The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2470 FARADAY AVE | 6200 EL CAMINO REAL; ; CB990519; PermitCity of Carlsbad 03/08/1999 Commercial/Industrial Permit Permit No: CB990519 Building Inspection Request Line (760) 438-3101 Job Address: 2470 FARADAY AV CBAD Permit Type: Tl Sub Type: Parcel No: Lot#: Valuation: $100,000.00 Construction Type: Occupancy Group: Reference #: Project Title: BECKMAN COULTER 2400 SF LOADING DOCK W/CANOPY Applicant: ANDREW TARANGO 200 12220 EL CAMINO REAL SAN DIEGO CA 92130 619-793-4777 Total Fees: $1,046.19 Building Permit , Add'I Building Permit Fee i Plan Check : Add'I Plan Check Fee Plan Check Discount Strong Motion Fee Park Fee LFM Fee Bridge Fee STD #2 Fee Renewal Fee Add'I Renewal Fee Other Building Fee Pot. Water Con. Fee Meter Size Add'I Pot. Water Con. Fee Inspector: $0.00 Date: INDUST 0 NEW Status: Applied: Entered By: Plan Approved: Issued: Inspect Area: ISSUED 02/09/1999 DT 03/03/1999 03/08/1999 7172 03/08/99 0001 01 C-PRMT $547.19 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,046.19 Clearance: _____ _ NOTICE: Please take NOTICE tha approval of your project includes the "lmpos ·on" of fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to as "fees/exactions." You have 90 days from the date this permit was issued to protest imposition of these fees/exactions. If you protest them, you must follow the protest procedures set forth in Government Code Section 66020(a), and file the protest and any other required information with the City Manager for processing in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3.32.030. Failure to timely follow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul their imposition. You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right to protest the specified fees/exactions DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capactiy changes, nor planning, zoning, grading or other similar application processing or service fees in connection with this project. NOR DOES IT APPLY to any fees/exactions of which ou have reviousl been iven a NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limitations has reviousl otherwise ex ired. CITY OF CARLSBAD 2075 Las Palmas Dr., Carlsbad, CA 92009 (760) 438-1161 02 PERMIT APPLICATION CITY OF CARLSBAD BUILDING DEPARTMENT 2075 Las Palmas Dr., Carlsbad CA 92009 (760) 438-1161 ',',"!"-"','-' """,,/Y -:-H, y Subdivision Name/Number w1rvic #of Stories - Name Address -City ~;-: -,,1).RPl,;IC~l)l:i'. ~ j~l')Fti;iotoi' , _1:J~ ~g,enCf_or_;~,6n,t_r~¢tor .. ,5w,0wner. .·)&A_g_ent for !)-wner . ,N_ameAfJOjaW t/f@fflG.D" _ Addr~ssft~~-~--Cl+{ IND ,p.fAC Jf2{JDtY __ S , YJ. , ,(l,,,_jfJ:iQ~IT-QWli\IB, ..•.. : ... .,.:-.. ~ ..... :._ .. ,, . .:. .. : ....... -.. -.> .. --. -.. · .. :. _: .. - Name ,. ,.,,, .. ,,., Address ls,'. ·.-cQNIR~Q-TOl'J,,•.QQMl?Al)IY;~l'v!,E. ,. .. : . ' . . .' FOR OFFICE USE ONLY PLAN cHEcK No. c 311cS11 EST. VAL. I 00 , 000 Plan Ck. Deposit 4 0 3 . 8Cc2 Validated By __ ~-'c,,,,"'--'-----,.=--;-;,,.,...,,.,-- Date ~/c;/?/ Unit No. Phase No. Total # of units Proposed Use H # ·9J Bedrooms b.J)l-'.,;.2/ 09 /99 # of Bathrooms 0001 or 02 C-P~MT 499,00 State/Zip Telep'J.'}e # )-\ Fax# · · · --~ -':1¥fY. @"t'i)··7q3 ·111,r, (Sec. 7031.5 Business and Professions Code: Any City or County which requires a permit to construct, alter, improve, demolish or repair any structure, prior to its issuance, also requires the applicant for such permit to file a signed statement that he is licensed pursuant to the provisions of the Contractor's License Law .[Chapter 9, commending with Section 7000 of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code] or that he is exempt therefrom, and the basis for the alleged exemption. Any violation of Section 7031.5 by any applicant for a permit subjects the applicant to a civil penalty of not more than five hundred dollars [$500]). Name State/Zip State License # _ _.__,,_,__,_Cr,.,,...t----City Business License # _______ _ ------c--P~,flli-t---Pr--fdll--t"Fli---:-:--:--;...,,,..'<Tr1,~l::lth;t.lf'rlJ~r---:::---~-ft-----::----::~.-.r=-:----f-hm'l-\-";f6#-+.~17 Designer Nam Address State License # {!, I \ 10 I re:.-:;worullERST<"'ounpfNlS:A;r:troN·. ,-·· ... · ... ~-.--, ·-. "··-·-· ·-. ,,,, __ ....... ., ... ___ ,.,,. ,~ ,.c ,~, !\.....,..,,,«,.-~,,..~· :._ ..,,O'™, ..,,__....,.. ,<,,/N'<W',v,'.<-«<.,.,,_.._,, ,J'<,, ,,,,-,,, ,'',',,,',(,, ,,.~,,~,HW, '"'''', /2.w(,,{,_,-,,',,,,,,,, , Workers' Compensation Declaration: I hereby affirm under penalty of perjury one of the following declarations: 0 I have and will maintain a certificate of consent to self-insure for workers' compensation as provided by Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for the performance of the work for which this permit is issued. ,Kl I have and will maintain workers' compensation, as required by Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for the performance of the work for which this permit is issued. My worker's compensation insurance carrier and policy number are: Insurance Company____________________ Policy No.____________ Expiration Date _______ _ (THIS SECTION NEED NOT BE COMPLETED IF THE PERMIT IS FOR ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS ($1001 OR LESS) D CERTIFICATE OF EXEMPTION: I certify that in the performance of the work for which this permit is issued, I shall not employ any person in any manner so as to become subject to the Workers' Compensation Laws of California. WARNING: Failure to secure workers' compensation coverage is unlawful, and shall subject an employer to criminal penalties and civil fines up to one hundred thousand dollars ($100,900 in diti n to the cost of compensation, damages as provided for in Section 3706 of the Labor code, interest and attorney's fees. SIGNATURE -;-DATE _5 .... !J:--29 . 11,;; __ i,qJ&~1;R:,Qu11;01;11)ilcilJc\. ·. :JQji{. , : ..... :: . : ;· . ·: ~·-~-. _ _-_~~: .. -~:, , . ' .. -· . . .· .i .. ;,' :' ·_ -· ~ , . . ,,, . -"·, I hereby affirm that I am exempt from the Contractor's License Law for the following reason: 0 I, as owner of the property or my employees with wages as their sole compensation, will do the work and the structure is not intended or offered for sale (Sec. 7044, Business and Professions Code: The Contractor's License Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or improves thereon, and who does such work himself or through his own employees, provided that such improvements are not intended or offered for sale. If, however, the building or improvement is sold within one year of completion, the owner-builder will have the burden of proving that he did not build or improve for the purpose of sale). 0 I, as owner of the property, am exclusively contracting with licensed contractors to construct the project (Sec. 7044, Business and Professions Code: The Contractor's License Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or improves thereon, and contracts for such projects with contractor(s) licensed pursuant to the Contractor's License Law). 0 I am exempt under Section ______ Business and Professions Code for this reason: 1. I personally plan to provide the major labor and materials for construction of the proposed property improvement. D YES ONO 2. I (have / have not) signed an application for a building permit for the proposed work. 3. I have contracted _with the following person (firm) to provide the proposed construction (include name / address / phone number / contractors license number): 4. I plan to provide portions of the work, but I have hired the following person to coordinate, supervise and provide the major work (include name / address / phone number/ contractors license number): _____________________________________________ _ 5. I will provide some of the work, but I have contracted (hired) the following persons to provide the work indicated (include name/ address / phone number/ type of work):. _______________________________________________________ _ DATE ----------- Is the applicant or future building occupant required to submit a business plan, acutely hazardous materials registration form or risk management and prevention program under Sections 25505, 25533 or 25534 of the Presley-Tanner Hazardous Substance Account Act? D YES D NO ls the applicant or future building occupant required to obtain a permit from the air pollution control district or air quality management district? D YES D NO Is the facility to be constructed within 1,000 feet of the outer boundary of a school site 7 0 YES D NO IF ANY OF THE ANSWERS ARE YES, A FINAL CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY MAY NOT BE ISSUED UNLESS THE APPLICANT HAS MET OR IS MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES AND THE AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT. @':,-.:9Q~~T.!i@Jf1QNJ,_!$1i!15i~~§~Y . .::-:~:-:::-~.--:-·7_::_:~ ----~~-::~-~~:-~~~---,-~~--, .. :_ --~-.... "; -~--;·. -:. ~--::--.. ·~:._ ... ;::·. _ .... -". -., .. , ., . I hereby affirm that there is a construction lending agency for the performance of the work for which this permit is issued (Sec. 3097(i) Civil Code). LENDER'S NAME:;;:;;;;;;:;:;:;;;::;;;:;;:;;;;:;;;:;;::;:;:::::==:::::::::;:,:-::::;:;::;:::=:::: LENDER'S ADDRESS tlk ~e.e:1iic~t:_q1;.1i'f0:1:ffl,1J>N:"'::-: ... _._: .. .:::-.. >:-: .. : -,~/~::-·:-.Z~::_,-_-::;_-:..:~.:::=, _:;:-:_ :::::::::'.== .. =. ,=. =-=. ~-_-=, .. =._=,,,::; __ =::::-=_=,/=;:=;:=:.::;::,.=,=.,:: .. ,:--::,_:::, __ -::: __ -:::-:::;,:::._-:_.:=7'._ -=-=-,,,,=-.:. :; I certify that I have read the application and state that the above information is correct and that the information on the plans is accurate. I agree to comply with all City ordinances and State laws relating to building construction. I hereby authorize representatives of the Citt of Carlsbad to enter upon the above mentioned property for inspection purposes. I ALSO AGREE TO SAVE, INDEMNIFY AND KEEP HARMLESS THE CITY OF CARLSBAD AGAINST ALL LIABILITIES, JUDGMENTS, COSTS AND EXPENSES WHICH MAY IN ANY WAY ACCRUE AGAINST SAID CITY IN CONSEQUENCE OF THE GRANTING OF THIS PERMIT. OSHA: An .OSHA permit is required for excavations over 5'0" deep· and demolition or construction of structures over 3 stories in height. EXPIRATION: Every per. issued by the Building Official under the provisions of this Code shall expire by limitation and become null and void if the building or work authorized by sue per nc d within 365 days from the date of such permit or if the building or work authorized by such permit is suspended or abandoned at any ti eat ced of 180 days (Section 106.4.4 Uniform Building Code).J l/l DATE ~9 !'fq YELLOW: Applicant PINK: Finance City of Carlsbad Inspection Request For: 6/16/99 Permit# CB990519 Title: BECKMAN COULTER Description: 2400 SF LOADING DOCK W/CANOPY Type:TI Job Address: Sub Type: INDUST 2470 FARADAY AV Suite: Lot Location: APPLICANT ANDREW TARANGO Owner: Remarks: Total Time: CD Description 19 Final Structural 29 Final Plumbing 39 Final Electrical 49 Final Mechanical 0 -i-Comments ± ± Inspection History Date Description Act lnsp Comments Inspector Assignment: PY --- Phone: 6195204048 Inspector: .,..----- Requested By: BOB Entered By: CHRISTINE 4/26/99 31 Underground/Conduit-Wiring AP TP NEED APPROVED ELECT REVISIONS 4/27/99 66 Grout AP PY 4/13/99 11 Ftg/Foundation/Piers AP PY RAMP SLAB 4/8/99 12 Steel/Bond Beam AP PY DOCK SLAB & STEM @ RAMP 4/6/99 12 Steel/Bond Beam AP PY DOCKS 3/19/99 63Walls AP PY 3/12/99 11 Ftg/Foundation/Piers AP PY ? ~11DfMA--DA-t( q q -G) q CHR.ISTIAN w DAILY REPORT Project Name Contractor Subcontractor 0 Reinforced Concrete 0 Shop Welding Material/Equipment: Weather: ?..>,-,,.J Y'fltt....D Date Time Arrived: I O , O 0 0 Pre-Stressed Concrete 0 Field Welding Permit# Engineer Time Departed: I i-:.Of Hours Charged: 1.. , 0 4925 Mercury Street+ San Diego, CA 92111 + 619-496-9760 + FAX 619-496-9758 '. (_1: ) I I ' (:.1(;(,i() ( \ ' t~oP~ev..crs. ., .. .:• ·' • • • 1 0 J •' • • 1 I I f • ~ 1 f • I • l • I •. 1 , • l !N· C. ... '· ... -....... -·~·f5ir0·~\ N &, DAILY REPORT Project Name '1Z' ,-L.;::>-c;c,-,::::mAt,.J Project Address Z.. '-17 O Contractor / _ • '---4=c:::,c:;,. Subcontractor ~~_--z_ CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEER.ING Permit# Project# /7'6. /Oh Architect,,,--, ,Ml-r1-f Engineer '7? rJL1mE !6';-C~ I Plan File# Jf;z.o./ . G._,t-,. 0 Geotechnical ~forced Concrete 0 Shop Welding 0 Pre-Stressed Concrete 0 Field Welding 0 Reinforced Masonry 0 Fireproofing o _______ _ Material/Equipment: 1,. . T""'b\S:- Weather: Date :s/11/q1 I I .. · .. :. .·:~ -----~; .. . . . . . ~ "" Time Arrived: /? so " -117t'-if-1 Jr;;:rJ ON <:;,:?Ge: 1 /._/'SP€G.77 c,,,.J fiJIL I S/~ oi= I, I ,?(.) Time Departed: IY ' I · Hours Charged: jf/1~. .ps,-z..1 oo/ e_ { 1------1---~--=-,__-n-l.....,:f~..:::E::.;.IZ-E.__,:=_:____.:,_I =-~-Lri.:__--=:l;,:_1"'172~!;:'G-::..SE:.=~-_;_;12.o:..=,--.::::(...f::..:,,,,,.-_..!,!f,-::.J.JU..w....:t Cs,:_1-1!...:,__,_/.TH.~_~__::,F..:_:A..Y=.._L!/J\J=~~~~=--~• rD~Tb.,-r._ ~UtJL:~ ( C~U,c? n.P' LOo_-:;c ..S61L-A-t./CJ 7,:?P//1./ --. / ,-::,ne,,JJ {.jl/f:::;/4.19-c;E ·- ::::.}171"'-I kiuowL~bE i2.&NFOrl<..~Gv/" //1..!()'Pc-C..~ ' , / A--Aln -· ...... -Unles:zd otherwise, the work obs~is, to the best of my knowledge, in compliance with the approved plans and specifications. r-----..?'lfn ./ £/ (r-1~~ -/_ ,._,.,,f ogy7t8f-3't /t.),-11 ON <,;/4 ~echfiici~'s Signature # Reg. # Superintendent's Signature -1 /_ / /1 / ff')._ ·-.--¥.\--"' n )/e c.1iuv vv L4111e£61CI II it>~ f.;\,\~'V-{{ti ~ ~\ ~~.10-J'vt ;,{ (, \,\·Y,1\ 'f Technicfan (Print or Type) 1 ~ ' 'I;-" U 1 4925 Mercury Street+ San Diego, CA 92111 + 619-496-9760 + FAX 619-496-9758 THIS Date _. • : :-:·~-:-..,~~~ ·-:: '· • • -~-- !N CHR.ISTIAN WHEELER. ENGINEERING DAILY REPORT Project Name Permit# 9':J/ _ s / q I Plan File# Project Address _;Lf70 Project# J q CZ I r,J_ I t.f/ f '--".f..../ Contractor n · I SP t--:; Architect L · f , ,~· _ , i )_ . ::::h, J I -h \.... Cl"M u ' ' I I"'-/? J Subcontractor \ Engineer {) c . I { ) ..-n Yf'<2. .::, le-: )r i?Jf'C.. i" -.e:I Reinforced Concrete D Shop Welding·-._ D Pre-Stressed Concrete 0 Field Welding -• I D Reinforced Masonry D Geoteclinical I l D Fireproofing ,0 e oc::·j_ \ ) n ('), . re ; , __ .,~ •, • I ; • _. (\laterial/Equipm~nt: . ~ I 11~1,,..,-A..:.:1-. r 1c; .,,,-...o:b. r.,,,_{) Date -~-1.1- ,---- 0. ...... Time Arrived, l • _.) C ,, . \ Arr,11.on l J I Time Departed: I Hours Charged: __) J ne..,r' r J /1 , I orv· Unless noted othefwise;'thE?-work observed)s;to thebest of my knowledge, in compliance with the approved plans and specifications. _,,,..-__ ,., .,,,, ;/ ,/ ,,., .. i I ,,,./ _..,./ , .,>/ / -~/ ~J F/Jf l I ~ /--:.-:..--,.---;./ // _,.,. -· /~;?"' _____ ,,{?ef (j P1/ //Z,v¼J..l/ "le.chnic:@n's Signcifur~/ \ '-r / Reg.# Superintendent's Signature \ / .l ! .... ,fp"'t l i J,,.. / \ _,, / f..~ "'; , ,r-;:_, !.~.., _,.-f ,./ V Te~hnician (Print or Type) -I/ .,. 7 l r I bu _) ! ' ('"}}..,_~le: J l 0. D /......., l ,.-, /'! ()) ' .( -I ,,; -~A,r· ,~ ,~0 It Date f 4925 Mercury Sitreet + San Diego, CA 92111 + 619-496-9760 + FAX 619-496-9758 '-:-•. ,, . 'I i -t_ ... ·{r~:\:"··· •·•··~·• : 1~i:·~~:1t·;~ ........ t; 7IWJ~~~~J CI-IRISTIAN WHEELER.. _-_-! -. ---~:---~ -• ENGINEBltlNG. ·' ••-'. •;.--,.--~-.~-. DAILY REPORT Project Name ,£ ~., pr;~ f Ponnlt # 7' 9' ,. :519 I Plan FIio # · R 1'.,1 Ar, .,,H ,;I , --•. . Project Addres~/ {3,; } /', _//,...,., ,.// Pr~loct # 193.!CJ!t"J ., ~/, 70 ~/-,; ti ,/,,,, ,,1 . .. . ... ' .~ .... \~~-{,' Contractor J_, ,/ .,, l, ::/., , ........ ,w.-, , .I ;/},.,.-,{,' I I-/I Architect 1./,'. · sJ (;, r1 I -' ]":, \, ~/'// I// _f,,i; . .' ,/ ///4,d Subcontractort-\ ~? t--._~ ,._) Mf\-&.,tuf!-JJ\ Engineer/ J • /! ,./,,fJl. ( vl-l 1 J/1'Lt'A_,d_/f r;:; ,,,,, D Reinforced Concrete D Pre-Stressed Concrete ~Reinforced Masonry D Gootochnlcal / '•, 0 Shop Welding D Field Welding D Fireproofing D Materlal/fqtllprmfflli C. 'S • Cf C) ("\ \.) I C -g..J , MW ,, F IM~ , ~-ere, / M.o rt A re. ~ I ~ ro P~ \ Weather: I /')A,<..£.'!.,{' 0-•·/;; -Ctn-f' Date Time Arrived, I It./-,..-I Time Departed, JS-30 I Hours Charged, kf 7;.17, 11 l l-,Y~Jt)E-~~ \ h. ~, -'-> ~ ~ 1. '' A /\J ~ \ 9-,.,.,, C..M-..)'S ,~ Cd,ull"::.c -:::i. ,.._.,. ' • 1/J..L~D ~ I/ ,:I-! l-~~s &" Ce-u!