 1 HALEY & ALDRICH 3131 Elliott Avenue Suite 600 Seattle, WA 98121 206.324.9530 26 January 2022 File No. 0203113-002 SECO Development, Inc. 1133 Lake Washington Boulevard N. Suite 90 Renton, Washington 98056 Attention: Derek Janke Subject: Southport West Office Expansion Master Site Plan Approval Preliminary Geotechnical Report Renton, Washington Dear Derek Janke: This geotechnical engineering report presents information for use in support of the City of Renton Master Site Plan Approval (MSA) application and Environmental Review (ECF) for the commercial development and future structures located at the existing Puget Sound Energy (PSE) Shuffleton site in Renton, Washington. The MSA application and ECF is for the planned development of the existing PSE site by SECO Development, Inc. (SECO), and renamed “Southport West”. Presented below are our preliminary geotechnical recommendations for site development. Purpose and Scope of this Study The purposes of this study were to assess the Southport West site from a geotechnical perspective in support of the MSA application and ECF for an aboveground parking structure and six new buildings as required by the City of Renton’s Department of Community and Economic Development department. Our scope for this study included the following:  corresponding with the design team;  reviewing historical geotechnical explorations and reports; and  preparation of this report with preliminary geotechnical recommendations and considerations regarding site development. We completed this work in general accordance with our contract dated December 15, 2021. This report is for the exclusive use of SECO Development and their design consultants for specific application to the site, MSA application, and ECF. We completed the work according to generally accepted geotechnical practices in the same or similar localities, related to the nature of the work accomplished, at the time the services were accomplished. We make no warranty, express or implied. www.haleyaldrich.com 2 Project Understanding The site is generally about 1,000 feet south of the southern edge of Lake Washington, in Renton, Washington, south of the existing Southport Hotel and Office developments. Existing site survey provided by ZGF Architects, dated November 30, 2021, is provided in Attachment 1. We understand that projects included in the MSA application and ECF consist of an aboveground parking structure attached to four new office towers, a fifth office tower in the southwest corner of the site, and a residential tower in the southeast corner of the site. The parking structure and all office towers are planned to be approximately 6 and 9 levels, respectively, and the residential tower is planned to be 8 levels. The proposed footprint and location of each of these buildings is illustrated in Attachment 2. The MSA and ECF are used to approve future-use plans of the Southport West Office Expansion. We are not making final geotechnical design recommendations for any specific infrastructure, but rather assessing the commercial and residential development site for general subsurface conditions and reporting selected geotechnical considerations for the permitting, preliminary design, and cost estimating. A full geotechnical engineering design study is required as part of final design. Generalized Subsurface Conditions Our understanding of the subsurface conditions that may be encountered at the Southport West site is based on a series of previous explorations and laboratory testing programs performed by Hart Crowser and others at adjacent sites. Historical exploration logs and laboratory test results are provided in Appendix A. Over 35 explorations were completed on the surrounding sites, including the Southport Hotel, Office, Park Avenue Extension, and Bristol One and Bristol Two, and adjacent Boeing building site developments, to depths generally between 70 and 130 feet. Generally, the soil units consist of a loose to medium dense sand with interbedded silt layers, underlain by soft to medium dense silt, then medium dense to dense sand, very soft silt and clay, and finally dense to very dense silty sand. The medium dense to dense sand could be considered a bearing unit for deep foundations. SOIL CONDITIONS The sequence of soils generally encountered in the historical explorations surrounding the area of the proposed development site, starting at the ground surface and moving downward, consist of the following soils:  Very loose to medium dense, silty Sand. We observed this layer in the historical explorations extending from the existing grade to a depth of about 20 to 50 feet below the existing ground surface. Sand was primarily observed in this layer with only a few thin interbedded layers of soft silt. This sand layer likely has the potential to liquefy during a significant seismic event. Loose sand layers with varying fines content generally do not provide adequate foundation support in its current condition.  Soft to medium stiff and stiff Silt and Clay. This layer was observed in most of the historical explorations with thicknesses varying from 0 to about 35 feet thick and is also likely unsuitable for foundation support.  Medium dense to dense, slightly silty Sand. This sand layer was observed in a majority of the historical borings and ranged in thickness from about 10 to 45 feet. Medium dense to dense sand is generally considered a suitable bearing unit for deep foundations. 3  Very soft to medium stiff and stiff Silt and Clay. This layer was observed in several explorations closer to Lake Washington, north of the Southport West site. We observed this layer in one exploration out of the seven explorations directly adjacent to the northern edge of the site, with a thickness of about 5 feet. Soft, compressible silt and clay layers are likely to cause elastic and/or consolidation (time-dependent) settlement of deep foundations.  Dense to very dense, slightly silty Sand. This layer was observed in the historical explorations approximately 75 to 95 feet below existing grade, closest to the site. This dense sand layer becomes deeper further north from the site. Medium dense to dense sand is generally considered a suitable bearing unit for deep foundations. Note that the depth to, and thickness of, the soil layers listed above varies across the historical explorations, indicating the likelihood of variable stratigraphy at this site. Additional explorations will be required within the footing of the buildings to provide final geotechnical design recommendations. GROUNDWATER Groundwater was observed in the historical explorations at Southport at depths ranging from 3 to 10 feet below existing grade. Note that the groundwater levels were identified at the time of the explorations, and that the groundwater elevation will generally be tied primarily to the level of Lake Washington, which varies by only about 3 feet annually. The groundwater gradient is from south or southeast to north or northeast, as groundwater flows from the upland areas toward the lake. Environmental Review Considerations The City of Renton requires a geotechnical study for the ECF submittal addressing considerations for slope stability and setbacks, foundation design, retaining wall design, material selection, and all other pertinent elements. The project site for the proposed development is relatively flat with no existing steep slopes; therefore, we do not anticipate the need for slope setback recommendations or slope stability analyses to be performed for the final design phase. General site grading recommendations are provided in the Site Drainage section of this report. Other elements required for the ECF submittal are addressed in subsequent sections of this report. Geotechnical Engineering Design Considerations This section of the report presents our considerations for the geotechnical aspects of design and construction on the project site. In this section, we make preliminary geotechnical engineering recommendations with the understanding that more analyses will need to be performed to finalize these recommendations. We have developed our recommendations based on our current understanding of the project and the subsurface conditions encountered in historical explorations by us and others. The recommendations we give in this section should be used for preliminary engineering and cost estimating purposes only. If the nature or location of the development is different than we have assumed, we should be notified so we can change or confirm our recommendations. SEISMIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS The site is located in a seismically active area. In this section, we describe the seismic setting at the project site and discuss the possibility of liquefaction and its effects. 4 We understand that the proposed buildings onsite will have a period more than 0.5 seconds, which will require a site-specific hazard analysis per the 2018 International Building Code to determine the site’s seismic hazard. As such, a code-based seismic design spectra is not available for design. However, based on the Chapter 21 ASCE 7-16 site class coefficients used to establish the minimum bounding spectrum for the site-specific hazard analysis, we anticipate that the design coefficients may be on the order of:  SDS ≈ 0.9  SD1 ≈ 1.4 We will determine the hazard level of the site during the final design phase of the project using a site- specific hazard analysis. Based on data from historical explorations at adjacent Southport sites, we expect that there is significant risk of liquefaction of the soils at the Southport West project site during a significant seismic event. Widespread liquefaction could result in ground surface settlement both below the proposed buildings and in the access areas around the buildings. Given the settlement-prone nature of the soils on the adjacent sites, even if ground improvement techniques are used, we recommend that underslab utilities be hung from the slab and/or grade beams rather than grade-supported. Exterior pavements, walkways, utilities, and grade-supported structures are subject to distress from liquefaction and may not function after a major seismic event. Foundation piles for the buildings (if used) should be largely unaffected, except that they may potentially not be designed for lateral resistance or frictional support in the liquefaction zone and may need to be designed for significant liquefaction induced downdrag loads. Potential methods of ground improvement at the site include aggregate piers (stone columns), earthquake drains, and soil cement mixing such as jet grout. It’s possible that deep foundations may be used in lieu of ground improvement. FOUNDATION DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS Due to the size of the proposed structures, we anticipate that deep foundations will be used as the primary building foundation type on the site. Alternative foundation types will be evaluated as additional subsurface information is collected, some of which may include shallow foundations on ground improvement. Pile Foundation Design For final design, we anticipate recommending using driven piles at the site for two reasons: (1) it is easier to identify the sometimes irregular bearing layer if the piles are driven rather than drilled, and (2) the driving process will increase the soil density and reduce the potential for liquefaction. Pile lengths will likely vary across the site, depending on the depth to the bearing layer identified in future site explorations. Note, that the installation of some types of ground improvement will likely result in an increase in pile resistance. With ground improvement, the loss of friction and downdrag from liquefaction could be minimal. Recommended pile capacities will be provided in the final design phase of the project. 5 Soils below the bearing layer are loose in many areas. In addition, a compressible soil zone exists at depths of about 100 to 120 feet in some locations, as disclosed by several of the historical explorations. We anticipate that piles could experience an initial compression as the building loads are applied. Over several months following construction, additional deep-seated soil consolidation and building settlement could occur. We do not expect this consolidation to result in abrupt differential settlement, but portions of the structure built at different times could experience differential settlement. Lateral Pile Capacity Lateral resistance and deflections of vertical pile foundations are often governed by the lateral capacity of near-surface soils and the strength of the pile itself. The design lateral capacity of the vertical piles will depend, to a large extent, on the allowable lateral deflections of the piles. Note, however, that if no ground improvement is completed, under severe seismic loading the piles will experience minimal lateral resistance in the zone of liquefaction. Lateral pile recommendations will be provided as part of the final geotechnical report as design progresses and explorations are completed within the building footprints. Floor Slabs Geotechnical recommendations for floor slabs will be dependent on the foundations system and included as part of final design. BELOW-GRADE WALLS AND FILL Walls backfilled on one side only will need to be designed using soil pressures estimated using equivalent fluid weights for the soil at the planned location. Walls with soil backfilled on one side will require drainage or must be designed to withstand full hydrostatic pressure. We will provide earth pressure diagrams during the final design phase. We generally recommend the following for fill behind walls.  Backfill with a minimum thickness of 18 inches of well-graded, free-draining sand (less than 3 percent fines based on the minus 3/4-inch fraction) or sand and gravel.  Install drains behind any backfilled subgrade walls. Drains with cleanouts should incorporate a minimum 4-inch-diameter perforated pipe surrounded by at least 6 inches of well-graded, free-draining sand (less than 3 percent fines based on minus 3/4-inch fraction), or sand and gravel. The drains should be sloped to carry the water to a sump or other suitable discharge.  The backfill should be continuous and should envelop the drainage behind the wall. Structural Fill. We anticipate that structural fill will be required for backfilling behind walls, for backfilling of utility trenches and other miscellaneous excavations, and possibly for replacement of overexcavated, soft or wet soils. The following are typical recommendations we make regarding placement of structural fill.  Generally, the structural fill should consist of clean, well-graded sand or sand and gravel to allow placement and compaction under wet conditions. Compaction to 95 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density is required in bearing areas. Beneath structural slabs, the fill needs only be compact enough to support the curing slab. Lower compaction levels are acceptable in non-bearing and landscaped areas. 6  Place structural fill in maximum 10-inch-thick loose lifts and compact it to a firm condition to support concrete placement as observed and verified by a Haley & Aldrich field representative.  The moisture content of the fill should be controlled within 2 percent of the optimum moisture. Optimum moisture is the moisture content corresponding to the maximum Proctor dry density.  If a select soil will be imported for use as structural fill, we recommend using a clean, well graded sand or sand and gravel with less than 5 percent by weight passing the U.S. No. 200 mesh sieve (based on the minus 3/4-inch fraction). If imported soil is used during wet weather periods, we recommend a gravel content (material coarser than a U.S. No. 4 sieve) of at least 30 percent.  If small, hand-operated compaction equipment is used to compact structural backfill, fill lifts should not exceed 8 inches of loose thickness.  