HomeMy WebLinkAbout3811; El Camino Real Widening Retaining Walls A & B; El Camino Real Widening Retaining Walls A & B; 2009-10-15Ik
k
Geotechnical ^ind Environmenral Sciences Consultants
GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION
EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING
RETAINING WALLS A AND B
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
c
r
r
ha
PREPARED FOR:
Bureau Veritas/Berryman & Henigar
11590 West Bernardo Court, Suite 100
San Diego, Califomia 92127
PREPARED BY:
Ninyo & Moore
Geotechnical and Environmental Sciences Consultants
5710 Ruffin Road
San Diego, Califomia 92123
I
October 15, 2009
Project No. 106641001
5710 Ruffin Road • San Diego, California 92 1 23 - Phone (858) 576-1000 - Fax (858) 576-9600
San Diego • Irvine • Rancho Cucamonga • Los Angeles • Oakland • i^s Vegas • Phoenix • Denver • El Paso • Tucson
ii
Geotechnical and Environmental Sciences Consultants
October 15, 2009
Project No. 106641001
Mr. Omar Atayee
Bureau Veritas/Berryman & Henigar
11590 West Bernardo Court, Suite 100
San Diego, Califomia 92127
Subject; Geotechnical Evaluation
El Camino Real Widening, Retaining Walls A and B
Carlsbad, Califomia
pi
I
Dear Mr. Atayee:
In accordance with your authorization, we have performed a geotechnical evaluation for the pro-
posed Retaining Walls A and B, which will be constmcted as part ofthe El Camino Real widening
project in Carlsbad, Califomia. This report presents o\ar geotechnical findings, conclusions, and
recommendations regarding the proposed project. Our report was prepared in accordance with
our proposal dated April 12,2009. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service on this project.
Sincerely,
NINYO & MOORE
Emil Rudolph, RE., G.E.
Senior Engineer
Gregory T. Farrand, C.E.G
Principal Geologist
ER/FOM/GTF/gg
Distribution: (5) Addressee
Francis O. Moreland,
Senior Geologist
r
P 5710 Ruffin Road • San Diego, California 92123 • Phone (858) 576-1000 • Fax (858) 576-9600
k San Diego • Irvine • Rancho Cucamonga • Los Angeles • Oakland • Las Vegas • Phoenix • Denver • El Paso • Tucson
El Camino Real Widening, Retaining Walls A and B October 15, 2009
Carlsbad, Califomia Project No. 106641001
P TABLE OF CONTENTS
H Page
1. INTRODUCTION 1
E 2. SCOPE OF SERVICES 1
3. SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2
k 4. SUBSURFACE EVALUATION AND LABORATORY TESTING 2
5. GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 3
r 5.1. Regional and Geologic Setting 3
• 5.2. Site Geology 3
E 5.2.1. Fill 3
5.2.2. Alluvium 4
5.2.3. Santiago Formation 4
^ 5.3. Groundwater 4
k 6. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS 5
6.1. Faulting and Seismicity 5
^ 6.1.1. Strong Ground Motion 5
Iw 6.1.2. Ground Surface Rupture 6
6.1.3. Liquefaction and Seismically Induced Settlement 6
^ 6.2. Landsiiding 6
^ 7. CONCLUSIONS 6
8. RECOMMENDATIONS 7
hH 8.1. Earthwork 7
8.1.1. Site Preparation 8
^ 8.1.2. Excavation Characteristics 8
im 8.1.3. Materials for Fill 8
8.1.4. Compacted Fill 9
^ 8.1.5. Fill Slopes 10
im 8.1.6. SiteRunoff U
8.2. Slope Stability 11
8.3. Retaining Walls 12
»i 8.3.1. Soldier Pile and Lagging Wall 12
8.3.2. Buried Vaults 15
P 8.4. Seismic Design Parameters 16
^ 8.5. Corrosion 15
8.6. Concrete 17
8.7. Pre-Construction Conference 17
8.8. Plan Review and Constmction Observation 17
pi 9. LIMITATIONS 18
10. REFERENCES 20
I06M1001 R.doc
IP
Il El Camino Real Widening, Retaining Walls A and B October 15, 2009
Carlsbad, Califomia ProjectNo. 106641001
P"
P
II
c
P
P k
P
k
z
P Tables
iki Table 1 - Recommended Materials 9
Table 2 - Soldier Pile Wall Design Parameters 13
Table 3 - Seismic Design Parameters 16
Figures
Figure 1 - Site Location Map
Figures 2A and 2B - Geotechnical Map
Figure 3 - Fault Location Map
Appendices
Appendix A - Boring Logs
Appendix B - Laboratory Testing
106641001 Rdoc
EI Camino Real Widening, Retaining Walls A and B October 15, 2009
Carlsbad, Cahfomia Project No. 106641001
P
k
k
1. INTRODUCTION
In accordance with your request and our proposal dated April 12,2009, we have performed a geo-
2 technical evaluation for the proposed Retaining Walls A and B, which will be constmcted as part of
the El Camino Real widening project located in Carlsbad, Califomia (Figure 1). The purpose of
^ this study was to evaluate the subsurface conditions at the project site and to provide design rec-
ommendations for the constmction of the proposed retaining walls. This report presents our
2 findings, conclusions, and recommendations regarding the subject project.
C 2. SCOPE OF SERVICES
fp, Ninyo & Moore's scope of services for this project included review of pertinent background
k data, performance of a geologic reconnaissance and subsurface evaluation, and engineering
im analysis with regard to the proposed project. Specifically, we performed the following tasks:
k
• Reviewing background data listed in the References section of this report. The data reviewed
w included geoteclmical literature, topographic maps, geologic data, fauU maps, and a site plan
^ for the project.
m • Performing a geologic reconnaissance of the proposed retaining wall sites including the ob-
y servation and mapping of geologic conditions and the evaluation of possible geologic
hazards which may impact the proposed project.
^ • Marking proposed boring locations prior to contacting Underground Service Alert (USA) for
underground utility clearance at the project site.
I"
^ • Perfomiing a subsurface evaluation consisting of drilling six small diameter borings to
evaluate the subsurface conditions.
^ • Performing geotechnical laboratory testing on selected soil samples to evaluate design
parameters.
P
^ • Compiling and analyzing the data obtained from our background research, subsurface
evaluation, and laboratory testing.
P
^ • Preparing this report presenting our findings, conclusions, and recommendations regarding
the geotechnical design and constmction of the project.
k
P
k
k
106641001 Rdoc
^ El Camino Real Widening, Retaining Walls A and B October 15, 2009
Carlsbad, Califomia Project No. 106641001
IP
m
k
p
p
k
3. SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed Retaining Walls A and B project is located along the west side of El Camino Real
at approximate Stations 513+70 to 526+40 between Tamarack and Chestnut Avenues in Carls-
bad, Cahfomia. The project area consists of a four-lane asphah paved street bordered by
ascending slopes to the west. The site is developed with paved curbs and gutters along the west
side ofthe street. Several underground utility lines were observed within the project area includ-
ing storm drains crossing the proposed retaining wall alignment. Overhead electrical lines and
communication lines were also observed along the east side of Ei Camino Real in a residential
area. Elevations along EI Camino Real at the project site range from a low of approximately 156
feet above mean sea level (MSL) to a high of approximately 216 feet MSL at the northem end of
Mi
^ the site. Vegetation on the slopes adjacent to the proposed retaining wall generally consists of a
moderate growth of grass, weeds, bmsh, and trees.
^ Based on our review of the retaining wall plan and profile provided to us by Simon Wong Engi-
neering (2009), it is our understanding that the proposed soldier pile retaining walls with
sculpted shotcrete over timber lagging will be constmcted in two segments. Retaining wall 'A'
^ will be approximately 338 feet long and retaining wall 'B' will be approximately 896 feet long,
with heights of 10 and 14 feet, respectively. Natural slopes above the proposed retaining wall
vary in gradient from approximately 2:1 to 1:1.
^ 4. SUBSURFACE EVALUATION AND LABORATORY TESTING
Our subsurface evaluation was conducted on August 20 and 21, 2009 and consisted of drilling
P
Il six small diameter borings with a tmck mounted drill rig to depths of up to approximately
41.5 feet. The boring locations were selected based on the results of our background review, field
r
In reconnaissance, the anticipated constmction at the site, and locations of existing utilities. Prior to
commencing the subsurface evaluation, USA was notified for mark-out of the existing utilities.
k The approximate locations of the borings are presented on Figures 2A and 2B. The boring logs
_ are presented in Appendix A.
106641001 Rdoc
El Camino Real Widening, Retaining Walls A and B October 15,2009
Carlsbad, Califomia Project No. 106641001
m
P
p
k
P Laboratory testing of representative soil samples included an evaluation of in-place moisture and
density, shear strength, and soil corrosivity. The results of the laboratory tests performed are pre-
P sented in Appendix B.
5. GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Our findings regarding regional and site geology and groundwater conditions at the subject site
are provided in the following sections.
5.1. Regional and Geologic Setting
The project area is situated in the San Diego County coastal section of the Peninsular
Ranges Geomorphic Province. This geomorphic province encompasses an area that extends
approximately 900 miles from the Transverse Ranges and the Los Angeles Basin south to
the southem tip of Baja Califomia (Norris and Webb, 1990). The province varies in width
from approximately 30 to 100 miles. In general, the province consists of mgged mountains
imderlain by Jurassic metavolcanic and metasedimentary rocks, and Cretaceous igneous
rocks ofthe southem Califomia batholith. The portion of the province in San Diego County
that includes the project area consists generally of Tertiary sedimentary rock.
