The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutEngineer Report 08.13.15t !XJn Engineering ~ & Consulting, Inc . August 31 , 2015 Mr. Shaun Brainard B&Y Drilling, Inc. P .O. Box 1878 Rifle. Colorado 81650 Project No. 15-053G-D1 Subject: Review of Micropile Foundation Load Testing, Meine Residence, 296 River Bank Lane, Garfield County, Colorado Dear Mr. Brainard, RJ Engineering conducted micropile load testing for the Meine Residence m icropiles on August 31 , 2015 at 296 River Bank Lane in Garfield County, Colorado. We conducted one verification on a production p ile to verify assumed soil strength parameters. The test was performed in tension, which we believe is more conservative than a compression test. Therefore, the measured deflection would typically be more than if the micropile were tested in compression. The verifi cati on test was loaded to 2 .0 times design load. The total measured deflection was O 15 inches at the design load The test was conducted in general conformance with FHWA guidelines and the test resu lts are attached. We believe test results indicated movements were within accept ab!e design lim its (see attached). Based on our test data 1t appears the micropiles installed by B&Y Drilling, Inc. were in general conformance with plans provided by RJ Engineering & Consulting , Inc., dated August 18, 2015 RJ Eng meeri ng d td not verify m icropile locations. Survey and micropile layout was assumed to be the respons1b 1hty of others . If you have questions or need additional information, please call us at 970-230-9208. S incerely Richard D Johns ProJect Manager 266 Red Cliff Circle , Glenwood Springs , CO 81601 , (970) 230 ~9208 Micropile Verification Test Meine Residence, 296 River Bank Lane Micropile Designation: NE Corner Micropile Job Number: 15-053G-01 Testers: RJ -----,.....,....~ Date: August 31, 2015 Load Hold Time Load Pressure Total Movement libs) Cosil (inches) AL( OSOL) 25min 4146 400 0 .000 0.15DL 25min 3000 312 0.30DL 25min 6000 546 0 .031 0 .45DL 2 .5min 9000 780 0 .060 AL( OSOL) 1 min 4146 400 0.15DL 2 .5min 3000 312 0.45DL 2 .5min 9000 780 0 .066 0.60DL 2.5min 12000 1014 0 .086 0.75DL 25min 15000 1248 0085 090DL 2 .5min 18000 1482 0 114 1.00DL 2 .5min 20000 1638 0148 AL(05Dl) 1 min 4146 400 0.15DL 1 min 3000 312 1.00DL 1 min 20000 1638 0152 1.15DL 25min 23000 1872 0 .162 1.30DL 1 min* 26000 2106 0.18 2min* 0.18 3min* 0 .181 4min* 0.182 5min• 0 .183 6min• 0 .184 10 min* 0 .187 20min 30min 40min SO min 60min 1.45DL 2.5mln 29000 2340 0197 AL 1 min 4146 400 0.15DL 1 min 3000 312 1.45DL 1 min 29000 2340 0 .198 1.60DL 1 min 32000 2574 0 .222 1.75DL 2.Smin 35000 2808 0 .247 1.90DL 2 .5min 38000 3042 0 .275 2 .00DL 10min 40000 3198 0304 1.SODL Smin 30000 2418 0 .258 1.00DL Smin 20000 1638 0 .200 0.50DL 5min 10000 858 0 .140 AL 5min 4146 400 COMMENTS: • Musi be less than 0.025 in/kip Design Load: Bond Length: Stress Length: Bar Size: 20.000 lbs 28 feet ------3 feet --~---'-38 mm Residual Movement I Elastic Movement! Load/Movement• (inches! (inches! I 0.018 0 .042 I I 0096 0.052 I I 0.122 0075 I I 0 204 0.100 I I I I (in/Idol 0 .000 0.010 0010 0 .004 0 .011 0 .007 0 .000 0 .010 0017 0.009 0003 0006 0 .006 0.005 0008 0008 0008 0009 0.015 0 .005 0 .006 0.006 0 .007 I Micropile Verification Test Meine Residence, 296 River Bank Lane Project No : 15·053G·D1 Date· 08131/15 Micropile Location NE Comer Micropile Test TvN> Tension Load Total Movement Residual Elastic Movement libs) linl Movement Cinl linl Design Load = Bond Length = Stress Length = Bar Size= 20 ,000 lbs __ .......;;;28~feet _....,,..,,_3_feet 38mm 4146 9000 20000 29000 0 .000 0.060 0 148 0.197 0 .000 0 .000 ·0.042 0.018 ·0.052 0.096 -0.075 0.122 oe 0.6 04 '° Cll .c CJ go 2 ... c Cll Eo o Cll > 0 ~ -0 2 ·04 -0 6 ·08 40000 0.304 ·0.100 : : ~MeewredELlssic:Mo~ment : i I I I : I 0.204 --------.... -------·-·---.. ·------------.. ·------------"'-------------.... ------------.. ·------------• I I I I t I I I I I I ~Me1 sured Resldu1I Movement I : I I ~ I I I I I I I I : : I : I --·----·---1-------------+-------------~---···-·-----~-----········~-------------~----······---~------------·t······------- ' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ------------~-------------P·------------r·------------P-----·------..