The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCT 15-08; Carlsbad Ranch PA 5; TEMPORARY SHORING DESIGN SUBMITTAL MARBRISA; 2016-06-08SHORING DESIGN GROUP~-"· June 8, 2016 Mr. Mark Elliott Elliott Drilling Services, Inc. 1342 Barham Drive Office (760) 722-1400 Fax (760) 722-1404 San Marcos, CA 92078 Re: Marbrisa JOB #16-115 Carlsbad, California Subject: Temporary Shoring Design Submittal Dear Mr. Elliott: Upon your request, please find the temporary shoring design calculations for the above referenced project. Should you have any additional questions or comments regarding this matter, please advise. Sincerely, SHORING DESIGN GROUP, Roy P. Reed, P.E. Project Engineer End: Design Calculations 7755 Via Francesco #11 San Diego, CA 921291 phone (760) 586-8121 Email: rreed@shoringdesigngroup.com SHORING DESIGN GROUP Marbrisa Carlsbad, California June 8, 2016 SDG Project # 16-115 Table of Contents: Section Shoring Plans: ........................................................................................................................................... 1 Load Development (Shoring Design Parameters & Hotel Surcharge) ..................................................... 2 Soldier Beam #1, 21 ( H=5', Max.): ........................................................................................................... 3 Soldier Beam #2 (H=13'): ......................................................................................................................... 4 Soldier Beam #3, 9-14 (H=17', with Building Surcharge): ........................................................................ 5 Soldier Beam #4-8 (H=25', with Building Surcharge): .............................................................................. 6 Soldier Beam #15, 18 ( H= 15'): ................................................................................................................. 7 Soldier Beam #16-17 ( H=15'): .................................................................................................................. 8 Soldier Beam #19 ( H=12'): ....................................................................................................................... 9 Soldier Beam #20 ( H =9'): ....................................................................................................................... 10 Temporary Handrail Design: .................................................................................................................. 11 Lagging Design: ...................................................................................................................................... 12 Soldier Beam Schedule: ......................................................................................................................... 13 Geotechnical Report: ............................................................................................................................. 14 7755 Via Francesco #11 San Diego, CA 921291 phone (760) 586-8121 Email: rreed@shoringdesigngroup.com Section 1 I ~ \ ) / / ( ,, ' / / / \\ ':(\ I \ \ \\ I \\ \\ -<;/'o0 .. ?~,( \\, / '\\( 1\\ I \ \ \\ DECLARATION OF RESPONSIBLE CHARGE I I l HEREBY DECLARE THAT I AM. THE ENGINEER Of WORK FOR THIS PROJECT, THAT I HAVE EXERCISED RESPONSIBLE CHARGE OVER THE DESIGN OF TEMPORARY SHORING AS DEFINED IN SECTION 6703 OF THE BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS CODE, AND THAT THE DESIGN IS CONSISTENT WITH CURRENT STANDARDS. I UNDERSTAND THAT THE CHECK OF PROJECT DRAWINGS MID SPECIFICATIONS BY THE CITY OF CARlSBAD DOES NOT RELIEVE ME, AS ENGINEER OF WORK, MY RESPONSIBILITIES FOR PROJECT DESIGN. SHORING DESIGN GROUP 7755 VIA FRANCESCO, UNIT 1 SAN DIEGO, CA 92129 PH: (760)586-8121 ~ ~ 8 ~ SCALE: 1"~10' ~,·e~~ 7755VIAFRANCESC0#1 SAN DIEGO, CA92129, [760)586-8121 ~ 6/9/2016 RO'r'P.REED R.C.£.80503 EXP.J.31-2017 DATE ~ . . ' Know what's below. Call before you dig. DIG ALERT!! TWO WORKING DAYS BEFORE DIG All EXISTING UTILITIES MAY NOT BE SHOWN ON THESE PLANS DIG ALERT & GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL LOCATE €t POTHOLE (AS NEEDED), ALL EXISTING UTILITIES BEFORE SHORING WALL CONSTRUCTION BEGINS. STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMEHT OF INDUSTRIAL RElATIONS DIVISION OF OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH TRENCH/EXCAVATION PERMIT NO LEGEND T.O.W. ~TOP OF SOLDIER BEAM WALL B.O.W. • BOlTOM OF SOLDIER BEAM WALL BY OTHERS =WORK OUTSIDE SHORING SCOPE (P)=PROPOSED (£)=EXISTING PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEMENT SYMBOL TEMPORARY SOLDIER BEAM TEMPORARY TIMBER LAGGING TEMPORARY TIEBACK ANCHOR SOLDIER BEAM COUNT (!) OITAILISECTION CA"-OUTS ~ 3x12DFII2TIMBERLAGGING D 4x1lDF#2TIMBERLAGGING • "AS BUILT" ~ CITY OF CARLSBAD I >HEETS I LAND OEVELOPI.IENTENGINEERING 38 ~ DRAWING NO 428-9H 2.30.00' ~ "~qq.oo· ___ _ NOTES: 1. SEE SOLDIER BEAM SCHEDULE ON SHEETSHl7 FOR "H", "S1", "52",&_ "0". 2. POTHOLE/FIELD VERIFY EXISTING CONDITIONS PRIOR TO SHORING INSTALLATION. 3. OFFSET SOLDIER BEAM/116 a 17 DRILL SHAfTS a RECESS SOLDIER BEAM IN ORDER TO AVOID CONFLICT WITH THE EXISTING 12" HOPE STORM DRAIN. SB#!i SBI/6 5B#7 SB/18 PROFILE -LOOKING NORTH SCALE:1".,10' ~0'00"" nss VIA FRANCESCO #1 SAN DIEGO, CA92129, (760)586-812.1 ~ 6/912016 ROYP.REED R.C.E.80503 EXP.3·31-2017 ;;u-~~T5!!~""le,~"f ~%,~~',:;SLOPE ---'--""'~,~~~:T~~f,,1 ' P) _l ' s.o.w-:-J ----BOTTOM OF ~ _ ~~~.oO·~ \_ OVER-EXCAVATiON- __ 21_Q,_~' 56#15 SB/116 $61117 SB#18 SBI/19 a wATERLINE (TO BE REMOVED) / /::; / II ._ \ I' OATE !INITIAL OlH!:RAPPROVAl ~ T.O.W. "'TOP OF WALL B.O.W. "'BOTTOM OF WALL _____1@~~ OESIGHATES 3x12 PRESSURE TREATED LAGGING ~ OESIGNATES4x12PRESSURETREATEDLAGGING J .r(P) PROPERTY LINE K " ' I 'I "AS BUILT' ~ ~ CITY OF CARLSBAD I'""" I ~ LANDDEVELOPMENTENGINEERING 38 SHORING Pl.AN FOR: CARLSBAD ~~~I!·,"fst~· NO. 5 PUD 15-16/SI)P OJ-02Jo/CDP OJ-04A/WP OJ'-OIA OWNBY:~ CHKDBy,.RE'.E..__ RVWDBY:-- SAFffiCABLfRAILI~G.PER CAL-OHSA REQUIREME~TS (TYP., AROUND ENTIRE SHORED PERIMETER, SEE 7/SH35) 'fl---. 'H" 42"(MIN.) I EXISTING GRADE {T.O.W., SEE ELEVATION) .. TIMBER LAGGING ·:· (SEEELfVATION) :t---1.5SACKSLURRYSHAFT BACKFILl (T.O.W. TO B.O.W) BOTTOM OF EXCAVATION (B.O.W.,SEEELEVATION) SH35 TIMBER LAGGING (SEE ELEVATION) SH35 l/ ~A~~F~c~ ~~~~~; ~~~IP) "D" SIZE) Luur SOLDIERBEAM .. . .· (SEESCHEDULEFOR _..j D~•f<l- 1. FIELD VERIFY AU. EXISTING & PROPOSED STRUCTURES PRIOR TO SHORING INSTAllATION. 2. SEE SOLDIER BEAM & TIEBACK SCHEDULE ON SHEET SH37 FOR "H" & "D". 3. SHORING BACK-WALl ALIGNMENT, SHALL BE VERIFIED FOR POTENTIAL CONFLICTS WITH THE PROPOSED RETAINING WALl PRIOR TO SHORING INSTALLATION. TEMPORARY CANTILEVERED SOLDIER BEAM (TYP.) SOLDIERBEM\ TIMBER LAGGING DIAGONAL SUPPORT DETAIL N.T.S. SH35 r4\ ~ L2x2x3f8 ANGl.E IRON ATOP EACH SOLDIER BEAM MEMBER SOLDIER BEAM, TYP. (SEESCHEDUL£) SOLDIER BEAM PLAN DETAIL (TYPICAL) ~BOTH SIDES CAL·OSHA GUARDRAIL DETAIL ~Of§ OM~ 7755 VIAFRANCESC0#1 SANDIEGO,CA92129, {760)586-8121 SH35 N.T.S. ~~ 6/9/2016 ROYP.REED R.C.£.80503 (SEE BEAM BACKFILL NAIL FOR LAGGING INSTALLATION (TYP., AS REQ"D) DRILL SHAFT (SEE BEAM SECTIONS FOR BACKFILL MATERIAL) INSIDE CORNER DETAIL SH35) N.T.S. ;- DRILLSHAFT(SEEBEAM 1 ·: SECTIONSFORBACKFILL ::) MATERIAL) "/ 2"'(MIN.) (5\ OUTSIDE CORNER DETAIL ~ DRILLSHAFT(SEEBEAM SECTIONS FOR BACKFILL MATERIAL) (8\ OFFSET LAGGING DETAIL ~ N.T.S. DATE )INinAL OTI!ERAF'PROVAI. "AS BUILT" SAFETY CABLE RAILING, PER CAL-OHSAREQUIREMENTS {TYP., AROUND ENTIRE SHORED PERIMETER, SEE7/SH3S) ,. BOTTOM OF EXCAVATION (B.O.W., SEE ELEVATION) EXISTING GRADE !T.O-:w:-;-SEE ELEVATION) 1.5SACKSLURRY (UNBONDED LENGTH) FAILURE WEDGE 6" CEMENT GROUT ANCHOR WITH POST-GROUTING H"xThickxWidth (Seetabledlmensloru;) TIEBACKSTIFFENERPL ThkkxWidth (SEE TABLE) TIEBACK DE-TENSION&. REMOVAL PROCEDURE TIEBACKS MAY BE DISENGAGED UPON WRiffiN APPROVAL FROM THE PROJECTS STRUCTURAL&. SHORING ENGINEER OF RECORD. WIRE STRANDS 1. ONCE AN ANCHOR HAS FULFILLED ITS DESIGN INTENT, RELEASE TENSION WITH A CONTROLLED APPLICATION OF HEAT TO THE PRE-STRESSING STEEL 2. REMOVE ANCHOR HEAD &. CUT REMAINING PORTION OF TENDONS PROTRUDING BEYOND THE EXPOSED FLANGE. 3. BUILDING WALL I! LOCKOUT (AS REQUIRED) FOR DE-TENSIONING OF TIEBACKS UPON COMPLETION OF PERMANENT STRUCTURE. TIEBACK POCKET TABLE (See table dimensions) DISENGAGE &: ABANDON TIEBACK IN PLACE {SEE TIEBACK PROCEDURES IN SHORING NOTES) NOTES: 1. TIEBACK INSTALlATION SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE '"SHORING INSTALLATION PROCEDURE FOR TIEDBACK BEAMS". 2. THE SHORING CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE ADDITIONAL TEMPORARY SUPPORT FOR STEEL SECTIONS, AS MAY BE REQUIRED DURING THE TEST LOAD!NG OF ANCHORS. 3. TIEBACKS SHALl. BE INSTALLED ON THE RIGHT SIDE Of ODD NUMBERED BEAMS&. ON THE LEFT OF EVEN NUMBERED BEAMS (REVERSE LOCATION AT EACH ADDITIONAL LEVEL PER BEAM). NOTES: 1. FIELD VERIFY ALL EXISTING & PROPOSED STRuCTURES PRIOR TO SHORING INSTALLATION. 2. SEE SOLDIER BEAM&. TIEBACK SCHEDULE ON SHEET SH37 FOR "51", "S2", "H" &. "D". 3. SHORING BACK-WALL ALIGNMENT, SHALL BE VERIFIED FOR POTENTIAL CONFLICTS WITH THE PROPOSED RETAINING WALL PRIOR TO SHORING INSTALLATION. 5~36) TIEDBACK SOLDIER BEAM SECTION~T ~~BAt•mONED STRAND ANCHOR) • PROPERTY LINE\! ('2\ TIEBACK POCKET DETAIL (TYP.) ~ N.T.S. -? ~F========~F==~====== bdl ~ \1 T-11"~ ! {MIN.)---of---i)--~~---~r-=======1 F===*===== jP)ELEVATOR I _l_3_Q,_Q[_ ______ 220,00' llQ,_QI[___ ----------· ------------7-- BOTT~~~~ OVER "0" NOTES: 1. FIELD VERIFY ALL EXISTING & PROPOSED STRUCTURES PRIOR TO SHORING INSTALLATION. EXCA A 0 ----L ~:~~~~~L~:c~~~~~~~E~~~~~~~~-~~~{~~~~~~T;xc·~~~~~-WlTHTHE •. 29Q • .Q[_ PROPOSED RETAINING WALL PRIOR TO SHORING INSTALLATION. TIED-BACK SOLDIER BEAM CROSS SECTION SH36 N.T.S. '"'"C!j"'"' 7755 VIA FRANCESCO #1 SAN DIEGO, CA92129, (760)586-6121 ~~ 61912016 ROYP.REED R.C.E.BG503 EXP.3·3H017 "AS BUILT" "'-- --M-,_- ~ CITY OF CARLSBAD ~ ~LANDDEVELOPMENTENGINEERING~ SHORJNG PLAN FOR: CARLSBAD ~~£l~l_!.,"f.o~· NO. 5 --------oAr£" DRAWING NO, 428-9H Shored Toe From : To , Beam -Beam Height Dopth BHm 1Beam: Qty Section W12xZ6 5.0 10.0 W1Sx65 13.0 17.0 W14x30 16.0 14.0 W 16 X 40 25.0 10.0 13 5 W 14 x30 17.0 8.0 14 14 WHx30 16.0 9.0 15 15 , WZ4x84 15.0 17.0 16 17 2 W14x90 15.0 17.0 18 18 1 W24xS4 15.0" 17.0 " 19 1 W1Sx50 12.0 16.0 20 20 W16x36 -9.0 13.0 i1 .. 21 ······w·ilx-i6" ··fa~· 10.0 VERIFICATION TEST LOAD SCHEDULE HOLD TIME 0.05 DTl MAX (ALIGNMENT LOAD) UNTIL MOVEMENT STABILIZES 0.25DTL UNTIL MOVEMENT STABILIZES 0.50DTL UNTIL MOVEMENT STABILIZES 0.75DTL UNTIL MOVEMENT STABILIZES UNTIL MOVEMENT STABILIZES 1.25DTL UNTIL MOVEMENT STABILIZES 1.50DTL UNTIL MOVEMENT STABILIZES 1.75Dll_ UNTIL MOVEMENT STABILIZES 15MIN,CREEPTEST NOTE: UPSIZE 200% TEST ANCHOR TENDONS NOT TO EXCEED 0.80x fpu 1. VERIFICATION TESTS: SHALL BE PERFORMED IN 25% INCREMENTS ACCORDING TO THE "VERIFICATION TEST LOADING SCHEDULE'" HEREIN. HOLD EACH LOAD INCREMENT UNTIL MOVEMENT STABILIZES li: MONITOR THE VERIFICATION TEST ANCHOR FOR CREEP AT THE 200%DTLINCREMENT. MEASURE AND RECORD ANCHOR MOVEMENTS DURING THE CREEP PORTION OF THE TEST IN INCREMENTS OF 1 MINUTE, 2, 4, 3, 5, 6, BAND 15 MINUTES. TOTAL CREEP MOVEMEtff BETWEEN THE 1 AND 15 MINUTE TEST SHALL NOT EXCEED 0.25-INCH, OR EXCEED A CUMULATIVE (0.05DTL • 2.00DTL) ELONGATION OF 12·1NCH FOR CABLE BUNDLES & 6·1NCH FOR THREAD BARS. 2. IF THE TOTAL CREEP MOVEMEt-ff BETWEEN THE 1 AND 15 MINUTES EXCEEDS 0.25-INCH, THE TEST LOAD THW SHALL BE MAINTAINED FOR AN ADDITIONAL 45 MINUTES AND THE MOVEMENT READINGS SHALL BE RECORDED AT 20, 30, 40, 50 AND 60MINUTES. THE TOTAL CREEP BETWEEN THE 15MIN. & 60MlN. EXTENDED TEST SHALLNOTEXCEEDO.SO-INCH. 3. SEE NOTES&. INSPECTIONS FOR ADDITIONAL TESTING REQUIREMENTS. Total Toe Drill D111meter Depth 15.0 24 30.0 24 lO.O "io~ 35,0 24 25.0 24 25.0 24 32.0 30 32.0 30 32.0 30 28.0 24 22.0 24 15.0 z"4 ~e·~· nSSVIAFRANCESC0#1 SAN DIEGO, CA 1121211, (760)586·8121 SOLDIER BEAM&: TIEBACK SCHEDULE Ttebac;k No. of Dbtanoe Dlstan("~ j Ttebac.k/ Number of Loc.k·off T .. t Dlan1eter Tiebacks{ ; Top of Beam lastRest. i Strands Load load Restrainh •To Restraint #1 to Subgr. : T6#1 TBN1 CANT CANT ' ' ' ' CAHT CANT CANT CANT CANT CANT . ~-~!P~ CANT CANT CANT CANT , 6.50 9.50 25 J 51 1 8.00 17.00 25 4 110 1 6.50 10.50 25 3 51 1 6.50 9,50 25 3 51 CANT CANT CAtiT CANT CANT CAHT CANT CANT CAHT CANT CANT ---c.:wr PROOF TEST LOAD SCHEDULE HOLD TIME 0.05 DTL MAX (ALIGNMENT LOAD) UNTIL MOVEMEt-ff STABILIZES UNTIL MOVEMEt-ff STABILIZES UNTIL MOVEMENT STABILIZES 0.75 DTL UNTIL MOVEMENT STABILIZES 1.00DTL UNTIL MOVEMWT STABILIZES 1.2SDTL UNTil MOVEMEt-ff STABILIZES 15MIN.CREEPTEST 1. PROOF TESTS: SHALL BE PERFORMED IN 25% INCREMENTS ACCORDING TO THE "'PROOF TEST LOADING SCHEDULE" HEREIN. HOLD EACH LOAD INCREMENT UNTIL MOVEMEt-rr STABILIZES li: MONITOR THE PROOF TEST ANCHOR FOR CREEP AT THE 150%DTL INCREMENT. MEASURE AND RECORD ANCHOR MOVEMENTS DURING THE CREEP PORTION OF THE TEST IN INCREMENTS Of 1 MINUTE, 2, 4, 3, 5, 6, 8 AND 15 MINUTES. TOTAL CREEP MOVEMENT BETWEEN THE 1 AND 15 MINUTE TEST SHALL NOT EXCEED 0.1-INCH, OR EXCEED A CUMULATIVE (O.OSDTL • 1.50DTL) ELONGATION OF 12-INCH FOR CABLE BUNDLES OR 6-INCH FOR THREADED RODS. 2. IF THE TOTAL CREEP MOVEMENT BETWEEN THE 1 AND 15 MINUTES EXCEEDS 0.1-INCH, THE TEST LOAD THEN SHALL BE MAINTAINED FOR AN ADDITIONAL 45 MINUTES AND THE MOVEMENT READINGS SHALL BE RECORDED AT 20, 30, 40, 50 AND 60 MINUTES. THE TOTAL CREEP BETWEEN THE 15MIN. & 60MIN. EXTENDED TEST SHALL NOT EXCEED 0.2-INCH. 3. SEE NOTES 1i: INSPECTIONS FOR ADDITIONAL TESTING REQUIREMEt-ffS. ~~ 61912016 ROYP.REED R.C.E.80503 Ex.l'.3-31-l017 .... " 153 •• " Couper Un-bonded Bonded Total Distance Leng:th Length Length TBil1 TB#1 TB/11 TB#1 ft ft ft ft 15 20 J5 15 " 38 15 20 35 15 20 35 270-KSISEVEN-WlRESTRANDS NUMBER OF STRANDS (3)·0.6lNCH0 (4)·0.61NCH0 (5)-0.61NCH0 {6)·0.61NCH0 (7)·0.61NCH0 NOMINAL AREA 0.65in' 0.87in' 1.0ilin' 1.30in' 1.52tn' DATE IINinAI. OTHER APPROVAl. MAX. LOCK MAX. TEST OFFLOAD LOAD 105-kips 141-klps 1•\0-kips 188-kips 175-kips 235-kips 210-kips 282-kips 245-kips l211-kips ""AS BUILT" ~ ~ CITY OF CARLSBAD I'""" I ~ LAND DE'I£LOPMENT ENGINEERING 38 SHORING PLAlCFOR: CARLSBAD ~A~li.l!•p,fs.,~· NO. 5 DWN BY: .sJllL___ CHKD BY:.EfiL.__ RVWOBY: __ ~ DRAWING NO.I 428-9H ' __ ! "' "' 0 ~m ~ ~ "' ~-~ 8 "' ' Ill 0 c:: "' ;~ s ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '. ~ ~ j lc,H-+++++1-H+H ~ ~ H "' G:;! ~~ ?'~ I ~ " ~ • ~ I ~ i • 1! • ~ i :n n ~~ ~~ ~~ flg ,. oo ~a d¥ 2g ~~ ~~ H !!1~ ~i i ~ • I ~ I j6 " " ~ s 0 z ~ ~ g ~ 2 --< 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ., • ~~ ~· u ~~ I ~i iiil ,. oo I •• ~~ ~c ~® •• ~~ • iii .. F II ci5 ~ ~ ~~ ~ II "I ~ ' • n 5-~ I F 0 .. "' 8;: g m •• ;;]£ ~ ~g ;:g~ !! 1:\ ~~ ~ z 1! ~§ p 0 ~ ~g 'I i [:1 .. ~~ 1! n • ~ i -~ ' ~ ' • ~~ •o l_i F ~~ ii ~=:; ~~ . " r ~i!i! ! ;; ~ 8? ~-~ ! I ~~c j6 ~~~ " m " ~ ~~~ m s l1 ~~" iJI ~ § ~ z ~ "" ~ "rn 2 Om il z ~ ~~ ~ ~· i ~~ ~8 ·~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ II c II c lg ~ i ~~~ @ " ~ " ~:~ • 0 I m ~ l • ~~~ a j ~ m • ~ g i I"! ~ ~~~ ~ ~ m 1! • ~ i g i ~-' I ~~i li~ ~ i !i~ " ~ ~!! i • ;:~ffi • §•ti I § ~i!l8 ~~~ ,9 jl!" !i il HHo m ~~ ~~ ~ g ~ ~o<!' !!~-";, ~g -gg il iiJH ll ~i '" -~ ~ (; g~ '" s-¥-Jj i !!'[ "~ :; ~~[ j ·~ ! < ' " ~ 'q • ~ ~ "' X ~ ~ " ~ G X X ~ _j Section 2 Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III -Geotechnical Investigation Carlsbad, California MTGL Project No. 1916All MTGLLogNo.15-1063 H P = 30 H psi 72 psi P = 25 H psi 72 sf P Total= 72 psf + 30 H psf P Total= 72 psf + 25 H psf SHORING DESIGN: LATERAL SHORING PRESSURES Design of the shield struts should be based on a value of 0.65 times the indicated pressure, Pa, for the approximate trench depth. The wales and sheeting can be designed for a value of 2/3 the design strut value. SHIELD (typ.) UNDISTURBE~~o ;,, . ;.oo Jou~ SOIL , o o:··· ·.-,00 .« ,/._!(:'),A--f BEDDING Pa = 30 Hsh psf HEIGHT OF SHIELD, Hsh = DEPTH OF TRENCH, D1 , MINUS DEPTH OF SLOPE, H1 TYPICAL SHORING DETAIL Placement of the shield may be made after the excavation is completed or driven down as the material is excavated from inside of the shield. If placed after the excavation, some over- excavation may be required to allow for the shield width and advancement of the shield. The shield may be placed at either the top or the bottom of the pipe zone. Due to the anticipated thinness of the shield walls, removal of the shield after construction should have negligible effects on the load factor of pipes. Shields may be successively placed with conventional trenching equipment. Page 20 of23 6295 Fcn·is Square, Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III -Geotechnical Investigation Carlsbad, California MTGLProjectNo. 1916All MTGL Log No. 15-1063 4.11 FOUNDATIONS The recommendations and design criteria are "minimum" in keeping with the current standard-of- practice. They do not preclude more restrictive criteria by the governing agency or structural considerations. The project structural engineer should evaluate the foundation configurations and reinforcement requirements for actual structural loadings. The foundation design parameters assumes that remedial grading is conducted as recommended in this report, and that all the buildings are underlain by a relatively uniform depth of compacted fill with a low to medium expansion potential. Note that expansion index testing should be conducted on the individual building pads during finish grading in order to confirm this assumption. Conventional shallow foundations are considered suitable for support of the proposed structures provided that remedial grading to remove undocumented fill materials and mitigation of cut/fill transitions are performed. Allowable Soil Bearing: Minimum Footing Width: Minimum Footing Depth: Coefficient of Friction: 0.33 Passive Pressure: 3,000 lbs/ft2 (allow a one-third increase for short-term wind or seismic loads). The allowable soil bearing may be increase 500 lbs/ft2 for every 12-inch increase in depth above the minimum footing depth and 250 lbs/ft2 for every 12-inch increase in width above the minimum footing width. The bearing value may not exceed 6,000 lbs/ft2 24 inches 24 inches below lowest adjacent soil grade 350 psfper foot of depth. Passive pressure and the friction of resistance could be combined without reduction 4.12 CONCRETE SLABS ON GRADE AND MISCELLANEOUS FLATWORK Interior slab-on-grade should be designed for the actual applied loading conditions expected. The structural engineer should size and reinforce slabs to support the expected loads utilizing accepted methods of concrete design, such as those provided by the Portland Cement Association or the American Concrete Institute. A modulus of subgrade reaction of 150 pounds per cubic inch (pci) could be utilized in design. Based on geotechnical consideration, interior slab for conventional slab- on-grade design should be a minimum of 5 inches and should be reinforced with at least No.4 bars on 18 centers, each way. Actual reinforcement should be designed by the project structural engineer 2 Page 13 of23 6295 Fcnis Square, Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Hotel #2 -Elevator Load Development Elevator Foundation ft Tributary Loads H := 25·ft b := 8.5-ft L:=8.5·ft t:= 16·in 19.83·ft xt:= ---2 yt := ll·ft = Max. Shored Height =Width of elevator foundation = Length of elevator foundation = Thickness of elevator foundation = Tributary width of floor loads = Tributary length of floor loads Load Bearing Walls tw:= 9·in = Thickness of elevator walls Hw:= 40ft = Thickness of elevator walls Nw:= 3 =Number of load bearing walls = Unit weight of concrete Tributary Floor ft Roof Loads tf:= 4·in =Thickness of floor slabs (Assume concrete conservative) MoL:= 5·psf =Mechanical/Electrical dead load = Floor live load = Roof live load Elevator Load Development.xmcdz Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet2_ot __ Date: June 9, 2016 Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Net Elevator Footing Load A. Dead Loads Footing Load: Wall Loads: Floor Loads: Mechanical I Electrical: B. Live Loads Floor Live Loads: Roof Live Loads: P2 := Nw·Hw·tw·b·"fc P3 := S·(xt·yt·tt)·lc P4 := 4·(xt·yt·Mol) P5 := 4·(xt·yt· FLL) P 6 := ( xt· yt· RLL) NET ELEVA TOR BEARING LOAD p 1 + p2 + p3 + p 4 + p5 + p 6 ----------= 2.5·ksf b·L Elevator Load Development.xmcdz Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet_1_of __ Date: June 9, 2016 p1 = 14.5·kip p2 = 114.8· kip p3 = 27.3· kip p 4 = 2.2·kip P5 = 17.5·kip p6 = 2.2·kip Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet_§_ of __ Date: June 9, 2016 A. Load Case: Elevator 7'-0" Away From Shoring Bulkhead q := 2.5·ksf x 1 := 7·ft z':=2·ft K := 0.50 o(y) := e2 (y) - e1 (y) Boussinesq Equation = Strip load bearing intensity = Distance from bulkhead to closest edge of strip load = Distance from bulkhead to furthest edge of strip load = Distance below top of wall to strip load surcharge = Coefficient for flexural yeilding of members K = 1.00 (Rigid non-yielding) ( \ K=0.75(Semi-rigid) x2 I K = 0.50 (Flexible) e2 (y) := atan -;) o(y) a(y) := e1 (y) + -2- Pb(y) := O·psf if O·ft :$; y :$; z' 2·q·K·TI-1·(o(y-z')-sin(o(y-z'))·cos(2·a(y-z'))) if z'< y:$; H 0· psf otherwise Maximum Boussinesq Pressure b.y:= 5·ft Given d -Pb(b.y) = O·psf db.y Pb(Find(b.y)) = 395.5·psf H ~ Pb (y) dy = 5.4· klf 0 Elevator Load Development.xmcdz Lateral Surcharge Loading 20 --·· ,-.._ q:: "-' .;3 0.. Q) Q 10 o~--~----~----------~----------~ 0 200 400 Pressure (psf) Section 3 Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Cantileverd Soldier Beam Design Sb_No := "1, 21" Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet_6_of __ Date: June 8, 2016 Soldier Beam Attributes £t Properties Pile:= "Concrete Embed" H:= 5·ft = Soldier beam retained height X:= 0 Hs := O· ft --> = Height of retained slope (As applicable) y:= 0 = Tributary width of soldier beam dia := 24·in = Soldier beam shaft diameter de':= dia = Effective soldier beam diameter below subgrade dt:= 2· H = Assumed soldier beam embedment depth (Initial Guess) w_table := "n/a" = Depth below top of wall to design ground water table ASTM A992 (Grade 50) Shoring Design Section 10 I I I E := 29000· ksi Fy:= 50· ksi 5 ASCE 7.2.4.1 (2) 0 D+H+L Lateral Embedment Safety Factor -5 FSd := 1.25 -10 I I I I -40 -20 0 20 40 Cantilever H = 5', bm 1, 21.xmcdz Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Soil Parameters Pa := 30·pcf Pp := 350·pcf p ·= "n/a" max· <!> := 30· deg - 1 be:= 0.08·deg ·<!>·de' a__ratio := min [ :: , I ~ a_ratio = 0.6 qa:= 0· psf fs := 600· psf "'s := 125· pcf = Active earth pressure = Passive earth pressure Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet_7_of __ Date: June 8, 2016 =Maximum passive earth pressure ("n/a" =not applicable) = Passive pressure offset at subgrade =Internal soil friction'angle (Below subgrade) = Effective soldier beam width below subgrade = Soldier beam arching ratio = Allowable soldier beam tip end bearing pressure = Allowable soldier skin friction = Soil unit weight Bouyant Soil Properties (As applicable) "'w := 62.4· pcf Pp' := Pp if w_table = "n/a" Pp ·( "'s-"'w) otherwise "'s Pa' := Pa if w_table = "n/a" Pa -·( "'s-"~w) otherwise "'s Cantilever H = 5', bm 1, 21.xmcdz = Unit weight of water Submereged Pressures (As Applicable) Pp' = 350· pcf Pa' = 30· pcf Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Lateral Live Load Surcharge Uniform Loading Full:= 72· psf Partial:= 0· psf Hpar:= O·ft = Uniform loading full soldier beam height = Uniform loading partial soldier beam height = Height of partial uniform surcharge loading Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet_B_of __ Date: June 8, 2016 Ps (y) := Full+ Partial if 0· ft:::; y:::; Hpar Full if Hpar < y:::; H Uniform surcharge profile per depth 0· psf otherwise Eccentric/Conncentric Axial 8: Lateral Point Loading Pr:= O·kip e:= O·in Pr·e Me:=-- xt Ph:= O·lb zh:= O·ft = Applied axial load per beam = Eccentricity of applied compressive load =Eccentric bending moment = lateral pont load at depth "zh" = Distance to lateral point load from top of wall Seismic Lateral Load (Monobe-Okobe, Not Applicable) EFP:= O·pcf Es:= EFP·H Eq(y) := Es Es - -· y if y:::; H H 0· psf otherwise Cantilever H = 5', bm 1, 21.xmcdz = Seismic force equivalent fluid pressure = Maximum seismic force pressure = Maximum seismic force pressure Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Boussinesq Loading q := O·ksf x1 := O·ft z':= O·ft K := 0.50 Boussinesq Equation = Strip load bearing intensity Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet___E__of __ Date: June 8, 2016 = Distance from bulkhead to closest edge of strip load = Distance from bulkhead to furthest edge of strip load = Distance below top of wall to strip load surcharge = Coefficient for flexural yeilding of members K = 1.00 (Rigid non-yielding) K = 0.75 (Semi-rigid) ( x2 l K = 0.50 (Flexible) e2 (y) := atan y) &(y) a(y) := e1 (y) + -2- Pb(y):= O·psf if O·ft:s;y:s;z' 2·q·K·n-1. (&(y-z')-sin(&(y-z') )·cos(2·a(y-z') )) if z' < y::::; H 0· psf otherwise Maximum Boussinesq Pressure D.y:= 5·ft Given d -Pb(D.y) = O·psf db.y Pb(Find(D.y)) = O·psf H ~ Pb(y)dy=O·klf 0 Cantilever H = 5', bm 1, 21.xmcdz Lateral Surcharge Loading s~---~----~------~-- 20 40 60 80 Pressure (psf) Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet___1Q_of __ Date: June 8, 2016 Resolve Forces Acting on Beam (Assume trial values) z:= 6·ft D := dt a_ratio· P A (H) = 90· psf 0=0.4ft Given Summation of Lateral Forces ~ H+O ( H r H+D r H+D r H + 1 PE(y) dy+ L PA(y) dy+ J Ps(y) dy+ J Pb(y) dy+ J Eq(y) dy+ :h JH J0 o o o t Summation of Moments ( -PE(H+ D-z) \? PJ(H +D)· z-[ mE(z, D) mE(z, D) ) + (PE(H + D-z) + mE(z, D)·Y)· (z-y) dy ... 6 jo ~ H+D-z r H+O ( H +I PE(y)·(H+D-y)dy+l PE(Y)·(H+D-y)dy+L PA(Y)·(H+D-y)dy+Me ... JH+O JH JO ( H+D ( H ( H+D +) Ps(y)·(H+D-y)dy+IJ Eq(y)·(H+D-y)dy+IJ Pb(y)·(H+D-y)dy+ Ph·(H+D-zh) o o o xt ( z l D /= Find(z, D) Z>O z = 1.8ft D = 6.7ft Cantilever H = 5', bm 1, 21.xmcdz =0 u u r-1 u r-, u ,--, I I l J c_ __ ! 1... _] l __ l i ~1 u Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 0 ,-.., ¢::: 5 '-' .£ fr 0 Soldier Beam Pressure Pressure (psf) Shear/ft width o~----------~------------r-----------~ ,-.., ¢::: 5 '-' .£ fr 0 -2 - 1 0 Shear (klf) Cantilever H = 5', bm 1, 21.xmcdz Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet_1Lof __ Date: June 8, 2016 Soil Pressures PD(H +D)= -2337.3-psf PE(H +D)= -1312.4-psf PK ( H + D) = 4087.3· psf PJ(H +D)= 2452.4-psf Distance to zero shear (From top of Pile) c: := a~ H c:~V(a) while c: > 0 a~ a+ 0.10-ft c:~V(a) return a c: = 8.2 ft c __ J Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Determine Minimum Pile Size M(y) := ~ y V(y) dy +Me 0 AISC Steel Construction Manual 13th Edition Mmax = 25.5·kip·ft Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 12 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 n := 1.67 = Allowable strength reduction factor AISC E1 & F1 ~() := 1.33 Fy·~<r Fb:= --n = Steel overstress for temporary loading =Allowable bending stress Required Section Modulus: Mmax Flexural Yielding, Lb < Zr = 7. 7· in3 Beam = "W12 x 26" z ·=--r· Fb Lr Fb = 39.8· ksi 2 A= 7.7·in bf = 6.5·in K:= 1 Lu := H if Pile= "Concrete Embed" d = 12.2·in tw = 0.2·in Axial Stresses tf = 0.4·in rx = 5.2·in Fy >..:=- Fe Z = 37 2·in X . I = 204·in 4 X 3 e: otherwise 2 n . E Fer:= ( >,. ) K·LU ~ 0.658 ·Fy if --s 4.71· - rx Fy =Nominal compressive stress-AISC E.3-2 & E3-3 (0.877·Fe) otherwise F cr"A PC:=--n =Allowable concentric force-AISC E.3-1 =Allowable bending moment-AISC F.2-1 Interaction:= [~ + ~.(Mmax ~l if ~ ~ 0.20 Pc 9 Ma )J Pc = AISC H1-1a & H1-1b (- Pr + Mmax \ otherwise 2·Pc Ma ) Interaction= 0.21 Cantilever H = 5', bm 1, 21.xmcdz Ma= 123.4·kip·ft Mmax = 25.5·kip·ft Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Global Stability FSd = 1.25 = Minimum embedment depth factor of safety Embedment depth increase for min. FS Dh := Ceil(D, ft) + l·ft Slidding Forces: r H+Dh Fs:= V(H + 0) + Pn(x) dx Jo2 Resisting Forces: 02 FR := r Pn(x) dx JH+O Overturning Moments: Marbrisa Eng: RPR SheetJ..;L_of __ Date: June 8, 2016 Fs = 2.4· klf FR = -3.9·klf M0 := c (Dh + H-Y)·PA (y) dy+ ~ H (Dh + H-y)·Ps(y) dy + ~ H (Dh + H-Y)·Pb(y) dy+ ~ H (Dh + H-y)·l ~0 0 0 0 ( H+O ( 0 l r H+Dh H + Dh -02 Ph +I, PE(y) dy· Dh-3' )+ Pn(Y) dy· 3 +Me+ -·(Dh + H-zh) JH JO xt 2 Resisting Moments Factor of Safety: Slidding := i{Fsd < :: , "Ok" , ''No Good: lncrca« Dh" ~ ( MR Overturning:= if FSd::; - Mo Cantilever H = 5', bm 1, 21.xmcdz , "Ok" , "No Good: Increase Dh" M0 = 8.2·kip MR = -13.6·kip Slidding = "Ok" I FRI = 1.59 Fs Overturning = "Ok" ) Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Vertical Embedment Depth Axial Resistance Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet____!±_of __ Date: June 8, 2016 qa = 0· psf = Allowable soldier beam tip end bearing pressure fs = 600· psf = Allowable soldier skin friction Pr= O·kip = Applied axial load per beam p': = 11· dia if Pile = "Concrete Embed" [2·( bf + d)] otherwise = Applied axial load per beam Allowable Axial Resistance d. 2 Q(y) := p'·fS·Y+ 11· 1a .qa if Pile = "Concrete Embed" 4 ( bf d· qa) otherwise Dv:= c: ~ O·ft T ~ Q(c:) while T > 0 c: ~ c: + O.lO·ft T ~ Pr-Q(c:) return c: Selected Toe Depth Dtoe:= if(Dh ;:o: Dv, Dh, Dv) Maximum Deflection D L':= H +-4 Cantilever H = 5', bm 1, 21.xmcdz = Effective length about pile rotation ~ = 0.07·in Dv =Oft Dh =8ft Dtoe =8ft Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Design Summary: Beam= "Wl2 x 26" H = Sft Dtoe =8ft H + Dtoe = 13 ft dia = 24·in ~ = 0.07·in Cantilever H = 5', bm 1 , 21.xmcdz Sb_No = "1, 21" = Soldier beam retained height = Minimum soldier beam embedment = Total length of soldier beam = Tributary width of soldier beam = Soldier beam shaft diameter = Maximum soldier beam deflection Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet~ of __ Date: June 8, 2016 Section 4 Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet~of __ Date: June 8, 2016 Cantileverd Soldier Beam Design Sb_No:= "2" Soldier Beam Attributes & Properties Pile:= "Concrete Embed" H := 13-ft = Soldier beam retained height X:= 0 Hs := 0· ft --> = Height of retained slope (As applicable) y:= 0 = Tributary width of soldier beam dia:= 24·in = Soldier beam shaft diameter de':= dia = Effective soldier beam diameter below subgrade dt:=2·H =Assumed soldier beam embedment depth (Initial Guess) w_table := "n/a" = Depth below top of wall to design ground water table ASTM A992 (Grade 50) Shoring Design Section I E := 29000· ksi 10 - Fy:= 50· ksi ASCE 7.2.4.1 (2) 0 - D+H+L -10 - Lateral Embedment Safety Factor -20 - I I -100 0 100 Cantilever H = 13', bm 2.xmcdz Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Soil Parameters Pa:= 30·pcf Pp := 350· pcf p ·= "n/a" max· <1> := 30· deg - 1 be:= 0.08·deg ·<!>·de' a_ratio:= min(be, 1) xt ) a_ratio = 0.6 qa:= O·psf fs := 600· psf = Active earth pressure = Passive earth pressure Marbrisa Eng: RPR SheetJ...Z.__of __ Date: June 8, 2016 =Maximum passive earth pressure ("n/a" =not applicable) = Passive pressure offset at subgrade = Internal soil friction angle (Below subgrade) = Effective soldier beam width below subgrade = Soldier beam arching ratio = Allowable soldier beam tip end bearing pressure = Allowable soldier skin friction = Soil unit weight Bouyant Soil Properties (As applicable) "'w := 62.4· pcf Pp' := Pp if w_table = "n/a" Pp ( -· "'s-"'w) otherwise "'s Pa' := Pa if w_table = "n/a" Pa ( -. "'s-"'w) otherwise "'s Cantilever H = 13', bm 2.xmcdz = Unit weight of water Submereged Pressures (As Applicable) Pp' = 350· pcf Pa' = 30·pcf Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Lateral Live Load Surcharge Uniform Loading Full:= 72· psf Partial:= 0· psf Hpar:= O·ft = Uniform loading full soldier beam height = Uniform loading partial soldier beam height = Height of partial uniform surcharge loading Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet_jf_of __ Date: June 8, 2016 Ps (y) := Full + Partial if 0· ft :-::; y :-::; Hpar Full if Hpar < y :-::; H Uniform surcharge profile per depth O· psf otherwise Eccentric/Conncentric Axial & Lateral Point Loading Pr:= O·kip e:= O·in Pr·e Me:=-- xt Ph:=O·lb zh:= O·ft = Applied axial load per beam = Eccentricity of applied compressive load = Eccentric bending moment = lateral pont load at depth "zh" = Distance to lateral point load from top of wall Seismic Lateral Load (Monobe-Okobe, Not Applicable) EFP := 0· pcf Es:= EFP·H Eq(y) := Es Es - -· y if y :-::; H H 0· psf otherwise Cantilever H = 13', bm 2.xmcdz = Seismic force equivalent fluid pressure = Maximum seismic force pressure = Maximum seismic force pressure Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Boussinesq Loading q := O·ksf x 1 := O·ft z':= O·ft K := 0.50 o(y) := e2 (y) - e1 (y) Boussinesq Equation = Strip load bearing intensity Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet_1Q_of __ Date: June 8, 2016 = Distance from bulkhead to closest edge of strip load = Distance from bulkhead to furthest edge of strip load = Distance below top of wall to strip load surcharge = Coefficient for flexural yeilding of members K = 1.00 (Rigid non-yielding) ( \ K = 0.75 (Semi-rigid) x2 I K = 0.50 (Flexible) e2 (y) := atan ~) o(y) o.(y) := e1 (y) + -2- Pb(y):= O·psf if O·ft:os;y:os;z' 2· q· K· 'IT-1. ( o(y-z') -sin ( o (y-z')). cos (2·o.(y-z'))) if z' < y::::; H 0· psf otherwise Lateral Surcharge Loading Maximum Boussinesq Pressure t:l.y:= 5·ft Given d -Pb(t:l.y) = O·psf dt:l.y Pb(Find(t:l.y)) = O·psf ~ H Pb(y) dy~ O·klf 0 Cantilever H = 13', bm 2.xmcdz 10 20 40 60 Pressure (psf) 80 --' Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 20 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 Resolve Forces Acting on Beam (Assume trial values) z:= 6·ft D := dt a_ratio· P A (H) = 210.6· psf 0 = 1.1 ft Given Summation of Lateral Forces 2 Jo ( H+O ( H r H+D r H+D r H +1, PE(y)dy+L PA(y)dy+J Ps(y)dy+J Pb(y)dy+J Eq(y)dy+Ph JH Jo o o o xt Summation of Moments ~ H+D-z ( H+O ( H +I PE(Y)·(H + D-y) dy+ 1, PE(y)·(H + D-y) dy+ L PA(y)·(H + D-y) dy+ Me ... JH+O JH ~0 r H+D r H r H+D Ph + J Ps ( y) · ( H + D -y) dy + J Eq ( y) · ( H + D -y) dy + J Pb ( y) · ( H + D -y) dy + -· ( H + D -zh) o o o xt ( z \ D /= Find (z, D) Z>O z = 3.9ft D= 15.5ft Cantilever H = 13', bm 2.xmcdz =0 Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 0 10 ~ ¢:: '--' -5 0.. ().) 0 -2x 103 Soldier Beam Pressure - 0 2x 103 4x 103 Pressure (psf) Shear/ft width o~-----------.------------.