Any import material to be used as structural fill should be sampled from the supplier's pit prior to delivery or use on site, to determine the maximum dry density, gradation, and optimum moisture content. Use of On-Site Soil as Structural Fill. The suitability of excavated site soils for use as compacted structural fill depends on the gradation and moisture content of the soil when it is placed. As the amount of fines (the portion passing the No. 200 sieve) increases, the soil becomes increasingly sensitive to small changes in moisture content and adequate compaction becomes more difficult to achieve. Soil containing more than about 5 percent fines cannot be consistently compacted to a dense non-yielding condition when the water content is greater than about 2 percent above or below optimum. Reusable soil must also be free of organic and other compressible material. Topsoil. We recommend that the surficial layer of topsoil, if present onsite, not be used as structural fill. Topsoil contains significantly more than 5 percent fines, and, therefore, is moisture-sensitive during periods of wet weather. In addition, this material contains organic matter that could lead to long-term settlement as the organic matter breaks down over time. Surficial topsoil or other native soil may be used in landscaped areas if it can be compacted to a reasonable degree with construction equipment. Existing Onsite Fill and Surficial Soils. Any existing onsite fill should be evaluated for its fines content to determine suitability for use as structural fill. Fill soils with a fines content that is great enough to make it moisture-sensitive when wet will make it more difficult to use during periods of wet weather, or if the material is wet. Earthwork operations would need to be scheduled during periods of dry weather to keep the material’s moisture content near its optimum level. ADJACENT SITE SETTLEMENT CONSIDERATIONS We understand the southern boundary of the site approximately parallels the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) railroad right-of-way and their railway embankment. Fill placement and any site activity causing vibrations will need to be considered to mitigate settlement of the adjacent railway embankment. We understand the portion of the site along the southern boundary is currently at a lower elevation than the northern portion of the site. Based on discussions with Coughlin Porter Lundeen (CPL), the site civil designer, fill will need to be placed along the southern portion of the site to be brought up to the same grade as the northern portion. Based on past settlement observed on adjacent sites, we anticipate that fill placement will likely cause settlement to occur, possibly affecting the adjacent BNSF railway. We recommend performing a settlement analysis with the final design to 7 evaluate the possible effects on this site and the adjacent site. To reduce settlement, we recommend offsetting the backfill away from the adjacent railway embankment or using lightweight fill, which will be evaluated during final design. Vibration induced settlements due to pile driving or other site activity will also need to be considered and evaluated during final design to reduce the risk of adjacent site settlement. The effects of ground vibrations on adjacent sites are dependent on the distance from the vibration source and the subsurface conditions, and will need to be evaluated during final design. If driven piles are used for the building foundation systems, we recommend vibration monitoring of the adjacent railway embankment during pile driving. Geotechnical Recommendations Supporting Civil Design UTILITY SETTLEMENT AND CONSTRUCTABILITY Utilities have the potential to settle with the surface of the fill, if there is deep-seated settlement in deeper soft, compressible soil layers onsite. If the fill is placed first and the utilities after, some of the utility settlement will be eliminated. Utility connections should be as flexible as possible, and utility grades and slopes should be adjusted, as appropriate, to adapt to the expected settlement. Below the groundwater table, estimated to be between 3 to 10 feet below the current site grade, the ability to dewater sufficiently to allow for a stable trench and workable conditions is uncertain. Our experience at the hotel and office sites suggest that the groundwater can be controlled using well points or wells, plus sheet pile cutoff walls. However, dewatering of the site may result in drawdown of the groundwater on adjacent sites, and drawdown induced settlement should be evaluated for any active dewatering system. If this is the case, then a traditional trench box to support utility excavations, combined with area dewatering, could be cost-effective and efficient. If the water cannot be controlled, more costly alternatives such as ground freezing may need to be considered. In either case, the pipe bedding and backfill should consist of high-quality sand and gravel with a low fines content if the work is to be completed in wet conditions. A well-graded sand and gravel can even be placed with some water in the excavation. If the bottom of the excavation is in soft silt, which the explorations indicate is possible, a separation fabric should be used to line the pipe trench and keep the clean bedding and backfill from becoming contaminated with fine-grained soil. UNDERSLAB DRAINAGE FOR BUILDINGS Geotechnical recommendations for floor slabs will be dependent on the foundations system and included as part of final design. SITE DRAINAGE Final grades should be sloped to carry surface water runoff away from structures to prevent water from infiltrating near the foundation walls. Roof drainage and new surface water drainage should not be tied into any onsite building subdrain system and should not discharge onto the site. 8 UTILITIES If there are soft compressible soils present onsite, utilities placed under areas of raised grade may settle along with any placement of new fill. In areas where the grade will be raised above the current ground surface, we recommend installing utilities after placing the backfill to reduce the amount of utility settlement. In general, areas of improved ground settle less than areas without ground improvement. Utility connections should be as flexible as possible, and utility grades and slopes should be adjusted, as appropriate, to adapt to the likely onsite settlement. For shallow utilities, we anticipate that open-cut trenches and/or trench boxes could be used for utility trench excavations. Note that unshored cuts deeper than 4 feet will need to be sloped; cuts shallower than 4 feet do not require sloping. During wet weather excavation, the slopes should be protected from sloughing and erosion. The contractor should be made responsible for the stability of all temporary excavation, ground settlement and associated damage to nearby structures, and worker safety. As noted previously, excavations deeper than 3 to 5 feet could encounter groundwater. Depending on the precise location of utilities, deleterious material such as concrete, wood, stumps, and other debris may be encountered. We anticipate that the majority of the utility excavations could be completed with conventional earthwork equipment. In addition, excavations must conform to federal, state, and local safety regulations. Bedding and trench backfill installation and compaction should at least meet minimum requirements per the City of Renton standard specifications and details. Our general recommendations for bedding and trench backfill materials are presented below. The minimum percent compaction recommended below is a percentage of the modified Proctor maximum dry density as determined by the ASTM D1557 test procedure.  Generally, a minimum of 6 inches of pipe zone bedding material should be used at the base of all utility pipe trenches. Bedding materials typically consist of well-graded sand and gravel with less than 3 percent material passing the No. 200 sieve (based on the minus 5/8-inch fraction). The bedding material should be compacted to at least 95 percent.  The recommended pipe zone bedding backfill materials should be used as backfill around the pipe utilities (pipe zone backfill) and should extend up to the top of the utility trench. Bedding material should be compacted using care not to damage the utility pipes.  Based on past experience at the adjacent Park Avenue Extension site, at least 6 inches of pipe zone bedding material that consists of well-graded sand and gravel with less than 3 percent passing the No. 200 sieve (based on the minus 5/8-inch fraction) should be used for bedding material beneath catch basins and manholes. The bedding material should be compacted to at least 95 percent.  If the bottom of the excavation is in soft silt, which the explorations indicate is possible, a separation fabric should be used to line the pipe trench and keep the clean bedding and backfill from becoming contaminated with fine-grained soil. Compaction Equipment Generally, we recommend using hand-operated compaction equipment within 12 inches of any pipe, catch basin, or similar structure to reduce the risk of damage. More than 12 inches on either side pipes 9 and structures, it is common to use a vibratory plate compactor attached to a backhoe or excavator, or use of 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 for adequate compaction and to avoid damage to the pipe. In general, heavy mechanical compaction equipment should not be allowed over utility pipes until the backfill is at least 2 feet above the top of the pipe. PAVEMENT SUPPORT Generally, haul roads should consist of quarry spalls, crushed rock, or crushed rock with an asphalt treated base (ATB) surface. The contractor typically has some control over this decision, since the nature of the ground, traffic loading, weather conditions, and other non-design factors will affect the subgrade needs. For the permanent at-grade roadways and access drives, we recommend that the upper 2 feet of fill or natural ground be well-compacted (to at least 95 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density), firm, and non-yielding. The pavement sections should at least meet minimum requirements per the City of Renton standard specifications and details for roadways and approaches. We expect that the roadways will undergo some widespread settlement over time in the high fill areas, but abrupt differences in settlement are less likely. EXCAVATION GROUNDWATER CONTROL In general, shallow excavation for construction of pile caps or footings will likely not require a detailed dewatering plan. Reasonably dry conditions should be able to be maintained by pumping from one or two sumps located within each excavation. The excavation side walls should be protected from sloughing by using steel sheets or similar protection. If excavation depths exceed about 7 feet below existing grade, the anticipated depth to the groundwater table onsite, then a comprehensive dewatering plan may be required. An alternative method would be to install a number of separate sumps just outside the excavation footprints to lower the groundwater table over a wider area than just one pile cap. A 12-inch slotted plastic casing or culvert pipe placed about 2 feet below the bottom of excavation and backfilled on the outside with pea gravel would serve as the sump. Deeper excavation will most likely require an active dewatering system using drilled wells or well points. We would expect to pump significant quantities of groundwater below depths of about 7 to 10 feet, and excavations of this depth should be conducted with great care to avoid sudden collapses of side walls and loss of soil integrity in the base. Note that at the nearby hotel site a series of dewatering wells and a sheet pile cutoff wall were used to construct a foundation mat 9 feet deep. Recommendations for Continuing Geotechnical Services Throughout this report, we recommend that we provide additional geotechnical input during the design and construction process. In addition, we recommend that Haley & Aldrich:  Continue to meet with the design team periodically as design concepts and design documents progress; 10  Perform additional soil explorations to support final design;  Prepare a final geotechnical design report with more detailed recommendations;  Review the final design plans to verify that the geotechnical engineering recommendations have been properly interpreted and implemented into the design. Use and Limitations of this Report We completed this work in accordance with our proposal dated December 8, 2021. Our report is for the exclusive use of SECO Development, Inc., and its design consultants for specific application to the subject project and site. We completed this study in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical practices for the nature and conditions of the work completed in the same or similar localities, at the time the work was performed. This report is for preliminary site assessments only and is not intended for final design. We make no other warranty, express or implied. We appreciate the opportunity to provide geotechnical engineering services in support of the MSA application and ECF on this project. Please do not hesitate to call if you have any questions or comments. Attachments: Attachment 1 – Existing Conditions Site Survey, dated November 30, 2021 Attachment 2 – Draft Architectural Plans by ZGF Architects Appendix A – Historical Explorations and Laboratory Results by Hart Crowser and Others \\haleyaldrich.com\share\sea_projects\Notebooks\0203113-002_Southport_West_MSA_Report\Deliverables\Letters\Southport West MSA\Final\2022_0126_HCHA_Southport West Geotechnical MSA Report_F.docx References 1. Hart Crowser 1987. Geotechnical Design Study, Proposed Boeing Building 4-86, Renton, Washington. Prepared for The Boeing Commercial Airplane Company. May 29, 1987. 2. Hart Crowser 2014. Geotechnical Engineering Design Study, Southport Hotel, Renton, Washington. Prepared for Seco Development. May 30, 2014. 3. Hart Crowser 2015. Geotechnical Engineering Design Study, Southport Office, Renton, Washington. Prepared for SECO Development. May 1, 2015. 4. Hart Crowser 2020. Geotechnical Engineering Design Report, Southport Bulkhead Rehabilitation and Float Piles, Renton, Washington. Prepared for Seco Development. May 11, 2020. ATTACHMENT 1 EXISTING CONDITIONS SITE SURVEY, DATED NOVEMBER 30, 2021 LOT A LOT CCITY OF RENTON LOT LINEADJUSTMENT NO. LUA 98-176REC. NO. 9902019014PROPO S E D L O T 2 CITY O F R E N T O N S H U F F E L T O N LOT LI N E A D J U S T M E N T (UNDER CI T Y R E VI E W A T TI M E OF SUR V E Y) LOT A PARCEL A PARCEL A PARCEL B PARCEL C PARCEL D LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N(DEDICATED PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY)NE PARK D R I V E (DEDICATED PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY)PARK AV E N U E N (DEDICATED PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY)LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N(DEDICATED PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY)JOHNS CREEK ATTACHMENT 2 DRAFT ARCHITECTURAL PLANS BY ZGF ARCHITECTS APPENDIX A HISTORICAL FIELD EXPLORATIONS AND LABORATORY TESTING (BY HART CROWSER AND OTHERS) Document Path: L:\Notebooks\1901411_Southport_Park_Ave_Extension\GIS\MGIS\1901411-AA (SPlan).mxd Date: 6/7/2019 User Name: evinfairchild!! !! !! HC19-DCP1 HC19-DCP2 BH-4 N Note: Feature locations are approximate. 0 80 16040 Feet Southport Park Ave Extension Renton, Washington Site and Exploration Plan 19014-11 6/19 Figure1 Source: Aerial photograph provided by Hexagon Imagery Program Data. Legend !!DCP Test Location (Hart Crowser 2019) !!Boring (HWA GeoSciences 2019) Project Boundary Proposed Asphalt Pavement AL GS GS GS GS HYD GS GS GS S-1 S-2 S-3 S-4 S-5 S-6 S-7 S-8 S-9 S-10 Soft, rust-mottled olive-gray, very sandy SILT, moist. Low plasticity. (ALLUVIUM) Becomes dark yellow-brown. Non-plastic. Very loose, rust-mottled, yellow-brown, very silty SAND, wet. Grades to dark gray. Becomes loose, dark gray. Becomes slightly gravelly. Becomes medium dense. Very loose, dark gray, slightly gravelly, slightly silty SAND, wet. Piece of decomposed wood in tip of sampler. Driller reports encountering decomposed wood from 20 feet to 23 feet. Medium dense, dark gray, silty SAND, wet. Driller reports drilling action at 27 feet. Medium dense dark gray, very gravelly, slightly silty SAND, wet. Driller reports drilling action ends at 32 feet. 1-1-2 1-2-2 1-1-1 2-3-5 2-3-4 2-2-2 7-6-5 1-1-1 6-4-4 12-9-9 ML SM SP SM SM SP SM SM BORING-DSM 2017-147-21.GPJ 2/22/19 FIGURE:PROJECT NO.:2017-147-21 RENTON, WASHINGTON PARK AVENUE N EXTENSIONDEPTH(feet)0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 25 20 15 10 5 0 -5ELEVATION (feet)BH-4 PAGE: 1 of 2(blows/6 inches)GROUNDWATERPEN. RESISTANCELiquid LimitSYMBOL0 10 20 30 40 50 0 20 40 60 80 100SAMPLE TYPESAMPLE NUMBERNatural Water ContentUSCS SOIL CLASSWater Content (%) NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated DESCRIPTION OTHER TESTSPlastic Limit BORING: and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations. (140 lb. weight, 30" drop) Blows per foot A-5 Standard Penetration Test DATE COMPLETED: 1/4/2019 DRILLING COMPANY: Geologic Drill Partners, Inc. DRILLING METHOD: Diedrich D-120 Truck Rig, 4.25" ID HSA LOCATION: See Figure 2 DATE STARTED: 1/4/2019 SAMPLING METHOD: SPT w/ Autohammer LOGGED BY: Z. Ngoma SURFACE ELEVATION: 27.0 feet GS HYD AL GS GS HYD GS HYD GS S-11 S-12 S-13 S-14 S-15 S-15 Medium dense, dark gray, silty SAND, wet. Very soft, olive-brown, organic SILT, moist. High plasticity. Drove Shelby Tube at 50 feet and it was advanced 13 inches. Medium Dense, gray, silty SAND, moist. Driller reports gravelly drilling action at 51 feet. Becomes dark gray. Minor organics. Very stiff, dark olive-brown, sandy organic SILT, moist. High plasticity. Borehole terminated 61.5 feet below ground surface (bgs). Ground water seepage encountered at approximately 5 feet bgs during drilling. Borehole completed as a 2-inch PVC well (DOE # BKC 472). 