Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Report (15)
P.20� 1 ?x) �4, ` '4 /7- (' r G E ODESIGN= REPORT OF GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING SERVICES New Tigard Self-Storage Facility 12740 SW Pacific Highway Tigard, Oregon For William Warren Group May 19, 2016 GeoDesign Project: WilliamWG-1-01 _-f t' f I NINDESIGNv May 19, 2016 \...s.'"-----..\N------------ William Warren Group 5200 East Evans Avenue Denver, CO 80222 Attention: Mr.Jon Sudduth Report of Geotechnical Engineering Services New Tigard Self-Storage Facility 12740 SW Pacific Highway Tigard, Oregon GeoDesign Project: WilliamWG-1-01 GeoDesign, Inc. is pleased to present our report of geotechnical engineering services for the proposed new self-storage facility to be located at 12740 SW Pacific Highway in Tigard, Oregon. This report has been prepared in accordance with our proposal dated April 15, 2016. We appreciate the opportunity to be of continued service to you. Please contact us if you have questions regarding this report. Sincerely, GeoDesign, Inc. 4PP :rett A. Shipton, P.E., G.E. Principal Engineer cc: Mr. Dirk McCullogh, Magellan Architects(via email only) Mr. Ryan Anderson, Swenson Say Faget(via email only) TCM:BAS:kt Attachments One copy submitted(via email only) Document ID:WilliamWG-1-01-051916-geor.docx ©2016 GeoDesign,Inc. All rights reserved. a 15575 SW Sequoia Pkwy,Suite 100 I Portland,OR 97224 1503.968.8787 www.geodesigninc.com TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE NO. 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 2.0 PROJECT UNDERSTANDING 1 3.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE 1 4.0 SITE CONDITIONS 2 4.1 Surface Conditions 2 4.2 Subsurface Conditions 2 5.0 CONCLUSIONS 3 6.0 SITE DEVELOPMENT RECOMMENDATIONS 3 6.1 Site Preparation 3 6.2 Construction Considerations 4 6.3 Temporary Slopes 4 6.4 Erosion Control 4 6.5 Structural Fill 4 7.0 FOUNDATION SUPPORT RECOMMENDATIONS 6 7.1 Foundation Subgrade Preparation 6 7.2 Spread Footings 6 8.0 SLABS-ON-GRADE 7 9.0 PERMANENT RETAINING STRUCTURES 8 10.0 DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS 8 10.1 Temporary 8 10.2 Surface 8 10.3 Subsurface 9 11.0 SEISMIC DESIGN CRITERIA 9 12.0 PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS 9 12.1 Pavement Design 9 12.2 Conventional Pavement Material Requirements 10 13.0 OBSERVATION OF CONSTRUCTION 10 14.0 LIMITATIONS 10 FIGURES Vicinity Map Figure 1 Site Plan Figure 2 Surcharge-Induced Lateral Earth Pressures Figure 3 APPENDICES Appendix A Field Explorations A-1 Laboratory Testing A-1 Exploration Key Table A-1 Soil Classification System Table A-2 Boring Logs Figure A-1 Summary of Laboratory Data Figure A-2 SPT Hammer Calibration G EODESIGN= WIIIiamWG-1-01:051916 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE NO. APPENDICES(continued) Appendix B Previous Geotechnical Study at Site B-1 Site Plan and CPT Logs ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS G EODESIGN= WIII iamWG-1-01:051 91 6 1.0 INTRODUCTION GeoDesign, Inc. is pleased to present this geotechnical engineering report for proposed new self- storage facility located at 12740 SW Pacific Highway in Tigard, Oregon. The location of the site relative to surrounding physical features is shown on Figure 1. Acronyms and abbreviations used herein are defined at the end of this document. 2.0 PROJECT UNDERSTANDING Based on available information, we understand that the proposed development will consist of a three-story self-storage facility with leasing office and will include a partial basement, or up to 7 feet below existing grade. The development will also include a small parking lot. Based on structural loading information provided by Swenson Say Faget, bearing wall loads will be on the order of 4 kips per foot with minimal column loads. In addition, column loads in the leasing office will range between 250 and 300 kips per foot. Floor slab loads will be 125 psf. 3.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE The purpose of our services was to provide geotechnical engineering recommendations for use in design and construction of the proposed development. The specific scope of our services is summarized as follows: • Reviewed readily available published geologic data and our in-house files for existing information on subsurface conditions in the site vicinity. In addition, reviewed information from the previous November 10, 2015 geotechnical report completed for the site by others. • Coordinated and managed the field investigation, including public utility locates, access preparation, and scheduling of subcontractors and GeoDesign field staff. • Completed one boring to a depth of 51.5 feet BGS with a truck-mounted drill rig utilizing mud rotary drilling methods. Upon completion, the boring was backfilled and surface patched with asphalt. • Collected groundwater levels in on-site environmental wells. • Maintained a continuous log of the exploration, collected samples at representative intervals, and observed groundwater conditions. • Performed a laboratory testing program. The specific laboratory tests performed on selected soil samples were as follows: • Seven moisture content determinations in general accordance with ASTM D 2216 • Three particle-size analyses in general accordance with ASTM D 1 140 • Provided recommendations for site preparation and grading, including temporary and permanent slopes, fill placement criteria, suitability of on-site soil for fill, subgrade preparation, and recommendations for wet weather construction. • Provided recommendations for excavation and excavation support. • Provided shallow foundation recommendations for the support of the proposed structure, including allowable bearing capacity, estimated settlement, and lateral resistance. • Provided recommendations for use in the design of conventional retaining walls, including backfill and drainage requirements and lateral earth pressures. G EO DESIGNY 1 WIIIiamWG-1-01:051916 • Provided recommendations for construction of asphalt pavements for on-site access roads and parking areas, including subbase, base course, and asphalt paving thickness. • Evaluated groundwater conditions at the site. Provided general recommendations for dewatering during construction and subsurface drainage. • Provided seismic design coefficients as prescribed by the 2012 IBC and 2014 SOSSC. • Prepared this report presenting our findings, conclusions, and recommendations. 4.0 SITE CONDITIONS 4.1 SURFACE CONDITIONS The site is located southeast of the intersection of SW Pacific Highway and SW McKenzie Street and is currently occupied by a single-story restaurant on the northeast corner and a two-story, L-shaped office building on the southwest edge. The remainder of the site includes AC-paved parking areas and drive aisles. In addition, the site includes a small parcel located on the north side of SW McKenzie Street, which is occupied by a paved parking lot. Site topography is relatively level. Land use in the vicinity of the site is primarily residential, commercial, and office. 4.2 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS We explored subsurface conditions at the site by drilling one boring (B-1)to a depth of 51.5 feet BGS. In addition, we reviewed CPT logs from the previous study completed at the site. The approximate locations of our boring and the previous CPTs are shown on Figure 2. Descriptions of the field exploration and laboratory testing programs and a log of our boring are presented in Appendix A. The site plan from the previous study at the site and logs of the CPTs are presented in Appendix B. The following sections provide a brief description of the subsurface conditions encountered in the exploration. 4.2.1 Soil Subsurface conditions generally consist of a pavement section comprised of 3.5 inches of AC underlain by 10.5 inches of aggregate base. The pavement section is underlain by soft to medium stiff silt fill with varying amounts of sand, gravel, and organics to a depth of approximately 8 feet BGS. The fill is underlain by loose to medium dense sand with varying amounts of silt to the total depth explored of 51.5 feet BGS. The moisture content of the silt fill and native sand ranges from 24 to 36 percent. 4.2.2 Groundwater Groundwater was measured in on-site monitoring wells at depths of 4.8 to 11.7 feet BGS across the site from east to west during our recent investigation conducted in May 2016. Groundwater was measured in on-site wells in November 2015 at depths ranging from 9 to 15 feet BGS. Based on our experience in the site vicinity, perched groundwater should be expected at shallower depths, particularly during and after extended periods of wet weather. The depth to groundwater is expected to fluctuate in response to seasonal changes, changes in surface topography, and other factors not observed in the site vicinity. CEO DESIGN=. 2 WIIIiamWG-1-01:051916 5.0 CONCLUSIONS In our opinion, the site is suitable for the proposed development. We anticipate that the following geotechnical factors will have an impact on the design and construction of the proposed improvements. • The proposed storage unit structure with estimated bearing wall loads on the order of 4 kips per foot and minimal column loads for structures can be supported on spread footings. • The proposed leasing office area with estimated column loads ranging between 250 and 300 kips per foot can be supported on spread footings underlain by 24-inch-thick granular pads. • Undocumented fill was encountered in the boring, which is unsuitable for support of the proposed building. Undocumented fill should be over-excavated and replaced with structural fill within areas supporting foundations. • The on-site soil is generally suitable for use as structural fill, provided it is properly moisture conditioned. However, compaction of silt soil will likely only be possible during the dry season. • The on-site soil will generally provide poor to fair support for construction equipment during the wet construction season. Granular haul roads and working pads should be employed if earthwork will occur during the wet season. • Approximately 4 inches of liquefaction-induced settlement is expected under design levels of ground shaking. Design differential settlement can be assumed to be one-half of the total predicted settlement over a distance of 40 feet. Our specific recommendations for site development are presented in the following sections of this report. 6.0 SITE DEVELOPMENT RECOMMENDATIONS 6.1 SITE PREPARATION 6.1.1 Demolition Demolition includes removal of the existing structures, pavements, concrete curbs, abandoned utilities, and any subsurface elements from the previous on-site structures. Demolished material should be transported off site for disposal. Excavations remaining from site preparation activities should be backfilled with structural fill where below planned site grades. The base of excavations should be excavated to expose firm subgrade before filling. Utility lines abandoned under new structural elements should be completely removed and backfilled with structural fill. Soft soil encountered in utility line excavations should be removed and replaced with structural fill. 6.1.2 Subgrade Preparation and Evaluation Following demolition and prior to placing fill, pavement, or building improvements, the exposed subgrade should be evaluated by proof rolling. The subgrade should be proof rolled with a fully loaded dump truck or similar heavy, rubber-tired construction equipment to identify soft, loose, or unsuitable areas. A member of our geotechnical staff should observe the proof rolling to evaluate yielding of the ground surface. Soft or loose zones identified during proof rolling should be G EODESIGN= 3 WIIIiamWG-1-01:051916 excavated and replaced with compacted structural fill. Areas that appear too wet or soft to support proof rolling equipment should be prepared in accordance with recommendations for wet weather construction provided in the "Construction Considerations"section of this report. 