<~ES i..J-, ~ H-Al rvE: Sc: 'V' Sw , C.;:-,.t'< rJ~.°'> o'P St f2..J ~ V '2-._;-I Ne (: 1P -c. ,·{ P\.Ae..6--t, I w~.R..\<. ' 'r,l o fl_J) r. i12 -~, • \ ! . - .. .,.,. ·- - =~rl< ob,eNod h,,o,i,. ~ ;,,...,,UM<e wffh~o ;••~~ p~,s •"j ,po<;f;wffoo, ¥W ~ ___ ;;;;;:~ :,c>~ &v r,1A~1 T ~ ~ Rog.# Soporimo,do,e, S!gooru~ "'{ Date \~MAS. kef:-~~ T~ (Print or Tvpe) .·;.·_g~ 4925 Mercury Street+ San Diego, CA 92111 + 619-496-9760 + FAX 619-496-9758 ; . .. '!":;. - .... !N B L()Ctc_ Wt\ L,, L l <c._1_ L-'-r-T D,\JLY REPOH'J' CHRISTIAN Wl-ltELER I' N C, I N L I: R I N G Pormlt # Projocl Name r) • l {' _ I:--\~ r I,( f'-1\IA.,-...) t,,:-U\..: \ l-'-----R... 9C\-S\<'.\ I Pion FIio 1t -Projocl Addre~ 'o2 4 +<1 F tA ,2. f.l.. 0.A i..J Ad f= C...L "S. \'~t:, Projoct # \qi.\u\.o Architect 'f; M. iT\-\ . C--,,-..J~u L,1 rJ c_ A.e.r .H. Subcontractor "' _. ,-'\ ·~ t:--.. ~i,...\ M l'\-s.() ...J I<-"-'\ Englnoor 7 R.. \ ·l'--,15 ~') cevu....,R-A"--6 t-,j(>... D Gootochnical D Reinforced Concrete D Shop Welding D Pre-Strossod Conc~oto D Field Weldlng ~lnforced Masonry D Fireproofing o ________ _ Material/Equipment: /" 1.... i'-'\\_) 'S' c.-Ci 0 Weather: ' Date Time Arrived: 0 \0 '3......--i I Time Departed: I I{ '6c:) I Hours Charged: CMv I 1--() --\I ,.:,._, \ ( Le r,-..... ::=-~cl-\.--fc 0,., \ '---< t:. l DI _.c.. c ~ii-\ Unless noted otherwise, the work observed is, to the best of-my knowledge;-in,compliance with the appro'leCl;>lcms-encrypecificatlons. ' ~ I ·;~ > --l r -----·-.. = ,,,, .~-.... ~.,,.. I ~ ..... t --\ ~ k ,.,l-' 1, fr.. r. ___ __.--\ [~~~ ¼ ~9)5( -, _...;.~ I // /, 1,.J V~Vu/}lf T~~_:..~-~~ ~/ I Reg.# Superintendent's Signature . ' f i \ \ I ~ • . V ' I ( r:,::,$P~ \ \_::¾:f)MA:S ~tf-\"-1\A \J i~ (Print or Type) 4925 Mercury Street+ San Diego, CA 92111 + 619-496-9760 + FAX 619-496-9758 l'!f 1. CHR.ISTIAN WHEELER. ENGINEER.ING fi DAILY REPORT Project Name Beckman Coulter Project# 198.106 DR# I Page 1 of 1 Project Address __ /--:2470 FarJ!dayA:ve., Carlsbad Permit# Plan File# 99-519 Contractor--Architect Subcontractor Date 3-11-99 Stephen W. Campbell #0847684- 88 3-12-99 Aaron Cooley Good and Roberts Betz Concrete Reinforced Concrete/Epoxy Dowels Rebar: A615, Grade 60 Concrete: 3000 psi, Pre-Mixed #3033500 Epoxy: Simpson ICBO #4945 Smith Consulting Architects Engineer Prime Structural Engineering Arrived on site as requested to perform periodic special inspection of.the reinforcing steel placement for the truck dock walls. Inspected the reinforcement for size, grade and coverage requirements for the east and west wall footings, the south ramp walls footing and the south building wall footings. The north building/ ramp wall footing is incomplete at this time. The engineer has verbally instructed the contractor to epoxy reinforcing footing dowels into a large rock at the south ramp wall footing on the west end. Footings require additional clean-up of loose soil and reinforcement coverage needs adjustment. Except as noted, to the best of my knowledge, reinforcement inspected to this date is in conformance with approved plans and specifications. Arrived on site as requested to perform the special inspection for epoxy dowels and the placement and consolidation of 35 cubic yards of concrete placed in all of the footings. Concrete was placed by chute and consolidated by mechanical vibration. Prior to concrete, observed the installation of epoxy dowels. Checked hole depth (5") and hole cleanliness. Also checked to make sure the epoxy was getting good mixture. Epoxy was done on a rock that was in the way in the footing. The engineer approved. Also prior to concrete, finished checking reinforcing steel in footings (northern most footing running and east and west). Checked for proper rebar size, grade and clearances. Checked steel for footing at the 4' high block wall per SDRSD C-5, plan page AS2, protecting breathers. Fabricated one set of 4 concrete test cylinders for compression testing. Sample location: North Eastern most comer of footing Slump= 4", Truck #427, Ticket #318685, concrete Temp.= 69° Unless noted otherwise, the work observed is, to the best of my knowledge, in compliance with the approved plans and specifications. Distribution: {2) Beckman Coulter { 1) City of Carlsbad ~~~ Reviewed by Michael B. Wheeler, R.C.E. #45358 4925 Mercury Street+ San Diego, CA 92111 + 619-496-9760 + FAX 619-496-9758 DAILY REPORT Project Name Beckman Coulter Project Address 2470 Faraday Ave., Carlsbad Contractor Subcontractor Date Good and Roberts Modem Masonry Reinforced Masonry CMUs: C-90, N, MW, f'm = 1500 Mortar: 1800 psi .,, CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERING Project# Permit# Architect Engineer 198.106 DR# 2 Page 1 of 1 Plan File# 99-519 Smith Consulting Architects Prime Structural Engineering 3-17-99 Inspected the lay-up of8" and 12" CMUs at the first course. Also inspected 8" and 12" leads six courses high at the northeast, southeast Thomas and southwest corners of the structure. No grout was placed. Work is in progress. Kriska #508 3-18-99 Thomas Kriska #508 Inspected the lay-up of 8" and 12" CMU walls as follows: a. North 8" wall courses 1 through 7. b. East and west 12" walls courses 1 through 8. c. South 8" wall courses 1 through 7. Vertical rebar not yet placed. City inspection required. Unless noted otherwise, the work observed is, to Iha best of my knowledge, in compliance with the approved plans and specifications. Distribution: (2) Beckman Coulter ( 1 } Smith Consulting (1} City of Carlsbad 4925 Mercury Street+ San Diego, CA 92111 + 619-496-9760 + FAX 619-496-9758 !ii CHR.ISTIAN WHEELER. ,;' ENGINEERING DAILY REPORT fi Project Name Beckman Coulter Project# DR# I Page 198.106 3 1 of2 Project Address 2470 Faraday Ave., Carlsbad Pennit# 99-519 Plan File# Contractor Subcontractor Date 3-22-99 Roger Morris #98978 3.-23-99 Roger Morris #98978 3-24-99 Roger Morris #98978 Good and Roberts Modern Masonry Reinforced Masonry Rebar: A615, Grade 60 Grout: 2011500 (Pre Mix) 2000 psi CMU: 8" and 12" medium weight open end Mortar: Type S Architect Smith Consulting Architects Engineer Prime Structural Engineering I Arrived on site, as requested, to perform continuous special inspection during the placement of grout for first 9' lift of CMU wall. Prior to placement of grout, inspected the reinforcement for size grade and coverage requirements which to the best of my knowledge is in substantial conformance. Observed the placement of approximately 12 cubic yards of grout placed and consolidated in CMU wall. Fabricated one set of 3 grout samples from 12" west CMU wall. Arrived on site, as requested, to perform continuous special inspection during masonry construction. Observed the placement of 12" CMU from 5' 4" to 8' 8" at the east and west walls. Monitored placement of reinforcing steel. Checked size, grade, quantity, placement and coverage which to the best of my knowledge is in substantial conformance. Monitored mortar proportioning for conformance to Table 21- A of the Uniform Building Code, no exceptions noted. Cast 1 set of 3 mortar cylinders for compressive strength from east wall at approximately 8' O". Arrived on site, as requested, to perform continuous special inspection during the placement of grout for second 4' 8" lift of CMU wall. Prior to placement of grout, inspected reinforcing steel for size, grade and coverage requirement which to the best of my knowledge is in substantial conformance. Observed the placement of approximately 12 cubic yards of Pre-Mix Concrete Company Grout mix #2011500 (2000 psi, 8-10" slump) into the east and west walls only from 5' 4" to 10' O". Grout mechanically consolidated and re-consolidated per code. Fabricated one set of 3 grout samples from the west wall. Contractor has no 12" full units to build masonry prisms from so they built prisms out of bond beam units. Bond beam prisms discarded, contractor to build three 12" masonry prisms Thursday for grouting on Friday. Remained on site after grouting to perform continuous special inspection during the placement of 8" open end CMUs as leads on the west wall from 1 O' O" to 14' 0". Unless noted otherwise, the work observed is, to the best of my knowledge, in compliance with the approved plans and specifications. Distribution: (2) Beckman Coulter (1) Smith Consulting ( 1) City of Carlsbad ~~ Re·fiewed by Michael B. Wheeler R.C.E. #45358 4925 Mercury Street+ San Diego, CA 92111 + 619-496-9760-}-FAX 619-496-9758 YJ CHR.ISTIAN WHEELER. -· ENGINEERING DAILY REPORT Proiect Name Beckman Coulter Pro!ect # 198.106 DR# 3 I Page 2of2 Pro!ect Address 2470 Faraday Ave., Carlsbad Permit# 99-519 Plan File# Contractor Subcontractor Date 3-25-99 Roger Morris #98978 3-26-99 Roger Morris #98978 Architect Good and Roberts Smith Consulting Architects Modern Masonry Engineer Prime Structural Engineering Arrived on site, as requested, to perform continuous inspection during the placement of CMUs. During the construction, inspected reinforcement for size, grade and clearances which, to the best of my knowledge, is in substantial conformance. Monitored mortar for proportioning, mixing time and age on boards with no exceptions noted. CMUs placed between leads on the west wall from 10' O" to 14' 8" and leads on the east wall from 10' O" to 14' O". Job shut down due to rain. Arrived on site, as requested, to perform continuous S:pecial inspection during placement of CMUs at the east and west walls. The contractor I placed 8 x 8 x 16 open end units at the west wall between leads from 1 O' O" to 14' 8". Remained on site to perform continuous special inspection during the grouting of the east and west walls from 10' O" to 14' 8". Fabricated one set of 3 grout samples per UBC 21-17. Grout immediately consolidated and reconsolidated. Contractor then constructed leads at the east wall from 14' 8" to 20' 0" (top of wall). Monitored mortar for proportioning and mi.x time with no exceptions noted. Work observed today was, to the best of my knowledge, insubstantial conformance with the approved plans, specifications and applicable workmanship provision of the UBC. Unless noted otherwise, the work observed is, to the best of my knowledge, in compliance with the approved plans and specifications. Distribution: (2) Beckman Coulter ( 1 ) Smith Consulting (1) City of Carlsbad -~d./ Reviewed by Michael B. Wheeler, R.C.E. #45358 4925 Mercury Street+ San Diego, CA 92111 + 619-496-9760 + FAX 619-496-9758 DAILY REPORT Project Name Beckman Coulter Project Address 2470 Faraday Ave., Carlsbad Contractor Subcontractor Date Good and Roberts Modern Masonry Reinforced Masonry Rebar: A615, Grade 60 Grout: 2011500 (Pre Mix) 2000 psi CMU: 8" and 12" medium weight open end l.\1ortar: Type S '' CHR.ISTIAN. WHEELER. ENGINEERING Project# 198.106 DR# 4 { I Page 1 of 1 Permit# Plan File# 99-519 Architect Smith Consulting Architects Engineer Prime Structural Engineering 3-29-99 Roger Morris #98978 Arrived on site, as requested, to perform continuous special inspection during the place~ent of 8" open end CMUs at the east and west walls of the truck dock from 14' 8" to 20' O" (top of wall). Monitored the mortar for proportioning and time on board. Inspected the reinforcement for size, spacing, grade and clearances which, to the best of my knowledge is in substantial conformance. 3-30-99 Roger Morris #98978 Arrived on site, as requested, to perform continuous special inspection during the grout placement in the east and west walls from 14' 8" to the top of the wall, 20' O". Prior to grout placement, inspected reinforcement for size, grade, location and clearances which, to the best of my knowledge, is in substantial conformance. Observed the placement of grout into the walls noted above. Fabricated 1 set of 3 grout samples per UBC 21-18. Grout mechanically consolidated and re-consolidated. No exceptions noted. Unless noted otherwise, the work observed is, to the best of my knowledge, In compliance with the approved plans and specifications. Distribution: (2) Beckman Coulter (1) Smith Consulting ( 1) City of Carlsbad w~~ Reviewea by Michael B. Wheeler, R.CE. #45358 4925 Mercury Street+ San Diego, CA 92111 ~ 619-496-9760 + FAX 619-496-9758 DAILY REPORT ,:a1 JIU CHR.ISTIAI\I WHEELER. ENGINEERING Project Name Jse.&-~.AJ LOl-"l1.e. P Permil # c:y4 _ S / C/ I Plun File# Project Address __ ___ .Fi, J. Y :---~~-7~-~ ~ A __ AvlZ.-• L.A.c.t sb:':'1> Project# /9 ~~ JO~ Contractor Re--r'2.. C-o .,vC--IU!-"f'~-+ /VlPt.~./J(L 'I Archit•?Ct 5./Vl l1'JA Co»!, CA I ·r, N''J Subcontractor . Engim,er p -s t'J?.,.t,tl-"'t't-1 £.c::t.C-£[~ ~nforced Concrete 0 Pre-Stressed Concrete 0 Reinforced Masonry 0 Geotechnical 0 Shop Welding 0 Field Welding 0 Fireproofing 0 Material/Equipment: ~ A-htS-f;.11-t.o Jd.. '3 .. -J:11 .J.:i-s CQ).,t;-,u.-re, fl"'IJ;< 3032'..S oo l!...j ., ( 3 .. ~I, f./e1A.1 <~o/41 14~~.) Weather: . !Sf<JJ 6 'if Date Time Arrived, 1000 I Time Departed: J Jc;, 0 J Hours ChargE•d: ~, s;--.,. 9-!'3-CtC AP-~ t v.e-d-o.JJ S:rP -ro -(Z_tLovi Je-. Co .IJT,.f\J"10c..,.5 5 ~ ,,... '.",,, I .,-_...u<; w,:, ..cr'tevJ oF -171L: 1/LJ-.t.ck... Doc..1<... ~~p , , -- -- - f ctT 1/.P--~cldµ..s5 LiSi'..ed q~,u~--c;J b.S._e.LL/U ;le__ .f-?lcu:..tZ.~.,;;_;- Cc:7.N~ ,.,e_. ~i,/2--l<:.!'t ,.ru/ -0-.,C A PLJM>C.. IS ,,..t,t/...,'c.. yef S", OP --, , OA.,J.,i:s, -~--r r?.P s ,e_,t;, tt::..y I /A!ck.,,1:.-s_ c,,A/ "-, <; I l-f Yv1 ~, ~r. Slt.t..-,~ :::; 4· 1/-z.-I/• ~s,ec--r& /I , .. .,,.,.,7:,j,I'. 72..e/.,v fi.,.e..c: ~ ~Tb2--/ ro1< , S,2-e.. &-~ob.--4>et.t:..t,v, e?.A./d C--/~ L~NU-f. ·- /,,...,,, ,,,. _,_, TIL.. I / ' ,..J /21Q-.AJuq I I Y .. lo 7J(R_ W~S' r ,:-,.AJS,-, I; J_ otT-(?(/ - &.sr ,---,.p /'Vl y 1£.. ,,VOi ~ lu 2.-e . tq t.J IA/o/c-/<. [..A./~_,) ;> ~ J:)r'J..,,ue.-, ~ r--t-b s -r~L11. rr}e:,., I ea~ 1-Fo~~a,'l./ce__ uJ:-t-f.l -,µ_ A¥A'r..c IN CJ /c:,.A/ .s. i I -- -- ·- -- -- -- ·- Unless noted otherwise, the work observed is, to the best of my knowledge, in compliance with the approved plans and specifications. ~[-v.~ ---· -Date r.ifc"hnician's Signature Reg.# Superintendent's Signature :::s;, HvJ W. l:ou--e. ~ Technician (Print or Type) ·- 4925 Mercury Street+ San Diego, C:1\ 92111 + 619-496-9760 + FAX 619-496-9758 , ems ct, (l,m-c~ ,,. DAILY REPORT Project Name Project f'!!g r~sL '--= -"- Contractor Subcontractor Iii Reinforced Concrete 0 Shop Welding Date ~I CHR.ISTIA '-I WHEELER. 0 Pre-Stressed Concrete 0 Field Welding ENGll'-EER.ING Time Departed: Perrni1 # 'rl· Sl'J Project# lq8-w. Architect $&\UM C01.lS\)L-i 1"4 Engincier PltlME $ffi0\J Ritt- 0 Reinforced Masonry 0 Fireproofing L'l5' P.t\. I Pinn File# C Geotechnical C Hours Chargnd: r------+-----....liB.l.!~~!i_91!:..-"~:K.u;_~~.....1,!~~uf\le.Y»" SL&I• OK",~& { J) AMP CASI• I~-MCi;. 1------+------lo-l<l£.-l;,-~!IC!!::>....:""""~~~~-llL-!!:t~ V.6$J Of MY M011Jl.§tie: 1 1s ,~ sue,,ra...m,1,k Unless noted otherwise, the work observed is, to the best of my knowledge, in compliance with the approved plans an Technician's Signatue Reg.# I Technician (Print or Type) 4925 Mercury Street+ San Diego, Ct\ 92111 + 619-496-9760 + FAX 619-496-975B ~ tti QQK\thl d DAILY REPORT Project Name Project Addre,~s Contractor · Subcontractor Reinforced Concrete 0 Shop Welding Material/Equipment: Weather: ~w CHRISTIA '-l WHEELER. ENGi!' £:ER.ING Permit# Pl,ln File# Proje,:t # . .2m,r~ _aosu_ 't' ~----Archilect /" '.l~ C' /·f, ~ engon·m O , /"\ r _ 1 ·c 0 Pre-Stressed Concrete 0 Field Welding [.[' ,tn2. Z2:tD. >cr:vu:,.,. ., ~ 0 Ruinforced Masonry [I Geotech • 1 1 0 Fii'eproofing [I of my knowledge, in com ,Hance wi':h the approved plans and specifications. Reg.