-------------.. -------------.. -----------· .. -----------·· I I I I I I I I I I I t I I I I f I I I I I I I : : I : : I : : I I I I I I t I I I I I I I I I --·---------+-----------·+------------il ---·-·-------~-------------~-------------t-------------~--------__..J._ ------------ ' t I I t t I : 1 I I 1 l : I • • I : I : I : i : ! ! ! 5ci;>O -~---~--: --L .,n.i.oo 35~00 40~ 45 100 : : : i : : : ' I I I t I I I I -----------~------------.... ------------_.. _____________ .,. _____________ ., ____________ .,. _________ .... ~-------------·-----········ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ! i : i i : i : t I I I t I I I I I I t I I I t I I t ! I I I ------·--····t----------··-r----··-------r-·····--·-·--r----------··-r-···---------~------····-··r-------------~-----------·· I I t t I I I J I I I I I I • I t I I t I I I t I I I t I I • I I I I • I : : : : : : : : ------------... ·-···--------..------------..... -------------P••·----------P.-------------·-------------~------------·-------------1 • • ' • • • • : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : I I I I I I I I I I I I I t I I ~------------+--···-·-----~--------····-~-------------~·-······---+-----·······-~-----------~----··-·-··--~---·---------• I I I t I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I : l : ~ i : : : ! ! ! ! I ! l ! ·1.0-'-------........:.--______ ..._ ______ __,__ ________ ..._ ______ .......... ________________ .......... ________ ..._ ______ --J Load (lbs) ~tech HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL June 30, 2015 James and Connie Meine 2903 South Oak Way Lakewood, Colorado 80227 jamesmeine@msn.com comeinet@gmai l.com IJcpworih-rawlak Gcotcchnical, Inc 5020 County Road 154 Gknwood Springs. Color;ido 81601 Phone : 970-945-7988 F:ix . 970-945-84S4 Email hpgco:g hpg\:Olcch .com Job No. t 15 037A Subject: Observation of Excavation, Proposed Residence, Lot 86, Iron bridge, River Bank Way, Garfield County, Colorado Dear Mr. and Mrs. Meine: As requested by Dave Reynolds of RM Construction, a representative of Hepworth- Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. observed the excavation at the subject site on June 18 and 24, 2015 to evaluate the soils exposed for foundation support. The findings of our observations and recommendations for the foundation design are presented in this report. We previously conducted a subsoil study for design of foundations at the site and presented our findings in a report dated February 27, 2015, Job No. 115 037A. The current observations were performed as additional services to an in accordance with our agreement for services with James and Connie Meine dated February 3, 2015 . The residence location and design is essentially the same as described in our previous report. The garage will be on the road side and at main level of the residence and the basement level will daylight to the northeast. Spread footings placed on the dense gravel soils or compacted structural fill and sized for an allowable bearing pressure of2,500 psf were recommended for the footing foundation support. We have been requested by RM Construction to evaluate the suitability to bear the footings on the natural soils encountered at design excavation depth . At the time of our initial visit to the site, the building excavation was in progress and incJuded the southern part of the basement level. A test pit had been dug off of the northeast comer of the basement level and encountered groundwater at a depth of about 4 to 5 feet in clay soils. It was discussed to continue the excavation grades as designed and we would evaluate the exposed soils for footing bearing support. When observed on June 24, the excavation had been cut in two main levels from 3 to 4 feet below the adjacent James and Connie Meine June 30, 2015 Page2 