8-10-12 0-0-0 1-1-1 13-11-13 11-10-14 OH SM OH BORING-DSM 2017-147-21.GPJ 2/22/19 FIGURE:PROJECT NO.:2017-147-21 RENTON, WASHINGTON PARK AVENUE N EXTENSIONDEPTH(feet)35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 -10 -15 -20 -25 -30 -35 -40ELEVATION(feet)BH-4 PAGE: 2 of 2(blows/6 inches)GROUNDWATERPEN. RESISTANCELiquid LimitSYMBOL0 10 20 30 40 50 0 20 40 60 80 100SAMPLE TYPESAMPLE NUMBERNatural Water ContentUSCS SOIL CLASSWater Content (%) NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated DESCRIPTION OTHER TESTSPlastic Limit BORING: and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations. (140 lb. weight, 30" drop) Blows per foot A-5 Standard Penetration Test DATE COMPLETED: 1/4/2019 DRILLING COMPANY: Geologic Drill Partners, Inc. DRILLING METHOD: Diedrich D-120 Truck Rig, 4.25" ID HSA LOCATION: See Figure 2 DATE STARTED: 1/4/2019 SAMPLING METHOD: SPT w/ Autohammer LOGGED BY: Z. Ngoma >>128 SURFACE ELEVATION: 27.0 feet 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.0010.010.1110 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS 50 SAMPLE S-11b S-2 S-3 30.5 - 31.5 5.0 - 6.5 7.5 - 9.0 #10 80.0 39.0 62.8 30 CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL- ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES SAND B-12 Coarse #60#40#20 Fine Coarse SYMBOL Gravel% 3"1-1/2"PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT#4 #200 0.7 1.6 Sand% (SM) Dark gray, silty SAND (ML) Dark yellowish-brown, sandy SILT (SM) Very dark grayish-brown, silty SAND Fines% 0.00050.005 CLAY BH-3 BH-4 BH-4 SILT 3/4" GRAVEL 0.05 5/8" 70 #100 0.5 29 42 42 50 Medium Fine 3/8" 5 PI 90 10 % MC LL PLDEPTH ( ft.) PARTICLE-SIZE ANALYSIS OF SOILS METHOD ASTM D6913 19.3 59.4 37.2 2017-147-21PROJECT NO.: HWAGRSZ 2017-147-21.GPJ 01/28/19 FIGURE: PARK AVENUE N EXTENSION RENTON, WASHINGTON 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.0010.010.1110 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS 50 SAMPLE S-4 S-6 S-8 10.0 - 11.5 15.0 - 16.5 20.0 - 21.5 #10 75.6 68.5 78.8 30 CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL- ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES SAND B-13 Coarse #60#40#20 Fine Coarse SYMBOL Gravel% 3"1-1/2"PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT#4 #200 7.6 9.6 Sand% (SM) Dark gray, silty SAND (SM) Dark gray, silty SAND (SP-SM) Dark gray, poorly graded SAND with silt Fines% 0.00050.005 CLAY BH-4 BH-4 BH-4 SILT 3/4" GRAVEL 0.05 5/8" 70 #100 0.5 35 30 36 50 Medium Fine 3/8" 5 PI 90 10 % MC LL PLDEPTH ( ft.) PARTICLE-SIZE ANALYSIS OF SOILS METHOD ASTM D6913 24.4 24.0 11.7 2017-147-21PROJECT NO.: HWAGRSZ 2017-147-21.GPJ 01/28/19 FIGURE: PARK AVENUE N EXTENSION RENTON, WASHINGTON 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.0010.010.1110 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS 50 SAMPLE S-9 S-10 S-11 25.0 - 26.5 30.0 - 31.5 35.0 - 36.5 #10 72.7 52.2 73.3 30 CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL- ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES SAND B-14 Coarse #60#40#20 Fine Coarse SYMBOL Gravel% 3"1-1/2"PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT#4 #200 1.1 41.9 5.0 Sand% (SM) Dark gray, silty SAND (SP-SM) Dark gray, poorly graded SAND with silt and gravel (SM) Dark gray, silty SAND Fines% 0.00050.005 CLAY BH-4 BH-4 BH-4 SILT 3/4" GRAVEL 0.05 5/8" 70 #100 0.5 30 15 29 50 Medium Fine 3/8" 5 PI 90 10 % MC LL PLDEPTH ( ft.) PARTICLE-SIZE ANALYSIS OF SOILS METHOD ASTM D6913 26.2 6.0 21.7 2017-147-21PROJECT NO.: HWAGRSZ 2017-147-21.GPJ 01/28/19 FIGURE: PARK AVENUE N EXTENSION RENTON, WASHINGTON 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.0010.010.1110 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS 50 SAMPLE S-13 S-14 S-15 45.0 - 46.5 50.0 - 51.1 55.0 - 56.5 #10 11.4 86.9 81.1 30 CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL- ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES SAND B-15 Coarse #60#40#20 Fine Coarse SYMBOL Gravel% 3"1-1/2"PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT#4 #200 3.3 Sand% (OH) Olive-brown, organic SILT (SM) Gray, silty SAND (SM) Dark gray, silty SAND Fines% 0.00050.005 CLAY BH-4 BH-4 BH-4 SILT 3/4" GRAVEL 0.05 5/8" 70 #100 0.5 78 22 27 50 Medium Fine 3/8" 5 PI 90 10 % MC LL PLDEPTH ( ft.) PARTICLE-SIZE ANALYSIS OF SOILS METHOD ASTM D6913 88.6 13.1 15.6 2017-147-21PROJECT NO.: HWAGRSZ 2017-147-21.GPJ 01/28/19 FIGURE: PARK AVENUE N EXTENSION RENTON, WASHINGTON 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.0010.010.1110 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS 50 SAMPLE S-15 S-1 S-3 60.0 - 61.5 0.0 - 1.5 5.0 - 6.5 #10 22.6 64.1 59.3 30 CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL- ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES SAND B-16 Coarse #60#40#20 Fine Coarse SYMBOL Gravel% 3"1-1/2"PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT#4 #200 1.7 17.6 14.6 Sand% (OH) Very dark grayish-brown, organic SILT (SM) Olive-brown, silty SAND with gravel (SM) Dark grayish-brown, silty SAND Fines% 0.00050.005 CLAY BH-4 BH-5 BH-5 SILT 3/4" GRAVEL 0.05 5/8" 70 #100 0.5 84 11 12 50 Medium Fine 3/8" 5 PI 90 10 % MC LL PLDEPTH ( ft.) PARTICLE-SIZE ANALYSIS OF SOILS METHOD ASTM D6913 75.7 18.3 26.0 2017-147-21PROJECT NO.: HWAGRSZ 2017-147-21.GPJ 01/28/19 FIGURE: PARK AVENUE N EXTENSION RENTON, WASHINGTON 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 20 40 60 80 100 % MC LL CL-ML MH SAMPLEPLASTICITY INDEX (PI)SYMBOL PL PI S-4 S-3 S-9 S-1 10.0 - 11.5 7.5 - 9.0 25.0 - 26.5 2.5 - 4.0 27 26 23 29 42 40 45 45 LIQUID LIMIT, PLASTIC LIMIT AND PLASTICITY INDEX OF SOILS METHOD ASTM D4318 CL (ML) Olive-brown, SILT (ML) Olive-gray, SILT (ML) Dark gray, SILT (ML) Grayish-brown, SILT B-21 14 8 4 9 CH CLASSIFICATION % Fines LIQUID LIMIT (LL) BH-1 BH-2 BH-2 BH-4 ML 41 34 27 38 DEPTH (ft) 2017-147-21PROJECT NO.: HWAATTB 2017-147-21.GPJ 01/28/19 FIGURE: PARK AVENUE N EXTENSION RENTON, WASHINGTON 0 50 100 150 200 250 0 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320 360 DEPTH (ft) 17.5 - 18.3 40.0 - 41.5 (OH) Brown, organic SILT (OH) Olive-brown, organic SILT 163 87 BH-1 BH-4 S-6a S-12 CH MH B-22 LIQUID LIMIT (LL)PLASTICITY INDEX (PI)SYMBOL SAMPLE LIQUID LIMIT, PLASTIC LIMIT AND PLASTICITY INDEX OF SOILS METHOD ASTM D4318 CLASSIFICATION % MC LL PL PI % Fines 217 134 54 47 165 128 CL-ML ML CL 2017-147-21PROJECT NO.: HWAATTB7 2017-147-21.GPJ 01/28/19 FIGURE: PARK AVENUE N EXTENSION RENTON, WASHINGTON N0100200Scale in FeetFigure1901404-001 (SPlan).dwg04/30/15EAL 19014-045/15Renton, WashingtonSouthport Office Development2Site and Exploration PlanHCCPT-1aCPT exploration (current study)Historical CPT exploration (by others)Historical boring (Hart Crowser)Historical boring (by others)Cross section location anddesignationApproximate extent of similarsubsurface conditions*Soil site 1Soil site 2Soil site 3Approximate extent ofplanned office developmentApproximate extent ofShuffleton foundationsAA'BB'B-1HC-1CPT-1A A'* Transition from soil site conditions is likely gradual.Location of transition is inferred based on interpolationbetween explorations. Site and Exploration MapSouthport1901402-001.dwg06/2/14----19014-026/14Figure 20100200Scale in FeetNote: Base map prepared from electronic file entitled, "99323BRH.dwg"provided by Bush, Roed, & Hitchings dated September 6, 2000.Boring conducted by Hart Crowser, 2000 (Approximate location)Boring conducted by others (Approximate location)CPT Test conducted by others (Approximate location)Approximate Construction LimitsHC-1CPT-1Exploration Location and NumberCross Section Locationand Designation 19014-0404/15FigureSouthport Office DevelopmentRenton, WashingtonLiquefaction Assessment5initials MM/DD/YY location\filename.xlsHCCPT-4HCCPT-1AHCCPT-2HCCPT-3HCCPT-5HCCPT-6HCCPT-6 Project: Southport Office DevelopmentHart Crowser, Inchttp://www.hartcrowser.comTotal depth: 83.83 ftRentonCPT: HCCPT-01aLocation:Cone resistance qtTip resistance (tsf)400300200100Depth (ft)8075706560555045403530252015105Cone resistance qtPore pressure uPressure (psi)806040200Depth (ft)8075706560555045403530252015105Pore pressure uDiss.Diss.Diss.Diss.Diss.Diss.Diss.Friction ratioRf (%)1086420Depth (ft)8075706560555045403530252015105Friction ratioSBT IndexIc SBT4321Depth (ft)8075706560555045403530252015105SBT IndexSoil Behaviour TypeSBT (Robertson, 2010)181614121086420Depth (ft)8075706560555045403530252015105Soil Behaviour TypeClay & silty claySand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clayVery dense/stiff soilSand & silty sandClay & silty clayOrganic soilClayClay & silty clayClayClay & silty clayClayClay & silty clayClay & silty clayClay & silty clayClay & silty clayClayClay & silty clayClayClay & silty claySand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty claySand & silty sandSand & silty sandSand & silty sandSand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltClayClaySand & silty sandSBT legend1. Sensitive fine grained2. Organic material3. Clay to silty clay4. Clayey silt to silty clay5. Silty sand to sandy silt6. Clean sand to silty sand7. Gravely sand to sand8. Very stiff sand to clayey sand9. Very stiff fine grainedCPeT-IT v.1.7.6.42 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 4/30/2015, 11:58:49 AM1Project file: L:\Notebooks\1901404_Southport Office Development Design\Field Data\Exploration Logs\CPT Analysis File.cpt Project: Southport Office DevelopmentHart Crowser, Inchttp://www.hartcrowser.comTotal depth: 83.83 ftRentonCPT: HCCPT-01aLocation:PermeabilityKsbt (ft/s)-91x10 -61x10 -31x10 Depth (ft)8075706560555045403530252015105PermeabilityYoung's modulusEs (tsf)2,0001,0000Depth (ft)8075706560555045403530252015105Young's modulusSPT N60N60 (blows/ft)50403020100Depth (ft)8075706560555045403530252015105SPT N60Relative densityDr (%)100806040200Depth (ft)8075706560555045403530252015105Relative densityCalculation parametersRelative desnisty constant, CDr: 350.0Permeability: Based on SBTnSPT N60: Based on Ic and qtYoung’s modulus: Based on variable alpha using Ic (Robertson, 2009)Phi: Based on Kulhawy & Mayne (1990)User defined estimation dataFriction angle (degrees)60555045403530Depth (ft)8075706560555045403530252015105Friction angleCPeT-IT v.1.7.6.42 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 4/30/2015, 11:58:49 AM2Project file: L:\Notebooks\1901404_Southport Office Development Design\Field Data\Exploration Logs\CPT Analysis File.cpt Project: Southport Office DevelopmentHart Crowser, Inchttp://www.hartcrowser.comTotal depth: 83.83 ftRentonCPT: HCCPT-01aLocation:Constrained ModulusM(CPT) (tsf)2,0001,0000Depth (ft)8075706560555045403530252015105Constrained ModulusShear strengthSu (tsf)6543210Depth (ft)807570656055504540353025201510Su peakSu remoldedShear strengthShear modulusGo (tsf)2,0001,0000Depth (ft)8075706560555045403530252015105Shear modulusUndrained strength ratioSu/',v21.510.50Depth (ft)807570656055504540353025201510Undrained strength ratioOCROCR1086420Depth (ft)807570656055504540353025201510OCRCalculation parametersUndrained shear strength cone factor for clays, Nkt: AutoOCR factor for clays, Nkt: 0.33Go: Based on variable alpha using Ic (Robertson, 2009)Constrained modulus: Based on variable alpha using Ic and Qtn (Robertson, 2009)User defined estimation dataCPeT-IT v.1.7.6.42 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 4/30/2015, 11:58:50 AM3Project file: L:\Notebooks\1901404_Southport Office Development Design\Field Data\Exploration Logs\CPT Analysis File.cpt Project: Southport Office DevelopmentHart Crowser, Inchttp://www.hartcrowser.comTotal depth: 83.83 ftRentonCPT: HCCPT-01aLocation:Shear Wave velocityVs (ft/s)1,0005000Depth (ft)8075706560555045403530252015105Shear Wave velocityIn-situ stress ratioKo210Depth (ft)807570656055504540353025201510In-situ stress ratioState parameter0-0.1-0.2Depth (ft)8075706560555045403530252015105State parameterSoil sensitivityS43210Depth (ft)807570656055504540353025201510Soil sensitivityEffective friction anglePeak (degrees)3020100Depth (ft)8075706560555045403530252015105Effective friction angleCalculation parametersSoil Sensitivity factor, NS: 7.00User defined estimation dataCPeT-IT v.1.7.6.42 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 4/30/2015, 11:58:50 AM4Project file: L:\Notebooks\1901404_Southport Office Development Design\Field Data\Exploration Logs\CPT Analysis File.cpt Project: Southport Office Development Hart Crowser, Inc http://www.hartcrowser.com Total depth: 83.83 ftRenton CPT: HCCPT-01a Location: CPTU Borehole Depth (ft)(t50)0.50 t50 (s) t50 (years)G/Su ch (ft2/s) ch (ft2/year) Tabular results Dissipation Tests Results Dissipation tests consists of stopping the piezocone penetration and observing porepressures (u) with elapsed time (t). The data are automatic recorded by the field computer and should take place until a minimum of 50% dissipation. The porepressures are plotted as a function of square root of (t). The graphical technique suggested by Robertson and Campanella (1989), yields a value for t50, which corresponds to the time for 50% consolidation. The value of the coefficient of consolidation in the radial or horizontal direction ch was then calculated by Houlsby and Teh's (1988) theory using the following equation: 50 5.0 r 2 h t IrTc××= where: T: time factor given by Houlsby and Teh's (1988) theory corresponding to the porepressure position r: piezocone radius Ir: stiffness index, equal to shear modulus G divided by the undrained strength of clay (Su). t50: time corresponding to 50% consolidation Dissipation tests Permeability estimates based on dissipation test The dissipation of pore pressures during a CPTu dissipation test is controlled by the coefficient of consolidation in the horizontal direction (ch) which is influenced by a combination of the soil permeability (kh) and compressibility (M), as defined by the following: /Mckwhh×= where: M is the 1-D constrained modulus and w is the unit weight of water, in compatible units. M (tsf) kh (ft/s) HCCPT-01a 16.08 124.4 15477 4.91E-004 327.33 9.59E-008 3 25.05 1.20E-010 HCCPT-01a 22.97 110.3 12163 3.86E-004 718.91 1.81E-007 6 3.71 1.52E-009 HCCPT-01a 35.76 0.0 0 0.00E+000 100.00 0.00E+000 0 405.57 -1.00E+004 HCCPT-01a 42.49 0.0 0 0.00E+000 318179.28 0.00E+000 0 352.85 -1.00E+004 HCCPT-01a 55.45 0.0 0 0.00E+000 100.00 0.00E+000 0 982.10 -1.00E+004 HCCPT-01a 71.52 0.0 0 0.00E+000 100.00 0.00E+000 0 1112.86 -1.00E+004 HCCPT-01a 83.99 0.0 0 0.00E+000 100.00 0.00E+000 0 2842.78 0.00E+000 5 Project file: L:\Notebooks\1901404_Southport Office Development Design\Field Data\Exploration Logs\CPT Analysis File.cpt CPeT-IT v.1.7.6.42 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 4/30/2015, 11:58:50 AM This software is licensed to: Hart Crowser CPT name: HCCPT-01a Piezocone Dissipation Test: HCCPT-01a Depth: 16.08 (ft) time (s) 1 10 100 1,000Porepressure u2 (psi)15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 4 124.407 Piezocone Dissipation Test: HCCPT-01a Depth: 16.08 (ft) u0 = 3.90 (psi) u initial dissipation assumed initial pore pressure, ui Pore pressure Legend u2 penetration Initial dissipation End of dissipation (extrapolated) Initial estimated at t=0 Pressure (psi) 100500Depth (ft)80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 Pore pressure 6 Project file: L:\Notebooks\1901404_Southport Office Development Design\Field Data\Exploration Logs\CPT Analysis File.cpt CPeT-IT v.1.7.6.42 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 4/30/2015, 11:58:50 AM This software is licensed to: Hart Crowser CPT name: HCCPT-01a Piezocone Dissipation Test: HCCPT-01a Depth: 22.97 (ft) time (s) 1 10 100Porepressure u2 (psi)30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 110.284 Piezocone Dissipation Test: HCCPT-01a Depth: 22.97 (ft) u0 = 6.89 (psi) u initial dissipation assumed initial pore pressure, ui Pore pressure Legend u2 