5.2. Site Geology
Geologic units encountered during our reconnaissance and subsurface evaluation included
fill, alluvium, and materials of the Santiago Formation. Generalized descriptions of the units
encountered are provided in the subsequent sections. More detailed descriptions are pro-
vided on the boring logs in Appendix A.
5.2.1. Fill
Fill was encountered in borings B-1 through B-6 from beneath the existing pavement
section to depths of approximately 2 to 3 feet. As observed and encountered, the materi-
als generally consisted of brown, damp to moist, medium dense, silty fine to coarse
sand. Fill materials are not expected to be encountered at the retaining wall locations.
pi 106641001 Rdoc
k
p
p
m
m
p
El Camino Real Widening, Retaining Walls A and B October 15, 2009
Carisbad, Califomia Project No. 106641001
* 5.2.2. Alluvium
HI Alluvium is present along portions of the site and was encountered in beneath the
roadway in borings B-1, B-2, and B-6 from beneath the fill to depths of approxi-
mately 21, 35, and 9 feet, respectively. As encountered, the materials generally
consisted of various shades of brown and reddish brown, moist to wet, medium
dense to dense, clayey, silty, or poorly graded sand and very stiff sandy clay.
5.2.3. Santiago Formation
Materials of the Santiago Formation were encountered in borings B-I, B-3, B-4, B-5,
and B-6 underlying the fill and/or alluvium to the depths explored. As encountered, the
materials generally consisted of light to dark shades of olive gray, brown, and white,
damp to moist, weakly to moderately cemented, clayey, silty, fme to coarse-grained
sandstone interbedded with moderately indurated, sandy and clayey siltstone and sandy
claystone. Boring B-4 met shallow drilling refusal at approximately 20 feet due to the
cemented nature ofthe underlying materials. Materials ofthe Sanfiago Formation were
observed in the exisfing cut slope and as outcrops along El Camino Real adjacent to
borings B-3, B-4, and B-5.
5.3. Groundwater
Groundwater was not encountered in our borings during the time of our exploration. Based
on our background review of the site, groundwater is estimated to be located at a depth in
excess of 20 feet below the ground surface. Fluctuafions in the groundwater level may occtir
due to variations in ground surface topography, subsurface geologic conditions and stmc-
ture, rainfall, irrigation, and other factors. However, seepage, particularly at geologic
P
k contacts, should be anticipated based on site geology and topography.
k
te
106641001 R.doc
IP
li
p
m k
^ El Camino Real Widening, Retaining Walls A and B October 15,2009
Carlsbad, Cahfomia Project No. 106641001
6. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS
In general, hazards associated with seismic activity include ground surface mpture, strong
ground motion, tsunamis, and liquefaction. These considerations and other geologic hazards such
as landsiiding are discussed in the following secfions.
6.1. Faulting and Seismicity
The project area is considered to be seismically active. Based on our review of the refer-
enced geologic maps and stereoscopic aerial photographs, as well as our geologic field
p
reconnaissance, the subject site is not underlain by known active or potenfially acfive faults
(i.e., faults that exhibit evidence of ground displacement in the last 11,000 years and
^ 2,000,000 years, respectively). Major known active fauhs in the region consist generally of
en-echelon, northwest-striking, right-lateral, strike-slip faults. These include the San
y Clemente, Agua Blanca-Coronado Bank, Newport-Inglewood, and Rose Canyon faults, lo-
cated to the west of the site, and the Whittier-Elsinore, San Jacinto, and San Andreas faults,
^ located to the east of the site. The locations of these faults are shown on Figure 3.
*" The nearest known acfive fauh is the Rose Canyon fauh system, located approximately
km
6 miles west of the site, which can generate an earthquake magnitude of up to 7.2 (Cao,
* etal, 2003). te
^ 6.1.1. Strong Ground Motion
^ The 2007 Califomia Building Code (CBC) recommends that the design of stmctures be
based on the peak horizontal ground acceleration having a 2 percent probability of ex-
te
ceedance in 50 years, which is defined as the Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE).
^ The stafisfical retum period for PGAMCE is approximately 2,475 years. The Design
Earthquake (PGADE) corresponds to two-thirds of the PGAMCE, and this value is typi-
cally used for residenfial and commercial stmctures. Based on our review of subsurface
data, the project site corresponds to a Site Class C. The site modified PGAMCE and
PGADE were esfimated to be 0.49g and 0.33g, respectively, using the United States Geo-
logical Survey (USGS) (USGS, 2009) ground motion calculator (web-based). These
P
li
106641001 R doc
p
k
P
te
P
te
r k
El Camino Real Widening, Retaining Walls A and B October 15, 2009
Carlsbad, Califomia Project No. 106641001
p estimates of ground motion do not include near-source factors that may be applicable to
ii
the design of stmctures on site.
P
k
6.1.2. Ground Surface Rupture
p Based on our review of the referenced literature and our site reconnaissance, no active
faults are known to cross the project site. Therefore, the potential for ground mpture due
g to faulting at the site is unlikely. However, lurching or cracking ofthe ground surface as
a result of nearby seismic events is possible.
6.1.3. Liquefaction and Seismically Induced Settlement
Liquefacfion of cohesionless soils can be caused by strong vibratory motion due to earth-
quakes. Research and historical data indicate that loose granular soils and non-plastic silts
that are saturated by a relatively shallow groundwater table are susceptible to liquefaction.
Based on the dense nature of the formational materials underlying the site and the esti-
mated depth to groundwater, the potential for liquefaction is not a design consideration.
6.2. Landsiiding
Based on our review of published geologic literature and aerial photographs, and our geo-
logic reconnaissance, landslides or related features have not been recognized as underlying
the project site.
p 7. CONCLUSIONS
k Based on our review ofthe referenced background data, geologic field reconnaissance, and sub-
p surface explorafion, it is our opinion that constmcfion of the proposed project is feasible from a
te
" geotechnical standpoint. Geotechnical considerations include the following:
^ • The proposed retaining wall will be installed in Santiago Formation materials consisting of
" claystone, sihstone, and sandstone. Although not anticipated, alluvium may be encoimtered
during drilling.
106641001 Rdoc
p
k El Camino Real Widening, Retaining Walls A and B October 15, 2009
Carlsbad, Califomia Project No. 106641001
P • The proposed earthwork should be feasible with earthmoving equipment in good working or-
k der. However, strongly cemented zones within materials of the Santiago Formation may be
encountered which would entail the use of heavy ripping, rock breakers, or core barrels.
r
^ • Although groundwater was not encountered during drilling, seepage, particularly at geologic
contacts, should be anticipated based on site geology and topography.
r
k • Except where select backfill is recommended, on site materials are generally considered
suitable for reuse as engineered fill provided that they are processed and prepared in accor-
dance with the following recommendations. [
Our analysis indicates that the factor of safety against surficial instability is marginal (not
more than 1.5) for a slope inclination of 1:1 (horizontal to vertical). Therefore, maintenance
of the slope above the wall should be anticipated as the proposed wall system will not ad-
dress surficial slope stability.
The site is subject to strong ground motion in the event of a nearby major earthquake.
Earthquake induced liquefaction is not considered a design consideration due to the density
and consistency of soils encountered during our subsurface exploration and the depth to the
historic high groundwater table.
The potential for an earthquake induced landslide is considered low.
8. RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the results of our subsurface evaluation and our understanding of the proposed con-
stmction, we present the following geotechnical recommendations relative to the design and
construction of the proposed retaining walls. The proposed constmction should also be per-
formed in accordance with the requirements of applicable goveming agencies.
8.1. Earthwork
Based on our understanding of the project, earthwork is anticipated to consist of excavating
earth materials as the soldier pile walls will be constmcted utilizing a "top down" approach.
Earthwork should be performed in accordance with the requirements of applicable govem-
ing agencies and the recommendations presented in this report.
fm 106641001 Rdoc
te
k
p
k
p"
te
to
El Camino Real Widening, Retaining Wails A and B October 15, 2009
Carisbad, Califomia Project No. 106641001
8.1.1. Site Preparation
Prior to excavation, the project site should be cleared of surface obstmctions, existing
pavement sections, and stripped of mbble, debris, vegetation, any loose, wet, or other-
wise unstable soils, as well as surface soils containing organic material. Exisfing
utilities within the project limits should be abandoned, rerouted, or protected from dam-
age by constmction activities. Obstmctions that extend below finish grade, if any,
^ should be removed and the resuhing holes filled with compacted soils. Materials gener-
ated from the clearing operations should be removed from the site and disposed of at a
^ legal dumpsite away from the project area,
te
^ As indicated in the preliminary plans, the proposed soldier pile walls will be constmcted
^ against existing cut slopes with inclinations ranging from 0.66:1 to 2:1. Based on the
p weathered nature of shallow formational materials, we anticipate that further excavation
may be recommended during constmction beyond the scheduled cut for the soldier pile
and lagging wall. The geotechnical representative should evaluate the cut materials
should potentially expansive or otherwise unsuitable soil be encountered behind the
planned retaining wall.
8.1.2. Excavation Characteristics
We anticipate that excavation of the site materials can generally be accomplished with
p heavy constmction equipment in good operating condition. Strongly cemented zones
k
™ within the Santiago Formation (concretions) may be encountered at the site and will be
p difficult to rip or drill through. The use of heavy ripping and/or rock breaking equip-
k
ment or core barrels should be anticipated.