6.2 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS Fine-grained soil present on this site is easily disturbed during the wet season. If not carefully executed, site preparation, utility trench work, and roadway excavation can create extensive soft areas and significant repair costs can result. In addition, the sandy soil is prone to raveling, and shoring will be required to maintain vertical excavation walls and protect adjacent improvements. Earthwork planning should include considerations for minimizing subgrade disturbance. If construction occurs during the wet season, or if the moisture content of the surficial soil is more than a few percentage points above the optimum, site stripping and cutting may need to be accomplished using track-mounted equipment, loading removed material into trucks supported on granular haul roads. The thickness of the granular material for haul roads and staging areas will depend on the amount and type of construction traffic and should be the responsibility of the contractor. Generally, a 12-to 18-inch-thick mat of granular material is sufficient for light staging areas and the basic building pad but is generally not expected to be adequate to support heavy equipment or truck traffic. The granular mat for haul roads and areas with repeated heavy construction traffic typically needs to be increased to between 18 to 24 inches. The actual thickness of haul roads and staging areas should be based on the contractor's approach to site development and the amount and type of construction traffic. The material used to construct haul roads and staging area should also be selected by the contractor. 6.3 TEMPORARY SLOPES Construction of temporary slopes less than 10 feet high should be no steeper than 1 Y2H:1 V. If slopes greater than 10 feet high are required, GeoDesign should be contacted to make additional recommendations. All cut slopes should be protected from erosion by covering them during wet weather. If sloughing or instability is observed, the slope should be flattened or the cut supported by shoring. 6.4 EROSION CONTROL The on-site soil is moderately susceptible to erosion. Consequently,we recommend that slopes be covered with an appropriate erosion control product if construction occurs during periods of wet weather. We recommend that all slope surfaces be planted as soon as practical to minimize erosion. Surface water runoff should be collected and directed away from slopes to prevent water from running down the slope face. Erosion control measures such as straw bales, sediment fences, and temporary detention and settling basins should be used in accordance with local and state ordinances. 6.5 STRUCTURAL FILL Structural fill includes fill beneath foundations, slabs, pavements, any other areas intended to support structures, or within the influence zones of structures. Structural fill should be free of G EODESIGN=. 4 WIIIiamWG-1-01:051916 organic matter and other deleterious material and, in general, should consist of particles no larger than 3 inches in diameter. Recommendations for suitable fill material are provided in the following sections. 6.5.1 On-Site Native Soil The on-site native soil will be suitable for use as structural fill only if it can be moisture conditioned. The on-site silty soil is sensitive to small changes in moisture content and may be difficult, if not impossible, to compact adequately during wet weather or when its moisture content is more than a few percentage points above optimum. Laboratory tests indicate that the moisture content of the native silt unit is significantly greater than the anticipated optimum moisture content required for satisfactory compaction. Therefore, this soil may require extensive drying if it is used as structural fill. We recommend using imported granular material for structural fill if the moisture content of the on-site soil cannot be reduced. Native soil should be placed in lifts with a maximum uncompacted thickness of 8 inches and compacted to not less than 92 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D 1557. 6.5.2 Imported Granular Material Imported granular material should be pit-or quarry-run rock, crushed rock, or crushed gravel and sand that is fairly well graded between coarse and fine and has less than 5 percent by dry weight passing the U.S. Standard No. 200 sieve. All granular material must be durable such that there is no degradation of the material during and after installation as structural fill. The percentage of fines can be increased to 12 percent if the fill is placed during dry weather and provided the fill material is moisture conditioned, as necessary, for proper compaction. The material should be placed in lifts with a maximum uncompacted thickness of 12 inches and compacted to not less than 95 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D 1557. During the wet season or when wet subgrade conditions exist, the initial lift should have a maximum thickness of 15 inches and should be compacted with a smooth-drum roller without the use of vibratory action. 6.5.3 Floor Slab Base Rock Imported durable granular material placed beneath building floor slabs should be clean crushed rock or crushed gravel and sand that is fairly well graded between coarse and fine. The granular material should have a maximum particle size of 11h inches, have less than 5 percent by dry weight passing the U.S. Standard No. 200 sieve, and have at least two mechanically fractured surfaces. The imported base rock should be placed in one lift and compacted to not less than 95 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D 1557. 6.5.4 Recycled Concrete Recycled concrete can be used for structural fill, provided the concrete is processed to a relatively well-graded material with maximum particle size of 3 inches. This material can be used as trench backfill and general structural fill if it meets the requirements for imported granular material, which would require a smaller maximum particle size. The material should be placed in lifts with a maximum uncompacted thickness of 12 inches and compacted to not less than 95 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D 1557. G EODESIGN=. 5 WIIIiamWG-1-01:051916 6.5.5 Trench Backfill Trench backfill for the utility pipe base and pipe zone should consist of durable, well-graded granular material containing no organic or other deleterious material, have a maximum particle size of% inch, and have less than 8 percent by dry weight passing the U.S. Standard No. 200 sieve. Backfill for the pipe base and to the springline of the pipe should be placed in maximum 12-inch- thick lifts and compacted to not less than 90 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D 1557, or as recommended by the pipe manufacturer. Backfill above the springline of the pipe should be placed in maximum 12-inch-thick lifts and compacted to not less than 92 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D 1557. Trench backfill located within 2 feet of finish subgrade elevation should be placed in maximum 12-inch-thick lifts and compacted to not less than 95 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D 1557. 6.5.6 Stabilization Material If groundwater is present at the base of utility excavations, we recommend placing trench stabilization material at the base of the excavation consisting of at least 2 feet of well-graded gravel, crushed gravel, or crushed rock with a minimum particle size of 4 inches and less than 5 percent by dry weight passing the U.S. Standard No. 4 sieve. The material should be free of organic matter and other deleterious material and should be placed in one lift and compacted until "well keyed." 7.0 FOUNDATION SUPPORT RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the results of our subsurface exploration program and geotechnical analysis, the planned storage structure with the estimated loading provided can be supported on conventional spread footings. The office portion of the structure with heavier loading can be supported on continuous wall and isolated column footings that bear on 2-foot-thick granular pads established on the underlying firm soil. Our recommendations for use in foundation design and construction are provided in the following sections. 7.1 FOUNDATION SUBGRADE PREPARATION All foundation subgrades should consist of firm, undisturbed native soil. Variable fill, if encountered, beneath spread footings should be removed to native, competent material. The resulting excavation should be backfilled with structural fill in accordance with recommendations provided in the "Structural Fill"section of this report. We recommend that a qualified geotechnical engineer or geotechnical field technician evaluate all foundation subgrades prior to placement of fill construction of forms or placement of reinforcing steel and concrete. 7.2 SPREAD FOOTINGS 7.2.1 Bearing Capacity The proposed storage facility portion of the structure can be supported on conventional spread footings bearing on firm, undisturbed native soil or on structural fill underlain by firm, G EO DESIGNS. 6 WIIIiamWG-1-01:051916 undisturbed native soil. Undocumented fill should be removed from footing subgrade and backfilled with structural fill. The structural fill should extend a minimum of 6 inches beyond the footing perimeter for every foot excavated below the base grade of the footings. All footings within the office portion of the structure should be established on crushed rock pads that are at least 24 inches thick. The pads should extend beyond the footing perimeter at 12 inches in all directions. Material used to construct the pads should meet the requirements of the"Imported Granular Fill" section of this report and be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM 1557. Footings should be proportioned for a maximum allowable soil bearing pressure of 2,500 psf. This bearing pressure is a net bearing pressure and applies to the total of dead and long-term live loads and may be doubled when considering seismic or wind loads. The weight of the footing and any overlying backfill can be ignored in calculating footing loads. We recommend that isolated column and continuous wall footings have minimum widths of 24 and 18 inches, respectively. The bottom of exterior footings should be founded at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent grade. Interior footings should be founded at least 12 inches below the top of the floor slab. The recommended minimum footing depth is greater than the design frost depth. 7.2.2 Lateral Resistance Lateral loads on footings can be resisted by passive earth pressure on the sides of the footings and by friction on the base of the footings. The available passive earth pressure for footings • confined by native soil and structural fill is 350 pcf. Adjacent floor slabs, pavements, or the upper 12-inch depth of adjacent, unpaved areas should not be considered when calculating passive resistance. A coefficient of friction equal to 0.35 may be used when calculating resistance to sliding on the native soil. A coefficient of friction equal to 0.45 may be used for footings founded on granular structural fill. 7.2.3 Settlement Shallow foundations with real bearing pressures less than 2,500 psf should experience post- construction settlement of less than 1 inch. Differential settlement of up to one-half of the total settlement magnitude can be expected between adjacent footings with similar loads. We expect that settlement will occur during construction as loads are applied. 8.0 SLABS-ON-GRADE A minimum 6-inch-thick layer of base rock should be placed and compacted over the prepared subgrade to assist as a capillary break. The base rock should be crushed rock or crushed gravel and sand meeting the requirements outlined in the "Structural Fill"section of this report. The imported granular material should be placed in one lift and compacted to not less than 95 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D 1557. A subgrade modulus G EODESIGNY. 7 WIIIiamWG-1-01:051916 of 100 pci can be used to design the floor slab. Floor slab base rock should be replaced if it becomes contaminated with excessive fines (greater than 5 percent by dry weight passing the U.S. Standard No. 200 Sieve). Vapor barriers are often required by flooring manufacturers to protect flooring and flooring adhesives. Many flooring manufacturers will warrant their product only if a vapor barrier is installed according to their recommendations. Selection and design of an appropriate vapor barrier(if needed) should be based on discussions among members of the design team. We can provide additional information to assist you with your decision. 