# Su,,erintendent's Signature Date 4925 Mercury Street+ San Diego, CA 92111 + 619-496-9760 + Pr\X 619-496-9753 iw CHR.ISTI/\.N WHEELER. E N G I t~ E E R. I N G COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH TEST RESULTS Job Name: Job Address: Contractor: Subcontractor: Test Location: Req. Strength: Date Sampled: Date Received: Sampled by: Tested by: Sample Type: Sample# 0485 0486 0487 Beckman Truck Door ,_J_470:!')raday:A..:Yrnuc,_C;i.1!:sqad, Good & Roberts Modern Masonry Masonry Walls, 0 to 4' 8" 2000 psi 3-22-99 3-25-99 RM CWE Grout, 3" x 3" x 6" Date Tested Age (days) 3-29-99 7 4-19-99 28 4-19-99 28 Job#: Permit#: Architect: Engineer: Supplier: Mix#: Admixture(s): Truck#: Mix Temp: Slump: Min in Mixer: Area (sq. inches) 9.0 9.0 9.0 198.106 99-519 Plan File#: Smith Consulting Architects Prime Structural Engineering Pre-Mixed 2011500 382 Ticket#: 67° Air Temp: 9" %Air: 90 Unit Wt: Maximum Load Comp. Strength (lbs) (psi) 22,110 2,460 30,570 3,400 29,480 3,280 PY 320515 63° Failure Type - .. The sampling, handling, curing and compressive strength testing were performed by Christian Wheeler Engmeenng in accordance with the appltcable ASTM standards. No other warranties express or implied. Distribution: (2) Beckman Coulter (1) Smith Consulting (1) City of Carlsbad Reviewed by: Michael B. Wheeler, RCE #45358 4925 Mercury Street+ San Diego, CA 92111 + 619-496-9760 + FAX 619-496-9758 - w CHRISTI '\N WHEELER. ENGINEERING COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH TEST RESULTS Job Name: Job Address: Contractor: Subcontractor: Test Location: Req. Strength: Date Sampled: Date Received: Sampled by: Tested by: Sample Type: Sample# 0432 0433 0434 0435 Beckman Truck Door \WO-Faraday .t\:ve.nuc, Calrsb;\d Betz Concrete Footings (North fact:) 3000 psi 3-12-99 3-13-99 AC/SL SC Concrete, 6" x 12" Date Tested Age (days) 3-19-99 7 4-9-99 28 4-9-99 28 Discarded Job#: 198.106 Permit#: Plan File#: Architect: Engineer: Supplier: Pre-Mixed Mix#: 3033500 Admixture(s): Truck#: 427 Ticket#: 318685 Mix Temp: 69° Air Temp: 74° Slump: 4" %Air: Min in Mixer: 38 UnitWt: Area (sq. inches) Maximum Load Comp. Strength Failure Type (lbs) (psi) 28.27 59,930 2,120 28.27 87,610 :1,100 28.27 87,190 :l,080 .. The sampling, handling, cunng and compressive strength testing were performed bi· Chnst1an Wheeler Engineering 1n accordance with the applicable ASTM standards. No other warranties express or implied. Distribution: (2) Beckman Coulter (1) Smith Consulting (1) City of Carlsbad Reviewed by: u/~~ Michael B. Wheeler, RCE #45358 4 9 2 5 M e r c u r y S t r c e t + Sa n D i ego , C /\ \• 2 1 1 1 + 6 1 9 -4 9 6 -9 7 6 0 + FA X 6 1 9 -4 9 6 -9 7 5 8 ·- - DAILY REPORT Project Name Beckman Coulter Project Address-------- f-2470 Faraday Ave., Carlsbad Contractor Betz Concrete and Masonry Subcontractor Date Reinforced Concrete Rebar: A615, Grade 60, #3, #4, #5 ·w CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEER.ING Project# Permit# Architect Engineer Concrete: Mix 3032500, 3000 psi, Hanson Aggregate 198.106 DR# 6 I Page 1 of 1 Plan File# 99-519 Smith Consulting Architects Prime Structural Engineering 4-13-99 John W. Bolger Arrived on site to provide continuous special inspection of the truck dock ramp at the address listed above. Observed the placement of approximately 15 cubic yards of concrete. Fabricated one set of 3 test cylinders and slump test. Slump = 4 ½". Inspected reinforcing steel for size, grade, spacing and clearances. Concrete was consolidated manually. To the best of my knowledge, all work was done in substantial conformance with the approved plans. Unless noted otherwise, the work observed is, to the best of my knowledge, in compliance with the approved plans and specifications. Distribution: (2) Beckman Coulter ( 1) Smith Consulting (1) City of Carlsbad Reviewed by Michael B. Wheeler, R.C.E. #45358 4925 Mercury Street+ San Diego, CA 92111 + 619-496-9760 + FAX 619-496-9758 w CHRISTIAN WHEELER. ENGlNEElllNG DAILY REPORT Pro!ect Nome Beckman Coulter Project# 198.106 DR# 5 I Page 1 of 1 Prolect Address 2470 Faraday Ave., Carlsbad Permit# 99-519 Plan File# Contractor Subcontractor Date 4-7-99 Roger Morris #98978 4-9-99 Aaron Cooley Architect Good and Roberts Smith Consulting Architects Betz Concrete and Masonry Engineer Prime Structural Engineering Reinforced Concrete Rebar: A615, Grade 60, A706 Concrete: 3/8" aggregate, 7 sk., #3011500, 3000 psi Arrived on site, as requested, to perform continuous special inspection during the placement of concrete for dock leveling slab-on-grade (3) and cast-in-place wall at the truck ramp which, to the best of my knowledge, is in substantial conformance. Observed the placement of approximately 9 ½ yards of Hanson (Pre-Mixed) concrete mix #3011500 (3/8" rock, 7 sk with Grace Polarset) into areas noted above. Concrete consolidated with mechanical vibrator. Obtained representative sample from one and only load delivered, cast one set of 3 concrete cylinders for compressive strength. Slump = 4 ¾". Arrived on site, as requested, to provide special inspection on the placement and consolidation of 31.5 cubic yards of concrete at the northern most C.I.P. wall on the ramp. All of slab-on-grade except the ramp. Concrete was placed by pump and consolidated by mechanical vibration. Prior to placement of concrete, inspected all the reinforcing steel for placement locations of concrete. Checked for rebar grade, size and clearances. Per plan detail 8, page S-5, weldable steel is required. Checked rebar but there were no marks indicating grade on the short piece used. According to the contractor A-706 steel was purchased. Fabricated one set of3 concrete samples for compression testing. Slump= 4 ½",Temp.= 69°, Truck #428, Ticket #324764. Unless noted otherwise, the work observed is, to the best of my knowledge, in compliance with the approved plans and specifications. Distribution: {2) Beckman Coulter {l) Smith Consulting (1) City of Carlsbad ~~~ Reviewed bv Michael B. Wheeler, R.C.E. #45358 4925 Mercury Street+ San Diego, CA 92111 + 619-496-9760 + FAX 619-496-9758 w CHR.ISTIAN WHEELER. ENGINEER.ING COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH TEST RESULTS Job Name: Job Address: Contractor: Subcontractor: Test Location: Req. Strength: Date Sampled: Date Received: Sampled by: Tested by: Sample Type: Sample# 0509 0510 0511 Beckman Truck Door 2470 Faraday Avenue, Calrsbad Good & Roberts Modern Masonry CMU walls at 10' O" to 14' 8" 1500 psi 3-26-99 3-29-99 RM JWB Masonry, 12" x 8" x 16" Date Tested Age (days) 4-23-99 28 4-23-99 28 4-23-99 28 Job#: Permit#: Architect: Engineer: Supplier: Mix#: Admixture(s): Truck#: Mix Temp: Slump: Min in Mixer: Area (sq. inches) 91.063 91.063 91.063 198.106 99-519 Plan File#: Smith Consulting Architects Prime Structural Engineering Pre-Mixed 2011501 439 Ticket#: 64° Air Temp: 9" %Air: 75 Unit Wt Maximum Load Comp. Strength (lbs) (psi) 188,740 2,070 197,590 2,170 192,730 2,120 321550 65° Failure Type .. The sampling, handling, cunng and compressive strength testing were performed by Christian Wheeler Engineering m accordance with the applicable ASTM standards. No other warranties express or implied. · Distribution: (2) Beckman Coulter (1) Smith Consulting (1) City of Carlsbad Reviewed by: Michael B. Wheeler, RCE #45358 4 9 2 5 M e r c u ry S t r e e t + S a n D i e g o , C A 9 2 1 1 1 + 6 1 9 -4 9 6 -9 7 6 0 -+: F A X 6 1 9 -4 9 6 -9 7 5 8 ·,1 CHRISTIAN WHEELER. ENGINEERING COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH TEST RESULTS Job Name: Job Address: Contractor: Subcontractor: Test Location: Req. Strength: Date Sampled: Date Received: Sampled by: Tested by: Sample Type: Sample# 0506 0507 0508 Beckman Truck Door 2470 Faraday Avenue, Calrsbad Good & Roberts Modern Masonry West CMU wall at 10' O" to 14' 8" 2000psi 3-26-99 3-29-99 RM SC Grout, 3" x 3" x 6" Date Tested Age (days) 4-2-99 7 4-23-99 28 4-23-99 28 Job#: Permit#: Architect: Engineer: Supplier: Mix#: Admixture(s): Truck#: Mix Temp: Slump: Min in Mixer: Area (sq. inches) 9.00 11.04 11.16 198.106 99-519 Plan File#: Smith Consulting Architects Prime Structural Engineering Pre-Mixed 2011501 439 Ticket#: 64° Air Temp: 9" %Air: 75 Unit Wt: Maximum Load Comp. Strength (lbs) (psi) 9,500 1,060 27,820 2,520 26,120 2,340 321550 65° Failure Type .. The sampling, handling, cunng and compressive strength testing were performed by Christian Wheeler Engmeenng m accordance with the apphcabte ASTM standards. No other warranties express or implied. · Distribution: (2) Beckman Coulter (1) Smith Consulting (1) City of Carlsbad Reviewed by: Michael 8. Wheeler, RCE #45358 4925 Mercury Street+ San Diego, CA 92111 + 619-496-9760 + FAX 619-496-9758 ·w CHR.ISTIAN WHEELER. ENGINEER.ING COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH TEST RESULTS Job Name: Job Address: Contractor: Subcontractor: Test Location: Req. Strength: Date Sampled: Date Received: Sampled by: Tested by: Sample Type: Sample# 0488 0489 0490 Beckman Truck Door 2470 Faraday Avenue, Calrsbad Good & Roberts Modern Masonry East and west CMU walls 2000 psi 3-24-99 3-25-99 RM JWB Grout, 3" x 3" x 6" Date Tested Age (days) 3-31-99 7 4-21-99 28 4-21-99 28 Job#: Permit#: Architect: Engineer: Supplier: Mix#: Admixture(s): Truck#: Mix Temp: Slump: Min in Mixer: Area (sq. inches) 10.13 10.56 10.56 198.106 99-519 Plan File#: Smith Consulting Architects Prime Structural Engineering Pre-Mixed 2011501 436 Ticket#: 64° Air Temp: 9" %Air: 80 Unit Wt: Maximum Load Comp. Strength (lbs) (psi) 22,030 2,170 28,200 2,670 29,960 2,840 321137 66° Failure Type .. The sampling, handling, cunng and compressive strength testing were performed by Chnst1an Wheeler Engineering in accordance with the applicable ASTM standards. No other warranties express or implied. Distribution: (2) Beckman Coulter (1) Smith Consulting (1) City of Carlsbad Reviewed by: Michael B. Wheeler, RCE #45358 4925 Mercury Street+ San Diego, CA 92111 + 619-496-9760 + FAX 619-496-9758 ·w CHR.ISTIAN WHEELER. ENGINEER.ING COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH TEST RESULTS Job Name: Job Address: Contractor: Subcontractor: Test Location: Req. Strength: Date Sampled: Date Received: Sampled by: Tested by: Sample Type: Sample# 0482 0483 0484 Beckman Truck Door 2470 Faraday Avenue, Calrsbad Good & Roberts Modem Masonry Head and bed joints -East 12" wall at 8' 1800 psi 3-23-99 3-25-99 RM JWB Mortar, 2" x 4" Date Tested Age (days) 3-30-99 7 4-20-99 28 4-20-99 28 Job#: Permit#: Architect: Engineer: Supplier: Mix#: Admixture(s): Truck#: Mix Temp: Slump: Min in Mixer: Area (sq. inches) 3.14 3.14 3.14 198.106 99-519 Plan File#: Smith Consulting Architects Prime Structural Engineering Site mix TypeS Lime Ticket#: 58° Air Temp: %Air: 10 UnitWt: Maximum Load Comp. Strength (lbs) (psi) 11,280 3,590 14,470 4,610 14,950 4,760 62° Failure Type .. The sampling, handling, cunng and compressive strength testing were performed by Chnst1an Wheeler Engmeermg in accordance with the applicable ASTM standards. No other warranties express or implied. Distribution: (2) Beckman Coulter (1) Smith Consulting (1) City of Carlsbad Reviewed by: Michael B. Wheeler, RCE #45358 4925 Mercury Street+ San Diego, CA 92111 + 619-496-9760 + FAX 619-496-9758 !N CHRISTIAN WHEELER. ENGINEER.ING DAILY REPORT Pennit# Plan File# Architect Engineer Material/Equipment: Weather: Date 0 Hours Charged: Unless noted-otherwise, the work observed is, to the best of my knowledge, in compliance with the approved plans and specifications. 709'17 Reg. # Superintendent's Signature 4925 Mercury Street+ San Diego, CA 92111 + 619-496-9760 + FAX 619-496-9758 ~°6·~ / ~Jl-1999 .a.: 57AM _.--,ar-10-99 16:18 ....._, .r- FROM SMITH_CONSULTING-OUT 619793.1787 PRlME STRVCTURAL ENGINEERS 16980 Via Tazon, Suire 260 San Diego, California 92127 Tel (619) 487-031 .l Fa,;, (619) 487-0106 TF.1.f.TQPIER TRANSMITTAL Date: 1;--10 ,qq Time: Ann: Compo.iy: From: Subject TO!al number of pages (including this cover sheet) : Re.mark: ------Hf::CEIVED· ?:~.R i· 0 1999 SMITH ~SULTING ARCHITECTS .. 1{f,. If there are a!l)' ~ucstions regarding the reception of the number of pages l-i$ced above, please calJ ar (619) 487~0311 D 1 P . .a. P.01 ·w CHR.ISTIAN WHEELER. ENGINEER.ING COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH TEST RESULTS Job Name: Job Address: Contractor: Subcontractor: Beckman Truck Door 2470 Faraday Avenue, Calrsbad Good & Roberts Modern Masonry Test Location: East and West Walls, 14'8" to 20'0" Req. Strength: 2000 psi Date Sampled: 3-30-99 Date Received: 4-1-99 Sampled by: RM Tested by: SCC Sample Type: Grout, 3" x 3" x 6" Sample# Date Tested Age (days) 0565 4-6-99 7 0566 4-27-99 28 0567 4-27-99 28 Job#: Pennit#: Architect: Engineer: Supplier: Mix#: Admixture(s): Truck#: Mix Temp: Slump: Min in Mixer: Area (sq. inches) 10.563 10.563 10.563 198.106 99-519 Plan File#: Smith Consulting Architects Prime Structural Engineering Pre-Mixed 2011501 407 Ticket#: 64° Air Temp: 9½" %Air: 89 UnitWt: Maximum Load Comp. Strength (lbs) (psi) 27,550 2,610 34,040 3,220 36,190 3,430 322582 63° Failure Type .. The sampling, handling, cunng and compressive strength testing were performed by Chnst1an Wheeler Engmeenng m accordance with the applicable ASTM standards. No other warranties express or implied. · Distribution: (2) Beckman Coulter (1) Smith Consulting (1) City of Carlsbad Reviewed by: Michael B. Wheeler, RCE #45358 4925 Mercury Street+ San Diego, CA 92111 + 619-496-9760 + FAX 619-496-9758 April 28, 1999 Beckman Coulter 2470 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 A ITENTION: Jim Williams w CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERING REFERENCE: Beckman Trnck Door, 2470 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, CA Building Permit #99-519 SUBJECT: Final Testing and Inspection Report Dear Mr. Williams, Project #198.106 Report #4 Christian Wheeler Engineering has provided testing and special inspections of reinforced concrete, reinforced masonry, epoxy dowels and field welding on the above referenced project as detailed in daily reports 1 through 7. The work requiring testing and special inspection was, to the best of my knowledge, in conformance to the approved plans and specifications and the applicable workmanship provisions of the Uniform Building Code. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me at 619-496-9760. Si~~~~ Michael B. Wheeler, R.C.E. 45358 MBW:clb cc: (2) Beckman Coulter (1) Smith Consulting (1) City of Carlsbad 4925 Mercury Street+ San Diego, CA 92111 + 619-496-9760 + FAX 619-496-9758 /~--\ -',\ . ' ' -\ ,. '',} I'll :Iv CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEER.ING COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH TEST RESULTS Job Name: Beckman Truck Door Job Address: '.---:::::Ziio .Faraday A venue, Calrsl:iad Contractor; Subcontractor: Test Location: Req. Strength: Date Sampled: Date Received: Sampled by: Tested by: Sample Type: Sample# 0601 0602 0603 Good & Roberts Betz Concrete & Masonry Dock leveling slab-on-grade 3000 psi 4-7-99 4-9-99 RM sec Concrete, 6" x 12" Date Tested Age (days) 4-14-99 7 5-5-99 28 5-5-99 28 Job#: Permit#: Architect: Engineer: Supplier: Mix#: Admixture(s): Truck#: Mix Temp: Slump: Min in Mixer; Area (sq. inches) 28.27 28.27 28.27 198.106 99-519 Plan File#: Smith Consulting Architects Prime Structural Engineering Pre-Mixed 3011500 #9786 Grace Polarset 427 Ticket#: 63° Air Temp: 4¾" %Air: 70 Unit Wt: Maximum Load Comp. Strength (lbs) (psi) 85,110 3,010 96,000 3,400 109,070 3,860 (( 324267 62° Failure Type .. The sampling, handling, curing and compressive strength testing were performed by Chnst1an Wheeler Engineering m accordance with the applicable ASTM standards. No other warranties express or implied. Distribution: (2) Beckman Coulter (1) Smith Consulting (1) City of Carlsbad Reviewed by: Michael B. Wheeler, RCE #45358 4925 Mercury ·Street+ San Diego, CA 92111 + 619-496-9760 + FAX 619-496-9758 GERAD C. GRIFFITH REGISTERED SPECIAL INSPECTOR 3962 ECOCHEE AVENUE SAN DIEGO, CA 92117 Phone (619) 274-8379 \ SPECIAL INSPECTOR'S REPORT Covering work performed which requires approval by the special inspector of: PROJECT.:-::B_e.Gkman Residence ADDRES_S: 247.0:Faraday Ave.nue, Carlsbad PERMIT NUMBER: 99519 PLAN FILE NUMBER: N/A SHOP WELDING FILE: R9D30 REPORT DATE: 4/30/99 Material Type, Grade, Source: A36 & A706 Steel; E70T-7 Electrode. INSPECTION DATE REPORT 04/16/99 Performed Shop Welding Inspection@ Corky's Welding, 8115 Wing Avenue, El Cajon. cc: Corky's Welding City of Carlsbad File Individual components inspected for compliance with shop and approved drawings include: -Tube steel columns designated 1A -2 units, 2A -2 units, 3A, 4A and 22A. -Wide flange beams designated SA -2 units and 6A -2 units. * * * Work inspected conforms with approved plans and specifications * * * 279 Certification # f'( / ·-. f DATE: 2/26/99 JURISDICTION: Carlsbad PLAN CHECK NO.: 99-519 EsGil Corporation 'l.n Partnersliip witli (jovernment for '13uiu£ing Safety SET: II PROJECT ADDRESS: 2470 Faraday Ave. PROJECT NAME: Beckman Coulter Loading Dock & Canopy ~NT ~ D PLAN REVIEWER D FILE • The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes. D The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes when minor deficiencies identified below are resolved and checked by building department staff. D The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the enclosed check list and should be corrected and resubmitted for a complete recheck. D The check list transmitted herewith is for your information. The plans are being held at Esgil Corporation until corrected plans are submitted for recheck. D The applicant's copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to forward to the applicant contact person. D The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to: D Esgil Corporation staff did not advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. ·-Esgil Corporation staff did advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. Person contacted: Andrew of Smith Consulting Date contacted: 2/26/99 (py: CM) . :, Mail Telephone Fax In Person D REMARKS: By: Chuck Mendenhall Esgil Corporation D GA D MB D EJ D PC walk in Telephone#: in person Fax#: Enclosures: trnsmtl.dot 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 + San Diego, California 92123 + (619) 560-1468 + Fax (619) 560-1576 ' ,.. ' DATE: 2/26/99 JURISDICTION: Carlsbad PLAN CHECK NO.: 99-519 EsGil Corporation 1n Partnersliip witli qovemment for 'lJuiUing Safetg SET: II PROJECT ADDRESS: 2470 Faraday Ave. PROJECT NAME: Beckman Coulter Loading Dock & Canopy 0 APPLICANT 0 JURIS. 