-----------~ 10 -10 -5 0 5 Shear (kif) Cantilever H = 13', bm 2.xmcdz Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 2i of __ Date: June 8, 2016 Soil Pressures P A (H) = 390· psf PD(H +D)= -5419.3·psf PE(H +D)= -2715.8·psf PK ( H + D) = 9969.3· psf PJ(H +D)= 5383.4·psf Distance to zero shear (From top of Pile) c: := a+--H c:+-V(a) while c: > 0 a+--a+ O.lO·ft c:+-V(a) return a c = 20.3 ft Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Determine Minimum Pile Size M(y) '= ~ y V(y) dy +Me 0 AISC Steel Construction Manual 13th Edition Mmax = 286.1·kip·ft Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 22 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 0 := 1.67 =Allowable strength reduction factor AISC E1 & F1 Aa := 1.33 Fy·Aa Fb:=-- 0 = Steel overstress for temporary loading = Allowable bending stress Required Section Modulus: Mmax z ·=--r· Fb Flexural Yielding, Lb < Zr = 86.2· in3 Beam = "W18 x 65" A= 19.l·in 2 d= 18.4·in tw = 0.5·in Axial Stresses bf = 7.6·in tf = 0.8·in rx = 7.5·in Fy A.:=- Fe Lr Fb = 39.8· ksi K:= 1 Lu := H if Pile= "Concrete Embed" Z = 133·in 3 X c: otherwise IX= 1070·in 4 2 11 · E ( >.. ) K·LU n; 0.658 ·Fy if --:-;:; 4.71· - rx Fy =Nominal compressive stress-AISC E.3-2 & E3-3 (0.877· Fe) otherwise F cr"A Pc:= -- 0 =Allowable concentric force-AISC E.3-1 =Allowable bending moment-AISC F.2-1 Interaction:= [_!2. + ~ · (Mmax ~l if _!2. :::: 0.20 Pc 9 Ma )J Pc = AISC H1-1a & H1-1b (- Pr + Mmax \ otherwise 2·Pc Ma ) Interaction = 0.65 Cantilever H = 13', bm 2.xmcdz Ma = 441.3·kip·ft Mmax = 286.1· kip· ft Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Global Stability = Minimum embedment depth factor of safety Embedment depth increase for min. FS Dh:= Ceil(D, ft) + l·ft Slidding Forces: [ H+Dh Fs:=V(H+O)+ Pn(x)dx ~02 Resisting Forces: Overturning Moments: Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 2.3 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 Fs = 11.6·klf FR = -14.8·klf 1H rH rH rH M0 : = L ( Dh + H -y) · P A ( y) dy + IJ ( Dh + H -y) · Ps ( y) dy + ) ( Dh + H -y). Pb ( y) dy + IJ ( Dh + H -y). E ~0 0 0 0 I H+O ( 0 l [ H+Dh H + Dh -02 Ph +I PE(y)dy· Dh-3)+ Pn(y)dy· 3 +Me+-·(Dh+H-zh) ~H ~0 xt 2 Resisting Moments 02 MR := r ( H + Dh -y) · P n (y) dy ~H+O M0 = 85.5· kip MR = -111.4·kip Factor of Safety: ( FR l Slidding := if FSd s , "Ok", "No Good: Increase Dh") Fs Slidding = "Ok" I FRI = 1.28 Fs ( MR Overturning:= if FSd s Mo l , "Ok" , "No Good: Increase Dh" ) Overturning = "Ok" Cantilever H = 13', bm 2.xmcdz Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Vertical Embedment Depth Axial Resistance Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 24 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 qa = O·psf = Allowable soldier beam tip end bearing pressure fs = 600· psf = Allowable soldier skin friction Pr= O·kip = Applied axial load per beam p' := TI· dia if Pile = "Concrete Embed" [2·( bf + d)] otherwise = Applied axial load per beam Allowable Axial Resistance d. 2 Q(y) := p'.fs·y+ TI· 1a ·qa if Pile = "Concrete Embed" 4 ( br d· qa) otherwise Dv:= c: f-O·ft T f-Q(e) while T > 0 c: f-c: + O.lO·ft T f-Pr-Q(c:) return c: Selected Toe Depth Dtoe:= if(Dh::?: Dv, Dh, Dv) Maximum Deflection D L':= H +- 4 Cantilever H = 13', bm 2.xmcdz = Effective length about pile rotation .6. = 0.9· in Dv=Oft Dh = 17ft Dtoe = 17ft Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Design Summary: Beam = "Wl8 x 65" H = 13ft Dtoe = 17ft H + Dtoe =30ft dia = 24·in ~ = 0.9·in Cantilever H = 13', bm 2.xmcdz Sb_No = "2" = Soldier beam retained height =Minimum soldier beam embedment =Total length of soldier beam = Tributary width of soldier beam = Soldier beam shaft diameter = Maximum soldier beam deflection Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 25 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 Section 5 _j Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 (1) Levels of Tiedback Soldier Beam Sb_No := "3, 9-14" Soldier Beam & Tieback Attributes Pile:= "Concrete Embed" H := 17·ft =Soldier beam retained height XS:= 0 Hs := 0· ft --> = Height of retained slope (As applicable) ys:= 0 xt:= 8·ft =Tributary width of soldier beam dia := 24· in = Soldier beam shaft diameter N = 1 = Number of tieback levels Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 26 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 dt:= 15·ft =Assumed soldier beam embedment depth (Initial Guess) Distance Between Tieback Levels Tieback Inclinations from Horizontal Sl := 6.5·ft TOW--> B.O.E. N <lt := 25· deg 1 --> Level 1 lnclincation sN+l :=H-I si i = 1 = Distance between lowest level tieback & bottom of excavation s2 = 10.5 ft Tieback Attributes ftb := 3500· psf Pull:= 130% rJ:= 35·deg x_rJ:= O·ft 1 Tieback H = 17', sb 3, 9-14 with Building Surcharge.xmcdz = Allowable bond capacity between soil & post-grouted anchor = Diameter of drilled tieback = Tieback test load =Active wedge failuire plane measured from the vertical = Active wedge failure plane horizontal offset Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 AISC Steel Construction Manual 13th Edition Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 27 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 n := 1.67 = Allowable strength reduction factor AISC E1 & F1 Fy:= 50· ksi = Soldier beam yield stress -ASTM A992 OS:= 1.33 =Temporary overstress for short duration loading Soldier Beam Attributes Beam= "W14 x 30" A= 8.9·in2 h:=d-2·tf K:= 1 AISC Table C-C2.2 2 7i . E -z . 3 Fy x = 47.3·m E := 29000· ksi Fe n l K Lu'n \ 2 A.:=-d = 13.8·in ~ = 0.4·in ~ = 0.3·in rx=5.7·in I . 4 J . 4 = 291·m = 0.4·m X rx ) Column Classification: --> Fully Restrained Against L TB & FLB Os = 1 min( Qa) = 0.8 Q := Qa· Os ---> Local Bucklikng Factor An n E if --~4.71· -Fer := n 0.658 ·Fy·Q n K·Lu' ~ rx Fy =Nominal compressive stress-AISC E.3-2 & E3-3 0.877 ·Fe otherwise n Beam Classification: --> Fully Restrained Against L TB & FLB Mn:= if Flange = "Slender" Z . Fy· OS otherwise X 1 Tieback H = 17', sb 3, 9-14 with Building Surcharge.xmcdz if Flange = "Non-Compact" Flange = "Compact" Web= "Compact" Fe L __ J I ___ J Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Soil Parameters Active Pressure Load Geometry Pa:= 25·pcf c1 := 0.20·H c2 := 0.20· H Passive Pressure Load Geometry Pp := 350· pcf p max:= "n/a" <P := 30·deg de':= dia - 1 be:= 0.08·deg ·<!>·de' a_ratio:= min[be, 1) xt ) = Active earth pressure = Trapazodial soil loading coefficient-Top = Trapazodial soil loading coefficient -Bottom = Trapazodial soil loading coefficient -Middle = Passive earth pressure Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 28 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 =Maximum passive earth pressure ("n/a" =not applicable) = Passive pressure offset at subgrade = Internal soil friction angle (Below subgrade) = Effective soldier beam diameter below subgrade = Effective soldier beam width below subgrade = Soldier beam arching ratio Axial Resistance Soil Strength Parameters qa:= O·psf = Allowable soldier beam tip end bearing pressure fs := 600· psf = Allowable soldier skin friction j..L:= 0.33 = Coefficient of friction between shoring bulkhead & retained soil p': = TI· dia if Pile = "Concrete Embed" 2 · ( bf + d) otherwise =Applied perimeter along frictional toe resistance 1 Tieback H = 17', sb 3, 9-14 with Building Surcharge.xmcdz Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Soil Parameters (Continued) Soil Pressure Profile P _H := Pa-H = Fully developed active pressure Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 29 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 ( P_H-Pps+ pmax l dmax := if P = "n/a" , 2dt, -------max Pp-Pa ) = Depth to maximum passive earth pressure (As applicable) Psoil(y) := P_H -·y if y< c1 c1 P _H if c1 s y s c1 + c3 p _H - ( P _H \_ ( y - c1 -c3) if c1 + c3 < y s H c2 ) -a_ratio· Pp· (y-H) -a_ratio· Pps if H < y s H + dmax -a_ratio· P max otherwise Soil Pressure Loading Diagram orT----~.-----~----~--~ 10 20 -3000 -2000 -1000 Soil Pressure (psf) 1 Tieback H = 17', sb 3, 9-14 with Building Surcharge.xmcdz 0 Depth to point of zero pressure "0" 0:= O·ft if Psoil(H + O.l·ft) s 0 c +--0.01· ft temp +--Psoil ( H + c:) while temp > 0 c: +--c: + O.DIO·ft temp +--Psoil ( H + c:) return c: 0 =Oft Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Lateral Live Load Surcharge Uniform Loading Full:= 0· psf Partial:= 0· psf Hpar := O·ft = Uniform loading full soldier beam height = Uniform loading partial soldier beam height = Height of partial uniform surcharge loading Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 30 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 Ps (y) := Full+ Partial if 0· ft ~ y ~ Hpar Full if Hpar < y ~ H Uniform surcharge profile per depth 0· psf otherwise Eccentric/Conncentric Axial & Lateral Point Loading Pv:= O·kip e:= O·in 0· kip·ft Me:=--- xt Ph:= O·lb zh:= O·ft = Applied axial load per beam = Eccentricity of applied compressive load = Eccentric bending moment = lateral pont load at depth "zh" = Distance to lateral point load from top of wall Seismic Lateral Load {Monobe-Okobe, Not Applicable) EFP:= O·pcf Es:= EFP· H Eq(y) := Es Es - -· y if y ~ H H 0· psf otherwise 1 Tieback H = 17', sb 3, 9-14 with Building Surcharge.xmcdz = Seismic force equivalent fluid pressure = Maximum seismic force pressure = Maximum seismic force pressure :_ J Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Boussinesq Loading q := 5·ksf x1 := 12.67. ft z':=2·ft K := 0.50 = Strip load bearing intensity Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet~ of __ Date: June 8, 2016 = Distance from bulkhead to closest edge of strip load = Distance from bulkhead to furthest edge of strip load = Distance below top of wall to strip load surcharge = Coefficient for flexural yeilding of members K = 1.00 (Rigid non-yielding) K = 0. 75 (Semi-rigid) K = 0.50 (Flexible) ( x1 ~ e1 (y) := atan Y) ( x2 ~ e2 (y) := atan Y) &(y) := e2 (y) -e1 (y) &(y) a(y) := e1 (y) + -2- Boussinesq Equation Pb(y):= O·psf if O·ft:s;y:s;z' 2·q·K·TI-1·(&(y-z')-sin(&(y-z'))·cos(2·a(y-z'))) if z' < y:s; H 0· psf otherwise Maximum Boussinesq Pressure b..y:= 5·ft Given d -Pb(b..y) = O·psf db..y Pb (Find ( b..y)) = 151.3 · psf H ~ Pb(y) dy= 1.7·klf 0 1 Tieback H = 17', sb 3, 9-14 with Building Surcharge.xmcdz Lateral Surcharge Loading 15 -~------ ' ' ' ' ' ' ' \ 10 5 \ \ . \ ... \ \ \ I I I I I I I I I ,- 1 I I I I I I I I I ob----~~--~-----~------~ 0 200 400 Pressure (psf) Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Soldier Beam Tieback Reactions Total Load per Depth i := I, 2 .. N Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 32 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 Pnet(y) := Psoil(y) + Ps(y) + Eq(y) + Pb(y) --->Distributed Loading Ph= 0· kip® zh = 0· ft ---> Point Load Point Loading Distributed Shear & Moment zarray:= I if zh:::; s1 otherwise E+--2 c temp +--L si -zh i = 1 while 0 ~ temp E+-E+I c temp+-L si-(zh+ O.l·ft) i = 1 return c: Tieback N Horizontal Reactions M'(z'. \ + if[zarray :::; i + 1 , (z'. -zh \ Ph , ql I+ 1 J 1+ 1 ) xt J Ti := ------='--------------= z'. 1 -s. I+ I Tieback Reaction T 1 = 5.8·klf 1 Tieback H = 17', sb 3, 9-14 with Building Surcharge.xmcdz V'(y) o~ ~ Y Pnet(y) dy ---> Distributed Shear I It 0 M' ( y) o~ ~ Y V ( y) dy + Me---> Distributed Bending I It 0 Hinge Support Points z'1 := s1 s. 1 + z'. if i < N I+ I s. 1 + z'. + 0 otherwise I+ I Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Maximum Bending Moments Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 33 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 Distance to zero shear points between levels (local Maxima) i:= 1,2 .. N+ 1 r ·= c: ~ O·ft i" while if(i::;; N, temp< 0, temp> 0) c: ~ c: + O.IO·ft temp<-v(z'1+ E ~-{ < N, ~1 return c: Maximum Bending Moments n:=1,2 .. N+2 M := n [ Ph l M'(z' \+if zarray::;; 1, (z'1-zh)·-, q n) xt J otherwise c: ~ 1 if n::;; N + 1 c: ~ 2 otherwise if n = 1 Pzarray ~ if[zh::;; z' 1 + r 1J(z' 1 + r 1 1 -zhl Ph,) n-n-L n- n-) J x I t J n-c: n-E -M'(z' + r \ + (z' + r \ '"' T -'"' (T .z' \-Pzarray + Ms·[r 1. (c:-1)] n-1 n-1 ) n-1 n-1 ) L..J n L..J n n) n- Tieback Reaction Tt = 5.8·klf 1 Tieback H = 17', sb 3, 9-14 with Building Surcharge.xmcdz n=l n=l Zero Shear Depths (Between Levels) r = ft ( 6.1' 4.1) Maximum Bending /ft ( 5.6 ' kip M= 4.8 l·ft·- ft -4.7) Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Minimum Lateral Embedment Depth (Equillibrium) Dh:= c: f-O.lO·ft tempf-~ Psoil(y)·[c:-[y-(H + 0)]] dy+ V'(H + 0) + :h-L r H+O+e: l N ~0 t i=l while temp > 0 c: f-c: + O.lO·ft Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 34 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 ( H+O+e: [ N I Ph tempf-~ Psoil(Y)·[c:-[y-(H + 0)]] dy+ V'(H + 0) +-;--L H+O t i = 1 return c: Dh = 7.1 ft Bending Moment Diagram o.-----.-----.-----.-----.-----. § il) o::l !-< Cl.) ...... "0 10 -0 r:/) OJ) s::: 0 -< .;3 0... il) Q -40 -20 0 20 Moment (ft-kip) 1 Tieback H = 17', sb 3, 9-14 with Building Surcharge.xmcdz 40 60 Maximum Bending Moments Mmax = 44.7·ft·kip Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Combined Forces: AISC Steel Construction Manual 13th Edition Beam= "Wl4 x 30" ---> Selected Soldier Beam Allowable Shear Vmax = 18.8· kip = Maximum shear load Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 35 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 0.60· Fy· d· tw Va:=-----=Allowable shear load-AISC G21.a Shear:= if(Vmax ~ Va, "Ok", "No Good") Va = 66.9· kip Allowable Bending Moment Bending = "Yielding" Mn Ma:=-n = Allowable Bending Moment -AISC F1 Allowable Concentric Loading Buckling= "Local" ---> min(Q) = 0.8 Shear= "Ok" Mmax = 44.7·ft·kip Ma= 157·ft·kip - 1 Pc-= F ·A·O · cr =Allowable concentric force-AISC E.3-1 Pr := Pv if n = 1 n Combined Interaction AISC H1-1a & H1-1b Interaction := n Pr n -~0.20 Pc n Prn IMn·Xtl --+ otherwise 2·Pc Ma n 1 Tieback H = 17', sb 3, 9-14 with Building Surcharge.xmcdz = Tieback drag-down force Soldier _Beam = "Ok" max( Interaction) = 0.28 Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 36 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 Approximate Soldier Beam Deflection Using 2nd Order Moment Area Function a:= s1 = Cantilevered length =Simply supported length between levels 1 & 2 Maximum Cantilevered Deflection 111 r L+a l ~a M'(Y)·Y dy 1 M'(y)·(L+a-y)dy 1 M' ( y) · ( L + a -y) d ~a ~11 }~>t• 0 .6.c := + ·Xt E·l E·l E·l X X X Maximum Deflection in Remaining Levels .6.s. := 1 Max;mum Deflectjons .6.c = 0.02· in max(.6.s) = 0.07·in Deflection = "Ok" E·l X 1 Tieback H = 17', sb 3, 9-14 with Building Surcharge.xmcdz z'2 r M' ( y) · ( L + a -y) dy ~a ri·Xt otherwise E·l X L if i = 1 Maximum Design Deflection: .6.max := 1· in Deflection:= if( max(.6.c, max(.6.s)) s; .6.max, "Ok", "No Good") Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Minimum Tieback Properties Tieback Constraints (As applicable): Removal:= "n/a" =Tieback removal depth below existing grade Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet37 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 Coupler:= 0· ft = Distance measured along anchor between removal depth ft coupler Encroachment:= O·ft =Allowable encroachment width with the Public-Right-of-Way Lock off ft Test Loads FS, PTI 8.3.2 ft 8.3.3 --> Design:= 0.60 Test:= 0.80 Anchor Type: Removable = Grade 150 Threadbar, Fub := 50· ksi Abandon= 7-wire strand, F u := 270· ksi As= 0.217. in2 (Single strand) T(xt Tdesign. := ( ) 1 cos ot. 1 = Tieback design lock off load Ttest := Pull· Tdesign = Tieback test load Minimum Anchor Sizes: Refer to Attached Threadbar Data For All Bar Sizes Level 1 Type1 = "Strand" Anchor1 = 2 Tdesignl = 51· kip Ttest1 = 66· kip Note: Minimum Strand Size Governed by: Tdesign ---> Max Ttest As· F u· Test 1 Tieback H = 17', sb 3, 9-14 with Building Surcharge.xmcdz Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Minimum Anchor Length Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 38 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 Lb.:= Ceil max 1 , 20· ft , ft l l Tdesign. 1 1 = Tieback bonded length -20'-0" minimum 1 ftb· TI· diatb ) ) ·-[[x_f3 + (H-z'i>tan(f3)Jsin(90·deg-f3) l L~ .. -max ( ) , 15· 1J 1 sin 90· deg -<4:i + f3 ~ I ' ' 10 Shoring Design Section ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' T ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' I - 01~----~------------~--------------~ 0 20 40 = Tieback un-bonded length beyond active wedge -15'-0" minimum Un-bonded Length For Removal Lr1 = 0 ft ---> Level 1 Anchor Minimum Un-bonded Length Lu. := Ceil(max(Lf3., Lr.\ ft \ 1 1 1) ) Minimum Design Lengths L. := Lu. + Lb. ---> Total Anchor Length 1 1 1 Level 1 Lu1 = 15ft Lb1 =20ft L1 =35ft 1 Tieback H = 17', sb 3, 9-14 with Building Surcharge.xmcdz Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Minimum Embedment Depth (Tieback Dragdown & Lateral Embed FS) Allowable Axial Resistance d. 2 Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 39 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 N Q(y) := p'.fs·y-Pv-L: i = 1 n· 1a ·qa if Pile = "Concrete Embed" 4 Dv:= c: ~ O·ft ( br d· qa) otherwise temp~ Q(c:) while temp < 0 c: ~ c: + O.lO·ft temp~ Q(c:) Dv = 1.7ft return c: Minimum Lateral Embedment Depth (Global Safety) FSd := 1.25 = Minimum factor of safety for lateral embedment Dh':= c:~O.lO·ft ( H+O+c: [ N I Ph temp~~ Psoil(y)· [c:-[y-(H + 0)]] dy + V'(H + 0) +-;--L: H+O t i = 1 while temp > 0 c: ~ c: + O.lO·ft temp~~ Psoil(y)· [c:-[y-(H + 0)]] dy + V'(H + 0) + :h -L: ( H+O+c: [ N H+O t i = 1 return c: Dh' = 7.9ft Dtoe: = Ceil (max ( Dh', Dv) , ft) = Minimum factor of safety for lateral embedment Dtoe =8ft <---Governing Embedment Depth 1 Tieback H = 17', sb 3, 9-14 with Building Surcharge.xmcdz Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Design Summary Soldier Beam Attributes Beam= "W14 x 30" H = 17ft Dtoe =8ft H + Dtoe = 25 ft dia = 24·in ~max= 0.07·in Distance Between Tieback Levels s = ft (6.5 ' 10.5) TOW--> Level 1 Level1 --> B.O.E. Tieback Level 1 Typel = "Strand" Anchor1 = 2 <lt = 25·deg 1 Tdesign1 = 5l·kip Ttest1 = 66· kip Lu1 =15ft Lb1 =20ft L1 =35ft 1 Tieback H = 17', sb 3, 9-14 with Building Surcharge.xmcdz Sb_No = "3, 9-14" Pile= "Concrete Embed" =Soldier beam retained height = Soldier beam embedment depth =Total length of soldier beam = Soldier beam shaft diameter = Tributary width of soldier beam = Maximum soldier beam deflection Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet_:!Q__of __ Date: June 8, 2016 Section 6 Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 ( 1 ) Levels of Tiedback Soldier Beam Sb_No := "4-8" Soldier Beam ft Tieback Attributes Pile:= "Concrete Embed" H := 25·ft =Soldier beam retained height XS:= 0 Hs := 0· ft --> = Height of retained slope (As applicable) ys:= o xt := 8· ft = Tributary width of soldier beam dia := 24· in = Soldier beam shaft diameter N = 1 = Number of tieback levels Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet_±:!_of __ Date: June 8, 2016 dt:= 15·ft =Assumed soldier beam embedment depth (Initial Guess) Distance Between Tieback Levels Tieback Inclinations from Horizontal TOW--> B.O.E. N sN+ 1 := H -L si i = 1 52= 17ft Tieback Attributes ftb := 3500· psf Pull:= 130% r3:= 35·deg 1 Tieback H = 25', sb 4-8 with Elevator Surcharge.xmcdz ~ := 25·deg 1 --> Level1 lnclincation = Distance between lowest level tieback 8: bottom of excavation = Allowable bond capacity between soil 8: post-grouted anchor = Diameter of drilled tieback = Tieback test load = Active wedge failuire plane measured from the vertical = Active wedge failure plane horizontal offset Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 AISC Steel Construction Manual 13th Edition Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 42 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 n := 1.67 = Allowable strength reduction factor AISC E1 & F1 Fy:= 50·ksi = Soldier beam yield stress -ASTM A992 OS:= 1.33 =Temporary overstress for short duration loading Soldier Beam Attributes Beam= "W16 x 40" A= 11.8·in2 h := d-2·tf K:= 1 AISC Table C-C2.2 2 'IT • E z . 3 Fy x = 73·m E := 29000· ksi Fe .-n [ K Lu'n \ 2 :A:=-d= 16·in tf = 0.5·in tw = 0.3·in rx = 6.6·in I . 4 J = 0.8·in 4 x = 518·m rx ) Column Classification: --> Fully Restrained Against L TB & FLB Os= 1 min( Qa) = 0.8 Q := Qa· Os ---> Local Bucklikng Factor An if --~4.71· -Fer := n 0.658 ·Fy·Q n K·Lu'n Hv rx Fy =Nominal compressive stress-AISC E.3-2 & E3-3 0.877 ·Fe otherwise n Beam Classification: --> Fully Restrained Against L TB & FLB Mn:= [ M -(M -0.70·Fy·Sx)·( :A-:Apf rl p p :Arf -Apf )j 090·E·k ·S . C X if Flange = "Slender" Zx· Fy· OS otherwise 1 Tieback H = 25', sb 4-8 with Elevator Surcharge.xmcdz if Flange = "Non-Compact" Flange = "Compact" Web= "Compact" Fe Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Soil Parameters Active Pressure Load Geometry Pa:= 25·pcf c1 := 0.20·H c2 := 0.20·H Passive Pressure Load Geometry Pp := 350· pcf p max:= "n/a" <1> := 30· deg de':= dia - 1 be:= 0.08·deg ·<!>·de' a_ratio:= min(be, 1) xt ) = Active earth pressure = Trapazodial soil loading coefficient -Top = Trapazodial soil loading coefficient -Bottom = Trapazodial soil loading coefficient -Middle = Passive earth pressure Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 43 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 =Maximum passive earth pressure ("n/a" =not applicable) = Passive pressure offset at subgrade = Internal soil friction angle (Below subgrade) = Effective soldier beam diameter below subgrade = Effective soldier beam width below subgrade = Soldier beam arching ratio Axial Resistance Soil Strength Parameters qa:= O·psf =Allowable soldier beam tip end bearing pressure fs := 600· psf = Allowable soldier skin friction J..L:= 0.33 = Coefficient of friction between shoring bulkhead &. retained soil p' := 'IT· dia if Pile = "Concrete Embed" 2·( bf + d) otherwise =Applied perimeter along frictional toe resistance 1 Tieback H = 25', sb 4-8 with Elevator Surcharge.xmcdz __ : Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Soil Parameters (Continued) Soil Pressure Profile P_H:=Pa-H = Fully developed active pressure Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet..1±_of __ Date: June 8, 2016 ( P _H-Pps + P max l dmax ·= if P = "n/a" 2dt -------. max ' ' ) Pp-Pa = Depth to maximum passive earth pressure (As applicable) Psoil(y) := P_H -.y if y< c1 c1 P _H if c1 s y s c1 + c3 p _H _ ( p _H 1. ( y - c1 - c3) if c1 + c3 < y s H c2 ) -a_ratio· Pp· (y-H) -a_ratio· Pps if H < y s H + dmax -a_ratio· P max otherwise Soil Pressure Loading Diagram -3000 -2000 -1000 0 Soil Pressure (psf) 1 Tieback H = 25', sb 4-8 with Elevator Surcharge.xmcdz Depth to point of zero pressure "0" 0·-O-ft if Psoil(H + O.l·ft) s 0 e: ~ 0.01-ft temp~ Psoil(H + e:) while temp > 0 e: ~ e; + O.QlQ.ft temp~ Psoil(H + e:) return e: 0 =Oft Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Lateral Live Load Surcharge Uniform Loading Full:= 0· psf Partial:= 0· psf Hpar:= O·ft = Uniform loading full soldier beam height = Uniform loading partial soldier beam height = Height of partial uniform surcharge loading Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 45 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 Ps (y) := Full+ Partial if 0· ft:::; y:::; Hpar Full if Hpar < y:::; H Uniform surcharge profile per depth 0· psf otherwise Eccentric/Conncentric Axial &. Lateral Point Loading Pv:= O·kip e:= O·in 0· kip· ft Me:=--- Ph:=O·lb zh := O·ft = Applied axial load per beam = Eccentricity of applied compressive load =Eccentric bending moment = lateral pont load at depth "zh" = Distance to lateral point load from top of wall Seismic Lateral Load (Monobe-Okobe, Not Applicable) EFP := O·pcf Es:= EFP·H Eq(y) := Es Es - -· y if y :::; H H 0· psf otherwise 1 Tieback H = 25', sb 4-8 with Elevator Surcharge.xmcdz = Seismic force equivalent fluid pressure = Maximum seismic force pressure =Maximum seismic force pressure Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Boussinesq Loading q := 2.5-ksf z':=2·ft K := 0.50 = Strip load bearing intensity Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 46 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 = Distance from bulkhead to closest edge of strip load = Distance from bulkhead to furthest edge of strip load = Distance below top of wall to strip load surcharge = Coefficient for flexural yeilding of members K = 1.00 (Rigid non-yielding) K = 0. 75 (Semi-rigid) K = 0.50 (Flexible) &(y) := e2 (y) -e1 (y) &(y) a(y) := e1 (y) + -2- Boussinesq Equation Pb(y):= 0-psf if O·ft~y~z· 2. q· K. TI-1-( & ( y -z') -sin ( & ( y -z')) ·cos ( 2 ·a ( y -z') ) ) if z' < y ~ H 0· psf otherwise Maximum Boussinesq Pressure ~y:= 5·ft Given d -Pb(~y) = O·psf d~y Pb(Find(~y)) = 395.5-psf H ~ Pb(y) dy= 5.4·klf 0 1 Tieback H = 25', sb 4-8 with Elevator Surcharge.xmcdz ,..-_ ¢::: '-' -B 0... ~ 0 20 10 Lateral Surcharge Loading ----I -~------'',::--I '' 1 ,, I' I' / ' / 200 400 Pressure (psf) Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Soldier Beam Tieback Reactions Total Load per Depth i := 1, 2 .. N Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 47 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 Pnet(y) := Psoil(y) + Ps(y) + Eq(y) + Pb(y) --->Distributed Loading Ph= O·kip® zh = O·ft --->Point Load Point Loading zarray := 1 if zh::;; s1 otherwise E+--2 c temp +--"L si -zh i = 1 while o ;:o: temp c temp+--'L si-(zh + O.l·ft) i = 1 return E Tieback N Horizontal Reactions M'(z'. \ + if[zarray::;; i + 1, (z'. -zh \ Ph, ol 1+ 1 J 1+ 1 J xt J Ti := ____ __.::;____ __________ --=. z'. 1 -s. 1+ 1 Tieback Reaction T 1 = 13.4· klf 1 Tieback H = 25', sb 4-8 with Elevator Surcharge.xmcdz Distributed Shear&: Moment V(y) ,~ ~ Y Pnet(y) dy --->Distributed Shear I It 0 M' ( y) ,= ~ Y V ( y) dy + Me ... > Distributed Bending I It 0 Hinge Support Points s. + z'. if i < N 1+1 1 s. 1 + z'. + 0 otherwise 1+ 1 Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Maximum Bending Moments Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet~ of __ Date: June 8, 2016 Distance to zero shear points between levels (Local Maxima) i:=1,2 .. N+1 r ·= e:: +--O·ft i" temp+--V'(z'i + e:: ~-if[i<N, ± 1 = 1 while if(i:::; N, temp< 0, temp> 0) e:: +--e:: + O.lO·ft N temp<--v'(z'i + € ~-{ < N, ~1 Ti'L i = 1 return e:: Maximum Bending Moments n:=1,2 .. N+2 [ Ph l M'(z' 1 +if zarray:::; 1, (z'1-zh)·-, q n) xt J if n = 1 otherwise e:: +--1 if n :::; N + 1 e:: +--2 otherwise [ Ph l Pzarray +--if zh :::; z' + r , [(z' + r 1 -zhl-, q n-1 n-1 n-1 n-1) J x t J n-e: n-e: -M'(z' + r 1 + (z' + r \ '"' T -~ (T .z' 1 -Pzarray + Ms·[r 1. (e::-1 )] n-1 n-1 ) n-1 n-1 ) L..J n L..J n n) n- Tieback Reaction T 1 = 13.4· klf 1 Tieback H = 25', sb 4-8 with Elevator Surcharge.xmcdz n=1 n=1 Zero Shear Depths (Between Levels) ( 9 ) r = )ft 5.2 Maximum Bending /ft [ 13.8) kip M = 22.4 l·ft-- ft -9.3) Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Minimum Lateral Embedment Depth (Equillibrium) Dh:= e: ~ O.lO·ft temp~~ Psoil(y)·[e:-[y-(H + 0)]] dy+ V'(H + 0) + :h-L ( H+O+c: [ N H+O t i = 1 while temp > 0 e: ~ e: + O.lO·ft Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 49 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 temp~~ Psoil(y)·[e:-[y-(H + 0)]] dy+ V'(H + 0) + :h-L ( H+O+c: [ N H+O t i = 1 return e: Dh = 8.9ft Bending Moment Diagram 20 -200 -100 0 Moment (ft-kip) 1 Tieback H = 25', sb 4-8 with Elevator Surcharge.xmcdz 100 Maximum Bending Moments Mmax = 179.1·ft·kip 200 Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Combined Forces: AISC Steel Construction Manual 13th Edition Beam= "W16 x 40" ---> Selected Soldier Beam Allowable Shear Vmax = 40.5· kip = Maximum shear load Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet__§Q_of __ Date: June 8, 2016 0.60· Fy· d· tw Va:=-----=Allowable shear load-AISC G21.a Shear:= if(Vmax ~ Va, "Ok", "No Good") Va = 87.7· kip Allowable Bending Moment Bending = "Yielding" Mn Ma:=-n = Allowable Bending Moment -AISC F1 Allowable Concentric Loading Buckling= "Local" ---> min(Q) = 0.8 Shear= "Ok" Mmax = 179.1· ft-kip Ma = 242.2·ft·kip =Allowable concentric force-AISC E.3-1 Pr := Pv if n = 1 n Combined Interaction AISC H1-1a & H1-1b Interaction := n Pr n -~ 0.20 Pc n Prn IMn·Xtl --+ otherwise 2·Pc Ma n 1 Tieback H = 25', sb 4-8 with Elevator Surcharge.xmcdz =Tieback drag-down force Soldier _Beam = "Ok" max(lnteraction) = 0.77 Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet__2!_of __ Date: June 8, 2016 Approximate Soldier Beam Deflection Using 2nd Order Moment Area Function a:= s1 = Cantilevered length = Simply supported length between levels 1 8: 2 Maximum Cantilevered Deflection ltl r L+a l ~a M'(y).ydy 1 M'(y)·(L+a-y)dy M' ( y) · ( L + a -y) d ~a ~tl J{~}xt+ 0 AC:= + ·Xt E·l E·l E·l X X X Maximum Deflection in Remaining Levels AS.:= 1 E·l X E·l X Maximum Deflections AC= -0.47·in max(As) = 0.58·in Deflection = "Ok" 1 Tieback H = 25', sb 4-8 with Elevator Surcharge.xmcdz z'2 r M' ( y) · ( L + a -y) dy ~a ri·Xt otherwise E·l X L if i = 1 Maximum Design Deflection: Amax:= l·in Deflection:= if(max(Ac, max(As)) :-::: Amax, "Ok", "No Good") Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Minimum Tieback Properties Tieback Constraints (As applicable): Removal:= "n/a" =Tieback removal depth below existing grade Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 52 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 Coupler:= O·ft = Distance measured along anchor between removal depth & coupler Encroachment:= 0· ft =Allowable encroachment width with the Public-Right-of-Way Lock off & Test Loads FS, PTI 8.3.2 & 8.3.3 --> Design:= 0.60 Test:= 0.80 Anchor Type: T{xt Tdesign. := ( ) 1 cos~. 1 Ttest := Pull· Tdesign Removable = Grade 150 Threadbar, Fub := 50· ksi Abandon= 7-wire strand, F ·= 270· ksi u· = Tieback design lock off load = Tieback test load As= 0.217·in2 (Single strand) Minimum Anchor Sizes: Refer to Attached Threadbar Data For All Bar Sizes Level 1 Typel = "Strand" Anchor1 = 4 Tdesignl = 118·kip Ttest1 = 154· kip Note: Minimum Strand Size Governed by: Tdesign As· F u · Design ---> Max Ttest 1 Tieback H = 25', sb 4-8 with Elevator Surcharge.xmcdz Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Minimum Anchor Length Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet~ of __ Date: June 8, 2016 Lb.:= Ceil max 1 , 20· ft , ft ( [ Tdesign. ~ ~ = Tieback bonded length -20'-0" minimum 1 ftb· TI· diatb ) ) ·-l[x_f3+ (H-z'i>tan(f3)Jsin(90·deg-(3) l L~ .. -max ( ) , 1s.1J 1 sin 90·deg-~i + f3 ~ Shoring Design Section I I 30r ~ ct:: "-' -B 20 - 0.. Q) ' ~ ' 10 - 01~------~------------L-~----------~~~ 0 20 40 = Tieback un-bonded length beyond active wedge -15'-0" minimum Un-bonded Length For Removal Lr1 = oft ---> Level 1 Anchor Minimum Un-bonded Length Lu. := Ceil(max(Lf3., Lr.\ ft1 1 1 1; ) Minimum Design Lengths L. := Lu. + Lb. ---> Total Anchor Length Level 1 Lu1 = 15ft Lb1 =22ft L1 =37ft 1 Tieback H = 25', sb 4-8 with Elevator Surcharge.xmcdz 1 1 1 Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet_M_of __ Date: June 8, 2016 Minimum Embedment Depth (Tieback Dragdown & Lateral Embed FS) Allowable Axial Resistance N Q(y) := p'.fs·y-Pv-I i = I Dv:= e: ~ O·ft temp~ Q(e:) while temp< 0 e: ~ e: + O.lO·ft temp~ Q(e:) return e: Dv = 3.9ft Minimum Lateral Embedment Depth (Global Safety) d. 2 TI· 1a ·qa if Pile = "Concrete Embed" 4 ( br d· qa) otherwise = Minimum factor of safety for lateral embedment Dh':= e:~O.IO·ft temp~~ H+O+e: Psoil(y)· [e:-[y-(H + 0)]] dy + lV'(H + 0) + Ph-...;;, Ti-Ms ~€ ~H+O xt ~ 1=1 ) while temp > 0 e: ~ e: + O.lO·ft temp ~ ~ Psoil ( y). [ E: - [ y - ( H + 0)]] dy + v· ( H + 0) + :h -I ( H+O+e: ( N ~0 t i=l return e: Dh' = 9.9ft Dtoe:= Ceil(max(Dh', Dv), ft) = Minimum factor of safety for lateral embedment Dtoe = lOft <---Governing Embedment Depth 1 Tieback H = 25', sb 4-8 with Elevator Surcharge.xmcdz Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Design Summary Soldier Beam Attributes Beam = "W16 x 40" H =25ft Dtoe = lOft H + Dtoe= 35ft dia = 24·in ~max= 0.58· in Distance Between Tieback Levels ( 8 ~ s = 17 /t TOW--> Level 1 Level1 --> B.O.E. Tieback Level 1 Typel = "Strand" Anchor1 = 4 nt = 25·deg 1 Tdesignl = 118·kip Ttest1 = 154· kip Lu1 = 15ft Lb1 =22ft L1 =37ft 1 Tieback H = 25', sb 4-8 with Elevator Surcharge.xmcdz Sb_No = "4-8" Pile = "Concrete Embed" = Soldier beam retained height = Soldier beam embedment depth =Total length of soldier beam = Soldier beam shaft diameter = Tributary width of soldier beam = Maximum soldier beam deflection Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 55 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 Section 7 Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 56 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 Cantileverd Soldier Beam Design Sb_No := "15, 18" Soldier Beam Attributes & Properties Pile:= "Concrete Embed" H:= 15-ft X:= 0 Hs := 0· ft --> y:= 0 dia := 30·in de':= dia dt:= 2·H w_table := "n/a" ASTM A992 (Grade 50) E := 29000· ksi Fy:= 50· ksi ASCE 7.2.4.1 (2) D+H+L Lateral Embedment Safety Factor FSd := 1.25 Cantilever H = 15', bm 15, 18.xmcdz =Soldier beam retained height = Height of retained slope (As applicable) = Tributary width of soldier beam = Soldier beam shaft diameter = Effective soldier beam diameter below subgrade =Assumed soldier beam embedment depth (Initial Guess) = Depth below top of wall to design ground water table 20 10 83' 0 '-' .£ fr Q -10 -20 -30 1- Shoring Design Section r I -100 0 I - 100 Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Soil Parameters Pa:= 30·pcf Pp := 350· pcf p ·= "n/a" max· <1> := 30· deg - 1 be:= 0.08· deg ·<!