• 8.1.3. Materials for Fill
P On-site soils relatively free of organics are suitable for reuse as fill. Fill material should
" generally not contain rocks or lumps over approximately 3 inches, and generally not
P more than approximately 30 percent larger than 3/4 inch. Utility trench backfill material
k
should not contain rocks or lumps over approximately 3 inches in general. Soils classi-k
|PK 106641001 Rdoc
te
El Camino Real Widening, Retaining Walls A and B
Carlsbad, Califomia
October 15, 2009
Project No. 106641001
P
te
fied as silts or clays should not be used for backfill behind retaining walls or in the util-
ity pipe zone. Larger chunks, if generated during excavafion, may be broken into
acceptably sized pieces or disposed of off site. Imported fill material, if needed for the
project, should generally be granular soils wilh a very low to low expansion potential
(i.e., an EI of 50 or less as evaluated by the American Society for Testing and Materi-
als [ASTM] D 4829). Import material should also be non-corrosive in accordance with
the Caltrans (2003) corrosion guidelines. Materials for use as fill should be evaluated by
Ninyo & Moore's representative prior to filling or importing. A summary of these rec-
ommendations are presented in the following table.
Table 1 - Recommended Materials
Material and Use Source Recommendation^'^
Select Fill
- for retaining wall backfill^ Import
Sand Equivalent of 20 or more
100 percent passing 1-inch sieve
0 to 12 percent passing No. 200 sieve
General Fill
- for uses not otherwise specified On-site borrow No additional requirements'
Select Permeable Aggregate
- subdrain, soldier-pi le-and-lagging wall Import Class 2; CSS" Section 68-1.025
Notes:
' In general, fill should be &ee of rocks or lumps in excess of 3 inches in diameter, trash, debris, roots, vegetation
or other deleterious material.
^ In general, import fill should be tested or documented to be non-corrosive' and free from hazardous materials in
concentrations above levels of concem.
' Non-corrosive as defined by the Corrosion Guidelines version 1.0 (Caltrans, 2003).
CSS is Califomia Standard Specifications (Caltrans, 2006)
' Placed above a plane rising up and away from the bottom of the wall lagging at a 1:1 angle.
8.1.4. Compacted Fill
Prior to placement of compacted fill, the contractor should request an evaluation of the
exposed groimd surface by Ninyo & Moore. Unless otherwise recommended, the exposed
ground surface should then be scarified to a depth of approximately 8 inches and watered
or dried, as needed, to achieve moisture contents generally above the optimtmi moisture
content. The scarified materials should then be compacted to a relative compaction of
90 percent as evaluated in accordance with ASTM D 1557. The evaluation of compaction
by the geotechnical consultant should not be considered to preclude any requirements for
k
106641001 Rdoc
El Camino Real Widening, Retaining Walls A and B October 15, 2009
Carlsbad, Califomia ProjectNo. 106641001
p
ii
m
te observation or approval by goveming agencies. It is the contractor's responsibility to no-
tify the geotechnical consultant and the appropriate goveming agency when the project
^ area is ready for observation, and to provide reasonable time for that review,
te
^ Fill materials should be moisture conditioned to generally above the laboratory opti-
te miun moisture content prior to placement. The optimum moisture content will vary with
p, material type and other factors. Moisture conditioning of fill soils should be generally
te consistent within the soil mass.
^ Prior to placement of additional compacted fill material following a delay in the grading
operations, the exposed surface of previously compacted fill should be prepared to receive
^ fill. Preparafion may include scarification, moisture conditioning, and recompaction.
^ Compacted fill should be placed in horizontal lifts of approximately 8 inches in loose
thickness. Prior to compacfion, each lift should be watered or dried as needed to achieve
*^ a moistiu-e content generally above the laboratory optimum, mixed, and then compacted
by mechanical methods, using sheepsfoot rollers, multiple-wheel pneumatic-tired rollers
or other appropriate compacting rollers, to a relative compacfion of 90 percent as evalu-
ated by ASTM D 1557. Successive lifts should be treated in a like manner until the
^ desired finished grades are achieved, te
P 8.1.5. Fill Slopes
k
Should fill slopes be needed to accomplish the project, fill slopes should not be steeper than
F 2:1, unless otherwise recommended by Ninyo & Moore and approved by the regulating
agencies. Compaction of the face of fill slopes should be performed by backrolling at inter-
vals of 4 feet or less in vertical slope height, or as dictated by the capability of the available
equipment, whichever is less. Fill slopes should be backroiled utilizing a conventional
sheepsfoot-type roller. Care should be taken to maintain the desired moisture conditions
and/or reestablish them, as needed, prior to backrolling.
k
p
te
106641001 Rdoc 10
p
il
te
PI
te
pi
P
El Camino Real Widening, Retaining Walls A and B October 15, 2009
Carlsbad, Califomia ProjectNo. 106641001
8.1.6. SiteRunoff
Site runoff should not be permitted to flow over the tops of slopes. Positive drainage
should be established away from the top of slopes. This may be accomplished by utiliz-
ing brow ditches placed at the top of slopes to divert surface mnoff away from the slope
face where drainage devices are not otherwise available.
p, The on-site soils will be suscepfible to erosion; therefore, the project plans and specifi-
te cations should contain design features and constmction requirements to mitigate erosion
ffl of on-site soils during and after constmction. Slopes and other exposed ground surfaces
should be appropriately planted with protective groimd cover.
8.2. Slope Stability
Both surficial and global stability analyses were performed for the proposed retaining wall
system. The intent of the surficial stability analysis was to evaluate the surficial erosion po-
tential ofthe slope area behind the soldier pile wall. Our analysis indicates that the factor of
safety against surficial instability is marginal (not more than 1.5) for a slope inclinafion of
1:1 with a 4-foot zone of saturation beneath the slope face.
Global stability analyses for the retaining wall system were performed using the surface and
subsurface profile of geologic units based on the preliminary project plans and the results of
our exploratory borings. Global stability analysis was perfonned on a representative section
where the wall height is about 14 feet, and a soldier pile and lagging system would be utilized.
The intent ofthe global stability analysis was to evaluate the potenfial for deep-seated, rota-
tional failures (Simplified Janbu type) through Sanfiago Formation materials. The global
stability analysis was also used as a tool to evaluate the need for tieback anchors and the lat-
eral load bearing capacity of the soldier pile wall. A two-dimensional stability analysis
program, GSTABL7, was used for this purpose. The design factors of safety under static and
pseudo-static loading conditions were 1.5 and 1.1, respectively, following accepted geotech-
^ nical practices and agency guidelines. A horizontal acceleration coefficient of 0.15g was
used to evaluate the pseudo-static stability. The bedrock layers were assigned homogeneous,
te
106641001 Rdoc 11
p
ii
p
k
p
pi
te
El Camino Real Widening, Retaining Walls A and B October 15, 2009
Carlsbad, Cahfomia ProjectNo. 106641001
isotropic strength properties derived from laboratory direct shear tests performed during this
evaluafion. Ultimate and peak shear strength values were used for evaluating stability imder
static and pseudo-static loading conditions, respectively.
IP Our global stability analyses indicate that the proposed soldier-pile-and-lagging walls retain-
hl ing slopes up to 1:1 inclinafion have adequate factors of safety imder static and pseudo-static
E loading conditions provided the recommendafions presented in the following sections are
implemented into project design and constmcfion.
8.3. Retaining Walls
Recommendations are presented in the following secfion for a soldier-pile-and-lagging
wall to support the planned cut. Soldier pile and lagging walls are typically constmcted in
a top-down fashion and generally do not entail significant excavation behind the wall. As
such, soldier pile and lagging walls are well-suited to support cut faces, particularly on
slopes. We understand that buried vaufts may also be constmcted on the order of 8 feet
deep as part of the project.
8.3.1. Soldier Pile and Lagging Wall
Soldier pile and lagging walls may be used to retain soil adjacent to the proposed road
widening. A soldier pile and lagging wall generally consists of wide-flange steel beams
set into drilled concrete piers. Wood, steel, or pre-cast concrete lagging supports the re-
tained soil between the soldier piles. Wood lagging should be appropriately treated to
reduce the potential for deterioration. Steel and concrete lagging should be specified
with consideration for the corrosive or deleterious nature of the on-site soil materials
(Section 8.1.3). Use of non-corrosive wall backfill material may reduce the potential for
corrosion of steel members or sulfate attack on concrete. Recommendafions for concrete
cover over steel in the drilled piers are presented in our Concrete secfion.
Soldier-pile-and-lagging walls may be designed for yielding conditions wherein the
wall rotates away from the retained soil and the at-rest earth pressures are reduced to
106641001 Rdoc 12
te El Camino Real Widening, Retaining Walls A and B
Carlsbad, Califomia
October 15,2009
ProjectNo. 106641001
P
il
p
p
p
k
I"
te
te
P k
p
k
m
active pressures. The movement of the top of the wall to develop active pressures
should be about one tenth of one percent of the wall height for walls retaining
formational materials, assuming weathered, expansive materials are generally removed.
Soldier-pile-and-lagging walls should be designed for the active and passive earth pres-
sures listed in Table 2. Where the engineer indicates that cut exposes expansive on-site
soils, they should be removed from the zone of influence behind the wall and replaced
with select fill to reduce the relatively high active lateral earth pressures characteristic
of expansive soils. Active lateral earth pressures for anticipated cut materials and select
import backfill are presented. Walls retaining flat ground are not anticipated, however,
sloping ground above the cut is considered. The recommended pressures should be con-
sidered ultimate values and do not include a factor of safety.
Table 2 - Soldier Pile Wall Design Parameters
Retained
Slope
(H:V)
Assumed Backfill
Material
Active
Equivalent Fluid
Pressure
Seismic
Earth
Pressure
Passive
Equivalent
Fluid
Pressure
2;1 Rising Select Fill or Formation
with Drainage 30 -350
1.5:1 Rising Select Fill or Formation
with Drainage 36 -350
1:1 Rising Select Fill or Formation
with Drainage 50 ~ 350
Notes:
' Backfill material within the zone of influence which is above a plane rising up and away from the bottom ofthe
lagging at a 1:1 gradient.