ground surface in the garage area and I to 9 feet below the adjacent ground surface in the basement area The northeast side cut was just below the topsoil. The soils exposed in the bottom of the excavation were variable and consisted of silty sandy gravel to sandy silt and clay to silty sand at both levels of the excavation. The finer grained soil areas were hand probed with a metal rod and found to be between~ and 2YJ feet deep. Results of swell-consolidation testing performed on a sample of silty clay taken from the basement level, shown on Figure 1, indicate the soils have a low collapse potential and moderate compressibility when wetted and loaded. The results of standard property tests perfonned on samples taken from the excavation bottom are presented in Table 1. Free water was encountered in the gravels soils of the deepest cut area and southeast comer of the basement level excavation. The silt, sand and clay soil moisture varied from slightly moist to very moist. The soil conditions exposed in the excavation vary from relatively dense gravel with low settlement potential to sand, silt and clay soils with higher compressibility and settlement potential. It should be suitable to span the higher compressibility soils with a heavily reinforced and lightly loaded spread footing and foundation walls provided the owner accepts the risk of differential settlement. Based on an assume depth of2 to 4 feet of compressible soils, we estimate additional differential settlement of about 1 inch at an allowable bearing pressure of 1,200 psf. The fine-grained soils should be moisture adjusted to near optimum and compacted in footing areas. The water seepage into the excavation should be collected and diverted away from the footing areas. An interior lateral subdrain should be provided below the basement level (possibly running in a northwest to southeast direction) about one foot deep and connected to the under slab gravel that discharges to the perimeter foundation underdrain. Any softened soils and mud should be removed before concrete placement. Helical piers appear needed for the outboard deck piers proposed along the northeast side of the building. We expect the helical piers will extend down through the clay soils and into the dense gravel soils or underlying bedrock. Other recommendations presented in our previous report which are applicable should also be observed. The recommendations submitted in this letter are based on our observation of the soils exposed within the foundation excavation and the previous subsurface exploration at the site. Variations in the subsurface conditions below the excavation could increase the risk of foundation movement. We should be advised of any variations encountered in the excavation conditions for possible changes to recommendations contained in this letter. Our services do not include determining the presence, prevention or possibility of mold or Job No . 115 037A James and Connie Meine June 30, 2015 Page 3 other biological contaminants (MOBC) developing in the future. If the client is concerned about MOBC, then a professional in this special field of practice should be consulted. If you have any questions or need further assistance, please call our office. Sincerely, HEPWORTH -PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. SLP/ksw Attachments: cc: RM Construction -Dave Reynolds (davcf@.buildwithnn.com) Job No . 115 037A Moisture Content = 9.1 percent Dry Density = 104 pcf Sample of: Silly Clay From: Bottom of Northeast protion of Excavation Basement Level '* .