9.0 PERMANENT RETAINING STRUCTURES Permanent retaining structures free to rotate slightly around the base should be designed for active earth pressures using an equivalent fluid unit pressure of 35 pcf. If retaining walls are restrained against rotation during backfilling, they should be designed for an at-rest earth pressure of 55 pcf. This value is based on the assumption that(1)the retained soil is level, (2)the backfill is drained, and (3)the wall is less than 12 feet in height. Lateral pressures induced by surcharge loads can be computed using the methods presented on Figure 3. Seismic lateral forces can be calculated using a dynamic force equal to 7H2 pounds per linear foot of wall, where H is the wall height. The seismic force should be applied as a distributed load with the centroid located at 0.6H from the wall base. Footings for retaining walls should be designed in as recommended for shallow foundations. Drains consisting of a perforated drainpipe wrapped in a geotextile filter should be installed behind retaining walls. The pipe should be embedded in a zone of coarse sand or gravel containing less than 2 percent by dry weight passing the U.S. Standard No. 200 sieve and should outlet to a suitable discharge. 10.0 DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS 10.1 TEMPORARY During mass grading at the site, the contractor should be made responsible for temporary drainage of surface water as necessary to prevent standing water and/or erosion at the working surface. During rough and finished grading of the building site, the contractor should keep all footing excavations and building pads free of water. As previously mentioned, there is a high probability shallow or perched groundwater will be encountered at the site. The contractor should be prepared for this condition. 10.2 SURFACE The ground surface at finished building pads should be sloped away from their edges at a minimum 2 percent gradient for a distance of at least 5 feet. Downspouts should discharge into solid, smooth-wall drainage pipes that carry the collected water to an appropriate discharge point at least 10 feet away from the foundation of the building. Trapped planter areas should not be created adjacent to pavements and structures without providing means for positive drainage (e.g., swales or catch basins). C EODESIGN=. 8 WIIIiamWG-1-01:051916 10.3 SUBSURFACE Because of the presence of shallow groundwater/seepage, we recommend the installation of perimeter footing drains around the building. The footing drains should consist of minimum 12-inch-wide, filter fabric-wrapped, gravel-filled trenches that extend at least 18 inches below interior grade (e.g., crawl space or slab subgrade elevation)and 3 feet below exterior grade, whichever is deepest. A minimum 4-inch-diameter, perforated pipe should be placed at the base of the gravel-filled trenches to collect water that gathers in the drain rock. The drain rock and fabric should meet the specifications provided in the "Structural Fill" section of this report. Surface and subsurface drainage systems should not be tied to one another, unless special provisions are taken to prevent backflow of surface water into the subsurface drainage system. 11.0 SEISMIC DESIGN CRITERIA Seismic design is prescribed by the 2014 SOSSC and the 2012 IBC. Table 1 presents the site design parameters prescribed by the 2012 IBC for the site. Table 1. Seismic Design Parameters Parameter Short Period 1 Second Period (Ts=0.2 second) (T, = 1.0 second) MCE Spectral Acceleration, S S = 0.97 g S =0.42 g Site Class E Site Coefficient, F F =0.94 F = 2.40 Adjusted Spectral Acceleration, SM SM5=0.91 g SMI = 1.01 g Design Spectral Response 0.61 g 0.68 g Acceleration Parameters, SD Liquefaction settlement is the result of seismically induced densification and subsequent ground settlement of loose sand and silty sand below the groundwater table. We anticipate up to 4 inches of liquefaction-induced settlement under design level of ground shaking. Differential settlement is anticipated to be one-half of the total predicted settlement over a distance of 40 feet. 12.0 PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS 1 2.1 PAVEMENT DESIGN The pavement subgrade should be prepared in accordance with the recommendations in this report. Our pavement recommendations are based on a minimum California Bearing Ratio value of 3 and a design life of 20 years. We do not have specific information on the frequency and type of vehicles that will use the area; however, we have assumed that post-construction traffic conditions will consist of no more than five trucks per day. G EODESIGN=. 9 WIIIiamWG-1-01:051916 For pavement areas accessed by trucks, we recommend a pavement section consisting of a minimum of 3.0 inches of AC pavement underlain by a minimum of 8.0 inches of crushed base rock. A pavement section of 2.5 inches of AC over 6.0 inches of crushed base rock can be used in paved areas that will be exposed to passenger car traffic only. In addition, we recommend that a geotextile separation layer be placed between the subgrade and crushed base rock in areas exposed to truck traffic to prevent migration of the silt up into the crushed base rock. All thicknesses are intended to be the minimum acceptable. The design of the recommended pavement section is based on the assumption that construction will be completed during an extended period of dry weather. Wet weather construction will likely require an increased thickness of crushed base rock. 12.2 CONVENTIONAL PAVEMENT MATERIAL REQUIREMENTS The AC should be Level 3, %z-inch, dense ACP as described in OSSC 00744 (Asphalt Concrete Pavement) and be compacted to 91 percent of the specific gravity of the mix, as determined by ASTM D 2041. Minimum lift thickness for%z-inch, dense ACP is 2.0 inches. Asphalt binder should be performance graded and conform to PG 70-22. The crushed base rock should consist of%-or 1%z-inch-minus material meeting the requirements in OSSC 00641 (Aggregate Subbase, Base, and Shoulders), with the exception that the crushed base rock should have less than 5 percent by dry weight passing the U.S. Standard No. 200 sieve. The crushed base rock should be compacted in one lift to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D 1557. 13.0 OBSERVATION OF CONSTRUCTION Satisfactory earthwork and foundation performance depends to a large degree on the quality of construction. Subsurface conditions observed during construction should be compared with those encountered during the subsurface explorations. Recognition of changed conditions often requires experience; therefore, qualified personnel should visit the site with sufficient frequency to detect whether subsurface conditions change significantly from those anticipated. In addition, sufficient observation of the contractor's activities is a key part of determining that the work is completed in accordance with the construction drawings and specifications. 14.0 LIMITATIONS We have prepared this report for use by William Warren Group and members of their design and construction teams for the proposed project. The data and report can be used for estimating purposes, but our report, conclusions, and interpretations should not be construed as a warranty of the subsurface conditions and are not applicable to other sites. Soil explorations indicate soil conditions only at specific locations and only to the depths penetrated. The soil explorations do not necessarily reflect soil strata or water level variations that may exist between exploration locations. If subsurface conditions differing from those described are noted during the course of excavation and construction, re-evaluation will be necessary. In addition, if design changes are made, we should be retained to review our conclusions and recommendations and to provide a written evaluation or modification. G EODESIGN= 10 WIIIiamWG-1-01:051916 The scope of our services does not include services related to construction safety precautions, and our recommendations are not intended to direct the contractor's methods, techniques, sequences or procedures, except as specifically described in our report for consideration in design. Within the limitations of scope, schedule, and budget, our services have been executed in accordance with the generally accepted practices in this area at the time this report was prepared. No warranty or other conditions, express or implied, should be understood. ♦ ♦ ♦ We appreciate the opportunity to be of continued service to you. Please call if you have questions concerning this report or if we can provide additional services. Sincerely, GeoDesign, Inc. sD PROFF00 Tacia C. Miller, P.E., G.E. %�/ -'e • Senior Associate Engineer ,' • ► - EGf 410 ��p �4i 11 20c0 O� �rrA. 8OI Brett A. Shipton, P.E., G.E. EXPIRES: 6/30/16 Principal Engineer G EO DESIGN=. 11 WIIIiamWG-1-01:051916 Printed By:aday I Print Date:5/19/2016 8:48:44 AM File Name:J:\S-Z\williamwg\williamwg-1\williamwg-1-01\Figures\CAD\WilliamWG-1-01-DET01.dwg I Layout:FIGURE 3 Imo— X=mH k...- X=mH POINT LOAD,Qp I LINE LOAD,Q L �-_______a STRIP LOAD,q T i ffir T --vim\\ ' .\\.\� ���� =nH iZ Z=nH XICIP� H = H ff. H 111, °h ah IR ah \��\\ FOR m<0.4= FOR m<0.4= \\\ o \%\\\j\ a _ 0.28 r? \\\�/\ Q \//\�i�\ h=223.14(18 SINS cos 2a) //i//i//�/`\\��\/// h H2 (01 r/�//�//� ///\ ah HL (00 6+ ii . .\/ / \//\\,\// (13 IN RADIANS) FOR m>0.4= FOR m>0.4= a Q 1.77m2 r? QL 1.28rr12 n h - (m rli)3 °h =H(mm LINE LOAD PARALLEL TO WALL STRIP LOAD PARALLEL TO WALL ROMP X=mH oh =oh COS2(1.1.) NOTES: d , 1. THESE GUIDELINES APPLY TO RIGID WALLS WITH POISSON'S RATIO ASSUMED TO BE 0.5 FOR BACKFILL MATERIALS. DISTRIBUTION OF HORIZONTAL PRESSURES 2. LATERAL PRESSURES FROM ANY COMBINATION OF ABOVE LOADS MAY BE DETERMINED BY THE PRINCIPLE OF VERTICAL POINT LOAD SUPERPOSITION. 3. VALUES IN THIS FIGURE ARE UNFACTORED. G EQ DES I GNU WILLIAMWG-1-01 SURCHARGE-INDUCED LATERAL EARTH PRESSURES 15575 SW Sequoia Parkway-Suite 100 Portland OR 97224 MAY 2016 NEW TIGARD SELF-STORAGE FACILITY FIGURE 3 Off 503.968.8787 Fax 503.968.3068 TIGARD,OR • -v m Z D X APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATIONS GENERAL Subsurface conditions at the site were explored by drilling one boring (B-1)to a depth of 51.5 feet BGS. Drilling services were provided by Hard Core Drilling on May 4, 2016. The exploration was observed by a member of our geology staff. We obtained representative samples of the various soil encountered in the explorations for geotechnical laboratory testing. The exploration log is presented in this appendix. Our exploration location was chosen based on preliminary site plans provided to our office by the design team. The location of the exploration was determined in the field by pacing from site features. This information should be considered accurate to the degree implied by the methods used. SOIL SAMPLING Soil samples were obtained from the borings using the following methods: • SPTs were performed in general conformance with ASTM D 1586. The sampler was driven with a 140-pound automatic trip hammer free-falling 30 inches. The number of blows required to drive the sampler 1 foot, or as otherwise indicated, into the soil is shown adjacent to the sample symbols on the exploration logs. Disturbed samples were obtained from the split barrel for subsequent classification and index testing. • Relatively undisturbed samples were obtained at selected intervals by pushing a Shelby tube sampler 24 inches ahead of the boring front. Sampling intervals are shown on the exploration log. The calibration factor for the SPT hammer used by Hard Core Drilling was 72 percent. The calibration testing results are presented at the end of this appendix. SOIL CLASSIFICATION The soil samples were classified in accordance with the "Exploration Key"(Table A-1) and "Soil Classification System"(Table A-2), which are presented in this appendix. The log indicates the depths at which the soils or their characteristics change, although the change could be gradual. If the change occurred between sample locations, the depth was interpreted. Classifications are shown on the exploration log. LABORATORY TESTING CLASSIFICATION The soil samples were classified in the laboratory to confirm field classifications. The laboratory classifications are shown on the exploration log if those classifications differed from the field classifications. G EODESIGN% A-1 WIIIiamWG-1-01:051916 MOISTURE CONTENT We tested the natural moisture content of selected soil samples in general accordance with ASTM D 2216. The natural moisture content is a ratio of the weight of the water to the dry weight of soil in a test sample and is expressed as a percentage. The test results are presented in this appendix. PARTICLE-SIZE ANALYSIS Particle-size analyses were performed on selected samples in general accordance with ASTM D 1140. This test