0 PLAN REVIEWER 0 FILE • The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes. D The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes when minor deficiencies identified below are resolved and checked by building department staff. D The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the enclosed check list and should be corrected and resubmitted for a complete recheck. D The check list transmitted herewith is for your information. The plans are being held at Esgil Corporation until corrected plans are submitted for recheck. D The applicant's copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to forward to the applicant contact person. D The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to: D Esgil Corporation staff did not advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. ,_. Esgil Corporation staff did advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. Person contacted: Andrew of Smith Consulting Date contacted: 2/26/99 (by: CM) ,I,, Mail Telephone Fax In Person D REMARKS: By: Chuck Mendenhall Esgil Corporation D GA D MB D EJ D PC walk in Telephone #: in person Fax#: Enclosures: trnsmtl.dot 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208· + San Diego, California 92123 + (619) 560-1468 + Fax (619) 560-1576 ,.· DATE: 2/19/99 JURISDICTION: Carlsbad PLAN CHECK NO.: 99-519 EsGil Corporation 2n Partnersfiip witfi {jovemment for '.Buifaing Safety SET:I PROJECT ADDRESS: 2470 Faraday Ave. PROJECT NAME: Beckman CoulterLoading Dock Canopy Cl APPLICANT ~- Cl PLAN REVIEWER Cl FILE D The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes. D The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes when minor deficiencies identified below-are resolved and checked by building department staff. D The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the enclosed check list ahd should be corrected and resubmitted for a complete recheck. • The check list transmitted herewith is for your information. The plans are being held at Esgil Corporation until corrected plans are submitted for recheck. D The applicant's copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to forward to the applicant contact person. • The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to: Smith Consulting 12220 El Camino Real, Suite 200, San Diego, CA 92130 • Esgil Corporation staff did not advise the applicant (except by mail) that the plan check has been completed. '. D Esgil Corporation staff did advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. Person contacted: Telephone#: ,1 .. Date contacted: (by: ) Fax#: Mail Telephone Fax In Person D REMARKS: By: Chuck Mendenhall Enclosures: Esgil Corporation D GA D MB D EJ D PC 2/11/99 trnsmtl.dot 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 + San Diego, California 92123 + (619) 560-1468 + Fax (619) 560-1576 Carlsbad, 99-519, I Date: 2/19/99 1. Please make all corrections on the original tracings, as requested in the correction list. Submit three sets of plans for commercial/industrial projects (two sets of plans for residential projects). For expeditious processing, corrected sets can be submitted in one of two ways: 1. Deliver all corrected sets of plans and calculations/reports directly to the City of Carlsbad Building Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, CA 92009, (760) 438-1161. The City will route the plans to EsGil Corporation and the Carlsbad Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments. 2. Bring one corrected set of plans and calculations/reports to EsGil Corporation, 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208, San Diego, CA 92123, (619) 560-1468. Deliver all remaining sets of plans and calculations/reports directly to the City of Carlsbad Building Department for routing to their Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments. NOTE: Plans that are su_bmitted directly to EsGil Corporation only will not be reviewed by the City Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments until review by EsGil Corporation is complete. · · 2. Provide disabled access to the loading dock platform: This may be accomplished using the 1: 12 sloping ramp but a handrail 34" to 38" high is required each side of the ramp. 3. Include in the special inspection information on sheet S-1 the masonry walls. 4. Complete the attached special inspection program form. 5. Include in the design calc's the ability of the 4-#10 tek screws to resist a combination vertical DL and LL from the roof. 6. The scale listed on sheet S-3 is incorrect. The dimensions shown on S-2 are not consistent with the scale on S-3. If you have any questions regarding this list, please contact Chuck Mendenhall at (619) 560-1468 ,I. ,. JURISDICTION: Carlabad PREPARED BY: CM VALUATION AND PLAN CHECK FEE PLAN CHECK NO.: 99-519 DATE: 2/19/99 BUILDING ADDRESS: 2470 Faraday Ave. BUILDING OCCUPANCY: S1 TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: II N BUILDING PORTION BUILDING AREA VALUATION VALUE (ft.2) ' MULTIPLIER ($) Canopy 2400 City Est 100,000 Air Conditioning Fire Sprinklers TOTAL VALUE 100,000 D 199 UBC Building Permit Fee • Bldg. Permit Fee by ordinance: $ 621.07 D 199 UBC Plan Check Fee • Plan Check Fee by ordinance: $ 403.69 Type of Review: D Complete Review D Structural Only D Hourly 0 Repetitive Fee Applicable D Other: Esgil Plan Review Fee: $ 322.95 Comments: .\.,. Sheet 1 of 1 macvalue.doc 5196 PlANNING/ENGINEERINC APPROVALS PEiMIT NUMBER CB yo/o St-7 ADDRESS d-'{ 2 D RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL ADDITION MINOR < < $10,000.00) ,. OTHER ~~ /Jock. DATE 3 }s/99 I 7 TENANT IMPROVEMENT .· PLAZA CAMINO REAL CARLSBAD COMPANY STORES VILLACE FAIRE COMPLETE OFFICE BUILDING PLANNER_________ DATE ______ _ DATE . -i/2772' Does/Mlsforms/Plannlng Engineering Approvals / ,,, ~ ' ' ((' c,-- tr" ½' I ~ ~ ....... l I (1 C'( 2 2 2 "' "' "' Cl 0 0 ~ ~ >, >, >, .0 .0 .0 ~ N "' 'It 'It .,,: -"' -"' u u u Q) Q) Q) .c .c: .c: u t) t) C: C: C: "' "' "' 0:: 5: 5: ¥f DD PLANNING DEPARTMENT BUILDING PLAN CHECK REVIEW CHECKLIST Plan Check No. CB 5 4 0 5( '7 Planner /o:arl2f'.tA-l<-&r1,1~ APN: ::20']-o<-(/--~h Address ;;2 </7 0 F& r ~~ Phone (619) 438-1161, extension 43:hC Type of Project & Use: of{//l'Jnµvl/fJl'ht:-G" Net Project Density: DU/AC Zoning: M, General Plan: ____ Facilities Management Zone: ___ _ CFD lin/n11tl # __ Date of participation: Remaining net dev acres: Circle One ------- (For non-residential development: Type of land used created by this permit: ____________________ ) Legend: ~ Item Complete Cid:! Item Incomplete -Needs your action Environmental Review Required: YES _ NO ____x_ TYPE ___ _ DATE OF COMPLETION: ______ _ Compliance with conditions of approval? If not, state conditions which require action. Conditions of Approval: lSZ( D D Discretionary Action Required: YES __ NO .,k_ TYPE ___ _ APPROVAL/RESO. NO. _____ DATE ___ _ PROJECT NO. _______ _ OTHER RELATED CASES: __________________ _ Compliance with conditions or approval? If not, state conditions which require action. Conditions of Approval: ------------------------ ~ D D Coastal Zone Assessment/Compliance Project site located in Coastal Zone? YES CA Coastal Commission Authority? YES NO_k_ NO If California Coastal Commission Authority: Contact them at -3111 Camino Del Rio North, Suite 200, San Diego CA 92108-1725; (619) 521-8036 Determine status (Coastal Permit Required or Exempt): Coastal Permit Determination Form afready c~inpleted? YES NO If NO, complete Coastal Permit Determination Form now. Coastal Permit Deter'mination Log #: Follow-Up Actions:, 1) Stamp Building Plans as "Exempt" or "Coastal Permit Required" (at minimum Floor Plans). 2) Complete Coast.al ·permit Determination Log as needed. -··- ,; ' ! ·bi D D lncli.Jsionary Housin·g ,fee requiredt .YES" ' NO p · (Effe'c'.trve-. date, of lnc:lusionary H_qu.sirig Ordinance -M!!Y 21, 1993.) · · ~OD Data 'Entry Com_pleted.? YES · . ·NO,·-- (AlP/0s, ,Activitv,Mair;iten'anrie, enter c;:su, toolbar, ·Scree'ps,,Rousihg; Fe.es, Construct Housing· Y /N, Enter F'ee, UPDAfE!), --). \ -= < ~ • ' -Site· Plan: 1 . Provide a full1/ dimensiom;tl: .. ~ite -pl~o-. ·drawr;i to ·sc,;l'le. Show: North arrow, . , property lines, ea~ements, ·existi'n,g ~nd ·proposed ·stn,Jctures, streets, existing street i'mpr,ovements, ' right-ofi.way width, ,dhtiehsional setbacks and e~isting :(Joo topographicql lines. · · ~-- 4. Provide legal !Z[escription of property and assessor·'s parcel number.' Zoning: 1 .. Setbacks: Frdnt: ·Interior $ic;te: Street Side: Rear: :R~quired Shown -,----,------,---------------'-,,---------'---- R'(;:}ql;Jired . .,_.· ---'---..:.-_..;....... Shown -------'-'---- R~quir(;:}d: . Shown ____ ___,.._ Required Shown -----'--- . ' I D 0·0.2. Accessory structure· setbacks-: · Front: Interior Side: Street Side: Rear: ~' . Required -----'--'---- Required --~-~...,...,... Reqt1 ireq ·--,------'----'-- :Required·· -,----..,.....,..-,-- ' Structure .s.epar~tion_; . Reqwired -....,.·· ....,.._~-~-------'- ,1 [] D. D 3. Lot .coverage: -Requited ,---,,---,----,----,---,------ Shown ------Shown --------,-,-Shown ---------Shown -----,---'$how n ,----------- Shown_ -------,---,--- : 0 0 D 4 .. Hei~ht: Requjr.ec;! ---"-------""""·_.;.·. Shown -------, '_p{'DD -·~-. ' ' ' ' 5. Parking:. '' ,)1,-0 ;~ fag, ,cl. Spt:rces Reqaired-..---'--------,-,-------,---'Shown---,----- GU$St Spaces. Reqciir~d ' , ' ' , -,-,., -----,-,----,---------,-,,,, • • l ·_t, ·:· I , . . . -, . OK TO IS.Sl;J~ ANO ENTERED APPROVAL.INTO COMPUTER _DATE ~J! .¥h-= ,/?)._~rv:...-~ -~-01s· .... 79, ~ \. ,..,, ·-.. > ii ___ ,... --· EB· )J-· ~ --~ :-.... ~ SI\N 01~ COUNTY I\SSE:SSOR S M_.,P BOOK.209 PG.04 s>n:Z OF3 Ei} SHT. I ,., l 1• NO ACCESS ll*S IMP ll.G 1'!18\1.'8! RA olSSES3'8ff PI.OOSES Clill. IO l"'8Ul"f IS 1'S5l.!Gt R)l'll€ l.itUl.\ttU Tl£ Oil~ lWtlt AS!l;srol S PIJl{QS %IT roT ~T .UH UlCM. Sl'f:t.a'I! IJI. lllllDN; ~ 9 2.09 -041, SHT.20F3 ---~-J---·/ 1'=200' <I ~' r-~ er ' ~-? ,.,., ._ EB I ~, ~2_,,,, ·. r/"" ·, . .. lY-n..r CHANGES BLK OLD-NEW r.'11 CUT Ml "'.:':'., ,-,,t; "-' ,-~ .. -. ~I~ ~-./4 lo, :;,;l?,< '' "'-z• '·--· 3. ,. ,. ~~ 'Z? ,,,., '£&£ 25 •• c ... 'a< sro Lo', 21 :.:-• .,,1 '1':.47 '~:a ~IT& zi. ~t.U C\"'\-4 . ,, -.. !,,, .J-..... J -, .... ·';f_ .. I\) 0) I ~ ~ ()) I\) " U1 w lJ ~ ,, ;u 0 ~ (/) ~ H -I I I 0 0 z (/) C ~ H z C) I 2 -I 0) ~ (0 --:;; [\) Cf't1--G, f 1'f r;-1../ 1 Lf1 ?-, e *' ·-·::------( /4 PRIME JOS: ~ r.-..~~ STRUCTlJRAL DATE; -4,-~ i.li.J"L~ ENGINEERS SHT : / I -4 ___________ C/J!!1as;g __ 1c·so Evaluation Service, Inc. 5360 WORKMAN MILL ROAD • WHITTIER, CALIFORNIA 90601-2299 A subsidiary corporation of the International Conference of Building Officials . . ~ EVALUATION REPORT • Cop)•right © 1996 ICBO Evaluation Service, Inc. · Filing C~legory: FASTENERS-Screws (066) . DARTS® BRAND SELF-DRILLING/SELF-TAPPING STEEL SCREWS COMPASS INTERNATIONAL POST OFFICE BOX 4876 . ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA 92803 I. Subject: DARTS® Brand Sell-Drilling/Sell-Tapping Steel Screws II. Description: A. General: DARTS® Brand screw fasteners are manufactured from heat-treated steel and have a coaling consisting of phosphate and/or electroplated zinc. Screws are self-drilling/self-tapping . steel screws available in various nominal shank diameters ranging from . 0.138 to 0.250 inch (3.51 to 6.35 mm), with nominal shank lengths vary- . ing from 7116 to 11/~ Inches (11.1 to 32 mm) with smooth or knurled · shanks. The screws are available in head styles of pan, hex washer head, pancake, flat, wafer and bugle. The screws comply with SAE J78 and ASTM C 9.54. ' Allowable fastener loads are as shown in Table 1. Allowable values are · · · . for a sin le shear connection consistin o teel sbeets of the same · .-.. ma er n c ness. ee s eels must conform with ASTM A 653 ·.·. ":· SQ Grade 33 with a minimum 33,000 psi {228 MPa) yield strength for ·.'.·-:·:. minimum uncoated thicknesses of 0.0359 inch and 0.0478 inch (0.91 ~ ·,_: .. mm and 1.21 mm), and Grade 50 with a minimum 50,000 psi (345 MPa) ... _:, ·yield strength for minimum uncoated thicknesses of 0.0747 inch and ;;:--,<:· 0.104$ Inch (1.9_0 mm and 2.66 mm) •. · · ~.;~/ s:1n~iallatlon: DARTS~ sell-drilling/self-tapping screw fasteners are -JI installed without predrilling holes In the receiving member of the connec- .: -. : .. lion. Fasteners of No. 4 through No. 10 screw diameter must be installed :, .. :: .. ·with a screw gun having a minimum speed of 2,500 rpm, with 1,800 rpm ,·,.-:";:· . for fasteners of No. 12 and 1/4-lnch screw diameter lncorporaling a depth- -;~-.:•• ·:, • • •• • •, • I • • :.-,i ER-5202 -_ Issued June 1, 1996 sensitive or torque-limiting nose piece. Installed fasteners must protrude through the attached· members three full threads beyond the attached members. The connection ls for fastening of studs lo tracks, studs, truss numbers, or strap bracing cold-formed steel members complying with Section 2230, Division V, of the code. The distance from the center of a fastener lo the edge and end of a stud or track shall not be less than three times the screw diameter. The minimum edge and end distance from con- nections subjected to shear force in one direction only may be reduced to 1.5 times the screw diameter in the direction perpendicular lo the force. C. ldenlillca!lon: Fastener heads are marked with !he Compass Interna- tional logo as noted In Figure 1. Each box of fasteners has a label bearing the DARTS® brand name, fastener description, head style, size, point type, length, quantity, country of origin, ICBO ES evaluation report ER-5202, and screw gun RPM recommendation as noted in Figure 2. Ill. Evidence Submilled: Report of shear and tension tests in accord- ance with AISI CF92·1; calculations and product description. Findings IV. Findings: Thal the DARTS~ Brand Sell-Drilling/Sell-Tapping Steel Screws described In !his report comply with the 19!M Uniform Building Code"", subject lo the following conditions: 1. Fasleners are Installed In accordance with the manulac!urer's lns!ruc!ions and this report. 2. Allowable shear and tension values comply wllh Table 1. 3. Allowable loads shall not be Increased due to duration of load such as wind or earthquake forces. Thls report Is subject lo re-examlnalion In one year. Eraluation reports of JCBO Evaluarion Sen•ict, Inc,, arc iJsucd sole/)' to provide infonnaJion to Cuiss A members of JCBO, utili;;ing the code upon 11·hich tht rtpon is based. E1•aluoJion reports art not to bt construed DJ representing otsthttics or rm)' othrr aJtributts not specijicall.,· ru!dresud nor os on tndorumrnt or ruommrn• daJionfor ust o/thr subjec:t rtporl, . This rtpoH ls bos~d upon lndrpendtnt lt1ls or other ltchnical dala submitttd b)' tht opplicanf. Tht JCBO E1·alua1ion Sm·icc, Inc., trchnic.ol staff ~os rt•·ieN·td tht ftsl rtsults and/or other daJa, but dots not posuss ftsf /odliJits to make an lndrptndcnt 1•erijira1ion. Thur: Is no M·orronl)· bJ· JCBO Evaluohon Srn·ir:t, Inc., e.rp!