>·de' a_ratio•~ min(~, I~ a_ratio = 0.8 qa:= O·psf fs := 600· psf = Active earth pressure = Passive earth pressure Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 57 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 =Maximum passive earth pressure ("n/a" =not applicable) = Passive pressure offset at subgrade = Internal soil friction angle (Below subgrade) = Effective soldier beam width below subgrade = Soldier beam arching ratio = Allowable soldier beam tip end bearing pressure = Allowable soldier skin friction = Soil unit weight Bouyant Soil Properties (As applicable) "'w := 62.4· pcf Pp' := Pp if w_table = "n/a" Pp . ( 1 s -"'w) otherwise "'s Pa' := Pa if w_table = "n/a" Cantilever H = 15', bm 15, 18.xmcdz = Unit weight of water Submereged Pressures (As Applicable) Pp' = 350· pcf Pa' = 30·pcf Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Lateral Live Load Surcharge Uniform Loading Full:= 72· psf Partial:= O· psf Hpar:= O·ft = Uniform loading full soldier beam height = Uniform loading partial soldier beam height = Height of partial uniform surcharge loading Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 58 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 Ps (y) := Full+ Partial if 0· ft :s: y :s: Hpar Full if Hpar < y :s: H Uniform surcharge profile per depth 0· psf otherwise Eccentric/Conncentric Axial & Lateral Point Loading Pr:= O·kip e:=O·in Pr·e Me:=-- xt Ph:= O·lb zh:= O·ft =Applied axial load per beam = Eccentricity of applied compressive load =Eccentric bending moment = lateral pont load at depth "zh" = Distance to lateral point load from top of wall Seismic Lateral Load (Monobe-Okobe, Not Applicable) EFP := O·pcf Es:= EFP· H Eq(y) := Es Es - -· y if y :s: H H 0· psf otherwise Cantilever H = 15', bm 15, 18.xmcdz = Seismic force equivalent fluid pressure = Maximum seismic force pressure = Maximum seismic force pressure Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Boussinesq Loading q := O·ksf z':=O·ft K := 0.50 Boussinesq Equation = Strip load bearing intensity Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 59 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 = Distance from bulkhead to closest edge of strip load = Distance from bulkhead to furthest edge of strip load = Distance below top of wall to strip load surcharge = Coefficient for flexural yeilding of members K = 1.00 (Rigid non-yielding) ( \ K = 0.75 (Semi-rigid) x2 I K = 0.50 (Flexible) e2 (y) := atan -y) o(y) o:(y) := e1 (y) + -2- Pb(y):= O·psf if O·ft=o;y:o;z' 2·q·K·TI-1·(o(y-z')-sin(o(y-z'))·cos(2·o:(y-z'))) if z' < y=o; H 0· psf otherwise Maximum Boussinesq Pressure A.y:= 5·ft Given d -Pb (A.y) = 0· psf dAy Pb(Find(A.y)) = O·psf H ~ Pb(y) dy= O·klf 0 Cantilever H = 15', bm 15, 18.xmcdz Lateral Surcharge Loading Is.-----,--------,----r-~ 20 40 60 80 Pressure (psf) Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet_§Q_of_· _ Date: June 8, 2016 Resolve Forces Acting on Beam (Assume trial values) Z:= 6·ft D:= dt a_ratio· P A (H) = 360· psf 0 = 1.3 ft Given Summation of Lateral Forces ( H+O ( H r H+D r H+D r H +I, PE(y) dy+ L PA(y) dy+ J Ps(y) dy+ J Pb(y) dy+ J Eq(y) dy+ Ph JH Jo o o o xt Summation of Moments ( -PE(H + D-z) 12 PJ(H +D)· z-r mE(z,D) mE(z, D) ) ___ --...:... _____ ____.::._ + 1 (PE(H + D-z) + mE(z, D)·Y)-(z-y) dy ... 6 jo ( H+D-z r H+O ( H +1, PE(Y)·(H+D-y)dy+l PE(Y)·(H+D-y)dy+L PA(Y)·(H+D-y)dy+Me ... JH+O JH JO r H+D r H r H+D + Ps ( y) · ( H + D -y) dy + J Eq ( y) · ( H + D -y) dy + J Pb ( y) · ( H + D -y) dy + Ph· ( H + D -zh) Jo o o xt (z 1 lD /= Find(z, D) Z>O z = 3.5ft D = 15ft Cantilever H = 15', bm 15, 18.xmcdz =0 Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Soldier Beam Pressure o.-------------r-------------r--------. 10 20 0 Pressure (pst) Shear/ft width 0 10 ,--.._ ct:: '-"' .;:; 0.. Q) Q 20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 Shear (klt) Cantilever H = 15', bm 15, 18.xmcdz Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet~ of __ _ Date: June 8, 2016 Soil Pressures PD(H +D)= -5258.3·psf PE(H +D)= -3846.7·psf PK(H +D)= 10508.3·psf PJ(H +D)= 8406.7·psf Distance to zero shear (From top of Pile) e:·-a~ H e: ~ V(a) while e: > 0 a~ a+ O.IO·ft e: ~ V(a) return a e: = 22.1 ft Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Determine Minimum Pile Size M(y) := ~ y V(y) dy +Me 0 AISC Steel Construction Manual 13th Edition Mmax= 367.3-kip·ft . ,.,Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 6c of __ Date: June 8, 2016 n := 1.67 = Allowable strength reduction factor AISC E1 & F1 .6.<J" := 1.33 Fy· .6.<J" Fb:= -- 0 = Steel overstress for temporary loading = Allowable bending stress Required Section Modulus: Mmax z ·=--r· Fb Flexural Yielding, Lb < Zr= 110.7·in3 Beam = "W24 x 84" A= 24.7·in 2 d = 24.1-in tw = 0.5·in Axial Stresses bf=9·in tf = 0.8-in rx = 9.8-in Fy >..:=- Fe Lr Fb = 39.8· ksi K:= 1 Lu := H if Pile= "Concrete Embed" Z = 224-in 3 X e otherwise I = 2370-in 4 X 2 1T ·E Fe:=--- ( >.. ) K·LU Hv 0.658 ·Fy if --::::; 4.71· - rx Fy =Nominal compressive stress-AISC E.3-2 & E3-3 (0.877-Fe) otherwise Fer" A Pc:= --n =Allowable concentric force-AISC E.3-1 =Allowable bending moment-AISC F.2-1 Interaction:= - + -. --I if -~ 0.20 [ Pr 8 (Mmax 'Jl Pr Pc 9 Ma )J Pc = AISC H1-1a & H1-1b (- Pr + Mmax) otherwise 2-Pc Ma ) Interaction= 0.49 Cantilever H = 15', bm 15, 18.xmcdz Ma = 743.3. kip· ft Mmax= 367.3-kip-ft Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Global Stability Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 63 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 = Minimum embedment depth factor of safety Embedment depth increase for min. FS Dh:= Ceil(D, ft) + l·ft Slidding Forces: [ H+Dh Fs:=V(H+O)+ Pn(x)dx Jo2 Resisting Forces: 02 FR := [ Pn(x) dx JH+O Fs = 16.2· klf FR = -22.4· klf Overturning Moments: M0 := r H (Dh + H-Y)·PA (y) dy+ ~ H (Dh + H-y)·Ps(y) dy+ ~ H (Dh + H-Y)·Pb(y) dy+ ~ H (Dh + H-y)·l ~0 0 0 0 Resisting Moments r 02 MR := 1 (H + Dh-Y)·Pn(Y) dy JH+O M0 = 114.4· kip MR = -162.9·kip Factor of Safety: ( FR ~ Slidding := if FSd ::; , "Ok" , "No Good: Increase Dh" ) Fs Slidding = "Ok" IFRI = 1.38 Fs ( MR Overturning:= if FSd::; Mo ~ , "Ok" , "No Good: Increase Dh" ) Overturning = "Ok" Cantilever H = 15', bm 15, 18.xmcdz Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Vertical Embedment Depth Axial Resistance Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 64 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 qa = 0· psf = Allowable soldier beam tip end bearing pressure fs = 600· psf = Allowable soldier skin friction Pr= O·kip = Applied axial load per beam p' := 'IT· dia if Pile = "Concrete Embed" =Applied axial load per beam r·(bf +d)] otherwise Allowable Axial Resistance d. 2 Q(y) := p'·fS·Y+ n· 1a ·qa if Pile = "Concrete Embed" 4 ( br d· qa) otherwise Dv:= c f-O·ft T f-Q(c) while T > 0 c f-c + O.IO·ft T f-Pr-Q(c) return c Selected Toe Depth Dtoe:= if(Dh;;:: Dv, Dh, Dv) Maximum Deflection D L':= H +-4 L' xt ( .6.:= -.1 Y·M'(y) dy E·lx Jo Cantilever H = 15', bm 15, 18.xmcdz = Effective length about pile rotation .6. = 0.63·in Dv =Oft Dh = 17ft Dtoe = 17ft Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Design Summary: Beam= "W24 x 84" H = 15ft Dtoe = 17ft H + Dtoe = 32ft dia = 30·in .6. = 0.63 ·in Cantilever H = 15', bm 15, 18.xmcdz Sb_No = "15, 18" = Soldier beam retained height = Minimum soldier beam embedment =Total length of soldier beam = Tributary width of soldier beam = Soldier beam shaft diameter = Maximum soldier beam deflection Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet~ of __ Date: June 8, 2016 Section 8 Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet__§_§_ot __ Date: June 8, 2016 Cantileverd Soldier Beam Design Sb_No:= "16-17" Soldier Beam Attributes & Properties Pile:= "Concrete Embed" H:= 15·ft = Soldier beam retained height X:= 0 Hs := 0· ft --> = Height of retained slope (As applicable) y:= 0 = Tributary width of soldier beam dia := 30·in = Soldier beam shaft diameter de':= dia = Effective soldier beam diameter below subgrade dt:=2·H =Assumed soldier beam embedment depth (Initial Guess) w_table := "n/a" = Depth below top of wall to design ground water table ASTM A992 (Grade 50) Shoring Design Section 20 E := 29000· ksi 10 1- Fy:= 50· ksi ASCE 7.2.4.1 (2) D+H+L r-- 1--Lateral Embedment Safety Factor -20 FSd := 1.25 -30 I -100 0 100 Cantilever H = 15', bm 16-17.xmcdz L __ : Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Soil Parameters Pa := 30·pcf Pp := 350· pcf p ·= "n/a" max· <1> := 30·deg - 1 be:= 0.08·deg ·<!>·de' a_ratio:~ min(~, I~ a_ratio = 1 qa := 0· psf fs := 600· psf "is:= 125·pcf = Active earth pressure = Passive earth pressure Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 6"7 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 =Maximum passive earth pressure ("n/a" =not applicable) = Passive pressure offset at subgrade = Internal soil friction angle (Below subgrade) = Effective soldier beam width below subgrade = Soldier beam arching ratio =Allowable soldier beam tip end bearing pressure = Allowable soldier skin friction = Soil unit weight Bouyant Soil Properties (As applicable) "iw := 62.4· pcf Pp' := Pp if w_table = "n/a" Pa' := Pa if w_table = "n/a" Cantilever H = 15', bm 16-17.xmcdz = Unit weight of water Submereged Pressures (As Applicable) Pp' = 350· pcf Pa' = 30·pcf ___ I Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Lateral Live Load Surcharge Uniform Loading Full:= 72· psf Partial:= 0· psf Hpar:= O-ft = Uniform loading full soldier beam height = Uniform loading partial soldier beam height = Height of partial uniform surcharge loading Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 68 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 Ps (y) := Full+ Partial if 0· ft ~ y ~ Hpar Full if Hpar < y ~ H Uniform surcharge profile per depth 0· psf otherwise Eccentric/Conncentric Axial & Lateral Point Loading Pr:= O·kip e:= 0-in Pr-e Me:=- xt Ph:= 0-lb zh:= O·ft =Applied axial load per beam = Eccentricity of applied compressive load =Eccentric bending moment = lateral pont load at depth "zh" = Distance to lateral point load from top of wall Seismic Lateral Load (Monobe-Okobe, Not Applicable) EFP := O·pcf Es:= EFP·H Eq(y) := Es Es - -· y if y ~ H H 0· psf otherwise Cantilever H = 15', bm 16-17.xmcdz = Seismic force equivalent fluid pressure = Maximum seismic force pressure =Maximum seismic force pressure Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Boussinesq Loading q := O·ksf x1 := O·ft z':=O·ft K := 0.50 &(y) := e2 (y) -e1 (y) Boussinesq Equation = Strip load bearing intensity Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 69 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 = Distance from bulkhead to closest edge of strip load = Distance from bulkhead to furthest edge of strip load = Distance below top of wall to strip load surcharge = Coefficient for flexural yeilding of members K = 1.00 (Rigid non-yielding) ( \ K = 0. 75 (Semi-rigid) x2 l K = 0.50 (Flexible) e2 (y) := atan Y) &(y) o:(y) := e1 (y) + -2- Pb(y) := O·psf if O·ft::;; y:s;; z' 2· q· K· 1r-1. ( & (y-z') -sin ( &(y-z')) ·cos (2·o:(y-z'))) if z' < y::;; H 0· psf otherwise Maximum Boussinesq Pressure l:l.y:= 5·ft Given d -Pb(l:l.y) = O·psf dl:l.y Pb(Find(l:l.y)) = O·psf H ~ Pb(y) dy= O·klf 0 Cantilever H = 15', bm 16-17.xmcdz Lateral Surcharge Loading Is.-----,---~----~----,--. 10 5 o~------~------~------========L_~ 0 w ~ @ w Pressure (psf) Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Marbrisa Eng: RPR SheetlQ_of __ Date: June 8, 2016 Resolve Forces Acting on Beam (Assume trial values) Z:= 6·ft 0:= dt a_ratio· P A (H) = 450· psf 0 = 1.3 ft Given Summation of Lateral Forces 2 jo ( H+O ( H r H+D r H+D r H +I, PE(y) dy+ L PA(y) dy+) Ps(y) dy+) Pb(y) dy+) Eq(y) dy+ :h JH J0 o o o t Summation of Moments ( H+D-z ( H+O ( H + 1, PE(Y)·(H + D-y) dy+ 1, PE(Y)·(H + D-y) dy+ L PA(Y)·(H + D-y) dy+ Me ... JH+O JH JO r H+D r H r H+D + Ps ( y) · ( H + D -y) dy + J Eq ( y) · ( H + D -y) dy + J Pb ( y) · ( H + D -y) dy + Ph · ( H + D -zh) )o o 0 xt ( z \ D /= Find(z, D) Z>O z = 3.1 ft D = 13.8 ft Cantilever H = 15', bm 16-17.xmcdz =0 Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 0 101-,-..._ ~ _., ...t:: ...... 0.. (]) Q -5x 103 Soldier Beam Pressure I I I I I ; I 0 5x 103 Pressure (psf) Shear/ft width o•r-------~r-------~--------~--------~ 10 c_ ---15 -10 -5 0 Shear (kif) Cantilever H = 151 , bm 16-17.xmcdz - 1x 104 5 Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheetl.L_of __ Date: June 8, 2016 Soil Pressures P A (H) = 450· psf PD(H +D)= -4822.2·psf PE(H + D) = -4372.2· psf PK ( H + D) = 10072.2· psf PJ(H +D)= 10072.2·psf Distance to zero shear (From top of Pile) c::= a~ H c: ~ V(a) while c: > 0 a~ a+ O.IO·ft c: ~ V(a) return a c: = 21.5 ft Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Determine Minimum Pile Size M(y) :~ ~ y V(y) dy +Me 0 AISC Steel Construction Manual 13th Edition Mmax = 284.5·kip·ft Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet "72 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 n := 1.67 = Allowable strength reduction factor AISC E1 & F1 ~() := 1.33 Fy·~rr Fb:= --n = Steel overstress for temporary loading =Allowable bending stress Required Section Modulus: Mmax z ·=--r· Fb Flexural Yielding, Lb < Zr = 85.7·in3 Beam= "W14 x 90" A= 26.5·in 2 d=14·in tw = 0.4·in Axial Stresses bf = 14.5·in tf= 0.7·in rx = 6.1·in Fy >..:=- Fe Lr Fb = 39.8· ksi K:= 1 Lu := H if Pile = "Concrete Embed" Zx = 157·in 3 e: otherwise IX= 999·in 4 2 7r ·E ( A. ) K·LU fly 0.658 ·Fy if --~ 4.71· - rx Fy =Nominal compressive stress-AISC E.3-2 & E3-3 (0.877·Fe) otherwise Fcr"A Pc:= --n =Allowable concentric force-AISC E.3-1 =Allowable bending moment-AISC F.2-1 Interaction:= [ Pr 8 (Mmax \l Pr Pc + 9. Ma JJ if Pc ~ 0"20 = AISC H1-1a & H1-1b (- Pr + Mmax l 2·Pc Ma ) otherwise Interaction= 0.55 Cantilever H = 15', bm 16-17 .xmcdz Ma = 521· kip· ft Mmax = 284.5· kip·ft Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Global Stability FSd = 1.25 = Minimum embedment depth factor of safety Embedment depth increase for min. FS Dh : = Ceil ( D, ft) + 2 · ft Slidding Forces: r H+Dh Fs:= V(H + 0) +I Pn(x) dx Jo2 Resisting Forces: r 02 FR :=I Pn(x) dx JH+O Overturning Moments: Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 73 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 Fs= 17.1·klf FR = -25.2· klf H H H H Mo : = I ( Dh + H -y). p A ( y) dy + ~ ( Dh + H -y). Ps ( y) dy + ~ ( Dh + H -y). Pb ( y) dy + rJ ( Dh + H -y). E ~0 0 0 0 ( H+O ( 0 ~ r H+Dh H + Dh -02 Ph +1, PE(y)dy· Dh-3")+ Pn(y)dy· +Me+-·(Dh+H-zh) JH JO 3 xt 2 Resisting Moments 02 MR := r (H + Dh-y)·Pn(Y) dy JH+O M0 = 110.1· kip MR = -169.2·kip Factor of Safety: ( FR ~ Slidding := if FSd :s:; "Ok" "No Good· Increase Dh" Fs ' ' · ) Slidding = "Ok" I FRI = 1.48 Fs [ MR Overturning:= if FSd :s:; - Mo , "Ok" , "No Good: Increase Dh" ) Overturning = "Ok" Cantilever H = 15', bm 16-17.xmcdz Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Vertical Embedment Depth Axial Resistance Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 7 4 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 qa = 0· psf = Allowable soldier beam tip end bearing pressure fs = 600· psf = Allowable soldier skin friction Pr= O·kip =Applied axial load per beam p' := 7i· dia if Pile = "Concrete Embed" [2·( bf + d)] otherwise =Applied axial load per beam Allowable Axial Resistance d. 2 Q(y) := p'.fs.y + 7i· 1a ·qa if Pile = "Concrete Embed" 4 ( br d· qa) otherwise Dv:= c: f-O·ft T f-Q(c) while T > 0 c: f-c: + 0.10·ft T f-Pr-Q(c:) return c: Selected Toe Depth Dtoe:= if(Dh ~ Dv, Dh, Dv) Maximum Deflection D L':= H +-4 Cantilever H = 15', bm 16-17.xmcdz = Effective length about pile rotation ..6. = 1.12·in Dv= Oft Dh = 16ft Dtoe = 16ft ~~ ___ } Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Design Summary: Beam= "W14 x 90" H = 15ft Dtoe = 16ft H + Dtoe = 31 ft dia = 30·in ~ = 1.12·in Cantilever H = 15', bm 16-17 .xmcdz Sb_No = "16-17" = Soldier beam retained height =Minimum soldier beam embedment =Total length of soldier beam = Tributary width of soldier beam = Soldier beam shaft diameter = Maximum soldier beam deflection Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 75 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 Section 9 Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 76 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 Cantileverd Soldier Beam Design Sb_No := "19" Soldier Beam Attributes £t Properties Pile:= "Concrete Embed" H:= 12·ft = Soldier beam retained height X:= 0 Hs := 0· ft --> = Height of retained slope (As applicable) y:= 0 = Tributary width of soldier beam dia := 24·in = Soldier beam shaft diameter de':= dia = Effective soldier beam diameter below subgrade dt:= 2·H =Assumed soldier beam embedment depth (Initial Guess) w_table := "n/a" = Depth below top of wall to design ground water table ASTM A992 (Grade 50) Shoring Design Section E := 29000· ksi 10 - Fy:= 50·ksi ASCE 7.2.4.1 (2) 0 - D+H+L -10 f-- Lateral Embedment Safety Factor -FSd:= 1.25 -20 I I -100 0 100 Cantilever H = 12', bm 19.xmcdz Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Soil Parameters Pa:= 30·pcf Pp := 350· pcf p ·= "n/a" max· <1> : = 30· deg - 1 be:= 0.08·deg ·<l>·de' a_ratio = 0.6 qa := O·psf fs := 600· psf = Active earth pressure = Passive earth pressure Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 77 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 =Maximum passive earth pressure ("n/a" = not applicable) = Passive pressure offset at subgrade = Internal soil friction angle (Below subgrade) = Effective soldier beam width below subgrade = Soldier beam arching ratio = Allowable soldier beam tip end bearing pressure = Allowable soldier skin friction = Soil unit weight Bouyant Soil Properties (As applicable) "'w := 62.4· pcf Pp' := Pp if w_table = "n/a" Pp ( -· "'s-1w) otherwise "'s Pa' := Pa if w_table = "n/a" Pa -·(1s-1w) otherwise "'s Cantilever H = 12', bm 19.xmcdz = Unit weight of water Submereged Pressures (As Applicable) Pp' = 350· pcf Pa' = 30·pcf Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Lateral Live Load Surcharge Uniform Loading Full:= 72· psf Partial:= 0· psf Hpar := O·ft = Uniform loading full soldier beam height = Uniform loading partial soldier beam height = Height of partial uniform surcharge loading Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 78 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 Ps(y):= Full+Partial if O·ft~y~Hpar Full if Hpar < y ~ H Uniform surcharge profile per depth O· psf otherwise Eccentric/Conncentric Axial& Lateral Point Loading Pr:= O·kip e:= O·in Pr·e Me:=-- xt Ph:= O·lb zh := O·ft =Applied axial load per beam = Eccentricity of applied compressive load =Eccentric bending moment = lateral pont load at depth "zh" = Distance to lateral point load from top of wall Seismic Lateral Load (Monobe-Okobe, Not Applicable) EFP:= O·pcf Es:= EFP·H Eq(y):= Es Es - -· y if y ~ H H 0· psf otherwise Cantilever H = 12', bm 19.xmcdz = Seismic force equivalent fluid pressure = Maximum seismic force pressure = Maximum seismic force pressure Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Boussinesq Loading q:= O·ksf z':=O·ft K := 0.50 Boussinesq Equation = Strip load bearing intensity Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 79 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 = Distance from bulkhead to closest edge of strip load = Distance from bulkhead to furthest edge of strip load = Distance below top of wall to strip load surcharge = Coefficient for flexural yeilding of members K = 1.00 (Rigid non-yielding) ( \ K = 0. 75 (Semi-rigid) x2 I K = 0.50 (Flexible) e2 (y) := atan Y) 1\(y) a(y) := e1 (y) + -2- Pb(y):= O·psf if O·ft~y~z· 2·q·K·TI-1·(1\(y-z')-sin(l\(y-z'))·cos(2·a(y-z'))) if z'< y~ H 0· psf otherwise Maximum Boussinesq Pressure D..y:= S·ft Given d -Pb(D..y) = O·psf db.y Pb(Find(D..y)) = O·psf H ~ Pb(y) dy = 0· klf 0 Cantilever H = 12', bm 19.xmcdz Lateral Surcharge Loading 10 20 40 60 Pressure (psf) 80 Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheetjill_of __ Date: June 8, 2016 Resolve Forces Acting on Beam (Assume trial values) z:= 6·ft D:= dt a_ratio·PA(H) = 216·psf 0 =I ft Given Summation of Lateral Forces ( H+O ( H r H+D r H+D r H Ph + 1, PE(y) dy+ L PA(y) dy+ J Ps(y) dy+ J Pb(y) dy+ J Eq(y) dy+- JH Jo o o o xt Summation of Moments r H+D-Z 1 H+O 1 H + 1, PE(Y)·(H + D-y) dy+ I PE(y)·(H + D-y) dy+ L PA(Y)·(H + D-y) dy+ Me ... JH+O JH JO r H+D r H r H+D + Ps ( y) · ( H + D -y) dy + J Eq ( y) · ( H + D -y) dy + J Pb ( y). ( H + D -y) dy + Ph. ( H + D -zh) Jo o o xt ( z \= Find (z, D) lo) Z>O z = 3.5ft D = 13.8ft Cantilever H = 12', bm 19.xmcdz =0 Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Soldier Beam Pressure o~--------~--------~--------~------~ 10 0 Pressure (psf) Shear/ft width o~----------~------------~----------~ 10 ~ ----10 -5 0 5 Shear (kif) Cantilever H = 12', bm 19.xmcdz Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet.§j_of __ Date: June 8, 2016 Soil Pressures PD(H +D)== -4840.2· psf PE(H +D)== -2688.1·psf PK ( H + D) == 9040.2· psf PJ(H +D)== 5424.1·psf Distance to zero shear (From top of Pile) c::= a~ H c: ~ V(a) while c: > 0 a~ a+ O.lO·ft c: ~ V(a) return a c: = 18.5ft Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Determine Minimum Pile Size M(y) := ~ y V(y) dy +Me 0 AISC Steel Construction Manual 13th Edition Mmax = 227.4· kip· ft Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet___§g_of __ Date: June 8, 2016 n := 1.67 = Allowable strength reduction factor AISC E1 & F1 .6.rr := 1.33 Fy· .6.rr Fb:= -- 0 = Steel overstress for temporary loading =Allowable bending stress Required Section Modulus: Mmax z ·=--r· Fb Flexural Yielding, Lb < Zr = 68.5·in3 Beam= "W18 x 50" A= 14.7·in 2 d = 18·in tw = 0.4·in Axial Stresses bf = 7.5·in tf = 0.6·in rx = 7.4·in Fy >.:=- Fe Lr Fb = 39.8· ksi K:= 1 Lu := H if Pile= "Concrete Embed" Z = 101·in 3 X e: otherwise I = 800·in 4 X 2 TI . E ( >. ) K·LU n; 0.658 · Fy if --:<::: 4.71· - rx Fy =Nominal compressive stress-AISC E.3··2 & E3-3 ( 0.877 ·Fe) otherwise Fcr"A Pc:= --n =Allowable concentric force-AISC E.3-1 =Allowable bending moment-AISC F.2-1 Interaction:= - + -. --I if -2 o.2o [ Pr 8 (Mmax ]l Pr Pc 9 Ma )J Pc = AISC H1-1a & H1-1b (- Pr + Mmax l otherwise 2·Pc Ma ) Interaction = 0.68 Cantilever H = 12', bm 19.xmcdz Ma == 335.2·kip·ft Mmax= 227.4·kip·ft Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Global Stability = Minimum embedment depth factor of safety Embedment depth increase for min. FS Dh := Ceil(D, ft) + 2·ft Sliddling Forces: r H+Dh Fs:= V(H + 0) +I Pn(x) dx Joz Resisting Forces: 02 FR := [ Pn(x) dx JH+O Overturning Moments: Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 83 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 Fs = 10.4· klf FR = ·-15.1·klf IH (H (H (H M0 :=L (Dh+H-y)·PA(y)dy+~ (Dh+H-y)·Ps(y)dy+~ (Dh+H-y)·Pb(y)dy+~ (Dh+H-y)·E ~0 0 0 0 r H+O ( 0 ~ [ H+Dh H + Dh -02 Ph +I PE(y)dy· Dh-3)+ Pn(y)dy· 3 +Me+-·(Dh+H-zh) JH Jo xt 2 Resisting Moments Oz MR : = r ( H + Dh -y) · P n ( y) dy JH+O M0 = 69.9· kip MR = -105.3·kip Factor of Safety: [ FR Slidding := if FSd ~ "Ok" "No Good· Increase Dh" Fs ' ' · ) Slidding = "Ok" I FRI = 1.46 Fs ( MR Overturning:= if FSd ~ Mo , "Ok" , "No Good: Increase Dh" ) Overturning = "Ok" Cantilever H = 12', bm 19.xmcdz ___ j Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Vertical Embedment Depth Axial. Resistance Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet~ of __ Date: June 8, 2016 qa == 0· psf =Allowable soldier beam tip end bearing pressure fs == 600· psf = Allowable soldier skin friction Pr == O·kip = Applied axial load per beam p' :== 11· dia if Pile = "Concrete Embed" =Applied axial load per beam [2·(bf +d)] otherwise Allowable Axial Resistance d. 2 Q(y) :== p'.fs·y+ 11· 1a · qa if Pile = "Concrete Embed" 4 ( br d· qa) otherwise Dv:== E f-O·ft T f-Q(E) while T > 0 E f-E + O.lO·ft T f-Pr-Q(e:) return e: Selected Toe Depth Dtoe:== if(Dh ~ Dv, Dh, Dv) Maximum Deflection D L':== H +- 4 L' xt ( .6.:= -.1 y·M'(y) dy E·lx Jo Cantilever H = 12', bm 19.xmcdz = Effective length about pile rotation .6. == 0.81·in Dv == 0 ft Dh == 16ft Dtoe == 16ft Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Design Summary: Beam = "Wl8 x 50" H = 12ft Dtoe = 16ft H + Dtoe = 28ft xt =8ft dia = 24·in .6. = 0.81·in Cantilever H = 12', bm 19.xmcdz Sb_No = "19" = Soldier beam retained height = Minimum soldier beam embedment = Total length of soldier beam = Tributary width of soldier beam = Soldier beam shaft diameter = Maximum soldier beam deflection Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet___QQ_of __ Date: June 8, 2016 ' -,, Section 10 Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Cantileverd Soldier Beam Design Sb_No := "20" Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 86 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 Soldier Beam Attributes & Properties Pile:= "Concrete Embed" H := 9·ft = Soldier beam retained height X:= 0 Hs := O·ft --> = Height of retained slope (As applicable) y:= 0 xt := 8·ft = Tributary width of soldier beam dia := 24·in = Soldier beam shaft diameter de':= dia = Effective soldier beam diameter below subgrade dt:= 2·H =Assumed soldier beam embedment depth (Initial Guess) w_table := "n/a" = Depth below top of wall to design ground water table ASTM A992 (Grade 50) Shoring Design Section I I E := 29000· ksi 10 1-- Fy := 50· ksi ASCE 7.2.4.1 (2) 0 - D+H+L Lateral Embedment Safety Factor -10 - FSd := 1.25 -50 0 50 Cantilever H = 9', bm 20.xmcdz Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Soil Parameters Pa := 30·pcf Pp := 350· pcf p ·= "n/a" max· <1> := 30· deg - 1 be:= 0.08· deg ·<I>· de' a_ratio:= min( be, 1) xt ) a_ratio = 0.6 qa := O· psf fs := 600· psf "'s := 125· pcf = Active earth pressure = Passive earth pressure Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 87 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 =Maximum passive earth pressure ("n/a" =not applicable) = Passive pressure offset at subgrade = Internal soil friction angle (Below subgrade) = Effective soldier beam width below subgrade = Soldier beam arching ratio = Allowable soldier beam tip end bearing pressure = Allowable soldier skin friction = Soil unit weight Bouyant Soil Properties (As applicable) '"'lw := 62.4· pcf Pp' := Pp if w_table = "n/a" Pp ) -·( "'s-'"'lw otherwise "'s Pa' := Pa if w_table = "n/a" Pa ( -. "'s-'"'~w) otherwise "'s Cantilever H = 9', bm 20.xmcdz = Unit weight of water Submereged Pressures (As Applicable) Pp' == 350· pcf Pa' == 30· pcf Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Lateral Live Load Surcharge Uniform Loading Full:= 72· psf Partial:= 0· psf Hpar:= O-ft = Uniform loading full soldier beam height = Uniform loading partial soldier beam height = Height of partial uniform surcharge loading Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet_§_§_of __ Date: June 8, 2016 Ps (y) := Full+ Partial if 0· ft ~ y ~ Hpar Full if Hpar < y ~ H Uniform surcharge profile per depth 0· psf otherwise Eccentric/Conncentric Axial &. Lateral Point Loading Pr:= O·kip e:= 0-in Pr-e Me:=-- xt Ph:= 0-lb zh:= O-ft = Applied axial load per beam = Eccentricity of applied compressive load =Eccentric bending moment = lateral pont load at depth "zh" = Distance to lateral point load from top of wall Seismic Lateral Load (Monobe-Okobe, Not Applicable) EFP := O·pcf Es:= EFP· H Eq(y):= Es Es - -· y if y ~ H H 0· psf otherwise Cantilever H = 9', bm 20.xmcdz = Seismic force equivalent fluid pressure = Maximum seismic force pressure = Maximum seismic force pressure Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Boussinesq Loading q:= O·ksf x 1 := O·ft z':= O·ft K:= 0.50 Boussinesq Equation = Strip load bearing intensity Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 89 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 = Distance from bulkhead to closest edge of strip load = Distance from bulkhead to furthest edge of strip load = Distance below top of wall to strip load surcharge = Coefficient for flexural yeilding of members K = 1.00 (Rigid non-yielding) ( \ K = 0. 75 (Semi-rigid) x2 1 K = 0.50 (Flexible) e2 (y) := atan y) &(y) a(y) := e1 (y) + -2- Pb(y):= 0-psf if 0-ft:s;y:s;z' 2·q·K·TI-1·(&(y-z')-sin(&(y-z'))·cos(2·a(y-z'))) if z' < y:s; H O· psf otherwise Maximum Boussinesq Pressure Ay:= 5·ft Given d -Pb(Ay) = 0-psf dAy Pb(Find(Ay)) = 0-psf ~ H Pb(y) dy~ O·klf 0 Cantilever H = 9', bm 20.xmcdz Lateral Surcharge Loading i ----[-- 1 I l I I -I 0,~---~----~------~-----L-~ 0 w ~ @ w Pressure (psf) Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 90 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 Resolve Forces Acting on Beam (Assume trial values) z:= 6·ft D := dt a_ratio·PA(H) = 162·psf 0 = 0.8ft Given Summation of Lateral Forces f H+O f H ( H+D ( H+D ( H +L PE(y)dy+L PA(y)dy+) Ps(y)dy+) Pb(y)dy+) Eq(y)dy+Ph JH Jo o o o xt Summation of Moments ( -PE(H + D-z) 12 p J ( H + D). z-) + r mE(z, D) mE(z, D) (PE(H + D-z) + mE(z, D)·Y)·(z-y) dy ... 6 jo f H+D-z ~ H+O ( H +I, PE(Y)·(H+D-y)dy+l PE(y)·(H+D-y)dy+L PA(Y)·(H+D-y)dy+Me ... JH+O JH JO ( H+D ( H ( H+D + I Ps ( y) · ( H + D -y) dy + IJ Eq ( y) . ( H + D -y) dy + IJ Pb ( y) . ( H + D -y) dy + ~Ph . ( H + D -zh) Jo o o xt (z 1 lD /= Find(z, D) Z>O z = 2 .. 8 ft D = 10.8 ft Cantilever H = 9', bm 20.xmcdz =0 Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Soldier Beam Pressure or-----------~----------~------------~ 5 10 Pressure (psf) Shear/ft width o.--------.---------.---------.--------~ Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheeti1.1_of __ Date: June 8, 2016 Soil Pressures P0 ( H + D) = -3778.4· psf PE(H+ D) =-2105·psf PK(H +D)= 6928.4·psf PJ(H +D)== 4157·psf Distance to zero shear (From top of Pile) c:·-a~ H 5 e ~ V(a) while c: > 0 a~ a+ O.IO·ft c: ~ V(a) return a E = 14.1 ft -6 -4 -2 0 2 Shear (klf) Cantilever H = 9', bm 20.xmcdz Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Determine Minimum Pile Size M(y) '~ ~ y V(y) dy +Me 0 AISC Steel Construction Manual 13th Edition Mmax = 108.2-kip·ft Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 92 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 n := 1.67 = Allowable strength reduction factor AISC E1 a F1 A<T := 1.33 Fy·A<T Fb:= -- 0 = Steel overstress for temporary loading =Allowable bending stress Required Section Modulus: Mmax Flexural Yielding, Lb < Zr = 32.6· in3 z ·=--r· Fb Lr Beam= "W16 x 36" Fb = 39.8· ksi 2 A= 10.6-in bf = 7-in K:= 1 Lu := H if Pile= "Concrete Embed" d = 15.9-in tw = 0.3·in Axial Stresses tf = 0.4-in rx = 6.5-in Fy >.:=- Fe Zx = 64-in 3 c otherwise IX= 448-in 4 2 TI . E Fe:=--- [ K·Lu '? rx ) ( >.. ) K·LU Hv 0.658 -Fy if --::;; 4.71· - rx Fy =Nominal compressive stress-AISC E.3··2 a E3-3 (0.877-Fe) otherwise =Allowable concentric force-AISC E.3-1 =Allowable bending moment-AISC F.2-1 Interaction:= [ Pr 8 [Mmax 11 Pr - + -. --I if -~ 0.20 Pc 9 Ma )J Pc = AISC H1-1a a H1-1b Ma == 212.4-kip·ft (- Pr + Mmax l otherwise 2·Pc Ma ) Interaction= 0.51 Mmax = 108.2-kip-ft Cantilever H = 9', bm 20.xmcdz Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Global Stability FSd = 1.25 = Minimum embedment depth factor of safety Embedment depth increase for min. FS Dh:= Ceil(D, ft) + l·ft Slidding Forces: ( H+Dh Fs:= V(H + 0) + 1, Pn(x) dx JQ2 Resisting Forces: Overturning Moments: Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 93 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 Fs = 6.3-klf FR = -8.2· klf (H H H H Mo: = L ( Dh + H -y). p A ( y) dy + ~ ( Dh + H -y). Ps ( y) dy + r) ( Dh + H -y). Pb ( y) dy + r) ( Dh + H -y). E ~0 0 0 0 ( H+O ( 0 1 ( H+Dh H + Dh -02 Ph +1, PE(y)dy· Dh-3)+1, Pn(y)dy· +Me+-·(Dh+H-zh) JH Jo 3 xt 2 Resisting Moments 02 MR := r (H + Dh-Y)·Pn(Y) dy JH+O M0 = 32.5· kip MR = -43.8· kip Factor of Safety: ( FR 1 Slidding := if FSd :S: , "Ok" , "No Good: Increase Dh" ) Fs Slidding = "Ok" IFRI = 1.32 Fs ( MR Overturning:= if FSd :s: Mo 1 , "Ok" , "No Good: Increase Dh" ) Overturning = "Ok" Cantilever H = 9', bm 20.xmcdz Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Vertical Embedment Depth Axial Resistance Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 94 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 qa = O·psf = Allowable soldier beam tip end bearing pressure fs = 600· psf = Allowable soldier skin friction Pr= O·kip = Applied axial load per beam p': = TI· dia if Pile = "Concrete Embed" [ 2 · ( bf + d)] otherwise = Applied axial load per beam Allowable Axial Resistance d. 2 Q(y) := p'·fS·Y + TI· 1a ·qa if Pile = "Concrete Embed" 4 ( bf d· qa) otherwise Dv:= c: +--O·ft T +--Q(c:) while T > 0 c +--c: + O.IO·ft T +--Pr-Q(c:) return c: Selected Toe Depth Dtoe:= if(Dh;:::: Dv, Dh, Dv) Maximum Deflection D L':= H +- 4 L" xt ( .6. := -.1 y·M'(y) dy E·lx Jo Cantilever H = 9', bm 20.xmcdz = Effective length about pile rotation .6. = 0.4· in Dv =Oft Dh =12ft Dtoe = 12ft Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Design Summary: Beam= "Wl6 x 36" H=9ft Dtoe = 12ft H + Dtoe = 21 ft dia = 24·in .6. = 0.4· in Cantilever H = 9', bm 20.xmcdz Sb_No = "20" = Soldier beam retained height = Minimum soldier beam embedment =Total length of soldier beam = Tributary width of soldier beam = Soldier beam shaft diameter = Maximum soldier beam deflection Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 95 of __ Date: June 8, 2016 -_I I - J Section 11 Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Handrail Design Handrail Design in Accordance with 2010 CBC & Cal-OSHA Requirements (A) 200lb concentrated load applied in any direction at the top handrail, CBC 1607.7 (B) 50plfuniform excempt per Cal Osha & CBC Exemption 1607.7.1 (1) Marbrisa Engr: RPR Date: 06/8/16 Sheet: 96 of __ _ H:=44·in = Maximum handrail height-CAL/OSHA Title 8, Section 1620 P:= 200·1b = Handrail concentrated load -CBC 1607.7 .1.1 Load Conditions Concentrated load shall be checked against both x-x & y-y geometric axis in addition to minor axis principle direction (Least radius of gyration) P = 2001b Minimum concentrated load applied at an direction at top of member-CBC 1607.7.1.1 M := p. H ---> Maximum design bending moment M = 8.8· in· kip Angle Iron Properties Member:= "L2 x 2 x 3/8" Fy:= 36·ksi b:= 2·in 3 t:= -·in 8 lz := 0.203· in 4 E := 29000· ksi J := 0.0658· in 4 A:= 1.36· in2 Handrail Design.xmcd , __ ) '. _ _I Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Geometric Bending -AISC F1 0 ---> cb := 1 cantilever Leg Local Buckling -AISC F10.3 Local Stability: AISC Table B4.1 b - = 5.33 t 0.54· {E = 15.33 ~FY ( b {E \ Leg:= if t ~ 0.54· ~ FY, "Compact" , "Non-compact") Unstiffened Leg = "Compact" Lateral Torsional Buckling-AISC F10.2 Marbrisa Engr: RPR Date: 06/8/16 Sheet: 97 of __ _ My:= Sc·Fy = Yield moment about minor principle axis My= 10-in-kip Lu:= H = Laterally unbraced length of member Elastic Lateral-Torsional Buckling Moment. AISC F10.2 ( 4 ' 1.25· 0.66-E·b ·t-CbJ·[ Lu2 Me:= min ( 4 ' 1.25· 0.66·E·b ·t·CbJ ·[ Lu2 Governing limit state ( 0.17·Me \ Me:= 0.92-·Me if Me~ My My ) min[(1.92-1.17· {My\. My, 1.5· MJl otherwise ~Me) J = Limiting tension or compression toe Lateral torsional restrain at point of max moment AISC Fl0.2(ii) M = 8.8· in· kip Me= 15· in· kip Bending = "Ok" Handrail Design.xmcd Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Principle Axis Bending -AISC F1 0 Yielding Limit State-AISC F10.1 = Yield moment about minor principle axis My= 8.2· in· kip Lu=44-in = Laterally unbraced length of member Lateral Torsional Buckling ---> Cb = 1 cantilever 2 2 0.46-E·b -t ·Cb Me:=------ Lu = Elastic Lateral-Torsional Buckling Moment-AISC F10-5 ( 0.17·Me) Me:= 0.92-·Me if Me::; My My ) M = 8.8· in· kip min[(1.92-1.17· [M;'l_ My, 1.5· MJl otherwise ~Me) J Me= 12.3· in· kip Flexure = "Ok" Shearing Stresses -AISC G4 e := b ---> Maximum eccentricity P-e·t P f :=--+- v J b·t = Maximum shearing stress (Directional eccentricity included) fv = 2.55· ksi ---> Ok Marbrisa Engr: RPR Date: 06/8/16 Sheet: 98 of __ _ Handrail Design.xmcd Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Concentric Compression The effects of eccentricity are addressed according to AISC E5 effective slenderness ratios K := 1.2 ---> Effective length factor K-Lu --= 89.34 Leg = "Compact" rx 0.75-Lu K-Lu Slenderness:= 72 + if --:-;:; 80 rx rx 1.25· Lu 32 + otherwise 7/E Fe:=------2 (Slenderness) Fy )\:=- Fe Marbrisa Engr: RPR Date: 06/8/16 Sheet: 99 of --- )1. ~ 0.658 -Fy if Slenderness:-;:; 4.71· -Fy = Nominal compressive stress -AISC E.3-2 & E3-3 0.877· Fe otherwise = Concentric compressive strength-AISC E.3-1 Pc = 21490-lb Compression = "Ok" Concentric Tension Rupture strength & block shear negligible ... 