determines of the amount of material finer than a 75-pm (No. 200) sieve expressed as a percentage of the dry weight of soil. The test results are presented in this appendix. G EO DESIGN= A-2 WIIIiamWG-1-01:051916 SYMBOL SAMPLING DESCRIPTION ill Location of sample obtained in general accordance with ASTM D 1586 Standard Penetration Test with recovery I} Location of sample obtained using thin-wall Shelby tube or Geoprobe® sampler in general accordance with ASTM D 1587 with recovery Location of sample obtained using Dames& Moore sampler and 300-pound hammer or pushed with recovery Location of sample obtained using Dames& Moore and 140-pound hammer or pushed with recovery 1 Location of sample obtained using 3-inch-O.D. California split-spoon sampler and 140-pound hammer NLocation of grab sample Graphic Log of Soil and Rock Types ,;`._;p' Observed contact between soil or Rock coring interval ,;30 : rock units(at depth indicated) Water level during drilling Inferred contact between soil or rock units(at approximate depths indicated) Y Water level taken on date shown — cF GEOTECHNICAL TESTING EXPLANATIONS ATT Atterberg Limits PP Pocket Penetrometer CBR California Bearing Ratio P200 Percent Passing U.S. Standard No. 200 CON Consolidation Sieve DD Dry Density RES Resilient Modulus DS Direct Shear SIEV Sieve Gradation HYD Hydrometer Gradation TOR Torvane MC Moisture Content UC Unconfined Compressive Strength MD Moisture-Density Relationship VS Vane Shear OC Organic Content kPa Kilopascal P Pushed Sample ENVIRONMENTAL TESTING EXPLANATIONS CA Sample Submitted for Chemical Analysis ND Not Detected P Pushed Sample NS No Visible Sheen PID Photoionization Detector Headspace SS Slight Sheen Analysis MS Moderate Sheen ppm Parts per Million HS Heavy Sheen G EODESIGM EXPLORATION KEY TABLE A-1 15575 SW Sequoia Parkway-Suite 100 Portland OR 97224 Off 503.968.8787 Fax 503.968.3068 RELATIVE DENSITY-COARSE-GRAINED SOILS Relative Density Standard Penetration Dames&Moore Sampler Dames&Moore Sampler Resistance (140-pound hammer) (300-pound hammer) Very Loose 0-4 0- 11 0-4 Loose 4- 10 11 -26 4- 10 Medium Dense 10-30 26-74 10-30 Dense 30-50 74- 120 30-47 Very Dense More than 50 More than 120 More than 47 CONSISTENCY- FINE-GRAINED SOILS Consistency Standard Penetration Dames& Moore Sampler Dames&Moore Sampler Unconfined Compressive Resistance (140-pound hammer) (300-pound hammer) Strength(tsf) Very Soft Less than 2 Less than 3 Less than 2 Less than 0.25 Soft 2-4 3-6 2- 5 0.25-0.50 Medium Stiff 4-8 6- 12 5-9 0.50- 1.0 Stiff 8- 15 12-25 9- 19 1.0-2.0 Very Stiff 15-30 25-65 19-31 2.0-4.0 Hard More than 30 More than 65 More than 31 More than 4.0 PRIMARY SOIL DIVISIONS GROUP SYMBOL GROUP NAME CLEAN GRAVELS GW or GP GRAVEL GRAVEL (< 5%fines) GRAVEL WITH FINES GW-GM or GP-GM GRAVEL with silt (more than 50%of (z 5%and<_ 12%fines) GW-GC or GP-GC GRAVEL with clay coarse fraction retained on GM silty GRAVEL COARSE-GRAINED GRAVELS WITH FINES GC clayey GRAVEL SOILS No. 4 sieve) (> 12%fines) GC-GM silty, clayey GRAVEL (more than 50% CLEAN SANDS SW or SP SAND retained on SAND (<5%fines) No. 200 sieve) SANDS WITH FINES SW SM or SP SM SAND with silt (50%or more of (Z 5%and 5 12%fines) SW-SC or SP-SC SAND with clay coarse fraction passing SM silty SAND No.4 sieve) SANDS WITH FINES SC clayey SAND (> 12%fines) SC-SM silty,clayey SAND ML SILT FINE-GRAINED CL CLAY SOILS Liquid limit less than 50 CL ML silty CLAY (50%or more SILT AND CLAY OL ORGANIC SILT or ORGANIC CLAY MH SILT passing Liquid limit 50 or CLAY No. 200 sieve) greater CH OH ORGANIC SILT or ORGANIC CLAY HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT PEAT MOISTURE ADDITIONAL CONSTITUENTS CLASSIFICATION Secondary granular components or other materials Term Field Test such as organics,man-made debris,etc. Silt and Clay In: Sand and Gravel In: very low moisture, Percent Fine-Grained Coarse- Percent Fine-Grained Coarse- dry dry to touch Soils Grained Soils Soils Grained Soils damp,without < 5 trace trace < 5 trace trace moist visible moisture 5- 12 minor with 5- 15 minor minor . visible free water, > 12 some silty/clayey 15-30 with with wet usually saturated 4 ' A;, ,,--"Ti., x�1 x „ , , M > 30 sandy/gravelly Indicate% G EODESIGM SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM TABLE A-2 15575 SW Sequoia Parkway-Suite 100 Portland OR 97224 Off 503.968.8787 Fax 503.968.3068 Z 0 H z J A BLOW COUNT INSTALLATION AND COMMENTS jw - •MOISTURE CONTENT%MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 0IgFEETd w w < MT!RQD% 177 CORE REC% U LU F- —0,0 0 50 100 ASPHALT CONCRETE(3.5 inches). 0.3 o• 'C AGGREGATE BASE(10.5 inches). Soft to medium stiff, gray-dark gray 1.2 SILT with sand (ML),trace organics 2.5 (woody debris); moist, sand is fine, organics are -1/4-inch diameter- FILL. !_l i • 5.0 —Medium stiff, gray-dark gray, sandy - 5.0 r SILT to silty SAND (ML/SM),trace n A • gravel; moist, sand is fine - FILL. (L 7.5 Loose, light brown-orange, silty SAND 8.0 (SM); moist to wet,fine (alluvium). P 10.0 '` : — P200 ` 7 • P200=45% 12.5 :•.ti a. • • 15.0 Medium dense, brown SAND with silt to 15.0 — — !�. silty SAND(SP-SM/SM);wet,fine, I] Al < -stratified beds of SILT(up to 2 inches •�. thick). 17.5 `20.0 •° loose; homogenous at 20.0 feet ,' H'• P200 E 1 • P200=34% Y K C6 22.5 C — — Medium dense, brown SAND (SP),trace 23.0 F ;, silt; wet,fine, homogenous. 0 z 25.0 — re p. I y 1 U Z N 27.5 — o i.::•... 0 u a. L? m 30.0 -. 0 0 50 100 • 3 DRILLED BY:Hard Core Drilling LOGGED BY:JGH COMPLETED:05/04/16 2 7' BORING METHOD:mud rotary(see document text) BORING BIT DIAMETER:4 7/8 inches N GEODESIGN? WILLIAMWG-1-01 BORING B-1 Z E 15575 SW Sequoia Parkway-Suite 100 503.968.8787 Fax 503.968.3068 m Portland OR 97224 MAY 2016 NEW TIGARD SELF-STORAGE FACILITY FIGURE A-1 Off TIGARD,OR u O= L w BLOW COUNT INSTALLATION AND H I- Z COMMENTS Q a o •MOISTURE CONTENT% DEPTH MATERIAL DESCRIPTION >t" I- m FEET Z U 0 w Q MT]RQD% l�CORE REC% W I— N 0 50 100 —30.0 ..,..L7,..:: dense,dark gray at 30.0 feet �4 P200=28% 'r P200 32.5—:�.;, 35.0—; `;:',' medium dense at 35.0 feet 28 ![ A40.0— — — A9 • 42.5—..2;. 45.0 -:..._` Medium dense, gray, silty SAND (SM), - 45.0 2 "•-,'', trace organics (woody debris); wet,fine, 11 ..•., organics are <1/8-inch diameter. 47.5 .. - 50.0---z; without organics; stratified beds of SILT 1] 24 (up to-2 inches thick) at 50.0 feet le51,5 Surface elevation was not i Exploration completed at a depth of measured at the time of oe 51.5 feet. exploration. io 52.5— Hammer efficiency factor is 72 percent. u, w 1- a 0 z 55.0— Fe et I- 0 u z u 57.5— — n- ` - 0 O W u a L °P 60.0 0 0 50 100 3 DRILLED BY:Hard Core Drilling LOGGED BY:JGH COMPLETED:05/04/16 11 BORING METHOD:mud rotary(see document text) BORING BIT DIAMETER:4 7/8 inches 3 • GEODESIGNWILLIAMWG-1-01 BORING B-1 u z (continued) 2 15575 SW Sequoia Parkway-Suite 100 NEW TIGARD SELF-STORAGE FACILITY m Portland OR 97224 MAY 2016 FIGURE A-1 Off 503.968.8787 Fax 503.968.3068 TIGARD,OR SAMPLE INFORMATION SIEVE ATTERBERG LIMITS MOISTURE DRY SAMPLE CONTENT DENSITY EXPLORATION DEPTH ELEVATION GRAVEL SAND P200 LIQUID PLASTIC PLASTICITY NUMBER (FEET) (FEET) (PERCENT) (PCF) (PERCENT) (PERCENT) (PERCENT) LIMIT LIMIT INDEX B-1 2.5 28 B-1 5.0 24 B-1 10.0 30 45 B-1 20.0 36 34 B-1 30.0 30 28 B-1 40.0 33 B-1 50.0 30 U reio I— z I- 0 z u u, 0 1- u 0 G EODESIGNZ WILLIAMWG-1-01 SUMMARY OF LABORATORY DATA E 15575 SW Sequoia Parkway-Suite 100 NEW TIGARD SELF-STORAGE FACILITY Portland OR97224 MAY 2016 FIGURE A-2 Off 503.968.8787 Fax 503.968.3068 TIGARD,OR Robert Miner Dynamic Testing, Inc. . Dynamic Measurements and Analyses for Deep Foundations February 07, 2013 Mr. Matt Van Bergen Hard Core Drilling Inc. 18755 NE Niederberger Rd Dundee, OR 97115 . i Re: Standard Penetration Test Energy Measurements Test Hole, CEM Unit 102, February 5, 2013 Gun Club, Dundee, Oregon RMDT Job No. 13F09 Dear Mr. Van Bergen, This letter presents energy transfer measurements made during penetrometer tests for the drill hole referenced above. Robert Miner Dynamic Testing, Inc. (RMDT) made dynamic measurements with a Pile Driving Analyzer® as a hammer advanced the NW rod during soil sampling. The purpose of RMDT's testing was the measurement of energy transferred to the drill rods. Measurements were made on a section of NW gauge rod at the top of the drill rod. Strain gages and accelerometers attached to the rod were connected to a Pile Driving Analyzer® (PDA) which generally processed acceleration and strain measurements from each hammer blow and stored both the measurements and computed results. Measurements and data processing generally followed the ASTM D 4633-10 standard. Energy transfer past the gage location, EFV, was computed by the PDA using force and velocity records as follows: b j EFV = f F (t) v (t) dt a The value "a"corresponds to the start of the record which is when the energy transfer begins and "b"is the time at which energy transferred to the rod reaches a maximum value. Appendix A contains more information on our measurement equipment and methods of analysis. The EFV energy calculation is identical to the EMX energy result discussed in Appendix A. The EFV and EMX values apply to the sensor location near the top of the rod. TEST DETAILS • Testing occurred on February 05, 2013 near the Gun Club in Dundee Oregon. We collected dynamic measurements as a NW rod advanced a split spoon sampler to a final embedment depth of 55 ft. The NW drill rods were advanced using a truck mounted CME hammer designated as Unit 102 with the serial number SN:187377. The drill truck licence number was YARL846 . A Hammer Performance Analyzer (HPA) was used during select samples to measure hammer ram velocity. The HPA unit applied RADAR technology for ram velocity Mailing Address: P.O. Box 340, Manchester,WA, 98353,USA Phone: 360-871-5480 Location: 2288 Colchester Dr. E., Ste A, Manchester, WA, 98353 Fax: 360-871-5483 SPT Energy Measurements, Gun Club February 7, 2013 . RMDT Job No. 13F09 Page 2 measurements. The hammer's top plate was removed and the HPA antenna was mounted above the hammer. RESULTS Table 1 summarizes RMDT's field results and Appendix B contains detailed numeric results. The tabulated records include the starting sample depth,the penetration resistance,the number of hammers blows in our data set, measured energy transfer, EFV, the computed transfer efficiency, ETR, and the hammer blow rate, BPM. Energy measurements must be divided by the theoretical free fall energy of the hammer to obtain an efficiency. A 140 lb ram raised 30 inches above an impact surface has 350 lb-ft of potential energy. Thus, the transfer energy results for sampling with the 140 lb ram may be divided by 350 lb-ft to yield the ratio of the delivered energy to the nominal potential energy. This efficiency ratio, ETR, is given for each sample interval as a percent efficiency. Table 1. Summary of Test Details and Results for the 140-lb ram Start Penetration Number Average Average Average Sample Resistance of Blows Transfer Transfer Hammer Depth in Energy Efficiency Blow Rate Data Set EFV ETR BPM (ft) (Blow/Set) (lb-ft) (percent) (blow/min) 20.0 11/ft 11 259 74 50 35.0 10/ft 9 241 69 51 40.0 13/ft 13 241 69 47 45.0 10/ft 10 248 71 46 50.0 15/ft 15 258 74 51 55.0 13/ft 13 260 74 51 Average: 261 72 49 f� The average of ETR values within each of the six sample intervals ranged from 69 to 74 percent, and the overall average ETR value was 72 percent. Tables 2 and 3 summarize results of the HPA results for sampling at depth of 45 and 50 ft. Ram velocities during the 45 and 50 ft samples averaged 11.7 and 11.8 ft/sec yielding a calculated kinetic energy of approximately 298 and 304 lb-ft, respectively. (The theoretical "free-fail"velocity for a 30 inch vertical drop height is 12.7 ft/second.) Robert Miner Dynamic Testing,Inc. SPT Energy Measurements, Gun Club February 7, 2013 i RMDT Job No. 13F09 Page 3 Table 2. Summary of HPA Results for the 45 ft Sample Blow Measured Ram Velocity, (ft/sec) Calculated Kinetic Energy, (ft-lb) 8 12.0 323.6 9 11.2 272.7 10 12.0 313.0 11 11.6 292.5 . 12 11.4 282.5 13 11.6 292.5 14 12.0 313.0 15 11.8 302.7 16 11.6 293.0 Average: 11.7 298.4 Table 3. Summary of HPA Results for the 50 ft Sample Blow Measured Ram Velocity, (ft/sec) Calculated Kinetic Energy, (ft-Ib) 8 12.5 339.7 . 9 11.6 292.5 10 12.3 328.9 11 11.7 297.6 12 11.6 293.0 13 11.5 287.5 14 12.3 329.0 ' 15 12.0 313.0 4 16 11.8 302.7 I 17 11.8 302.7 1 18 11.2 272.7 19 12.2 323.6 20 12.2 323.6 21 11.2 272.7 I 22 11.5 287.5 Average: 11.8 304.4 ' Robert Miner Dynamic Testing,Inc. SPT Energy Measurements, Gun Club February 7, 2013 RMDT Job No. 13F09 Page 4 It was a pleasure to assist you and to participate on this project. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you or your client have any questions about this report. Sincerely, 141) RlidorA- 0AtILK. Andrew Sanas Robert Miner Staff Engineer Principal Robert Miner Dynamic Testing, Inc. Robert Miner Dynamic Testing, Inc. • 1 Robert Miner Dynamic Testing,Inc. APPENDIX A - AN INTRODUCTION INTO DYNAMIC PILE TESTING METHODS The following has been written by Goble Rausche Likins and Associates,inc.and may only be copied with its written permission. BACKGROUND RESULTS FROM DYNAMIC TESTING There are two main objectives of high strain dynamic Modem procedures of design and construction controlg y require verification of bearing capacity and integrity of pile testing: deep foundations during preconstruction test programs and also production installation. Dynamic • Dynamic Pile Monitoring and pile testing methods meet this need economically and • Dynamic Load Testing. reliably, and therefore, form an important part of a quality assurance program when deep foundations Dynamic pile monitoring is conducted during the are executed. Several dynamic pile testing methods installation of impact driven piles to achieve a safe exist;they have different benefits and limitations and and economical pile installation. Dynamic load different requirements for proper execution. testing, on the other hand, has as its primary goal the assessment of pile bearing capacity. It is The Case Method of dynamic pile testing, named applicable to both cast insitu piles or drilled shafts after the Case Institute of Technology where it was and impact driven piles during restrike. developed between 1964 and 1975, requires that a substantial ram mass (such as that of a pile driving Dynamic Pile Monitoring hammer) impacts the pile top such that the pile undergoes at least a small permanent set. The During pile installation,the sensors attached to the method is therefore also referred to as a"High Strain pile measure pile top force and velocity. A PDA Method". The Case Method requires dynamic conditions and processes these signals and . measurements on the pile or shaft under the ram calculates or evaluates: impact and then an evaluation of various quantities based on closed form solutions of the wave equation, • Bearing capacityatthe time of testing,including an ; . a partial differential equation describing the motion assessment of shaft resistance development and of a rod under the effect of an impact. Conveniently, driving resistance. This information supports measurements and analyses are done by a single formulation of a driving criterion. piece of equipment:the Pile Driving Analyzer®(PDA). However, for bearing capacity evaluations an • Dynamic pile stresses,axial and averaged over the important additional method is CAPWAP® which pile cross section, both tensile and compressive, performs a much more rigorous analysis of the during pile driving to limit the potential of damage dynamic records than the simpler Case Method. either near the pile top or along its length. Bending stresses can be evaluated at the point of sensor A related analysis method is the "Wave Equation attachment. Analysis" which calculates a relationship between bearing capacity and pile stress and field blow count. • Pile integrity assessment by the PDA is based on The GRLWEAPT"^ program performs this analysis the recognition of certain wave reflections from and provides a complete set of helpful information along the pile. If detected early enough,a pile may and input data. be saved from complete destruction. On the other hand, once damage is recognized measures can The following description deals primarily with the be taken to prevent reoccurrence. Case Method or "High Strain Test" Method of pile testing, however, for the sake of completeness, the • Hammer performance parameters including the "Low Strain Test" performed with the Pile Integrity energy transferred to the pile,the hammer speed • Test (PIT), mainly for pile integrity evaluation, will in blows per minute and the stroke of open ended also be described. diesel hammers. ©1999,Goble Rausche Likins and Associates,Inc. A-1 stiffness of the resistance at the pile/soil Dynamic Pile Load Testing interface.) Bearing capacity testing of either driven piles or MEASUREMENTS drilled shafts applies the same basic measurement approach of dynamic pile monitoring. However, the PDA test is done independent of the pile installation process and therefore a pile driving hammer or other The basis for the results calculated by the PDA are dynamic loading device may not be available. If a pile top strain and acceleration measurements which special ram has to be mobilized then its weight should are converted to force and velocity records, be between 0.8 and 2%of the test load(e.g. between respectively. The PDA conditions, calibrates and 4 and 10 tons for a 500 ton test load) to assure displays these signals and immediately computes sufficient soil resistance activation. average pile force and velocity thereby eliminating bending effects. Using closed form Case Method For a successful test,it most important that the testis solutions,based on the one-dimensional linear wave conducted after a sufficient waiting time following pile equation, the PDA calculates the results described installation for soil properties approaching their long in the analytical solutions section below. term condition or concrete to properly set. During testing, PDA results of pile/shaft stresses and HPA transferred energy are used to maintain safe stresses and assure sufficient resistance activation. For safe The ram velocity may be directly obtained using and sufficient testing of drilled shafts, ram energies radar technology in the Hammer Performance are often increased from blow to blow until the test AnalyzerTM. For this unit to be applicable, the ram capacity has been activated. On the other hand, must be visible. The impact velocity results can be restrike tests on driven piles may require a warm automatically processed with a PC or recorded on a hammer so that the very first blow produces a strip chart. complete resistance activation. Data must be evaluated by CAPWAP for bearing capacity. Saximeter TM After the dynamic load test has been conducted with Far open end diesel hammers,the time between two sufficient energy and safe stresses, the CAPWAP Impacts indicates the magnitude of the ram fall analysis provides the following results: height or stroke. This information is not only measured and calculated by the PDA but also by the • Bearing capacity i.e.the mobilized capacity present convenient, hand-held Saximeter. at the time of testing PIT • Resistance distribution including shaft resistance and end bearing components The Pile Integrity .TesterTM (PIT) can be used to evaluate defects in concrete piles or shafts which '. • Stresses in pile or shaft calculated for both the may have occurred during driving or casting. Also static load application and the dynamic test. These timber piles of limited length can be tested in that stresses are averages over the cross section and manner. This so-called "Low Strain Method" or do not include bending effects or nonuniform "Pulse-Echo Method"of integrity testing requires only contact stresses, e.g. when the pile toe is on the measurement of acceleration at the pile top. The uneven rock. stress wave producing impact is then generated by a small hand-held hammer and the records • Shaft impedance vs depth;this is an estimate of the interpreted in the time domain. PIT also supports shaft shape if it differs substantially from the the so-called "Transient Response Method" which planned profile requires the additional measurement of the hammer force and an analysis in the frequency domain. This • Dynamic soil parameters for shaft and toe, i.e. method may also be used to evaluate the unknown damping factors and quakes(related to the dynamic length of deep foundations under existing structures. A-2 ANALYTICAL SOLUTIONS BEARING CAPACITY Case Method Wave Equation The Case Method is a closed form solution based on a few simplifying assumptions such as ideal plastic GRL has written the GRLWEAPT'" program which soil behavior and an ideally elastic and uniform pile. calculates a relationship between bearing capacity, Given the measured pile top force F(t) and pile top pile stress and blow count. This relationship is often velocity v(t),the total soil resistance is called the "bearing graph." Once the blow count is known from pile installation logs, the bearing graph R(t)=Y2{[F(t)+ F(t2)]+ Z[v(t)-v(t2)]} (1) yields the bearing capacity. This approach requires no measurements and therefore can be performed where during the design stage of a project,for example for the selection of hammer,cushion and pile size. t = a point in time after impact t2 = timet+2L/c After dynamic pile monitoring and/or dynamic load L = pile length below gages testing has been performed, the "Refined Wave c = (E/p)'is the speed of the stress wave • Equation Analysis"or RWEA(see schematic below) p = pile mass density is often performed by inputting the PDA and Z = EA/c is the pile impedance CAPWAP calculated parameters. Then the bearing E = elastic modulus of the pile (p c2) graph from the RWEA is the basis for a safe and A = pile cross sectional area sufficient driving criteria. The total soil resistance consists of a dynamic (Rd) and a static(R5)component The static component is therefore At least 2 strain transducer% Rs(t)= R(t)-Rd(t) (2) The dynamic component may be computed from a I u Pile Driving soil damping factor, J, and a pile toe velocity, vt(t) IAnalyzer which is conveniently calculated for the pile toe. PAL Using wave considerations, this approach leads immediately to the dynamic resistance CAPWAP: Rd(t)= J[F(t)+Zv(t)-R(t)] (3) Flnd Dynamic Sal Parameters,Resistance Distribution y and finally to the static resistance by means of Refined Wave Equation Equation 2. Analysis by GRLWEAP There are a number of ways in which Eq. 1 through 3 can be evaluated. Most commonly,t2 is set to that time at which the static resistance becomes maximum. The result is the so-called RMX capacity. Damping factors for RMX typically range between 0.5 for coarse grained materials to 1.0 for clays. The RSP capacity (this method is most commonly referred to in the literature, yet it is not very frequently used) requires damping factors between 0.1 for sand and 1.0 for clay. Another capacity,RA2, determines the capacity at a time when the pile is essentially at rest and thus damping is small; RA2 . A-3 • therefore requires no damping parameter. In any At the pile top (location of sensors) both the event, the proper Case Method and its associated maximum compression stress, CSX, and the damping parameter is most conveniently found after maximum stress from individual strain transducers, a CAPWAP analysis has been performed. CSI, are directly obtained from the measurements. Note that CSI is greater than or equal to CSX and The static resistance calculated by Case Method or the difference between CSI and CSX is a measure CAPWAP is the mobilized resistance at the time of of bending in.the plane of the strain transducers. testing.Consideration therefore has to be given to soil Note also that all stresses calculated for locations setup or relaxation effects and whether or not a below the sensors are averaged over the pile cross sufficient set has been achieved under the test section and therefore do not include components loading that would correspond to a full activation of from either bending or eccentric soil resistance the ultimate soil resistance. effects. The PDA also calculates an estimate of shaft The PDA calculates the compressive stress at the • resistance as the difference between force and pile bottom, CSB, assuming (a)a uniform pile and velocity times impedance at the time immediately (b)that the pile toe force is the maximum value of prior to the return of the stress wave from the pile toe. the total resistance R(t) minus the total shaft This shaft resistance is not reduced by damping resistance, SFT. Again, for this stress estimation effects and is therefore called the total shaft uniform resistance force are assumed (e.g. not a resistance SFT. A correction for damping effects sloping rock.) produces the static shaft resistance estimate, SFR. For concrete piles, the maximum tension stress, The Case Method solution is simple enough