~ss or implitd, as to on)' "Finding" or other mailer In tht report or DJ to an)· product ro1•rrtd bj• the report. This disclaimer inrludts, but Is not limited to, mrrchantab1l11y. Page 1 ol 2 :~ -. . .. •. ,..""l ,f ~:P.· ! . ; ·_· ..-Pag/2 of 2 TABLE 1-ALLOWABLE SCREW LOADS1,2 . Gage of material In contact with screw_ head t . Gtge of malerial not In contact wilh screw head 20 20 GAGE THICKNESS (In) 0.D359 D.0359 STEEL CONNECTING Fy(ksl) 33 MATERIAL N0mlnnl Minimum Serew Oll!moler HendO.D. P0fnl Sin He. (In) (In) Type' Sheer Tension #6 0.)38 0.302 SD#2 168 BJ #8 0.164 0.322 SD#2,3 ·222~ 93 '110 0.190 0.384 SD #2,3 225 83 1112 0.216 0.398-SD#3 232 123 111, inch 0.250 0.480 SD#l3 242 120 For SI: 1 inch= 25.4 mm, 1 lbf = 4.45 N, 1 psi= 6.89 kPa. ls1eel members shall conform to Section 2230, A3, of the code. 18 18 16 16 0.0478 0.0478 0.0598 D.0598 33 50 Shear Tension Shenr Tenglon ~~6) 138 423 231 143" ~8;:, 302 344 155 629 230 326 ]41 · '621' 294 35) 137 689 219 • 20 ga, I 8 ga-ASTM A 653 Grade 33 S.Q. with a minimum of 33,000 psi yield strength. • 16 ga, 14 ga, 12 ga-ASTM A 653 Grade 50 S.Q. with a minimum of 50,000 psi yield strenglh. ER-5202 14 14· 12 12 D.07U 0.07~7 0.1046 0.1046 .::50 50 J, Shear Tension Shesr Tension 452 220 436 320 533 352 534 363 624 337 660 575 ~ 379-884 497 920 386 1,102 591 2Allowable screw loads are based on test mclhods provided in AISJ CF 92-1, "Test Melhods for Mechanically Faslened Cold-Formed Steel Connections." Safety factor 2.5. 3SD = Self-drill point . :. ·,, r;':_ LETTERS Cl NOTATING 't' COMPASS INTERNATIONAL mn~\-D Vlr~1%~AKE (:)~. HEX WASHER HEAD -~ PART NO.: 73 . SIZE: 12X2 HEX WAS,HER·· SELF•DRILLING,'«3 POINT QTY: 2M N.W.: 35 LBS G.W.: 36 LBS MADE IHTIJWAH ASTM: _. __ ICBO ES REPORT NO.: __ USE 2100 RPM SCREWOUPI .. ·:·. ··/_:( @)~ . MODIFIED TRUSS FIGURE 1-MARKINGS ON FASTENER HEADS FIGURE 2-LABELING ON BOXES OF FASTENERS .J . -...... '; ~- ,,, , r ·- PRIME STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS 16980 Via Tazon, Suite 260 San Diego, California 92127 Tel (619) 487-0311 =======.: .-., ------.. ..::. .. ---::-·:: : --:::·-.... STRUCTURAL\ CALCULATIONS t]:f-/0 .Bt;~ --0/f"//1,J~ Oo v/<!-,) , , p~ /1ff~ <t,?;? l ' ~ J ·-J P5t'"T~ _1r_'-v __ ----------- 1,<-I p-::: fb\.OF'7f 'f -1--i ,;/ +-1iv (,v l,, ~ 1.AJ_ (? >( 4t < ({ D~ 1-o ~ · CJ>0Sn'Vv'1tJ~ ~e--w1~t?/(f I 't \ j_, Tk~ b,'1v f.-it:? 'f--1 -r 1-,[~ 'ft(:,~ 1~&J,~r ' ' ;:. I (.,,l_,;; ( ~~~ f;..F V p -,, l O~<> f "1'9-l,,,,:1h ( -.1 ~ qq C-, -,,_*'-#- ~ \-~ l "2.--tc::;:> K 1, _____ ~ 1161. i..H--i!. ~} ~ fltof-"( ~---l <-p1"; '2-.(!of(t-- P11..'/" t\<61'v . -·--~~--gp;f--~-r~6f. ~r·:_-~---~---~- }. --· ::·-i~;~------··_·. . -·-· ~--·_:··~~~ ~~:--~=-.. -A PRIME JOB:{Jgd£_ /$..'1,. SffiUCTUAAL DAIB -+#{;J. . _ !l!iJS:.-:a. ENGINEERS SHT : ~I ~ f( b' ~· b, -:-~-__ fc,,a, l~0 f7P'f 1}<--11} ~ 'fbo~ 1i=======\=~=l====:::t+--··· \I\,,~ "U>-... (? f-It" ,;;;-Ii<?<? . ,-,,{~·~ ·i~~l"fc/ .. , ... _s-v~~ c;·,~1..j ~ tt--e-i' ~~ L..b.d<o. t::,? lBeJ~o , f ~ DO.? "f-... ?-/0 {,:? -:::-FX'Wr.,1, = L-,/11,rv c: o\v ---.. _ M~t Js e, b._9)j -~, l/ . LMii} _ ~-k;~~ 1~"-ol( ... t- ~\?-0 ~ '7 ri (q ,.J;-~_?' I 4J;>.t? . '{:.. b .').:~ ~ £-i--;v M f~,tf IBb-(.;· (1Lf !) ~Fz:-ut ~ 'i_ vL2 tJl¾I~ I I r i ~/ZR;>-/ ·-~ A PRIME JOB:~ /ij-b smucruRAL DATE: ~ Si;."'cl¼. ENGINEERS SHT : . -------~--------·---- .••.••• L 1 • M~ --0j,Lffr.~>e/2,::=-~04..g /c.-,vi 6K ~~rd_ = ~(/) l(-_g fc.(v1 ~ c IZ-~0'2-!VI~ 0.0 ~ y: t.1& m ~ f • ' ' IA.8£? T5 /2->Cfx 8J1t/J ~x= i~. 4 1n ~ ChPcJ~-1"/ UthtrY) it C!iYYLpacr ~ Y 4-= 'Z-f/1 > f z)' t;Jjc:.- {_,,(!, -(; q6D +-/2JJ?J 1;l () ) _k_ ··· ···: 1i'l16D(i/i;) -;uq 1vtjtics -14 fu,r r :., ~e,,-iuYJ -non_~c+-. r-~ (Id---o_ {/) FY -,::, :2-;. u f:-g C / . ; --w ~ {d-:;-; J~4 f"k-,1VJ --/~,2--///J 2> ..(_ /{[) .. 411/J 6 :21. & /L-Rt . .....,._....______, _____ ---------. ----·--------~-----------4-------------- s3B RB-1 slp12v1s0b4148TBEAM ANALYSIS PPDGRAHslp9vlsOb414BT SPAN LENGTH= 16,00 ft LEFT CANT= 15.33 ft flGHT CANT= 15.67 ft i UNIFORM LOADS (k/ft & ft) vd 11i Y.! Y.2 POINT LOADS (k & ft) Pd Pl V !, i1GOO O,GOO -15,33 31.t,7 LDAD Dead Ma:~ : Live Total LErT 2.70i -0,384 -01367 2,205 2,334 F;AXIMUM FORCES V max = 2,88 k @ i6,CO+ft "mix = O.OG kit@ ends M Bin = -30,40 kft@ 16.00 ft (WO full span) DEFLECTID~S (El= kinA2l LOAD Defl. (inl X (ft) Total Live Dead TOTAL Defi L I 180 ' I ·1-~l"i i. ,l,._7i.) L I 3bf) I LIVE Deil I I 240 '-I I I 360 l. L I 480 -1551070/EI S4'35884iEI '3'371:376/EI -33216&/EI i_BSO 177 /EI 1%1':1~:4/EI -12188'35/EI 7535706/EI 800'3441 /EI Main Span EI 1454128 1 '338837 2903256 EI 415207 62281 l 830415 8,02 LL L.C. R,C. r.idspan L.[:, R.C, C;;nt. (local) EI 1808774 3617549 EI 415557 62333ti fJj 114 sCB02i01i99 T~ A PRlME J0!3 : 'f(?fi7"f! fit'£> STRUCnJPAL c:::: .u1~ ~~ ENGINEERS Srff : =4--j (6,f,(l)s0p10,00h12v0s0b3T s3B s3B RB-1 slpl2v1;0b4148TBEAM PRQGRliMs1p9v1sOb4148T Left Cant Lu= !6.00 ft Right Cant Lu= 16.00 ft Brace Spacing = 16.00 ft Beam Braced g Supports Bov. Deflection : Cant. Total = 3 in W 12 ~ 26 Fy = 36 ksisOB ST~ESSES (ksi) Max, Shear Main Span Fv = 14,4) !\ = :.:2 Fb = 23.76 !b = 0.00 1 'J I I, r~ •; ·._: !t Left Cant fb = 13.44 fb = l0.57 79 % Right Cant Fb = 13,44 fb = 10192 81 % •. 1 .. t:o = • thJ HEFLECT!Of~S (in) Tc,tal ~ Main Span = -0. 26 = L i 732 25 Ii LEft Cant = 1.61 = L / 621t 54 Z Right Cant = 1.69 = L / 589t 56 Z Live: Main Span= -0.06 = L !3420 7 X Left Cant= 0.31 = L /36491 10 X Right Cant = 0133 = L /34171 11 Z Dead: Midspan = -0,21 Left Cant= 1.29 Right Cant = 1.35 * local sOB02/0i/99 99-10 (6:60)s0p10,00h12vCsOb3T ---~----~----------~-----------------------------·····-····-···········-·-·· ···- s3B sip12v1s0b4148TBEAM ANALYSIS PRDGRAMs1p9v1s0b4i48T SPAN LEilBTH = 37. 33 ft LEFT CANT= 5,00 ft RIGHT CANT = (}, (H) ft UNIFORM LOADS lk/ft I It) Xi 01050 0:000 -5.00 37,33 POINT LOADS lk & ftl Pd Pl X 2.701 1,557 Ll'34 -5. 0(} 5.22 0, 9'35 18.55 1,i94 1, 1'34 l,194 24188 0,995 REACTIONS OJ LOAD Dead Max : Live LEFI 7,747 13,704 4,037 4.179 8,2i5 fotal Min : Live Total 0.000 -0.210 7. 747 V ffiiX = 7.00 k @ O.OO+it M tax = 62,95 kft@ 12,66 ft N min = -21.97 kit@ ,.oo ft M = 0 kft@ 5.58 ft DEFLECTIONS (EI = ki r,'·2) LOAD Defl (in) V (ft) " Total 15101220/EI 1'3, 01 -5f.24334/EI L.C, Live 8201608/EI 18.56 -3495389/Ei L,[:, Dead 58'32984/EI ii.id span -21289~5/EI • t· L,i..,, Main Span Ca;-1t, ( ioi:21 J TDTAL DQ", ~" EI c-· 1-l ! J 180 6067'3% 471%'3 ,_ L I 240 8090662 6280132 I L I 35(1 121359:32 S42138 LIVE Defl EI ,..T c. I I ·ji{r1 4334111 225648 ... -·'-' L I 3b0 f,5'3i1&6 338472 L I 480 8788221 4512% :OB02i0ii99 . "A PRIME J<?~_: ct1-1°J "Ill, smucTURAL o ..... ,t: -1'.::.15:, 8a ENGINEERS SHI : (5.50)s0p10,00hi2v0s0b3T s3B s38 RB-2 s 1 p i2v1 s0b4148TBE,;M DESI8N PRDGF:AHs1 p·M s0t4148T Left Cant Lu= 5.68 ft Bee:F:! Braced @ Suppcwts Poe. Moment Lu= 5,00 it Brace Spacing = 5t00 ft Gov. Deflection : M;in Span Total = L/180 R2quired I= 209 inA4 W ib x 2b fy = 35 ksisOB STRESSES (ksi) L,dt Cant fb = 23.76 Fb = 21.60 ~EFLECTlONS <in) ;b = 19,67 fb = S,86 32 % Total: Main Span= 1,73 = L / 259 70 X Left Cant= -0,&4 = L /3235* 21 % live : H~in Spfn = 01S4 = L / 477 50 % Left C2nt = -0,40 = L /92841 13 X De,;.ri : Midspan = 0, 79 Left Cant= -0,24 * local ----------------------'~· s0B02i01/9"3 9"3-1(1 T/ A pD'\l,E JO!): tf'i~~I ~/1; STRU1CTURAL DA:-E: ..:1::!......,. .5tz~ ENGINEERS SHI : 4==1 ~ C6,SO)s0p10r00h12v0s0b3T s3B RB-3 sl p 12vl s0b4148TBEAM ANALYSIS PRGBRAMs1~9v1 s0c4148T SPAN LENGTH= 12.00 ft (Simple Span) UNlHlRM LOADS (k/ft t, ftj wd wi ):j 0.020 (l.000 O.O(l PdlNT LOADS lk I ft) Pd Pl REACT IONS ( kl LOAD L;,,,, fotal X 6.00 LEFT 0.600 !,5£0 V•) /,/.. 12.00 0.60() i15b(l V max = 1,56 k @ 0100 ft H max = 9.00 kft @ 6.00 ft DEFLECTIONS (EI = kinA2) LOAD DEfl (in) X (it) Total Live 119439/El 6.00 Dead 69051/EI 1idsp;n TOTAL Defl EI I I 180 . 235613 L L I 240 314i5(J I L I 3f,(l 471226 LIVE Defl CT '-. L I 24(l i '3'3066 L I 360 298598 L I 480 3"38131 ·r-A PR!ME .J03: ~I r~.c. smucruRAL oA~: ~!}-1 ~~ ENGINEERS SHI : ==tr=:1 s0B02i0l /9'3 (6.60}s0p10,00h12v0s0b3T -------~----~--------------· ---··--~------------- PRIME STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS BECKMAN 99-10 Overall Length of Beam: 16 ft. Axial Load: 0 KIPS 0 Mx (Max) Vx (Max) I Required 8.7443 jnA4 :ITT oca 10n 8.00 ft 0.00 ft 8.00 ft r~ A PRIME JOS : v fit'JJ; smucTURAL o.'<:::: ~ lfia ENGINEERS SHT : Deflection Limit: 180.0 pan I Length (ft) / . o I Load (PLF) / Momen!(K-mJ I Location (ft)TDefl. Fact. (m) I Location (ft) 18o.6 71.65 I s.oo -9:3212 s.oo PRIME STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS BECKMAN L ... A. PRIME J09 : q '\ri'Ol "~ STRUCTURAL o.;r::: ..i::j~! sa ENGINEERS SKT : =t:P=J 99-10 Member: C12-158-14 Manufacturer: Generic 97 Yield = 50.0 KSI Configuration: Sin_gle Dimensions Gross Properties Depth = mo In Area = 1.12 rn2 Flange = 1.6250 in Ix = 19.37 in4 Lip = 0.5000 in ly = 0.25 in4 Bend . -0.1426 in Rx = 4.16 in t = 0.0713 in Ry = 0.47 in Punch = 1.5000 in Cw = 7.65 in6 Wlip = 0.2861 in Jx10E3 = 1.89 in4 Wflg = 1.1972 in Xo = -0.74 in Wweb = 11.5722 in Ro = 4.26 in Beta = 0.97 BENDING ANALYSIS Eq. C3.1.2-9 Sigt = (GJ + Pi"2ECw/Lt"2)/ARo"2 = 765.50 KSI Eq. C3.1.2-8 Sigy = Pi"2E/(Ly/Ry)"2 = 454.86 KSI Eq. C3.1.2-5 Me = RoA(Sigt*Sigy)".5 = 2803. 75 K-in Eq. C3.1.2-3 My = Sf*Fy = 161.38 K-in Me> 0.5My Therefore, Mc= My(1 -My/4Me) = 159.061 K-in Find effective section at stress f, f = Mc/Sf = 49.28 KSI Loads and Bracing Axial: p = 0.00 KxLx = 192.00 KyLy = 12.00 KtLt = 12.00 Bending: Mx = 71.65 KLx = 192.00 KLy = 12.00 KU = 12.00 eFlange = 1.197 in; elip = 0.286 in; eWeb = 9.079 in; Sc = 2.928 in"3 Eq. C3.1.2-1 Mn = ScMc/Sf = 144.29 K-in KIPS in in in K-in in in in Eq. C3.1-1 Ma = Mn/1.67 = 86.40 K-in With 1/3 stress increase Ma = 115.20 K-in SHEAR ANALYSIS h / t > 1.38 * (5.34 * E / Fy) " .5. Therefore Va = .53 * E * 5.34 * t" 3 / h Va = 2.62 KIPS With 1/3 stress increase= 3.49 KIPS -~--------·. ----------------·------. ------ PRIME STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS BECKMAN 99-10 Web Crippling Analysis T:,-~ PRIME JCB : _q--'- /'tt>JJ; STRUCTURAL D;.:.2: ~'i-B'a ENGINEERS SHT : · Member: C12-158-14 Yield= 50.0 KSI Configuration: Single Support 2 Pt Load earing Width (in) Web Crippling Equations C 3.4 -1: Pa = t2kC3C4 (179 -0.33h/t) [1 + 0.01 (N/t)] Where: Pa = Allowable concentrated load or reaction per web, lbs C3 = (1 .. 33 -0.33k) 0.830 C4=0.50 <(1.15-0.15R/t)<=1 0.850 Fy = Design yield stress of the web 50 KSI h = Depth of flat portion of web 11.572 inches k=Fy/33 1.515 m = t / 0.075 0.951 t = Web thickness 0.0713 inches R = Inside bend radius 0.1426 inches N = Bearing width, inches Ma= Allowable bending moment 87.2328 K-in Combined bending and web crippling: 1.2 IP/ Pal + IM/ Mal <= 1.5 (Eq. C3.5 -1) 1 ener Required? ;<')_··. '!J · ) ·-" . --~ lwcf SG(c;f'17v ~ 10.of:;,f.,( 1AV ~ '-°-~ -:;;_ rlvff . -. -·--···-.. ---~ Ulvfpvtf~ ~r~ ~~~ -A-b4_o 1.;y1 iM e~ ~ &; g v:;, o-(/I~ c v) 0. M-Y , = tJ. 0 /) tJ.,-1·· lb(. ~}fj" ' ... \r1/ ~;) ~¼tM_~J~ G-!r-~ _;__ \/WV~) . e tb Q-<>/ v· ._.: fp~ o,?J'/-?f [f. f7F:;. "i6. 'Vf/f' -eo;>~:fri\'41 v'e, vU:-v1 J. -;:. t.e-et/? c. i, Le, -::,,-I..(-?? i, -q ._ 0 ~ \1, Ir >f L_ff c.b ~ j,cz,. ~~ ::::-\--i,, k, --~-v -< . ,-:-.... ~ m ~ ~ t7~l~.'l( . . v~ /vG-~~--~~~<-. . ~ ~ Lti4 ~{.: · . .: ~ -=--~-{1J~ .:._ ~<' f r.qO )'\~ 1< ((~}~ ... -"!'1~,~~ f 7: <. 117&~-,,_ 'o/'3 ~ 1,r,1 r'~" l<v<t-~ '~ -· -· · l1 ('Jo .. 1ovi6f * <: e u/ ~ /{, c ~? €A--fkvt . o .. D_ovi. r()f .... O ... Oq> 1 C.: le~ r),'?,1'f>f,_ J,?, D--1o1'V .. j :. . ! ! . ( -. •• !...J. tek{,,0 0~\Cj ~. e-0~1, .,.,." A PRIME JOB: 'ft{O /~ smucruRAL DATE:~!+ BJsa ENGINEERS SHf : • -:-# ~ _, (."'"'!\··-. . .... ·-· ',, f r1 ~f n1:,cr' WKt,L, <.PI l 07Yov\ t~.J , a '"lra ti-1 v} ,;;._fp~ )t M~ ~ ti§, 4_ ~ lt~7,,tPh,,.\-1ru.. l°'-7,; °' ~ ~1~~~r~ l&-~-f~f 7 ,1,1r'7,/ {_ ~Dv¼l,,)~ . t# / -:;:-[qsh,~ rrf ~ t;'\ VJ Uou1(/ ·_~r~ B~ o .... ~\ ::. 0-.. oO?/ . l){f~ o--o1_Cf7 i l:, 'f-. i:; I ";, ' y .2_\,C..~ CA._<l,1,10/. '1 ~ o,8~'7-, -~ f-k ~ {cf~1 .)~ c:-{-f,g,.fb~IJ -1-b-c?G<'/ ~--4!;D, 13(7>._: (__ ~ f_tJ/7 (:__~~e,/f- ( '21-{-~ rv' 1 h ~ 1q<1, .. t3 )l (-1/ ,:;,-J/(~l, h; ( ~ K rf/i -cc'"~o 1v D'-'2--)~)l e>v6'8~s.,i. S '3 s3B WALL DESiBN s ip12vis0b4148TBEAM ANALYSIS H:OH:Ai'is1p9v1s0h4148T SPAN LENGTH= 5.00 !t L~FT CANT= 0,00 ft RIGHT CANT = 1U)O ft 1RAP/UNIFORH LOADS (k/fi t it) Y.1 X2 0.00 0, (H)(l 0, 000 5.00 (;J(}30 0,000 o. ce 5: r)o 5, O(l 21 =(HJ PGINT LOADS Ck & ft) V r, 20. (H) REACTIONS Od LOAD Dsao Live MAXIMUM FORCES i EFT -(},468 (1, i)OO RIGHT (:. 000 1,724 V wax = i:20 k @ 5.00-ft Vd ffiiX = 1.20 k @ 5,00-ft ~ 1ax = 0,00 tft@ EnQs M tin = -4.69 kft@ 5,00 ft Kd ~in= -4:69 ~ft@ 5100 ft U'i<O iull sp2i1) DEFL EC: JONS (EI = kinA2) LOAD Defl (in) Total -i1097 /EI 74'3815/EI Live 0/EI 0/EI Dead -1G658iEI 749815iEI Main Span TOTAL Def! EI L / 180 33260 L / 240 44347 L / 360 66521 X (ft) 2. •37 R.C. 0,00 R,f:= mi Gs.pan R,C, Cant. (local) EI 25'3293 345724 518585 ~( ~ /s.. PRIME JOB : '1 rt B4-smucruRAL DATE: 1::§ fl iiiJ.i.~ ENGINEERS SHf : , ' · '3'3-10 (6.60)s0pi0.00hl2v0s0b3T I -;----~ ----·--- {;vk'11€5l1 Qot4-IP~ e~ (Y1 {= 1,7~/rf 4~ C-oM()v~ o...0: ~wf" H ~~ ~ ~1 '-f'r#/µ-. vl 'l/ /}, c,01,,--'1.-• ()(-:;; ,z,q 0oo :::. ,i,r;, 9:? :;::;. vf K. 7?..tJc1 -1~0-/..(\. ~ £).,9 (bit k~ 0-t/"8 ~er . j :;, °" 1 di i, . 7--: -[«-~ 1 ,1<'1 .. . .. 'Vllf f.. / -v _ 117--00 ~~tr~ Z ?ff f/47t. qd ~o,4ot,'l--~'7---~ ~1)b1.-z, J?/n <. 0-1 ~~ odq ?I' .IJ' /r:{' , . -~-< -01' ~' { . o, o 1~ /rr -,( tk b--r' Q 0-i'o/ J.r -.?> w~ ~/( oJiiu WA1v u0 I Ji: fcu, 8 ~'1v i ~-, if Or) s3B LOADING DOC!( WALLS s1p12v1~0b4148TBEAM ANALYSIS PROGRAMs1p9vi::Ob4148T SPAN LENETH = 4.67 ft (Simple 3~E;;) TRAPlUNIFORM LOADS (k/ft & ftl wd wl X1 X2 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.210 l),(;00 4.57 f) I 030 (l, 000 O:(H) REACTIONS fk) !12ad Live Total 0.234 0,000 MAXIMUM FORGES V max = 0,397 k Vd ma:= 0.397 k DEfLECTIONS L'.:iiiD Total live Dead TOTAL Defl / 18(1 / 240 / 350 {J,374 kft @ !),374 kft @ Def l (in) i?47 iEI 0/EI 144£./EI Ei 4E.4'3 ti'3'3 f1 ::a:t! , •• ,._;.,!} --~ t.i .q. '::U'i I\.· ; C,'7 u. 'r,i...-, ll .·, r ... , t.:. .:.:, ~-L 1 ~ 2.4i 0,00 !iii d!:pa;i s0B02/03/99 '3'3-10 ,...{ _ A PRIME JOs : q~vl "~ STRUC1UR/'l c:,:::: -I ~B~ ENGINEERS SHT : ~ Ui. &O)sOrl (l, Oi}hi2v0s0b3T ---. . ---• {JA-\-i) -.:c ~-~ i > '£-rp ' r-A PRIME JOB: ffl /~~ STRUCTURAL DAB F~ ENGINEERS SHT : 17 ! 1 L12---:::. ), I'?. , ?j ~ ~~1 ~-o:(-) ~ (, V 1 J 1::.9 {1,-,(c,_ it;y-..-(. -'J-;, r:JO r~p-l {½of" ,q1,, ~ \)~ -t-J~} f~, r1 ff tk,c. t)~ ~w C b "v..) \ 1..,. rM / n~ <=-l ~, c.1 -1-.. G ,...,v----1-V ~ c-ii;; (1nl f M A; :::, 1:,r;t1ri+1./ -4'-1~ ~~ ..:. o-1~ o\ 1G.o( -> :;-~ H.J.~ Dee,,/'--' 1.,,,¼A. --i '1,,"7 A {)(fl{ v i> , t~ ~------~------.. ----------~---.. t;~n-) ~ \l;'17!,1 -rµ,tYiJ ~it:;; 1~~(1 ft1'-·]( b,.,,,; ~ s+ .. ,'?. rir / Q4-==-·f?½Jl-1 I Kld) ~ru,). ~~ . -· ?·ttc,o{~ ~, w ~ u)t\'A; ~~bf 0;;i + V . ~ -. 1 , .. '?1 r(7~\'f--. 1 h1 ... :, "1A 1 ~ ,.{ M -<U.o ~ hM, cPf l~,l~rf vJ I b-f.. WJ Ot )v . (_,.;)( !/Q fOtfJ-r ~t, ~6,~ ~~ --·-----·· -~ PRIME STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS BECKMAN 99-10 Overall Length of Beam: 16 ft. Axial Load: O KIPS 0 Mx (Max) Vx (Max) I Required 3.9612 in"4 oca 10n 8.00 ft 0.00 ft 8.00 ft ·,..." A PRIME JOB : <{~415· II ~ STRUCTIJRAL C/,TE: ~4-1 IQ'.,_.;.;.. ENGINEERS SHT : Deflection Limit: 180.0 LF) I Moment (K-~n) I Location (ftJTDefl. Fact. (mJ I Location ( . . 