penetration Initial dissipation End of dissipation (extrapolated) Initial estimated at t=0 Pressure (psi) 100500Depth (ft)80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 Pore pressure 7 Project file: L:\Notebooks\1901404_Southport Office Development Design\Field Data\Exploration Logs\CPT Analysis File.cpt CPeT-IT v.1.7.6.42 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 4/30/2015, 11:58:50 AM This software is licensed to: Hart Crowser CPT name: HCCPT-01a Piezocone Dissipation Test: HCCPT-01a Depth: 35.76 (ft) t^0.50 (s^0.50) 1211109876543210Porepressure u2 (psi)12 11.8 11.6 11.4 11.2 11 10.8 10.6 10.4 10.2 10 9.8 9.6 9.4 9.2 9 8.8 8.6 Piezocone Dissipation Test: HCCPT-01a Depth: 35.76 (ft) u0 = 11.97 (psi) Pore pressure Legend u2 penetration Initial dissipation End of dissipation (extrapolated) Initial estimated at t=0 Pressure (psi) 100500Depth (ft)80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 Pore pressure 8 Project file: L:\Notebooks\1901404_Southport Office Development Design\Field Data\Exploration Logs\CPT Analysis File.cpt CPeT-IT v.1.7.6.42 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 4/30/2015, 11:58:50 AM This software is licensed to: Hart Crowser CPT name: HCCPT-01a Piezocone Dissipation Test: HCCPT-01a Depth: 42.49 (ft) t^0.50 (s^0.50) 1211109876543210Porepressure u2 (psi)14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 Piezocone Dissipation Test: HCCPT-01a Depth: 42.49 (ft) u0 = 14.86 (psi) Pore pressure Legend u2 penetration Initial dissipation End of dissipation (extrapolated) Initial estimated at t=0 Pressure (psi) 100500Depth (ft)80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 Pore pressure 9 Project file: L:\Notebooks\1901404_Southport Office Development Design\Field Data\Exploration Logs\CPT Analysis File.cpt CPeT-IT v.1.7.6.42 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 4/30/2015, 11:58:50 AM This software is licensed to: Hart Crowser CPT name: HCCPT-01a Piezocone Dissipation Test: HCCPT-01a Depth: 55.45 (ft) t^0.50 (s^0.50) 9876543210Porepressure u2 (psi)20.4 20.2 20 19.8 19.6 19.4 19.2 19 18.8 18.6 18.4 18.2 18 17.8 17.6 17.4 17.2 17 16.8 16.6 16.4 Piezocone Dissipation Test: HCCPT-01a Depth: 55.45 (ft) u0 = 20.55 (psi) Pore pressure Legend u2 penetration Initial dissipation End of dissipation (extrapolated) Initial estimated at t=0 Pressure (psi) 100500Depth (ft)80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 Pore pressure 10 Project file: L:\Notebooks\1901404_Southport Office Development Design\Field Data\Exploration Logs\CPT Analysis File.cpt CPeT-IT v.1.7.6.42 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 4/30/2015, 11:58:50 AM This software is licensed to: Hart Crowser CPT name: HCCPT-01a Piezocone Dissipation Test: HCCPT-01a Depth: 71.52 (ft) t^0.50 (s^0.50) 1514131211109876543210Porepressure u2 (psi)30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 -2 -4 Piezocone Dissipation Test: HCCPT-01a Depth: 71.52 (ft) u0 = 30.14 (psi) Pore pressure Legend u2 penetration Initial dissipation End of dissipation (extrapolated) Initial estimated at t=0 Pressure (psi) 100500Depth (ft)80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 Pore pressure 11 Project file: L:\Notebooks\1901404_Southport Office Development Design\Field Data\Exploration Logs\CPT Analysis File.cpt CPeT-IT v.1.7.6.42 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 4/30/2015, 11:58:50 AM This software is licensed to: Hart Crowser CPT name: HCCPT-01a Piezocone Dissipation Test: HCCPT-01a Depth: 83.99 (ft) t^0.50 (s^0.50) 191817161514131211109876543210Porepressure u2 (psi)34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 -2 -4 -6 Piezocone Dissipation Test: HCCPT-01a Depth: 83.99 (ft) u0 = 35.55 (psi) Pore pressure Legend u2 penetration Initial dissipation End of dissipation (extrapolated) Initial estimated at t=0 Pressure (psi) 100500Depth (ft)80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 Pore pressure 12 Project file: L:\Notebooks\1901404_Southport Office Development Design\Field Data\Exploration Logs\CPT Analysis File.cpt CPeT-IT v.1.7.6.42 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 4/30/2015, 11:58:50 AM Project: Southport Office DevelopmentHart Crowser, Inchttp://www.hartcrowser.comTotal depth: 100.07 ftRentonCPT: HCCPT-02Location:Cone resistance qtTip resistance (tsf)600400200Depth (ft)1009590858075706560555045403530252015105Cone resistance qtPore pressure uPressure (psi)6040200Depth (ft)1009590858075706560555045403530252015105Pore pressure uDiss.Diss.Friction ratioRf (%)1086420Depth (ft)9590858075706560555045403530252015105Friction ratioSBT IndexIc SBT4321Depth (ft)9590858075706560555045403530252015105SBT IndexSoil Behaviour TypeSBT (Robertson, 2010)181614121086420Depth (ft)1009590858075706560555045403530252015105Soil Behaviour TypeSand & silty sandSand & silty sandClay & silty clayClay & silty claySand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clayClayClay & silty clayClaySilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clayClay & silty clayClayClaySandSandSandSand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltSandSand & silty sandSand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clayClay & silty claySand & silty sandSBT legend1. Sensitive fine grained2. Organic material3. Clay to silty clay4. Clayey silt to silty clay5. Silty sand to sandy silt6. Clean sand to silty sand7. Gravely sand to sand8. Very stiff sand to clayey sand9. Very stiff fine grainedCPeT-IT v.1.7.6.42 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 4/30/2015, 11:58:50 AM13Project file: L:\Notebooks\1901404_Southport Office Development Design\Field Data\Exploration Logs\CPT Analysis File.cpt Project: Southport Office DevelopmentHart Crowser, Inchttp://www.hartcrowser.comTotal depth: 100.07 ftRentonCPT: HCCPT-02Location:PermeabilityKsbt (ft/s)-91x10 -61x10 -31x10 Depth (ft)9590858075706560555045403530252015105PermeabilityYoung's modulusEs (tsf)2,0001,0000Depth (ft)1009590858075706560555045403530252015105Young's modulusSPT N60N60 (blows/ft)50403020100Depth (ft)9590858075706560555045403530252015105SPT N60Relative densityDr (%)100806040200Depth (ft)9590858075706560555045403530252015105Relative densityCalculation parametersRelative desnisty constant, CDr: 350.0Permeability: Based on SBTnSPT N60: Based on Ic and qtYoung’s modulus: Based on variable alpha using Ic (Robertson, 2009)Phi: Based on Kulhawy & Mayne (1990)User defined estimation dataFriction angle (degrees)60555045403530Depth (ft)9590858075706560555045403530252015105Friction angleCPeT-IT v.1.7.6.42 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 4/30/2015, 11:58:50 AM14Project file: L:\Notebooks\1901404_Southport Office Development Design\Field Data\Exploration Logs\CPT Analysis File.cpt Project: Southport Office DevelopmentHart Crowser, Inchttp://www.hartcrowser.comTotal depth: 100.07 ftRentonCPT: HCCPT-02Location:Constrained ModulusM(CPT) (tsf)2,0000Depth (ft)1009590858075706560555045403530252015105Constrained ModulusShear strengthSu (tsf)43210Depth (ft)7570656055504540353025201510Su peakSu remoldedShear strengthShear modulusGo (tsf)2,0000Depth (ft)1009590858075706560555045403530252015105Shear modulusUndrained strength ratioSu/',v21.510.50Depth (ft)7570656055504540353025201510Undrained strength ratioOCROCR1086420Depth (ft)7570656055504540353025201510OCRCalculation parametersUndrained shear strength cone factor for clays, Nkt: AutoOCR factor for clays, Nkt: 0.33Go: Based on variable alpha using Ic (Robertson, 2009)Constrained modulus: Based on variable alpha using Ic and Qtn (Robertson, 2009)User defined estimation dataCPeT-IT v.1.7.6.42 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 4/30/2015, 11:58:50 AM15Project file: L:\Notebooks\1901404_Southport Office Development Design\Field Data\Exploration Logs\CPT Analysis File.cpt Project: Southport Office DevelopmentHart Crowser, Inchttp://www.hartcrowser.comTotal depth: 100.07 ftRentonCPT: HCCPT-02Location:Shear Wave velocityVs (ft/s)1,0005000Depth (ft)1009590858075706560555045403530252015105Shear Wave velocityIn-situ stress ratioKo210Depth (ft)7570656055504540353025201510In-situ stress ratioState parameter0-0.2-0.4Depth (ft)9590858075706560555045403530252015105State parameterSoil sensitivityS43210Depth (ft)7570656055504540353025201510Soil sensitivityEffective friction anglePeak (degrees)20100Depth (ft)1009590858075706560555045403530252015105Effective friction angleCalculation parametersSoil Sensitivity factor, NS: 7.00User defined estimation dataCPeT-IT v.1.7.6.42 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 4/30/2015, 11:58:50 AM16Project file: L:\Notebooks\1901404_Southport Office Development Design\Field Data\Exploration Logs\CPT Analysis File.cpt Project: Southport Office Development Hart Crowser, Inc http://www.hartcrowser.com Total depth: 100.07 ftRenton CPT: HCCPT-02 Location: CPTU Borehole Depth (ft)(t50)0.50 t50 (s) t50 (years)G/Su ch (ft2/s) ch (ft2/year) Tabular results Dissipation Tests Results Dissipation tests consists of stopping the piezocone penetration and observing porepressures (u) with elapsed time (t). The data are automatic recorded by the field computer and should take place until a minimum of 50% dissipation. The porepressures are plotted as a function of square root of (t). The graphical technique suggested by Robertson and Campanella (1989), yields a value for t50, which corresponds to the time for 50% consolidation. The value of the coefficient of consolidation in the radial or horizontal direction ch was then calculated by Houlsby and Teh's (1988) theory using the following equation: 50 5.0 r 2 h t IrTc××= where: T: time factor given by Houlsby and Teh's (1988) theory corresponding to the porepressure position r: piezocone radius Ir: stiffness index, equal to shear modulus G divided by the undrained strength of clay (Su). t50: time corresponding to 50% consolidation Dissipation tests Permeability estimates based on dissipation test The dissipation of pore pressures during a CPTu dissipation test is controlled by the coefficient of consolidation in the horizontal direction (ch) which is influenced by a combination of the soil permeability (kh) and compressibility (M), as defined by the following: /Mckwhh×= where: M is the 1-D constrained modulus and w is the unit weight of water, in compatible units. M (tsf) kh (ft/s) HCCPT-02 36.09 0.0 0 0.00E+000 100.00 0.00E+000 0 593.97 -1.00E+004 HCCPT-02 45.77 0.0 0 0.00E+000 100.00 0.00E+000 0 1131.84 -1.00E+004 17 Project file: L:\Notebooks\1901404_Southport Office Development Design\Field Data\Exploration Logs\CPT Analysis File.cpt CPeT-IT v.1.7.6.42 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 4/30/2015, 11:58:51 AM This software is licensed to: Hart Crowser CPT name: HCCPT-02 Piezocone Dissipation Test: HCCPT-02 Depth: 36.09 (ft) t^0.50 (s^0.50) 131211109876543210Porepressure u2 (psi)13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 Piezocone Dissipation Test: HCCPT-02 Depth: 36.09 (ft) u0 = 13.59 (psi) Pore pressure Legend u2 penetration Initial dissipation End of dissipation (extrapolated) Initial estimated at t=0 Pressure (psi) 806040200Depth (ft)100 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 Pore pressure 18 Project file: L:\Notebooks\1901404_Southport Office Development Design\Field Data\Exploration Logs\CPT Analysis File.cpt CPeT-IT v.1.7.6.42 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 4/30/2015, 11:58:51 AM This software is licensed to: Hart Crowser CPT name: HCCPT-02 Piezocone Dissipation Test: HCCPT-02 Depth: 45.77 (ft) t^0.50 (s^0.50) 9876543210Porepressure u2 (psi)18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 Piezocone Dissipation Test: HCCPT-02 Depth: 45.77 (ft) u0 = 18.18 (psi) Pore pressure Legend u2 penetration Initial dissipation End of dissipation (extrapolated) Initial estimated at t=0 Pressure (psi) 806040200Depth (ft)100 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 Pore pressure 19 Project file: L:\Notebooks\1901404_Southport Office Development Design\Field Data\Exploration Logs\CPT Analysis File.cpt CPeT-IT v.1.7.6.42 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 4/30/2015, 11:58:51 AM Project: Southport Office DevelopmentHart Crowser, Inchttp://www.hartcrowser.comTotal depth: 94.00 ftRentonCPT: HCCPT-03Location:Cone resistance qtTip resistance (tsf)400300200100Depth (ft)90858075706560555045403530252015105Cone resistance qtPore pressure uPressure (psi)100806040200Depth (ft)90858075706560555045403530252015105Pore pressure uDiss.Diss.Friction ratioRf (%)1086420Depth (ft)90858075706560555045403530252015105Friction ratioSBT IndexIc SBT4321Depth (ft)90858075706560555045403530252015105SBT IndexSoil Behaviour TypeSBT (Robertson, 2010)181614121086420Depth (ft)90858075706560555045403530252015105Soil Behaviour TypeSilty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sandClay & silty claySand & silty sandSand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clayClayClayClay & silty clayClay & silty clayClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty claySand & silty sandSandSand & silty sandSandSandSandSand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sandSBT legend1. Sensitive fine grained2. Organic material3. Clay to silty clay4. Clayey silt to silty clay5. Silty sand to sandy silt6. Clean sand to silty sand7. Gravely sand to sand8. Very stiff sand to clayey sand9. Very stiff fine grainedCPeT-IT v.1.7.6.42 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 4/30/2015, 11:58:51 AM20Project file: L:\Notebooks\1901404_Southport Office Development Design\Field Data\Exploration Logs\CPT Analysis File.cpt Project: Southport Office DevelopmentHart Crowser, Inchttp://www.hartcrowser.comTotal depth: 94.00 ftRentonCPT: HCCPT-03Location:PermeabilityKsbt (ft/s)-91x10 -61x10 -31x10 Depth (ft)90858075706560555045403530252015105PermeabilityYoung's modulusEs (tsf)2,0001,5001,0005000Depth (ft)90858075706560555045403530252015105Young's modulusSPT N60N60 (blows/ft)50403020100Depth (ft)90858075706560555045403530252015105SPT N60Relative densityDr (%)100806040200Depth (ft)90858075706560555045403530252015105Relative densityCalculation parametersRelative desnisty constant, CDr: 350.0Permeability: Based on SBTnSPT N60: Based on Ic and qtYoung’s modulus: Based on variable alpha using Ic (Robertson, 2009)Phi: Based on Kulhawy & Mayne (1990)User defined estimation dataFriction angle (degrees)60555045403530Depth (ft)90858075706560555045403530252015105Friction angleCPeT-IT v.1.7.6.42 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 4/30/2015, 11:58:51 AM21Project file: L:\Notebooks\1901404_Southport Office Development Design\Field Data\Exploration Logs\CPT Analysis File.cpt Project: Southport Office DevelopmentHart Crowser, Inchttp://www.hartcrowser.comTotal depth: 94.00 ftRentonCPT: HCCPT-03Location:Constrained ModulusM(CPT) (tsf)2,0001,0000Depth (ft)90858075706560555045403530252015105Constrained ModulusShear strengthSu (tsf)210Depth (ft)88868482807876747270686664626058565452504846444240383634323028Su peakSu remoldedShear strengthShear modulusGo (tsf)2,0001,0000Depth (ft)90858075706560555045403530252015105Shear modulusUndrained strength ratioSu/',v21.510.50Depth (ft)88868482807876747270686664626058565452504846444240383634323028Undrained strength ratioOCROCR1086420Depth (ft)88868482807876747270686664626058565452504846444240383634323028OCRCalculation parametersUndrained shear strength cone factor for clays, Nkt: AutoOCR factor for clays, Nkt: 0.33Go: Based on variable alpha using Ic (Robertson, 2009)Constrained modulus: Based on variable alpha using Ic and Qtn (Robertson, 2009)User defined estimation dataCPeT-IT v.1.7.6.42 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 4/30/2015, 11:58:51 AM22Project file: L:\Notebooks\1901404_Southport Office Development Design\Field Data\Exploration Logs\CPT Analysis File.cpt Project: Southport Office DevelopmentHart Crowser, Inchttp://www.hartcrowser.comTotal depth: 94.00 ftRentonCPT: HCCPT-03Location:Shear Wave velocityVs (ft/s)1,0005000Depth (ft)90858075706560555045403530252015105Shear Wave velocityIn-situ stress ratioKo10.50Depth (ft)88868482807876747270686664626058565452504846444240383634323028In-situ stress ratioState parameter0-0.1-0.2-0.3Depth (ft)90858075706560555045403530252015105State parameterSoil sensitivityS6543210Depth (ft)88868482807876747270686664626058565452504846444240383634323028Soil sensitivityEffective friction anglePeak (degrees)3020100Depth (ft)90858075706560555045403530252015105Effective friction angleCalculation parametersSoil Sensitivity factor, NS: 7.00User defined estimation dataCPeT-IT v.1.7.6.42 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 