~ 1 UJ Compression !ii c. ( upon ~ wetting I 0 ['\ c ,_ I'--i-0 ~,.. ~ ·0 Ii> (/) 1 Q) .... _... c. § - u I :t 2 ""' 3 '\ 4 ~ ~ 5 \ \ 6 ~ \ ~ 7 0.1 1.0 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE • ksr 115 037A ~ SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Figure 1 H~wtJl'rTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. TABLE1 Job No .115 037A SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS Excavation Observation SAMPLE LOCATION NATURAL NATURAL GRADATION ATTERBERG LIMITS UNCONFINED PERCENT BOTTOM OF MOISTURE DRY GRAVEL SAND PASSING LIQUID PLASTIC COMPRESSIVE SOIL OR EXCAVATION CONTENT DENSITY (%) (%) N0.200 LIMIT INDEX STRENGTH BEDROCK TYPE 1%\ CD en SIEVE l%l (%) tPSR Northeast Side 9.1 104 Silty Clay Lower Level North End 12 .3 99 21 Silty Sand Lower Level Northeast Corner 19.7 95 57 Very Sandy Silt Garage Southwest Corner 8.1 95 Sandy Silt and Clay Garaee ~tech 5020 County Road 154 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Phone: 970 -945-7988 Fax : 970 -945-8454 hpgeo@hpgeotech.com HEPWORTH· PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY REPORT Client: James and Connie Meine 2903 South Oak Way Lakewood, Colorado 80227 Job No.: 115 037A Day : Date: Page: Thursday 7/16/15 1of1 Project: Proposed Residence, Lot 86, lronbridge, 296 River Bank Lane, Garfield County, Colorado Weather: Partly cloudy, calm, dry Temperature: 72°F at 11:00 am Contractor's Construction Activities : Equ ipment in Use: HP Geotech 's Site Activities: Verbal Communication: distribution: RM Construction held a meeting on site with the Owner, Structural Engineer, Civil Engineer, and HP Geotech. Four exploratory pits were excavated and observed in fine grained soils in footing areas to determine the depth to suitable gravel bearing soils. Link Belt rubber track excavator ------- As requested, we attended the meeting on site and observed the test pits excavated. The first pit was excavated in the planned area of the deck piers just east of the east strip footing area. The pit exposed very moist to wet and soft silty clay to a depth of 6 feet below design footing elevation overlying dense, wet silty sandy gravel with cobbles and boulders. Ground water was encountered in the gravel. The second and third pits, excavated In the strip footing areas in the southwest and northwest walk-out basement areas encountered about 2 to 3 feet of very moist silty clay over the underlying wet gravel. The fourth pit, located in the east walk-out basement strip footing area encountered very moist to wet, soft silty clay to a depth of 5 feet below footing grade overlying the wet, dense gravel. Ground water seepage was also noted at the excavated footing level at multiple locations In the walk-out basement footing areas. Potential options for extending the foundation bearing down to the gravel were discussed: 1. Deep foundation system such as helical piers, micro piles, or drilled piers where gravel is not exposed at footing grade. 2. Excavating to the gravel, dewatering and placing footings on the gravel. 3. Excavating to the gravel, dewatering and replacing to design footing grade with granular backfill such as aggregate base course placed In thin lifts and compacted to at least 98 percent of standard Proctor density. 4. A combination of the above, such as sub-excavation and replacement in the basement strip footing areas and a deep foundation system in the deck pier areas. A foundation and basement slab sub-drain system to daylight or sump was also discussed as being needed. James and Connie Melne Uamesmeine@msn.com ; comelne@gmail.com) RM Construction -Dave Reynolds Cdaye@buildwlthnn.c;o m } TJINI Thomas J. Westhoff, CET Steven L. Pawlak, P.E. Field Technician Reviewed By ~ech HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHN ICAL August 14. 2015 James nnd Connie Meine 2903 South Oak Way Lakewood, Colorado 80227 comeine@gmuil.com H1.rt,or1h p,,,,J 1k Gw1 .