^ Lateral pressure assumes no additional surcharge from structures or equipment.
^ Equivalent fluid pressure acting on the soldier piles and lagging in pounds per cubic foot (pcf).
Seismic earth pressure may be neglected for short walls (retaining less than 12 feet of soil).
^ Equivalent ultimate fluid pressure acting on the soldier piles. The passive pressure should be neglected to a
depth of one foot below the backfill surface when the backfill surface is not covered by a concrete slab or as-
phalt pavement. The passive resistance may be increased by one-third when considering loads of short duration
such as wind or seismic forces.
Once the depth of embedment and point of rotation are selected to meet static and mo-
ment equilibrium at the tip (base) of the soldier pile, the depth of embedment should be
increased by 20 to 40 percent for an approximate factor of safety of 1.5 to 2.0, respec-
tively. Global stability of retaining walls is addressed previously.
106641001 Rdoc 13
PI
k
p
H
te
to
p
p
te
EI Camino Real Widening, Retaining Walls A and B October 15, 2009
Carlsbad, Califomia Project No. 106641001
Soldier piles may be designed for an allowable side friction of 16L pounds per square
foot to resist vertical loads where 'L' is the pile embedment length in feet. The soldier
piles may be considered to have an effective width (with respect to earth pressures) of
3B, where 'B' is the diameter of the concrete pier, provided that the center-to-center
spacing ofthe soldier piles is equivalent to 3B or wider An effective pier width equiva-
lent to the pier spacing may be assumed where the center-to-center spacing is less than
3B. On level ground, lagging should be continued to 1 foot below grade at the bottom of
the wall. On sloping ground, the lagging should be continued to I foot below the point
where there is 5 feet of lateral clearance between the wall and the slope face. Passive
pressure should be neglected above the bottom of the lagging. The vertical distance
from the bottom of the lagging to the grade of the retained soil should be used as the
wall height for design purposes.
Should granular backfill be used to fill gaps between the cut and the wall, measures
should be taken to reduce potenfial for erosion and loss ofthe retained soil. Filter fabric
(Mirafi 140NC or equivalent) should be placed against the backside of the cut to sepa-
rate the granular backfill. To reduce discoloration and corrosion attack due to seepage
through the wall facing, sealant may be placed between lagging members. Because the
wall will receive a shotcrete texture, geocomposite drain panels (Miradrain 6000XL, or
similar) should be careftrlly installed as strip drains between the lagging members and
the retained soil. The strip drain panels should be 2 feet wide or more and each panel
oufiet by weepholes if a slip hazard is not present at the toe of wall. If seepage at the toe
of wall is not tolerable, the strip drain should extend below the lagging into a subdrain
trench constmcted in front of the wall, below the bottom elevafion of the lagging. The
subdrain trench should be backfilled with select permeable aggregate (Section 8.1.3)
and capped with a pavement, concrete slab, or 1 foot of native soil. Perforated pipe
(Schedule 40 PVC) should be placed within the subdrain trench and sloped at 1 percent
or more towards a solid collector pipe (Schedule 40 PVC). Approximately 4 cubic feet
of select permeable aggregate per linear foot should be placed around the perforated
pipe. Cmshed rock wrapped with filter fabric is not a suitable altemative to select per-
106641001 R.doc 14
El Camino Real Widening, Retaining Walls A and B October 15,2009
Carlsbad, Califomia ProjectNo. I0664100I
k
p
k
p
meable aggregate for this application. The collector pipe should be sloped at 2 percent
or more to discharge at a suitable outiet away from the wall. Cleanouts should be pro-
vided to facilitate periodic maintenance. The outfall from the collector pipe should be
equipped with an energy dissipater and rodent screens. The geotechnical engineer
should be provided an opportunity to observe subdrain constmcfion, should it be the se-
lected drainage method.
Soldier piles should be installed close to the planned location. The soldier piles should
not be out of plumb by more than 5 percent over the length of the pile. Furthermore, the
top ofthe pile should be within 3 inches ofthe design location. Cast-in-drilled-hole sol-
dier piles should be drilled to the specified depth, and the shaft bottom should be
cleaned of loose material prior to pouring concrete. Excavations may not remain stable
for a significant length of fime. The contractor should be prepared to use temporary cas-
ing or drilling fluid to inhibit the shaft excavafion from collapsing. Standing water
should be removed from the pier excavation or the concrete should be delivered to the
bottom of the excavafion, below the water surface, by tremie pipe. Casing, if used,
should be removed from the excavafion as the concrete is placed. Concrete should be
placed in a manner that reduces the potential for segregation of the components. The
drilled hole above the poured concrete may need to be backfilled with lean concrete to
stabilize the hole while the excavafion proceeds and lagging is installed.
The geotechnical consuhant should be permitted to observe the drilling and constmction
of the soldier piles to check that the embedment criteria are satisfied, the materials en-
ll countered match the design assiunpfions, and that the appropriate constmction
p, procedures were followed,
li
_ 8.3.2. Buried Vaults
te Should buried vauhs be planned for the site as part of a storm drain system, the vauh
walls may be designed to resist an earth pressure from backfill equivalent to a fluid with
106641001 Rdoc 15
El Camino Real Widening, Retaining Walls A and B
Carlsbad, Califomia
m
te
k
k
p
p
I"
te
E
p
te
te
October 15, 2009
ProjectNo. 106641001
a unit weight of 60 poimds per cubic foot. Vauhs should be tmderlain with approxi-
mately 1 foot of cmshed rock.
8.4. Seismic Design Parameters
Proposed improvements should be designed in accordance with the requirements of govem-
ing jurisdictions and applicable building codes. Table 3 presents the seismic design
parameters for the site in accordance with CBC (2007) guidelines and mapped spectral ac-
celeration parameters (USGS, 2009).
k Table 3 - Seismic Design Parameters
f k
Parameters Values f k Site Class C
Site Coefficient, Fa 1.000
Site Coefficient, Fy 1.338
to Mapped Short Period Spectral Acceleration, Ss 1.221g
m Mapped One-Second Period Spectral Acceleration, Sj 0.462g
te Short Period Spectral Acceleration Adjusted For Site Class, SMS 1.22Ig te One-Second Period Spectral Acceleration Adjusted For Site Class, SMI 0.618g
Design Short Period Spectral Acceleration, SDS 0.814g
te Design One-Second Period Spectral Acceleration, SDI 0.412g
8.5. Corrosion
Laboratory testing was performed on two representative samples of the on-site soils to
evaluate pH and electrical resistivity, as well as chloride and sulfate contents. The pH and
electrical resistivity tests were performed in accordance with the Califomia Test (CT) 643
and the sulfate and chloride content tests were performed in accordance with CT417 and
422, respectively. These laboratory test results are presented in Appendix B.
The results ofthe corrosivity tesfing indicated that the electrical resisfivity ranged from 850
to 3,000 ohm-cm, a soil pH of 6.9, a chloride content range of 250 to 290 parts per mil-
lion (ppm) and a sulfate content range of 0.006 to 0.060 percent (i.e., 60 to 600 ppm). Based
on the Caltrans (2003) criteria, the project site would not be classified as corrosive, which is
106641001 Rdoc 16
te
p
ite
p
p
to
El Camino Real Widening, Retaining Walls A and B October 15,2009
Carlsbad, Califomia ProjectNo. 106641001
^ defined as a site having soils with more than 500 ppm of chlorides, more than 0.2 percent
to
sulfates or a pH less than 5.5.
m k
8.6. Concrete
Concrete in contact with soil or water that contains high concentrations of water-soluble
sulfates can be subject to premature chemical and/or physical deterioration. The soil samples
2 tested in this evaluation indicated water-soluble sulfate content range of 0.006 to 0.060 per-
cent (i.e., 60 to 600 ppm). Based on the American Concrete Institute (ACI) criteria (2008),
P
^ the potential for sulfate attack is negligible for water-soluble sulfate contents in soils ranging
from about 0.0 to 0.10 percent by weight (0 to 1,000 ppm) and Type II cement may be used
^ for concrete constmction. However, due to the variability of site soils, consideration should
be given to using Type IW cement and concrete with a water-cement ratio no higher than
^ 0.45 by weight for normal weight aggregate concrete and a 28-day compressive strength of
4,500 pounds per square inch or more for the project. A 3-inch thick concrete cover should
^ be maintained over reinforcing steel where concrete is in contact with soil in accordance
with Secfion 7.7 of ACI Committee 318 (ACI, 2008).
8.7. Pre-Construction Conference
to We reconunend that a pre-constmction meeting be held prior to commencement of constmc-
tion activities. The ovmer or his representative, the agency representatives, the architect, the
civil engineer, Ninyo & Moore, and the contractor should be in attendance to discuss the
plans, the project, and the proposed constmction schedule.