60 I ITTJO I -4.225 I s.o --fs... PRIME J'.:J : ~rJll ,/'~ STRUCTURAL o:.::::: ...2211R 8a ENGINEERS SHT : ·t-' PRIME STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS BECKMAN 99-10 Member: C12-158-14 Manufacturer: Generic 97 Yield= 50.0 KSI Configuration: Single Dimensions Gross Properties Depth = 12.0000 m Area = 1.12 m2 Flange = 1.6250 in Ix = 19.37 in4 Lip = 0.5000 in ly = 0.25 in4 Bend = 0.1426 in Rx = 4.16 in t = 0.0713 in Ry = 0.47 in Punch = 1.5000 in Cw = 7.65 in6 Wlip = 0.2861 in Jx10E3 = 1.89 in4 Wflg = 1.1972 in Xo = -0.74 in Wweb = 11.5722 in Ro = 4.26 in Beta = 0.97 BENDING ANALYSIS Eq. C3.1.2-9 Sigt = (GJ + Pi"2ECw/Lt"2)/ARo"2 = 13.00 KSI Eq. C3.1.2-8 Sigy = Pi"2E/(Ly/Ry)"2 = 7.11 KSI Eq. C3.1.2-5 Me = RoA(Sigt*Sigy)".5 = 45.67 K-in Eq. C3.1.2-3 My = Sf*Fy = 161.38 K-in Me < 0.5My Therefore, Mc= Me = 45.675 K-in Find effective section at stress f, f = Mc/Sf = 14.15 KSI Loads and Bracing Axial: p = 0.00 KxLx = 192.00 KyLy = 12.00 Ktlt = 12.00 Bending: Mx = 32.46 KLx = 96.00 KLy = 96.00 KU = 96.00 eFlange = 1.197 in; elip = 0.286 in; eWeb = 10.072 in; Sc = 3.223 in"3 Eq. C3.1.2-1 Mn = ScMc/Sf = 45.61 K-in KIPS in in in K-in in} !n .,./" m Eq. C3.1-1 Ma = Mn/1.67 = 27.31 K-in With 1/3 stress increase Ma = 36.42 K-in SHEAR ANALYSIS h / t > 1.38 * (5.34 * E / Fy) " .5. Therefore Va = .53 * E * 5.34 * t" 3 / h Va = 2.62 KIPS With 1/3 stress increase= 3.49 KIPS WD;~ i~Jr# PRIME STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS BECKMAN 99-10 fPw {µ))1) ~ t,l4v\v' Web Crippling Analysis -r~~ ~-, _ PRIME JC'l : ,i o ~ STRUCTURAL o:,:::: ~ I iliMf£'wll ENGINEERS SHT : ~[ . J Member: C12-158-14 Manufacturer: Generic 97 Yield= 50.0 KSI Configuration: Single 2 -Web Crippling Equations C 3.4 -1: Pa= t2kC3C4 (179 -0.33h/t) [1 + 0.01 (N/t)] Where: Pa = Allowable concentrated load or reaction per web, lbs C3 = (1 .. 33 -0.33k) 0.830 C4=0.50 <(1.15-0.15R/t)<=1 0.850 Fy = Design yield stress of the web 50 KSI h = Depth of flat portion of web 11.572 inches k=Fy/33 1.515 m = t / 0.075 0.951 t = Web thickness 0.0713 inches R = Inside bend radius 0.1426 inches N = Bearing width, inches Ma= Allowable bending moment 116.3101 K-in Combined bending and web crippling: 1.2 JP/ Pal + IM/ Mal <= 1.5 _ (Eq. C3.5 -1) 1 ener Required? j. ' I lJ s3B RP.-2 HIND UPLIFT CHECK s1pi2v1s0b4148TBEAM ANALYSIS PR06F.:Aris1p9vls0b4148T SPAN LENGTH= 37.33 ft (Simple Span) UNIFORM LOADS It/ft l ft) ~d wl . X 1 X.-, ,. (), (H) ,,, -:,'j -..J!r-..:..J REACT IDNS ( k) Deati Live Total rihXIMUM HWCES LEFT ,-. :-.,I"'. ~. ,JiL 0. (H)O RIGHT 3,572 0,(l(l(! 3.572 V ma~ = 3r57 k @ 0,00 ft VG max = 3.57 k ~ 0,(H) fi; M Aax = 33,34 kft@ 18:67 ft rfo /!"ic;X = 33.34 kft @ iB.£.7 ft DEFLECTIONS <EI = kinA2) LOAD Defl (inl X (ftl Tot al 8352B93iEI i 8. Ei Live 0/EI 0,(l(l D:ad 83b2B93/EI ~idspcn Post Hornerit Lu = 12, 44 ft Erace Spacing = 12,44 ft 6ov. Deflection : Totsl = L/180 REquired I= 116 inA4 W 16 x 26 Fy = 36 ksisOB Fv = 14.40 Fb = 13.79 f v = o. '31 fb = 10.42 DEFLECTIONS linl Total = 0.96 = L / 4E.8 = L / ---Li VE = Dead = 0.0() (l,95 t, 'I. 7f, 'I. 38 i. 0 i. ·,, l. s0B02/03i'39 .,.,..'" A PRIME J0:1 : Gf f-t-0r ~ STRUCTIJRAL o.:.!'::: 1,--"f Pi'I 6.1'.i'-il ENGINEERS S:-iT : 1 ff,. 60) sOpi 0. OOh 12v0st)b3T l Pv C-2-4.0~ + 0.0k- C,~J:J j_~J<__ _1_ ----·. -• {#.()/< 42/:::. +o_tl/Uk o _qu1<., q_ 1 lt I(. ~ PRIME x,s: ~ STRUC1URAL DAiE: ~~ Ef\JGINEERS SHT: --4V- ( /, c;-&/< t;7 -----,---~---~----. ---··-·--·---· --·-·-·-·-·----·-- ,. r , ""' STRUCTURAL TUBE GQLuJiN DESIGN (2.1) TYP, COLUMN . LDF = LOO ' UNITS = :NCH-KIPS U, D. N COL.HTS Lx= 14.00 FTS COL.HTS Ly= 14.00 FTS LOAD FROM FLOOR ~BOVE= 13,BOKIPS P1D, PIL, el= 0.00 P201 P2L! e2 = 0,00 P3D1 P2L, e3 = 0.00 P4D, P4L 1 E4 = 0.00 Mx= O.CO INCH-KIPS My= 0,00 lNC:H-KlPS Fy = 4&.00 KSI Cb =LOO fc == 2,00 KBI ALLOt:L BEARIN6=1, 4(H) KSI LDAD CASE 1 PT= 13,80 !'ix= 0.00 My= 0,00 LOAD l·-,qi:: ·j .r,...,._ ... 13.80 0:00 0,(i(l 0100 01 (H) CASE 3 {},(}(1 OrOO 0, (;O 0: r)O LOAD CA.SE 4 0,0(l LOAD CASE 5 ii:t 0{; .w,uv 0.00 TS 3.5X 3,5X0,1875 TS 4.0X 3,0X0,1875 IS 3.01 3,0X0,2500 W6T= 8.15 8.15 8.81 LOAD CASE= Fa = '3, 50 fa = 5,77 Fhx= 27.60 " rox= 0,00 Fby= 27.60 iby= !), (J(J 1A = 0. 61 iB = 0,21 7,37 5. 77 27,60 (I, (H) 27.60 (1.00 0.78 0.21 6.40 C' -,:-, .J1J..:t 27,60 Q,0() ·Ji Ct1 Li 1\JV (l, (H) 0,83 per AISC 1.6-1a per AISC 1.6-ib i-A.. PRIME JOB : 1'f1Vl Jr~ STRUClURAL DAi::: ~!}! _ lllwl'"'~ ENGINEERS SHT : :::©:-J 0 \ ___ ) HR-36 18-24 Gauge Architectural Panels See Light Gauge Roof and Wall Panels section for 26 & 29 gauge. Featuring BHP Zincalume® Twice the Life! D Excellent choice for industrial roof and wall applications. _ HR-36 (Typical Roof Application) 1 ~71/5'~, (coated side) Reversed HR-36 (Typical Wall Application) (coated side) 1 ..... 71/5".+I D Symmetrical shape and strong shadow effect makes for architecturally pleasing commercial applications. ·---------36"----------,~ D Long-span capability-economy in design. D Matching flashings and accessories available. D Available in wide variety of PVF2 (Polyvinylidene Fluoride) colors, Zincalume®, or G90 galvanized coa_ted steel. Gauge 24 22 20 18 Wt. (!~s/ft2) 1.20 1.53 1.85 2.46 .BHP HR;36 ·section Properties S+ I+·. s- (in3/ft) (in4/ft) (in3/ft) .1234 .1116 .1156 .11'11 .1504 .1601 .2229 .1907 .2085 .3264 .2633 .3055 BHP Steel Building Products USA Inc. Sacramento -800-726-2727, 916-372-6851 FAX 916-372-7606 Los Angeles -800-272-2466, 909-823-0401 FAX 909-823-2625 Phoenix -800-551-2062, 602-598-1200 FAX 602-598-1219 Tacoma -800-733-4955, 206-383-4955 FAX 206-272-0791 Salem -800-272-7023, 503-390-7174 FAX 503-390-7443 Spokane -800-776-8771, 509-535-0600 FAX 509-535-1346 Anchorage -800-478-2727, 907-349-2727 FAX 907-344-7095 I- (in4/ft) .1141 .1544 . .1964 .2721 --,-~==----:------------------~--,---,.-, __ ,,-,, .. -,_.,,,,_,.=·-,;"". ,,_,,_ ·-=---ss-~ ""'c _;,,--. =· .,,,.-. ,,__ .,;=, =:,--,:::=====·""·=·· =··=====::' HR 36 - -- HR-36 Allowable Span (ft-in) HR-36 Allowable Loa'cf (LBS/FT2) ,, Gauge Span Loads (PSF) Gauge Span Loads (PSF) Condition Condition 10 20 25 30 40 50 5-0 6-0 7-0 8-0 9-0 10-0 11-0 12-0 ss f 14-7 10-5 9-3 8-6 7-3 6-6 ss f 86 60 44 34 26 21 18 15 1/180 10-0 7-10 7-3 6-10 6-3 5-9 Vl80 79 46 29 19 14 10 7 6 24 DS f 14-2 10-0 9-0 8-2 7-1 6-3 24 DS f 80 56 41 31 25 20 17 14 Gauge V180 13-4 10-0 9-0 8-2 7-1 6-3 Gauge 1/180 80 56 41 31 25 20 17 14 TS f 15-3 10-9 9-8 8-9 7-8 6-9 TS f 94 65 48 37 29 23 19 16 Vl80 12-7 10-0 9.3 8-8 7-8 6-9 V180 94 65 48 37 27 20 15 11 ss f 17-2 12-2 10-10 10-0 8-7 7-8 ss f 119 83 61 46 37 30 25 21 :~ @ 1/180 11-0 8-8 8-1 7-7 6-10 6-4 VJ80 107 62 39 26 18 13 10 8 DS f 16-8 11-9 10-6 9-7 8-3 7-6 22 DS f Ill 77 57 43 34 28 23 19 1/180 14-9 11-8 10-6 9-7 8-3 7-6 Gauge VJ80 Ill 77 57 43 34 28 23 19 e TS f 18-0 12-8 11-4 10-4 9-0 8-1 TS f 130 90 66 51 40 32 27 23 1/180 13-10 11-0 10-2 9-7 8-8 8-1 VJ80 130 90 66 51 37 27 20 15 ss f 19-8 13-10 12-4 11-4 9-9 8-9 ss f 155 108 79 61 48 39 32 27 , nQn 1).10 CJ.A R-9 8-3 7-6 7-0 V180 136 78 49 33 23 17 13 10 20 DS f 19-0 13-6 12-0 11-0 9-6 8-6 20 DS f 145 101 74 57 45 36 30 25 Gauge VJ80 16-0 12-8 11-9 11-0 9-6 8-6 Gauge VJ80 145 101 74 57 45 36 30 24 TS f 20-7 14-6 13-0 I 1-10 10-3 9-2 TS f 169 117 86 66 52 42 35 29 1/JRO 15-0 11-10 11-1 10-4 9-6 8-9 VJ80 169 117 86 66 47 34 26 20 ss f 23-9 16-9 15-1 13-8 11-10 10-7 ss f 227 158 116 89 70 57 47 39 VJSO 13-3 10-6 9-9 9-2 8-4 7-9 VJ80 187 108 68 46 32 23 18 14 18 DS f 23-0 16-3 14-7 13-3 11-6 10-3 18 DS f 212 147 108 83 66 53 44 37 Gauge VJ80 17-9 14-1 13-1 12-3 11-2 10-3 Gauge VJ80 212 147 108 83 66 53 42 33 TS f 24-10 17-7 15-8 14-4 12-4 ll-1 TS f 248 172 126 97 76 62 51 43 Vl80 16-8 13-3 12-3 11-7 10-6 9-9 VJ80 248 172 126 92 64 47 35 27 Notes: D Steel confonns to ASTM A446 Grade C or ASTM A792 Grade 40. ; D Values are based on the American Iron and Steel Institute (AISI) "Specifications for the Design of Cold-Rolled Steel Structural Members" (1986 edition, with 1989 Addendum). D For wind loading, multiply allowable load values by 1.33 or allowable span values by 1.15. D Span/Load combinations to the right of the bold line apply to wA]ls only. Loading Table Legend f-Load limited by flexural bending stress L-Span Vxxx-Load limited by deflection SS-Single span t _ L _t SupportTYP \. OS-Double span t _ L_t_ L-;,. t TS -Triple span t_L_t_L _t_L_t .BHP BHP Steel Building Products Zincalume® is a registered trademark of BHP Steel (JI.,\) Ply Ltd USA Inc. © BHP Steel Building Products USA Inc. March 1995 Printed in USA Revision lOM (PSl65) ) ;:;. ,!- .,. January 18, 1999 Beckman Coulter 2470 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, California 92008 Attention: Jim Williams w CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERING Hl::CEIVED .!AN 2 5 1999 ... , SMITH CONSULTING ARCHITECTS CWE 198.106.2 SUBJECT: Pavement Section Recommendations, Proposed Outside Truck Dock, Beckman Coulter Facility, 2470 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California. REFERENCE: Report of Soil Investigation, Proposed Outside Truck Dock, Beckman Coulter Facility, by Christian Wheeler Engineering, dated December 10, 1998. Gentlemen and Ladies: This report has been prepared to present structural pavement section recommendations for the proposed loading dock. These recommendations were inadvertently omitted from the referenced geotechnical report. We understand that the proposed pavement will consist of Portland Cement Concrete pavement (PCC). However, some pavement consisting of an asphalt concrete and aggregate base structural section may also be constructed. The soils exposed by our subsurface explorations consisted of decomposed granitics that posses relatively high strength parameters in regards to support of structural pavements. Based on our experience, we estimate that the pavement subgrade will have a Resistance Value (R-Value) of at least 60. The traffic on the proposed pavement is expected to consist of semi trailers and trucks. Based on the truck traffic being less than five trucks per day, we assumed a Traffic Index of 6.0 for use in designing the structural section. Based on the above design parameters and anticipated traffic loads, we recommend that the structural concrete pavement section consist of six (6) inches of Portland Cement Concrete, placed over the prepared subgrade. The subgrade preparation should consist of scarifying the subgrade soil to a depth of 12 inches, moisture conditioning the soil, and compacting it to at least 95 percent of ma.ximum dry density. The ma.ximum dry density should be determined by ASTM Test 1557-91, Method A and C. The concrete should comply with Class 520-A-2500 as per the Standard Specifications of Public Works Construction (SSPWC), Section 201-1.1.2. The pavement should have expansion/ contraction control joints spaced in accordance with the requirements of the American Concrete Institute. " CWE 198.068.2 January 18, 1999 Page No. 2 If asphalt concrete pavement will be constructed, the structural section should consist of 3.0 inches of asphalt concrete over 6.0 inches of crushed aggregate base. The asphalt concrete should consist of a Class ''B" mi.x with AR 4000 bituminous, as per Sections 203-6.3.2 and 203-1.2, respectively, of the SSPWC. The aggregate base material should consist of Crushed Aggregate Base in accordance with Section 200-2.2 of the SSPWC. If you have any questions after reviewing this report, please do not hesitate to contact our office. This opportunity to be of professional service is sincerely appreciated. Respectfully submitted, CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERING Charles H. Christian, RGE 00215 cc: (2) Submitted ( 4) Smith Consulting Architects I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERING REPORT OF SOIL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED OUTSIDE TRUCK DOCK BECKMAN COULTER FACILITY 2470 FARADAY AVENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA PREPARED FOR: BECKMAN COULTER 2470 FARADAY AVENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA PREPARED BY: CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERING 4925 MERCURY STREET SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 4925 Mercury Street+ San Diego, CA 92111 + 619-496-9760 + FAX 619-~758 ~1-r@>:rfl I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I December 10, 1998 Beckman Coulter 2470 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, California 92008 Attention: Jim Williams w CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERING CWE 198.106.1 SUBJECT: Report of Soil Investigation, Proposed Outside Truck Dock, Beckman Coulter Facility, 2470 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California. Gentlemen and Ladies: In accordance with your request and our Proposal dated October 1, 1998, we have performed a preliminary geotechnical investigation for the subject project. We are presenting herewith our findings and recommendations. In general, we found the site suitable for the proposed construction provided the recommendations presented in the body of our report are followed. The proposed construction area is underlain by competent granitic bedrock material that has very good supporting characteristics and low expansion potential. If you have any questions after reviewing this report, please do not hesitate to contact our office. This opportunity to be of professional service is sincerely appreciated. Respectfully submitted, CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERING -t- Charles H. Christian, RGE 00215 cc: (2) Submitted ( 4) Smith Consulting Architects 4925 Mercury Street + San Diego, CA 92111 + 619-496-9760 + FAX 619-496-9758 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I REPORT OF SOIL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED TRUCK DOCK BECKMAN COULTER FACILITIES 2470 FARADAY AVENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION This report presents the results of our soil investigation for a proposed above-grade truck dock and canopy, to be constructed at the Beckman Coulter facilities in Carlsbad, California. The site location is shown on the following Figure Number 1. We understand that the subject project will consist of constructing an approximately 3.5-foot-high truck dock in the northeast corner of the subject property. The dock will have masonry perimeter walls and will measure about 40 feet by 60 feet in dimension. A light steel frame canopy will cover the truck dock. A ramp will be constructed on the north side of the dock that descends towards the west. Concrete pavement will be constructed at the front of the truck dock to connect it with existing asphalt pavement. Grading for the proposed truck dock is expected to be relatively minimal, and should result in cuts and fills of less than a couple of feet from existing grades around the dock and filling in the interior of the dock with imported soil. In general, the purpose of our investigation was to provide the necessary recommendations regarding the geotechnical aspects of the proposed construction as presently proposed. PROJECT SCOPE The investigation consisted of: surface reconnaissance, subsurface explorations, obtaining representative disturbed and undisturbed samples, laboratory testing, analysis of the field and laboratory data, research of available geologic literature and geotechnical documents pertaining to the site, and preparation of this report. More specifically, the intent of this analysis was to: a) Explore the subsurface conditions to the depths influenced by the proposed construction. b) Evaluate, by laboratory tests, the pertinent engineering properties of the various strata which may influence the proposed construction, including bearing capacities, expansive characteristics, and settlement potential. I I I I I I I ) \ COSMOS I CT I I I I I I I I I I I -.----- ,,/ ,, / ) I I I _.,,,,,.------..... __ ,/ ' // " /' / / ( __ __ .