200lb tension load checked agains yield T:= Fy·A = Concentric tensile strength -AISC 02 T= 49-kip Tens ion = "Ok" Handrail Design.xmcd '·-_i Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Angle Iron Connection Weld Properties Weld := "Fillet" F exx := 70· ksi = Electrode classification Marbrisa Engr: RPR Date: 06/8/16 Sheet: i 00 of --- n := 2.00 = Fillet weld safety factor loaded in plane, AISC J2.4 4 t := -.in = Weld thickness (2) longitudinal welds w 16 12 t6 := -·tw =Fillet weld effective throat 2 Lw := 4· in = Length of weld along angle member ( 2 i'l Lw· 3·b + Lw ) I:= ·te Lw C:=- 2 6 Weld bending stress 0.60· Fexx Fa:=---0 = Weld group moment of inertia = Centroid of weld group = Applied bending stress =Allowable weld stress AISC J2.4 Weld:= if( fb :-::; F8 , "Ok", "No Good") F8 =21·ksi AISC J2.2b min_w1eld = 0.19·in max_weld = 0.31·in fb = 5.8·ksi Weld= "Ok" USE: ASTM A36, Grade 36 -L.2 x 2 x 3/8" Angle Welded 4" along soldier beam with 3/8" diameter wire rope. Handrail Design.xmcd Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Service Conditions -Deflection Marbrisa Engr: RPR Date: 06/8/16 Sheet: i 01 of __ _ = Minimum deflected height of guardrail system under applied load = Maximum member deflection under concentrated point load ~ = 0.96·in dH := J Lu2 -~2 = Vertical height of deflected member Deflection:= if( Hmin s dH, "Ok" , "No Good") dH = 43.99· in Deflection = "Ok" Handrail Design.xmcd Section 12 Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Lagging Geometry Lagging = "3x12, DF#2" L:=8·ft b:= 1·ft shaft:= 24· in S:= L-shaft s =6ft Soil Parameters <!> := 30· deg c := 100· psf '"'(:= 125·pcf 2 1T·S area:=-- 8 Timber Lagging Design = Soldier beam center to center space = Lagging width = Min. drill shaft backfill diameter = Lagging clear span = Internal soil friction angle (Weighted avg.) = Soil cohesion (Conservative) = Soil unit weight = Active earth pressure coefficient = Silo cross sectional area (See figure) Lagging soil wedge functions W(z) := area·J'·Z =Columnar silo vertical surcharge pressure fs(z) := ka·J'·tan(<!>)·z + c =Soil column side friction W:= O·psf =Additional wedge surcharge pressure Surcharge : = 151.3 · psf = Lateral surcharge pressure Timber Lagging Design_3x12.xmcdz D Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 1 02 of __ Date: 6/9/2016 ll dzJ-~L~ fs l ~---+<=:::---., ___ ' 1-~,.::o---·--t; Lf_~J ' Soil Wedge Geometry ka = 0.33 2 area= 14.1 ft Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Maximum Lagging Design Pressure Summing forces vertically 1T· s r z Fv(z) := W(z) + w-area--·) fs(z) dz 2 0 Summing forces horizontally ka·"f·S . !.::. Fv(z)·ka P(z) := ---c·y ka + Surcharge+ --- 2 area Given, inital guess: z:= 3-ft d Taking partial derivative with respect to z: -P(z) = 0 D := Find (z) "(·S-4·C ------= 3.6ft ( 4·"(· ka· tan ( <P)) Maximum design pressure P max= 253.9· psf Sectional Properties Lagging = "3xl2, DF#2" d = 3-in A:= b{d-~-in) dz D = 3.6ft =Maximum lagging pressure = Lagging thickness = Section modulus (Rough Sawn) Q Vl 0.. '-" ~ !:l Vl Vl ~ l-< t:J... ........ ....... 0 CZl = Lagging cross sectional area (Rough Sawn) Timber Lagging Design_3x12.xmcdz 8x 103 6><103 4x103 2><103 0 I Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 1 03 of __ Date: 6/9/2016 Depth to critical tension crack & maximum lagging design pressure Soil Pressure 2 4 6 Lagging Length ( ft) Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Allowable Stress Design Maximum lagging stresses Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 1 04 of __ Date: 6/9/2016 Shear & Moment Diagrams 6x 1 o4.------.-------.------.,----------, =Maximum bending moment V max:= V ( 0.5· shaft) =Maximum shear force Mmax = 1460.1·ft·lbf V max= 507.9lbf Mmax fb:= -- Sm 3 Vmax fv:= -·--2 A --- ' ' 0,~-----~'~,~,--,----~ ... ______ _ -2x to4·L_ __ _L_ __ _...L ___ __J __ ___J 0 2 4 6 8 Lagging Length ( ft) NOS Allowable Stress & Adjustment Factors Fb = 900 psi = Allowable flexural stress_NDS Table 4A Fv:= 180·psi =Allowable shear stress_NDS Table 4A = Load duration factor_NDS Figure B1, Appendix B = Repetative member factor_NDS 4.3.9 = Flat-use factor = Size factor = Temprature factor_NDS Table 2.3.3 = Incising factor = Beam stability factor (Flat) CF Fb = 900 psi Maximum Design Stress = Wet service factor fb = 1158.4 psi 0.85 otherwise fv = 23.1 psi Timber Lagging Design_3x12.xmcdz Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Tabulated Stresses Bending Stress Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet i 05 of __ Date: 6/9/2016 = Tabulated bending stress_NDS Table 4. 3.1 Bending:= if(fb ~ Fb', "Ok", "No Good") Fb' = 1366 psi fb = 1158· psi Bending = "Ok" Shear Stress =Tabulated shear stress_NDS Table 4.3.1 Shear:= if ( fv ~ Fv', "Ok" , "No Good" ) Fv' = 198 psi fv = 23.1 psi Anticipated Deflection E = 1600000 psi (d-±·in) I : = Sm· ....:._ __ ____::_ 2 ( 0.5-L .6.. := - 1 .I M(x)·x dx E·l J0 .6.. = O.S·in Timber Lagging Design_3x12.xmcdz Shear= "Ok" = Modulus of elasticity_NDS Table 4A =Moment of inertia (Rough Sawn) Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Lagging Geometry Lagging = "4x12, DF#2" L:=8·ft b:= 1·ft shaft:= 24· in S:= L-shaft s =6ft Soil Parameters <!> := 30· deg c:= 100· psf "'{:= 125·pcf ka:= tan(45·deg-: J 2 TI· S area:=--8 Timber Lagging Design = Soldier beam center to center space = Lagging width = Min. drill shaft backfill diameter = Lagging clear span = Internal soil friction angle (Weighted avg.) = Soil cohesion (Conservative) = Soil unit weight = Active earth pressure coefficient = Silo cross sectional area (See figure) Lagging soil wedge functions W(z) := area·"f·Z =Columnar silo vertical surcharge pressure fs(z) := ka·"{·tan(<!>)·z + c =Soil column side friction W:= O·psf =Additional wedge surcharge pressure Surcharge:= 395.5 · psf = Lateral surcharge pressure Timber Lagging Design_ 4x12.xmcdz D Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 1 06 of __ Date: 6/9/2016 F w i v tfj~ dz Y--t~ z ; t Soil Wedge Geometry ka =' 0.33 2 area= 14.1 ft Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Maximum Lagging Design Pressure Summing forces vertically 71· s r z Fv(z) := W(z) + w-area--·) fs(z) dz 2 0 Summing forces horizontally ka·"f·S . r.:: Fv(z)·ka P(z) := ---c·y ka+ Surcharge+_.:....__:___ 2 area Given , inital guess: z:= 3·ft d Takingpartialderivativewithrespecttoz: -P(z) = 0 D:= Find(z) "f·S-4·C ------= 3.6ft ( 4 · 1 · ka· tan ( c:p) ) Maximum design pressure P max= 498.1· psf Sectional Properties Lagging= "4xl2, DF#2" d = 4-in 6 A:= b{d-~-in) dz D = 3.6ft = Maximum lagging pressure = Lagging thickness = Section modulus (Rough Sawn) -...... 0 Vl = Lagging cross sectional area (Rough Sawn) Timber Lagging Design_ 4x12.xmcdz Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet i 07 of __ Date: 6/9/20 16 Depth to critical tension crack & maximum lagging design pressure Soil Pressure Lagging Length (ft) Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Allowable Stress Design Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 1 08ot __ Date: 6/9/2016 Maximum lagging stresses Shear & Moment Diagrams =Maximum bending moment V max:= V ( 0.5· shaft) = Maximum shear force Mmax = 2864.2· ft·lbf V max = 996.3 lbf Mmax fb:= -- Sm 3 Vmax fv:= -.-- 2 A NDS Allowable Stress & Adjustment Factors Fb = 900 psi = Allowable flexural stress_NDS Table 4A Fv:= 180·psi = Allowable shear stress_NDS Table 4A Lagging Length ( ft) =Load duration factor_NDS Figure B1, Appendix B = Repetative member factor _NDS 4. 3. 9 = Flat-use factor = Size factor = Temprature factor_NDS Table 2.3.3 = Incising factor = Beam stability factor (Flat) CF· Fb = 990 psi Maximum Design Stress = Wet service factor fb = 1222.1 psi 0.85 otherwise fv = 33.2 psi Timber Lagging Design_ 4x12.xmcdz ... _____ _ Shoring Design Group 7755 Via Francesco Unit 1 San Diego, CA 92129 Tabulated Stresses Bending Stress Marbrisa Eng: RPR Sheet 109 of __ Date: 6/9/2016 =Tabulated bending stress_NDS Table 4.3.1 Bending:= if ( fb :s; Fb', "Ok" , "No Good" ) Fb' = 1378 psi fb = 1222· psi Bending = "Ok" Shear Stress =Tabulated shear stress_NDS Table 4.3.1 Shear:= if(fv :s; Fv', "Ok", "No Good") Fv' = 198 psi fv = 33.2psi Anticipated Deflection E = 1600000 psi (d-~·in) I:=Sm·_::.._ __ ____::_ 2 r 0.5-L il:= -1 · M(x)·x dx E·l J0 il = 0.4·in Timber Lagging Design_ 4x12.xmcdz Shear= "Ok" = Modulus of elasticity_NDS Table 4A =Moment of inertia (Rough Sawn) Section 13 Shoring Design Group Project: Marbrisa Soldier Beam ft Tieback Schedule 6/8/2016 Revision 0 From To Beam Beam Beam Beam; Qty Section 1 1 1 W 12 X 26 2 2 1 W 18 X 65 3 3 1 W 14x 30 4 8 5 W16x40 9 13 5 W 14x 30 14 14 1 W 14 X 30 15 15 1 W 24x 84 16 17 2 W14x 90 18 18 1 W24x 84 19 19 1 W 18 X 50 20 20 1 W 16 X 36 21 21 1 W 12 X 26 Shored Height H 5.0 13.0 16.0 25.0 17.0 16.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 12.0 9.0 5.0 Toe Total Toe Tieback No. of Depth Drill Diameter Diameter Tiebacks/ Depth Restraints D Dshaft 10.0 15.0 24 CANT CANT 17.0 30.0 24 CANT CANT 14.0 30.0 24 6 1 10.0 35.0 24 6 1 8.0 25.0 24 6 1 9.0 25.0 24 6 1 17.0 32.0 30 CANT CANT 17.0 32.0 30 CANT CANT 17.0 32.0 30 CANT CANT 16.0 28.0 24 CANT CANT 13.0 zz.o 24 CANT CANT 10.0 15.0 24 CANT CANT 4 '10 Distance Distance Tieback! Number of Lock-off Test Couper Un-bonded Bonded Total Top of Beam last Rest. Restraint Strands Load Load Distance Length Length Length To Restraint #1 to Subgr. Angle 51 52 TB #1 TB#1 TB#1 TB#1 TB #1 TB#1 TB#1 TB#1 deg_~"~" -~ --- CANT CANT CANT CANT 6.50 9.50 25 3 51 66 15 20 35 8.00 17.00 25 4 118 153 15 23 38 6.50 10.50 25 3 51 66 15 20 35 6.50 9.50 25 3 51 66 15 20 35 CANT CANT CANT CANT CANT CANT CANT CANT CANT CANT CANT CANT , __ j Section 14 ! d ', ) j I GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION Marbrisa Resorts Phase Ill Grand Pacific Resorts Carlsbad, California Prepared For: Grand Pacific Resorts 5900 Pasteur Court, Suite 200 Carlsbad, California 92008 Prepared By: MTGL, Inc. 6295 Ferris Square, Suite C San Diego, California 92121 April24, 2015 MTGL Project No. 1916All MTGL Log No. 15-1063 1 '". April24, 2015 Grand Pacific Resorts 5900 Pasteur Court, Suite 200 Carlsbad, California 92008 Attention: Mr. Houston Arnold MTGL Project No. 1916All MTGL Log No. 15-1 063 Subject: GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III Grand Pacific Resorts Carlsbad, California Dear Mr. Arnold: In accordance with your request and authorization we have completed a Geotechnical Investigation for the subject site. We are pleased to present the following report which addresses both engineering geologic and geotechnical conditions including a description of the site conditions, results of our field exploration and laboratory testing, and our conclusions and recommendations for grading and foundations design. Based on our investigation, the site will be suitable for construction, provided the recommendations presented herein are incorporated into the plans and specifications for the proposed construction. Details related to geologic conditions, seismicity, site preparation, foundation design, and construction considerations are also included in the subsequent sections of this report. We appreciate this opportunity to be of continued service and look forward to providing additional consulting services during the planning and construction of the project. Should you have any questions regarding this report, please do not hesitate to contact us at your convenience. Respectfully submitted, MTGL, Inc. /t-.(, San1 E. Valdez, RCE 56226, GE 2813 Vice President Engineering Page i of iii 1urlr<U Ht::~.~HTr'l'tl'hoU.Pr-Hll cks, CE G 13 23 Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III -Geotechnical Investigation Carlsbad, California TABLE OF CONTENTS MTGL Project No. 1916All MTGL Log No. 15-1063 1.00 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................... l 1.01 PLANNED CONSTRUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1 1.02 SCOPE OF WORK ........................................................................................................................... 1 1. 03 SITE DESCRIPTION ......................................................................................................................... 1 1.04 FIELD INVESTIGATION ................................................................................................................... 2 1.05 LABORATORYTESTING ................................................................................................................. 3 2.00 FINDINGS ............................................................................................................. e .•••••••••••••••••••••••• 4 2.01 REGIONAL GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS .............................................................................................. 4 2.02 SITE GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS ........................................................................................................ 4 2.03 GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS ........................................................................................................ 5 2.04 FAULTING AND SEISMICITY··········································································································· 5 2.05 LIQUEFACTIONPOTENTIAL ............................................................................................................. 6 2.06 LANDSLIDES .................................................................................................................................... 6 2.07 TSUNAMI AND SEICHE HAzARD ..................................................................................................... 6 3.00 CONCLUSIONS··································································································~························· 7 3.01 GENERAL CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................... 7 3.02 EARTHQUAKE ACCELERATIONS\ CBC SEISMIC PARAMETERS ..................................................... 7 3.03 EXPANSION POTENTIAL ................................................................................................................ 8 4.00 RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................................. 9 4. 01 EXCAVATION CHARACTERISTICS/SHRINKAGE ............................................................................. 9 4.02 SETTLEMENT CONSIDERATIONS ................................................................................................... 9 4.03 SITE CLEARING RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................................................................... 10 4.04 SITE GRADING RECOMMENDATIONS-STRUCTURES .................................................................. 10 4.05 SITE GRADING RECOMMENDATIONS-CUT/FILL TRANSITION .................................................. 11 4.06 SITE GRADING RECOMMENDATIONS-HARDSCAPE AND PAVEMENTS ...................................... 11 4.07 COMPACTIONREQUIREMENTS .................................................................................................... 11 4.08 FILL MATERIALS ......................................................................................................................... 11 4.09 SWIMMING POOLS ....................................................................................................................... 12 4.10 SLOPES ........................................................................................................................................ 12 4.11 FOUNDATIONS ............................................................................................................................. 13 4.12 CONCRETE SLABS ON GRADE AND MISCELLANEOUS FLATWORK ............................................. 13 4.13 PREWETTINGRECOMMENDATION .............................................................................................. 15 4.14 CORROSIVITY .............................................................................................................................. 15 4.15 RETAINING WALLS ..................................................................................................................... 15 4.16 FOUNDATION SETBACKS ............................................................................................................. 17 4.17 pAVEMENT DESIGN ..................................................................................................................... 17 4.17.1 ASPHALT CONCRETE ............................................................................................................... 17 4.17.2 PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE ............................................................................................. 18 4.18 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS ............................................................................................. 18 4.18.1 MOISTURE SENSITIVE SOILS/WEATHER RELATED CONCERNS ................................................. 18 Page ii of iii 6295 Fcnis Square, Suite C' San Diego, C' A 92121 (858) 537-3999 Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III -Geotechnical Investigation Carlsbad, California MTGL Project No. 1916All MTGL Log No. 15-1063 4.18.2 DRAINAGE AND GROUNDWATER CONSIDERATIONS ................................................................ 19 4.18. 4 UTILITY TRENCHES ................................................. ····· .......................................................... 21 4.18.5 SITEDRAINAGE ...................................................................................................................... 22 4.19 GEOTECHNICAL OBSERVATION/TESTING OF EARTHWORK OPERATIONS .................................. 22 5.00 LIMITATIONS ........................................................................................................................... 23 ATTACHMENTS: Figure 1 -Proposed Development Plan Figure 2-Rough Topo Map Figure 3 -Geologic Cross Section (A-A') Figure 4-Geologic Cross Section (B-B') Figure 5-Geologic Cross Section (C-C') Figure 6-Geologic Cross Section (D-D') Figure 7-Geologic Cross Section (E-E') Figure 8-Retaining Wall Drainage Detail Appendix A-References Appendix B-Field Exploration Program Appendix C -Laboratory Test Procedures Appendix D -Standard Earthwork and Grading Specifications Page iii of iii 6295 Ferris Square, Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III -Geotechnical Investigation Carlsbad, California 1.00 INTRODUCTION MTGL Project No. 1916All MTGLLogNo.15-1063 In accordance with your request and authorization, MTGL, Inc. has completed a Geotechnical Investigation for the subject site. The following report presents a summary of our findings, conclusions and recommendations based on our investigation, laboratory testing, and engineering analysis. 1.01 Planned Construction It is our understanding that the Phase III Project will include construction of a total of six villa buildings that range from two to four stories, two four-story hotel buildings, a one-story restaurant/lobby/meeting building, two one-story maintenance/back of hotel buildings, and a potential two-story parking garage. Other improvements at the site are to include automobile parking, concrete hardscape, swimming pool, and associated underground utilities. The proposed development is shown on the Proposed Development Plan, Figure 1. 1.02 Scope of Work The scope of our geotechnical services included the following: • Review of geologic, seismic, ground water and geotechnical literature. • Logging, sampling and backfilling of 13 exploratory borings drilled with an 8-inch diameter hollow stem auger drill rig to a maximum depth of 51 Yz feet below existing grades and 19 exploratory test pits with a mini-excavator to a maximum depth of 10 feet below existing grade. Appendix B presents a summary ofthe field exploration program. • Laboratory testing of representative samples (See Appendix C). • Geotechnical engineering review of data and engineering recommendations. • Preparation of this report summarizing our findings and presenting our conclusions and recommendations for the proposed construction. 1.03 Site Description The project is located along Grand Pacific Drive, south of Cannon Road, in Carlsbad, California. The Proposed Development Plan, Figure 1, shows the site and proposed development layout. The site is bordered on the north by Cannon Road, on the west by undeveloped land, on the south by previous development within the Grand Pacific Resorts, and on the east descending slopes. Grand Pacific Drive runs through the site in a north-south direction. Page 1 of23 6295 Fcn·is Square, Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III -Geotechnical Investigation Carlsbad, California MTGLProjectNo. 1916All MTGL Log No. 15-1063 Portions of the site were part of previous grading activities which created relatively level pads graded so that sheet flow would take rainwater to a detention basin. Portions of the site are being used as agricultural fields growing flowers while the remainder of the site is barren. There is a large stockpile of soil on the northeastern portion of the development. The stockpile of materials is from previous grading activities within the entire Marbrisa Grand Resorts development. Figure 2, Rough Topo Map, was generated using the 'As-Built' conditions following the previous grading activities. Figure 2 does not accurately represent the topography of the entire site since it does not show the stockpile of the soil that was generated from previous grading activities. 1.04 Field Investigation Prior to the field investigation, a site reconnaissance was performed by an engineer from our office to mark the boring and test pit locations, as shown on the Proposed Development Plan, and to evaluate the borings and test pits exploration locations with respect to obvious subsurface structures and access for the drilling rig. Underground Service Alert was then notified of the marked location for utility clearance. Our subsurface investigation consisted of drilling test borings utilizing a truck mounted drill rig equipped with an 8-inch diameter hollow stem auger and excavating test pits with a track mounted mini-excavator. See Appendix B for further discussion of the field exploration including logs of test borings and test pits. Borings were logged and sampled using Modified California Ring (Ring) and Standard Penetration Test (SPT) samplers at selected depth intervals. Samplers were driven into the bottom of the boring with successive drops of a 140-pound weight falling 30 inches. Blows required driving the last 12 inches of the 18-inch Ring and SPT samplers are shown on the boring logs in the "blows/foot" column (Appendix B). SPT was performed in the borings in general accordance with the American Standard Testing Method (ASTM) D1586 Standard Test Method. Representative bulk soil samples were also obtained from our borings and test pits. Each soil sample collected was inspected and described in general conformance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). The soil descriptions were entered on the boring logs. All samples were sealed and packaged for transportation to our laboratory. 6295 Fen·is Square, Suite C Page 2 of23 Afi~U~~l San D~~~og)~~7~~~~~ Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III -Geotechnical Investigation Carlsbad, California 1.05 Laboratory Testing MTGLProjectNo.l916All MTGLLogNo.15-1063 Laboratory tests were performed on representative samples to verify the field classification of the recovered samples and to determine the geotechnical properties of the subsurface materials. All laboratory tests were performed in general conformance with ASTM or State of California Standard Methods. The results of our laboratory tests are presented in Appendix C of this report. Page 3 of23 6295 Fcn·is Square, Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III -Geotechnical Investigation Carlsbad, California 2.00 FINDINGS 2.01 REGIONAL GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS MTGL Project No. 1916A11 MTGLLogNo. 15-1063 The site is located in the coastal portion of the Peninsular Range Province of California. This area of the Peninsular Range Province has undergone several episodes of marine inundation and subsequent marine regression throughout the last 54 million years, which has resulted in the deposition of a thick sequence of marine and nonmarine sedimentary rocks on the basement rock of the Southern California Batholith. Gradual emergence of the region from the sea occurred in Pleistocene time, and numerous wave-cut platforms, most of which were covered by relatively thin marine and nonmarine terrace deposits, formed as the sea receded from the land. Accelerated fluvial erosion during periods of heavy rainfall, coupled with the lowering of the base sea level during Quaternary times, resulted in the rolling hills, mesas, and deeply incised canyons which characterize the landforms in the general site vicinity today. 2.02 SITE GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS As observed during this investigation, and our review of geotechnical maps, the site is underlain at depth by Quaternary-aged Old Paralic Deposits, Unit 2-4 Undivided (QoP2-4) and Tertiary-aged Santiago Formation (Tsa). Previously placed engineered fill materials were encountered above the formational materials. Logs of the subsurface conditions encountered in our borings are provided in Appendix B. Generalized descriptions of the materials encountered during this investigation are presented below. Geologic Cross Sections are shown on Figures 3 thru 7. The Geologic Cross Sections were prepared using the information obtained from the Rough Topo Map, Figure 2. Previously placed fill soils were encountered in all borings and test pits, except for Test Pit numbers 1 and 13, and extended up to 15'l'2 feet below existing grade. As observed in our borings and test pits, the fill materials consisted of Silty Sand (SM), Clayey Sand (SC), Sandy Clay (CL), and Sandy Fat Clay (CH). The fills ranged in color from brown, reddish brown, and yellowish brown. In general, the sands were fine to coarse grained, loose to medium dense and the clays were medium plasticity and were firm to hard. Some organics and gravels were encountered in the fills. Quaternary-aged Old Paralic Deposits, Unit 2-4 Undivided (Q0p2-4) [formerly Terrace Deposits] was encountered in all the borings and test pits at depths that ranged from existing ground surface to 35 feet below existing grade. As observed in our explorations, the Old Paralic Deposits consisted of Silty Sandstone 'SM', Poorly Graded Sandstone with Silt 'SP-SM', Sandy Claystone 'CL', and Claystone 'CL'. Colors ranged from reddish brown, dark brown, light brown, orangish brown, Page 4 of23 6295 Ferris Square, Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III -Geotechnical Investigation Carlsbad, California MTGL Project No. 1916All MTGLLogNo.15-1063 yellowish brown, reddish brown with black, and gray. The sandy materials were fine to coarse grained, moist, and moderately cemented. The clayey materials encountered were medium plasticity, moist, and moderately indurated. In general, the Old Paralic Deposits are considered suitable for support of structural loading in their current condition. Tertiary-aged Santiago Formation was encountered throughout the site below the Old Paralic Deposits. The Santiago Formation material encountered consisted of Silty Sandstone 'SM', Poorly Graded Sandstone 'SP', Poorly Graded Sandstone with Silt 'SP-SM', Siltstone 'ML', Claystone 'CL', and Fat Claystone 'CH'. The sandy materials were light reddish brown, light gray, light brown, yellowish brown, fine to medium grained, moist, and moderately cemented. The siltstone materials encountered were observed to be light organish brown and gray, non-plastic, moist, and moderately cemented. The claystones encountered were gray, medium to high plasticity, moist, and moderately to strongly indurated. The Santiago Formation material is expected to underlie Old Paralic Deposits. In general, the sandy materials of the Santiago Formation are considered suitable for support of structural loading in their current condition; however, there are highly expansive clayey portions of the formation that require special handling during construction. 2.03 Groundwater Conditions Groundwater was encountered in one boring, Boring B-1, at a depth of 41 feet below existing grade. It should be recognized that excessive irrigation, or changes in rainfall or site drainage could produce seepage or locally perched groundwater conditions within the soil underlying the site. 2.04 Faulting and Seismicity Active earthquake faults are very significant geologic hazards to development in California. Active faults are those which have undergone displacement within the last approximately 11,000 years. Potentially active faults show evidence of displacement within the last approximately 1.6 million years. The site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone and there are no known active faults mapped through the site, therefore, surface rupture of an active fault is not considered to be a significant geologic hazard at the site. Potential seismic hazards at the site are anticipated to be the result of ground shaking from seismic events on distant active faults. The nearest known active fault is the Rose Canyon fault zone, which is located about 5.0 miles west of the site. A number of other significant faults also occur in the San Diego metropolitan area suggesting that the regional faulting pattern is very complex. Faults such as those offshore are known to be active and any could cause a damaging earthquake. Other active Page 5 of23 6295 Fen-is Square, Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III -Geotechnical Investigation Carlsbad, California MTGL Project No. 1916All MTGL Log No. 15-1063 faults within the region include the Coronado Banks fault zone, approximately 21.0 miles southwest of the site, and the Elsinore fault zone, approximately 22.6 miles northeast of the site. The San Diego metropolitan area has experienced some major earthquakes in the past, and will likely experience future major earthquakes. 2.05 LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL Liquefaction is a phenomenon where earthquake induced ground vibrations increase the pore pressure in saturated, granular soils until it is equal to the confining, overburden pressure. When this occurs, the soil can completely lose its shear strength and become liquefied. The possibility of liquefaction is dependent upon grain size, relative density, confining pressure, saturation of the soils, and strength of the ground motion and duration of ground shaking. In order for liquefaction to occur three criteria must be met: underlying loose, coarse-grained (sandy) soils, a groundwater depth of less than about 50 feet and a nearby large magnitude earthquake. Given the relatively dense nature of the subsurface soils, and the absence of a groundwater table, the potential for liquefaction at the site is considered to be negligible. 2.06 LANDSLIDES Evidence of ancient landslides was not found at the subject site. Recommendations are provided in the following sections of the report which will help to reduce the potential for future slope instabilities. 2.07 TSUNAMI AND SEICHE HAzARD The site is-not located within an area mapped by the California Geological Survey as subject to inundation by tsunami. Given the location of the site at an elevation of over 200 feet MSL, within a densely developed area, the inundation hazard posed by tsunami is considered to be low. Seiches are not considered to be a hazard due the absence of above-ground tanks or reservoirs located immediately up gradient from the site. Page 6 of23 6295 Fcn·is Square. Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III -Geotechnical Investigation Carlsbad, California 3.00 CONCLUSIONS 3.01 GENERALCONCLUSIONS MTGL Project No. 1916A11 MTGL Log No. 15-1063 Given the findings of the investigation, it appears that the site geology is suitable for the proposed construction. Based on the investigation, it is our opinion that the proposed development is safe against landslides and settlement provided the recommendations presented in our report are incorporated into the design and construction of the project. Grading and construction of the proposed project will not adversely affect the geologic stability of adjacent properties. The nature and extent of the investigation conducted for the purposes of this declaration are, in our opinion, in conformance with generally accepted practice in this area. Therefore, the proposed project appears to be feasible from a geologic standpoint. There appears to be no significant geologic constraint onsite that cannot be mitigated by proper planning, design, and sound construction practices. Specific conclusions pertaining to geologic conditions are summarized below: • Due to proximity of the site to regional active and potentially active faults, the site could experience moderate to high levels of ground shaking from regional seismic events within the projected life of the building. A design performed in accordance with the current California Building Code and the seismic design parameters of the Structural Engineers Association of California is expected to satisfactorily mitigate the effects of future ground shaking. • The potential for active (on-site) faulting is considered low. • The potential for liquefaction during strong ground motion is considered low. • The potential for landslides to occur is considered low if the remedial recommendations presented herein are incorporated. • The on-site fill materials are considered not suitable for structural support in their present condition. Recommendations are presented in the following sections for remedial grading at the site. • The proposed structures may be supported by a conventional shallow foundation system if the undocumented fill materials are mitigated as recommended. 