8.8. Plan Review and Construction Observation
The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based on analysis of ob-
served conditions in widely spaced exploratory excavations. If conditions are found to vary
from those described in this report, Ninyo & Moore should be notified, and additional recom-
mendations will be provided upon request. Ninyo & Moore should review the final project
106641001 Rdoc 17
te
p
p
to
El Camino Real Widening, Retaining Walls A and B October 15, 2009
Carisbad, Califomia Project No. 106641001
drawings and specifications prior to the commencement of constmction. Ninyo & Moore
should perfonn the needed observation and testing services during constmction operations.
m
to The recommendations provided in this report are based on the assumption that Ninyo &
^ Moore will provide geotechnical observation and tesfing services during constmction. In the
k event that it is decided not to utilize the services of Ninyo & Moore during constmction, we
E request that the selected consultant provide the client with a letter (with a copy to Ninyo &
Moore) indicating tiiat they tully understand Ninyo & Moore's recommendations, and that
IP, they are in full agreement witii the design parameters and recommendations contained in tiiis to
• report. Constmction of proposed improvements should be performed by qualified subcon-
pi tractors utilizing appropriate techniques and constmction materials.
k
r 9. LIMITATIONS to
The field evaluation, laboratory testing, and geotechnical analyses presented in this geotechnical
^ report have been conducted in general accordance with current practice and the standard of care
exercised by geotechnical consultants performing similar tasks in the project area. No warranty,
^ expressed or implied, is made regarding die conclusions, recommendations, and opinions pre-
sented in this report. There is no evaluation detailed enough to reveal every subsurface condition.
^ Variations may exist and conditions not observed or described in this report may be encountered
^ during constmcfion. Uncertainfies relative to subsiuface condifions can be reduced through addi-
^ fional subsurface exploration. Addifional subsurface evaluation will be performed upon request.
Please also note tiiat our evaluation was limited to assessment of tiie geotechnical aspects ofthe
p
project, and did not include evaluation of stmctural issues, environmental concems, or the pres-
ence of hazardous materials.
This document is intended to be used only in its entirety. No portion ofthe document, by itself, is
designed to completely represent any aspect of tiie project described herein. Ninyo & Moore
should be contacted if the reader requires additional informafion or has questions regarding the
content, interpretations presented, or completeness of this document.
106641001 Rdoc
^ EI Camino Real Widening, Retaining Walls A and B October 15, 2009
Carlsbad, Califomia Project No. 106641001
1^
c
c
k
to
This report is intended for design purposes only. It does not provide sufficient data to prepare an
accurate bid by contractors. It is suggested that the bidders and their geotechnical consultant per-
form an independent evaluation of the subsurface conditions in the project areas. The independent
evaluations may include, but not be limited to, review of otiier geotechnical reports prepared for
the adjacent areas, site reconnaissance, and additional exploration and laboratory testing.
Our conclusions, recommendations, and opinions are based on an analysis of the observed site
conditions. If geotechnical conditions different from tiiose described in this report are encountered,
our office should be notified, and additional recommendations, if warranted, will be provided upon
request. It should be understood that the conditions of a site could change with time as a result of
natural processes or the activities of man at the subject site or nearby sites. In addition, changes to
the applicable laws, regulations, codes, and standards of practice may occur due to govemment ac-
p tion or the broadening of knowledge. The findmgs of this report may, tiierefore, be invalidated over
time, in part or in whole, by changes over which Ninyo & Moore has no controls.
P
^ This report is intended exclusively for use by tiie client. Any use or reuse of tiie findings, conclu-
sions, and/or recommendafions of this report by parties other than the client is undertaken at said
^ parties' sole risk.
p
to
m
k
0m 106641001 Rdoc
te
19
in
i
to
m
to
p
p
to
to
pi
to
P
pi
te
p
to
pm
to
El Camino Real Widening, Retaining Walls A and B October 15, 2009
Carlsbad, Cahfomia ProjectNo. 106641001
Pi 10. REFERENCES
to
American Concrete Institute (ACI), 2005, ACI 318-05 Building Code Requirements for Stmc-
tural Concrete and Commentary.
American Concrete Insfitute, 2009, ACI Manual of Concrete Practice.
Califomia Building Standards Commission (CBSC), 2007, Califomia Building Code (CBC) Ti-
tle 24, Part 2, Volumes 1 and 2.
Califomia Department of Conservation Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG), 1998, Maps of
IM Known Active Fauh Near-Source Zones in Califomia and Adjacent Portions of Nevada:
dated Febmary.
jjg Califomia Department of Transportation (Caltrans), 2003, Corrosion Guidehnes (Version 1.0), Divi-
sion of Engineering and Testing Services, Corrosion Technology Branch: dated September.
Cao, T, Bryant, W.A., Rowshandel, B., Branum, D., and Wills, C.J., Califomia Geological Sur-
vey (CGS), 2003, The Revised 2002 Califomia Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Maps.
County of San Diego, 1963, Topographic Survey, Sheet 362-1671, Scale 1" = 200'.
County of San Diego, 1975, Orthotopographic Survey, Sheet 362-1671, Scale 1" = 200'.
Jennings, C.W., 1994, Fault Activity Map of Califomia and Adjacent Areas: Califomia Division
of Mines and Geology, Califomia Geologic Data Map Series, Map No. 6 Scale
1:750,000.
Kennedy, M.P and Tan, S.S., 2005, Geologic Map of tiie Oceanside 30 x 60 Quadrangle Cali-
fomia, Scale 1:100,000.
k Norris, R. M. and Webb, R. W, 1990, Geology of Califomia, Second Edition: John Wiley &
Sons, Inc.
Public Works Standards, Inc., 2006, "Greenbook," Standard Specifications for Public Works Con-
stmction.
Tan, S.S., and Giffen, D.G, 1995, Landslide Hazards in tiie Northem Part of tiie San Diego Metro-
politan Area, San Diego County, Califomia, Oceanside and San Luis Rey Ouadranele-
Scale 1:24,000.
United States Department of tiie Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, 1998, Engineering Geology
Field Manual.
United States Geological Survey, 2009 Ground Motion Parameter Calculator v 5.0.8, Worid
Wide Web, http://earthquake.usgs.g0v/research/ha2maps/design/.
United States Geological Survey, 1968 (photo-revised 1975), San Luis Rey Quadrangle, Califor-
nia, San Diego County, 7.5-Minute Series (Topographic): Scale 1:24,000.
106641001 Rdoc
PI
El Camino Real Widening, Retaining Walls A and B
Carlsbad, Califomia
October 15, 2009
ProjectNo. 106641001
P
to
m
to
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS
Source Date Flight Numbers Scale
United States Department of
Agriculture April 11, 1953 AXN-8M 102 and 103 1:20,000
p
to
p
II
pi
to
L
[
te
to
to
106641001 Rdoc 21
.OKI •ft
PKlflC cast
PIA2A
T .l>>.!,> H
Hi
HIMC05TA
Wfg^COLLm
PACKARD
rr=4^ "/in, ^
PlWA M
q«t58«
sill
of
'""us "
•To* ^\
SITE
i" "Tin •
X
^1/
^3
REFERENCE: 2005 THOMAS GUIDE FOR SAN DIEGO COUNTY, STREET GUIDE AND DIRECTORY,
APPROXIMATE SCALE
2400 4800 FEET
^40TE• ALL DIMENSIONS, DIRECTIONS AND LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE
Map IS Rand McNally. R.L.07-S-129
N
A
SITE LOCATION MAP FIGURE
1 PROJECT NO. DATE EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING RETAINING WALLS A AND B
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
FIGURE
1 106641001 10/09
EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING RETAINING WALLS A AND B
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
FIGURE
1
Tsa
Tsa
-i? —
TD-35'
>B-3
Tsa
rinnfi.iinn -i -i n n n"ii.if,ii rt n ri ii i
CD
I S
•> ' =
-iiuaJ CD
Qal
-PT -
LU LU
.9 CO
Qal
•
: 1
UJ
LEGEND
TD-41'
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF
EXPLORATORY BORING
TD=TOTAL DEPTH IN FEET
0 0 0 APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF
SOLDIER BEAM WALL
Qal ALLUVIUM
Tsa SANTIAGO FORMATION
—? GEOLOGIC CONTACT QUERIED
WHERE QUESTIONABLE
BEST ORIGINAL
NOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS. DIRECTIONS AND LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE
APPROXIMATE SCALE
100 200 FEET
GEOTECHNICAL MAP FIGURE
2A PROJECT NO. DATE EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING RETAINING WALLS A AND B
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
FIGURE
2A 106641001 10/09
EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING RETAINING WALLS A AND B
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
FIGURE
2A
LEGEND
B-6 ^
TD-41.5'
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF
EXPLORATORY BORING
TD=TOTAL DEPTH IN FEET
0 0 0 APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF
SOLDIER BEAM WALL
Qal ALLUVIUM
Tsa SANTIAGO FORMATION
—? GEOLOGIC CONTACT QUERIED
WHERE QUESTIONABLE
BEST ORIGINAL
NOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS. DIRECTIONS AND LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE
APPROXIMATE SCALE
100 200 FEET
GEOTECHNICAL MAP FIGURE
2B PROJECT NO. DATE EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING RETAINING WALLS A AND B
CARLSBAD. CALIFORNIA
FIGURE
2B 106641001 10/09
EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING RETAINING WALLS A AND B
CARLSBAD. CALIFORNIA
FIGURE
2B
T—
!<5 \
Kern County
Los Angeles County
SAN ^X*^ ^
CAYETANO \ '~ ,
N
Victoa'ille'
! Wrightwood .-i- J^"^l\
^^^^ - ^ >\ \
^'-.i^!lUBu COAST J^^^o^Ang'efes ^..^^^Tna/S* ^f^^^^
Palms
^^'^ SdAy^Bernardino cVuntyNtjj^^g^
~ ^ ^ \\\ , ir^. V • Riverside, V
BANN/, Riverside County
Long*" Beach ""^X-^ ®
Island
^Santa'^(s\
Ana
rvine
Santia Catalina^ * ,San~ "
lesert Ger
--Riverside County^\
ty 1 Imperiai County
^Oceanside
San Clemente
Island
San DiegQ Count
"^A, * Saltan Sea
j'
PACIFIC
OCEAN
LEGEND
CALIFORNIA FAULT ACTIVITY
HISTORICALLY ACTIVE
HOLOCENE ACTIVE
LATE QUATERNARY
(POTENTIALLY ACTIVE)
QUATERNARY
(POTENTIALLY ACTIVE)
STATE/COUNTY BOUNDARY
SOURCE FAULTS - CA DEPT OF CONSERVATION, 2000; BASE - ESRI. 2008
N
A
NOTES. ALL DIRECTIONS, DIMENSIONS AND LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE
APPROXIMATE SCALE
25 50 MILES
FAULT LOCATION MAP FIGURE
3 PROJECT NO. DATE EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING RETAINING WALLS A AND B
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
FIGURE
3 106641001 10/09
EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING RETAINING WALLS A AND B
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
FIGURE
3
El Camino Real Widening, Retaining Walls A and B October 15, 2009
Carlsbad, Califomia ProjectNo. 106641001
APPENDIX A
BORING LOGS
Field Procedure for the Collection of Disturbed Samples
Disturbed soil samples were obtained in the field using the following methods.