(_.,, .. / ' --' -, ' ' \ -J \ I \ \ \ , I \ L, CA~LSB o L I I I I I I ---·-r-1-----;;.,6-_____ _ \ /' ------ )--,/ ' ___ ,,. i Ii' ' I I ®l I t: CARJIILLO f/ANCH PARK 19 30 / CARL RAC/ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I CWE 198.106 December 10, 1998 Page No. 2 c) cl) e) Develop soil engineering criteria for site preparation and precise grading. Recommend an appropriate foundation system for the type of construction proposed and develop soil engineering design criteria for the recommended foundation design. Provide design parameters for retaining walls f) Provide recommendations for structural pavement sections. g) Prepare a report which includes in addition to our conclusions and recommendations, a plot plan showing the locations of our subsurface explorations, logs of our test pits, and a summary of our laboratory test results. FINDINGS SITE AND BUILDING DESCRIPTION The project area is located in an area of the Beckman Coulter facility that was graded to its existing topography in the early 1980's. The area is nearly level and appears to have been cut down to its present grade. A concrete-block trash enclosure encroaches into the construction area at the front of the truck dock. We understand that this structure will be demolished to make way for the proposed improvements. We also understand that a water main for the fire fighting system runs through the proposed truck dock area in a north/ south direction, and that this line is probably at least four feet deep. GENERAL GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS GEOLOGIC SETTING AND SOIL DESCRIPTION: The project site is located near the boundary between the Coastal Plains Physiographic Province and the Foothills Physiographic Province of San Diego County and underlain by Cretaceous-age granitic rock and minor artificial fill. The granitic materials have weathered into a yellow-brown, humid, dense to very dense, silty sand. The overlying fill material consist of approximately six inches of the granitic bedrock material that apparently was disturbed during the mass grading operation. This material was humid and relatively loose in consistency. GROUNDWATER: No groundwater was encountered during our subsurface exploration and we do not anticipate any significant groundwater related problems, either during or after construction I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I CWE 198.106 December 10, 1998 Page No. 3 CONCLUSIONS In general, no geotechnical conditions were found that would preclude the proposed truck dock construction as proposed, provided the recommendations presented in this report are complied with. The only condition that will require special consideration is the fire waterline that crosses the proposed construction area. This condition will require additional reinforcing steel in the foundation to help bridge over the waterline. RECOMMENDATIONS SITE PREPARATION GENERAL: Site preparation should begin with the demolition and removal of the existing trash enclosure masonry wall and on-grade slab. The resulting debris should be legally disposed of off-site. Once this is accomplished, the soils exposed at grade should be scarified to a depth of 12 inches, be moisture conditioned and be compacted to at least 90 percent of maximum dry density. In order to help minimize costs, it will probably be best to import, place and compact the fill material to raise the grade to the dock height before the perimeter footings and masonry walls for the dock are constructed. This will allow spreading and compaction of the fill material with heavy grading equipment. The side slopes around the dock can either be overfilled and cut back at an inclination of 0.5:1 (horizontal to vertical), or a false slope can be constructed starting at the back side of the wall and ascending at an inclination of 1.5:1 (h:v). However, if desired, the foundation and perimeter walls can be constructed first and the imported fill material can be placed inside the dock area using light compacting equipment that can fit in the area. EARTHWORK: All earthwork and grading contemplated for site preparation should be accomplished in accordance with the attached Recommended Grading Specifications and Special Provisions. All special site preparation recommendations presented in the sections above will supersede those in the standard Recommended Grading Specifications. All fill material should be compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction at or slightly over optimum moisture content. Utility trench backfill in the area of the proposed structure and beneath pavements and concrete slabs should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of its maximum dry density. The maximum dry density of each soil type should be determined in accordance with ASTM Test D-1557-91, Method A or C. FOUNDATIONS GENERAL: Conventional spread foundations may be used to support the perimeter masonry walls and canopy for the proposed truck dock. Spread footings should have a minimum embedment depth of 18 inches I I I I I I I I I I I . I I I I I I I I CWE 198.106 December 10, 1998 Page No. 4 below lowest adjacent finish grade. A minimum width of 24 inches is recommended for retaining wall footings. A bearing capacity of 3500 psf may be assumed for said footings. This bearing capacity may be increased by one-third when considering wind and/ or seismic forces. The project structural engineer should specify footing reinforcement. However, as a minimum, we recommend that continuous footings be reinforced with at least one No. 5 bar positioned near the bottom of the foo_ting and one No. 5 bar positioned near the top of the footing. This reinforcement is based on soil characteristics and is not intended to be in lieu of reinforcement necessary to satisfy structural considerations. Where the footings cross the existing fire waterline, the minimum reinforcing should be increased to at least two No. 5 bars top and bottom. This additional reinforcing should extend at least ten feet out of both sides of the utility trench. SETTLEMENT CHARACTERISTICS: The anticipated total and/ or differential settlements for the proposed foundations under anticipated loads imposed by proposed structure are expected to be less than about one-half inch, provided the recommendations presented in this report are followed. It should be recognized that minor cracks normally occur in concrete slabs and foundations due to shrinkage during curing or redistribution of stresses and some cracks may be anticipated. Such cracks are not necessarily an indication of excessive vertical movements. EXPANSIVE CHARACTERISTICS: The prevailing foundation soils were found to be nondetrimentally expansive. The recommendations presented in this report reflect this condition . EARTH RETAINING WALLS PASSIVE PRESSURE: The passive pressure for the prevailing soil conditions may be considered to be 400 pounds per square foot per foot of depth. This pressure may be increased one-third for seismic loading. The coefficient of friction for concrete to soil may be assumed to be 0.40 for the resistance to lateral movement. When combining frictional and passive resistance, the friction should be reduced by one-third. The upper 12 inches of soil should not be considered when calculating passive pressures for exterior walls unless pavements or concrete slabs abut the base of the wall. ACTIVE PRESSURE: It is assumed that the perimeter retaining walls will be restrained at the top by the concrete slab. The active soil pressure for the design of the restrained retaining walls with level backfill may be assumed to be equivalent to the pressure of a fluid weighing 45 pounds per cubic foot. In consideration of additional loading on the walls due to fork lift traffic, we recommendation that an additional lateral load of 30 pounds per square foot be added to the load on the retaining walls. These pressures do not consider any other surcharge loads. If any are anticipated, this office should be contacted for the necessary increase in soil I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I CWE 198.106 December 10, 1998 pressure. This value assumes a drained backfill condition. The project architect should provide waterproofing specifications and details. Page No. 5 BACKFILL: All backfill soils should be compacted to at least 90% relative compaction. Expansive or clayey soils should not be used for backfill material. The wall should not be backfilled until the masonry has reached an adequate strength. FACTOR OF SAFETY: The above values, with the exception of the allowable soil bearing pressure, do not include a factor of safety. Appropriate factors of safety should be incorporated into the design to prevent the walls from overturning and sliding. LIMITATIONS The recommendations and opinions expressed in this report reflect our best estimate of the project requirements based on an evaluation of the subsurface soil conditions encountered at the subsurface exploration locations and the assumption that the soil conditions do not deviate appreciably from those encountered. It should be recognized that the performance of the foundations might be influenced by undisclosed or unforeseen variations in the soil conditions that may occur in the intermediate and unexplored areas. Any unusual conditions not covered in this report that may be encountered during site development should be brought to the attention of the soils engineer so that he may make modifications if necessary. In addition, this office should be advised of any changes in the project scope or proposed site grading so that it may be determined if the recommendations contained herein are appropriate. This should be verified in writing or modified by a written addendum. FIELD EXPLORATIONS Three subsurface explorations were made at the locations indicated on the attached Plate Number 1 on November 25, 1998. These explorations consisted of test pits excavated by hand. The fieldwork was conducted under the observation of our engineering geology personnel. The explorations were carefully logged when made. These logs are presented on the following Plate Numbers 2 through 4. The soils are described in accordance with the Unified Soils Classification System. In addition, a verbal textural description, the wet color, the apparent moisture and the density or consistency are provided. The density of granular soils is given as either very loose, loose, medium dense, dense or very dense. The consistency of silts or clays is given as either very soft, soft, medium stiff, stiff, very stiff, or hard. I I I I I I C\"Xi'E 198.106 December 10, 1998 Page No. 6 Disturbed and "undisturbed" samples of typical and representative soils were obtained and returned to the laboratory for testing. LABORATORY TESTING Laboratory tests were performed in accordance with the generally accepted American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) test methods or suggested procedures. A brief description of the tests performed is presented below: a) CLASSIFICATION: Field classifications were verified in the laboratory by visual examination. I The final soil classifications are in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System. I I I b) MOISTURE-DENSITY: In-place moisture contents and dry densities were determined for representative undisturbed soil samples.· This information was an aid to classification and permitted recognition of variations in material consistency with depth. The dry unit weight is determined in pounds per cubic foot, and the in-place moisture content is determined as a percentage of the soil's dry weight. The results are summarized in the test pit logs. c) MAXIMUM DENSITY/ OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT: The maximum dry density I and optimum moisture content of a typical soil was determined in the laboratory in accordance with ASTM Standard Test D-1557-78, Method A. The results of this test are presented below. I I I I I I I I Sample Number Description Maximum Density Optimum Moisture Content TP 1 at 0.5' to 1' Clayey Silty Sand (SM/SC) 129.0 pcf 9.0% d) EXP ANSI ON INDEX: Expansion index tests on remolded samples were performed on representative samples of soils likely to be present at finish grade. The test was performed on the portion of the sample passing the #4 standard sieve. The samples were brought to optimum moisture content and then dried back to a constant moisture content for 12 hours at 230 ± 9 degrees Fahrenheit. The specimen was then compacted in a 4-inch-diameter mold in two equal layers by means of a tamper, then trimmed to a final height of 1 inch, and brought to a saturation of approximately 50 percent. The specimen was placed in a consolidometer with porous stones at the top and bottom, a total normal load of 12.63 pounds was placed (144.7 psf), and the sample was allowed to consolidate for a period of 10 minutes. The sample was allowed to become saturated, and the change in vertical movement was recorded until the rate of expansion became nominal. The I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I CWE 198.106 December 10, 1998 Page No. 7 expansion indexes are reported below as the total vertical displacement times the fraction of the sample passing the #4 sieve times 1000. Sample Number Description Initial Moisture Content Initial Dry Density Final Moisture Content Expansion Index Classification TP 1@0.5'-1' Clayey Silty Sand (SM/SC) 9.2% 109.2pcf 20.4% 26 Low e) DIRECT SHEAR TESTS: A direct shear test was performed to determine the failure envelope based on yield shear strength. The shear box was designed to accommodate a sample having a diameter of 2.375 inches or 2.50 inches and a height of 1.0 inch. Samples were tested at different vertical loads and at a saturated moisture content. The shear f) stress was applied at a constant rate of strain of approximately 0.05 inches per minute. The results of this test are presented below. Sample Number Description Angle of Internal Friction Apparent Cohesion TP 1 at 0.5' to 1' Remolded to 90% 36 Degrees 275 psf GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION: The grain size distribution was determined from representative samples of the native soils in accordance with ASTM D422. The results of these tests are presented below. SAMPLE TP 1 @ 0.5' -1' U.S. SIEVE SIZE PERCENT PASSING 1-1/2" 100% l" 99% 0.75" 98% 0.5'' 98% 0.33" 98% #4 96% #8 87% #16 68% #30 53% #so· 40% #ioo 30% #200 22% I I I I I· I I I I I I I I I I I I· I 'I ~ 82"S&'4~E-14J~.,OS' (~T.~! ___ --------------------------------_ -----------=-~ -~ 7 -----------7 / ----------------------------------I I !-------------~ ---------~e;>l<SA=~D-y // I ----- 1 -'-----~---/ / I i; ~I ~i QJ ;, EXISTING FENCE ...... ~_ ... /-... / ./.,-..... / :,.x-.. ;/r-~-··;,/'· .............. ·· _.,. .... -···· .. . /' _,/ / .. ····· /1/ ...... / / / ./ ,/ ,,/ ...... ../ ~/::::}~~;;;~ .. . .. ·' / ' ,/ // ... ., / ,· .• .. · [/::-:>::/: >·<::::.,> .. : ... : .. ,<>/~>···':::~ .. ~:,.;>/. .... .. ,.·-~::::.·:: ... / // ./ ./' // / .......... //~_,/ / ./'// .,·/··········· / .,········ 1{{{~~;31 <//./.............. . >/, eu I L.O INC; #2 .. ··, ...... ····:: ... / .............. .,// ,.//; ./ . .,/ ,.,..,. / ,/ / .. / / ....... .,/ ,/ .// :W ~ff~/§/j /.,..... // ....... / 0·/ ....... ,/ /./ .. ./ .. ·· / ,/ / ./ ........ .. ....... -······ , ...•.• -·· ..... ·· ... .-·· /,/' /.,..-· .-, .. -······ __ ... -··· _.,.,, .. / // / /_.... / / / / ,. / ./ / .,. ;;<;;:1:/ a:«:~/ .. ···· .. / / .. ···· . ./ /./ EXISTiNG GUARD 1-lOUSE'-.L-, .. · .... ····<.:>·' .::.··::.,.::/::< :>··>~>:.::~;T, :!9Ri~,:.~~~); / EXISTING WALK :Xl5TING 1-lANDICAF ACCESS. FAf"l<ING 5TALLS·ITF, CF 5 ...... -.. //. .·"' --_---;-~-· ...... --· .,...... . .... -··· -~-.... ··•·· /... . .... . / ./ EXl5T[N6 5TORACrE" _./ /,,. / /,_/_.,. ...•.. "' .... __ ........ ··· ____ _../_~ ........ ··· ___ ., ... -··· '_,.. ......... __ ... .... UTILITIES ... -·· f~ ..... / ./ /. .· .. / .. / / ./ . / .. ,/ .. / {1 / ·· ,· / /E>l::llLOfNG?f° #J / _,.. ./ / .• .· // ,/ / ... / .. / / c ./ // // / ........ / _,/ -=XISTING, EXISTING ,· /. ,/ / ./ / / ..... / /. · ./ / -r l LOADING ;~:& ~ /~····</· : ... ,·< .. /; .. ,< ................. · /.....-::: ... · ...... : ..... ./::: ............ / .. :.. . ~ (TYF.) \ .,.... . / ....... ./ ./ ./ • ...... /.. ........ .,..... ....... l I RA,"1P DN --I f~~;/~' ~ ~ UP . </ (,,-P/4~···/ · __ / ./ / ,..... / /: .... /:,.,. / .-·:.,;::f/. · ............ ···~: .. ,/·· .................. ..> .. · I EXl5TINC; i I :-lALK--i EXISTING FENCE---' !/ I I ~ 11' I / I I I ~ I 1i1 1/ =t= ( J I // I I I I i/ I fiJ I /1 I If l !l I I / /"' I I I I I I I I I I =t= /, I / I I // 11 CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERING I ,. L ____ _ ± ---;----_j ----EXISTING, ACCE55 TO ---, ---_, ------- FARADAY AVENUE -------~--N 62'5&'4'3' E 1224,04 <N.T.S.J -------------- FARADAY AVENUE • tii~G~ND A-P-PR-0=· *fMATE TEST PIT LOCATIO~ B1;:CKMAN TRUCK DOCK .. ;BY: DRR/CRB/SD i;,, • ' DATE: 12-07-98 JOB NO: 198.106 PLATE NO: 1 SITE PLAN SCALE: l'c&Z'·ti' n~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0 1 2 !N CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERING LOG OF PIT NUMBER P1 Date Drilled: ---=l=l=---=2.;;;..5-....,9~8:c..