4/30/2015, 11:58:51 AM23Project file: L:\Notebooks\1901404_Southport Office Development Design\Field Data\Exploration Logs\CPT Analysis File.cpt Project: Southport Office Development Hart Crowser, Inc http://www.hartcrowser.com Total depth: 94.00 ftRenton CPT: HCCPT-03 Location: CPTU Borehole Depth (ft)(t50)0.50 t50 (s) t50 (years)G/Su ch (ft2/s) ch (ft2/year) Tabular results Dissipation Tests Results Dissipation tests consists of stopping the piezocone penetration and observing porepressures (u) with elapsed time (t). The data are automatic recorded by the field computer and should take place until a minimum of 50% dissipation. The porepressures are plotted as a function of square root of (t). The graphical technique suggested by Robertson and Campanella (1989), yields a value for t50, which corresponds to the time for 50% consolidation. The value of the coefficient of consolidation in the radial or horizontal direction ch was then calculated by Houlsby and Teh's (1988) theory using the following equation: 50 5.0 r 2 h t IrTc××= where: T: time factor given by Houlsby and Teh's (1988) theory corresponding to the porepressure position r: piezocone radius Ir: stiffness index, equal to shear modulus G divided by the undrained strength of clay (Su). t50: time corresponding to 50% consolidation Dissipation tests Permeability estimates based on dissipation test The dissipation of pore pressures during a CPTu dissipation test is controlled by the coefficient of consolidation in the horizontal direction (ch) which is influenced by a combination of the soil permeability (kh) and compressibility (M), as defined by the following: /Mckwhh×= where: M is the 1-D constrained modulus and w is the unit weight of water, in compatible units. M (tsf) kh (ft/s) HCCPT-03 20.01 0.0 0 0.00E+000 100.00 0.00E+000 0 485.20 -1.00E+004 HCCPT-03 32.81 468.1 219156 6.95E-003 176.46 4.97E-009 0 86.19 1.80E-012 24 Project file: L:\Notebooks\1901404_Southport Office Development Design\Field Data\Exploration Logs\CPT Analysis File.cpt CPeT-IT v.1.7.6.42 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 4/30/2015, 11:58:51 AM This software is licensed to: Hart Crowser CPT name: HCCPT-03 Piezocone Dissipation Test: HCCPT-03 Depth: 20.01 (ft) t^0.50 (s^0.50) 14131211109876543210Porepressure u2 (psi)7.28 7.27 7.26 7.25 7.24 7.23 7.22 7.21 7.2 7.19 7.18 7.17 7.16 7.15 7.14 7.13 7.12 7.11 7.1 7.09 7.08 7.07 7.06 7.05 7.04 Piezocone Dissipation Test: HCCPT-03 Depth: 20.01 (ft) u0 = 7.29 (psi) Pore pressure Legend u2 penetration Initial dissipation End of dissipation (extrapolated) Initial estimated at t=0 Pressure (psi) 100500Depth (ft)90 85 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 Pore pressure 25 Project file: L:\Notebooks\1901404_Southport Office Development Design\Field Data\Exploration Logs\CPT Analysis File.cpt CPeT-IT v.1.7.6.42 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 4/30/2015, 11:58:51 AM This software is licensed to: Hart Crowser CPT name: HCCPT-03 Piezocone Dissipation Test: HCCPT-03 Depth: 32.81 (ft) time (s) 1 10 100 1,000Porepressure u2 (psi)70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 468.141 Piezocone Dissipation Test: HCCPT-03 Depth: 32.81 (ft) u0 = 13.44 (psi) u initial dissipation assumed initial pore pressure, ui Pore pressure Legend u2 penetration Initial dissipation End of dissipation (extrapolated) Initial estimated at t=0 Pressure (psi) 100500Depth (ft)90 85 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 Pore pressure 26 Project file: L:\Notebooks\1901404_Southport Office Development Design\Field Data\Exploration Logs\CPT Analysis File.cpt CPeT-IT v.1.7.6.42 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 4/30/2015, 11:58:51 AM Project: Southport Office DevelopmentHart Crowser, Inchttp://www.hartcrowser.comTotal depth: 89.73 ftRentonCPT: HCCPT-04Location:Cone resistance qtTip resistance (tsf)600400200Depth (ft)858075706560555045403530252015105Cone resistance qtPore pressure uPressure (psi)50403020100Depth (ft)858075706560555045403530252015105Pore pressure uFriction ratioRf (%)1086420Depth (ft)858075706560555045403530252015105Friction ratioSBT IndexIc SBT4321Depth (ft)858075706560555045403530252015105SBT IndexSoil Behaviour TypeSBT (Robertson, 2010)181614121086420Depth (ft)858075706560555045403530252015105Soil Behaviour TypeSand & silty sandClay & silty clayClayClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltClaySilty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sandSandSand & silty sandSand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltClaySilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltClaySand & silty sandSand & silty sandClaySilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clayClay & silty clayClay & silty clayClay & silty clayClayClay & silty clayClaySilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltClayClay & silty clayClaySandSBT legend1. Sensitive fine grained2. Organic material3. Clay to silty clay4. Clayey silt to silty clay5. Silty sand to sandy silt6. Clean sand to silty sand7. Gravely sand to sand8. Very stiff sand to clayey sand9. Very stiff fine grainedCPeT-IT v.1.7.6.42 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 4/30/2015, 11:58:52 AM33Project file: L:\Notebooks\1901404_Southport Office Development Design\Field Data\Exploration Logs\CPT Analysis File.cpt Project: Southport Office DevelopmentHart Crowser, Inchttp://www.hartcrowser.comTotal depth: 89.73 ftRentonCPT: HCCPT-04Location:PermeabilityKsbt (ft/s)-91x10 -61x10 -31x10 Depth (ft)858075706560555045403530252015105PermeabilityYoung's modulusEs (tsf)1,0005000Depth (ft)858075706560555045403530252015105Young's modulusSPT N60N60 (blows/ft)50403020100Depth (ft)858075706560555045403530252015105SPT N60Relative densityDr (%)100806040200Depth (ft)858075706560555045403530252015105Relative densityCalculation parametersRelative desnisty constant, CDr: 350.0Permeability: Based on SBTnSPT N60: Based on Ic and qtYoung’s modulus: Based on variable alpha using Ic (Robertson, 2009)Phi: Based on Kulhawy & Mayne (1990)User defined estimation dataFriction angle (degrees)60555045403530Depth (ft)858075706560555045403530252015105Friction angleCPeT-IT v.1.7.6.42 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 4/30/2015, 11:58:52 AM34Project file: L:\Notebooks\1901404_Southport Office Development Design\Field Data\Exploration Logs\CPT Analysis File.cpt Project: Southport Office DevelopmentHart Crowser, Inchttp://www.hartcrowser.comTotal depth: 89.73 ftRentonCPT: HCCPT-04Location:Constrained ModulusM(CPT) (tsf)1,5001,0005000Depth (ft)858075706560555045403530252015105Constrained ModulusShear strengthSu (tsf)543210Depth (ft)858075706560555045403530252015105Su peakSu remoldedShear strengthShear modulusGo (tsf)1,5001,0005000Depth (ft)858075706560555045403530252015105Shear modulusUndrained strength ratioSu/',v21.510.50Depth (ft)858075706560555045403530252015105Undrained strength ratioOCROCR1086420Depth (ft)858075706560555045403530252015105OCRCalculation parametersUndrained shear strength cone factor for clays, Nkt: 14OCR factor for clays, Nkt: 0.33Go: Based on variable alpha using Ic (Robertson, 2009)Constrained modulus: Based on variable alpha using Ic and Qtn (Robertson, 2009)User defined estimation dataCPeT-IT v.1.7.6.42 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 4/30/2015, 11:58:53 AM35Project file: L:\Notebooks\1901404_Southport Office Development Design\Field Data\Exploration Logs\CPT Analysis File.cpt Project: Southport Office DevelopmentHart Crowser, Inchttp://www.hartcrowser.comTotal depth: 89.73 ftRentonCPT: HCCPT-04Location:Shear Wave velocityVs (ft/s)5000Depth (ft)858075706560555045403530252015105Shear Wave velocityIn-situ stress ratioKo210Depth (ft)858075706560555045403530252015105In-situ stress ratioState parameter0-0.1-0.2-0.3-0.4Depth (ft)858075706560555045403530252015105State parameterSoil sensitivityS3210Depth (ft)858075706560555045403530252015105Soil sensitivityEffective friction anglePeak (degrees)20151050Depth (ft)858075706560555045403530252015105Effective friction angleCalculation parametersSoil Sensitivity factor, NS: 7.00User defined estimation dataCPeT-IT v.1.7.6.42 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 4/30/2015, 11:58:53 AM36Project file: L:\Notebooks\1901404_Southport Office Development Design\Field Data\Exploration Logs\CPT Analysis File.cpt Project: Southport Office DevelopmentHart Crowser, Inchttp://www.hartcrowser.comTotal depth: 87.60 ftRentonCPT: HCCPT-05Location:Cone resistance qtTip resistance (tsf)600400200Depth (ft)858075706560555045403530252015105Cone resistance qtPore pressure uPressure (psi)3020100Depth (ft)858075706560555045403530252015105Pore pressure uFriction ratioRf (%)1086420Depth (ft)858075706560555045403530252015105Friction ratioSBT IndexIc SBT4321Depth (ft)858075706560555045403530252015105SBT IndexSoil Behaviour TypeSBT (Robertson, 2010)181614121086420Depth (ft)858075706560555045403530252015105Soil Behaviour TypeSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltClayClaySand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltClayClayClayClay & silty clayClaySilty sand & sandy siltSandSand & silty sandSandSand & silty sandSandSilty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sandSandSand & silty sandSandSand & silty sandSand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltClaySilty sand & sandy siltClaySandSand & silty sandSandSandSBT legend1. Sensitive fine grained2. Organic material3. Clay to silty clay4. Clayey silt to silty clay5. Silty sand to sandy silt6. Clean sand to silty sand7. Gravely sand to sand8. Very stiff sand to clayey sand9. Very stiff fine grainedCPeT-IT v.1.7.6.42 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 4/30/2015, 11:58:53 AM37Project file: L:\Notebooks\1901404_Southport Office Development Design\Field Data\Exploration Logs\CPT Analysis File.cpt Project: Southport Office DevelopmentHart Crowser, Inchttp://www.hartcrowser.comTotal depth: 87.60 ftRentonCPT: HCCPT-05Location:PermeabilityKsbt (ft/s)-91x10 -61x10 -31x10 Depth (ft)858075706560555045403530252015105PermeabilityYoung's modulusEs (tsf)1,5001,0005000Depth (ft)858075706560555045403530252015105Young's modulusSPT N60N60 (blows/ft)50403020100Depth (ft)858075706560555045403530252015105SPT N60Relative densityDr (%)100806040200Depth (ft)858075706560555045403530252015105Relative densityCalculation parametersRelative desnisty constant, CDr: 350.0Permeability: Based on SBTnSPT N60: Based on Ic and qtYoung’s modulus: Based on variable alpha using Ic (Robertson, 2009)Phi: Based on Kulhawy & Mayne (1990)User defined estimation dataFriction angle (degrees)60555045403530Depth (ft)858075706560555045403530252015105Friction angleCPeT-IT v.1.7.6.42 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 4/30/2015, 11:58:53 AM38Project file: L:\Notebooks\1901404_Southport Office Development Design\Field Data\Exploration Logs\CPT Analysis File.cpt Project: Southport Office DevelopmentHart Crowser, Inchttp://www.hartcrowser.comTotal depth: 87.60 ftRentonCPT: HCCPT-05Location:Constrained ModulusM(CPT) (tsf)2,0001,0000Depth (ft)858075706560555045403530252015105Constrained ModulusShear strengthSu (tsf)543210Depth (ft)75706560555045403530252015105Su peakSu remoldedShear strengthShear modulusGo (tsf)2,0001,0000Depth (ft)858075706560555045403530252015105Shear modulusUndrained strength ratioSu/',v21.510.50Depth (ft)75706560555045403530252015105Undrained strength ratioOCROCR1086420Depth (ft)75706560555045403530252015105OCRCalculation parametersUndrained shear strength cone factor for clays, Nkt: 14OCR factor for clays, Nkt: 0.33Go: Based on variable alpha using Ic (Robertson, 2009)Constrained modulus: Based on variable alpha using Ic and Qtn (Robertson, 2009)User defined estimation dataCPeT-IT v.1.7.6.42 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 4/30/2015, 11:58:53 AM39Project file: L:\Notebooks\1901404_Southport Office Development Design\Field Data\Exploration Logs\CPT Analysis File.cpt Project: Southport Office DevelopmentHart Crowser, Inchttp://www.hartcrowser.comTotal depth: 87.60 ftRentonCPT: HCCPT-05Location:Shear Wave velocityVs (ft/s)1,0005000Depth (ft)858075706560555045403530252015105Shear Wave velocityIn-situ stress ratioKo210Depth (ft)75706560555045403530252015105In-situ stress ratioState parameter0-0.1-0.2-0.3Depth (ft)858075706560555045403530252015105State parameterSoil sensitivityS210Depth (ft)75706560555045403530252015105Soil sensitivityEffective friction anglePeak (degrees)2520151050Depth (ft)858075706560555045403530252015105Effective friction angleCalculation parametersSoil Sensitivity factor, NS: 7.00User defined estimation dataCPeT-IT v.1.7.6.42 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 4/30/2015, 11:58:53 AM40Project file: L:\Notebooks\1901404_Southport Office Development Design\Field Data\Exploration Logs\CPT Analysis File.cpt Project: Southport Office DevelopmentHart Crowser, Inchttp://www.hartcrowser.comTotal depth: 77.43 ftRentonCPT: HCCPT-06Location:Cone resistance qtTip resistance (tsf)400200Depth (ft)75706560555045403530252015105Cone resistance qtPore pressure uPressure (psi)706050403020100Depth (ft)75706560555045403530252015105Pore pressure uDiss.Friction ratioRf (%)1086420Depth (ft)75706560555045403530252015105Friction ratioSBT IndexIc SBT4321Depth (ft)75706560555045403530252015105SBT IndexSoil Behaviour TypeSBT (Robertson, 2010)181614121086420Depth (ft)75706560555045403530252015105Soil Behaviour TypeSilty sand & sandy siltClayClaySilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty claySand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltClayClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sandClay & silty claySand & silty sandSandSilty sand & sandy siltSandSand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sandSand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty claySand & silty sandSandSBT legend1. Sensitive fine grained2. Organic material3. Clay to silty clay4. Clayey silt to silty clay5. Silty sand to sandy silt6. Clean sand to silty sand7. Gravely sand to sand8. Very stiff sand to clayey sand9. Very stiff fine grainedCPeT-IT v.1.7.6.42 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 4/30/2015, 11:58:51 AM27Project file: L:\Notebooks\1901404_Southport Office Development Design\Field Data\Exploration Logs\CPT Analysis File.cpt Project: Southport Office DevelopmentHart Crowser, Inchttp://www.hartcrowser.comTotal depth: 77.43 ftRentonCPT: HCCPT-06Location:PermeabilityKsbt (ft/s)-91x10 -61x10 -31x10 Depth (ft)75706560555045403530252015105PermeabilityYoung's modulusEs (tsf)1,5001,0005000Depth (ft)75706560555045403530252015105Young's modulusSPT N60N60 (blows/ft)50403020100Depth (ft)75706560555045403530252015105SPT N60Relative densityDr (%)100806040200Depth (ft)75706560555045403530252015105Relative densityCalculation parametersRelative desnisty constant, CDr: 350.0Permeability: Based on SBTnSPT N60: Based on Ic and qtYoung’s modulus: Based on variable alpha using Ic (Robertson, 2009)Phi: Based on Kulhawy & Mayne (1990)User defined estimation dataFriction angle (degrees)60555045403530Depth (ft)75706560555045403530252015105Friction angleCPeT-IT v.1.7.6.42 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 4/30/2015, 11:58:52 AM28Project file: L:\Notebooks\1901404_Southport Office Development Design\Field Data\Exploration Logs\CPT Analysis File.cpt Project: Southport Office DevelopmentHart Crowser, Inchttp://www.hartcrowser.comTotal depth: 77.43 ftRentonCPT: HCCPT-06Location:Constrained ModulusM(CPT) (tsf)2,0001,0000Depth (ft)75706560555045403530252015105Constrained ModulusShear strengthSu (tsf)3210Depth (ft)7270686664626058565452504846444240383634Su peakSu remoldedShear strengthShear modulusGo (tsf)2,0001,0000Depth (ft)75706560555045403530252015105Shear modulusUndrained strength ratioSu/',v21.510.50Depth (ft)7270686664626058565452504846444240383634Undrained strength ratioOCROCR1086420Depth (ft)7270686664626058565452504846444240383634OCRCalculation parametersUndrained shear strength cone factor for clays, Nkt: AutoOCR factor for clays, Nkt: 0.33Go: Based on variable alpha using Ic (Robertson, 2009)Constrained modulus: Based on variable alpha using Ic and Qtn (Robertson, 2009)User defined estimation dataCPeT-IT v.1.7.6.42 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 4/30/2015, 11:58:52 AM29Project file: L:\Notebooks\1901404_Southport Office Development Design\Field Data\Exploration Logs\CPT Analysis File.cpt Project: Southport Office DevelopmentHart Crowser, Inchttp://www.hartcrowser.comTotal depth: 77.43 ftRentonCPT: HCCPT-06Location:Shear Wave velocityVs (ft/s)1,0005000Depth (ft)75706560555045403530252015105Shear Wave velocityIn-situ stress ratioKo10.50Depth (ft)7270686664626058565452504846444240383634In-situ stress ratioState parameter0-0.1-0.2Depth (ft)75706560555045403530252015105State parameterSoil sensitivityS43210Depth (ft)7270686664626058565452504846444240383634Soil sensitivityEffective friction anglePeak (degrees)302520151050Depth (ft)75706560555045403530252015105Effective friction angleCalculation parametersSoil Sensitivity factor, NS: 7.00User defined estimation dataCPeT-IT v.1.7.6.42 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 4/30/2015, 11:58:52 AM30Project file: L:\Notebooks\1901404_Southport Office Development Design\Field Data\Exploration Logs\CPT Analysis File.cpt Project: Southport Office Development Hart Crowser, Inc http://www.hartcrowser.com Total depth: 77.43 ftRenton CPT: HCCPT-06 Location: CPTU Borehole Depth (ft)(t50)0.50 t50 (s) t50 (years)G/Su ch (ft2/s) ch (ft2/year) Tabular results Dissipation Tests Results Dissipation tests consists of stopping the piezocone penetration and observing porepressures (u) with elapsed time (t). The data are automatic recorded by the field computer and should take place until a minimum of 50% dissipation. The porepressures are plotted as a function of square root of (t). The graphical technique suggested by Robertson and Campanella (1989), yields a value for t50, which corresponds to the time for 50% consolidation. The value of the coefficient of consolidation in the radial or horizontal direction ch was then calculated by Houlsby and Teh's (1988) theory using the following equation: 50 5.0 r 2 h t IrTc××= where: T: time factor given by Houlsby and Teh's (1988) theory corresponding to the porepressure position r: piezocone radius Ir: stiffness index, equal to shear modulus G divided by the undrained strength of clay (Su). t50: time corresponding to 50% consolidation Dissipation tests Permeability estimates based on dissipation test The dissipation of pore pressures during a CPTu dissipation test is controlled by the coefficient of consolidation in the horizontal direction (ch) which is influenced by a combination of the soil permeability (kh) and compressibility (M), as defined by the following: /Mckwhh×= where: M is the 1-D constrained modulus and w is the unit weight of water, in compatible units. M (tsf) kh (ft/s) HCCPT-06 21.98 0.0 0 0.00E+000 100.00 0.00E+000 0 439.59 -1.00E+004 31 Project file: L:\Notebooks\1901404_Southport Office Development Design\Field Data\Exploration Logs\CPT Analysis File.cpt CPeT-IT v.1.7.6.42 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 4/30/2015, 11:58:52 AM This software is licensed to: Hart Crowser CPT name: HCCPT-06 Piezocone Dissipation Test: HCCPT-06 Depth: 21.98 (ft) t^0.50 (s^0.50) 9876543210Porepressure u2 (psi)7.7 7.65 7.6 7.55 7.5 7.45 7.4 7.35 7.3 7.25 7.2 7.15 Piezocone Dissipation Test: HCCPT-06 Depth: 21.98 (ft) u0 = 7.27 (psi) Pore pressure Legend u2 penetration Initial dissipation End of dissipation (extrapolated) Initial estimated at t=0 Pressure (psi) 806040200Depth (ft)75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 Pore pressure 32 Project file: L:\Notebooks\1901404_Southport Office Development Design\Field Data\Exploration Logs\CPT Analysis File.cpt CPeT-IT v.1.7.6.42 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 4/30/2015, 11:58:52 AM Hart Crowser Operator: Brown Sounding: CPT-01 Cone Used: DDG1238 CPT Date/Time: 4/2/2015 10:57:10 AM Location: Southport Office Development Job Number: 1901404 Maximum Depth = 4.76 feet Depth Increment = 0.164 feet InSitu Engineering *Soil behavior type and SPT based on data from UBC-1983 Tip Resistance Qc TSF 3000 0 1 2 3 4 5 Depth (ft) Pore Pressure Pw PSI 120-20 Friction Ratio Fs/Qc (%) 120 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 900 file:///L|/Notebooks/1901404_Southport%20Office%20Development%20Design/Field%20Data/Exploration%20Logs/SOD-01.txt[4/30/2015 3:58:44 PM] Data File:HCCPT-01 4/2/2015 10:57:10 AM Operator:Brown Location:Southport Office Development Cone ID:DDG1238 Job Number:1901404 Customer: Units: Depth Qc Fs Pw Fs/Qc Soil Behavior Type SPT N* (ft) TSF TSF PSI (%) Zone UBC-1983 60% Hammer 0.16 32.55 2.0303 -0.243 6.238 3 clay 31 0.33 158.81 0.2957 -0.318 0.186 8 sand to silty sand 23 0.49 249.94 1.5666 -0.243 0.627 9 sand 41 0.66 274.91 2.2128 -0.727 0.805 9 sand 52 0.82 341.89 3.4680 -1.619 1.014 9 sand 66 0.98 422.71 5.3446 1.044 1.264 9 sand 71 1.15 430.79 8.7014 -0.577 2.020 9 sand 77 1.31 537.27 8.1559 -1.691 1.518 9 sand 89 1.48 325.26 4.0165 2.345 1.235 9 sand 95 1.64 482.74 10.1046 0.133 2.093 9 sand 101 1.80 718.83 8.4158 1.083 1.171 9 sand 104 1.97 565.96 9.1049 0.848 1.609 9 sand 106 2.13 616.35 4.9687 1.028 0.806 9 sand 113 2.30 545.14 7.3520 -1.757 1.349 9 sand 116 2.46 612.53 4.8740 -2.790 0.796 10 gravelly sand to sand 93 2.62 601.21 4.3640 -5.009 0.726 10 gravelly sand to sand 93 2.79 568.12 4.1590 -0.450 0.732 10 gravelly sand to sand 80 2.95 572.76 0.2829 -3.660 0.049 10 gravelly sand to sand 68 3.12 567.91 -0.1093 -3.149 -0.019 10 gravelly sand to sand 54 3.28 38.99 -0.1071 -1.917 -0.275 10 gravelly sand to sand 40 3.44 4.99 -0.1068 -3.149 -2.139 0 <out of range> 0 3.64 4.99 -0.1155 -3.147 -2.314 0 <out of range> 0 3.77 4.98 -0.1019 -3.141 -2.047 0 <out of range> 0 3.94 4.98 -0.1060 -3.130 -2.127 0 <out of range> 0 4.10 4.86 -0.1052 -2.252 -2.166 0 <out of range> 0 4.27 4.93 -0.1059 -2.232 -2.149 0 <out of range> 0 4.43 4.61 -0.1017 -2.077 -2.209 0 <out of range> 0 4.59 4.57 -0.1041 -2.072 -2.278 0 <out of range> 0 4.76 4.55 -32768 -2.077 -32768 0 <out of range> 0 Hart Crowser Operator: Brown Sounding: CPT-01 Cone Used: DDG1238 CPT Date/Time: 4/2/2015 11:47:38 AM Location: Southport Office Development Job Number: 1901404 Maximum Depth = 83.83 feet Depth Increment = 0.164 feet InSitu Engineering 6inch Predrilling*Soil behavior type and SPT based on data from UBC-1983 Tip Resistance Qc TSF 3000 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Depth (ft) Pore Pressure Pw PSI 120-20 Friction Ratio Fs/Qc (%) 120 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 900 Pressure (psi) Time: (seconds) Hart Crowser Operator Brown Sounding: CPT-01 Cone Used: DDG1238 CPT Date/Time: 4/2/2015 11:47:38 AM Location: Southport Office Development Job Number: 1901404 1 10 100 1000 10000 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Selected Depth(s) (feet) 16.076 Pressure (psi) Time: (seconds) Hart Crowser Operator Brown Sounding: CPT-01 Cone Used: DDG1238 CPT Date/Time: 4/2/2015 11:47:38 AM Location: Southport Office Development Job Number: 1901404 1 10 100 1000 10000 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Selected Depth(s) (feet) 22.966 Pressure (psi) Time: (seconds) Hart Crowser Operator Brown Sounding: CPT-01 Cone Used: DDG1238 CPT Date/Time: 4/2/2015 11:47:38 AM Location: Southport Office Development Job Number: 1901404 1 10 100 1000 8 9 10 11 12 13 Selected Depth(s) (feet) 35.761 Pressure (psi) Time: (seconds) Hart Crowser Operator Brown Sounding: CPT-01 Cone Used: DDG1238 CPT Date/Time: 4/2/2015 11:47:38 AM Location: Southport Office Development Job Number: 1901404 1 10 100 1000 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 Selected Depth(s) (feet) 42.487 Pressure (psi) Time: (seconds) Hart Crowser Operator Brown Sounding: CPT-01 Cone Used: DDG1238 CPT Date/Time: 4/2/2015 11:47:38 AM Location: Southport Office Development Job Number: 1901404 1 10 100 1000 10000 20 25 30 35 40 45 Selected Depth(s) (feet) 48.885 Pressure (psi) Time: (seconds) Hart Crowser Operator Brown Sounding: CPT-01 Cone Used: DDG1238 CPT Date/Time: 4/2/2015 11:47:38 AM Location: Southport Office Development Job Number: 1901404 1 10 100 1000 16 17 18 19 20 21 Selected Depth(s) (feet) 55.446 Pressure (psi) Time: (seconds) Hart Crowser Operator Brown Sounding: CPT-01 Cone Used: DDG1238 CPT Date/Time: 4/2/2015 11:47:38 AM Location: Southport Office Development Job Number: 1901404 1 10 100 1000 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Selected Depth(s) (feet) 71.522 Pressure (psi) Time: (seconds) Hart Crowser Operator Brown Sounding: CPT-01 Cone Used: DDG1238 CPT Date/Time: 4/2/2015 11:47:38 AM Location: Southport Office Development Job Number: 1901404 1 10 100 1000 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Selected Depth(s) (feet) 83.99 Hart Crowser Operator: Brown Sounding: CPT-02 Cone Used: DDG1238 CPT Date/Time: 4/3/2015 11:24:58 AM Location: Southport Office Development Job Number: 1901404 Maximum Depth = 100.07 feet Depth Increment = 0.164 feet InSitu Engineering *Soil behavior type and SPT based on data from UBC-1983 Tip Resistance Qc TSF 3000 0 1 2 3 4 5 Depth (ft) Pore Pressure Pw PSI 120-20 Friction Ratio Fs/Qc (%) 120 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 900 Pressure (psi) Time: (seconds) Hart Crowser Operator Brown Sounding: CPT-02 Cone Used: DDG1238 CPT Date/Time: 4/3/2015 11:24:58 AM Location: Southport Office Development Job Number: 1901404 1 10 100 1000 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Selected Depth(s) (feet) 36.089 Pressure (psi) Time: (seconds) Hart Crowser Operator Brown Sounding: CPT-02 Cone Used: DDG1238 CPT Date/Time: 4/3/2015 11:24:58 AM Location: Southport Office Development Job Number: 1901404 1 10 100 1000 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Selected Depth(s) (feet) 45.768 Hart Crowser Operator: Brown Sounding: CPT-03 Cone Used: DDG1238 CPT Date/Time: 4/3/2015 1:08:12 PM Location: Southport Office Development Job Number: 1901404 Maximum Depth = 94.00 feet Depth Increment = 0.164 feet InSitu Engineering *Soil behavior type and SPT based on data from UBC-1983 Tip Resistance Qc TSF 3000 0 1 2 3 4 5 Depth (ft) Pore Pressure Pw PSI 120-20 Friction Ratio Fs/Qc (%) 120 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 900 Pressure (psi) Time: (seconds) Hart Crowser Operator Brown Sounding: CPT-03 Cone Used: DDG1238 CPT Date/Time: 4/3/2015 1:08:12 PM Location: Southport Office Development Job Number: 1901404 1 10 100 1000 7 8 Selected Depth(s) (feet) 20.013 Pressure (psi) Time: (seconds) Hart Crowser Operator Brown Sounding: CPT-03 Cone Used: DDG1238 CPT Date/Time: 4/3/2015 1:08:12 PM Location: Southport Office Development Job Number: 1901404 1 10 100 1000 10000 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Selected Depth(s) (feet) 32.808 Hart Crowser Operator: Brown Sounding: CPT-04 Cone Used: DDG1263 CPT Date/Time: 4/15/2015 10:26:56 AM Location: Southport Office Development Job Number: 1901404 Maximum Depth = 89.73 feet Depth Increment = 0.164 feet InSitu Engineering *Soil behavior type and SPT based on data from UBC-1983 Tip Resistance Qc TSF 90000 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Depth(ft) Pore Pressure Pw PSI 60-10 Friction Ratio Fs/Qc (%) 60 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 1200 Red - Right Shear Wave Green - Compression WaveBlue - Left Shear Wave CPT-04 Shear wave velocity plotsHart-Crowser Southport Office Development Depth 3.937ft Ref* Delay 7.62ms Velocity* Depth 10.171ft Ref 3.937ft Delay 21.87ms Velocity 417.88ft/s Depth 17.060ft Ref 10.171ft Delay 37.26ms Velocity 442.78ft/s Depth 23.458ft Ref 17.060ft Delay 50.82ms Velocity 469.75ft/s Depth 30.020ft Ref 23.458ft Delay 62.34ms Velocity 567.90ft/s Depth 36.417ft Ref 30.020ft Delay 72.69ms Velocity 616.98ft/s Depth 42.979ftRef 36.417ft Delay 84.84msVelocity 539.49ft/s Depth 49.213ft Ref 42.979ft Delay 95.70ms Velocity 573.54ft/s Depth 55.938ft Ref 49.213ft Delay 106.67ms Velocity 612.34ft/s Depth 62.992ft Ref 55.938ft Delay 121.67ms Velocity 470.03ft/s 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Time (ms) Hammer to Rod String Distance 0.6 (m) * = Not Determined Hart Crowser Operator: Brown Sounding: CPT-05 Cone Used: DDG1263 CPT Date/Time: 4/15/2015 8:06:44 AM Location: Southport Office Development Job Number: 1901404 Maximum Depth = 87.60 feet Depth Increment = 0.164 feet InSitu Engineering *Soil behavior type and SPT based on data from UBC-1983 Tip Resistance Qc TSF 70000 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Depth(ft) Pore Pressure Pw PSI 40-10 Friction Ratio Fs/Qc (%) 60 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 1000 Red - Right Shear Wave Green - Compression WaveBlue - Left Shear Wave CPT-05 Shear wave velocity plotsHart-Crowser Southport Office Development Depth 3.937ft Ref* Delay 19.02ms Velocity* Depth 10.335ft Ref 3.937ft Delay 26.25ms Velocity 846.76ft/s Depth 16.732ft Ref 10.335ft Delay 39.02ms Velocity 495.37ft/s Depth 23.130ft Ref 16.732ft Delay 51.87ms Velocity 495.37ft/s Depth 29.692ft Ref 23.130ft Delay 64.72ms Velocity 509.17ft/s Depth 35.925ft Ref 29.692ft Delay 78.16ms Velocity 463.08ft/s Depth 42.487ftRef 35.925ft Delay 91.44msVelocity 493.46ft/s Depth 49.049ft Ref 42.487ft Delay 100.27ms Velocity 742.63ft/s Depth 55.610ft Ref 49.049ft Delay 109.88ms Velocity 682.40ft/s 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Time (ms) Hammer to Rod String Distance 0.6 (m) * = Not Determined Hart Crowser Operator: Brown Sounding: CPT-06 Cone Used: DDG1238 CPT Date/Time: 4/3/2015 9:22:55 AM Location: Southport Office Development Job Number: 1901404 Maximum Depth = 77.43 feet Depth Increment = 0.164 feet InSitu Engineering *Soil behavior type and SPT based on data from UBC-1983 Tip Resistance Qc TSF 3000 0 1 2 3 4 5 Depth (ft) Pore Pressure Pw PSI 120-20 Friction Ratio Fs/Qc (%) 120 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 900 Pressure (psi) Time: (seconds) Hart Crowser Operator Brown Sounding: CPT-06 Cone Used: DDG1238 CPT Date/Time: 4/3/2015 9:22:55 AM Location: Southport Office Development Job Number: 1901404 1 10 100 1000 7 8 Selected Depth(s) (feet) 21.982 Hart Crowser Operator: Springer Sounding: CPT-01 Cone Used: DDG1238 CPT Date/Time: 5/12/2014 11:16:43 AM Location: Renton Southport Job Number: N/A Maximum Depth = 91.08 feet Depth Increment = 0.164 feet *Soil behavior type and SPT based on data from UBC-1983 Tip Resistance Qt TSF 45000 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Depth(ft) Pore Pressure Pw PSI 120-20 Friction Ratio Fs/Qt (%) 60 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 800 Depth 4.101ft Ref* Delay 9.73ms Velocity* Depth 10.663ft Ref 4.101ft Delay 23.36ms Velocity 479.00ft/s Depth 17.388ft Ref 10.663ft Delay 35.82ms Velocity 539.15ft/s Depth 23.950ft Ref 17.388ft Delay 46.13ms Velocity 636.00ft/s Depth 30.184ft Ref 23.950ft Delay 56.44ms Velocity 604.33ft/s Depth 36.745ft Ref 30.184ft Delay 68.08ms Velocity 563.61ft/s Depth 43.307ftRef 36.745ft Delay 86.48msVelocity 356.62ft/s Depth 49.705ft Ref 43.307ft Delay 97.92ms Velocity 558.95ft/s Depth 56.266ft Ref 49.705ft Delay 109.33ms Velocity 575.26ft/s Depth 62.828ft Ref 56.266ft Delay 121.75ms Velocity 528.24ft/s Depth 69.390ft Ref 62.828ft Delay 131.40ms Velocity 680.09ft/s Depth 75.951ft Ref 69.390ft Delay 142.53ms Velocity 589.41ft/s Depth 82.513ft Ref 75.951ft Delay 151.71ms Velocity 714.82ft/s Depth 89.075ft Ref 82.513ft Delay 169.99ms Velocity 358.94ft/s 0 50 100 150 200 250 Time (ms) Hammer to Rod String Distance 0.2 (m) * = Not Determined Hart Crowser Operator: Pemble Sounding: CPT-03 Cone Used: DDG1238 CPT Date/Time: 5/12/2014 1:33:03 PM Location: Renton Southport Job Number: N/A Maximum Depth = 85.89 feet Depth Increment = 0.164 feet *Soil behavior type and SPT based on data from UBC-1983 Tip Resistance Qt TSF 45000 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Depth(ft) Pore Pressure Pw PSI 120-20 Friction Ratio Fs/Qt (%) 60 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 800 Depth 4.101ft Ref* Delay 11.37ms Velocity* Depth 10.663ft Ref 4.101ft Delay 28.71ms Velocity 376.51ft/s Depth 17.388ft Ref 10.663ft Delay 43.67ms Velocity 449.06ft/s Depth 23.786ft Ref 17.388ft Delay 57.18ms Velocity 473.14ft/s Depth 30.184ft Ref 23.786ft Delay 68.75ms Velocity 553.18ft/s Depth 36.745ft Ref 30.184ft Delay 79.45ms Velocity 612.98ft/s Depth 43.143ftRef 36.745ft Delay 91.32msVelocity 538.71ft/s Depth 49.541ft Ref 43.143ft Delay 103.74ms Velocity 515.01ft/s Depth 56.266ft Ref 49.541ft Delay 113.59ms Velocity 683.24ft/s Depth 62.828ft Ref 56.266ft Delay 126.16ms Velocity 521.68ft/s Depth 69.226ft Ref 62.828ft Delay 137.49ms Velocity 564.77ft/s Depth 75.787ft Ref 69.226ft Delay 147.30ms Velocity 669.25ft/s Depth 82.349ft Ref 75.787ft Delay 158.35ms Velocity 593.58ft/s Depth 86.122ft Ref 82.349ft Delay 162.41ms Velocity 928.76ft/s 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 Time (ms) Hammer to Rod String Distance 0.2 (m) * = Not Determined 5/14 Figure A-1 19014-02 Key to Exploration Logs Sample Description Very soft Soft Medium stiff Stiff Very stiff Hard Approximate Shear 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. Standard PenetrationResistance (N) in Blows/Foot 0 4 10 30 SILT or CLAY Consistency to to to to >50 Liquid LimitNatural Plastic Limit Classification of soils in this report is based on visual field and laboratory observations which include density/consistency, moisture condition, grain size, and plasticity estimates and should not be construed to imply field nor laboratory testing unless presented herein. Visual-manual classification methods of ASTM D 2488 were 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 is estimated based on visual observation and is presented parenthetically on the logs. 4 10 30 50 Standard PenetrationResistance (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 Sample Number Blows per 6 inches 12 Sample RecoverySample Type KEY SHEET 1901402-BL.GPJ HC_CORP.GDT 5/30/14LETTERGRAPH SYMBOLSMAJOR DIVISIONS SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART PT OH CH MH OL CL ML SC SM SP COARSE GRAINED SOILS SW TYPICAL DESCRIPTIONS WELL-GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL -SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NO FINES POORLY-GRADED GRAVELS,GRAVEL - SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NO FINES SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVEL - SAND -SILT MIXTURES GC GM GP GW CLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVEL - SAND -CLAY MIXTURES WELL-GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY SANDS, LITTLE OR NO FINES POORLY-GRADED SANDS,GRAVELLY SAND, LITTLE OR NOFINES SILTY SANDS, SAND - SILT MIXTURES CLAYEY SANDS, SAND - CLAYMIXTURES INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINE SANDS, 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 HIGH PLASTICITY ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TOHIGH PLASTICITY, ORGANIC SILTS PEAT, HUMUS, SWAMP SOILS WITHHIGH ORGANIC CONTENTS CLEAN GRAVELS GRAVELS WITHFINES CLEAN SANDS (LITTLE OR NO FINES) SANDS WITH FINES LIQUID LIMITLESS THAN 50 LIQUID LIMIT GREATER THAN 50 HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS NOTE: DUAL SYMBOLS ARE USED TO INDICATE BORDERLINE SOIL CLASSIFICATIONS GRAVEL AND GRAVELLY SOILS (APPRECIABLEAMOUNT OF FINES) (APPRECIABLEAMOUNT OF FINES) (LITTLE OR NO FINES) FINE GRAINED SOILS SAND AND SANDY SOILS SILTSANDCLAYS SILTS AND CLAYS MORE THAN 50% OF MATERIAL IS LARGER THANNO. 