Bulk Samples
Bulk samples of representative earth materials were obtained from the exploratory borings.
The samples were bagged and transported to the laboratory for testing.
The Standard Penetration Test Sampler
Disturbed drive samples of earth materials were obtained by means of a Standard Penetra-
tion Test sampler. The sampler is composed of a split barrel with an external diameter of
2 inches and an unlined intemal diameter of 1-3/8 inches. The sampler was driven into the
ground 12 to 18 inches with a 140-pound hammer free-falling from a height of 30 inches in
general accordance with ASTM D 1586. The blow counts were recorded for every 6 inches
of penetration; the blow counts reported on the logs are those for the last 12 inches of pene-
tration. Soil samples were observed and removed from the sampler, bagged, sealed and
transported to the laboratory for testing.
Field Procedure for the Collection of Relatively Undisturbed Samples
Relatively undisturbed soil samples were obtained in the field using the following method.
The Modified Split-Barrel Drive Sampler
The sampler, with an external diameter of 3.0 inches, was lined with 1-inch long, thin brass
rings with inside diameters of approximately 2.4 inches. The sample barrel was driven into
the ground with the weight of a hammer in general accordance with ASTM D 3550. The
driving weight was permitted to fall freely. The approximate length of the fall, the weight of
the hammer, and the number of blows per foot of driving are presented on the boring logs as
an index to the relative resistance of the materials sampled. The samples were removed from
the sample barrel in the brass rings, sealed, and transported to the laboratory for testing.
106641001 R.doc
p
CO
a.
O
m
LU
Q:
o
tr o
a.
(O •z. UJ
Q
Q
n
3
o
r
o
BORING LOG EXPLANATION SHEET
Bulk sample.
Modified spiit-bairel drive sampler.
No recovery with modified split-barrel drive sampler.
Sample retained by others.
Standard Penetration Test (SPT).
No recovery with a SPT.
Shelby tube sample, Distance pushed in inches/length of sample recovered
in inches.
No recovery with Shelby tube sampler.
Continuous Push Sample.
Seepage.
Groundwater encountered during drilling.
Groundwater measured after drilling.
xx«x
10
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
E
t
fciL
?
XL
15
SM ALLUVIUM:
Solid line denotes unit change.
DashedTme dfenotes matenafcFange.
Attitudes: Strike/Dip
b: Bedding
c: Contact
j: Joint
f: Fracture
F: Fault
cs: Clay Seam
s: Shear
bss: Basal Slide Surface
sf: Shear Fracture
sz: Shear Zone
sbs: Sheared Bedding Surface
The total depth line is a solid line that is drawn at the bottom of the
boring.
BORING LOG
EXPLANATION OF BORING LOG SYMBOLS
PROJECT NO. DATE
Rev. 01/03
FIGURE
U.S.C.S. METHOD OF SOIL CLASSIFICATION
MAJOR DIVISIONS SYMBOL TYPICAL NAMES
s 1
S 1
s
o
w a: < o u
5 o o n
d Z
A
GRAVELS
(More than 1/2 of coarse
fraction
> No. 4 sieve size)
SANDS
(More than 1/2 of coarse
fraction
<No. 4 sieve size)
GW
GP
GM
GC
SW
SP
SM
SC
Well graded gravels or gravel-sand mixtures,
little or no fines
Poorly graded gravels or gravel-sand
mixtures, little or no fines
Silty gravels, gravel-sand-silt mixtures
Clayey gravels, gravel-sand-clay mixtures
Well graded sands or gravelly sands, little or
no fines
Poorly graded sands or gravelly sands, little or
no fines
Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures
Clayey sands, sand-clay mixtures
SILTS & CLAYS
Liquid Limit <50
ML Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock fiour,
silty or clayey fine sands or clayey silts with
CL
tu
o
9 ^ d w ^ I S S V
Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity,
gravelly clays, sandy clays, silty clays, lean
OL
SILTS & CLAYS
Liquid Limit >50
Organic silts and organic silty clays of low
plasticity
MH Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous
fine sandy or silty soils, elastic silts
CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays
OH Organic clays of medium to high plasticity,
organic silty clays, organic silts
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS Pt Peat and other highly organic soils
m
GRAIN SIZE CHART
CLASSIFICATION
RANGE OF GRAIN SIZE
CLASSIFICATION
LI.S. Standard
Sieve Size
Grain Size in
Millimeters
BOULDERS Above 12" Above 305
COBBLES 12"to 3" 305 lo 76,2
GRAVEL
Coarse
Fine
3" lo No. 4
3" to 3/4"
3/4" to No. 4
76.2 to 4,76
76,2 to 19,1
19 I to 4.76
SAND
Coarse
Medium
Fine
No. 4 to No, 200
No. 4 to No. 10
No. !0 to No. 40
No, 40 to No. 200
4.76 to 0,075
4,76 lo 2,00
2,00 to 0,420
0.420 lo 0,075
SILT & CLAY Below No, 200 Below 0,075
PLASTICITY CHART
° 10 20 30 ^0 60 6 0 70 8 0 90 100
LIQUID LIMIT (LL), "/»
U.S.C.S. METHOD OF SOIL CLASSIFICATION
uses Soil CIassification
CO UJ
CO
LU ^
Q 3 >
m
O
m
h-co
o
u.
O
CO
z
Ui Q > sr Q
O
CD
>-
o
^ CO
t CO CO
r
DATE DRILLED 8/20/09 BORING NO. B-1
GROUND ELEVATION 156' +(MSL) SHEET 1 OF
METHOD OF DRILLING 6" Diameter Hollow Stem Auger (Pacific Drilling)
DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. (Auto-Trip) DROP 30"
SAMPLED BY MAH LOGGED BY MAH REVIEWED BY
DESCRIPTION/INTERPRETATION
RI
10,0 111.9
10 I 10.1 117.0
15 I 30
ISL
ASPHALT CONCRETE:
V\pproximately 6 inches thick.
SM BASE:
Approximately 6 inches thick.
FILL:
SC \Brown, damp, medium dense, silty fine to medium SAND-
ALLUVIUM;
Brown, moist, medium dense, clayey fine SAND.
CL Dark1)rown, moist, very stiff^fine sandy CLAY.
SM Re3 Brown, moist to wet, me3ium dense, silty fine to medium SAND.
SP Light re3 Brown, moist, medium dense, poorly graBeB SAND; TTttTe clay.
BORING LOG
EL CAWING REAL WIDENING, RETAINING WALLS AND B
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
PROJECT NO,
106641001
DATE
10/09
FIGURE
A-1
CO UJ
<
CO
CD
O
o
55
us
cc
I-co
o
li. o
CL
CO
z UJ o
>-
O
O CD
>-
CO
yd
CO ^
o
DATE DRILLED 8/20/09 BORING NO. B-1
GROUND ELEVATION 156'±(MSL) SHEET OF
METHOD OF DRILLING 6" Diameter Hollow Stem Auger (Pacific Drilling)
DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. (Auto-Trip) DROP
SAMPLED BY MAH LOGGED BY MAH REVIEWED BY
DESCRIPTION/INTERPRETATION
30"
RI
48
25'
50/3"
30
50/5'
35
40
SC ALLUVIUM: (Continued)
Light red to yellow brown, moist, dense, clayey fme SAND; chunk of olive gray, clayey
siltstone in sampler.
SANTIAGO FORMATION:
Olive gray, moist, moderately cemented, clayey silty fme-grained SANDSTONE.
Yellowish gray.
Total Depth - 30.9 feet. ~
Groundwater not encountered diu-ing drilling.
Backfilled with 6 cubic feet grout and capped with asphalt concrete shortly after drilling
on 8/20/09.
Note: Groundwater, though not encountered at the time of drilling, may rise to a higher
level due to seasonal variations in precipitation and several other factors as discussed in
the report.
BORING LOG
EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING, RETAINING WALLS AND B
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
PROJECT NO.
106641OOI
DATE
10/09
FIGURE
A-2
CO
CL
<
CD
o
O
LL
W
CD
UJ CC
I-
co
o
o
Q.
CO
z
LU Q >-CC
a
o
CD
5
>-
CO
o
< CO
yd
CO ^
s
DATE DRILLED 8/21/09 BORING NO. B-2
GROUND ELEVATION 162'± (MSL) SHEET 1 OF
METHOD OF DRILLING 6" Diameter Hollow Stem Auger (Pacific Drilling)
DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs, (Auto-Trip) DROP
SAMPLED BY MAH LOGGED BY MAH REVIEWED BY
DESCRIPTION/INTERPRETATION
30"
RI
10
15
ISL
ASPHALT CONCRETE:
^Approximately 5 inches thick.