to be TSX,is also of great importance. It occurs at some evaluated"in real time,"i.e. between hammer blows, point below the pile top. The maximum tension using the PDA. It is therefore possible to calculate all stress can be computed from the pile top relevant results for all hammer blows and plot these measurements by finding the maximum tension results as a function of depth or blow number. This is wave (either traveling upward, Wu, or downward, done in the PDAPLOT program. Wd) and reducing it by the minimum compressive wave traveling in opposite direction. CAPWAP W„= Y2[F(t)-Zv(t)] (4) The CAse Pile Wave Analysis Program combines the wave equation pile and soil model with the Case Wd = Y2[F(t)+Zv(t)] (5) Method measurements. Thus,the solution includes not only the total and static bearing capacity values CAPWAP also calculates tensile and compressive but also the shaft resistance, end bearing, damping stresses along the pile and, in general, more factors and soil stiffnesses. The method iteratively accurately than the PDA. In fact, for non-uniform calculates a number of unknowns by signal matching. piles or piles with joints, cracks or other While it is necessary to make hammer performance discontinuities, the closed form solutions from the assumptions fora GRLWEAP analysis,the CAPWAP PDA may be in error. program works with the pile top measurements. Furthermore, while GRLWEAP and Case Method PILE INTEGRITY require certain assumptions regarding the soil behavior,CAPWAP calculates these soil parameters. High Strain Tests(PDA) STRESSES Stress waves in a pile are reflected wherever the pile impedance, Z = EA/c = pcA = A ✓(E p), changes. During pile monitoring, it is important that Therefore, the pile impedance is a measure of the compressive stress maxima at pile top and toe and quality of the pile material(E,p,c)and the size of its tensile stress maxima somewhere along the pile be cross section (A). The reflected waves arrive at the calculated for each hammer blow. pile top at a time which is greater the farther away from the pile top the reflection occurs. The A-4 . magnitude of the change of the upward traveling . wave (calculated from the measured force and The PDA calculates the energy transferred to the velocity, Eq. 4) indicates the extent of the cross pile top from: sectional change. Thus,with 6,(BTA)being a relative integrity factor which is unity for no impedance E(t)=of`F(t)v(t)dt (8a) change and zero for the pile end, the following is The maximum of the E(t)curve is the most important calculated by the PDA. information for an overall evaluation of the performance of a hammer and driving system. This R;= (1 -a)/(1 + a;) (6) EMX value allows for a classification of the with hammer's performance when presented as the rated transfer efficiency, also called energy transfer ratio ; ai= %(WUR WUD Di)/(W .-WUR) (7) (ETR)or global efficiency where eT= EMX/ER (8b) WUR is the upward traveling wave at the onset of where the reflected wave. It is caused by resistance. ER is the manufacturer's rated energy value. WU0 is the upwards traveling wave due to the damage reflection. Both Saximeter and PDA calculate the stroke(STK) of an open end diesel hammer using . W is the maximum downward traveling wave due D to impact. STK= (g/8)T z-hL (9) It can be shown that this formulation is quite accurate where as long as individual reflections from different pile . impedance changes have no overlapping effects on g is the earth's gravitational acceleration, the stress wave reflections. TB is the time between two hammer blows, hL is a stroke loss value due to gas compression Without rigorous derivation, it has been proposed to and time losses during impact(usually 0.3 ft or consider as slight damage when R 0.1 is above 0.8 and a � m). serious damage when R is less than 0.6.• DETERMINATION OF WAVE SPEED Low Strain Tests(PIT) An important facet of dynamic pile testing Is an The pile top is struck with a held hand hammer and assessment of pile material properties. Since in the resulting pile top velocity is measured, displayed general force is determined from strain by and interpreted for signs of wave reflections. In multiplication with elastic modulus, E, and cross general, a comparison of the reflected acceleration sectional area, A, the dynamic elastic modulus has leads to a relative measure of extent of damage, to be determined for pile materials other than steel. again the location of the problem is indicated by the In general,the records measured by the PDA clearly arrival time of the reflection. PIT records can also be indicate a pile toe reflection as long as pile interpreted by the 6-Method. However, low strain penetration per blow is greater than 1 mm or .04 tests do not activate much resistance which simplifies inches. The time between the onset of the force and Eq. 7 since WUR is then equal to zero. velocity records at impact and the onset of the reflection from the toe (usually apparent by a local For drilled shafts and PIT records that clearly show a maximum of the wave up curve) is the so-called toe reflection, an approximate shaft profile can be wave travel time,T. Dividing 2L(L is here the length calculated from low strain records using the PITSTOP of the pile below sensors) by T leads to the stress 1 program's PROFILE routine. wave speed in the pile: HAMMER PERFORMANCE c=2LIT (10) A-5 . • measurements are taken that have to conform to The elastic modulus of the pile material is related to certain relationships. the wave speed according to the linear elastic wave equation theory by Proportionality E _ C2p (11) As long as there is only a wave traveling in one direction, as is the case during impact when only a Since the mass density of the pile material, p, is downward traveling wave exists in the pile,force and usually well known (an exception is timber for which velocity measured at the pile top are proportional samples should be weighed),the elastic modulus is easily found from the wave speed. Note, however, F =v Z=v(EA/c) (12a) that this is a dynamic modulus which is generally higher than the static one and that the wave speed g P This relationship can also be expressed in terms of depends to some degree on the strain level of the stress stress wave. For example,experience shows that the wave speed from PIT is roughly 5% higher than the o= v(E/c) (12b) wave speed observed during a high strain test. or strain Other Notes: e =v/c (12c) • If the pile material is nonuniform then the wave speed c, according to Eq. 10, is an average wave. This means that the early portion of strain times speed and does not necessarily reflect the pile wave speed must be equal to the velocity unless the material properties of the location where the strain proportionality is affected by high friction near the sensors are attached to the pile top. For example, pile top or by a pile cross sectional change not far pile driving often causes fine tension cracks some . below the sensors. Checking the proportionality is distance below the top of concrete piles. Then the an excellent means of assuring meaningful average c is slower than that at the pile top. It is measurements. therefore recommended to determine E in the beginning of pile driving and not adjust it when the Measurements are always taken at opposite sides of average c changes. the pile as a means of calculating the average force and velocity in the pile. The velocity on the two sides • If the pile has such a high resistance that there is no of the pile is very similar even when high bending clear indication of a toe reflection then the wave exists. Thus, an independent check of the velocity speed of the pile material must be determined either measurements is easy and simple. by assumption or by taking a sample of the concrete and measuring its wave speed in a simple Strain measurements may differ greatly between the free column test. Another possibility is to use the two sides of the pile when bending exists. It is even proportionality relationship,discussed under"DATA possible that tension is measured on oneeide while QUALITY CHECKS"to find c as the ratio between very high compression exists on the other side of the the measured velocity and measured strain. pile. In extreme cases, bending might be so high that it leads to a nonlinear stress distribution. The DATA QUALITY CHECKS averaging of the two strain signals does then not lead to the average pile force and proportionality will Quality data is the first and foremost requirement for not be achieved. accurate dynamic testing results. It is therefore important that the measurement engineer performing When testing drilled shafts,measurements of strain PDA or PIT tests has the experience necessary to may also be affected by local concrete quality recognize measurement problems and take variations. It is then often necessary to use four appropriate corrective action should problems strain transducers spaced at 90 degrees around the develop. Fortunately, dynamic pile testing allows for pile for an improved strain data quality. The use of certain data quality checks because two independent four transducers is also recommended for large pile A-6 • diameters,particularly when it is difficult to mount the should be tested after a minimum one week wait sensors at least two pile widths or diameters below either statically or dynamically (with particular the pile top. emphasis than on the first few blows). Relaxation has also been observed for displacement piles LIMITATIONS,ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS driven into dense saturated silts or fine sands due to a negative pore pressure effect at the pile toe. Mobilization of capacity Again, restrike tests should be used, with great emphasis on early blows. Estimates of pile capacity from dynamic testing indicate the mobilized pile capacity at the time of Capacity results for open pile profiles testing. At very high blow counts(low set per blow), dynamic test methods tend to produce lower bound Larger diameter open ended pipe piles (or H-piles capacity estimates as not all resistance (particularly which do not bear on rock) may behave differently at and near the toe)is fully activated. under dynamic and static loading conditions. Under dynamic loads the soil inside the pile or between its Time dependent soil resistance effects flanges may slip and produce internal friction while under static loads the plug may move with the pile, Static pile capacity from dynamic method calculations thereby creating end bearing over the full pile cross provide an estimate of the axial pile capacity. section. As a result both friction and end bearing Increases and decreases in the pile capacity with time components may be different under static and typically occur (soil setup/relaxation). Therefore,. dynamic conditions. restrike testing usually yields a better indication of long term pile capacity than a test at the end of CAPWAP Analysis Results pile driving. Often a wait period of one or two days between end of driving and restrike is satisfactory for A portion of the soil resistance calculated on an a realistic prediction of pile capacity but this waiting individual soil segment in a CAPWAP analysis can time depends, among other factors, on the usually be shifted up or down the shaft one.soil permeability of the soil. segment without significantly altering the match quality. Therefore, use of the CAPWAP resistance (A) Soli setup distribution for uplift, downdrag, scour, or other geotechnical considerations should be made with an Because excess positive pore pressures often understanding of these analysis limitations. develop during pile driving in fine grained soil (clays,• silts or even fine sands),the capacity of a pile at the • time of driving may often be less than the long term Stresses pile capacity. These pore pressures reduce the effective stress acting on the pile thereby reducing the PDA and CAPWAP calculated stresses are average soil resistance to pile penetration, and thus the pile values over the cross section. Additional allowance capacity at the time of driving. As these pore has to be made for bending or non-uniform contact pressures dissipate,the soil resistance acting on the, stresses. To prevent damage it is therefore pile increases as does the axial pile capacity. This important to maintain good hammer-pile alignment phenomena is routinely called soil setup or soil and to protectthe pile toes using appropriate devices freeze. or an increased cross sectional area. (8) Relaxation In the United States