3.02 EARTHQUAKE ACCELERATIONS\ CBC SEISMIC PARAMETERS The 2013 California Building Code seismic design parameters were obtained from the. USGS website using a project location of latitude 33.13° North and a longitude of 117.31 o West. Based upon the anticipated grading requirements at the site a Site Class D was used for the project. The 2013 Seismic Design Parameters are presented below: Page 7 of23 6295 Ferris Square, Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III -Geotechnical Investigation Carlsbad, California GrQUnd Motion Value .. ,:Parameter Ss 1.119g s1 0.431g Site Class D SMs 1.178g SMl 0.676g SDs 0.785g Sm 0.450g 3.03 EXPANSION POTENTIAL MTGL Project No. 1916All MTGLLogNo. 15-1063 Highly expansive claystone materials were encountered within the Santiago Formation. The claystone observed had an Expansion Index of 233. These materials are not considered suitable for support of any new loads. Recommendations are provided in this report for mitigation of these highly expansive clayey materials. Other clayey materials were encountered within the fill and Old Paralic Deposits and are considered to have a very low to medium expansion potential (Expansion Index of 0 to 71). The on-site fill soil could be used for structural support but structural design criteria should be taken into consideration for the on-site soil's medium expansion potential. Page 8 of23 6295 Fcnis Square. Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III -Geotechnical Investigation Carlsbad, California 4.00 RECOMMENDATIONS MTGL Project No. 1916All MTGL Log No. 15-1063 Our recommendations are considered minimum and may be superseded by more conservative requirements of the architect, structural engineer, building code, or governing agencies. The foundation recommendations are based on the expansion index and shear strength of the onsite soils. Import soils, if necessary should have a very low expansion potential (Expansion Index less than 20) and should be approved by the Geotechnical Engineer prior to importing to the site. In addition to the recommendations in this section, additional general earthwork and grading specifications are included in Appendix D. 4.01 EXCAVATION CHARACTERISTICS/SHRINKAGE Our exploratory borings were advanced with little difficulty within the fill soils and no oversize materials were encountered in our subsurface investigation. Our exploratory borings were advanced with some effort within the moderately cemented formational materials. Accordingly we expect that all earth materials will be rippable with conventional heavy duty grading equipment with experienced operations and that oversized materials are not expected. Shrinkage is the decrease in volume of soil upon removal and recompaction expressed as a percentage of the original in-place volume, which will account for changes in earth volumes that will occur during grading. Bulking is the increase in volume of soil upon removal recompaction expressed as a percentage of the original in-place volume. Our estimate for shrinkage of the onsite fill soils are expected to range from 5 to 10 percent. Our estimate for bulking of the formational materials is estimated to range from 5 to 10 percent. It should be noted that bulking and shrinkage potential can vary considerably based on the variability of the in-situ densities of the materials in question. 4.02 SETTLEMENT CONSIDERATIONS Based on the proposed grading recommendations, we anticipate that properly designed and constructed foundations that are supported on compacted fill materials will experience a total static settlement of up to 1.0 inch with differential settlements of Yz an inch. As a minimum, structures supported by shallow conventional foundations should be designed to accommodate a total settlement of at least 1.0 inch with differential settlements of Yz an inch over a horizontal distance of 40 feet. Page 9 of23 6295 FcJTi' Square, Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III -Geotechnical Investigation Carlsbad, California 4.03 SITE CLEARING RECOMMENDATIONS MTGL Project No. 1916A11 MTGL Log No. 15-1063 All surface vegetation, trash, debris, asphalt concrete, portland cement concrete and underground pipes should be cleared and removed from the proposed construction site. Underground facilities such as utilities may exist at the site. Depressions resulting from the removal of foundations of existing buildings, buried obstructions and/or tree roots should be backfilled with properly compacted material. All organics, debris, trash and topsoil should be removed from the grading area and hauled offsite. 4.04 SITE GRADING RECOMMENDATIONS -STRUCTURES Remedial grading for new buildings at the site should include removal of all previously placed fills to expose undisturbed formational materials (Old Paralic Deposits, Unit 2-4, Undivided or Santiago Formation). Based on information from the borings and test pits, removals may exte:nd to about 15Y2 feet below existing grade. The bottom of the removals should then be evaluated by the geotechnical engineer or geologist to see if further remedial grading is warranted. Once formational materials have been exposed and approved, the undocumented fill materials (with an expansion index of less than 50 and with no deleterious materials) may be placed as compacted fill. Prior to fill placement, the exposed excavation bottom should be scarified to a depth of 8 to 12 inches, moisture conditioned and re-compacted. The materials should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM Test Method D1557 at a moisture content that is slightly above optimum moisture content. Fill materials placed at a depth greater than 30 feet below finished grade should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the maximum dry density. The highly expansive claystone materials of the Santiago Formation should not underlie new structures. Based on the information from the field investigation, the expansive clayey materials appear to underlie the main 4-story hotel building. Remedial grading should include complete removal of all expansive claystone materials beneath the structure. The claystone materials should be properly disposed of off-site. The lateral extent of the removals should extend from the building footprint a distance equal to the distance measured from finish grade elevation to the bottom of the removals, but should not be less than 10 feet. Page 10 of23 6295 Fcn·is Square, Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III -Geotechnical Investigation Carlsbad, California 4.05 SITE GRADING RECOMMENDATIONS-CUT/FILL TRANSITION MTGL Project No. 1916All MTGL Log No. 15-1063 After remedial grading to remove all previously placed fill materials and highly expansive clayey materials have been performed, there is a potential within the individual building footprints to have a transition where footings rest both on undisturbed formational materials and compacted fill. This 'cut/fill' transition could result in adverse differential settlement. To mitigate the cut/fill transition we recommend that the formational deposits within the cut portion of the building pad be over- excavated to a depth equal to one-half of the maximum fill depth (but not less than 3 feet) of the fill portion of the building pad. The depths are those measured from the bottom of the proposed footings. The over-excavated cut soils may then be placed as compacted fill. The purpose of the cut/fill mitigation is to provide a uniform fill of at least 3 feet mat beneath all of the footings. 4.06 SITE GRADING RECOMMENDATIONS-HARDSCAPE AND PAVEMENTS Remedial grading for new hardscape and pavement areas should include removal of all previously placed fills to expose undisturbed formational materials (Old Paralic Deposits, Unit 2-4, Undivided or Santiago Formation). Prior tore-compaction of soils, the exposed excavation bottom should be scarified to at least 8 to 12 inches, moisture conditioned, and compacted. The materials should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum density at a moisture content that is slightly above optimum. 4.07 COMPACTION REQUIREMENTS All fill materials should be compacted to at least 90 percent of maximum dry density as determined by ASTM Test Method D1557. Deep fill materials, those placed at a depth that is greater than 30 feet below fmished grade, should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D1557. Fill materials should be placed in loose lifts, no greater than 8 inches prior to applying compactive effort. All engineered fill materials should be moisture-conditioned and processed as necessary to achieve a uniform moisture content that is slightly above optimum moisture content and within moisture limits required to achieve adequate bonding between lifts. 4.08 FILL MATERIALS Removed and/or over-excavated soils may be reused as engineered fill except for expansive soils (expansion index greater than 50) and soils containing detrimental amounts of organic material, trash and other debris. Page 11 of23 6295 Ferris Square, Suilc C San Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537~3999 Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III -Geotechnical Investigation Carlsbad, California MTGL Project No. 1916A11 MTGL Log No. 15-1063 Imported materials shall be free from vegetable matter and other deleterious substances, shall not contain rocks or lumps of a greater dimension than 4 inches, shall have an expansion index of less than 20, and shall be approved by the geotechnical consultant. Soils of poor gradation, expansion, or strength properties shall be placed in areas designated by the geotechnical consultant or shall be removed off-site. 4.09 SWIMMING POOLS Remedial grading for swimming pools should include removal off all previously placed fills to expose undisturbed formational materials (Old Paralic Deposits, Unit 2-4, Undivided or Santiago Formation). The over-excavation should extend a minimum of five feet laterally from the swimming pool footprint. The exposed excavation bottom should be scarified to at least 8 to 12 inches, moisture conditioned, and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density at a moisture content that is slightly above optimum. The excavated soils may then be placed as compacted fill. Soils to be placed within five feet of planned swimming pool bottoms should have a low expansion potential, expansion index less than 20. The low expansion potential should extend a minimum of five feet beyond pool footprint. 4.10 SLOPES Grading at the site will include construction of a variety of minor fill slopes. We recommend that slopes be inclined no steeper than 2:1 (horizontal to vertical). Fills over sloping ground should be constructed entirely on prepared bedrock. In areas where the existing ground surface slopes at more than a 5: 1 gradient, it should be benched to produce a level area to receive the fill. Benches should be wide enough to provide complete coverage by the compaction equipment during fill placement. Slopes constructed at 2: 1 or flatter should be stable with regard to deep seated failure with a factor of safety greater than 1.5, which is the generally accepted safety factor. However, all slopes are susceptible to surficial slope failure and erosion, given substantial wetting of the slope face. Surficial slope stability may be enhanced by providing proper site drainage. The site should be graded so that water from the surrounding areas is not able to flow over the top of the slopes. Diversion structures should be provided where necessary. Surface runoff should be confined to gunite-lined swales or other appropriate devises to reduce the potential for erosion. It is recommended that slopes be planted with vegetation that will increase their stability. Ice plant is generally not recommended. Page 12 of23 6295 Ferris Square, Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 ())58) 537-3999 Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III -Geotechnical Investigation Carlsbad, California MTGL Project No. 1916All MTGLLogNo.lS-1063 4.11 FOUNDATIONS The recommendations and design criteria are "minimum" in keeping with the current standard-of- practice. They do not preclude more restrictive criteria by the governing agency or structural considerations. The project structural engineer should evaluate the foundation configurations and reinforcement requirements for actual structural loadings. The foundation design parameters assumes that remedial grading is conducted as recommended in this report, and that all the buildings are underlain by a relatively uniform depth of compacted fill with a low to medium expansion potential. Note that expansion index testing should be conducted on the individual building pads during finish grading in order to confirm this assumption. Conventional shallow foundations are considered suitable for support of the proposed structures provided that remedial grading to remove undocumented fill materials and mitigation of cut/fill transitions are performed. Allowable Soil Bearing: Minimum Footing Width: Minimum Footing Depth: Coefficient ofFriction:0.33 Passive Pressure: 3,000 lbs/ft2 (allow a one-third increase for short-term wind or seismic loads). The allowable soil bearing may be increase 500 lbs/ft2 for every 12-inch increase in depth above the minimum footing depth and 250 lbs/W for every 12-inch increase in width above the minimum footing width. The bearing value may not exceed 6,000 lbs/ft2 24 inches 24 inches below lowest adjacent soil grade 350 psfper foot of depth. Passive pressure and the friction of resistance could be combined without reduction 4.12 CONCRETE SLABS ON GRADE AND MISCELLANEOUS FLATWORK Interior slab-on-grade should be designed for the actual applied loading conditions expected. The structural engineer should size and reinforce slabs to support the expected loads utilizing accepted methods of concrete design, such as those provided by the Portland Cement Association or the American Concrete Institute. A modulus of subgrade reaction of 150 pounds per cubic inch (pci) could be utilized in design. Based on geotechnical consideration, interior slab for conventional slab- on-grade design should be a minimum of 5 inches and should be reinforced with at least No. 4 bars on 18 centers, each way. Actual reinforcement should be designed by the project structural engineer Page 13 of23 6295 Ferris Square, Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 (X58) 537-3999 Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III -Geotechnical Investigation Carlsbad, California MTGL Project No. 1916All MTGL Log No. 15-1063 based upon medium expansion potential. Structural slabs should be designed by the structural engineer and should span from foundation supports. Concrete slabs constructed on soil ultimately cause the moisture content to rise in the underlying soil. This results from continued capillary rise and the termination of normal evapotranspiration. Because normal concrete is permeable, the moisture will eventually penetrate the slab. Excessive moisture may cause mildewed carpets, lifting or discoloration of floor tiles, or similar problems. To decrease the likelihood of problems related to damp slabs, suitable moisture protection measures should be used where moisture sensitive floor coverings, moisture sensitive equipment, or other factors warrant. A commonly used moisture protection in southern California consists of about 2 inches of clean sand covered by at least 10 mil plastic sheeting. In addition, 2 inches of clean sand are placed over the plastic to decrease concrete curing problems associated with placing concrete directly on an impermeable membrane. However, it has been our experience that such systems will transmit from approximately 6 to 12 pounds of moisture per 1,000 square feet per day. This may be excessive for some applications, particularly for sheet vinyl, wood flooring, vinyl tiles, or carpeting with impermeable backing that use water soluble adhesives. If additional moisture protection is needed, then a Stego Wrap moisture barrier, or equivalent, may be used in lieu of 10 mil plastic sheeting. The Stego Wrap should be installed per the manufacturers' recommendations. Concrete is a rigid brittle material that can withstand very little strain before cracking. Concrete, particularly exterior hardscape is subject to dimensional changes due to variations in moisture of the concrete, variations in temperature and applied loads. It is not possible to eliminate the potential for cracking in concrete; however, cracking can be controlled by use of joints and reinforcing. Joints provide a pre-selected location for concrete to crack along and release strain and reinforcement provides for closely spaced numerous cracks in lieu of few larger visible cracks. Crack control joints should have a maximum spacing of 5 feet for sidewalks and 10 feet each way for slabs. Differential movement between buildings and exterior slabs, or between sidewalks and curbs may be decreased by doweling the slab into the foundation or curb. Exterior concrete slabs on the expansive site soils may experience some movement and cracking. Exterior slabs should be at least 4 inches thick and should be reinforce with at least 6x6, W2.9/W2.9 welded wire fabric or No.4 bars spaced at 18 inches on center, each way, supported firmly at mid- height of the slab. Page 14 of23 6295 Ferris Square, Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III -Geotechnical Investigation Carlsbad, California 4.13 PREWETTING RECOMMENDATION MTGL Project No. 1916All MTGL Log No. 15-1063 The soils underlying the slab-on-grade should be brought to a minimum of 2% and a maximum of 4% above their optimum moisture content for a depth of 12 inches prior to the placement of concrete. The geotechnical consultant should perform insitu moisture tests to verify that the appropriate moisture content has been achieved a maximum of 24 hours prior to the placement of concrete or moisture barriers. 4.14 Corrosivity Corrosion series tests consisting of pH, soluble sulfates, soluble chlorides, and minimum resistivity were performed on selected samples of the on-site soils. Soluble sulfate levels for the on-site fill soils indicate a negligible sulfate exposure for concrete structure. As such, no special considerations are required for concrete placed in contact with the on-site soils. However, it is recommended that Type II cement to be used for all concrete. Based on the soluble chloride levels the on-site soils have a degree of corrosivity to metals that is negligible. Based on the pH and Resistivity, the on-site soils have a degree of corrosivity to ferrous metals that is moderately corrosive. The actual corrosive potential is determined by many factors in addition to those presented herein. MTGL, Inc. does not practice corrosion engineering. Underground metal conduits in contact with the soil need to be protected. We recommend that a corrosion engineer be consulted. 4.15 RETAINING WALLS Embedded structural walls should be designed for lateral earth pressures exerted on the walls. The magnitude of these earth pressures will depend on the amount of deformation that the wall can yield under the load. If the wall can yield sufficiently to mobilize the full shear strength of the soils, it may be designed for the active condition. If the wall cannot yield under the applied load, then the shear strength of the soil cannot be mobilized and the earth pressures will be higher. These walls such as basement walls and swimming pools should be designed for the at rest condition. If a structure moves towards the retained soils, the resulting resistance developed by the soil will be the passive resistance. For design purposes, the recommended equivalent fluid pressure for each case for walls constructed above the static groundwater table, backfilled with low expansive soils, and where remedial grading has been performed is provided below. Retaining wall backfill should be compacted to at least 90% Page 15 of23 6295 Fen-is Square, Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III -Geotechnical Investigation Carlsbad, California MTGL Project No. 1916All MTGLLogNo.lS-1063 relative compaction based on the maximum density defined by ASTM Dl557. Retaining structures may be designed to resist the following lateral earth pressures. • Allowable Bearing Pressure-3,000 psf • Coefficient of Friction (Soil to Footing)-0.33 • Passive Earth Pressure -equivalent fluid weight of 300 pcf (Maximum of 2,000 pet) • At rest lateral earth pressure -60 pcf • Active Earth Pressures -equivalent fluid weights: Level 40 2:1 (H:V) 55 It is recommended that all retaining wall footings be embedded at least 24 inches below the lowest adjacent fmish grade. In addition, the wall footings should be designed and reinforced as required for structural considerations. Lateral resistance parameters provided above are ultimate values. Therefore, a suitable factor of safety should be applied to these values for design purposes. The appropriate factor of safety will depend on the design condition and should be determined by the project Structural Engineer. If any super-imposed loads are anticipated, this office should be notified so that appropriate recommendations for earth pressures may be provided. Retaining structures should be drained to prevent the accumulation of subsurface water behind the walls. Back drains should be installed behind all retaining walls exceeding 3.0 feet in height. A typical detail for retaining wall back drains is presented as Figure 8. All back drains should be outlet to suitable drainage devices. Walls and portions thereof that retain soil and enclose interior spaces and floors below grade should be waterproofed and damp-proofed in accordance with the 2013 CBC. For retaining walls exceeding 6 feet in height we recommend that a seismic retaining wall design be conducted by the structural engineer. For seismic design we used a peak site acceleration of 0.45g calculated from the modified seismic design parameters (Ss/2.5). For a retained wall condition, such as the planned basement levels, we recommend a seismic load of 18H be used for design. The Page 16 of23 6295 Ferris Square, Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III -Geotechnical Investigation Carlsbad, California MTGL Project No. 1916All MTGLLogNo. 15-1063 seismic load is dependent of the retained wall height where H is the height of the wall, in feet, and the calculated triangular loads result in pounds per square foot exerted at the base of the wall and zero at the top of the wall. 4.16 FOUNDATION SETBACKS As a minimum, structural foundations should be setback from any descending slope at least 8 feet. Screen-wall foundations should have a minimum setback of 5 feet. The setback should be measured horizontally from the bottom outside edge of the footing to the slope face. The horizontal setback can be reduced by deepening the foundation to achieve the recommended setback distance projected from the footing bottom to the slope face. It should be recognized that the outer few feet of all slopes are susceptible to gradual down-slope movements due to slope creep. This will affect hardscape such as concrete slabs. We recommend that settlement sensitive structures, including concrete slabs, not be constructed within 5 feet of the slope top without a specific review by the geotechnical consultant. Utility trenches, swimming pools, and biorentention basins that are adjacent to foundations should not extend into the footing influence zone defined as the area within a line projected at a 1: 1 (horizontal to vertical) drawn from the bottom edge of the footing. 4.17 PAVEMENTDESIGN Alternatives for asphalt or Portland cement concrete pavements are given below. Immediately prior to constructing pavement sections, the upper 12 inches of pavement subgrade should be scarified, brought to about optimum moisture content, and compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D 1557. Aggregate base should also be compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction. Aggregate base should conform to Caltrans Class II or Standard Specifications for Public Works Constructions (SSPWC), Section 200 for crushed aggregate base. Asphalt concrete should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the Hveem unit weight. Asphalt concrete should conform to SSPWC Section 400-4. 4.17.1 ASPHALT CONCRETE Asphalt concrete pavement design was conducted in general accordance with Caltrans Design Method (Topic 608.4). Two traffic types are anticipated at the site. These include areas oflight traffic and passenger car parking (Traffic Index of 4.5), and access and truck routes (Traffic Index of 6.0). The project civil engineer should review these anticipated traffic levels to Page 17 of23 6295 Ferris Square, Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III -Geotechnical Investigation Carlsbad, California MTGL Project No. 1916All MTGL Log No. 15-1063 determine if they are appropriate. Laboratory R-Value tests on the site soils indicate an R-Value range of 20 to 64. For preliminary pavement design, an R-value of 20 was used. R-Value confirmation and final pavement design should be performed on the finished soils within the pavement areas. The following pavement sections would apply based on the Caltrans Design Method. . Traffic IndeX; .. Asphalt'[~iclrn~ss ·: ~ ... . . . . . . . . . .· . 1· .. · ·:c ;,Ba~e ThicliJl.ess 4.5 3 inches 6 inches 6.0 4 inches 9 inches 4.17.2 PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE Concrete pavement design was conducted in accordance with the simplified design procedure of the Portland Cement Association. This methodology is based on a 20 year design lift. For design, it was assumed that aggregate interlock would be used for load transfer across control joints. Laboratory R-Value tests indicate that the subgrade materials will provide a 'low' subgrade support. Based on these assumptions, we recommend that the pavement section consist of 6 inches of Portland cement concrete over native subgrade. This PCC section is applicable for both truck traffic areas and passenger car parking areas. Crack control joints should be constructed for all PCC pavements on a maximum of 10 foot centers, each way. Concentrated truck traffic areas, such as trash truck aprons, should be reinfon::ed with at least No.4 bars on 18-inch centers, each way. 4.18 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS 4.18.1 MOISTURE SENSITIVE SOILS/WEATHER RELATED CONCERNS The upper soils encountered at this site may be sensitive to disturbances caused by construction traffic and to changes in moisture content. During wet weather periods, increases in the moisture content of the soil can cause significant reduction in the soil strength and its support capabilities. In addition, soils that become excessively wet may be slow to dry and thus significantly delay the progress of the grading operations. Therefore, it will be advantageous to perform earthwork and foundation construction activities during the dry season. Much of the on-site soils may be susceptible to erosion during periods of inclement weather. As a result, the project Civil Engineer/ Architect and Grading Contractor should take appropriate precautions to reduce the potential for erosion during and after construction. Page 18 of23 6295 FciTis Square, Suite C San Diego, Ci\ 92121 (858) 537-3999 Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III -Geotechnical Investigation Carlsbad, California 4.18.2 DRAINAGE AND GROUNDWATER CONSIDERATIONS MTGL Project No. 1916All MTGLLogNo.15-1063 Groundwater was encountered in Boring B-1 at a depth of approximately 41 feet below existing grade. It should be noted, however, that variations in the ground water table may result from fluctuation in the ground surface topography, subsurface stratification, precipitation, irrigation, and other factors that may not have been evident at the time of our exploration. Seepage sometimes occurs where relatively impermeable and/or cemented formational materials are overlain by fill soils. We should be consulted to evaluate areas of seepage during construction. Water should not be allowed to collect in the foundation excavation, on floor slab areas, or on prepared subgrades of the construction area either during or after construction. Undercut or excavated areas should be sloped to facilitate removal of any collected rainwater, groundwater, or surface runoff. Positive site drainage should be provided to reduce infiltration of surface water around the perimeter of the building and beneath the floor slabs. The grades should be sloped away from the building and surface drainage should be collected and discharged such that water is not permitted to infiltrate the backfill and floor slab areas of the building. 4.18.3 TEMPORARY EXCAVATIONS AND SHORING Short term temporary excavations in existing soils may be safely made at an inclination of 1: 1 (horizontal to vertical) or flatter. If vertical sidewalls are required in excavations greater than 3 feet in depth, the use of cantilevered or braced shoring is recommended. Excavations less than 3 feet in depth may be constructed with vertical sidewalls without shoring or shielding. Our recommendations for lateral earth pressures to be used in the design of cantilevered and/or braced shoring are presented below. These values incorporate a uniform lateral pressure of 72 psf to provide for the normal construction loads imposed by vehicles, equipment, materials, and workmen on the surface adjacent to the trench excavation. However, if vehicles, equipment, materials, etc. are kept a minimum distance equal to the height of the excavation away from the edge of the excavation, this surcharge load need not be applied. Page 19 of23 6295 Fcn·is Square, Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 (858) 53'/-3999 Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III -Geotechnical Investigation Carlsbad, California MTGL Project No. 1916All MTGLLogNo.15-1063 H P = 30 H psi 72_PM P Total= 72 psf + 30 H psf P Total= 72 psf + 25 H psf SHORING DESIGN: LATERAL SHORING PRESSURES Design of the shield struts should be based on a value of 0.65 times the indicated pressure, Pa, for the approximate trench depth. The wales and sheeting can be designed for a value of 2/3 the design strut value. STRUTS (typ.) SHIELD (typ.) BEDDING Pa = 30 Hsh psf HEIGHT OF SHIELD, Hsh = DEPTH OF TRENCH, D1 , MINUS DEPTH OF SLOPE, H1 TYPICAL SHORING DETAIL Placement of the shield may be made after the excavation is completed or driven down as the material is excavated from inside of the shield. If placed after the excavation, some over- excavation may be required to allow for the shield width and advancement of the shield. The shield may be placed at either the top or the bottom of the pipe zone. Due to the anticipated thinness of the shield walls, removal of the shield after construction should have negligible effects on the load factor of pipes. Shields may be successively placed with conventional trenching equipment. Page 20 of23 6295 Ferris Square, Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 (~58) 53?-3999 Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III -Geotechnical Investigation Carlsbad, California MTGL Project No. 1916All MTGLLogNo.15-1063 Vehicles, equipment, materials, etc. should be set back away from the edge of temporary excavations a minimum distance of 15 feet from the top edge of the excavation. Surface waters should be diverted away from temporary excavations and prevented from draining over the top of the excavation and down the slope face. During periods of heavy rain, the slope face should be protected with sandbags to prevent drainage over the edge of the slope, and a visqueen liner placed on the slope face to prevent erosion of the slope face. Periodic observations of the excavations should be made by the geotechnical consultant to verify that the soil conditions have not varied from those anticipated and to monitor the overall condition of the temporary excavations over time. If at any time during construction conditions are encountered which differ from those anticipated, the geotechnical consultant should be contacted and allowed to analyze the field conditions prior to commencing work within the excavation. All Cal/OSHA construction safety orders should be observed during all underground work. 4.18.4 UTILITYTRENCHES All Cal/OSHA construction safety orders should be observed during all underground work. All utility trench backfill within street right of way, utility easements, under or adjacent to sidewalks, driveways, or building pads should be observed and tested by the geotechnical consultant to verify proper compaction. Trenches excavated adjacent to foundations should not extend within the footing influence zone defined as the area within a line projected at a 1: 1 (horizontal to vertical) drawn from the bottom edge of the footing. Trenches crossing perpendicular to foundations should be excavated and backfilled prior to the construction of the foundations. The excavations should be backfilled in the presence of the geotechnical engineer and tested to verify adequate compaction beneath the proposed footing. Utilities should be bedded and backfilled with clean sand or approved granular soil to a depth of at least 1-foot over the pipe. The bedding materials shall consist of sand, gravel, crushed aggregate, or native, free draining soils with a sand equivalence of not less than 30. The bedding should be uniformly watered and compacted to a firm condition for pipe support. The remainder of the backfill shall be typical on-site soil or imported soil which should be placed in lifts not exceeding 8 inches in thickness, watered or aerated to near optimum moisture content, and mechanically compacted to at least 90% of maximum dry density (ASTM D1557). 