SM IBASE:
Approximately 6 inches thick.
FILL:
Brown, moist, medium dense, silty fme to medium SAND.
CL ALLUVIUM:
Brown, moist, stiff, fme sandy CLAY.
Dark brown; more sand.
Light brown.
BORING LOG
EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING, RETAINING WALLS AND B
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNL^
PROJECT NO.
106641001
DATE
10/09
FIGURE
A-3
CO LU
< CO
f-o o
S
o
LU
•:: ZD (-CO
o CD
o
CL
CO z LU Q >-OL
a
Q
^ CO
yd
!i:co
O
DATE DRILLED 8/21/09 BORING NO. B-2
GROUND ELEVATION 162^ (MSL) SHEET OF
METHOD OF DRILLING 6" Diameter Hollow Stem Auger (Pacific Drilling)
DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. (Auto-Trip) DROP
SAMPLED BY MAH LOGGED BY MAH REVIEWED BY
DESCRIPTION/INTERPRETATION
30"
R]
I SC ALLUVIUM: (Continued)
Reddish brown, moist, medium dense, clayey fme to medium SAND.
25
CL ReddTsh brown, moist, very stif!^ fine sandy CLAY.
Brown.
Total Depth - 35 feet. ~ '
Groundwater not encountered during drilling.
Backfilled with 7 cubic feet grout and capped with asphalt concrete shortly after drilling
on 8/20/09.
Note: Groundwater, though not encountered at the time of drilling, may rise to a higher
level due to seasonal variations in precipitation and several other factors as discussed in
the report.
40
BORING LOG
EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING, RETAINING WALLS AND B
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
PROJECT NO,
106641001
DATE
10/09
FIGURE
A-4
0)
vSi
X
1-
Q. LU
a CD
t-o o
O -J CD
LU
a:
I-
W
o
o a.
CO
o >-cc a
g
CO ^
o
DATE DRILLED 8/20/09 BORING NO. B-3
GROUND ELEVATION 175'± (MSL) SHEET 1 OF
METHOD OF DRILLING 6" Diameter Hollow Stem Auger (Pacific Drilling)
DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. (Auto-Trip) DROP
SAMPLED BY MAH LOGGED BY MAH REVIEWED BY
DESCRIPTION/INTERPRETATION
30"
RI
ASPHALT CONCRETE:
v^pproximately 6 inches thick.
SM BASE: 1 pproximately 6 inches thick.
FILL:
Brown, moist, medium dense, silty fme to medium SAND; trace clay; trace mica.
I
15
JSL
34
68
9,4
7.4
11,9
119.3
SANTIAGO FORMATION:
Light olive gray, moist, weakly cemented, silty fme to medium-grained SANDSTONE;
trace clay and mica.
White to light gray; damp; silty fme to coarse-grained; friable.
BORING LOG
EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING, RETAINING WALLS AND B
CARLSBAD, CALIFORMA
PROJECT NO.
106641001
DATE
10/09
FIGURE
A-5
to
Ui
<
to
1-
Q. LU O CD
O
o
LJ.
i
CD
Q
UJ CC 3 I-CO
O
o
D.
(O z
LU Q
>-
OL
Q
Z
o
< CO
yd
CO ^
o
DATE DRILLED 8/20/09 BORING NO. B-3
GROUND ELEVATION 175'± (MSL) SHEET OF
METHOD OF DRILLING 6" Diameter Hollow Stem Auger (Pacific Drilling)
DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. (Auto-Trip) DROP
SAMPLED BY MAH LOGGED BY MAH REVIEWED BY
DESCRIPTION/INTERPRETATION
30"
RI
ID" I 50/5"
25
30 I 50/5"
35
MM
]
]
SANTIAGO FORMATION: (Continued)
Olive gray, moist, moderately indurated, fme sandy SILTSTONE with clay interbedded
with very light gray, moist, weakly cemented, silty fme to medium-grained
SANDSTONE; chunks of brown claystone in sampler; friable.
40
Li^t gray, damp, weakfy to moderately cementedTclayey sntyTme-gramed"
SANDSTONE.
BORING LOG
EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING. RETAINING WALLS AND B
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
PROJECT NO,
106641001
DATE
10/09
FIGURE
A-6
CO LU
S5
CL LU Q
CD
O O
CD
LLI CC
CO
O
O
CO
z UJ o ::-OL a
o
CD >-CO
o
DATE DRILLED 8/20/09 BORING NO. B-3
GROUND ELEVATION 175'± (MSL) SHEET OF
METHOD OF DRILLING 6" Diameter Hollow Stem Auger (Pacific Drilling)
DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. (Auto-Trip) DROP
SAMPLED BY MAH LOGGED BY MAH REVIEWED BY R]
30"
DESCRIPTION/INTERPRETATION
50/6"
45
50
55
_6Q_
SANTIAGO FORMATION: (Continued)
Light gray, damp, weakly to moderately cemented, clayey silty fme-grained
SANDSTONE. Total Depth = 41 feet.
Groundwater not encountered during drilling.
Backfilled with 8 cubic feet grout and capped with asphalt concrete shortly after drilling
on 8/20/09.
Note: Groundwater, though not encountered at the time of drilling, may rise to a higher
level due to seasonal variations in precipitation and several other factors as discussed in
the report.
BORING LOG
EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING, RETAINING WALLS AND B
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
PROJECT NO,
106641001
DATE
10/09
FIGURE
A-7
CO LU
<
CO o o
LL.
CO
LU
a:
CO
o
o
CO
LU O
>-
o
o
CD >• (O
< CO
Od
CO
O
DATE DRILLED 8/20/09 BORING NO. B-4
GROUND ELEVATION 184'±(MSL) SHEET 1 OF
METHOD OF DRILLING 6" Diameter Hollow Stem Auger (Pacific Drilling)
DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs, (Auto-Trip) DROP
SAMPLED BY MAH LOGGED BY MAH REVIEWED BY
DESCRIPTION/INTERPRETATION
30"
RI
I 50/6"
10
15 50/1"
_2Q_
ASPHALT CONCRETE:
^Approximately 6 inches thick.
SM BASE:
7,3 109.1
pproximately 6 inches thick.
FILL:
\Brown, moist, medium dense, silty fine to coarse SAND.
SANTIAGO FORMATION:
Light brown gray, moist, weakly cemented, fme to medium-grained sandy CLAYSTONE
WFite to light gray, damp, weakly cemented, fme to coarse-grained SANDSTONE wit¥
silt; friable.
Very difficuh drilling.
BORING LOG
EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING, RETAINmG WALLS AND B
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNL\
PROJECT NO,
106641001
DATE
10/09
FIGURE
A-8
CO LU
a
LU
Q CD
O
o
Li.
s
o
_i CQ
UJ CC ZD \-
co
O
o
D.
CO z LU
Q
>-a: a
o
CD 5 >-CO
g
*< CO
yd
CO ^
o
DATE DRILLED 8/20/09 BORING NO. B-4
GROUND ELEVATION 184-±(MSL) SHEET OF
METHOD OF DRILLING 6" Diameter Hollow Stem Auger (Pacific Drilling)
DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs, (Auto-Trip) DROP
SAMPLED BY MAH LOGGED BY MAH REVIEWED BY
DESCRIPTION/INTERPRETATION
30"
RJ
25
30
35
40
SANTIAGO FORMATION: (Continued)
White to light gray, moist, moderately cemented, fme-grained SANDSTONE with silt.
Practical reftisal.
total Depth = 20.2 feet.
Groundwater not encountered during drilling.
Backfilled with 4 cubic feet grout and capped with asphalt concrete shortly after drilling
on 8/20/09.
Note: Groundwater, though not encountered at the time of drilling, may rise to a higher
level due to seasonal variations in precipitation and several other factors as discussed in
the report.
BORING LOG
EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING, RETAINING WALLS AND B
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNL\
PROJECT NO.
106641001
DATE
10/09
FIGURE
A-9
CO LU
< CO
CD
O
o
u.
£0
CD
LU
CC
w o
o
CL
CO
z
LU O > OC o
o
CD >-CO
o
is
o
DATE DRILLED 8/20/09 BORING NO. B-5
GROUND ELEVATION 201'± (MSL) SHEET 1 OF
METHOD OF DRILLING 6" Diameter Hollow Stem Auger (Pacific Drilling)
DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs, (Auto-Trip) DROP
SAMPLED BY MAH LOGGED BY MAH REVIEWED BY RJ
30"
DESCRIPTION/INTERPRETATION
ASPHALT CONCRETE:
\Approximately 5 inches thick.
SM BASE:
A.pproximately 6 inches thick.
FILL:
Grayish brown, moist, medium dense, silty fine to coarse SAND; micaceous.
10 1
15
_2£L
50
33
13,3 110.5
SANTIAGO FORMATION:
Light brownish gray, moist, weakly cemented, clayey silty fme-grained SANDSTONE;
interbedded with brown fine sandy SILTSTONE.
White to gray; moist to wet; less clay; friable; micaceous.
BORING LOG
EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING, RETAINING WALLS AND B
CARLSBAD. CALIFORNU
PROJECT NO,
106641001
DATE
10/09
FIGURE
A-10
0. lU
o
CO LU
< CO
CD
O O U-
co
CQ
LU CC ZD
\-
to
o
o
CL
CO
z
LU Q > DC
a
o
CD >-CO
< CO
yd
r
o
DATE DRILLED 8/20/09 BORING NO. B-5
GROUND ELEVATION 201'± (MSL) SHEET OF
METHOD OF DRILLING 6" Diameter Hollow Stem Auger (Pacific Drilling)
DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. (Auto-Trip) DROP
SAMPLED BY MAH LOGGED BY MAH REVIEWED BY
DESCRIPTION/INTERPRETATION
30"
RI
10"
50/4" 17,2 108.0
25 f 59/10"
SANTIAGO FORMATION: (Continued)
White, moist to wet, weakly cemented, silty fine-grained SANDSTONE; fiiable.