200 SIEVESIZE MORE THAN 50% OF MATERIAL IS SMALLER THAN NO. 200 SIEVE SIZE MORE THAN 50% OF COARSE FRACTIONPASSING ON NO.4 SIEVE MORE THAN 50%OF COARSEFRACTIONRETAINED ON NO. 4 SIEVE SM SP ML SM SAND to silty SAND (based on visual observation of soil cuttings). (Soft), sandy SILT to (loose), silty SAND. 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50+ 100+ Depth in Feet 20 60 0 10 20 40 80 Water Content in Percent 30 Boring Log HCB-1 LAB TESTS STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE Sample Blows per Foot Drill Equipment: Mud Rotary/Track Rig Hammer Type: Automatic hammer Hole Diameter: 4-7/8 inches Logged By: B. Exley Reviewed By: M. Veenstra 0 40 Graphic Log Soil DescriptionsUSCS Class Location: Lat: 47.5029 Long: -122.2053 Approximate Ground Surface Elevation: 21 Feet Horizontal Datum: WGS84 Vertical Datum: Renton, WA Vertical Datum 19014-02 Figure A-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 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. 5/14 1/4NEW BORING LOG 1901402-BL.GPJ HC_CORP.GDT 5/30/14 S-1 S-2 022 AL ML SM SP SM ML SM SM (Soft), sandy SILT to (loose), silty SAND. (cont'd) SAND to silty SAND (based on visual observation of soil cuttings). Sandy SILT to silty SAND (based on visual observation of soil cuttings). (Very dense), silty SAND (based on visual observation of soil cuttings). 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 50+ 100+ Depth in Feet 20 60 0 10 20 40 80 Water Content in Percent 30 Boring Log HCB-1 LAB TESTS STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE Sample Blows per Foot Drill Equipment: Mud Rotary/Track Rig Hammer Type: Automatic hammer Hole Diameter: 4-7/8 inches Logged By: B. Exley Reviewed By: M. Veenstra 0 40 Graphic Log Soil DescriptionsUSCS Class Location: Lat: 47.5029 Long: -122.2053 Approximate Ground Surface Elevation: 21 Feet Horizontal Datum: WGS84 Vertical Datum: Renton, WA Vertical Datum 19014-02 Figure A-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 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. 5/14 2/4NEW BORING LOG 1901402-BL.GPJ HC_CORP.GDT 5/30/14 S-3 S-4 S-5 S-6 266 TV = 0.5 TV = 0.7 AL TV = 0.75 SM CL ML (Very dense), silty SAND (based on visual observation of soil cuttings). (cont'd) (Stiff), wet, gray, lean CLAY and SILT. 90 95 100 105 110 115 120 125 130 135 50+ 100+ Depth in Feet 20 60 0 10 20 40 80 Water Content in Percent 30 Boring Log HCB-1 LAB TESTS STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE Sample Blows per Foot Drill Equipment: Mud Rotary/Track Rig Hammer Type: Automatic hammer Hole Diameter: 4-7/8 inches Logged By: B. Exley Reviewed By: M. Veenstra 0 40 Graphic Log Soil DescriptionsUSCS Class Location: Lat: 47.5029 Long: -122.2053 Approximate Ground Surface Elevation: 21 Feet Horizontal Datum: WGS84 Vertical Datum: Renton, WA Vertical Datum 19014-02 Figure A-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 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. 5/14 3/4NEW BORING LOG 1901402-BL.GPJ HC_CORP.GDT 5/30/14 S-7 S-8 4 26 2 25 6 76 CL ML SP SM (Stiff), wet, gray, lean CLAY and SILT. (cont'd) Very dense, wet, gray, slightly silty SAND. Bottom of Boring at 141.5 Feet. Started 05/15/14. Completed 05/16/14. 135 140 145 150 155 160 165 170 175 180 50+ 100+ Depth in Feet 20 60 0 10 20 40 80 Water Content in Percent 30 Boring Log HCB-1 LAB TESTS STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE Sample Blows per Foot Drill Equipment: Mud Rotary/Track Rig Hammer Type: Automatic hammer Hole Diameter: 4-7/8 inches Logged By: B. Exley Reviewed By: M. Veenstra 0 40 Graphic Log Soil DescriptionsUSCS Class Location: Lat: 47.5029 Long: -122.2053 Approximate Ground Surface Elevation: 21 Feet Horizontal Datum: WGS84 Vertical Datum: Renton, WA Vertical Datum 19014-02 Figure A-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 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. 5/14 4/4NEW BORING LOG 1901402-BL.GPJ HC_CORP.GDT 5/30/14 CH CH A Li n e OH PtCL CL CL -ML OL MH ML orOL MHorOH SRF GrainSize(B-1).cdr3/06 Fine-GrainedSoils Coarse-GrainedSoils 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 GW ML GP GM GC SW SP SM SC 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<_ <_3D>4 for G W D >6 for S W 60 10 (D ) D X D 30 10 60 2 G M and S M Atterberg limits below A line with PI <4 G P and S P Clean GRAVEL or SAND not meetingrequirements 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 HighlyOrganicSoils 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 UnifiedSoilClassification(USC)System SoilGrainSize 319014-02 FigureB-1 5/14 ML or OL 70 7 30 90 110 60 Dashed line indicates the approximate upper limit boundary for natural soils 10 Remarks: Figure B- 2 46 39 subsample at 116 feet PL 50 Source: HCB-1 Source: HCB-1 -200 12 14 34 25 USCS 30 20 10 PI Project:Southport Hotel Location: Depth: 55 Depth: 115 19014-02 C L o r O L ML or OL MH or OH Project:Southport Hotel 40 PLASTICITY INDEX50 Source: HCB-1 Source: HCB-1 -200 Location: USCS sandy SILT lean CLAYPLASTICITY INDEX46 39 subsample at 116 feet C L o r O L Liquid and Plastic Limits Test Report 5/14 70 90 110 60 ML CL LIQUID LIMIT 10 Remarks: MH or OH sandy SILT lean CLAY Location + Description LIQUID LIMIT 4 LL PLLocation + Description 30 7 4 C H o r O H Dashed line indicates the approximate upper limit boundary for natural soils Client: 50 40 30 20 10 PILL 50 12 14 34 25 C H o r O H Client: Sample No.: S-2 Sample No.: S-5 ATTERBERG LIMITS 1901402-BL.GPJ HC_CORP.GDT 5/30/14 CL-ML CL-ML Expl. Sample Depth W.C. % Atterberg Limit Wet Wt USC Description No. No. (ft) Before After LL PL PI (pcf) HC-1 S-5 116 38% 35% 39 25 14 114 pcf CL 19014-02 5/20/2014 Figure B-3 lean CLAY 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25Axial Strain1 32168421/2 0.001 0.010 0.100 1.000 10.000 100.000Coeff of Consolidation (ft2/day)REMARKS: Interpreted preconsolidation pressure of 5.5 tsf, modified compression index of 0.11, modified recompression index of 0.012, secondary compression index of 0.01 CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Stress (tons/ft2) 1/41/81/161/32 Expl. Sample Depth W.C. % Atterberg Limit Wet Wt USC Description No. No. (ft) Before After LL PL PI (pcf) HCB-1 S-6 126 36% 32% 31 23 8 116 pcf CL 19014-02 5/27/2014 Figure B-4 lean CLAY 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25Axial Strain1 32168421/2 0.001 0.010 0.100 1.000 10.000 100.000Coeff of Consolidation (ft2/day)REMARKS: Interpreted preconsolidation pressure of 5 tsf, modified compression index of 0.11, modified recompression index of 0.012, secondary compression index of 0.01 CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Stress (tons/ft2) 1/41/81/161/32 Brown, slightly silty, gravelly, fine tomedium SAND over medium dense, wet,brown-gray, slightly gravelly SAND. Loose, wet, gray, silty, fine SAND. Loose, wet, black, gravelly SAND. Loose to medium dense, wet, dark gray,non-gravelly to slightly gravelly, fine tomedium SAND. Slightly silty. Medium dense, wet, dark gray, slightlysilty, gravelly SAND. Medium stiff to stiff, wet, dark gray to gray,fine, sandy SILT. Medium dense, wet, gray, silty, fine SANDwith trace organic material. Medium stiff, wet, dark gray, slightly finesandy SILT. Medium dense to dense, wet, gray, silty toslightly silty, fine to medium SAND. S-1 S-2 S-3 S-4 S-5 S-6 S-7 S-8 S-9 S-10 *S-11 *S-12 S-13 S-14 S-15 S-16 GS GS GS ATD 2 2 50 50 Boring Log HC-1 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 Approximate Ground Surface Elevation in Feet:Approximate Ground Surface Elevation in Feet: Soil Descriptions 100 5 5 1 10010 20 10 Blows per Foot 1 Water Content in Percent STANDARD PENETRATIONRESISTANCE Sample LABTESTS 20 Depthin Feet 19014-02 1/2 09/00 Figure A-2 1. Refer to Figure A-1 for explanation of descriptions and symbols.2. Soil descriptions and stratum lines are interpretive and actual changesmay be gradual.3. Groundwater level, if indicated, is at time of drilling (ATD) or for datespecified. Level may vary with time.BORING LOG 745200.GPJ HC_CORP.GDT 4/17/14 Medium dense to dense, wet, gray, silty toslightly silty, fine to medium SAND. Stratified layers of organic material. Very stiff to hard, wet, gray, non-sandy tofine to medium sandy SILT. Medium stiff to hard, wet, light gray CLAY. Trace fine sand and gravel. Trace fine sand. Bottom of Boring at 129.0 Feet. Completed 09/20/00. S-17 *S-18 S-19 S-20 S-21 S-22 S-23 *S-24 S-25 S-26 S-27 S-28 S-29 S-30 S-31 AL AL AL,CN AL 2 2 50 50 Boring Log HC-1 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 115 120 125 130 Approximate Ground Surface Elevation in Feet:Approximate Ground Surface Elevation in Feet: Soil Descriptions 100 5 5 1 10010 20 10 Blows per Foot 1 Water Content in Percent STANDARD PENETRATIONRESISTANCE Sample LABTESTS 20 Depthin Feet 19014-02 2/2 09/00 Figure A-2 1. Refer to Figure A-1 for explanation of descriptions and symbols.2. Soil descriptions and stratum lines are interpretive and actual changesmay be gradual.3. Groundwater level, if indicated, is at time of drilling (ATD) or for datespecified. Level may vary with time.BORING LOG 745200.GPJ HC_CORP.GDT 4/17/14>> IMPORT FILL. Very loose, moist, brown and gray, slightlygravelly, silty, fine to medium SAND withinterbedded silt. Organic silt and fibrous peat within samplershoe. Loose to dense, wet, gray, non-silty toslightly silty, fine to medium SAND withtrace scattered gravel. Grading to less silty. Trace wood fragments. 1.5 feet of heave observed. Stiff, wet, gray, fine, sandy SILT, thinlylaminated. 1.5 feet of heave observed. Soft, wet, gray SILT, thinly laminated. Abundant organic material noted. Medium dense, wet, gray, slightly silty, fineto medium SAND. 2.5 feet of heave observed. Interbedded silt zones and organic materialnoted. Very dense, wet, gray, slightly silty to silty,fine SAND. 1.5 feet of heave observed. 4 feet of heave observed. Medium dense to dense, wet, gray, slightlysilty to silty, fine SAND. S-1 S-2 S-3 S-4 S-5 S-6 S-7 S-8 S-9 S-10 S-11 S-12 S-13 GS GS ATD 2 2 50 50 Boring Log HC-2 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 Approximate Ground Surface Elevation in Feet:Approximate Ground Surface Elevation in Feet: Soil Descriptions 100 5 5 1 10010 20 10 Blows per Foot 1 Water Content in Percent STANDARD PENETRATIONRESISTANCE Sample LABTESTS 20 Depthin Feet 19014-02 1/3 09/00 Figure A-3 1. Refer to Figure A-1 for explanation of descriptions and symbols.2. Soil descriptions and stratum lines are interpretive and actual changesmay be gradual.3. Groundwater level, if indicated, is at time of drilling (ATD) or for datespecified. Level may vary with time.BORING LOG 745200.GPJ HC_CORP.GDT 4/17/1450/6" 50/5" Medium dense to dense, wet, gray, slightlysilty to silty, fine SAND. Lamination of organic material noted. Silt zones and 1-inch organic layer. (PEAT) Medium stiff to stiff, moist, gray, slightlyfine to medium sandy to non-sandy SILT. Dense to very dense, moist, gray, silty tovery silty, fine to medium SAND. Abundandt organic material (shellfragments) noted. Very soft, wet, gray, slightly sandy tonon-sandy SILT. Very soft, wet, gray CLAY. Very soft to very stiff, wet, gray SILT. Medium stiff to very stiff, wet, gray, slightlyfine to medium sandy SILT. S-14 S-15 S-16 S-17 S-18 S-19 S-20 S-21 *S-21B S-22 S-22B S-23 S-24 S-25 S-26 AL AL AL, CN AL AB 2 2 50 50 Boring Log HC-2 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 115 120 125 130 Approximate Ground Surface Elevation in Feet:Approximate Ground Surface Elevation in Feet: Soil Descriptions 100 5 5 1 10010 20 10 Blows per Foot 1 Water Content in Percent STANDARD PENETRATIONRESISTANCE Sample LABTESTS 20 Depthin Feet 19014-02 2/3 09/00 Figure A-3 1. Refer to Figure A-1 for explanation of descriptions and symbols.2. Soil descriptions and stratum lines are interpretive and actual changesmay be gradual.3. Groundwater level, if indicated, is at time of drilling (ATD) or for datespecified. Level may vary with time.BORING LOG 745200.GPJ HC_CORP.GDT 4/17/14 Medium stiff to very stiff, wet, gray, slightlyfine to medium sandy SILT. Very loose, wet, gray, silty, fine to mediumSAND. Dense to very dense, wet, gray, slightlygravelly, fine to medium SAND. Bottom of Boring at 149.0 Feet. Completed 09/18/00. S-27 S-28 S-29 *S-30 2 2 50 50 Boring Log HC-2 130 135 140 145 150 155 160 165 170 175 180 185 190 195 Approximate Ground Surface Elevation in Feet:Approximate Ground Surface Elevation in Feet: Soil Descriptions 100 5 5 1 10010 20 10 Blows per Foot 1 Water Content in Percent STANDARD PENETRATIONRESISTANCE Sample LABTESTS 20 Depthin Feet 19014-02 3/3 09/00 Figure A-3 1. Refer to Figure A-1 for explanation of descriptions and symbols.2. Soil descriptions and stratum lines are interpretive and actual changesmay be gradual.3. Groundwater level, if indicated, is at time of drilling (ATD) or for datespecified. Level may vary with time.BORING LOG 745200.GPJ HC_CORP.GDT 4/17/14 PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION TEST REPORT ~ . " " " z " .. " .. • • ~ . ~ . s ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ N " • • " 100 , ;~; ........... , ~ 90 ; , [ 80 rr , , , i \ ~ I 70 , , \ ~ , , , I c:: I 60 , w \\ i z , u: I-50 , Z , \ w r () , , c:: I W 40 ~ [L I 30 I 1\ , ! 20 ~~t 1 , ~ 10 , , '"' ~ 0 200 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE -mm % GRAVEL % SAND % FINES %+ 3" I eRS. FINE CRS. MEDIUM FINE SILT CLAY 0 0.0 0.0 18.4 18.6 44.9 15.2 2.9 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 42.1 49.6 7.7 [:, 0.0 0.0 16.8 12.0 45.5 20.2 5.5 X LL PI 085 060 050 030 015 010 Cc Cu 0 5.64 l.77 1.21 0.630 0.376 0.295 0.76 5.99 0 0.689 0.440 0.389 0.308 0.223 0.135 l.59 3.25 [:, 5.92 l.23 0.87 1 0.485 0.282 0.199 0.96 6.16 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION USCS NAT. MOIST. 0 Gravelly SAND SP 16% 0 Slightly silty. mediwn to fme SAND SP-SM 31% [:, Slillhtlv silty. l!1avellv SAND SP-SM 16% Remarks: Project: Southport 0 0 Client: [:, 0 Source: He-l Sample No.: S-3 0 Source: He-I Sample No.: S-6 [:, Source: He-l Sample No.: S-8 ... ... J-7452 10/4/2000 HMTCROWSER Figure No. 8-2 r r r LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMITS TEST REPORT / / Dashed line indicates the approximate / 110 I-upper limit boundary for natural soils / / / /' / / / V / ./ 90 -oY-/ // / .