·chnic ii, Inc. 5020 C,111my Rn id 154 Glcn,moJ Srnng~. Color;1J,, 816JI Ph.mi: 970 945 i9::l he 970 945 8454 un ul hri.:1.o~hri.:~~l1~du:mn Job No. 115 037A Subject: Proposed Micro-Piles for Meine Residence, Lot 86, Ironbridge, 296 River Bank Lane, Garfield County. Colorado Dear Mr. and Mrs. Meine: As requested by Blake Piland, we are providing our opinion on use of micro-piles for support of the eastern part of the proposed residence at the subject site. We previously observed the excavation on July 16, 2015 for exposed bearing conditions and provided options for foundation bearing in the Construction Activity Report, attached. Since the July 161h site meeting, structural fill has been placed for footing bearing except in the eastern area where soft wet clay soils were encountered. We have been provided the revised foundation plan which includes micro-piles for foundation support in the eastern area. In our July 16"' report we provided for bearing on natural coarse granular soils, compacted structural fill, deep foundation and a combination of these. In our opinion, bearing the foundation on the natural course granular soils, compacted structural fill placed on natural coarse granular soil or bedrock, or a deep foundation (micro-piles) which rely on the natur.il coarse granular soils or bedrock for load capacity, provide similar bearing in low compressibility materials and the resulting foundation should have low settlement risk. The revised foundation plan appears appropriate for the building support. If you have any questions or need further assistance, please call our office. Sincerely. Rev. By: DEH SLP/ksw Attachment: Construction Activity Report: 7/16/15 cc: RM Construction-Blake Piland Cbluke@buildwithnn.com) RM Construction -Dave Reynolds (dave@buildwilhrm.com) P::irker 303-841-7119 • ColoradoSprings 719-633-5562 • Silverrhomc 970-468-1989 ~ech 5020 County Road 154 Glenwood Springs, co 81&01 Phone: 970-945-7988 Fax: 970-145-8454 hpgeo@hpgeotech.com HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY REPORT Client James and Connie Meine 2903 South Oak Way Lakewood, Colorado 80227 Job No.: 115 037 A Day: Date: Page: Thursday 7/18/15 1of1 Project: Proposed Residence, Lot 86, lronbridge, 296 River Bank Lane, Garfield County, Colorado Weather. Partly cloudy, calm, dry Temperature: 72°F at 11:00 am Contractor's Construction Activities : Equipment in Use: HP Geotech's Site Activities: Verbal Communication : distribution: RM Construction held a meeting on site with the Owner, Structural Engineer, Civil Engineer, and HP Geotech. Four exploratory pits were excavated and observed in fine grained soils In footing areas to determine the depth to suitable gravel bearing soils. Link Belt rubber track excavator As requested, we attended the meeting on site and observed the test pits excavated. The first pit was excavated In the planned area of the deck piers just east of the east strip footing area. The pit exposed very moist to wet and soft sllty clay to a depth of 6 feet below design footing elevation overlying dense, wet silty sandy gravel with cobbles and boulders. Ground water was encountered in the gravel. The second and third pits, excavated in the strip footing areas In the southwest and northwest walk-out basement areas encountered about 2 to 3 feet of very moist silty clay over the underlying wet gravel. The fourth pit, located in the east walk-out basement strip footing area encountered very moist to wet, soft silty clay to a depth of 5 feet below footing grade overlying the wet, dense gravel. Ground water seepage was also noted at the excavated footing level at multiple locations in the walk-out basement footing areas. Potential options for extending the foundation bearing down to the gravel were discussed: 1. Deep foundation system such as helical piers, micro piles, or drilled piers where gravel is not exposed at footing grade. 2. Excavating to the gravel, dewaterlng and placing footings on the gravel. 3. Excavating to the gravel, dewatering and replacing to design footing grade with granular backfill such as aggregate base course placed in thf n lifts and compacted to at least 98 percent of standard Proctor density. 4. A combination of the above, such as sub-excavation and replacement In the basement strip footing areas and a deep foundation system in the deck pier areas. A foundation and basement slab sub-drain system to daylight or sump was also discussed as being needed. Connie Mefne fcometnoCamiJ!..c.pm) RM Construction -Dave Reynolds (dfvt0bu!kfwi1hrm .com • T.JNI Thomas J. Westhoff, CET Steven L. Pawlak, P.E. Field Technician Reviewed By