is has become generally acceptable to limit the dynamic installation stresses • Relaxation (capacity reduction with time) has been of driven piles to the following levels: observed for piles driven into weathered shale, and 90% of yield strength for steel piles may take several days to fully develop. Pile capacity estimates based upon initial driving or short term 85% of the concrete compressive strength-after restrike tests can significantly overpredict long term subtraction of the effective prestress - for pile capacity. Therefore, piles driven into shale concrete piles in compression A-7 100% of effective prestress plus % of the concrete's tension strength for prestressed piles in tension Wave equation analysis results 70% of the reinforcement strength for regularly' reinforced concrete piles in tension The results calculated by the wave equation analysis program depend on a variety of hammer, pile and 300% of the static design allowable stress for soil input parameters. Although attempts have been timber made to base the analysis on the best available information, actual field conditions may vary and Note that the dynamic stresses may either be directly therefore stresses and blow counts may differ from measured at the pile top by the PDA or calculated by the predictions reported. Capacity predictions the PDA for other locations along the pile based on derived from wave equation analyses should use the pile top measurements. restrike information. However, because of the uncertainties associated with restrike blow counts Additional design considerations and restrike hammer energies, correlations of such results with static test capacities with have often Numerous factors have to be considered in pile displayed considerable scatter. foundation design. Some of these considerations include As for PDA and CAPWAP, the theory on which . additional plle loading from downdrag or negative GRLWEAP is based is the one-dimensional wave equation. For that reason,stress predictions by the skin friction, wave equation analysis can only be averages over • lateral and uplift loading requirements the pile cross section. Thus, bending stresses or stress concentrations due to non-uniform impact or • effective stress changes (due to changes in water uneven soil or rock resistance are not considered in table, excavations, fills or other changes in these results. Stress maxima calculated by the wave overburden), equation are usually subjected to the same limits as those measured directly or calculated from • long term settlements in general and settlement measurements by the PDA. from underlying weaker layers and/or pile group effects, These factors have not been evaluated by GRL and have not been considered in the interpretation of the dynamic testing results. The foundation designer should determine if these or any other considerations are applicable to this project and the foundation design. A-8 { . Appendix B Summary of Case Method Field Results • i Robert Miner Dynamic Testing,Inc. • Robert Miner Dynamic Testing,Inc.-Case Method& CAP®Results PDIPLOT Ver.2012.2-Printed:7-Feb-2013 Test date:5-Feb-2013 HARDCORE,GUN CLUB TEST HOLE-20 FT SAMPLE SPT SAMPLER, CME UNIT 102 BLC(blows/ft) EFV(k-ft) BPM(") Blow Count Energy of FV Blows per Minute 0 10 20 30 40 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0 20 40 60 80 0 4 l _ 8 B 0 w N 12 _ u m b e 16 20 24 I 0 25 50 75 100 ETR((Energy%)) Transfer Ratio Robert Miner Dynamic Testing,Inc. Page 1 of 1 Case Method&iCAP®Results PDIPLOT Ver.2012.2-Printed:7-Feb-2013 • HARDCORE,GUN CLUB TEST HOLE-20 FT SAMPLE SPT SAMPLER, CME UNIT 102 OP:RMDT Test date:5-Feb-2013 AR: 1.43 in^2SP: 0.492 k/t3 LE: 24.00 ft • EM:30,000 ksi WS:16,807.9 f/s JC: 0.35 CSX Max Measured Compr.Stress FMX: Maximum Force CSI: Max Fl or F2 Compr.Stress VMX: Maximum Velocity ETR: Energy Transfer Ratio RAT: SPT Length Ratio EFV: Energy of FV CSB: Compression Stress at Bottom BPM: Blows per Minute BL# BLC CSX CSI ETR EFV BPM FMX VMX RAT CSB a/ft ksi ksi (%) k-ft .kips f/s p ksi 5 12 28.6 28.6 78.1 0.273 50.3 41 13.5 1.0 9.8 6 12 27.8 27.8 72.0 0.252 49.4 40 13.0 1.0 10.0 7 12 27.6 27.6 76.1 0.267 49.8 39 13.3 1.0 10.1 8 12 27.8 28.0 71.0 0.248 49.6 40 13.9 1.0 10.7 9 12 27.4 27.5 72.4 0.253 49.9 39 13.7 1.0 10.9 10 12 27.9 27.9 75.5 0.264 50.0 40 14.1 1.0 9.4 11 10 28.0 28.0 72.1 0.252 49.8 40 13.8 1.0 11.2 12 10 27.2 27.3 72.7 0.255 49.8 39 13.7 1.0 12.2 13 10 28.6 28.6 74.9 0.262 50.3 41 14.2 1.0 12.1 14 10 28.5 28.5 74.2 0.260 49.4 41 14.1 1.0 13.1 15 10 28.1 28.2 75.2 0.263 49.9 40 14.3 1.0 13.9 Average 27.9 28.0 74.0 0.259 49.8 40 13.8 1.0 11.2 Std.Dev. 0.4 0.4 2.1 0.007 0.3 1 0.4 0.0 1.4 Maximum 28.6 28.6 78.1 0.273 50.3 41 14.3 1.0 13.9 @ Blow# 13 5 5 5 5 13 15 5 15 Total number of blows analyzed: 11 Time Summary Drive 17 seconds 10:47:55 AM-10:48:12 AM(2/5/2013) BN 1-15 • Robert Miner Dynamic Testing,Inc.-Case Method&CAP®Results PDIPLOT Ver.2012.2-Printed:7-Feb-2013 Test date:5-Feb-2013 HARDCORE,GUN CLUB TEST HOLE-35 FT SAMPLESPT SAMPLER, CME UNIT 102 BLC(blows/ft) EFV(k-ft) BPM(**) Blow Count Energy of FV Blows per Minute 0 10 20 30 40 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0 20 40 60 80 0 4 8 N 12 16 20 24 0 25 50 75 100 �,r ETR((%)) //7 7 Energy Transfer Ratio Robert Miner Dynamic Testing,Inc. Page 1 of 1 Case Method&'CAPD Results PDIPLOT Ver.2012.2-Printed:7-Feb-2013 - HARDCORE,GUN CLUB TEST HOLE-35 FT SAMPLE SPT SAMPLER, CME UNIT 102 OP:RMDT Test date:5-Feb-2013 AR: 1.43 in^2 SP: 0.492 k/ft3 LE: 39.00 ft EM:30,000 ksi WS:16,807.9 Ns JC: 0.35 CSX: Max Measured Compr.Stress FMX: Maximum Force CSI: Max F1 or F2 Compr.Stress VMX: Maximum Velocity ETR: Energy Transfer Ratio RAT: SPT Length Ratio EFV: Energy of FV CSB: Compression Stress at Bottom BPM: Blows per Minute BL# BLC CSX CSI ETR EFV BPM FMX VMX RAT CSB bl/ft ksi ksi (%) k-ft "" kips f/s [] ksi 4 8 28.5 28.6 74.9 0.262 50.6 41 12.2 0.7 13.6 5 8 28.0 28.1 73.9 0.259 51.1 40 12.2 0.7 13.8 6 8 28.0 28.2 73.5 0257 50.6 40 11.9 0.7 13.0 7 8 28.0 28.1 68.2 0.239 51.1 40 11.6 0.7 13.7 8 10 28.2 28.3 74.6 0.261 50.9 40 12.0 0.7 15.0 9 10 26.7 26.7 62.8 0.220 50.9 38 11.1 0.7 14.0 10 10 27.6 27.7 67.2 0.235 50.5 39 11.5 0.7 14.7 11 10 27.0 27.0 62.9 0.220 50.7 39 11.2 0.7 14.6 • 12 10 25.8 26.0 60.8 0.213 51.2 37 10.9 0.7 14.2 Average 27.5 27.6 68.8 0.241 50.8 39 11.6 0.7 14.1 • Std.Dev. 0.8 0.8 5.3 0.019 0.2 1 0.5 0.0 0.6 Maximum 28.5 28.6 74.9 0.262 512 41 12.2 0.7 15.0 @ Blow# 4 4 4 4 12 4 5 8 8 Total number of blows analyzed: 9 Time Summary Drive 14 seconds 11:24:24 AM-11:24:38 AM(2/5/2013) BN 1-13 • I I i I • • Robert Miner Dynamic Testing,Inc.-Case Method&iCAP®Results PDIPLOT Ver.2012.2-Printed:7-Feb-2013 Test date:5-Feb-2013 HARDCORE,GUN CLUB TEST HOLE-40 FT SAMPLESPT SAMPLER, CME UNIT 102 BLC(blows/ft) EFV(k-ft) BPM(`•) Blow Count Energy of FV Blows per Minute 0 10 20 30 40 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0 20 40 60 80 0 4 8 B 0 w N 12 U m b e 16 20 24 0 25 50 75 100 ETR((%)) aeg EnergyyTransfer Ratio Robert Miner Dynamic Testing,Inc. Page 1 of 1 Case Method&ICAP®Results PDIPLOT Ver.2012.2-Printed:7-Feb-2013 • HARDCORE,GUN CLUB TEST HOLE-40 FT SAMPLE SPT SAMPLER, CME UNIT 102 OP:RMDT Test date:5-Feb-2013 AR: 1.43 inA2 SP: 0.492 k/ft3 LE: 44.00 ft EM:30,000 ksi WS:16,807.9 f/s JC: 0.35 . CSX: Max Measured Compr.Stress FMX: Maximum Force CSI: Max Fl or F2 Compr.Stress VMX: Maximum Velocity ETR: Energy Transfer Ratio RAT: SPT Length Ratio EFV: Energy of FV CSB: Compression Stress at Bottom BPM: Blows per Minute BL# BLC CSX CSI ETR EFV BPM FMX VMX RAT CSB bl/ft ksi ksi (%) k-ft ** kips f/s [] ksi 1 8 26.2 26.3 69.7 0.244 1.9 37 12.6 0.8 17.0 2 8 26.5 27.0 69.7 0.244 50.7 38 12.8 0.8 19.9 3 8 27.4 27.6 67.4 0.236 50.0 39 12.7 0.8 19.7 4 8 26.3 26.6 66.7 0.233 50.4 38 13.0 0.8 19.0 5 18 25.8 26.1 66.2 0.232 50.3 37 12.7 0.8 19.2 6 18 26.0 26.5 67.1 0.235 50.3 37 12.3 0.8 18.9 7 18 26.6 27.0 68.5 0.240 50.6 38 12.3 0.8 19.6 8 18 26.5 27.0 70.5 0.247 50.6 38 12.5 0.8 19.5 9 18 26.0 26.5 70.0 0.245 50.2 37 12.5 0.8 19.4 10 18 26.2 26.6 71.4 0.250 50.4 37 12.7 0.8 20.0 11 18 25.8 26.0 69.2 0.242 50.1 37 12.4 0.8 19.2 12 18 26.4 26.5 69.8 0.244 50.4 38 12.5 0.8 19.2 13 18 26.4 26.7 70.3 0.246 50.5 38 12.4 0.8 19.4 Average 26.3 26.6 69.0 0.241 46.6 38 12.6 0.8 19.2 Std.Dev. 0.4 0.4 1.6 0.005 12.9 1 0.2 0.0 0.7 Maximum 27.4 27.6 71.4 0.250 50.7 39 13.0 0.8 20.0 @ Blow# 3 3 10 10 2 3 4 12 10 Total number of blows analyzed: 13 Time Summary Drive 14 seconds 11:38:58 AM-11:39:12AM(2/5/2013) BN 1-13 • Robert Miner Dynamic Testing,Inc.-Case Method&'CAP®Results PDIPLOT Ver.2012.2-Printed:7-Feb-2013 Test date:5-Feb-2013 HARDCORE,GUN CLUB TEST HOLE-45 FT SAMPLESPT SAMPLER, CME UNIT 102 BLC(blows/ft) EFV(k-ft) BPM("") Blow Count Energy of FV Blows per Minute 0 10 20 30 40 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0 20 40 60 80 0 4 • 8 N 12 u ' 16 20 24 0 25 50 75 100 ETR((%)) Energy Transfer Ratio Robert Miner Dynamic Testing,Inc. Page 1 of 1 Case Method&iCAP®Results PDIPLOT Ver.2012.2-Printed:7-Feb-2013 HARDCORE,GUN CLUB TEST HOLE-45 FT SAMPLE SPT SAMPLER, CME UNIT 102 OP:RMDT Test date:5-Feb-2013 AR: 1.43 in^2 SP: 0.492 ktft3 LE: 49.00 ft EM:30,000 ksi WS:16,807.9 f/s JC: 0.35 CSX: Max Measured Compr.Stress FMX: Maximum Force CSI: Max Fl or F2 Compr.Stress VMX: Maximum Velocity ETR: Energy Transfer Ratio RAT: SPT Length Ratio EFV`. Energy of FV CSB: Compression Stress at Bottom BPM: Blows per Minute BL# BLC CSX CSI ETR EFV BPM FMX VMX RAT CSB bllft ksi ksi (%) k-ft ** kips f/s a ksi 4 8 28.8 28.9 70.6 0.247 50.7 41 12.1 0.6 16.8 5 8 28.1 28.3 73.0 0.256 50.5 40 12.2 0.6 14.5 6 8 29.6 29.7 76.2 0.267 51.5 42 12.9 0.6 17.0 • 7 8 27.2 27.3 69.5 0.243 50.5 39 11.3 0.8 14.1 , 8 12 27.4 27.5 68.4 0.239 4.5 39 11.6 0.6 14.5 9 12 26.4 26.5 65.5 0.229 51.5 38 11.2 0.6 15.6 10 12 28.0 28.3 71.9 0.252 . 50.2 40 11.8 0.6 14.3 11 12 27.8 27.8 71.3 0.249 51.3 40 11.5 0.8 14.8 12 12 28.3 28.5 72.8 0.255 50.6 40 11.9 0.6 17.3 13 12 27.2 27.2 69.9 0.245 51.1 39 11.3 0.8 14.6 • Average 27.9 28.0 70.9 0.248 46.2 40 11.8 0.7 15.3 Std.Dev. 0.9 0.9 2.8 0.010 13.9 1 0.5 0.1 1.2 Maximum 29.6 29.7 76.2 0.267 51.5 42 12.9 0.8 17.3 @ Blow# 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 7 12 Total number of blows analyzed: 10 Time Summary Drive 27 seconds 12:00:03 PM-12:00:30 PM(21512013) BN 1-13 • I • • Robert Miner Dynamic Testing,Inc.-Case Method&ICAP®Results PDIPLOT Ver.2012.2-Printed:7-Feb-2013 Test date:5-Feb-2013 HARDCORE, GUN CLUB TEST HOLE-50 FT SAMPLESPT SAMPLER, CME UNIT 102 BLC(blows/ft) EFV(k-ft) BPM(**) Blow Count Energy of FV Blows per Minute 0 10 20 30 40 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0 20 40 60 80 0 4 ) 8 B I 0 w N 12 u m b e r 16 20 24 0 25 50 75 100 • ETR((%)) Energy Transfer Ratio . ........._..._................ Robert Miner Dynamic Testing,Inc. Page 1 of 1 Case Method&iCAP®Results PDIPLOT Ver.2012.2-Printed:7-Feb-2013 HARDCORE, GUN CLUB TEST HOLE-50 FT SAMPLE SPT SAMPLER, CME UNIT 102 OP:RMDT Test date:5-Feb-2013 AR: 1.43 inA2 SP: 0.492 k/ft3 LE: 54.00 ft EM:30,000 ksi WS:16,807.9 f/s JC: 0.35 CSX: Max Measured Compr.Stress FMX: Maximum Force CSI: Max Fl or F2 Compr.Stress VMX: Maximum Velocity ETR: Energy Transfer Ratio RAT: SPT Length Ratio . EFV: Energy of FV CSB: Compression Stress at Bottom BPM: Blows per Minute BL# BLC CSX CSI ETR EFV BPM FMX VMX RAT CSB bIIft ksi ksl (%) k-ft ** kips f/s p ksi 8 14 24.8 25.1 76.8 0.269 51.2 36 14.7 0.7 14.0 9 14 24.6 24.8 75.7 0.265 50.8 35 14.6 0.7 13.4 10 14 24.5 24.8 73.9 0.259 51.2 35 14.6 0.7 14.3 11 14 23.1 23.5 66.4 0.232 50.5 33 13.6 0.6 12.9 12 14 24.5 24.7 75.5 0.264 51.4 35 14.6 0.5 13.8 13 14 24.5 24.9 74.5 0.261 50.6 35 14.7 0.6 14.5 14 14 24.7 24.9 76.1 0.266 50.7 35 14.7 0.6 13.8 15 16 24.0 24.3 72.7 0.255 50.7 34 14.4 0.5 13.8 16 16 24.8 25.1 77.1 0.270 51.2 35 14.9 0.5 14.1 17 16 23.8 24.1 70.0 0.245 51.5 34 14.2 0.5 14.0 18 16 24.1 24.2 73.3 0.257 51.0 34 14.4 0.7 14.0 19 16 23.8 24.2 72.3 0.253 50.1 34 14.3 0.5 14.0 20 16 24.4 24.6 74.2 0.260 51.6 35 14.5 0.6 14.7 21 16 24.1 24.4 72.0 0.252 50.8 34 14.4 0.5 14.1 22 16 23.8 24.1 73.3 0.257 51.0 34 14.2 0.7 14.2 Average 24.2 24.5 73.6 0.258 51.0 35 14.5 0.6 14.0 Std.Dev. 0.5 0.4 2.7 0.009 0.4 1 0.3 0.1 0.4 Maximum 24.8 25.1 77.1 0.270 51.6 36 14.9 0.7 14.7 @ Blow# 8 16 16 16 20 8 16 8 20 Total number of blows analyzed: 15 Time Summary Drive 25 seconds 12:17:42 PM-1218:07 PM(2/5/2013) BN 2-23 • i. Robert Miner Dynamic Testing,Inc.