6295 Fcn·is Square, Suite C Page 21 of23 t:~~UALt\ san Di(~~o~l~~7~~~~~ Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III -Geotechnical Investigation Carlsbad, California 4.18.5 SITEDRAINAGE MTGL Project No. 1916All MTGL Log No. 15-1063 The site should be drained to provide for positive drainage away from structures in accordance with the building code and applicable local requirements. Unpaved areas should slope no less than 2% away from structure. Paved areas should slope no less than 1% away from structures. Concentrated roof and surface drainage from the site should be collected in engineered, non- erosive drainage devices and conducted to a safe point of discharge. The site drainage should be designed by a civil engineer. 4.19 GEOTECHNICAL OBSERVATION/TESTING OF EARTHWORK OPERATIONS The recommendations provided in this report are based on preliminary design information and subsurface conditions as interpreted from the investigation. Our preliminary conclusion and recommendations should be reviewed and verified during site grading, and revised accordingly if exposed Geotechnical conditions vary from our preliminary findings and interpretations. The Geotechnical consultant should perform Geotechnical observation and testing during the following phases of grading and construction: • During site grading and over-excavation. • During foundation excavations and placement. • Upon completion of retaining wall footing excavation prior to placing concrete. • During excavation and backfilling of all utility trenches • During processing and compaction of the sub grade for the access and parking areas and prior to construction of pavement sections. • When any unusual or unexpected Geotechnical conditions are encountered during any phase of construction. Page 22 of23 6295 Fcnis Square, Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III -Geotechnical Investigation Carlsbad, California 5.00 LIMITATIONS MTGL Project No. 1916All MTGLLogNo.lS-1063 The findings, conclusions, and recommendations contained in this report are based on the site conditions as they existed at the time of our investigation, and further assume that the subsurface conditions encountered during our investigation are representative of conditions throughout the site. Should subsurface conditions be encountered during construction that are different from those described in this report, this office should be notified immediately so that our recommendations may be re-evaluated. This report was prepared for the exclusive use and benefit of the owner, architect, and engineer for evaluating the design of the project as it relates to geotechnical aspects. It should be made available to prospective contractors for information on factual data only, and not as a warranty of subsurface conditions included in this report. Our investigation was performed using the standard of care and level of skill ordinarily exercised under similar circumstances by reputable soil engineers and geologists currently practicing in this or similar localities. No warranty, express or implied, is made as to the conclusions and professional advice included in this report. This firm does not practice or consult in the field of safety engineering. We do not direct the Contractor's operations, and we are not responsible for their actions. The contractor will be solely and completely responsible for working conditions on the job site, including the safety of all persons and property during performance of the work. This responsibility will apply continuously and will not be limited to our normal hours of operation. The findings of this report are considered valid as of the present date. However, changes in the conditions of a site can occur with the passage of time, whether they are due to natural events or to human activities on this or adjacent sites. In addition, changes in applicable or appropriate codes and standards may occur, whether they result from legislation or the broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, this report may become invalidated wholly or partially by changes outside our control. Therefore, this report is subject to review and revision as changed conditions are identified. Page 23 of23 6295 F cn·is Square, Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 FIGURES ~¢ --' TP-1 B TP-5 I!!BITP-7 B B tP)13 ~ SCAI£o '" • 'W REFERENCE: Prelim PH-4.pdf provided by Grand Pacific Resorts. B' A' KEY: A Boring Number and '1' B-13 Approximate Location Test Pit Number and 8 TP-19 Approximate Location + E E' Borings From Previous Investigations ~ Geologic Cross Section PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLAN PROJECT NO_ 1916A 11 MTGL, INC I LOG NO. 15-1063 FIGURE 1 1 t 'c"'" ,. • '"'' REFERENCE: Grading Plans for: 'As-Built' Carlsbad Ranch Planning Area No.5, Sheets 11, 12, 13, 15, 17, and 18 (2006). KEY: E E' Boring Number and Approximate Location Borings From Previous Investigations ~ Geologic Cross Section ROUGH TOPO MAP PROJECT NO. 1916A 11 MTGL, INC I LOG NO. 15-1063 FIGURE 2 I ""iii E -~ Q) ~ z 0 t= <( > LU .....1 LU A 270' 260' 250' 240' 230' E.x\sttMGra_de_ 220' 210' ::::~ j TD=25' TD=36'h' 180' 170' I I TD=51' LB-1-03 (projected 86' N) TD=46' A' 270' 260' 250' 240' 230' m r m < 220' ~ i3 z it 210' ~ s· 3 S!!. 200' 190' 180' 170' 160' -'---------------------~----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~L160' KEY: ----? Approximate location of geologic contact (queried where uncertain) Proposed Building Location FILL Previously placed Fill Qop,. Old Paralic Deposits, Unit 2-4, Undivided Tsa Santiago Formation CH High Expansive Fat Clay E 5.8° N 6295 Ferris Square, Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 SCALE: 1" = 30' 2:1 VERTICAL EXAGGERATION GEOLOGIC CROSS-SECTIONS PROJECT NO. 1916A11 MTGL, INC I LOG NO. 15-1063 FIGURE 3 270' 260' 250' 240' 230' "iii E -~ (j) 220' ~ z 0 i= 210' <1: > w ....J w 200' 190' 180' 170' 160' KEY: ----? B CH I 1 T0=51' B-10 (projected 14' S) TD=21Y:.' TD=30' CH -- B' 270' 260' 250' CB-3 240' 230' m r m < )> 220' -1 Tsa 6 z it 210' ~ ---:;· 3 ~ 200' T0= 50' 190' 180' 170' _L-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------L160' Approximate location of geologic contact (queried where uncertain) Proposed Building Location E 2.3° N FILL Previously placed Fill Qop,4 Old Paralic Deposits, Unit 2-4, Undivided Tsa Santiago Formation CH High Expansive Fat Clay 6295 Ferris Square, Suite C San Diego, CA92121 (858) 537-3999 SCALE: 1"=30' 2:1 VERTICAL EXAGGERATION GEOLOGIC CROSS-SECTIONS MTGL, INC PROJECT NO. 1916A11 LOG NO. 15-106~ FIGURE~ c 270 ,_ 260' ,_ 250' ,. -240' 230' Ui E .E a:; 220' ~ z 0 ,_ _PmposedEievalLon B-10 B-11 (projected 20' SW) (projected 13' SW} TP-11 (projected 33' NE\ ,._ FILL FILL ----- Qop,4 1--TD=4%' QopM ?-j-... Tsa CH ------i= 210' ,~m '-FILL ?-~----~----<( > w .....1 I? Qop2-4 w 200' , _ TD=10' ,_ 190' ,_ 180' 170' - 160' KEY: 7 Approximate location of geologic contact ---(queried where uncertain) Proposed Building Location TD=21'h' TD=51' S 28.3° E FILL Previously placed Fill QopM Old Paralic Deposits, Unit 2-4, Undivided Tsa Santiago Formation CH High Expansive Fat Clay -- c· 270' 260' r-: r-250' 1--240' CB-7 TP-18 B-13 (projected 6' NE} (projected 42' NE} T 230' m r m --I- TD=25' Propos~d FF:224 3ft Tsa -- FILL ? T~:~. - Qop2-4 j--: 220' ~ 0 ? z CH it ----1-210' m. s· --1--? 1--: 200' r-90' 1-80' TD=51' 1--70' 160' SCALE: 1" = 30' 2:1 VERTICAL EXAGGERATION 3 ~ GEOLOGIC CROSS-SECTIONS 6295 Ferris Square, Suite C I MTGL, INC San Drego, CA 92121 PROJECT NO. 1916A11 LOG NO. 15-1062 (858) 537-3999 FIGURE 5 D 240' 230'- 220' 210'- 200'- Cii TP-5 CB-2 (projected 46' NE) (projected 19" NE) E -~ ~ aJ 190' -FILL ~ -T TD=4%' PrQiiosedFF19~ z 0 f= 180'-<{ Qop,4 > w _J w 170'- 160'- Tsa 150' -1 TD=41'h' TD=SO' 140'- ProposedFF=193}\ft FILL QopM Tsa Ex1SI1ngGrade B-4 (projected 86' NE) TD=41'h' TP-6 (projected 87' NE) FILL + TD=3' QopM Tsa Propose~ FF ,207 9511 B-7 (projected 14' NE) TD=46v.' D' 240' 230' 220' 210' 200' m r m < 1-190' ~ 0 z a? 1-180' ~ :;· 3 "' -= 170' 160' 150' 140' 130' 130' KEY: ---? Approximate location of geologic contact (queried where uncertain) Proposed Building Location FILL Previously placed Fill Qop,4 Old Paralic Deposits, Unit 2-4, Undivided Tsa Santiago Formation cH High Expansive Fat Clay 6295 Ferris Square, Suite C San D1ego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 SCALE: 1" = 30' 2:1 VERTICAL EXAGGERATION GEOLOGIC CROSS-SECTIONS MTGL, INC PROJECT NO. 1916A11 LOG NO. 15-1063 FIGURE 6 KEY: ---? Ul E c Q) ~ z 0 ~ > w _J w E E' 240' 240' 230'- I ------l 220'- 210'- 200'- "--230' "--220' -210' -200' m r 190' ~ I I B-6)1 ~ 8 1 TP-2 B-3 (projected 18' NE) )> • 1 PropgssdFF:1888 ft 1 (proJejed24 SW\ S!l- 3 ernoooom-""" (projected 12'SW) . (projected 15'NE) 1_ 190 :::! T FILL ::'ojecJted 53' NE) I '''"'""G""' FILL FILL ~ ?~ TD4Y,' CD ? 1--180' ~ TD=6W ::r 3 (/) 180'- = 170'-Qop,. -170' Qop,. m "' ' C Hill' .-sa I Tsa -160' TD=41%' "--140' _J_ ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________ L130' S24.4°E SCALE: 1" = 30' 2:1 VERTICAL EXAGGERATION FILL Previously placed Fill Approximate location of geologic contact (queried where uncertain) Qop24 Old Paralic Deposits, Unit 2-4, Undivided GEOLOGIC CROSS-SECTIONS Tsa Santiago Formation Proposed Building Location CH High Expansive Fat Clay 6295 Ferris Square, Suite C I MTGL, INC San D1ego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 PROJECT NO. 1916A 11 LOG NO. 15-1063 FIGURE 7 Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III -Geotechnical Investigation Carlsbad, California Retaining wall Wall waterproofing per architect's specifications Compacted fill Wall footing SPECIFICATIONS FOR CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL (CAL TRANS SPECIFICATIONS) Sieve Size %Passing 1" 100 3/4" 90-100 3/8" 40-100 No.4 25-40 No.8 18-33 No.30 5-15 No.50 0-7 No.200 0-3 0 0 0 0 0 0 MTGL Project No. 1916All MTGLLogNo.lS-1063 Soil backfill, compacted Ito 90% relative compaction* Filter fabric envelope (Mirafi 140N or approved equivalent) ** Minimum of 1 cubic foot per linear foot of 3/4" crushed rock 3" diameter perforated PVC pipe (schedule 40 or equivalent) with pe1rforations oriented down as depicted minimum 1% gradient to suitable outlet * Based on ASTM 01557 ** If class 2 permeable material (See gradation to left) is used in place of 3/4"-1 1/2" gravel. Filter fabric may be deleted. Class 2 permeable material compacted to 90% relative compaction.* RETAINING WALL DRAINAGE DETAIL Figure 8 6295 Fcn·is Square, Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 APPENDIX A REFERENCES Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III -Geotechnical Investigation Carlsbad, California APPENDIX A REFERENCES MTGL Project No. 1916All MTGLLogNo.lS-1063 Anderson, J.G., Rockwell, T.K., Agnew, D.C (1989). Past and Possible Future Earthquakes of Significance to the San Diego Region, Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 4, No.2, pp 299-335. California Building Standards Commission (2013). 2013 California Building Code, July 2013. California Division of Mines and Geology, 1997, Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones in California, Special Publication 42. California Geological Survey, 2008, Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California, Special Publication 117. Excel Engineering (2006). 'As-Built' Grading Plans for: Carlsbad Ranch, Planning Area No. 5, Resort Site-Phase 1, Project No. CT 03-02, Drawing No. 428-9A, Sheets 11, 12, 13, 15, and 17. Kennedy, Michael P. and Siang Tan (2005). Geologic Map of the Oceanside 30' x 60' Quadrangle, California, USGS Digitally Prepared. Leighton and Associates (2005). Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed 53-Acre Resort Development-Phase 1, Carlsbad Ranch, Planning Area No. 5, Carlsbad, California, Project No. 040575-003, Aprilll. Seed, H.B. and Whitman, R.V., 1970, Design of Earth Structures for Dynamic Loads in ASCE Specialty Conference, Lateral Stresses in the Ground and Design of Earth-Retaining Structures. U.S. Geologic Survey (2010). Design Maps, http://geohazards.usgs.gov/designmpas/us. PageAl 6295 Fenis Square, Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 (gsg) 537-3999 APPENDIXB FIELD EXPLORATION PROGRAM Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III -Geotechnical Investigation Carlsbad, California APPENDIXB FIELD EXPLORATION PROGRAM MTGL Project No. 1916A11 MTGLLogNo. 15-1063 The subsurface conditions for this Geotechnical Investigation were explored by excavating 13 exploratory borings and 19 exploratory trenches. The exploratory borings were excavated using an 8-inch diameter hollow-stem-auger to a maximum depth of 51 Yz feet below existing grade. The exploratory trenches were excavated using a track-mounted mini-excavator to a maximum depth of 10 below existing grade. The approximate locations of the borings and test pits are shown on the Proposed Development Plan (Figure 1 ). The field exploration was performed under the supervision of our engineer who maintained a continuous log of the subsurface soils encountered and obtained samples for laboratory testing. All drive samples were obtained by SPT or California Tube Sampler. Subsurface conditions are summarized on the accompanying Logs of Borings and Logs of Test Pits. The logs contain factual information and interpretation of subsurface conditions between samples. The stratum indicated on these logs represents the approximate boundaty between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The logs show subsurface conditions at the dates and locations indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times. Identification of the soils encountered during the subsurface exploration was made using the field identification procedure of the Unified Soils Classification System (ASTM D2488). A legend indicating the symbols and definitions used in this classification system and a legend defining the terms used in describing the relative compaction, consistency or firmness of the soil are attached in this appendix. Bag samples of the major earth units were obtained for laboratory inspection and testing, and the in-place density of the various strata encountered in the exploration was determined The exploratory borings were located in the field by using cultural features depicted on a preliminary site plan provided by the client. Each location should be considered accurate only to the scale and detail of the plan utilized. The exploratory borings were backfilled in accordance with State of California regulations which incorporated compacting soil cuttings and bentonite chips. We are also presenting select borings from the 2005 Geotechnical Investigation by Leighton and Associates, Inc. The information from these borings were used for geologic interpretation and engineering analysis. Page Bl 6295 Ferris Square, Suite C San Diego, C A 92121 (858) 537-3999 Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III -Geotechnical Investigation Carlsbad, California MTGL Project No. 1916All MTGLLogNo.lS-1063 UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM $ 00 ~ GRAVELS Clean Gravels (less GW Well-graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, ·-·-(J) are more than half of than 5% fines) little or no fines 0 1Z1 ·-"'-"' coarse fraction larger Poorly-graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, "0 ·§ 0 Gravels with fines GP ·~ ~ ~ than #4 sieve little or no fmes so s a SANDS Clean Sands (less Silty Gravels, poorly-graded gravel- .2 d>~£ are more than half of than 5% fines) GM sand-silt mixtures r9 ~ ~ a> "' 0 -OJ) coarse fraction larger Clayey Gravels, poorly-graded gravel-·;;: U/\E Sands with fines GC 1 than #4 sieve sand-clay mixtures sw Well-graded sands, gravelly sands, p., little or no fines ~ (I) Poorly-graded sands, gravelly sands, 1 SP "' SILTS AND CLAYS little or no fines (I) Silty Sands, poorly-graded sands-£ "' Liquid Limit SM ';;j .~ ·.: Less than 50 gravel-clay mixtures (I) ~ ~ Clayey Sands, poorly-graded sand-~ s .;!:l sc iZi '+-; "' gravel-silt mixtures "0 oo ~ ~~ ML Inorganic clays oflow to med plasticity, "0 -=~~: gravelly, sandy, silty, or lean clays ~ 1\ 1:: ..ZI <IS r/J ·-..s:: Inorganic clays oflow to med plasticity, tZi 0 ...... CL r/J .... gravelly, sandy, silty, or lean clays ::::i "0~ (I) <IS 0 ·= s OL Organic silts and clays 0 <IS "' ('.1 ~.;!3 oflow plastic:ity ~ (I) SILTS AND CLAYS Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous .!3 Liquid Limit MH ~ fme sands or silts Greater than 50 Inorganic clays of high plasticity, CH fat clays OH Organic silts and clays of medium to high plasticity Highly Organic Soils PT Peat, humus swamp soils with high organic content .. : <: GRAIN SizE .. Sq;E PROPORTION :. Description Sieve Size · GrainSize Approximate Size Trace: -Less than 5% Boulders >12" >12" Larger than basketball-sized Few-5%to 10% Cobbles 3"-12" 3"-12" Fist-sized to basketball-sized Little-15% to 20% Gravel Coarse %"-3" %"-3" Thumb-sized Some-30% to 45% Fine #4-%" 0.19"-0.75" Peat-sized to thumb-sized Mostly -50% to 100% Coarse #10-#4 0.079"-0.19" Rock salt-sized to pea-sized MOISTURE CONTENT Sand Medium #40 -#10 0.017"-0.079" Sugar-sized to rock salt-sized Dry-Absence of moisture Fine #200-#40 0.0029"-0.017" Flour-sized to sugar-sized Moist-Damp but not visible Fines Passing #200 <0.0029" Flour-sized or smaller Wet-Visible free water CONSISTENCY FINE GRAINED SOILS RELATIVE DENSITY COARSE GRAINED SOILS Apparent SPT. Density (Blows/Foot) Very Soft <2 Soft 2-4 Firm 5-8 Stiff 9-15 Very Stiff 16-30 Hard >30 Mod CASampler Apparent (Blows/Foot) Density <3 Very Loose 3-6 Loose 7-12 Medium Dense 13-25 Dense 26-50 Very Dense >50 Page B-2 SPT (Blows/Foot) <4 4-10 11-30 31-50 <50 Mod CA Sampler (Blows/Foot) <5 5-12 13-35 36-60 <60 6295 Fcnis Square, Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 BORING NO. B-1 Logged by: SEV Date Drilled: 3/9/2015 Method of Drilling: 8-inch diameter hollow-stem auger Elevation: 185' msl 1-w w ii:' ~ j::' u.. .J .J IX ll. ll. (.) ~ !:!:.. w ::E ::E ~ w :I: ll. <( <( ~ IX DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS 1-(/) (/) (/) ::1 ll. ;: w ~ ii) 1- w ~ (/) 0 .J z i5 c .J IX ::1 w Ill c Ill c ::E }' r-1 ,.,. FILL: Silty Sand (SM}, reddish brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, medium dense, trace clay. ,,,() t-2 ~ t-3 36 128 8.4 t-4 f-5 ~ t-6 20 l.s~j f-7 OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS, Unit 2-4, Undivided (Q0D2-4): Silty Sandstone 'SM', f-8 reddish brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, moderately cemented. 9 10 ~ 11 78-8" 112 8.4 12 13 14 15 ~ 16 61 ~ 17 f-18 f-19 f-20 ~ f-21 71 f-22 f-23 f-24 f-25 ~ Some gravel. '-26 59 f-27 SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa): Silty Sandstone 'SM', light reddish brown, f-28 fine grained, moist, moderately cemented. -29 f-30 PROJECT NO. 1916A11 A{~s ,,;, sq"'"· s""' c San Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 LOG OF BORING FIGURE B-1a BORING NO. B-1 (continued) Logged by: SEV Date Drilled: 3/9/2015 Method of Drilling: 8-inch diameter hollow-stem auger Elevation: 185' msl 1-w w u:::-~ LL ...I ...I t=' 0::: a. a. (.) ~ !:!:.. w ::!: ::!: e:.. w :r: a. <( <( ~ 0::: DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS 1-en en en ::1 a. ;: w ~ iii 1-w ~ (/) 0 ...I z 0 c ...I 0::: ::1 w Ill c Ill c ::!: I'''· [Continued] 31 Silty Sandstone 'SM', light gray, fine grained, moist, moderately cemented. Atterberg Limits 59 ~ (Non-Plastic) 32 33 34 35 ~ Grayish brown, moist to wet. -36 50 '-37 38 ,.. 39 ;-40 ~ f-41 \1 68 ~ - f-42 1-43 1-44 f-45 i (Non-Plastic) Atterberg Limits 46 58 @ 47 48 49 f-50 ---------~ ----·------·------~(~y~~9!£~t9~i§!Q6~=·£8~=a~<!Y.=6~:PJ§§yfiti:~9I~~~J~Q69Iii~~~~~t~~========== --------- 1-51 41 f-52 TotaiDepth: 51%feet f-53 Groundwater encountered at 41 feet Backfilled: 3/9/2015 f-54 f-55 f-56 1-57 f-58 f-59 1-60 ~; ''"'" Sq"'re, s""' c PROJECT N0.1916A11 an Diego, CA 92121 LOG OF BORING FIGURE B-1b (858) 537-3999 Logged by: SEV Method of Drilling: 1-w w u.. ...I ...I i=' 0:: a. a. !:!:.. w ::!!: ::!!: ::t: a. <( <( 1-(/) (/) (/) a. s: w ::.:: w 0 ~ ...I Q ...I 0:: ::J £ll Q £ll 2 3 4 39 5 6 31 7 8 9 10 11 74 12 13 14 15 16 43 17 BORING NO. B-2 Date Drilled: 3/13/2015 8-inch diameter hollow-stem auger Elevation: 193' msl u::-~ (.) ~ ~ w ~ 0:: ::J Ci) 1-(/) z 0 w Q ::!!: 114 6.8 DESCRIPTION FILL: Silty Sand (SM), reddish brown, fine to medium grained, moist, medium dense. OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS, Unit 2-4, Undivided (Q0p2-4): Silty Sandstone 'SM', reddish brown, fine to medium grained, moist, moderately cemented. Dark brown and reddish brown. Trace clay. LAB TESTS Maximum Density/ Optimum Moisture 18 -----------------·------·-------------------------------------------------------------------------------·----- 19 20 21 50 22 23 24 25 26 48 27 28 29 30 PROJECT NO. 1916A11 Poorly graded sandstone with silt 'SP-SM', reddish brown and brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, moderately cemented. 6295 Ferris Square, Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 LOG OF BORING FIGURE B-2a BORING NO. B-2 (continued) Logged by: SEV Date Drilled: 3/13/2015 Method of Drilling: 8-inch diameter hollow-stem auger Elevation: 193' msl 1-w w u::-~ i=' Ll. -I -I 0::: ll. ll. (,) ~ !:!=.. w ::!: ::!: ~ w ::1: ll. <( <( ~ 0::: DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS 1-en en en :;:) ll. ~ w ~ iii 1- w ~ en 0 -I z i5 c -I 0::: :;:) w m c m c ::!: : [Continued] 31 62 <spt. Poorly graded sandstone with silt 'SP-SM', reddish brown and brown, fine to ~ 32 coarse grained, moist, moderately cemented, rounded gravel. 33 34 35 l'"i'i:' 36 ~ SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa): Silty Sandstone 'SM', light brown with orangish 70 brown, fine grained, moist, moderately cemented. 37 38 ,... 39 r-40 1"7? r-41 53 I'~W 42 Total Depth; 41%feet r-43 Groundwater not encountered Backfilled: 3/13/2015 r-44 r-45 f-46 r-47 48 49 50 51 52 r-53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 ~ Fe<e;, Sq""'· S";(' C PROJECT NO. 1916A11 an Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537 ·3999 LOG OF BORING FIGURE B-2b BORING NO. B-3 Logged by: SEV Date Drilled: 3/10/2015 Method of Drilling: 8-inch diameter hollow-stem auger Elevation: 186' msl 1-w w £2 ~ i= u. ...I ...I 0::: a. a. 0 ~ !:!:. w :iii :iii e:.. w :1:: a. <( <( >-It DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS 1-1/) 1/) 1/) 1-:;) a. 3: w ~ ii) 1-w ~ 1/) 0 ...I z 0 c ...I 0::: :;) w Ill c Ill c :iii 1-1 FILL: Silty Sand (SM), reddish brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, medium dense to dense, some gravel, trace clay. r-2 1-3 ~ 1-4 58 127 9.6 Brown, dense. r-5 ~ 1-6 32 1-7 1-8 r-9 OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS, Unit 2-4, Undivided (Q0p2-4): Silty Sandstone 'SM', reddish brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, moderately cemented, trace clay. r-10 77 1-11 40 ~ r-12 r-13 1-14 r-15 ~ 16 70 17 1-18 Reddish brown and dark brown, fine to medium grained. r-19 r-20 ~ 1-21 55 1-22 1-23 '-24 1-25 ~ r-26 51 1-27 Total depth: 26Y:. feet 28 Groundwater not encountered Backfilled: 3/10/2015 29 1-30 ~< F,;, Sq""· '""' C PROJECT NO. 1916A11 an Diego, CA 92121 LOG OF BORING FIGURE B-3 (858) 537-3999 BORING NO. B-4 Logged by: SEV Date Drilled: 3/13/2015 Method of Drilling: 8-inch diameter hollow-stem auger Elevation: 195%' msl 1-w w u::-~ i=" u. ..I ..I 0:: Q. Q. (,) !!.... !:!::. w == == e:. w :I: Q. <( <( ~ 0:: DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS 1-~ t/) t/) ::J 1-Q. w X: ii) t/) w 0 ~ ..I z 0 Q ..I 0:: ::J w lXI Q lXI Q ::iii FILL: Silty Sand (SM), reddish brown, fine to medium grained, moist, medium r-1 dense. r-2 OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS, Unit 2-4, Undivided (Q0p2•4): Silty Sandstone 'SM', light brown, fine grained, moist, moderately cemented. 3 ; 4 75-9" 118 10.4 Light brown with orangish brown. r-5 ~ 6 87 ~ 7 8 f-9 r-10 i f-11 42 Fine to medium grained, trace clay. f-12 r-13 f-14 f-15 I f-16 71 Orangish brown with dark brown. r-17 18 19 20 ~ 21 88-t~ 11%" f-22 f-23 24 -25 ~ 26 55 Rounded gravel. r 27 f-28 r-29 f-30 PROJECT NO. 1916A11 ~ Fooi' Sq"'"' S"it' C an Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 LOG OF BORING FIGURE B-4a BORING NO. B-4 (continued) Logged by: SEV Date Drilled: 3/13/2015 Method of Drilling: 8-inch diameter hollow-stem auger Elevation: 195Yz' msl 1-w w L2 ~ i=' Ll. .J .J ~ a. a. 0 ~ !:!:.. w ::!!: ::!!: ~ w :::t: a. <( <( ~ ~ DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS 1-(/) (/) (/) ::1 a. 3: w ~ u; 1-w ~ (/) 0 .J z 0 c .J ~ ::1 w m c m c ::!!: i \ .~ r-31 88-1::"· Poorly graded sandstone with silt 'SP-SM', orangish brown and dark brown, 11 y,'' ~ fine to medium grained, moist, moderately cemented. r-32 33 34 r-35 7 36 50-3" S~T Gravel. 37 38 39 40 I , ·:: ·~· .• SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa): Silty Sandstone 'SM', light brown, fine grained, 41 I,'~~~ moist, moderately cemented. 54 42 Total depth: 41%feet 43 Groundwater not encountered Backfilled: 3/13/2015 -44 45 46 47 r-48 r-49 r-50 r-51 r-52 r-53 r-54 r-55 r-56 r-57 f-58 r-59 r-60 ~ F'"i' Sq"'"· S"ite C PROJECT NO. 1916A11 an Diego, CA 92121 LOG OF BORING FIGURE B-4b (858) 537-3999 BORING NO. B-5 Logged by: SEV Date Drilled: 3/12/2015 Method of Drilling: 8-inch diameter hollow-stem auger Elevation: •• 1-w w u:-~ j:' LL. ...1 ...1 a:: a. a. (.) !!..... !:!::.. w ::iE ::iE ~ w ::t: a. < < ~ a:: DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS 1-0 0 0 ::) a. ;: w ~ ii) 1-w 2: 0 0 ...1 z 0 c ...1 a:: ::) w al c al c ::iE ., 1 ,,~ FILL: Silty Sand (SM), brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, loose to R-Value IT:__ medium dense, trace clay. 2 3 r-4 5 ,... 6 r-7 r-8 1-9 r-10 I r-11 23 Some gravel. 1-12 1-13 -----------------·--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------·----- r-14 Sandy Clay (CL), brown, medium plasticity, moist, hard. 15 50-6" ,CAl" 107 5.8 -......;__; OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS, Unit 2-4, Undivided (Q0p2•4): Silty Sandstone 'SM', 16 brown to reddish brown, fine to medium grained, moist, moderately cemented. 17 18 19 20 ~ r-21 57 J.!ll. r-22 r-23 r-24 r-25 ~ r-26 --------->'~ ----·------·------50 ~ -saiici},-ciaystor1Ei'cC·~9ray~medilim"Piasticiiy~n;;;;-;cn;;;(ieriiiEiiY"irid"lirafiJ.---·------Atterberg Limits 1-27 (LL=37 .3, Pl=12.9, Pl=24.4) 28 1-29 1-30 PROJECT NO. 1916A11 ~ '"'' """"'· '"''' c an Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 LOG OF BORING FIGURE B-5a BORING NO. B-5 (continued) Logged by: SEV Date Drilled: 3/12/2015 Method of Drilling: 8-inch diameter hollow-stem auger Elevation: -- 1-w w u:::-~ i=' 1.1. ..1 ..1 0:: a. a. (,) ~ !:!:.. w :iE :iE e:.. w :I: a. <( <( ~ 0:: DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS 1-(/) (/) (/) ::I a. 3: w ~ ii) 1-w ~ (/) 0 ..1 z 0 c ..1 0:: ::I w Ill c Ill c :iE r-31 ~ Silty Sandstone 'SM', reddish brown, fine to medium grained, moist, moderately 54 cemented. -32 r-33 r-34 r-35 tl r-36 39 Trace clay. r-37 r-38 r-39 40 r 41 66 ~ 42 Gravels. 43 44 45 50-3" ''SP:F; ~ 46 47 !(BORING REFUSAL ON GRAVEL LAYER AT 47 FEET) 48 Total depth: 47 feet Groundwater not encountered 49 Backfilled: 3/12/2015 50 r-51 r-52 r-53 r-54 r-55 r-56 r-57 r-58 r-59 r-60 PROJECT N0.1916A11 ~ F'"'" Sqco", Scilli C an Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 LOG OF BORING FIGURE 8-Sb BORING NO. B-6 Logged by: SEV Date Drilled: 3/9/2015 Method of Drilling: 8-inch diameter hollow-stem auger Elevation: 189%' msl 1-w w u:::--LL. ...1 ...1 ~ i= 0:: 0. 0. (.) ~ !:!:.. w :::!: :::!: e:. w :J: 0. <( <( ~ 0:: DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS 1-~ II) II) :::l 0. w ~ (i) 1-w ~ II) 0 ...1 z 0 c ...1 0:: :::l w m c m c :::!: 1 ~;,s,; FILL: Silty Sand (SM), reddish brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, medium Expansion Index dense. 2 I< ' (Expansion Index= 0) ,... ~ 3 ~ r-4 37 ~ 125 12.1 Dense. r-5 ---::- f-6 ~ Brown and dark gray, fine to medium grained, abundant organics. 31 f-7 r-8 r-9 f-10 r-11 70 ~ OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS, Unit 2-4, Undivided (Q0p24): Silty Sandstone 'SM', reddish brown, fine to medium grained, moist, moderately cemented. r-12 f-13 14 15 I r-16 75 f-17 f-18 r-19 20 ~ 21 59 Reddish brown and dark brown. 22 23 24 25 ~ -26 66 27 r-28 29 30 PROJECT N0.1916A11 ~ '""' Sqcere, sc;t, c an Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 LOG OF BORING FIGURE B-6a BORING NO. B-6 (continued) Logged by: SEV Date Drilled: 3/9/2015 Method of Drilling: 8-inch diameter hollow-stem auger Elevation: 189%' msl 1-w w ii:' ~ i=' u.. ...I ...I ~ ll. ll. 0 !!- !:!:.. w ::iii: ::iii: ~ w ::t: ll. <( <( ~ ~ DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS 1-~ (/) (/) :J ll. w ~ in 1- w ~ (/) 0 ...I z 0 c ...I ~ :J w lXI c lXI c ::iii: [Continued] 31 54 ~ Silty Sandstone 'SM', light brown and orange, fine to coarse grained, moist, 32 moderately cemented, some gravels. r-33 f-34 r-35 ~ f-36 50-6" f-37 38 39 SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa): Silty Sandstone 'SM', light brown, fine grained, moist to wet, moderately cemented. 40 ------:; 41 67 ,:§fi~' r-42 Total depth: 41%feet 43 Groundwater not encountered Backfilled: 3/9/2015 44 45 46 47 48 49 f-50 f-51 f-52 f-53 54 55 '-56 57 f-58 59 f-60 ~ ,.,;, Sqo,., '""' C PROJECT NO. 1916A11 an Diego, CA 92121 LOG OF BORING FIGURE B-6b (858) 537-3999 BORING NO. B-7 Logged by: SEV Date Drilled: 3/12/2015 Method of Drilling: 8-inch diameter hollow-stem auger Elevation: 202' msl 1-w w u: -I=' LL ...I ...I c 0::: 11. 11. 0 !::!:.. w :!!: :!!: !!::. w ::r: 0.. <( <( ~ 0::: DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS 1-en en en ::J 11. ~ w X: u; 1-w ;:: en 0 0 ...I z 0 ...I 0::: ::J w Ill 0 Ill 0 :!!: 1 FILL: Sandy Fat Clay (CH}, brown, medium plasticity, moist, firm to hard. 2 3 50-6" .CAL t 114 13.4 pH, Resistivity, ,... 4 OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS, Unit 2-4, Undivided (Q0024): Silty Sandstone 'SM'., Sulfate, Chloride brown and reddish brown, fine to medium grained, moist, moderately cemented. 5 ~ r-6 50-6" Reddish and yellowish brown, fine grained. 1-7 1-8 r-9 r-10 77 1-11 50-5'/," ·~~r· 1-12 r-13 -----------------·------·------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1-14 Sandy Claystone 'CL', reddish brown with black, low plasticity, moist, moderately indurated. r-15 ! (55.9% Passing No. 200 Sieve; LL=27.0, PL=15.3, Pl=11.7) No. 200 Wash, r-16 Atterberg Limits 19 ---....; r-17 -----------------·------·------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1-18 Claystone 'CL', reddish brown, medium plasticity, moist, moderately indurated. 1-19 1-20 ---------~ ----·------·-------------------------------------------------------------------------------·----- 21 Silty Sandstone 'SM', reddish brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, moderately 42 ~ cemented, trace clay. 22 23 -----------------·------·------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 24 Poorly Graded Sandstone with Silt 'SP-SM', yellowish brown and brown, fine to medium grained, moist, moderately cemented. 25 ~ (Non-Plastic) Atterberg Limits 26 47 27 28 29 30 ~< ''"'' Sqoo", SqHe C PROJECT NO. 1916A11 an Diego, CA 92121 LOG OF BORING FIGURE B-7a (858) 537-3999 BORING NO. B-7 (continued) Logged by: SEV Date Drilled: 3/12/2015 Method of Drilling: 8-inch diameter hollow-stem auger Elevation: 202' msl 1-w w u:::--LL. ...J ...J ~ i=' ~ a.. a.. (.) ~ !6. w :E :E ~ w J: a.. <( <( ~ ~ DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS 1-C/) C/) C/) ::1 a.. ~ w ~ ii) 1-w ~ C/) 0 ...J z 0 c ...J ~ ::1 w Ill c Ill c :E , 'C, [Continued] 31 :, Poorly Graded Sandstone with Silt 'SP-SM', yellowish brown and brown, fine to 42 1'i!'f medium grained, moist, moderately cemented, ,... 32 f-33 r-34 r-35 ~ f-36 50-5%" Dark brown and black, abundant gravels. r-37 r-38 39 40 50-5%" 1 si>r' Yellowish brown. !-'--'-'- 41 42 43 44 r-45 litl~ f-46 SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa): Silty Sandstone 'SM', yellowish brown, fine 86 lorained, moist, moderately cemented. r-47 Total depth: 46% feet 48 Groundwater not encountered Backfilled: 3/12/2015 49 50 51 52 53 r-54 r-55 f-56 f-57 58 59 60 PROJECT NO. 1916A11 "~' ''"'' Sq""'· s""' c an Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 LOG OF BORING FIGURE B-7b BORING NO. B-8 Logged by: SEV Date Drilled: 3/12/2015 Method of Drilling: 8-inch diameter hollow-stem auger Elevation: 213' msl 1-w w iL -i=' ll. ...I ...I :::!:: 0:: 0. 0. 0 ~ !:!:.. w :!: :!: !:!:.. w ::1: 0. <( <( ~ 0:: DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS 1-U) U) U) ;::) 0. ~ w ::.:: iii 1- w ~ U) 0 ...I z 0 c ...I 0:: ;::) w ttl c ttl c :!: 1 FILL: Silty Sand (SM), yellowish brown, fine to medium grained, moist, medium dense, trace clay. 2 3 4 5 6 7 r-8 r-9 Some gravels. r-10 !: r-11 14 r-12 r-13 14 15 ,;: ' c; 16 75-11" ~ 105 9.4 SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa): Silty Sandstone 'SM', light brown and reddish 17 brown, fine grained, moist, moderately cemented. r-18 r-19 r-20 y (16.0% Passing No. 200 Sieve) No. 200Wash r-21 72 ;sp,r; Orangish brown. .;.......,.... r-22 r-23 24 25 r--,....-Total depth: 29% feet Groundwater not encountered ~ Backfilled: 3/12/2015 26 70 27 -----------------·------·------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 28 ,...._.,._ 1·, .. Poorly Graded Sandstone with Silt 'SP-SM', light brown and reddish brown, fine to ~ 29 medium grained, moist, moderately cemented. 76 ·SI>J r-30 ~' '""' s'"'"· s,;,, c PROJECT NO. 1916A11 an Diego, CA 92121 LOG OF BORING FIGURE B-8 (858) 537-3999 BORING NO. B-9 Logged by: SEV Date Drilled: 3/11/2015 Method of Drilling: 8-inch diameter hollow-stem auger Elevation: 212' msl 1-w w LL' ~ i=" LL ...I ...I a:: a. a. (.) ~ !:!:.. w ::!: ::!: e:.. w ::J: a. <( <( ~ a:: DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS 1-~ (/) (/) ::1 a. w ~ 1i) 1-w ~ (/) 0 ...I z 6 c ...I a:: ::1 w a:l c a:l c ::!: r-1 FILL: Poorly graded Sand (SP), light orang ish brown, medium grained, moist, medium dense. 