-..________ Logged by: DRR Project Manager: CRB Equipment: Hand Tools Driving Weight and Drop: ---=-N"'--/=-=A=------------ Surface Elevation (ft): ___________ Depth to Water (ft): ___ ....:N:..:t./...:.A=----------- SAMPLES 0 ,-.. ~ >-, w t""' "$. ~ ~ 0 '-' p ~ 0 w ~ t""' t""' E=, J:I.. SUMMARY OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS i: ~ ~en >-, ;:J ::r: t""' en ~ :3:: t""' t""' ~ -en 0 t""' J:I.. ~ 5 0 -~<B' i=oen -0 w 0 ~ <w Q en i:o i:o ~ 0~ ~t""' -SC FIIJ., -Yellow Brown, Moist, Dense, Fine I'-. to Coarse, CLAYEY SAND, Stained, r---. Concrete Fragments SM/ V , , ,.. DECCMPOSED GRANITICS -Yellowish Brown, CK .,,-BA.g_.-10.5 114.7 ,., . -SC Fine to Coarse Grained, CLAYEY SAND/ I'--.. SILTY SAND, Occasional GRAVEL i---.. Bottom of Test Pit at 2 Feet - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Project Name: BECKMAN TRUCK DOCK Project No. 198 .106 Plate No. 2 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0 1 2 w CHRISTIAN WHEaER. ENGINEERING LOG OF PIT NUMBER P2 Date Drilled: 11-25-9 8 Logged by: DRR Project Manager: --------------Equipment: Hand 'Ibols Driving Weight and Drop: __ N,_/_A ________ _ Surface Elevation (ft): Depth to Water (ft): N/A ------------------------ CRB SAMPLES 0 ,-._ ~ >< ~ f-< . '#. ~ ~ 0 '-' t' ~ 0 ~ f-< ~ ~ SUMMARY OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ~ -~ Cl) .._, f-< ::i 5 1:5 Cl) f-< Cl) ~ ~ f-< -Cl) 0 f-< '1.. d ~ ....:i 0 -~<§' t:!l Cl) ~ 0 ::i ....:i ~ :Sf::: 0 Cl) t:!l t:!l 0-8 -SC FILL -YellCMish BrCMn, Moist, Dense, t:::. / / Fine to Coarse, CLAYEY SAND, Occasional _.,.~G;:: ~ Concrete Fragments / // r---..... ,,CK/ 6.5 120.l SC DEOO,lPOSED GRANITE -YellCMish BrCMn, / ,, ,, ,,,,_BAG;_ ~ Moist, Dense to Ver:y Dense, Fine to Coarse, CLAYEY SAND, Occasional Fine to ~ Medium GRAVEIS, - -Bottom of Test Rit at 1.5 Feet - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Project Name: BECKMAN TRUCK DOCK Project No. 198 .106 Plate No. 3 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0 1 2 w CHRISTIAN WHEaER ENGINEER.ING LOG OF PIT NUMBER P3 Date Drilled: 11-25-98 Logged by: DRR Project Manager: ---==--a::.::...-=-a:=----------CRB Driving Weight and Drop: __ ..... NµIA...._ _______ _ Equipment: Hand Tools Surface Elevation (ft): Depth to Water (ft): N/A -----------___ _.,;:;==--------- SAMPLES ~ -~ Q E-< '$-~ 0 '-' p i:i:l 0 ~ 0 E-< E-< ~ i:i... SUMMARY OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ~ -~ Cl) >-Cl) i: $ ~ E-< Cl) ~ ~ -Cl) 0 E-< i:i... ...:I ~ s 0 ..... ~<f;' ~i2 ..... 0 w 0 ...:I 0 Cl) a:i a:i ~ 0 -e ...:I E-< -SC FILL -Yello;vish Bram, Moist, Dense, /// ,.CK~ 6.6 121.2 CI.AYEY SAND, Fine to Coarse GRAVEL, ,,, / ,,.,,,, ~ Slight Concrete and AC Fragments I'--_ ~BAG,.~ -,,, .... ,,, SC DECC11POSED GRANITE -Yellc:Mish Bram, .. ~G0- ~ Moist, Dense to Ver:y Dense, CLAYEY SAND, "'-Fine to Coarse Grained, Occasional Fine to Coarse GRAVEL Bottom of Test Pit at 1. 5 Feet - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Project Name: BECKMAN TRUCK DOCK Project No. 198 .106 Plate No. 4 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I CWE 198.106.1 December 10, 1998 PROPOSED OUTSIDE TRUCK DOCK BECKMAN COULTER FACILITY CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA Page No. A-1 RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS -GENERAL PROVISIONS GENERAL INTENT The intent of these specifications is to establish procedures for clearing, compacting natural ground, preparing areas to be filled, and placing and compacting fill soils to the lines and grades shown on the accepted plans. The recommendations contained in the preliminary geotechnical investigation report and/ or the attached Special Provisions are a part of the Recommended Grading Specifications and shall supersede the provisions contained hereinafter in the case of conflict. These specifications shall only be used in conjunction with the geotechnical report for which they are a part. No deviation from these specifications will be allowed, except where specified in the geotechnical report or in other written communication signed by the Geotechnical Engineer. OBSERVATION AND TESTING Christian Wheeler Engineering shall be retained as the Geotechnical Engineer to observe and test the earthwork in accordance with these specifications. It will be necessary that the Geotechnical Engineer or his representative provide adequate observation so that he may provide his opinion as to whether or not the work was accomplished as specified. It shall be the responsibility of the contractor to assist the Geotechnical Engineer and to keep him appraised of work schedules, changes and new information and data so that he may provide these opinions. In the event that any unusual conditions not covered by the special provisions or preliminary geotechnical report are encountered during the grading operations, the Geotechnical Engineer shall be contacted for further recommendations. If, in the opinion of the Geotechnical Engineer, substandard conditions are encountered, such as questionable or unsuitable soil, unacceptable moisture content, inadequate compaction, adverse weather, etc., construction should be stopped until the conditions are remedied or corrected or he shall recommend rejection of this work. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I CWE 198.106.1 December 10, 1998 Page No. A-2 Tests used to determine the degree of compaction should be performed in accordance with the following American Society for Testing and Materials test methods: Maximum Density & Optimum Moisture Content -ASTM D-1557-91 Density of Soil In-Place -ASTM D-1556-90 or ASTM D-2922 All densities shall be expressed in terms of Relative Compaction as determined by the foregoing ASTM testing procedures. PREPARATION OF AREAS TO RECEIVE FILL All vegetation, brush and debris derived from clearing operations shall be removed, and legally disposed of. All areas disturbed by site grading should be left in a neat and finished appearance, free from unsightly debris. After clearing or benching the natural ground, the areas to be filled shall be scarified to a depth of 6 inches, brought to the proper moisture content, compacted and tested for the specified minimum degree of compaction. All loose soils in excess of 6 inches thick should be removed to firm natural ground which is defined as natural soil which possesses an in-situ density of at least 90 percent of its maximum dry density. When the slope of the natural ground receiving fill exceeds 20 percent (5 horizontal units to 1 vertical unit), the original ground shall be stepped or benched. Benches shall be cut to a firm competent formational soil. The lower bench shall be at least 10 feet wide or 1-1/2 times the equipment width, whichever is greater, and shall be sloped back into the hillside at a gradient of not less than two (2) percent. All other benches should be at least 6 feet wide. The horizontal portion of each bench shall be compacted prior to receiving fill as specified herein for compacted natural ground. Ground slopes flatter than 20 percent shall be benched when considered necessary by the Geotechnical Engineer. Any abandoned buried structures encountered during grading operations must be totally removed. All underground utilities to be abandoned beneath any proposed structure should be removed from within 10 feet of the structure and properly capped off. The resulting depressions from the above described procedure should be backfilled with acceptable soil that is compacted to the requirements of the Geotechnical Engineer. This includes, but is not limited to, septic tanks, fuel tanks, sewer lines or leach lines, storm drains and water lines. Any buried structures or utilities not to be abandoned should be brought to the attention of the Geotechnical Engineer so that he may determine if any special recommendation will be necessary. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I CWE 198.106.1 December 10, 1998 Page No. A-3 All water wells which will be abandoned should be backfilled and capped in accordance to the requirements set forth by the Geotechnical Engineer. The top of the cap should be at least 4 feet below finish grade or 3 feet below the bottom of footing whichever is greater. The type of cap will depend on the diameter of the well and should be determined by the Geotechnical Engineer and/ or a qualified Structural Engineer. FILL MATERIAL Materials to be placed in the fill shall be approved by the Geotechnical Engineer and shall be free of vegetable matter and other deleterious substances. Granular soil shall contain sufficient fine material to fill the voids. The definition and disposition of oversized rocks and expansive or detrimental soils are covered in the geotechnical report or Special Provisions. Expansive soils, soils of poor gradation, or soils with low strength characteristics may be thoroughly mixed with other soils to provide satisfactory fill material, but only with the explicit consent of the Geotechnical Engineer. Any import material shall be approved by the Geotechnical Engineer before being brought to the site. PLACING AND COMPACTION OF FILL Approved fill material shall be placed in areas prepared to receive fill in layers not to exceed 6 inches in compacted thickness. Each layer shall have a uniform moisture content in the range that will allow the compaction effort to be efficiently applied to achieve the specified degree of compaction. Each layer shall be uniformly compacted to the specified minimum degree of compaction with equipment of adequate size to economically compact the layer. Compaction equipment should either be specifically designed for soil compaction or of proven reliability. The minimum degree of compaction to be achieved is specified in either the Special Provisions or the recommendations contained in the preliminary geotechnical investigation report. When the structural fill material includes rocks, no rocks will be allowed to nest and all voids must be carefully filled with soil such that the minimum degree of compaction recommended in the Special Provisions is achieved. The maximum size and spacing of rock permitted in structural fills and in non- structural fills is discussed in the geotechnical report, when applicable. Field observation and compaction tests to estimate the degree of compaction of the fill will be taken by the Geotechnical Engineer or his representative. The location and frequency of the tests shall be at the Geotechnical Engineer's discretion. When the compaction test indicates that a particular layer is at less than I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I CWE 198.106.1 December 10, 1998 Page No. A-4 the required degree of compaction, the layer shall be reworked to the satisfaction of the Geotechnical Engineer and until the desired relative compaction has been obtained. Fill slopes shall be compacted by means of sheepsfoot rollers or other suitable equipment. Compaction by sheepsfoot roller shall be at vertical intervals of not greater than four feet. In addition, fill slopes at a ratio of two horizontal to one vertical or flatter, should be trackrolled. Steeper fill slopes shall be over-built and cut- back to finish contours after the slope has been constructed. Slope compaction operations shall result in all fill material six or more inches inward from the finished face of the slope having a relative compaction of at least 90 percent of maximum dry density or the degree of compaction specified in the Special Provisions section of this specification. The compaction operation on the slopes shall be continued until the Geotechnical Engineer is of the opinion that the slopes will be surfi.cially stable. Density tests in the slopes will be made by the Geotechnical Engineer during construction of the slopes to determine if the required compaction is being achieved. Where failing tests occur or other field problems arise, the Contractor will be notified that day of such conditions by written communication from the Geotechnical Engineer or his representative in the form of a daily field report. If the method of achieving the required slope compaction selected by the Contractor fails to produce the necessary results, the Contractor shall rework or rebuild such slopes until the required degree of compaction is obtained, at no cost to the Owner or Geotechnical Engineer. CUT SLOPES The Engineering Geologist shall inspect cut slopes excavated in rock or lithified formational material during the grading operations at intervals determined at his discretion. If any conditions not anticipated in the preliminary report such as perched water, seepage, lenticular or confined strata of a potentially adverse nature, unfavorably inclined bedding, joints or fault planes are encountered during grading, these conditions shall be analyzed by the Engineering Geologist and Geotechnical Engineer to determine if mitigating measures are necessary. Unless otherwise specified in the geotechnical report, no cut slopes shall be excavated higher or steeper than that allowed by the ordinances of the controlling governmental agency. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I CWE 198.106.1 December 10, 1998 Page No. A-5 ENGINEERING OBSERVATION Field observation by the Geotechnical Engineer or his representative shall be made during the filling and compaction operations so that he can express his opinion regarding the conformance of the grading with acceptable standards of practice. Neither the presence of the Geo technical Engineer or his representative or the observation and testing shall release the Grading Contractor from his duty to compact all fill material to the specified degree of compaction. SEASON LIMITS Fill shall not be placed during unfavorable weather conditions. When work is interrupted by heavy rain, filling operations shall not be resumed until the proper moisture content and density of the fill materials can be achieved. Damaged site conditions resulting from weather or acts of God shall be repaired before acceptance of work. RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS -SPECIAL PROVISIONS RELATIVE COMPACTION: The minimum degree of compaction to be obtained in compacted natural ground, compacted fill, and compacted backfill shall be at least 90 percent. For street and parking lot subgrade, the upper six inches should be compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction. EXPANSIVE SOILS: Detrimentally expansive soil is defined as clayey soil which has an expansion index of 50 or greater when tested in accordance with the Uniform Building Code Standard 29-C. OVERSIZED MATERIAL: Oversized fill material is generally defined herein as rocks or lumps of soil over 6 inches in diameter. Oversized materials should not be placed in fill unless recommendations of placement of such material is provided by the Geotechnical Engineer. At least 40 percent of the fill soils shall pass through a No. 4 U.S. Standard Sieve. TRANSITION LOTS: Where transitions between cut and fill occur within the proposed building pad, the cut portion should be undercut a minimum of one foot below the base of the proposed footings and recompacted as structural backfill. In certain cases that would be addressed in the geotechnical report, special footing reinforcement or a combination of special footing reinforcement and undercutting may be required. ,-2.. 4?0 fi:Ya.-,~ A-v cB99osl1\ \ ~ 1 oo Sv I <f'CL),;~ ol oc.,{<::_/ Cart~ 2./ q / 91 Tu fr ;JI p;,. <-(if.; w / Jtfl 1 ½ r! S frud. ( a1a.s. · APPROVALS ,;l_ / J <, / 11 L(.fa1. -h/'"'.c Dcite . 2/lff, /91 C[_pv{ · --z_(i~q Bunding d-} ?-5 h q,-UM. fd-Jt:u: -A oJ ~ th [f i IL/ 1 aJJ /2 /4--r ~ ~~~;~;,::i;i w/ r~ ~ '--<-"J . -J!b"_:_~::w1 A 01 _..p L. ·_ L •.. ~_fl /J,,,AcJ--)-.. (' -L ~ -/ /W ~t ~tt Hc~:~h J ·~ ~r-ur;.r VLJ/f J Vl ~ __ Assoc. utr-.11 R~41/?IR_~ ~~ ""'..w--#1 .5/5/crr 9-ry Jl g r/C ( ~. ' {o I 1J-!',I W C.o-v I }.J . -io{ cs er9 f 1 <;, I ec c; )s,;;.c.v ,,. '~:j ~~_,,J \ 10 APPiicant DATES ---.-Frorii APPiicant I HAZ MAT FORM ____ IND WASTE APP -----:L ______ SCHOOLFEEFORM _____ -t-____ PLAr-,i CORR ____ ,_______ ENGRG CORR _ __ ____ 8'JS UC .j.... ·-·----\'.' COMP . _ . • FlRi: PLAMS -----+1-_-__ -. _ ;!:~SOR Pl.ANS