~'o{ V / / v'('/ ~ / r--/ ./ Q 70 / V ~ / /' ~ // U / / / ;:: rJ) r--/ :5 50 / V a. // ./ / / /" v / 30 - / /0" / / d 10 / /C,V/V I-L 7 / • ML 9r OL MH orpH 4 / 10 30 50 70 90 110 130 150 170 lIaUID LIMIT Location + Description LL PL PI -200 • Source: HC-l Sample No.: S-21 Elastic SILT 119 59 60 • Source: HC-l Sample No.: S-25 CLAY 38 22 16 .. Source: HC-l Sample No.: S-30 CLAY 38 24 14 Remarks: Project: Southport • • .. Client: Location: Renton, WA ... &II J-7452 HlJKTCROWSER Figure No. B-4 /" v I I I I 190 USCS MH CL CL 1015/2000 r r r r [ LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMITS TEST REPORT I 60 Dashed line indicates the approximate / V / V / / upper limit boundary for natural soils / / I-,/ 0-(\ 50 / l,/ o~ / v~ / / -/ • 40 / / V X / / w 0 / ~ / ~30 / () I- / V >= / '" / :5 / 0.. / 20 I-/ 0'" / //// oV 10 I-~ ./i / V 7 --7///d0~";~~/// 4/ ML rOL MH r OH 4 V I : 10 30 50 70 90 11 0 LIQUID LIMIT Location + Description LL PL PI -200 USCS • Source: He-l Sample No.: S-27 Fat CLAY 69 28 41 CH Remarks: Project: Southport • Client: Location: Renton, WA -&II J-7452 9/2912000 HNrrCROWSER Figure No. 8 -5 r LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMITS TEST REPORT r [ 60 Dashed line indicates the approximate / v / V / upper limit boundary for natural soils / // o~ 50 I-/' / // o~ / (j~ / / 40 I-/ / / / >< / / • I w Cl / ~ / ~3O '-// I () / V ;:: / I <n / :5 / Q. // 0"'./ 20 l-I /// Ot/ I ~ 10 -/l / V 7 --7'/////A';~';/),,////Y MLrOL MHrOH 4 V I : 10 30 50 70 90 110 LIQUID LIMIT Location + Description LL PL PI -200 USCS • Source: HC-2 Sample No.: S-17 Elastic SILT 82 45 37 MH • Source: HC-2 Sample No.: S-21 Elastic SILT 54 30 24 MH .. Source: HC-2 Sample No.: S-25 SILT 38 25 13 ML /Remarks: Project: Southport • • .. Client: Location: Renton, WA -lUI J-7452 10/512000 Hl.tRTCROWSER Figure No. 8-6 f I f f 1 ! LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIM ITS TEST REPORT 60 Dashed line indicates the approximate / v / / / / upper limit boundary for natural soils / // o~ 50 c-/ / // o( / v~ / / 40 / -/ / V >< / / uJ 0 / ~ / ~3O -// U / V ;:: / VJ / :5 / 0. / 20 r-/~/ / 0"" / oV 10 -~ /I / V : --&/////9~P/////Y MLr OL MHrOH V I : 10 30 50 70 90 110 LIQUID LIMIT Location + Description LL PL PI -200 uses • Source: HC-2 Sample No. S-22b Fat CLAY 54 25 29 CH Remarks: Project: Southport • Client: Location: Renton, WA -.. J-7452 9122/2000 HlJRTCROWSER Figure No. 8-7 r r r [ f 1/32 0.00 0.05 0.10 c: >§ ~ '" .. 'x < 0.15 0.20 0.25 >-0.00 '" l:! N 0.20 ~ c: 0.40 0 .;:; '" :E 0.60 "0 "' c: 0 0.80 u "0 1.00 -Qj 0 1.20 u Expl. Sample Depth No. No. (ft) HC-l 5-27 109'-111 ' Remarks: CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Stress (tons/ft2) 1/16 1/8 1/4 1/2 1 2 4 8 16 32 ----.... I'---....., '- " ~ 1\ \ \ !\ 1\ l- / ~ ~ W.C. % Atterberg Limit Wet Wt USC Description Before After LL PL I PI (pcl) 57% 47% 69 28 I 41 110 Dcf CH Fat CLAY -.. J-7452 9 /29/20 00 IIL\RTCROWSER Figure B-8 r f r r f I ! 1/32 0.00 0.05 0 .10 c: .~ ~ '" .. 'x « 0 .15 0.20 0 .25 >. 0.00 .. :!e N 0.20 :!O c: 0.40 0 . ., .. ~ 0 .60 "0 ., c: 0 O.BO u '0 1.00 -Q; 0 1.20 U Expl. Sample Depth No . No . (It I HC·2 S·22b 12.5 '·115.( Remarks: CONSOLIDATION T EST RESULTS Stress (tons/lt21 1/16 1/8 1/4 1/2 1 2 4 8 16 32 '------~ '" !', r-- \ 1\ \ \ \ 1\ /' W.C. % Atterb erq limit WetWt USC Description Before I Alter LL I PL J PI (oefl 56% I 40% 54 25 I 29 110 pef CH Fat CLAY -.. J·7452 9/21 /20 00 1lLiRTCR0WSER Figure B·9 o~ tsUKIN{j 1 ~ ~~ ,l' ~o ~ ~q; ~,c;<:-~cY :o'\~ ,<),-0 ~~ ('-~ G'? Description <:f .<,,0 ~ cp .;:,"3 Gravel l- r I-Dark brown, gravelly SAND, fine-to medium-grained, moist, loose r y -becomes wet l-@] 5 r-1 I l-S l- I- I-! 10 --1 2 m Dark gray, silty SAND, fine-to medium-grained, wet, very loose -SM -II I -I Light gray SILT, low plasticity , wet, very loose - 15 -1 3 R ML -II II -becomes gray-green --Light gray, gravelly SAND, medium-to coarse grained, wet, loose - 20 -4 m -8 ---@] 25 -6 5 ~ ----30 -4 6 ~ -becomes very loose ---:' I -Lig ht gray to brown , sli ghtly sandy SILT, low plasticity, wet , very loos e 35 -2 7 e II, -i --- 40- BORING 1 IS CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE, PLATE 4 , BORING LOG -~$J GEOTECH 11 01 Lake Washington Boulevard North CONSULTANTS, INC. Renton, Washington ~ 1 , Job : I Date: . I Logged by: I Plate: ~~..,.-' -99037 Febru ary 1999 SES 3 J-74S2 12/00 Figure C-1 1/4 f f 0'-BORING 2 continued \. q,~ ,l' ~o q, 1< ~ ~,o,"'" 1<0:' :<J\.q, «;\.0 q,~ {CQ." eo"; Description <:l 0..0 Q.";0-0'" I-11 81 -some gravel noted, medium-dense l-@] l- I- 45 i-8 g I -becomes loose l- t-I~~I Light gray, silty SAND interbedded with silt layers, fine-to medium- "-grained, very wet, loose t- tl 50 M=50.8% 2 101 Light brownish-gray, slightly sandy SILT, low plasticity, interbedded with - : I sand layers, wet, very loose ---rl 55 -3 111 IML -no sand layers -: I -! I --' , i, II I 60 -40 121 ' II, -Light gray SAND, fine-to medium-grained, wet, dense '-EJ -- 65 -2 13m I Light brownish/greenish-gray, slightly sandy SILT, low plasticity, wet, --very loose --, III 70 --24 14 ~ Light gray SAND, fine-to medium-grained, wet, medium-dense -EJ ---llill 75 -4 15 g Greenish-gray, slightly sandy SILT, low plasticity, wet, very loose ,... ML -1m --Is,",: 11 Gray, silty SAND interbedded with sand layers, fine-to medium-grained, wet 80 -I~}~.-•••••• _ ••••••••••••.•.•••••••.•.•••••••••• -•• '.-.'._.' •••.•••••.•.•••••.•••••••••.•.••••• '.'.'.'.-." BORING 2 IS CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE, PLA TE 9 .----£1 BORING LOG GEOTECH 1101 Lake Washington Boulevard North CONSULTANTS, INC. Renton, Washington ~ 1 Job: I Date: I Logged by: I Plate: ~~~ 99037 February 1999 SES 8 J-7452 12/00 Figure C-2 2/3 Key to Exploration Logs Sample Descriptions Classification of soils in this report is based on vi sual field and laboratory observati ons which include density/consistency, moisture condi tion. grain size. and plasticity estimates and should not be construed to imply field nor laboratory testing unless presented herein. Visual-manual classification methods of ASTM D 2488 were used as an identification guide. Soil descriptions consist of the following: Density /consistency, moisture. color. minor constituents. MAJOR CONSTITUENT. addi t i onal remarks . Density/Consistency Soil density/consistency in borings is related primarily to the Standard Penetration Resistance. Soil density/consistency in test pits is estimated based on visual observation and is presented parenthetically on the test pit logs. SAND or GRAVEL Density Standard Penetration Resistance in Blows/Foot Very loose Loose 0 - 4 4 -10 Medium dense Dense 10 -30 30 -50 >50 Very dense Moisture Dry Damp Moist Wet Little perceptible moisture Some perceptible moisture, probably below optimum Probably near optimum moisture content Much perceptible moisture. probably above optimum Legends Sampling BORING SAMPLES ~ Split Spoon [SJ Shelby Tube [ill] Cuttings OJ Core Run * No Sample Recovery p Tube Pushed. Not Driven TEST PIT SAMPLES ~ 12] [SJ Grab (Jar) Bag Shelby Tube Ground Nater Observations [:, ...5l... = = Surface Seal Ground Water Level on Date (AT□) At Time of Drilling Observation Well Tip or Slotted Section Ground Water Seepage (Test Pits) Standard SILT or CLAY Penetration Resistance Consistency in Blows/Foot Very soft 0 -2 Soft 2 -4 Medium stiff 4 -8 Stiff 8 -15 Very stiff 15 -30 Hard >30 Minor Constituents Not identified in description Slightly (clayey, silty, etc.) Clayey, silty, sandy, gravelly Very (clayey, silty, etc .J Test Symbols GS Grain Size Classification CN Consolidation TUU Triaxial Unconsolidated Undrained TCU Triaxial Consolidated Undrained TC□ Triaxial Consolidated Drained GU Unconfined Compression DS Direct Shear K pp Permeability Pocket Penetrometer Approximate Shear Strength in TSF <0 .125 0.125 -0.25 0.25 -0.5 0.5 -1.0 1.0 -2 .0 >2.0 Estimated Percentage 0 -5 5 -12 12 -30 30 -50 TV CBR MD AL Approximate Compressive Strength in TSF Torvane Approximate Shear Strength in TSF California Bearing Ratio Moisture Density Relationship Atterberg Limits • I Water Content in Percent I LUquid Limit L--Natural '------Plastic Limit J-1945 May 1987 HART-CAOWSEA & associates, inc . Figure A-1 Probe Log HCP-1 SOIL INTERPRETATION CONE PENETRATION TEST FRICTION RATIO Ground Surface Elevation in Feet Depth in Feet .,..__. Cone Resistance in TSF I I ,. "' IIO , .. ... Percentage o a 4 1 1 10 1.a u Predr1lled and backf1lled with SAND. Loose to medium dense SAND. Very soft to soft. clayey SILT Soft to medium stiff. Approx1mately 1/2-foot-thick sandy layer . Medium dense to dense SAND. Med1um dense . Approximately 1-foot-thi ck SILT layer. ~Loose to medium dense . Approximately 1-foot-thick SILT layer. Med1um dense. Stiff, clayey SILT . Dense SAND. Approximately 1/2-foot-thick silty layer. Medium dense . Loose . Medium stiff to stiff. clayey SILT. Med1um·dense SAND. Loose SAND and silty SAND. 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 1. Refer to Figure A-1 for expl anation of descriptions and symbols. 2 . Soil descriptions and stratum linaa are interpretive and actual changes may be gradual. -~ • ~ I -,.. ,.,..., ( ' ' ' • ·Ki..-"~ -• i..--.,,,,... ._ ~ .--• ~ 6 • -=====-· i-. .. :C: .::: I'-,... ,.. ~ ... \ - ~ ~ I--... ~~ L -.. .i-.... .. ,-......_ -.: A~ :::• ':. ~ ~ v"" ~ •r-, • "' L--... .. ~ L,.t -- r--"'17 .,1,; ~ ''. .:'. , i ~ t ... .. • ~ ...~~ .. •, .. ~~ ) -' ' -.. .. /I t:=-I) -...,.. ) I-~ , __ ---.~ J 0 ' k:-• ... ~ . l■r: i,-11 lrL-- I«: t::• ~ r.. .. ' " 'IC I■ --~ ' I\ ~ -lo::::'. ..... • :::~~ ... ... L.,, o., o.a 0.1 , a • to ao __. Sleeve Friction in TSF ... • • • • ~ io~ 12 u J-1945 May 19 8 7 HART-CROWSER & associates. inc Sheet 1 of 2 F i gur e A-6 Probe Log HCP-1 SOIL INTERPRETATION Ground Surteca Elevation 1n Feat Loose SAND and s i lty SAND . Approx imately 1-foot-thick SILT layer. Medium stiff to stiff, clayey SILT and sandy SILT. Dense SAND. Dense to very dense. Dense. >----------------Medium dense . Bottom of Probe at 90 Feet. Completed 5/6/87. CONE PENETRATION TEST ~~P~~at ...,________. Cone Resistance in TSF • • ,. "" .. 60 -~ .. ~ i.-~ r' ..,. . MC.. ii. ·-----~ I ---· 65 < ~ .~ .: .... ~ (■ A '-A )t. 70 ( ~: C _ __. -• 75 .. < v• .. h ... 80 J L--.A ,,,. 85 l,,e i---. A;:: ~ 90 95 100 105 110 115 ... ... ,oo ... •• ~ -ll t ~ --j-'- ( ~ i.. __ :_L.......... ---- 120 o., 0.1 0 ,. l I II i.O .. -.. 1. Rater to F1gure A-1 tor axplanet1on ot descriptions and symbols. .-. Sleeve Friction in TSF J-1945 May FRICTION RA TIO Percentage D R -' I I lO Ll U I', ; I ' > ~ ,_,J I I' ; - II < -- . ····· -. .. . ---. I -J_ I .L -l 01411l01.ZU 1987 2. Soil descr1pt1ons and stratum lines are interpretive and actual changes may be gradual . HART-CROWSER & associates, inc Sheet 2 of 2 F i gure A-6 Probe Log HCP-2 SOIL INTERPRETATION Ground Surface Elevetion in Feet Predrilled and backfilled with SAND. Loose SAND. Medium dense. Loose. Approximately 1/2-foot-thick silty layer. Soft to medium stiff. clayey SILT and/or sandy SILT. Medium dense. gravelly SAND. ~---------------------, Medium dense SAND . Loose . Approximately 1-foot-thick silty layer. Approximately 1/2-foot-thick silty layer. Medium stiff. clayey SILT. Loose, silty SAND. Dense SAND. ~ Very dense . Dense. Very dense. Dense. CONE PENETRATION TEST ~~Pi~et -Cone Rasistanca in TSF • • • • ... __ .. 0 I• 5 .... "-b II &i-. ....... ~ • .. . L 10 ... """' ' • L--v ._ t:::,, ....... ~ 15 . i. r::::::, :( K"' ... ~ ..__ i-... 20 • I..-'--i-L< .~I-L ....... -::t::i. IC"' ,I,::.._ 25 ·•Iii II :..,~ u ...... ... ,....i.. =-.a.::: L-,1 --30 .. ~ ~~ .. .... ( ~ ~ ~ 35 ~~ ~~ I -1-~ 40 v I t::,e 45 t--,, t-- 0 11,,:i-• ... I.. 50 i..-• I• 1¥l,, I• t:• ~ "" 1, 55 ~i,.. It ~ I~ la,:::::.- It i-bL 1,1.. ,.i-- •• --'!!-~ ,_ ,_ f\. ·--~ --I-·- .. L I ·~ i 1---1- -1--,_ --'- 60 --~L--o., o.a 0.1 t. a a "' ao .. 1. Refer to Figure A-1 for explanation of descriptiona and symbols. --Sleeve Friction in TSF J-1945 May FRICTION RA TIO Percentage 0 1.~••1012u , l II --· I• I' "► -. - t,.. ~ .. --- ~ i.-• --... - "r-1> Ii,, - ~I'-,l ! ) ' I\, .... - II ~ I l I - ) . - I '!'I l1 J Ol411UIL2 14 1987 2. Soil daacr1pt1ons and stratum lines are interpretive and actual changes may be gradual. HART -CROWSER & a sso c iates. inc. Sheet 1 of 2 F igure A-7 Probe Log HCP-2 SOIL INTERPRETATION Ground Surface Elevation in Feet rMelITllllr?fen!r~o-.nrn-s-e-. --------~ Medium stiff to stiff. clayey SILT. Loose, silty SAND . Loose to medium dense SAND. Medium stiff. clayey SILT. Stiff, sandy SILT and clayey SILT. Stiff to very stiff. Approximately 1-foot-thick SAND layer. Approximately 1-foot-thick SAND 1 layer. Bottom of Probe at 90 Feet. Completed 5/6/87. I CONE PENETRATION TEST Depth in Feat __.Cone Raa1■tanca 1n TSF 60 • • .. --I A t». .. ~~ -l,.,' .. I,.._,_ -.... 1-,j I _ ..... 65 <: .. I« I,;' I l i-.. .,, ' " ~ ' 70 A ~ i 75 -1---' i. < r-" le 1 BO l ~~ ~ 85 (..A r---. At:::t,. ~ 90 95 100 105 us 120 0 . , ... , .• ' I .- -Sleeve Friction 1n TSF J-19i15 FRICTION RATIO Percentage , .. --• • • • . , . • •• ~ I ) II _,_ --'--I"'~ --~ ' 1 -- I• Ir ~ ~ i ~ I ~ \_ ) (, i 1, i ~ l,v I' .,. I ' I __ ,_ j - I I I - I -I I I LI .. l_l .. l J. 10 ,a -,~ • • • May 1987 1. Refer to Figure A-1 for explanation of de■cription■ end ■ymbols . 2. Soil dascriptiona and stratum lines ere interpretive and actual changes may be gradual . HART-CROW SER & associates, inc. Sheet 2 o f 2 Figure A-7 J-1945 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. Laboratory tests were performed on disturbed samples. The laboratory tests performed and the procedures followed are outlined below. Soil Classification Soil samples recovered in the explorations were visually classified in the field and then taken to our laboratory where the classifications were verified in a relatively controlled environment. Visual-manual field and laboratory observations include density/consistency, moisture condition, grain size and plasticity estimates. The classifications of selected samples were checked by performing 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 in general accordance with ASTM D 2216 for most samples recovered in the explorations 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, the water contents of samples subjected to other testing have been determined J-1945 Page B-2 and are presented on the exploration logs as well as with the various test results which follow in this appendix. Atterberg Limits (AL) Atterberg limits determinations were accomplished for selected fine-grained soil samples. The liquid limit and plastic limit were determined in general accordance with ASTM D 423 and ASTM D 424, respectively. The results of the Atterberg limits analyses and the plasticity characteristics are summarized on the Plasticity Chart, Figures B-2 and B-3, which 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. Grain Size Analysis (GS) Grain size analyses were performed on representative samples in general accordance with ASTM D 422. The wet sieve analysis method was used for most samples and determines the size distribution greater than the U.S. No. 200 mesh sieve. The results of the tests are presented as curves on Figure B-4 plotting percent finer by weight versus grain size. Plasticity Chart 70 60 50 X Q) ,::, 40 C >-.'!:: (.) :;:: (/) 30 ~ ci: CH V / V LL=122.4~ CL ~ V \_,; v~ MHo rOH 20 10 ~ / V V L Ii.CL•• "\:7 "'90 r OJ. V 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Liquid Limit WATER CONTENT BORING SAMPLE DEPTH IN PERCENT SYMBOL NUMBER NUMBER IN FEET NAT. LL P.L. P.I. CLASSIFICATION USC • HC-1 S-9 32.5-51 44 35 9 SILT ML 34.0 & HC-2 S-4 10.0-121 122 79 43 Organic SILT OH 11. 5 T HC-2 S-8 22.5-44 35 31 4 SILT ML 24.0 ■ HC-2 S-13 47.5-50 45 35 10 SILT ML 49.0 HC-2 S-21 89.0-85 90.5 ' L.L. LIQUID LIMIT J-1945 May 1987 P .L. PLASTIC LIMIT HART-CROWSER & associates inc. P.1 . PLASTICITY INDEX USC UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION Figure B-2 Plasticity Chart 70 60 50 )( (I) "O 40 C: >. -0 .:: 1/J CH / / 1/ CL ~ / ~ 30 ~ a: /~ MHo rOH .,, 20 10 / / • V u /':: E:lli "/;j,!llfl" Mlo rOL 0 / ■ 0 10 20 30 40 50 Liquid Limit WATER CONTENT BORING SAMPLE DEPTH IN PERCENT SYMBOL NUMBER NUMBER IN FEl;T NAT. L.L. P.L. P.I. • l'IC-3 S-6 17.5-113 90 82 8 19.0 • HC-3 S-10 I 37 .5-52 47 35 12 39 .0 • HC-3 S-15 62.5-48 40 33 7 .. 64.0 • HC-3 S-17 72.5-36 29 2d 1 74.0 L.L. LIQUID LIMIT P.L. PLASTIC LIMIT P.I. PLASTICITY INDEX USC UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION 60 0 70 80 90 100 CLASSIFICATION USC SI LT MH SILT ML SIL T · ML SILT ML J-1945 May 1987 HART-CROWSER & associates inc. Figure B-3