2 r-3 [lli r-4 47 125 8.0 Orangish brown. r-5 ~ Coarse grained. r-6 28 I r-7 r-8 r-9 t-10 1".2;.~~ ~~~.'}' r-11 50-5" ~ ~ OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS, Unit 2-4, Undivided (Q0D24): Poorly Graded Sandstone 'SP', orangish brown, medium to coarse grained, moist, moderately r-12 cemented. 13 14 15 ~ 16 85 Coarse grained, iron oxide staining. r-17 18 19 r-20 21 60 Medium to coarse grained. r---- 22 23 r-24 r-25 ~ 1-26 1:· 55 SPT Coarse grained, trace clay. r---- t-27 t-28 1-29 t-30 ~ F'";' Sq"'re, s,;;, C PROJECT NO. 1916A11 an Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 LOG OF BORING FIGURE B-9a BORING NO. B-9 (continued) Logged by: SEV Date Drilled: 3/11/2015 Method of Drilling: 8-inch diameter hollow-stem auger Elevation: 212' msl 1-w w u:::--I=" u.. .J .J ~ D. (.) .. ~ D. -!:!:.. w ::!: ::!: e::. w J: D. <( <( ~ ~ DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS 1-~ II) II) :J D. w ~ ii) 1-w i:!: II) 0 .J z 0 0 .J ~ :J w co 0 co 0 ::!: r-31 ~ SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa): Sandy Siltstone 'ML', light orang ish brown, 51 non-plastic, moist, moderately cemented. r-32 r-33 r-34 r-35 ~ r-36 38 ~ r-37 Abundant gravels. 38 39 r-40 m Light gray to orang ish brown. r-41 50 42 Total depth: 41%feet 43 Groundwater not encountered Backfilled: 3/11/2015 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 r-51 r-52 r-53 r-54 r-55 r-56 r-57 f-58 r-59 r-60 ~ ''"'' sq"'"· s""' c PROJECT NO. 1916A11 an Diego, CA 92121 LOG OF BORING FIGURE B-9b (858) 537-3999 ,, BORING NO. B-1 0 Logged by: SEV Date Drilled: 3/11/2015 Method of Drilling: 8-inch diameter hollow-stem auger Elevation: 225' msl .... w w u::-~ LL .J .J i=' Ill: a. a. (,) ~ !:!::.. w :a: :a: e:.. w ::1: a. <( <( ~ Ill: DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS .... (/) (/) (/) :::1 a. 3: w ~ ii) .... w ~ (/) 0 .J z 5 c .J Ill: :::1 w Ill c Ill c :a: f-1 1;;~:. FILL: Poorly Graded Sand 'SP', orangish brown, medium to coarse grained, moist, medium dense . t-2 .. ; t-3 50-5" ·cAl) ·~.~~ 126 3.1 Very dense. ---'-~i~~~i: f-4 t-5 •. i,.> t-6 r·~%; OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS, Unit 2-4, Undivided (Q0p2-4): Poorly Graded 52 ~ Siltstone 'SP', orangish and reddish brown, medium to coarse grained, moist, f-7 moderately cemented. ',_ J 8 9 10 1-~~ 1:1~·:,.-Orangish brown, coarse grained. 11 29 87 32.4 ; 12 SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa): Fat Claystone 'CH', gray, high plasticity, moist, moderately indurated. t-13 14 t-15 ---------~ ----·------·------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ~ 16 Sandy Siltstone 'ML', gray, non-plastic, moist, moderately indurated. 49 f-17 f-18 t-19 t-20 11 t-21 56 22 Total depth: 21 'h feet 23 Groundwater not encountered Backfilled: 3/11/2015 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 PROJECT N0.1916A11 £~',.,;, Sqoe~. '""' C an Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 LOG OF BORING FIGURE B-10 BORING NO. B-11 Logged by: SEV Date Drilled: 3/11/2015 Method of Drilling: 8-inch diameter hollow-stem auger Elevation: 224' msl 1-w w u:-~ p u.. ..J ..J 0:: 11. 11. 0 !!.... !:!:.. w :::!!: :::!!: !!:. w ::J: 11. < < ~ 0:: DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS 1-(/) (/) (/) ::::l 11. 3: w ~ ii) 1- w > (/) 0 ..J z 0 Q ..J ii: ::::l w al Q al Q :::!!: 1-1 FILL: Poorly Graded Sand (SP), light yellowish brown, medium to coarse grained, moist, medium dense. 1-2 1-3 50-5" :1:;,1\L 120 7.8 4 OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS, Unit 2-4, Undivided (Q0D24): Poorly Graded Sandstone 'SP', orangish brown, coarse grained, moist, moderately cemented. 5 ~ 6 26 ~ 7 8 9 10 ~ Orangish brown and reddish brown, trace clay. 11 11 ~ 12 I SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa): Fat Claystone 'CH', gray, high plasticity, moist, moderately indurated. Direct Shear 13 82 14 15 ---------I ----·------·------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 16 Silty Sandstone 'SM', light orangish brown, medium grained, moist, moderately 60 cemented. 1-17 18 t-19 20 ~ 21 63 t-22 t-23 t-24 t-25 ~ 1-26 48 S~T Light gray. -....;..__ 1-27 t-28 1-29 t-30 ~ ''"'' Sq""'' Sciffi C PROJECT NO. 1916A11 an Diego, CA 92121 LOG OF BORING FIGURE B-11a (858) 537-3999 BORING NO. B-11 (continued) Logged by: SEV Date Drilled: 3/11/2015 Method of Drilling: 8-inch diameter hollow-stem auger Elevation: 224' msl 1-w w u:::--i=' u.. .J .J ~ ~ a. a. 0 ~ !!:.. w ::iE ::iE e:.. w ::1: a. < < ~ ~ DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS 1-II) II) II) ::::1 a. == w :::.:: ii) 1-w ;:: II) 0 .J z 0 c .J ~ ::::1 w al c al c ::iE [Continued] 1-31 ~ Silty Sandstone 'SM', light gray, fine grained, moist, moderately cemented, iron 77 oxide. 1-32 1-33 -----------------·------·------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1-34 Poorly Graded Sandstone 'SP', light orangish brown, medium grained, moist, moderately cemented. 1-35 ~ 1-36 90-11" 1-37 1-38 1-39 1-40 ~ 1-41 50-6" Reddish brown, iron oxide. 1-42 1-43 1-44 1-45 ~ 1-46 88 Light gray. 1-47 1-48 1-49 1-50 ~- 1-51 50-6" ·sl>.r Oranqish brown. 1-52 Total depth: 51 feet Groundwater not encountered 1-53 Backfilled: 3/11/2015 54 55 '-56 57 r-58 59 r-60 PROJECT N0.1916A11 .~ Fwi• '""""· '"'' c an Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 LOG OF BORING FIGURE B-11 b BORING NO. B-12 Logged by: SEV Date Drilled: 3/10/2015 Method of Drilling: 8-inch diameter hollow-stem auger Elevation: 226' msl 1-w w i:L -i=' Ll. ...I ...I ~ 0:: 0. 0. (.) e... !:!:.. w :E :E e:. w :I: 0. <( <( ~ 0:: DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS 1-(/) (/) (/) ::1 0. 3: w ~ (i) 1-w ;:: (/) 0 ...I z 0 0 ...I 0:: ::1 w al 0 al 0 :E ', •( 'cc FILL: Silty Sand (SM), brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, medium dense. Maximum Density/ r-1 ~ Optimum Moisture, r-2 Direct Shear r-3 ~ r-4 32 114 13.1 r-5 ~ OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS, Unit 2-4, Undivided (Q0p2-4): Silty Sandstone 'SM', orang ish brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, moderately cemented, trace clay. r-6 32 f-7 t-8 t-9 10 ~ Direct Shear 11 45 116 15.3 12 13 14 15 I 16 32 17 18 19 20 21 ih SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa): Silty Sandstone 'SM', light brown and reddish 18 brown, fine grained, moist, moderately cemented. t-22 r-23 f-24 r-25 ~ f-26 ,• '.'· .. 72 SPT Orangish brown. f-27 f-28 r-29 f-30 PROJECT NO. 1916A11 ~Fee,;, Sqo,., Sq;teC an Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 LOG OF BORING FIGURE B-12a BORING NO. B-12 (continued) Logged by: SEV Date Drilled: 3/10/2015 Method of Drilling: 8-inch diameter hollow-stem auger Elevation: 226' msl 1-w w u::-~ j::' u.. .J .J 0:: 0.. 0.. () ~ !:!:.. w ::!: ::!: e:.. w :t: 0.. <( <( ~ 0:: DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS 1-!/) !/) !/) ::1 0.. :: w ~ ii) 1- w ~ !/) 0 .J z 0 c .J 0:: ::1 w Ill c Ill c ::!: .. ,;;; Poorly Graded Sandstone 'SP', light brown, fine grained, moist, moderately f-31 78 $i>f cemented. 32 33 34 35 r« 36 86 ·.~~j 37 Total depth; 36% feet f-38 Groundwater not encountered Backfilled: 3/10/2015 f-39 f-40 f-41 f-42 f-43 f-44 f-45 f-46 f-47 f-48 f-49 f-50 1-51 f-52 f-53 ,... 54 r-55 f-56 f-57 1-58 f-59 f-60 PROJECT N0.1916A11 ~ Foo;, Sq"'"· '""' C an Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 LOG OF BORING FIGURE B-12b BORING NO. B-13 Logged by: SEV Date Drilled: 3/10/2015 Method of Drilling: 8-inch diameter hollow-stem auger Elevation: 230' msl .... w w u:::-~ I=' LL ...1 ...1 0::: 0.. 0.. (,) ~ !!:... w :E :E e:.. w ::1: 0.. <( <( ~ 0::: DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS .... ~ (/) (/) ::1 0.. w ~ Ci) .... w ~ (/) 0 ...1 z 0 c ...1 0::: ::1 w Ill c Ill c :E iJ '',; FILL: Silty Sand (SM), brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, medium dense, pH, Resistivity, f-1 lv\J trace clay. Sulfate, Chloride r-2 ~ f-3 ~ Dark brown with black, fine to medium grained, some gravel, some organics. f-4 33 123 10.5 r-5 ~ OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS, Unit 2·4, Undivided (Q0n24): Silty Sandstone 'SM', r-6 reddish brown and brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, moderately cemented, 22 trace clay. f-7 f-8 r-9 50-5" :CAL Gravel. ..._ r-10 1-11 r-12 ; 1-13 50-6" Reddish brown, fine grained. 1-14 15 ~. SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa): Fat Claystone 'CH', gray, high plasticity, moist, 50-6" .S~I moderately indurated. 16 17 18 ~ Direct Shear 19 28 92 26.2 ;~rr (78.6% Passing No. 200 Sieve; LL=76.2, PL=20.5, Pl=55.7; No. 200 Wash, 20 Expansion Index= 233) Atterberg Limits, i Expansion Index r-21 -------------·------·------------------------------------------------------------------------------------36 r-22 Sandy Claystone 'CL', gray, medium plasticity, moist, moderately indurated. r-23 -24 r-25 ---------r ----·------·------------------------------------------------------------------------------------:.c. Poorly Graded Sandstone with Silt 'SP-SM', light brown, fine grained, moist, f-26 53 SPT moderately cemented. r-27 f-28 -----------------·------·------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ f-29 Silty Sandstone 'SM', yellow and light brown, fine grained, moist, moderately cemented. r-30 PROJECT NO. 1916A11 £;;{~/";' Sq"'"· s""' c an Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 LOG OF BORING FIGURE B-13a BORING NO. B-13 (continued) Logged by: SEV Date Drilled: 3/10/2015 Method of Drilling: 8-inch diameter hollow-stem auger Elevation: 230' msl 1-w w u::--i= II.. .J .J ~ 0:: D. D. 0 ~ !:!:.. w ::iE ::iE !!:.. w ::1: D. <( <( ~ 0:: DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS 1-U) U) U) ::1 D. ~ w ~ (i) 1- w ~ U) 0 .J z 0 Q .J 0:: ::1 w al Q al Q ::iE "yii'; [Continued] r-31 57 SF! I Silty Sandstone 'SM', yellow and light brown, fine grained, moist, moderately !'-'---cemented. 32 r-33 -----------------·------·------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ f-34 Poorly Graded Sandstone 'SP', yellow and light brown, fine grained, moist, moderately cemented. r-35 " ",· f-36 50-6" ~ f-37 r-38 r-39 f-40 I f-41 50-6" r-42 f-43 f-44 r-45 50-6" ~ r-46 f-47 f-48 f-49 r-50 50-5" • f-51 r-52 Total depth: 51 feet Groundwater not encountered r-53 Backfilled: 3/10/2015 54 55 56 57 58 f-59 f-60 &:~' Fe<eie Sq"'re, SqHe C PROJECT NO. 1916A11 an Diego, CA 92121 LOG OF BORING FIGURE B-13b (858) 537-3999 LOG OF EXPLORATION TEST PIT NO. 1 Logged by: SEV Equipment Used: Mini-Excavator with 18-inch bucket Date Excavated: 3/10/2015 Elevation: 181' msl 1- f- t- f- t- f- 1- i=' !:!::.. J: I-D.. w c 2 3 f-4 1- f-5 -6 -7 -8 -9 -10 DESCRIPTION OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS, Unit 2·4, Undivided (Q0p2-4): Silty Sandstone 'SM', reddish brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, moderately cemented, trace clay. Total depth: 5% feet Groundwater not encountered Backfilled: 3/10/2015 LOG OF EXPLORATION TEST PIT NO. 2 LAB TESTS Logged by: SEV Date Excavated: 3/10/2015 Equipment Used: Mini-Excavator with 18-inch bucket Elevation: 185' msl i=' !:!::.. J: 1-D.. w c - - 2 -3 -4 f-5 t- f-6 1- f-7 t- t--8 t- f-9 1- 10 w .J D.. ::iE <( !/) lll:: .J :::l co DESCRIPTION Fill: Silty Sand (SM), brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, medium dense, trace clay. OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS, Unit 2·4, Undivided (Q0p2-4): Silty Sandstone 'SM', reddish brown, fine to coarse _grained, moist, moderately cemented, trace clay. Total depth: 4% feet Groundwater not encountered Backfilled: 3/10/2015 LOG OF TEST PITS LAB TESTS FIGURE B-14 LOG OF EXPLORATION TEST PIT NO. 3 Logged by: SEV Date Excavated: 3/10/2015 Equipment Used: Mini-Excavator with 18-inch bucket Elevation: 187' msl w j::' ...J a.. !:!:.. :lE :I: < DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS 1-!/) a.. ~ w ...J c ::J Ill 1 !fi%~,~~f: FILL: Silty Sand (SM), brown, fine to medium grained, moist, medium dense. R-Value - ---2 1--3 f- ----4 ---5 r-OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS, Unit 2-4, Undivided (Q0p24): Silty Sandstone 'SM', reddish brown, f--6 fine to coarse grained, moist, moderately cemented, trace clay. f- f--7 Total depth; 6 feet f- f--8 Groundwater not encountered Backfilled: 3/10/2015 t- f--9 f- ----10 LOG OF EXPLORATION TEST PIT NO. 4 Logged by: SEV Date Excavated: 3/9/2015 Equipment Used: Mini-Excavator with 18-inch bucket Elevatic)n: 191' msl w j::' ...J a.. !:!:.. :lE :I: < DESCRIPTION 1-!/) a.. ~ w ...J c ::J Ill f-FILL: Clayey Sand (SC), reddish brown and brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, medium dense. f--1 f- f--2 t- f--3 f- f--4 f- f--5 f- 1--6 OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS, Unit 2-4, Undivided (Q0p24): Clayey Sandstone 'SC', reddish f- f--7 1.........._ brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, moderately cemented, trace clay. t-Total depth: 6% feet f--8 f-Groundwater not encountered 1--9 Backfilled: 3/9/2015 f- ----10 PROJECT NO. 1916A11 6295 Ferris Square, Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 LOG OF TEST PITS LAB TESTS FIGURE B-15 LOG OF EXPLORATION TEST PIT NO. 5 Logged by: SEV Date Excavated: 3/10/2015 Equipment Used: Mini-Excavator with 18-inch bucket Elevation: 194' msl w I=' ..J D.. !!:.. :E J: <( DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS 1-en D.. ::.&:: w ..J c :::1 al f-FILL: Silty Sand (SM), brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, medium dense. f--1 1- f--2 f- f--3 f- f--4 OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS, Unit 2-4. Undivided (Q0 p2-4): Silty Sandstone 'SM', light brown, 1- f--5 fine to coarse Qrained, moist, moderately cemented. f-Total depth: 4% feet f--6 Groundwater not encountered f-Backfilled: 3/10/2015 f--7 f- f--8 -9 -10 LOG OF EXPLORATION TEST PIT NO. 6 Logged by: SEV Date Excavated: 3/10/2015 Equipment Used: Mini-Excavator with 18-inch bucket Elevation: 197' msl w I=' ..J D.. !!:.. :E J: <( DESCRIPTION 1-en D.. ::.&:: w ..J c :::1 al f-FILL: Silty Sand (SM), brown, fine to coarse, moist, medium dense. f--1 r-OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS. Unit 2·4, Undivided (Q0p2•4): Silty Sandstone 'SM', light brown and f--2 ~ orangish brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, moderately cemented. '--3 f--4 Total depth: 3 feet 1-Groundwater not encountered f--5 Backfilled: 3/10/2015 -6 -7 f--8 -9 -10 PROJECT NO. 1916A11 6295 Ferris Square, Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 LOG OF TEST PITS LAB TESTS Maximum Density/ Optimum Moisture FIGURE B-16 LOG OF EXPLORATION TEST PIT NO. 7 Logged by: SEV Date Excavated: 3/10/2015 Equipment Used: Mini-Excavator with 18-inch bucket Elevation: 214' msl w i=' ...J ll. !:!:.. ~ :J: <( DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS 1-tJ) ll. ~ w ...J c :::1 lXI r-FILL: Silty Sand (SM), brown, fine to medium grained, loose to medium dense. I-1 r- 1-2 1- I-3 r- I-4 1- 1-5 ·--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1-Layer of crushed rock. I-6 ""-OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS, Unit 2·4, Undivided (Qop2•4): Silty Sandstone 'SM', reddish r-brown, fine to coarse Qrained, moist, moderately cemented. I-7 r-Total depth: 6 feet I-8 1-Groundwater not encountered 1-9 Backfilled: 3/10/2015 r- '-10 LOG OF EXPLORATION TEST PIT NO. 8 Logged by: SEV Date Excavated: 3/10/2015 Equipment Used: Mini-Excavator with 18-inch bucket Elevation: 205' msl w i=' ...J ll. !:!:.. ~ :J: <( DESCRIPTION 1-tJ) ll. ~ w ...J c :::1 lXI 1-FILL: Silty Sand (SM), brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, medium dense. 1-1 1- 1-2 1- I-3 r-OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS, Unit 2·4, Undivided (Q0p24): Silty Sandstone 'SM', reddish I-4 r-brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, moderately cemented. I-5 Total depth: 4 feet -6 Groundwater not encountered Backfilled: 3/10/2015 -7 -8 -9 ~ '-10 PROJECT NO. 1916A11 6295 Ferris Square, Suiie C San Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 LOG OF TEST PITS LAB TESTS FIGURE B-17 LOG OF EXPLORATION TEST PIT NO. 9 Logged by: SEV Date Excavated: 3/10/2015 Equipment Used: Mini-Excavator with 18-inch bucket Elevation: 213' msl w I=' .J fl. !:!:.. ::!!: J: <( DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS 1-1/) fl. ~ w .J c ;:::) a! -1 FILL: Silty Sand (SM), brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, medium dense. -2 Trace clay. -3 '--4 ,--5 Total depth: 10 feet -6 Groundwater not encountered Backfilled: 3/10/2015 '--7 f-8 Gravels. -9 SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa}: Fat Claystone 'CH', olive gray, high plasticity, moist, r- '--10 moderately indurated. LOG OF EXPLORATION TEST PIT NO. 10 Logged by: SEV Date Excavated: 3/10/2015 Equipment Used: Mini-Excavator with 18-inch bucket Elevation: 211' msl w I=' .J fl. !:!:.. ::!!: J: <( DESCRIPTION 1-1/) fl. ~ w .J c ;:::) a! FILL: Silty Sand (SM), brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, medium dense. -1 -2 OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS. Unit 2·4, Undivided (Q0P24): Silty Sandstone 'SM', reddish r-brown to brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, moderately cemented. f-3 r-Total depth: 3 feet f-4 r-Groundwater not encountered f-5 Backfilled: 3/10/2015 r- f-6 r- - 7 r- r-8 f-9 r- -10 PROJECT NO. 1916A11 6295 Ferris Square, Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 LOG OF TEST PITS LAB TESTS FIGURE B-18 LOG OF EXPLORATION TEST PIT NO. 11 Logged by: SEV Date Excavated: 3/10/2015 Equipment Used: Mini-Excavator with 18-inch bucket Elevation: 222' msl w I=' .J 0.. !:!:.. == J: <t DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS 1-t/) 0.. ~ w .J c :::1 al -1 FILL: Silty Sand (SM), brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, medium dense. -2 -3 -4 -5 I" OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS, Unit 2-4. Undivided (Qop2-4): Silty Sandstone 'SM', reddish brown to brown, fine to coarse Qrained, moist, moderately cemented. -6 Total depth: 4% feet -7 Groundwater not encountered Backfilled: 3/10/2015 -8 -9 -10 LOG OF EXPLORATION TEST PIT NO. 12 Logged by: SEV Date Excavated: 3/10/2015 Equipment Used: Mini-Excavator with 18-inch bucket Elevation: 226' msl w I=' .J 0.. !:!:.. == J: <t DESCRIPTION 1-t/) 0.. ~ w .J c :::1 al -1 FILL: Silty Sand (SM), brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, medium dense. -2 ~~-";~,-~.;::. ·siii"isarici"<"sriii)~"b-rawri-ari<i-r"Eid"d"ish"tiroW"ri,-fi;;e;fO<:"Oars"Ei9rairie<rn;;;r;cn;e"diuiii-cieri56~----------1- 1--3 some calcium carbonate. "' /•:. 1-,. 1--4 ~' '~ .. ~.·, 1-,,';/i/",0 1--5 OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS, Unit 2-4, Undivided (Qop2-4): Silty Sandstone 'SM', reddish 1-brown to brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, moderately cemented. 1--6 Total depth; 5 feet 1--7 Groundwater not encountered Backfilled: 3/10/15 r- 1--8 r- 1--9 1- '-10 PROJECT NO. 1916A11 6295 Ferris Square, Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 LOG OF TEST PITS LAB TESTS pH, Resistivity, Sulfate, Chloride FIGURE B-19 LOG OF EXPLORATION TEST PIT NO. 13 Logged by: SEV Equipment Used: Date Excavated: 3/10/2015 ,...- r- i- r-r- r- t=' !:!::. J: I-ll. w Q 1 2 3 ._ 4 1- i-5 r-...... 6 r- r-7 1- i-8 r-r-9 r- ._ 10 Mini-Excavator with 18-inch bucket Elevation: 215' msl DESCRIPTION OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS, Unit 2-4, Undivided (Qop2-4): Silty Sandstone 'SM', reddish brown to brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, moderately cemented. Total depth: 7 feet Groundwater not encountered Backfilled: 3/10/2015 LOG OF EXPLORATION TEST PIT NO. 14 LAB TESTS Logged by: SEV Date Excavated: 3/10/2015 Equipment Used: Mini-Excavator with 18-inch bucket Elevation: 219' msl w t=' .J II. !:!::. ::!!!: J: <( DESCRIPTION 1-fl) II. ~ w .J Q ::) al -1 ~ FILL: Silty Sand (SM), brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, medium dense. (Expansion Index= 0) -2 -3 1- r-4 r- r-5 1- r-6 OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS. Unit 2-4, Undivided (Qop2-4): Silty Sandstone 'SM', reddish 1- r-7 .........._ brown to brown, fine to coarse _grained, moist, moderately cemented. r-Total depth: 6Y. feet i-8 r-Groundwater not encountered r-9 Backfilled: 3/10/2015 1- ...... 10 PROJECT NO. 1916A11 6295 Ferris Square, Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 LOG OF TEST PITS LAB TESTS Expansion Index FIGURE B-20 LOG OF EXPLORATION TEST PIT NO. 15 Logged by: SEV Date Excavated: 3/10/2015 Equipment Used: Mini-Excavator with 18-inch bucket Elevation: 221' msl w i=' ....1 ll. !:!:.. :::E J: <( DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS 1-t/) ll. ~ w ....1 0 ::l a:l ...._ 1 FILL: Silty Sand (SM), brown, fine to medium grained, moist, medium dense. 1-2 r- 1-3 r- 1-4 r- 1-5 r-Total depth: 8 feet 1-6 Groundwater not encountered r-Backfilled: 3/10/2015 I-7 r- 1-8 ""-OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS, Unit 2·4, Undivided (Qop2·4): Silty Sandstone 'SM', orangish -9 brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, moderately cemented. -10 LOG OF EXPLORATION TEST PIT NO. 16 Logged by: SEV Date Excavated: 3/10/2015 Equipment Used: Mini-Excavator with 18-inch bucket Elevation: 232' msl w i=' ....1 ll. !:!:.. :::E J: <( DESCRIPTION 1-t/) ll. ~ w ....1 0 ::l a:l -1 FILL: Silty Sand (SM), brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, medium dense. - 2 OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS. Unit 2·4, Undivided (Qop2-4): Silty Sandstone 'SM', reddish brown r-and brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, moderately cemented. 1-3 r- 1-4 r-Total depth: 4 feet 1-5 Groundwater not encountered r-Backfilled: 3/10/2015 1-6 r- 1-7 r- I-8 r- 1-9 r- '-10 PROJECT NO. 1916A11 6295 Ferris Square, Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 LOG OF TEST PITS LAB TESTS FIGURE B-21 LOG OF EXPLORATION TEST PIT NO. 17 Logged by: SEV Date Excavated: 3/10/2015 Equipment Used: Mini-Excavator with 18-inch bucket Elevation: 223' msl w j::' .J 0.. !:!:. ::iE :I: <( DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS 1-en 0.. ~ w .J c ::I al 1-~ FILL: Silty Sand (SM), brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, medium dense. R-Value -1 -2 -3 1- '-4 ~ 5 1-OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS. Unit 2-4. Undivided (Qop2-4): Silty Sandstone 'SM', reddish brown '--6 and brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, moderately cemented. - 7 Total depth: 5Y. feet Groundwater not encountered 1-Backfilled: 3/10/2015 '-8 1- 1--9 f- '--10 LOG OF EXPLORATION TEST PIT NO. 18 Logged by: SEV Date Excavated: 3/10/2015 Equipment Used: Mini-Excavator with 18-inch bucket Elevation: 227%' msl w j::' .J 0.. !:!:. ::iE :I: <( DESCRIPTION 1-en 0.. ~ w .J c ::I al 1-FILL: Silty Sand (SM), brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, medium dense. r-1 1- 1--2 1- 1--3 OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS. Unit 2-4. Undivided (Qop2-4): Silty Sandstone 'SM', reddish brown - 4 ~ fine to coarse grained, moist, moderately cemented. -5 Total depth: 3Y. feet Groundwater not encountered -6 Backfilled: 3/10/2015 -7 -8 -9 -10 PROJECT NO. 1916A11 6295 Ferris Square, Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 LOG OF TEST PITS LAB TESTS FIGURE B-22 LOG OF EXPLORATION TEST PIT NO. 19 Logged by: SEV Date Excavated: 3/10/2015 Equipment Used: Mini-Excavator with 18-inch bucket Elevation: 233' msl w i=' ..J D.. !!:. ::iE J: <( DESCRIPTION 1-t/) D.. ~ w ..J c :l CCI 1-FILL: Silty Sand (SM), brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, medium dense. 1--1 1- 1--2 1- 1--3 1-OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS. Unit 2-4. Undivided (Qop2-4): Silty Sandstone 'SM', reddish brown 1--4 """' fine to coarse grained, moist, moderately cemented. 1- 1--5 Total depth: 4 feet 1- 1--6 Groundwater not encountered 1-Backfilled: 3/10/2015 1--7 1- 1--8 -9 -10 PROJECT NO. 1916A11 6295 Ferris Square, Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 LOG OF TEST PITS LAB TESTS FIGURE B-23 Date Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter 2-16-05 8" GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-7 Sheet 1 of 1 Project No. __ 0~9575-003. Type of Rig _)jollow-Stem Aug e.-!:_ 140 pound hammer --···-Drop 30" Elevation Top of Elevation 186' Grand Pacific Resorts West Hazmat Drive Weight Location See Map 185· l70 i 165 160 -:: ~-. :.:·-:·: -·· .... . .. · .. · .. . .. 5-.. ·:.·. : · .. -: .. . · ....... . . . .. .. . -:·: ::-: -:': :··:-:···. -·:.:·.::_._:_1 15~-.: .... :. :··:. ,. . .. . ~ -·: · ... ...... ,.~ l 25- - ,_ - - 30 ! SAMPLE TYPES: s SPUTSPOON R RING SAMPLE B BULK SAMPLE T TUBE SAMPLE o I z R-1 B-1 @4-8' R-2 R-3 ..... VlO :;;o ()I.L. iil:S D... 89 I 78 60 » Q)~ ..... 'iii 1... ~ c .... :::~- QIO ..... c (I')Q) 00.. _..., oc >. :EO ... 0 0· 116.3 9.6 1 l I 123.4 10.4 107.8 11.9 u)~ Vl(f'J m.' -<..> (.). _rn '5::} tl)~ ... Logged By Sampled By DESCRIPTION GJM !!lll:Y.JLd!lfiJP !Q mo.ist,JQQSf_ (QU range-brown, damp to moist, very @ 5': Silly fine to medium SAND: Orange-brov.11, damp to moist, very dense @ 10':. Silty fine to medium SAND: Dark orange-brown, damp to mmst, dense to very dense @ 15': Silty [me to medium SMTD: Dark orange-brown, damp tu moist, dense to very dense 1-------·-----------·---~-,-· ----l Total Depth= 16.5 Feet No ground water encountered at time of drilling Backfilled with bentonite grout on 2/16/05 TYPE OF TESTS: G GRAB SAMPLE OS DIRECT SHEAR SA SIEVE ANALYSIS AT ATTERBURG LIMITS EI EXPANSION INDEX RV R-VALUE SH SHELBY TUBE MD MAXIMUM DENSITY CN CONSOLIDATION CR CORROSION LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. 3te 2-19-03 ... ojeet Drilling Co. o'le Diameter 10 in. lev at ion Top of Hole 188 ft I . lfl 0 0 w t::."" ·-u z +·+-.COl ;j GJ r OL OJ OLO +-Q) QJ l'l1..J ·-- C:l0 L +-OL (.!) +-e l'l1 a: (I) f 0 .. .. - I - , . . . -, l -. 5-.. 1 ... . , . -... -· -· 10-:: .. 2 - - -... -· 15-'. ... 3 -.. -. .. - .. -. . . 20-... - -... -.· J b:generally -· horizontal 25-· _. : ·~ -.. -· -. ':\0 505A( 11/77) GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG CB-1 I Grand Pacific Resort Tri-County Drilling Drive Weight Ref or Datum 'J1 GJX I .nr-+-+-·-\ll • \1)0 \llr. LV, 1110: 30 C4-='+--u oLL WO +-c u. ClOL Vlw (Qt.. '-" '{)+-_(I) w :Ec ·-::::) n.. 0 av u SM \ I SM 86 54 98 SP-SM SP SM of_4_ 040575-002 Sheet Project No. Type of Rig --HS Core Rig CME 95 9s Drop -~in~ ;:-140 pounds Mean Sea Level GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By MDJ/BJO Sampled By MDJ/BJO Q1LATERNAR Y TERR.ACp DEPQSITS...(Q!}_ @0': Silty fine SANDSTONE: Red-brown, dry, medium dense 1- r-- 1- @3.5': Silty fine SANDSTONE: Orange-brown. damp, very dense i- r-- @to': Becomes dense r-- @ IS': Becomes vel)' dense @ 15'-20': Runb'i, Recovery/RQD=S0/72 @ 15'·16': No recovery @ 16'-17.8': Silty fme SANDSTONE, Orange-brown, damp, dense @ 17.8'-20': Well cemented SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, damp, very dense @ 20'-25': Run #2, RecoverytRQD = l 00/95 @ 20-23.7': Silty medium SANDSTONE: Orange-brown to red-brown, damp, very dense Well indurated blocky SANDSTONE: Interbedded 118" thick @23'-23.5': light brown beds, generally horizontal @ 23.5'-25': Very fine SANDSTONE wilh silr: Orange-brown. damp, very dense; micaceous @ 25'-30': Run #3, Recovery/RQD:=96/90 @ 25'-25.5': massive Very fme SANDSTONE with silt: Orange-brown, damp, deme; @ 25.5'-26.4': Fine SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, dry to damp, dense; friable @26.4': Silty fme SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, damp, very dense LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES l i . L, L t l l l l l l. l l l I lJ Date ------=-2--"1:..:-:9_:::-03::__ __ _ Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter Elevation Top of Hole 1!1 0 (!) £""" ·--o .;-+-.£:0) :j a.ID 0..0 +-wiD i'll...J ·-Cl~ L +-(.!) +-<I: 30 _. -.. b: horizontal - IF - 35- -. . ~. :_ -.. - .. -.. .. ' . ' . . 40-· .. '.> -· .. . . -· -· .. -... 45- _. . ' .. -.. . . - ,• --· ·.: 10 in. 188 -·· 50-:::.::::::: 6 degrees north dip -~.; < :-.. : ... . . -.. .·. .. . . -.· .. 55~-.. l 1110 l::=·· 5051\( 1, /77) ft 0 z ()) -a. E ro (J) Bag-4 5 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG CB-1 I t I Grand Pacific Resort Tri-County Drillina Drive Weight Ref or Datum r-.. +-(!);-,: ·-11'10 Ul'"' LV ::;0 C'+-:::l.;-oLL (!)0 t;c ClQ. -L ·-(!) roiD V' o+-::11 n.. Ec L 0 Cl u 72 ui"'-1!1' 10~ -u u. _(J) . '():::> (J)"' SM SP SM --.... - SP SP SP-SM Sheet 2 of 4 Project No. 040575-002 Type of Rig HS Core Rig CME 9! 140 pounds Drop 30 in. Mean Sea Level - GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By MDJ/BJO ~<·-· Sampled By MDJ/DJO -~~·· .. QUATERNARY TERRAC~ DEPOSITS (Q!L.... @ 30'-35': Runl/4, Recovery/RQD=lOOJ70 @ 30'-32.2': Silty medium SANDSTONE: Orange-blOwn, moist, dense; micaceous f- @ 32.2'-33.\': Fine SANDSTONE: Light gray/orange-brown, damp to dry, dense; mottled, cross-bedded, iron-oxide stained bedding @ 33.1'-35': Silty fme SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, damp, dense; possible cross-bedding; micaceous @ 35'-40': Run #5, Recovery/RQD= 100/80 @ 35'-36.7': Silty fme SANDSTONE: Omnge-brown, dense TERmR.x sxr-rrrP:&oPoru..1A1foiL~------------- @ 36.7'40': Fine SANDSTONE: Yellow-brown, damp, dense; micaceous; friable - @ 40'-45': Run #6, Recovery/RQD = 100/100 Fine SANDSTONE: Yellow-brown, damp to dry, dense; micaceous; friable - @ 45'-50: Rw1 #7, Recovery/RQD=95/90 @ 45'-50': Fine to very fmc SANDSTONE: Pale gmy, dry to damp, very dense; micaceous, friable @ 50'-55': Run#S, Recovery/RQD=!00/100 @50'--52.2': Very fme SANDSTONE: Light gray, damp. very det,se; friable, iron-oxide blebs @ 52.2'-55': Fine to very fine SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, moist, very dense; faint bedding @52.5': Perched ground water @ 55'-60': Run #9, Recovery/RQD=90/80 @ 53' -60': Fine SANDSTONE with silt: Orange-brown, light gray, moist to wet, very dense LEIGIITON & ASSOCIATES l GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG CB-1 late _____ ___1:19-0l_ __ Sheet _3_ of _4_ ject Grand Pacific Resort Project No. 040575-002 : lling Co. -----~-___ T.:_r....:ci~County Drilling Type of Rig HS Core Rig CME 9: {ole Diameter __ 10 in.__ Drive Weight ____ _ 140 pounds Drop _]Q_ in. :· vation Top of Hole -~-ft. Ref. or Datum Mean Sea Level . lO 0 (JJ 0 +- I r:"' 'U 2 \flo I :+-..COl ;::1 (JJ :Jo j LID 0..0 +--ol.l.. ~.+-!ll..J ll. -L ~y_ +-E tOQJ +-ttl CL <I: (/) ;o .· .... .. 505A(11/77) :Jl +- \fir. C'+-Q/0 Qll. v ::n L Q ...., tJir. QJ~ U1 • s: I ttl~ -u tic u. ·;;~I _(f) Ec ·-:::) 0 ~----u SP sc CL ML CL CL sc SM sc SM CH I l_ GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By ------·-'M:....;..::;;:D-=.J.;..;;/B,_J-'0'-· Sampled By MDJ/BJO TERTIARY SANTIAGO-..EQ.RMATION (Tsa) _-- @ 60'-65': Run #10, Recovei)'/RQD-90155 Fine SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, moist to wet, dense; iron-oxide staining @ 65'-70': Run ifll, Recovery/RQD= 100/40 @ 65'..{!6.7', clayey silty very fme SANDSTONE; Gray with orange-brown staining, wei, dense @ 66.7'-68': Gray and brown, ligllt brown CLAYSTONE: Moist, stiff; laminated with clayey SILT to SAND layers 118"-l/2" thick; 6 to JO degree dip; orange (lmn-<>xide) stained friable fine grained sand laminations @ 68'-69': Clayey sandy SILTSTONE: Gray, moist, medium stiff @ 69'-70': Same as above 67'-68': Solid gray CLAY at 69.5'. Cone sample tested in lab from 69.5'-10' @ 70'-75': Run #12, Recovecy/RQD= 100/40 @ 70'-71.5': CLAYSTONE: Gray, moist, stiff @ 71.5'-73 .4': CLAYSTONE: Gray-brown with lenticular SAND/SILT blebsflami.nations; nmtt!ed wlr.!1 iron-oxide staining @ 73.4'-75': Clayey fme SANDSTONE: Orange-brown to yellow-brown, moist, dense, friable @ 75'-80': Run #13, Recovery/RQD=86/86 @ 75'-77': Clay to silty SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, moist, dense; friable; increasing or decreasing coarsens with depth @ 77' -80': SANDSTONE with silt and clay: Gray, moist, dense; very fine to medium grained, friable, massive; rare pebbles @ 80'-85': Run #14, Recovery/RQD= 100/100 @ 80'-85': Silty clayey SANDSTONE: Gray, moist, dense; friable, generally fme to medium grained, massive, iron-stained with depth @ 85'-90': Run #15, Recovery/RQD=90/86 @ 85' -86.6'; Silty clayey SANDSTONE: Gray. moist, dense @ 86.6'-86.8': CLAYSTONE: Blue-gray., moist, stiff; wavy, irregular contact bentonitic, subhorizontal @ 86.8'-90': Clayey silty SANDSTONE: Gray with iron oxide in diffuse layers, moisr, dense, fine !o medium grained with scattered coarse grains LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j I j GEOTECfiNICAL BORING LOG CB-1 Date -----'2=--·~19:.:...·.::.0:::.3 __ _ Sheet 4 of 4 Project __________ ___:G:::.:"r:.::a:.::n:::d....::le-::1a:.::c.:.::.if::..;ic:-:-R:.::es=o::.-rt=--Project No. 04057 5-002 Drilling Co. Tri-County Drilling Type of Rig HS Core Rig CME 95 Hole Diameter 10 in. Drive Weight -----------=-'-"-~=~'"'-"-------------------------------·---------Drop ~Q_ in_ Elevation Top of Hole 188 ft. Ref. or Datum Mean Sea Level Ill 0 +-0 Q.t .c'"' ·-" z 1110 +-+-.em ::::1 30 o..W 0..0 +-(]) oLL (])(]) cd..J -0~ L +-0.. i(iL t!) + E Q! Ill D... <.I: (f) 90 4 80 505A (1 1 /77) :11 r-+-QJ~ Ill'"' L""' C'+-::::1+- QJO +-c 00. lflw '-' '()+ ::n I:c L 0 0 u J.r-. Ill • (I)~ -u u. (f) ·-::) ~v GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By ______ :::.M=D::.:J.:.::/B:::.:J:.::O:__ ____ _ Sampled By ____ 1\IDJ/BJO TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION IT~_m!!!~ @ 90'-95': Run 1116, Recovery/RQD:= 100/90 @ 90'-95': Gray silty to clayey SANDSTONE: Moist, dense, Vel)' fme to fine grained with scattered medium to coarse grains; sandy CLAY laminations, 1/4"-l/2" thick, gray, horizontal@ 92' and 92.6'. otherwis massive @ 95'-100': Run #17, Recovery/RQD=95i/88 @ 95'-100': Gray silty to clayey SANDSTONE: Moist, dense,; very fine to fme grained with scattered medium to coarse grains; evidence of gray rip-ups clasts between 96'-97' disturbed sample @ 100'-105': Run #18, Recovery/RQD=92/92 @ 100'-105': Gray silty to clayey SANDS'rONE: Moist, dense, vety fme to fme grained with seattered medium to coarse grains @ 102'-103': Gray clay rip-up clasts, r•re rounded gtavel Total Depth = 105 Feet Perched ground water encountered at 56 fe:etto 66 feet BackftUed with 59.3 cubic feet of bentonite grout on 2/19/03 LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES •• ... ' ... Date -~-------'::....:.