-Case Method&ICAP®Results PDIPLOT Ver.2012.2-Printed:7-Feb-2013 Test date:5-Feb-2013 HARDCORE,GUN CLUB TEST HOLE-55 FT SAMPLESPT SAMPLER, CME UNIT 102 BLC(blows/ft) EFV(k-ft) BPM(**) Blow Count Energy of FV Blows per Minute 0 10 20 30 40 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0 20 40 60 80 0 4 8 N 12 16 20 24 0 25 50 75 100 ETR((%)) Energyy Transfer Ratio . .... ....... .. Robert Miner Dynamic Testing,Inc. Page 1 of 1 Case Method&iCAP®Results PDIPLOT Ver.2012.2-Printed:7-Feb-2013 HARDCORE,GUN CLUB TEST HOLE-55 FT SAMPLE SPT SAMPLER, CME UNIT 102 OP:RMDT Test date:5-Feb-2013 AR: 1.43 in^2 SP: 0.492 k/ft3 LE: 59.00 ft EM:30,000 ksi WS:16,807.9 f/s JC: 0.35 CSX: Max Measured Compr.Stress FMX: Maximum Force CSI: Max Fl or F2 Compr.Stress VMX: Maximum Velocity ETR: Energy Transfer Ratio RAT SPT Length Ratio EFV: Energy of FV CSB: Compression Stress at Bottom BPM: Blows per Minute BL# BLC CSX CSI ETR ERV BPM FMX VMX RAT CSB bl/ft ksi ksi (%) k-ft kips f/s [] ksi 5 12 28.9 29.1 73.0 0.255 50.8 41 12.1 0.5 16.7 6 12 29.3 29.7 74.5 0.261 50.6 42 12.4 0.5 16.8 7 12 29.5 29.9 76.4 0.267 51.2 42 12.5 0.5 17.3 8 12 30.1 30.3 78.3 0.274 50.8 43 12.7 0.5 17.6 9 12 29.0 29.4 73.5 0.257 50.1 41 12.3 0.5 16.9 10 12 29.7 30.0 75.5 0.264 50.5 42 12.6 0.5 17.8 11 14 29.9 30.3 77.1 0.270 50.7 43 12.6 0.5 17.5 12 14 28.8 29.3 75.0 0.262 50.8 41 12.2 0.5 17.0 13 14 28.2 28.6 73.8 0.258 50.5 40 11.8 0.5 16.4 14 14 27.9 28.3 72.2 0.253 51.0 40 11.7 0.5 16.0 15 14 27.5 27.9 72.0 0.252 50.4 39 11.6 0.5 15.6 16 14 28.6 29.0 73.7 0.258 50.6 41 11.9 0.5 16.2 17 14 27.9 28.3 72.4 0.253 50.7 40 11.7 0.5 15.9 • Average 28.9 29.3 74.4 0.260 50.7 41 12.2 0.5 16.7 Std.Dev. 0.8 0.8 1.9 0.007 0.3 1 0.4 0.0 0.7 Maximum 30.1 30.3 78.3 0.274 51.2 43 12.7 0.5 17.8 r©Blow# 8 11 8 8 7 8 8 7 10 . Total number of blows analyzed: 13 Time Summary Drive 19 seconds 12:33:41 PM-12:34:00 PM(2/5/2013) BN 1-17 m X Z W a APPENDIX B PREVIOUS GEOTECHNICAL STUDY AT SITE Terracon conducted a previous geotechnical study at the site titled Geotechnical Engineering Report;Storquest Self-Storage; 12750 SW Pacific Highway;Tigard, Oregon, dated November 10, 2015. The report included five CPTs. The site plan and CPT logs are presented in this appendix. G EODESIGN= B-1 WIIIiamWG-1-01:051916 CPT LOG NO. CPT-1 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: Storquest Self-Storage CLIENT: The Williams Warren Group, Inc. TEST LOCATION: See Exhibit A-2 Surface Elev.: 179 ft SITE: Tigard, Oregon Latitude: 45.42731° Longitude: -122.77684° Material Depth Tip Resistance,q, Sleeve Friction,f, Friction Ratio,F, Pore Pressure,u2 Shear Wave Velocity,V. Description Elev. (ft) (tsf) (tsf) (%) (tsf) (ft/sec) Normalized CPT (ft) Soil Behavior Type 100 200 300 400 1 2 3 4 2 4 6 2 6 10 14 250 500 750 1000 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 175 - 5 1-2: _ _ _ • = 170 o- 10 - _ _ o - - :. =165 Z' - _ _ i =160- o - 2U = _ _ _ _ _155 1- 25 _.. 07 ..._----= =150 ,1* _ — _ _ -_ -140 - 35 = _ _ = - _ _ _ _ - re - - _ _ -135- a 45 - • - - e _ _ _ _ _ -130- 50 _ _ _ - _ _ ... ... .._ 2 15 g- 55 � "I: _ _ c� _ — f� _ _ • -120 � • - _ = - . _115 _ Z _ _ _ i _ 110 0. co - .��: e0.,- -105- LI 75 - o 'CPT Terminated at 75 5 Feet - 1 Sensitive fine grained See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures. CPT sensor caibration reports available upon request. ® z organic sols-day 3 Clay-eNty day to clay p See Appendix B for explanation of symbols and abbreviations. 4 silt mixtures-clayey sin to silty day Sand mixtures-oily sand to sandy silt CO 6 Sends-dean sand to silty sand 7 Gravels sand tt dense sent 0 al O 9 V�stistff line ed grained sand i WATER LEVEL OBSERVATION Probe no.DDG1296 CPT Started:9/22/2015 CPT Completed:9/22/2015 $ 112 ft estimated water depth 1 rets con Rig:DDG1296 Operator:SAM 11 (used in normalizations and correlations; 4103 SE International Way,#300 Project No.: 82155040 Exhibit:A-4 r see Appendix B) Portland.Oregon CPT LOG NO. CPT-2 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: Storquest Self-Storage CLIENT: The Williams Warren Group, Inc. TEST LOCATION: See Exhibit A-2 Surface Elev.: 180 ft SITE: Tigard, Oregon Latitude: 45.42711° Longitude: -122.77698° Material Depth Tip Resistance,ch Sleeve Friction,f, Friction Ratio,Fr Pore Pressure,u2 Description Elev. (ft) (tsf) (tsf) CM (tsf) Normalized CPT (ft) Soil Behavior Type 100 200 300 400 1 2 3 4 2 4 6 2 6 10 14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 - 0 _ _ 180- 0- 5 _- C _ W n = • •' _0- 10 — 17 - 0 r- - E, _. _ _ 165 N; - _ 20 _ - �a _ - _160 w 25 _ _ _ I::' _ 35 - - '�'' T - - =145 S 40 _ - �, - s� _ _ Ile -CPT Terminated at 41 Feet - —140 45 - -135 0. 50 _ _ - _- 130- z 55 - - - - - - 125- -_ - - - - - o- 60 - - - - o _ _ _ _ _120 0 __ _ _ - _ w _ - _ _ _115 70 _ _co _a. _ 110- - - 0 75 _ _ _ =105 1 Sensitive,fine grained See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures. CPT sensor caibration reports available upon request.PO s a�nlc�lry dayd day p See Appendix B for explanation of symbols and abbreviations. CO Z 5 Sand mluzhxeso sf s'M to sen�S1rt 6 Sands-dean sand to silty sand 0ill 7 GrevellyNsera to dense sand OJ dayey 9 Very stiff fine premed sand i WATER LEVEL OBSERVATION PfObe no.DDG1296 CPT Started:9/22/2015 CPT Completed:9/22/2015 g 1 12 ft estimated water depth 1 terra con Rig:DDG1296 Operator:SAM (used in normalizations and correlations; 4103 SE International Way,#300 see Appendix B) Portland,Oregon Project No.: 82155040 Exhibit:A-5 CPT LOG NO. CPT-3 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: Storquest Self-Storage CLIENT: The Williams Warren Group, Inc. TEST LOCATION: See Exhibit A-2 Surface Elev.: 175 ft SITE: Tigard, Oregon Latitude: 45.42718° Longitude: -122.77642° Material Descrition Elev. Sleeve Friction,t Friction Ratio,Fr Pore Pressure,u2 pft Depth Tip Resistance,q, Normalized CPT (ft) (tsf) (till) (%) ( � Soil Behavior Type ( ) 100 200 300 400 1 2 3 4 2 4 6 2 6 10 14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 - 0• _ - 175- 5 -" s� _ -170 . 5 CPT Terminated at 4.3 Feet _ - - N _ a 10 - 165- 15 - _160- u7 - - - — Z - -0 20 _ - - U _ �[ - _150- F- 25 - - o - 30 _ _ _ -145- g: - — -140- 35 - - - _ it — — -135- $ 40 _ - - - E _ 45 _ - - _130- - - - _ . a- 50 - - - - 4- 55 _ _ =120- - - -115- 0 60 - - - - - LL - 65 _ _ _ _ Li- ~ - - -105- . 70 - - - - 0. m - -LL 75 - o , 1 Sensitive,floe grained See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures. CPT sensor calibration reports available upon request. 2 organic soils-day 3 Gay-silty day to day pSee Appendix B for explanation of symbols and abbreviations. 4 Silt mixtures-clayey slit to silty day Z 5 Sand mixtures-silty sand to sandy silt to 6 Sands-dean sand to silty sand 111 7 Very sf f sendd to lease sand O9 Very stiff rine grained sand 2 WATER LEVEL OBSERVATION Probe no.DDG1296 CPT Started:9/22/2015 CPT Completed:9/22/2015 z m 1 9 ft estimated water depth 1t'erracon Rig:DDG1296 Operator:SAM E (used in normalizations and correlations; 4103 SE International Way,#300 pmt No.: 82155040 Exhibit:A-6 F see Appendix B) Portland,Oregon CPT LOG NO. CPT-3A Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: Storquest Self-Storage CLIENT: The Williams Warren Group, Inc. TEST LOCATION: See Exhibit A-2 Surface Elev.: 175 ft SITE: Tigard, Oregon Latitude: 45.42718° Longitude: -122.77642° Material Depth Tip Resistance,q, Sleeve Friction,fa Friction Ratio,F5 Pore Pressure,u2 Description Elev. (ft) (tsf) (tsf) (%) (tsf) Normalized CPT (ft) Soil Behavior Type 100 200 300 400 1 2 3 4 2 4 6 2 6 10 14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 175 0 10 •- _ _ _17 0 t- _ _ illE.. . —165- 15 _.. _ —160- 0- 20 = _ _ • _ _155- 'a - - _ _ : _150 0 30 — -- _ _ _ - =145- - 35 _ _ - _ _ _ _ • _ _140- $ 40 — '.+..*.• —135- =CPT Terminated at 40.7 Feet = _ ()- 45 — - _ = _130: o- 50 — - - _ _ w = _ _ - -125 55 _ _ _ - _ -.. ....... .. . . . . _120 - 0 60 - - - _ _ o _ _ -_ =115 iz '- 65 - w _ _ _ =110- 70 _ _ _ _ _ =105- - 0 - - _ - —- 100 1 sensitive,tine grained > See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures. CPT sensor calibrationreports available upon p0 request. z Organic togs-day i See Appendix B for explanation of symbols and abbreviations. a Clay �,i daroyeaay V) 5 Sand mixtures-sii to sildio�ndyys It 6 Sands-dean sand toasty sand 7 crevelW sena ro dares send 0CS IIIS Very stili sand to dayey sand J 9 Very stiff fine grained WATER LEVEL OBSERVATION Probe no.DDG1296 1 1 torr con CPT Started.9/23/2015 CPT Completed:9/23/2015 °m 9 ft estimated water depth Rig:DDG1296 Operator:SAM 2 (used in normalizations and correlations; 4103 SE International Way,#300 see Appendix B) Portland,Oregon Project No.: 82155040 Exhibit:A-7 CPT LOG NO. CPT-4 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: Storquest Self-Storage CLIENT: The Williams Warren Group, Inc. TEST LOCATION: See Exhibit A-2 Surface Elev.: 184 ft SITE: Tigard, Oregon Latitude: 45.4272° Longitude: -122.77752° Material Depth Tip Resistance,q, Sleeve Friction,f° Friction Ratio,F, Pore Pressure,u2 Description Elev. (ft) (tat) (tsf) N (tat) Soil Behavior Type (ftp 100 200 300 400 1 2 3 4 2 4 6 2 6 10 14 1 2 4 5 6 7 - 0 - • _ _ _ '� _.�. _ = 180- �'F. _ _ _ _ -175- N — — — a- 10 _.. ..:.. ....... - _ .... _ c = _ _ �s _170 N- 15 _ - ..................... — R - _ _ _ __ -165 I _ _ - I:::'•• st `� 30 - _ _ _ _ =150 - 35 -... — - - cc cc _ - ��,, - • - IN -145- - 40 =CPT Terminated at 40.7 Feet _ _ _ —140 45 = - - _ _ _ _ _ _ -135- o 50 :- _0. _ _ - _ _ -RI - 55 -_- - - - _ - o = _ _ _ _ -125 - _ o - - - _120 Lo• _ _ _ _ • -115- co _ _ _ _ _ -110- -.- 75 _ - 1 Sensitive,fine grained See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures. CPT sensor calbration reports available upon request. 2 organic soils-day 3 Clay-silty day to day p See Appendix B for explanation of symbols and abbreviations. 4 sin mixtures-d roy au to only day. Z 5 Sand mixtures- send s sandy alt COIII6 Sands-dean send to silty sand 7 Gravelly send to darns sand CD 8 Verystiff sand to dayey send O 9 Very stiff fine grained WATER LEVEL OBSERVATION Probe no.DDG1296 CPT Started:9/22/2015 CPT Completed:9/22/2015 $Z 1rerracon 1 15 ft estimated water depth Rig:DDG1296 Operator:SAM B (used in normalizations and correlations; 4103 SE International Way,#300 Project No.: 82155040 Exhibit:A-8 � see Appendix B) Portland,Oregon CPT LOG NO. CPT-5 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: Storquest Self-Storage CLIENT: The Williams Warren Group, Inc. TEST LOCATION: See Exhibit A-2 Surface Elev.: 179 ft SITE: Tigard, Oregon Latitude: 44.42753° Longitude: -122.77695° Material Depth Tip Resistance,qt Sleeve Friction,fe Friction Ratio,F, Pore Pressure,u2 Description Elev. (ft) (tsf) (tsf) (070) (tsf) Normalized CPT (ft) Soil Behavior Type 0 100 200 300 400 1 2 3 4 2 4 6 2 6 10 14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 5 - 1r..... 175- 0 10 —'•' - - - 170- " —- 165- 15 — N - 0 20 - -4- - 160 QU - - •.= - w 25 = _ _ _ I:::' N - 35 _ =145 ao - - t- _ _ °a- 40 - - _140 Lu =CPT Terminated at 40.7 Feet = - o- 45 _ - - _135_ - o 50 — - - -130- a - - - - - - w - - - - s - - 55 — -- =125 z - - - - - - C — — — - - o- 60 — — — — =120- LL 65 - - - —115- i - 70 _ _ _ —w - - - - - 75 - - _105- o - - - - - 1 Sensitive,fine grained > See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures. CPT sensor catbration reports availableupon ay z See Appendix B forexplanation of �rt request. z orga-silty day nic tads-d ~ symbols and abbreviations. a Sia mi clayey silt to silty day 5 Sand mixtures-silty rand to sandy silt x_a mi 7 Sands-deansandto stay sand 7 Very send tdense sea d 0O 8 Verysandnto dayeydsand 9 Very stiff fine grained i WATER LEVEL OBSERVATION Probe no.DDG1296 CPT Started:9/23/2015 CPT Completed:9/23/2015 $ 1 12 ft estimated water depth terra con Rig:DDG1296 Operator.SAM (A (used in normalizations and correlations; 4103 SE International Way,#300 see Appendix B) Portland,Oregon Project No.: 82155040 Exhiblt:A-9 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS AC asphalt concrete ACP asphalt concrete pavement ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials BGS below ground surface CPT cone penetrometer test g gravitational acceleration (32.2 feet/second2) H:V horizontal to vertical IBC International Building Code MCE maximum considered earthquake OSSC Oregon Standard Specifications for Construction (2015) pcf pounds per cubic foot pci pounds per cubic inch PG performance grade psf pounds per square foot SOSSC State of Oregon Structural Specialty Code SPT standard penetration test pm micrometer • G EO DESIGNti WIIIiamWG-1-01:051916 www.geodesigninc.com