Light olive brown; damp; moderately cemented.
30
35
ASL
Total Depth - 26.3 feet.
Groundwater not encountered during drilling.
Backfilled with 5 cubic feet grout and capped with asphalt concrete shortly after drilling
on 8/20/09.
Note: Groundwater, though not encountered at the time of drilling, may rise to a higher
level due to seasonal variations in precipitation and several other factors as discussed in
the report.
BORING LOG
EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING, RETAINING WALLS AND B
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNLi\
PROJECT NO.
106641001
DATE
10/09
FIGURE
A-Il
CD
1-o o
LI.
I
o
LU
1-CO
o
D.
CO
z
UJ D > CC
a
O
CD
> CO r
o
DATE DRILLED 8/20/09 BORING NO. B-6
GROUND ELEVATION 2ir±(MSL) SHEET 1 OF
METHOD OF DRILLING 6" Diameter Hollow Stem Auger (Pacific Drilling)
DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. (Auto-Trip) DROP
SAMPLED BY MAH LOGGED BY MAH REVIEWED BY
DESCRIPTION/INTERPRETATION
30"
RI
10 I
15 I
23
31
50/4"
20
18,0
19.1
107,5
98,2
SM
CL
ASPHALT CONCRETE:
v^pproximately 6 inches thick.
BASE:
Approximately 7 inches thick.
FILL:
piive brown, moist, medium dense, silty fme to medium SAND; frace mica.
ALLUVIUM:
Brown to red brown, moist, very stiff, fme sandy CLAY.
Moist to wet.
Light brown; more sand.
SANTIAGO FORMATION:
Light gray, moist to wet, weakly cemented, clayey fine-grained SANDSTONE
interbedded with light olive brown, moist, weakly to moderately indurated, clayey
SILTSTONE.
Moist.
BORING LOG
EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING, RETAINING WALLS AND B
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
PROJECT NO.
106641001
DATE
10/09
FIGURE
A-12
CO LLI
< CO
CD
O
o
LL
i o _)
CD
lU CC _j
I-
co
o
o
CO
z
UJ
Q >-OL a
g
is
CO ^
o
DATE DRILLED 8/20/09 BORING NO. B-6
GROUND ELEVATION 2ir±(MSL) SHEET OF
METHOD OF DRILLING 6" Diameter Hollow Stem Auger (Pacific Drilling)
DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs, (Auto-Trip) DROP
SAMPLED BY MAH LOGGED BY MAH REVIEWED BY
DESCRIPTION/INTERPRETATION
30"
RI
1(T
25 I 50/4"
]
]
1
SANTIAGO FORMATION: (Continued)
Light gray, moist, weakly cemented, clayey fme-grained SANDSTONE interbedded with
light olive brown, moist, weakly to moderately indurated, clayey SILTSTONE.
Light pmkT)rowTi, moist, weakly cemented^ fine sandy ^LTFTDNE; numerous pieces
light brown; moderately indurated; silty claystone.
Light brown.
Very difficult drilling.
BORING LOG
EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING, RETAINING WALLS AND B
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNL^
PROJECT NO.
106641001
DATE
10/09
FIGURE
A-l 3
CO
<
CO
X
LU O
CD
O O
LJ. I o
CD
LU OC ZD I-(O
O
o
D.
CO
z
LU Q >-cc o
o
CD
>-
CO
O
^ CO
yd
o
DATE DRILLED 8/20/09 BORING NO. B-6
GROUND ELEVATION 2ir±(MSL) SHEET OF
METHOD OF DRILLING 6" Diameter Hollow Stem Auger (Pacific Drilling)
DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. (Auio-Trip) DROP
SAMPLED BY MAH LOGGED BY MAH REVIEWED BY RI
30"
DESCRIPTION/INTERPRETATION
44
SANTIAGO FORMATION: (Continued)
Light olive gray, moist, weakly cemented, clayey fme-gramed SANDSTONE.
45
50-
55
Total Depth = 41.5 feet.
Groundwater not encountered during drilling.
Backfilled with 8 cubic feet grout and capped with asphalt concrete shortly after drilling
on 8/20/09.
Note: Groundwater, though not encountered at the time of drilling, may rise to a higher
level due to seasonal variations in precipitation and several other factors as discussed in
the report.
BORING LOG
EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING, RETAINING WALLS AND B
CARLSBAD. CALIFORNL\
PROJECT NO,
I0664100I
DATE
10/09
FIGURE
A-14
ii El Camino Real Widening, Retaining Walls A and B October 15, 2009
Carlsbad, Califomia ProjectNo. 106641001
APPENDIX B
LABORATORY TESTING
Classification
Soils were visually and texturally classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification
System in general accordance with ASTM D 2488-00. Soil classifications are indicated on the
logs ofthe exploratory borings in Appendix A.
In-Place Moisture and Densitv Tests
The moisture content and dry density of relatively undisturbed samples obtained from the ex-
ploratory borings were evaluated in general accordance with ASTM D 2937. The test resuhs are
presented on the logs of the exploratory borings in Appendix A.
Direct Shear Tests
Direct shear tests were performed on relatively undisturbed samples in general accordance with
ASTM D 3080 to evaluate the shear strength characteristics of selected materials. The samples
were inundated during shearing to represent adverse field conditions. The results are shown on
Figures B-1 through B-3.
Soil Corrosivity Tests
Soil pH, and electrical resistivity tests were performed on a representative sample in general ac-
cordance with CT643. The chloride content of the selected sample was evaluated in general
accordance with CT 422. The sulfate content of the selected sample was evaluated in general ac-
cordance with CT 417. The test results are presented on Figure B-4.
fi
m
106641001 Rdoc
5000
u 0 1000 2000 3000 4000
NORMAL STRESS (PSF)
5000
Description Symbol Sample
Location
Depth
(ft)
Shear
Strength
Cohesion, c
(psf)
Friction Angle, ^
(degrees) Soil Type
Clayey SAND B-1 5.0-6.5 Peak 230 39 SC Clayey SAND B-1 5.0-6.5 Peak 230 39 SC
Clayey SAND - -X - -B-1 5.0-6.5 Ultimate 230 34 SC
PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 3080
DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS FIGURE
B-1
PROJECT NO. DATE
EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING. RETAINING WALLS A AND B
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
FIGURE
B-1 106641001 10/09
EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING. RETAINING WALLS A AND B
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
FIGURE
B-1
106641001 SHEAR B-1 @ 5.0-6 5,xls
il
IP
k
k
5000
4000
CO
9^ 3000
CO CO UJ cc H CO
OC
<5 2000
X
CO
1000
>
*
V
. ^
y^ y 1
•
1000 2000 3000
NORMAL STRESS (PSF)
4000 5000
Description Symbol Sample
Location
Depth
(ft)
Shear
Strength
Cohesion, c
(psf)
Friction Angle, (j)
(degrees) Soil Type
Silty SANDSTONE B-3 10.0-11.5 Peak 670 32 Formation Silty SANDSTONE B-3 10.0-11.5 Peak 670 32 Formation
Silty SANDSTONE - -X - -B-3 10.0-11.5 Ultimate 50 32 Formation
PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 3080
DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS FIGURE
B-2 PROJECT NO. DATE
EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING. RETAINING WALLS A AND B
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
FIGURE
B-2 106641001 10/09
EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING. RETAINING WALLS A AND B
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
FIGURE
B-2
106641001 SHEAR B-3 @ 10 0-11.5,xls
5000
4000
CO
9^ 3000
CO CO LU DC I-
co
DC <5 2000
X C/3
1000
u
0 1000 2000 3000 4000
NORMAL STRESS (PSF)
5000
Description Symbol Sample
Location
Depth
(ft)
Shear
Strength
Cohesion, c
(psO
Friction Angle, ij)
(degrees) Soil Type
Sandy CLAY B-6 5.0-6.5 Peak 320 22 CL Sandy CLAY B-6 5.0-6.5 Peak 320 22 CL
Sandy CLAY - -X - -B-6 5.0-6.5 Ultimate 200 22 CL
PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 3080
DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS FIGURE
B-3 PROJECT NO. DATE
EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING, RETAINING WALLS A AND B
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
FIGURE
B-3 106641001 10/09
EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING, RETAINING WALLS A AND B
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
FIGURE
B-3
106641001 SHEAR B-6 @ 5,0-6.5.x)s
SAMPLE
LOCATION
SAMPLE DEPTH
(FT)
RESISTIVITY ^
(Ohm-cm)
SULFATE CONTENT ^
(ppm) (%)
CHLORIDE
CONTENT ^
(ppm)
B-2
B-5
6.0-10.0
2.0-5.0
6.9
6.9
3,000
850
60
600
0,006
0.060
250
290
PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH CALIFORNIA TEST METHOD 643
PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH CALIFORNIA TEST METHOD 417
PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WfTH CALIFORNIA TEST METHOD 422
CORROSIVITY TEST RESULTS FIGURE
B-4 PROJECT NO. DATE
EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING, RETAINING WALLS A AND B
CARLSBAD. CALIFORNIA
FIGURE
B-4 106641001 10/09
EL CAMINO REAL WIDENING, RETAINING WALLS A AND B
CARLSBAD. CALIFORNIA
FIGURE
B-4
106641001 CORROSIVITY Page l.xis