--==----- ~roject Drilling Co. Hole Diameter Elevation Top of Hole Ul 0 Q.l _c;r'> ·-"0 +-+-..em ::l Q.Q.I a.o +-QJQJ nl...J ·-o0 bi +-+-<r: 0 ~ - ' - - -·-s-· -.' -' .. -· - 10-.. -·: - - .. - 15-: .. -. :;i/ r} -'~. - .. -. .. 20-... .. -... -· -. -.. 25-- -· : -· -· - "<ll : S05M1 1/77) 8 in. 195 ft . 0 z Q.l -a. E Ill (f) GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG CB-2 Sheet of Grand Pacific Resorts Project No. 040575-002 Tri-Countv Drilling Type of Rig HS Core Rig Cl\ill ~5 Drive Weight Ref or Datum ----·------~~-----·----Drop NIA in. Mean Sea Level " ·- " r.. Jir. +-+-QJX GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION l/10 ·-LV Ul • Ulr. ::!.;-roU: :Jo C'+--u ou.. ruo +-c u. on. -~ Q) -t.. (f) cow '-' o+--Logged By ______ lVIDJ a. :n ::cC ·-::) L 0 (Av D u Sampled By lVf.DJ -sc ARTIFICI.AL FILL • Undocuml;nte41A.fi!L_ @ 0·5': Run /11, Recovery/RQD =70/55 @ 0-2.5 ': Clayey SAND: Brown, moist, loose; flo wets and roots SM @ 2.5'-5': Silty fme SAND with clay: Orn:nge-brown. damp to moist, loose I -SM---QUATERNARY TERRACE fnfeQsrfi{(~iil--------~ -· - @ 5'-10': Run /12, Recovery/RQD=70/62 @5': Silty fme SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, damp, dense; recovered 3.5' @ 6'-6.5': Laminated bedding @ 10'-15': Run #3, Recovety/RQD= 100165 @ 10': Silty fme SANDSTONE: Ornngelred-brown, damp, dense; gray sand inflllt:d, near ven:ical joint II '-12.8', two parnlld 40-45 degree dipping joints. possibly mechanical breaks, massive @ !5'-20': Run 1/4, Recovery/RQD=80/BO @ 15': Silty SANDSTONE with clay: Red-brown, damp to moist, dense; massive, recovered 4' om5' sc @ 16.5'-17.2': Clayey SANDSTONE: Red-brown, moist, dense SM ! @ 20'-25': Run 115, Recovery/RQD=78f65 @ 20'-20.7': Silty medium SANDSTONE wilh clay: Red-brown, moist, dense slightly friable @ 20.7': Silty fme SANDSTONE with clay: Orange/red-brown, damp to moist, dense @ 25'-30': Run /16, Recovery/RQD 40/30 f- @ 25'-29': Silty fme to medium SANDSTONE: Red-brown, moist, dense; massive, recove~ed l sample using sand catcher, possible water seepage at 2Z' f-! 1- @29.5': Silty very fine SANDSTONE: Brown, damp to moist dense LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG CB-2 Date ____ 5-7-03 Sheet 2 of __ 2_ Project Grand Pacific Resorts ---Project No. 040575-002 Drilling Co. Tri-County Drilling Type of Rig HS Cor·e Rig CME 95 Hole Diameter Drive Weight ~-------~------~~~-----------~-----Drop N/Ain. Elevation Top of Hole 195 ft Ref or Datum Mean Sea Level ---. j\ I"' ui-" Ill 0 +-+-OJ'~ GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION 0 OJ ·-tn • t:""' ·-"0 z 1110 to ...... c...'-' rn(f) +-+-t:Ol :l OJ 30 C'+ :l+--u a.Cll 0..0 +-oLL QJO t;c u. ll.IQI rn...J ·--Oil. !l. -~... ·-OJ _(f) 0~ L +-E Ill (I) ._., o+-Logged By MDJ (.!) +-Ill 0.. :n I:c ·-:;) 0: (f) L 0 (J,v MllJ 0 u Sampled By ------30 SM "" "'*' ... -... -..... 1%... , ... ,..-c;-~""''""' .... ....-· ... QUATERNARY TE~(Qt) iContinl,l~l_L_ -.. @ 30'-35': Run #7, Recovery/RQD-75170 @ 30': Silty fme to medium SANDSTONE: Red-brown, damp, dense -. . . : -. .'1 :-'1\ ·s'M/o'M-.9D_3~-~·:_ ~~vc;!lt s_ilt:t ~.!"!?~TQJ~E.:_ ~e~~-~o_w~,_?<:!Jl£,_?C._!IS_f? -----1-TERTIARY SANTIAQQ EQRMA T!ON iD@L..... -: @ 33 ': Silty fme SANDSTONE with gravel and cobble: Orange-brown, damp, dense; micaceous 35-: @ 35'-40'; Run 1/8, Recovery/RQD=62/62 -@35': Fine SANDSTONE with siit, and gravel and cobble: Light brown, .., moist, dense; friable; massive; recov•:red 1.2' of this sample, logged -: .. cuttings, possible seepage .. SM : -: @ 38': Silty very fine SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, damp, dense; black blebs (1116"); micaceous; moderately bedded -. . . . . 40-@ 40'-45': Run #9, Recovery/RQD=I00/92 -. @ 40'-43.2': Silty very fine to fine SANDSTONE: Light orange-brown, damp to moist, dense; micaceous; cross-bedding dipping 4 to 10 degrees '. -. . . I -. '' @ 43.2'-14.7': Silty \'el)' fine to fine SANDSTONE: Light orange-brown, wet -I micaceous. cross-bedding (4-10), seepage at siltstone contact : . -· ·.:. . 45-. f-·' . b:generally ML @ 44.7'-45.3': Very fine sandy SILTSTONE: Brown, damp to moist, stiff · horizontal l SM @ 45'-50': Run i/10, Recovery/RQD=l00/95 -· @45.3': Silty frne SANDSTONE: Gray oto light brown, moist to wet, dense; .. micaceous -· -. '. ¥ \ Ground water at 48; measured with tape - 50 .. : --- Total Depth = 50 Feet -Seepage at22 Feet, 35 Feet, and 43.2 Feet Ground water encountered at 48 Feet --Backfilled with bentonite/cement grout on 517103 - - r 55-' - - - - If 60 ! LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES _..., _____ _ f • GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG CB-3 Date Sheet l of 2 Project Drilling Co. ________ Grand Pacific Resorts --· _ .. ------···------··---Tri:..County Drilling Project~ ti4057S-002 Type of Rig J!S Core Rig CME ' Hole Diameter 8 in. Elevation Top of Hole 240 fi. . Ill 0 u OJ J:"" z ·-'0 ++ .em ::I OJ a_ OJ 0.0 +--QJQJ Ill _I 0. a!!; L +-E (!) +-Ill <I: (f) 505A(, 1/77) Drive Weight Ref. or Datum j1 r. ~r. + + OJ~ L'-' Ill • 1110 Ill~ Ill""' ::I+ 30 Cli--u oU.. 010 tic u • -L 00. ·-OJ _(f) IDCLI ...., o+- 0.. j1 Ec ·-:::i L 0 J5v 0 u SM CH sc ·--'-'N~IA:.:::._ _________ Drop N/A in 1\lean Sea Level GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By --------=M=-DJ;:__ _____ _ Sampled By QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS (Ot) ----------- @ 0'-3'; Run #I, Recovery/RQD= 100/100 @ 0': Silty fine to medium SANDSTONE: Red-brown, moist, medium dense; rootlets top 3.5'", 0-3' undiisturbed @ 3.5'-5': Did no( core sample, logged cuttings @ 5'·10': Run #2, Recovery/RQD=78170 @ 5': Silty medium SANDSTONE with clay: Red-brown, damp, dense; moderately mottled @ 10'-15': Run #3, Recovery/RQD=30/25 @ 10': Silty fine to medium SANDSTONE: Red-brown, damp, dense; recovered 1.5' of sample, logged cuttings @ 15': No recovery @ 15': Silty gravelly SANDSTONE: Red-brown, damp, dense; hit cobble at 17'-19', logged cutting TERTiARY SANfiAGOFORM"ATIQji ITSaf---- - --------- @ 19': Fine sandy CLAYSTONE to CLAYSTONE, gray-green, moist, stiff; at 19'-25' logged cuttings Drilled out claystone plugging auger at 24'-25' @ 25' -30': Run 1/6, RecoveryiRQD := 100/90 @ 25' -27 .5': CLAYSTONE: Gray-gr<:en, moist, stiff to very stiff; fat clay; highly plastic, discontinuous randomly-oriented parting surfaces @ 27.5': Sandy CLAYSTONE: Olive-gray, damp to moist, very stiff @ 28.5': Clayey SANDSTONE: Gray-brown, damp, dense LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES u Date Project Drilling Co. 5-7-03 Hole Diameter Elevation Top of Hole lfl 0 (l) .r:/' ·-iJ +-+-.COl :::l o..(l) 0..0 +-(l)QJ fll..J ·-o0 t. +-(.!) +-<C 30 . ' "" -. '. - . . -.. . . - .. 35-.. .. . . ... -.. .. -· .. --. . . -.. . . . 40--: : .. .. -.. -... . ' - .. - 45-. .. - - - '. '. - 50-r---:- - - - - 55- - - - - 1'\0 50S A( 11/77) 240 l.i. 0 z QJ -0.. e flj (!) ' ' GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG CB-3 Sheet 2 of 2 ----Grand Pacific Resorts Project No. ____sJ40575-002 Tri-County Drilling Type of Rig HS Core Rig CME 9 Drive Weight --------------=-~;!__----------··-Drop N/A_in. Ref or Datum Mean Sea Level :J'I I ,...... vi'"" +-+-QJ~ GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Ulo ·-LV 1.0 • l.flr, :::l+-lllo: :30 C'+--u ou.. QJO tic u. -c.. 00.. ·-QJ (!) MDJ il)QJ v o+--Logged By 0.. :Jl :Ec ·-:::) L 0 ~'-' MDJ Cl u Sampled By ' T SP-SM IE.RTIARY SANTIAGQ FORMATION (Tsal {Continued) @ 30'-35': Run #7, Recovery/RQD==20120 @ 35': Fine SANDSTONE with si!t: Palie gray-brown, damp, dense; logged f-- .. cuttings 1- 1- ' @ 35'-40': Run #8, Recovery/RQD=40/35 i @ 40': Very fine to fine SANDSTONE with silt dense; ell:tremely friable, logged cuttings Off-white, dry to damp, 1- ' - ' @ 40'-45': Run#9, Recovery/RQD=90174 @ 40': Very fme to fmc SANDSTONE with silt: Off-white to pale brown, dry to damp. dense @ 45'-50': RunltlO, Recovery/RQD==72/58 @ 45': Vert fme SANDSTONE with sill: Off-white, dry to damp, dense; several generaliy horizontal iron-oxide stained beds . Total Depth = 50 Feet No ground water encounrered at time or drilling Backfilled with bentonite/cement sluny on 517/03 LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES Date ----.5-9-03 ___ _ Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter ___ 8 in. __ Elevation Top of Hole 225 ft .c ...... 0 ·-+'~-o..lll .CO'> 0..0 QIQ.i i!I..J o0 L {!) 0 -... 5- -· -· .. --:::.:_.. -·· -·. ·.·.· zo-·,.,.· : 'l;fl -... - .. ..., ... - - "' Ill 1J :::J +-·-+- -1-<I: I 0 z Q) a. s 111 (!) GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG CB-7 Sheet _1_ of _1 __ Grand Pacific Resorts Project No. 040575-002 ~ ~ Tri-Count1 Drilling Type of Rig HS Core Rig CME 95 Drive Weight ---·--------------='-"-~..:;;._------------Drop N/A in. Ref or Datum I I I l 1/)r. C'f.. 4110 q,e. :n L 0 I ' Mean Sea Level GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION ~ggwBy ____________ ~M~D=-J ___________ _ Sampled By r..IDJ SM Q._TJA TERNARY TERRA~E DEPOSITS @ 0': Silty medium SANDSTONE: Red-brown, moist, medium dense; logged cuttings to 5' SM/GM @ 4.5'-9': Silty medium SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, moist, dense; gravelly, hit cobble, no core sample, logged cuttings f- ---TElff[ARY sM-rfL:\GQ-FQ!lli1A'fioN [Tsa)----------f-.. CH @ 9' · CLAYSTONE: Olive-green, moist, stiff -@ 10'-!5': Run HI. Recovery/RQD=l00/78 @ 10'-12.8': CLAYSTONE: Olive-gree:n, moist, stiff; fat clay; discontinuous randomly-oriented paning surfaces SC @ 12.8': Clayey SANDSTONE: Gray-green, damp, dense SP @ 14.3': Fine SANDSTONE: Lightgmy, damp, dense; friable, micaceous @ !5'-20': Run /12, Recovery/RQD""92/54 @ 15': Fine SANDSTONE: Light gray, damp, dense; friable, micaceous SP-SM @ 20'-25': Run /13, Recovery/RQD=l00/86 @ 20'-22.T: Fine SANDSTONE with silt: Ornnge-brnwn, moist, dense; slightly friable, possible slight seepage, iron-Dxide stained @ 22.7': Fine SANDSTONE with silt: Pale gray, moist, dense; slightly friable, possible slight seepage, iron-oxide stained Total Depth = Z5 Feet Seepage at Z3 Feet Backfilled with bentonite/cement slurry on 5/9103 LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB1-03 Dale ___ _ 2-17-03 Sl).eet _1_ of _L__ Pr9jecl ____________ G::..::..:ra~n=-=d=-I::-'a=-c:..:i:..:fi:.::c . .=R:..:es=o::.;rt:___._ Project No. 040575-002 I Drllling Co. Morrison Drilling (San Diego Drillh!g),____ Type of Rig Bucket A~ Hole Diameter 30 in. Drive Weight --~------------------~ Drop ..ll:_ in--:- ' Flevation Top of Hole 241 fl Ref or Dalum _, Mean Sea Level .. ! :n .-.. J,r-. tO 0 +-+-(lj~ GEOTECHNICAl-' DESCRIPTION u Q) ·-tO • .r:""' ·-1J z 010 01..--. L'"' roU: ++-.ern :::1 (lj 30 !:4-:::1+-uc.: o..Q) 0..0 +--oLL wu ific: Q)(lj lll..J ·-0.. -L DO.. ·-Q) _(f) 0~ L +-E o::lw '-' o+-Logged By MDJ (.!) +-:n E§ ·-::) <r: Ill 0.. L ~'-' .. - (f) 0 u Sampled By MD.J .. 0 -"-~ ... ... SM QUATERNARY TER~CE DEPOSIT$ (Qtl .. . .. @ 0': Siltj fine to medium SANDSTONE: Ora.11ge-brown, damp, dense to -~ . .. . . ' very dense; iron-oxide staining, massive .. .. _, : ~ ... t .. . -. . .. ·.· .. -: ' I .. .. 5--. . · . . .. -' . ' ~ .. -· .. . . -. . . . -~ . 10-.. . "' ' I 9 115.2 7.4 . . . . .. -· . ' . . -. ' . . .. . - .. . -. . '. ., ' 15-... ._, , ... :. I ., -. . .. .. -t-: . ...-. @ 17.2'-17.8': Two light gray SAND infillecljoints, sand is slightly less .~ .. I -,1: .. ·~, j:NIOW, 44NE cemented than orange-brown sandstone surrounding feature -. ·7.;. @ 18': Three 1.5" to 3" thick beds of dark brown moderately cemented .. sandstone that are offset by light gray sand inftlled fracture; beds are . , , ' interbedded with orange-brown sandstone; gravel and cobble rare; 20-:;_.:.~; fr:N20W, 60NE fracture very slightly open at 19' gc:N30-N45W, 3SW SP·SM @ 20'-20.5': Fine SANDSTONE: Orange-bwwn, wet, dense; cobble at the l.i~~ -CH--\ base of sandswne; moderate to heavy s~page within the layer, general r ~~-\-l __ ~E~c~ ~a:l}_e~~o~a!_C£ll~~ ________ ---------TERTIARY SANTIAGO FQRMATION {Tsa) ~ 2 push 82.0 39.3 @ 20.5': CLAYSTONE: Olive, moist to wet, stiff; discontinuous -randomly-oriented parting surfaces, moderately plastic layers that interbed with highly plastic CLAYSTONE layers -t~ @ 21 •: Discontinuous wavy randomly-orlemed fractures throughout CLAYSTONE -~ Plastic (fat) layers interbedded between blocky CLAYSTONE; closely spaced 25-Bag-3 tight fracrures; randomly oriented plastic parting surfaces ~ CH -@25' cs:N44E, 25-4SSE @ 26': l/4" thick plastic clayseam along striated polished surface; continuous -:~ @ 26.2': Fracture below it connects with cl.ayseam on north side of boring \,\ fr:N55E, 51SE _ _l_l ~ ' -· @ 29': Discontinuous plastic clay-lined fracture ~\... fr:N45W, 40NE @ 29.6': Silty fme SANDSTONE: Light gray, damp, dense; slightly friable; 1(1 .... ~ ~ .... lr<c:N20-60W 5-6NE gradational upper con!_act S05A( 1 1/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG l81-03 Sheet 2 of _2_ ·, oc:t. ~-----·-------'G:::.:r:..::·a:.:.n::::d:..;P::..:a::..:c::.:;il:.:..i.::..c .::.R:.::es:::.o::.:rt:..:_ ____ ·--------Project No. Type of Rig 040575-002 iuiing Co. Morrison Drilling (San Die:.z:g>.:o-=D:c.r::..:i-=H-=in=<g,'-) ____ _ Bucket Aug~ Drop __!l_in. p!e Diameter 30 in. Drive Weight ation Top of Hole 241 ft Ref or Darum Mean Sea Level --. -I J1 "" ~A til 0 +-..... (!)~ GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION (.) (l) 2 1110 ·-c_'""' til • ""' ·-iJ ({!"" Ill~ . ,... ::1+-QJ .COl ::1 Q; 30 C'+ u~ :QJ! 0.0 ..... -oLL 0.10 t;c "'4-· 1\l...l ·-a. ;;=;c_ a a. ·-QJ _tl) 0,_,, L +-.._, o+-MDJ (.9 +-E 0) J1 :r: 5 . ·-:) Logged By Ill n_ <I: tl) L g\J MDJ D u Sampled By 1 --• ~t~~ :._ ---·--·---· SM .TERTIARY $ANTIAQ.O fORMATION (Tml.Qm!inuedl _ .... ; ~ t • 4 4 112.6 8.5 j @30': Significant caving -. ' .. .' .. . -. . . . . f t I . . . . --•; ~ .~ -. ' ~~5-.•. \ .. : . SP @35': Fine SANDSTONE: Pale gtay lo off-white. damp, dense, very friable ~ -. . . . Bag-5 . .. @36' I -: . ' . . . " .. 'mt b:generally SM-SP @ 38'-40': Silty fine SANDSTONE to fine SANDSTONE: Pale gray, damp, -~ . :. ~ horizontal vel}' dense, iron-oxidized stained bed at 38', iron-oxide stained krotovina; less friable than above I . u. : ... _40-.-.. ' ~ .:. SP -\-:.:·: ... I ',..r• ' .. - !45~ ' -'------c---· -Geologically Logged to 42 feet Ground water encountered at 20 feet at lime of drilling Total Depth = 46 feet -Boring caved to 20 feet on 2/18/03 Backfilled with 41 cubic feet of bentonite grout and native soil on 2/18/03 - 50- - - - - 55- - - - - r1 1>0 505A(11/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-6 Date ______ .2-=-2=-:.7--'-9:.::-5'----Sheel _1_ of ____ 2_ Project ___ Legoland/Car!sbad Ranch Project No. 4950294-001 Drilling Co. ____________ _:D::::.a=-"~·es::::-::D:::r_il:;:.::li::::n:hg________ Type of Rig Bucket Auger Hole Diameter Drive Weight 0-27 =4,500#;_ 27-_§7:...==-=.:3t.:.7~00:::.:fl,___ ____ Drop .11_ in. Elevation Top of Hole +/-228 ft. Ref. or Datum Mean Sea Level . c 0 o, u z ·-.... £.'"' ·-(/) +OJ ........ ..CCI) OJ QJ !llQ) o_ll.l 0.0 +->'+-Q)Q) lti..J 0 0.. OJ'-" a~ L z E (!) !ll llJ Ul 0 Bag-1 225 220 2 215 210 3 205 200 505A01/77) + l/)0 ::;0 otL -L COQJ 0.. push 4 :J1 + (/),-.. C'+-QJU on. '-' :J1 (._ 0 ,-.. IDX c_'"' :;:j+ tic ·-OJ o+ Ec 0 tJ ~,... (/) . ltl~ -u u. Ul . ·-:::> ~~ SP GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By Sampled By TERRACE DEPOSITS MLF MLF Yellowish red, moist, fine to medium SAND; trace of SILT; micaceous; upper 1 to 2 feet disturbed by fam1ing -= -cH--\_®_l.Q':_~Ht!h!_a!il~u~t~f_:;e~p~g~-~~a_b~,~~ecl~y_ta~e_: ________ _ SP SANTIAGO FORMATION @ Hl': Light olive-gray, moist, CLAY; laminations; randomly oriented shearslparting surlaces @ 18': Driller indicated drilling became hard @ 20': Light gray, micaceous, damp, medium dense, fme to medium SAND; sligh!ly @ 26': Becomes damp, driller having troubl·e keeping sand in bucket, friable SAND LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES r GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG lB .. s Date ___ ____,9::..;·e.J27~·9:::.::5:...__ __ ProJect l..egoland/Carlsbad Ran~!L. ______ _ Drilling Co. Daves Drilling Hole Diameter 24 ln. Drive Weight Elevation Top of Hole 228 ft Ref or Datum Sheet 2 of 2 Project No. _ 4950294..001 Type of Rig Bucket Auger 0·27=4,500#; 27·52=3,700# Drop .JJ...in~ Mean Sea Level . . :n ,.... ........ Ill 0 ..... .... wX Ul • GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION .c.""' 0 ~ z 1/10 ·-t.'"" Ill (f) ·-\II A ::1-r-(II • ......... .CUI ::I QJ 30 C:l+ -u o.W 0..0 ..... oU.. OJO t;c u . OJQJ nl..J -00.. ·-0. -t. ·-OJ _(f) o0 (.. ..... (()OJ ..... o+-Logged By .MLF e ·-::;) (.!) ..... 111 n. :n I:c <I: (/) (.. 0 Ji'-' Sampled By MLF c u 30 -Total Depth "' 3D Feel Due to No Recowry Seepage at 10 Feet -&ckiilled on September 27, 1995 - - 35- - - - - 40- ~ - - - 45-. -1- -1- -1- - 50--- - - - 55- - - - - -I i__ LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES 'I )ate ----"'-9·..:.11:..·~95"---- ?roject -----------=Leg=o.::..:lc::::an:::;d::L/...:;:C~ar=-=ls::.:b:..::;~=d-=-R.a=nc=h;...__ ______ _ Drilling Co. Barge's Drilling Company Hole Diameter 8 ln. Drive Weight Elevation Top of Hole +/-182 ft. Ref. or Datum GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG SD-3 Sheet 1. of 1 Project No. . 495'0294..001 Type of Rig liollow~Stem Auge; 140 younds Drop ...llilui:" Mean Sen Level '·~ . ;:II ,... .,... c: §t ..... + Ql~ Ill • GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION .~ ..... .r:. .... (.) lilo ·-r..v Ill en -Ill 1)1,.. ttl • ........ ... ...... '[g QJ Ql ;30 C:'f-::1+ -u .-:~GI o_GI + oU.. Ql(.) 1;ic: u, >~ wGI I'O.J 0 a_ -r.. 00. ·-Ql _en ~ ...... o0 L z Ulw '\..1 o+ Logged By sen (!) m 0.. ~ I:§ ·-::) w (J) Ov Sampled By SCB 0 u (/) 0 .. SM llH!.RA.CE QBfOSITS/FILL?? ' .. -::: @ 0-2': Light reddish brown, dry, loose silty SAND .. 180 -~~; .. "":' ~ -Sl\f -wwce omosrrs---------:-------------------::: 1 31 124.8 10.7 @ 2': Orange-brown, moist, medium dense to dense, fine silty SAND with iron oxide staining and manganese staining ... -... .s-. . .. . 2 46 124.0 11.2 . ~ . . . -.. . . @ 6': &!me as above . . . 175 -Total Depth = 65 Feet No Ground Water Encountered at Time of Drilling -Hole Backfilled on September 11, 1995 - to- - 170 - - - 15- - 165 - - - 20- - 160 - - - 25-r - 155 - - - 505A<11/7i') LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES APPENDIXC LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES APPENDIXC LABORATORY TESTING PROCEDURES 1. Classification Soils were classified visually, generally according to the Unified Soil Classification System. Classification tests were also completed on representative samples in accordance with ASTM D422 for Grain Size. The test resultant soil classifications are shown on the Boring Logs and Test Pit Logs in Appendix B. 2. In-Situ Moisture/Density The in-place moisture content and dry unit weight of selected soil samples were determined using relatively undisturbed samples from the Cal Tube Sampler. The dry unit weights and moisture contents are shown on the Boring Logs in Appendix B. 3. Percent Passing No. 200 Sieve Particle size determinations for the percentage of sample passing the No .. 200 sieve were performed in general accordance with the laboratory procedures outlined in ASTM test Method D1140. The results are shown on the Boring Logs in Appendix B. 4. Atterberg Limits The liquid limit, plastic limit, and plasticity index of selected soil samples were estimated in general accordance with the laboratory procedures outlined in ASTM D 4318. The results are shown on the Boring Logs in Appendix B. 5. Maximum Density Maximum density tests were performed on a representative bag sample of the near surface soils in accordance with ASTM D1557. Test results are presented on the table below. Page C-1 6295 Ferris Square, Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III -Geotechnical Investigation Carlsbad, California Sample ; I>esc~;iption ' Location . ·. B-2 at 2' to 4' Silty Sand (SM) -Reddish brown B-12 at 0 to 2' Silty Sand (SM) -Brown TP-6 at 2' to 3' Silty Sandstone 'SM'-Light brown 6. Direct Shear MTGL Project No. 1916A11 MTGL Log No. 15-1063 M~ximumDry Optilllum Moisture .. Delisity(pct) Content(%) 132.5 7.5 129.9 9.9 128.8 7.7 Direct Shear Tests were performed on in-place samples of site soils in accordance with ASTM D3080. The test results are presented in Figures C-1 thru C-4. 7. Expansion Index Expansion Index testing was completed in accordance with the standard test method ASTM D4829. Test results are presented below. B-6 at 0 to 2' Silty Sand (SM) -Reddish brown B-13 at 19' to 20' Fat Claystone 'CH'-Gray TP-14 at 0 to 1' Silty Sand (SM) -Brown 8. Corrosion 0 233 0 · Exp~nsioJ!, >;!J:il.6ex Very Low Very High Very Low Chemical testing was performed on representative samples to determine the corrosion potential of the onsite soils. Testing consisted of pH, chlorides (CTM 422), soluble sulfates (CTM 417), and resistivity (CTM 643). Test results are as follows: . Chlorides Sample pH Location <Jipm) B-7 at 3' to 5' 8.3 77 B-13 at 0 to 2' 7.2 74 TP-12 at 2' to 4' 8.5 40 Page C-2 Sulfates I (ppm) 128 181 Ill Resistivity (ohm-em 3280 2300 2400 6295 FctTis Square, Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III -Geotechnical Investigation Carlsbad, California 9. R-Value MTGL Project No. 1916All MTGLLogNo.15-1063 R-value test was performed on samples of the upper soils in general accordance with the laboratory procedures outlined in ASTM D 2844. Test results are presented below. ,, ,;.\':s~liiP!~ Lo~atiort B-5 at 0 to 2' TP-3 at 0 to 1' TP-17 at 0 to 1' Silty Sand (SM) -Brown Silty Sand (SM) -Brown Silty Sand (MS) -Brown Page C-3 20 26 64 6295 Ferris Square, Suiic C San Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 F~iL Ult. ~H--I bY I I + H-X I ~-144 . -J /._ --1 i--H I + f-t 180 --t-L I -- 6000 l:l.:-37.8 If-! --~g I ·Jt 1J( -· I H 4000 ........... g_li • tri (I) (I) (I) (J) (J) 1-mw 2000 :::: ~m :;lL 0 6000 5000 -4000 til 0.. 3000 ,_ ro (jj ..c (/) 2000 1000 0 Sample Description: Remarks: C-1 Tan $) 0.77 0.67 I I ~1-· ! : ' i ' I I "r···· v I -r-1-rF IIX1 I r ; I ---I I I I /'t' '/ ' I+ ·+ -ffifq-------I ' I I --· I H-m-~ -·+ r% ;,(·I i i " ----· ~'-H-f 1---I I I I I I I 1 I I I '±~ -l I J --···1-+ I I -1 --.L + __ _L -i I 1/, ++ -· I I Fl~l-·· H--I_J± +-I I m I -1 ,r I ' ~Lr + I I I I I I ' ---1·+-I -1 1 ~ y"'"t I ' ' '-\--I --+ I . L V' I ;+!· I ' I\ 1+--~~~-! I I ~-"t i I ---~ ; I I I I I I I l IJ I I I I I I ~ I j j ~~ f I I I 0 2000 I I 81-:;:-J-t~ rl-I+·- 4000 6000 Normal Stress, psf ~ttl~. T ' I ' I I I I I I 8000 10000 12000 FR+I I I I I I I : I I -11 I I -I ~~ I I I I ~~r * j ·-' I I I I J i l/ I I I I I w !---~-I ! -I -\ : +I '-j j IL IIi I -1 ! I I i I i --I + I I I I w i -~ -+-'+lc -\-1-l--I 1-1-j-I i 0 5 '10 15 20 2.65 3 2 Sample No. 2 3 ~ c -til ~ Water Content,% 15.3 14.2 14.9 Dry Density, 1022 99.1 100.8 OJo 65.6 56.3 61.5 Void Ratio 0.6186 0.6687 0.6413 Diameter, in. 2.42 2.42 2.42 1.00 1.00 01~ 22.7 24.2 23.0 Dry Density, pcf 103.1 100.5 102.6 99.5 99.5 99.7 0.6041 0.6453 0.6117 2.42 2.42 0.99 0.98 1000 3000 5000 883 2649 3982 9.5 3.6 6.9 842 2116 3538 !4.3 14.0 15.2 (}.(}1 0.01 O.Ql MARBRISA-PHASE Ill B-ll I ')' .. DIRECT SHEAR TEST REPORT MTGL, Inc. =--:.--------------~~---Checked By: §Y___ ______ _ 6295 Ferris Square, Suite C San Diego. CA 92121 /Ot:O\ r::...'::1.7 "J.QOO: t I 3000 2500 1ii 2000 Ht-1 +. ++++++-H-t-!r+-H-+-t-h-1 c. uf f/l e: U5 1500 ..... cv (!) .c: (f) Sample Type: Description: Specific Gravity= 2.65 Strain,% Remarks: REMOLDED AT 90% RELATIVE COMPACTION. Figure C-2 Normal Stress, psf Sample No. Water Content,% Dry Density, pcf Jg Saturation, % 9.2 116.5 57.9 2 3 9.3 9.3 116.4 116.4 58.6 58.6 ·c: Void Ratio 0.4196 0.4216 0.4216 Water Content, % _. Dry Density, pcf fill ~I Saturation,% 2.42 1.00 15.3 117.6 99.5 2.42 2.42 1.00 1.00 15.1 14.9 118.1 118.5 99.9 100.0 <: Void Ratio 0.4068 0.4003 0.3961 Normal Stress, psf Fail. Stress, psf Strain,%, U!t. Stress, psf Strain,% Strain rate, in./min. Client: Project: MARBRISA-PHASE III 2.42 0.99 1000 842 2.3 573 12.4 0.01 Sample Number: B-12 Depth: 0-2' 2.42 0.98 2000 1841 3.2 1656 12.5 0.01 Proj. No.: 1916-All Date Sampled: DIRECT SHEAR TEST REPORT MTGL, Inc. San Die o CA 2.42 0.98 4000 2908 8.8 2877 12.7 0.01 Tested By: =JH..:._ ________ Checked By: 6295 Ferris Square, Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 H wrn o.O. 6000 !-+-1 +I +-1--H-+-"-+-!-C-J-+ -1--i -1----i-++++---i-!-+- 4000 v;vi {f) {f) (].) e; ++~-f~-+-~~-++-++-+-'[t~-++-H-+-!-+-++~-+-~-1----i--l--r~ --l-t·-++-H~-!-+-+-1 c75C75 2000 =:: ·ro ::> l,L 5000 vi {f) e; U5 ,_ co Ql .c (f) Strain,% Sample Description: Specific 2.65 -t~--~~-~-rlrl-+-t++-1 ~~L ++++++++-1-+++-++-++-++-++-++-++-H~t-+---t~--rtl No. ~ Saturation, % 5 Void Ratio I Water Content,% Density, pcf iii Q) Saturation, % 1- <( Void Ratio Diameter, in. Hei ht, in. Normal Stress, psf Fail. Stress, psf Strain,% U!t. Stress, psf Fail. U!t 45 36.0 0.73 10000 12000 2 3 15.1 15.2 15.3 116.0 114.9 117.2 93.6 91.6 98.3 0.4267 0.4401 0.4116 2.42 2.42 2.42 LOO 1.00 15.6 16.0 14.7 117.1 1!6.2 119.0 100.0 100.0 99.8 0.4125 0.4243 0.3904 2.42 2.42 2.42 0.99 0.99 0.98 1000 2000 4000 1249 2655 4245 3.9 3.6 3.4 767 !503 2946 13.6 15.0 13.3 0.01 (),{} l 0.01 I 0' MTGL, lnc. 3i9!!5 6295 Ferris Square, Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 1858\ 537-3999 3000 H 2000 (/j 0. <tJ<tl UJ UJ OJ OJ '-.... (i)U5 1000 ~:ffi =>u. 3000 2500 -2000 UJ 0. ~ry UJ OJ '-1500 (i) .... ctl OJ ..r::. (f) Strain,% Sample Type: Figure C-4 I I 5000 6000 Normal Stress, psf -------------------------·----------------~ Sample No. ~ Saturation, '% 5 Void Ratio Diameter, ln. Hei ht, in. Water Content,% Density, pcf Normal Stress, psf Fail. Stress, psf Strain,% Ult. Stress, psf % Strain rate, ln./min. Client: 26.7 91.2 86.9 0.8142 2.42 1.00 30.1 92.0 99.9 0.7979 2.42 __ Qc~ 1000 !662 3.9 1083 15.5 OJ) 1 MARBRISA PHASE III Depth: 18' 2 3 25.7 26.2 91.7 94.3 84.8 91.9 0.8043 0.7552 2.42 2.42 1.00 l.OO 29.2 27.2 93.3 96.1 99.9 99.7 0.7737 0.7218 2.42 2.42 0.98 0.98 2000 4000 2126 2276 5.2 3.7 1791 1963 15.9 13.2 0.0 l 0.01 6295 Ferris Square, Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III -Geotechnical Investigation Carlsbad, California APPENDIXD MTGL Project No. 1916All MTGL Log No. 15-1063 STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Page C-4 6295 Fcnis Square, Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III -Geotechnical Investigation Carlsbad, California APPENDIXD MTGL Project No. 1916All MTGLLogNo. 15-1063 GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS GENERAL These specifications present general procedures and requirements for grading and earthwork as shown on the approved grading plans, including preparation of areas to be filled, placement of fill, installation of subdrains, and excavations. The recommendations contained in the attached geotechnical report are a part of the earthwork and grading specifications and shall supersede the provisions contained herein in the case of conflict. Evaluations performed by the Consultant during the course of grading may result in new recommendations, which could supersede these specifications, or the recommendations of the geotechnical report. EARTHWORK OBSERVATION AND TESTING Prior to the start of grading, a qualified Geotechnical Consultant (Geotechnical Engineer) shall be employed for the purpose of observing earthwork procedures and testing the fills for conformance with the recommendations of the geotechnical report and these specifications. It will be necessary that the Consultant provide adequate testing and observation so that he may determine that the work was accomplished as specified. It shall be the responsibility of the Contractor to assist the Consultant and keep them apprised of work schedules and changes so that he may schedule his personnel accordingly. It shall be the sole responsibility of the Contractor to provide adequate equipment: and methods to accomplish the work in accordance with applicable grading codes or agency ordinances, these specifications and the approved grading plans. Maximum dry density tests used to determine the degree of compaction will be performed in accordance with the American Society for Testing and Materials Test Method (ASTM) D1557. PREPARATION OF AREAS TO BE FILLED Clearing and Grubbing: All brush, vegetation and debris shall be removed or piled and otherwise disposed of. PageDl 6295 Fenis Square, Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 (858) 537-3999 Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III -Geotechnical Investigation Carlsbad, California MTGLProjectNo.l916All MTGL Log No. 15-1063 Processing: The existing ground which is determined to be satisfactory for support of fill shall be scarified to a minimum depth of 12 inches. Existing ground, which is not satisfactory, shall be overexcavated as specified in the following section. Overexcavation: Soft, dry, spongy, highly fractured or otherwise unsuitable ground, extending to such a depth that surface processing cannot adequately improve the condition, shall be overexcavated down to firm ground, approved by the Consultant. Moisture conditioning: Overexcavated and processed soils shall be watered, dried-back, blended, and mixed as required to have a relatively uniform moisture content near the optimum moisture content as determined by ASTM D1557. Recompaction: Overexcavated and processed soils, which have been mixed, and moisture conditioned uniformly shall be recompacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent of ASTMD1557. Benching: Where soils are placed on ground with slopes steeper than 5: 1 (horizontal to vertical), the ground shall be stepped or benched. Benches shall be excavated in firm material for a minimum width of 4 feet. FILL MATERIAL General: Material to be placed as fill shall be free of organic matter and other deleterious substances, and shall be approved by the Consultant. Oversize: Oversized material defined as rock, or other irreducible material with a maximum dimension greater than 12 inches, shall not be buried or placed in fill, unless the location, material, and disposal methods are specifically approved by the Consultant. Oversize disposal operations shall be such that nesting of oversized material does not occur, and such that the oversize material is completely surrounded by compacted or densified fill. Oversize material shall not be placed within 10 feet vertically of finish grade or within the range of future utilities or underground construction, unless specifically approved by the Consultant. Import: If importing of fill material is required for grading, the import material shall meet the general requirements. PageD2 6295 Fen·is Square. Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 cgsg) 537-3999 Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III -Geotechnical Investigation Carlsbad, California FILL PLACEMENT AND COMPACTION MTGL Project No. 1916All MTGL Log No. 15-1063 Fill Lifts: Approved fill material shall be placed in areas prepared to receive fill in near-horizontal layers not exceeding 6 inches in compacted thickness. The Consultant may approve thicker lifts if testing indicates the grading procedures are such that adequate compaction is being achieved with lifts of greater thickness. Each layer shall be spread evenly and shall be thoroughly mixed during spreading to attain uniformity of material and moisture in each layer. Fill Moisture: Fill layers at a moisture content less than optimum shall be watered and mixed, and wet fill layers shall be aerated by scarification or shall be blended with drier material. Moisture conditioning and mixing of fill layers shall continue until the fill material is at uniform moisture content at or near optimum. Compaction of Fill: After each layer has been evenly spread, moisture conditioned, and mixed, it shall be uniformly compacted to not less that 90 percent of maximum dry density in accordance with ASTM Dl557. Compaction equipment shall be adequately sized and shall be either specifically designed for soil compaction or of proven reliability, to efficiently achieve the specified degree of compaction. Fill Slopes: Compacting on slopes shall be accomplished, in addition to nonnal compacting procedures, by backrolling of slopes with sheepsfoot rollers at frequent increments of 2 to 3 feet as the fill is placed, or by other methods producing satisfactory results. At the completion of grading, the relative compaction of the slope out to the slope face shall be at least 90 percent in accordance with ASTM D1557. Compaction Testing: Field tests to check the fill moisture and degree of compaction will be performed by the consultant. The location and frequency of tests shall be at the consultant's discretion. In general, these tests will be taking at an interval not exceeding 2 feet in vertical rise, and/or 1,000 cubic yards of fill placed. In addition, on slope faces, at least one test shall be taken for each 5, 000 square feet of slope face and/ or each 10 feet of vertical height of slope. SUBDRAIN INSTALLATION Subdrain systems, if required, shall be installed in approved ground to conform to the approximate alignment and details shown on the plans or herein. The subdrain location or materials shall not be changed or modified without the approval of the Consultant. The Consultant, however, may recommend and, upon approval, direct changes in subdrain line, grade or materials. All subdrains PageD3 ()295 Fe1Tis Square, Suite C' San Diego, CA 92121 cgs~n 537-3999 Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III -Geotechnical Investigation Carlsbad, California MTGL Project No. 1916All MTGLLogNo.l5-1063 should be surveyed for line and grade after installation and sufficient time shall be allowed for the surveys, prior to commencement of fill over the subdrain. EXCAVATION Excavations and cut slopes will be examined during grading. If directed by the Consultant, further excavation or overexcavation and refilling of cut areas, and/or remedial grading of cut slopes shall be performed. Where fill over cut slopes are to be graded, unless otherwise approved, the cut portion of the slope shall be made and approved by the Consultant prior to placement of materials for construction of the fill portion of the slope. PageD4 6295 Fen-is Square, Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 (l:\58) 537-3999