J5155124 Berne, NY Tower Geotechnical Report (Sealed) 11-6-15

8/20/2019 J5155124 Berne, NY Tower Geotechnical Report (Sealed) 11-6-15

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/j5155124-berne-ny-tower-geotechnical-report-sealed-11-6-15 1/25

Geotechnical Engineering ReportProposed Telecommunications Tower

Berne, New York

November 6, 2015

Terracon Project No. J5155124

Prepared for:

Pyramid Network Services, LLC

East Syracuse, New York

Prepared by:Terracon Consultants – NY, Inc.

Rochester, New York











Geotechnical Engineering Report

Proposed Telecommunications Tower ■ Berne, New York

November 6, 2015 ■ Terracon Project No. J5155124

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 2

Item Description

Site Layout Exploration Location Diagram on Exhibit A-2, Appendix A

Structures

New 180-foot high steel self-supporting lattice telecommunications

tower and associated equipment shelters and ground equipment

within an approximately 50-foot by 60-foot fenced compound area.

Estimated Maximum LoadsTower dead load: 50 kips

Equipment shelter: 150 pounds per square foot (psf)

GradingMinor grading (cuts and fills up to about 1 to 2 feet) will be required

to develop the compound area.

2.2 Site Location and Descr iption

Item Description

Location 28 Jansen Lane, Berne, New York.

Existing Improvements The site is undeveloped in the area of the proposed tower.

Current Ground Cover Forest mat.

Existing Topography 1

The site slopes slightly downward to the northeast in the vicinity of

the proposed tower from approximate Elevation (El) = 1449 to 1447

feet.

1. Elevations taken from a plan by Infinigy Solutions, LLC of Albany, New York, titled “Overall Site

Plan”, sheet No. C3A, revised February 23, 2015.

3.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATIONS AND CONDITIONS

3.1 Typical Profile

Based on the results of the explorations and observations at the time of drilling, subsurface

conditions on the project site can be generalized as follows:

Description

Approximate Depth to

Bottom of Stratum

(feet)

Material Encountered 1

Consistency /

Relative

Density

Bedrock >20.2Shale, moderately weathered,

weak, very thin beddingNA

1. Approximately 6 inches of forest mat and 12 inches of subsoil were encountered at the surface of

the boring.

The Surficial Geologic Map of New York – Hudson-Mohawk Sheet (1987) identifies native soils

in the vicinity of the site as exposed glacial till or bedrock outcrops. Bedrock was encountered







near the ground surface just below surficial organic soils. The Geologic Map of New York –

Hudson-Mohawk Sheet (1970) indicates that bedrock in the vicinity of the site consists of shale,

sandstone, or limestone. B-1 was terminated at a depth of approximately 20 feet below existing

grade after auger drilling through about 18.5 feet of shale bedrock.

Conditions encountered at the exploration location are indicated on the exploration log in Appendix

A of this report. Stratification boundaries on the exploration log represent the approximate location

of changes in soil/rock types; in situ, the transition between materials may be gradual. Further

details of the exploration can be found on the exploration log.

3.2 Groundwater

Groundwater was not encountered in the exploration. However, fluctuations in groundwater level

may occur because of seasonal variations in the amount of rainfall, runoff, and other factors. In

addition, water may become temporarily perched over the bedrock. The possibility of

groundwater level fluctuations should be considered when developing the design and

construction plans for the project.

3.3 In-situ Resistivity

On October 21, 2015, a Terracon field engineer completed in-situ soil resistivity testing in

general accordance with ASTM G57 by the Wenner Four Probe Method. The testing was

completed using a Megger DET5/4R Digital Earth Tester. Two resistivity lines were completed

with electrodes spaced at approximately 5, 10, 20, 30, and 40 feet. The locations and

orientations of resistivity lines are shown on Exhibit A-2. The resistivity test results are

tabulated below:

Resisti vity (ohm-cm)

Electrode

Spacing (ft)Line 1 Line 2

5 184,225 157,795

10 19,610 22,290

20 8,925 9,995

30 4,940 6,895

40 5,055 6,280







4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION

4.1 Geotechnical Considerations

The proposed steel self-supporting lattice telecommunications tower may be supported on amonolithic mat or pier-and-pad foundations bearing directly on bedrock or on a leveling mat of

minus ¾-inch crushed stone or lean concrete placed over the bedrock. Based on conditions

encountered in the boring, we consider the shale bedrock excavatable using heavy excavation

equipment to the required depth of foundations, estimated to be about 6 to 8 feet, perhaps a little

deeper. As an alternative, the proposed telecommunications tower may be supported on drilled

shaft foundations extending through the shale bedrock. The proposed equipment shelter and other

ancillary structures may derive support from the bedrock. Design recommendations are

presented in the following paragraphs.

We recommend the exposed subgrades be evaluated after excavation to proposed grade. Werecommend the geotechnical engineer be retained to evaluate the bearing material for the

foundation subgrade or construction of the drilled shafts, if selected.

4.2 Earthwork

4.2.1 Site Preparation

Preparation of the site should include removal of forest mat, organic subsoil, and any otherwise

unsuitable materials. Bedrock exists just below surface organic soils, therefore proofrolling of

subgrades will be unnecessary. However, loose rock should be removed and replaced with

minus ¾-inch crushed stone to provide a level subgrade. Sand and gravel should not be placeddirectly on bedrock. Finished bedrock subgrades should not be steeper than 4 horizontal to 1

vertical (4H:1V) and free of loose rock or soil.

4.2.2 Material Types

Fill and backfill materials should meet the following material property requirements:

Fill Type USCS Classification Acceptable Location for Placement

Crushed Stone GP

For use underneath the tower foundation and equipment

shelter slab, as foundation backfill, and as drainage fill. Can

be used to level subgrades between foundations and

bedrock. Should be uniform ¾-inch angular crushed stone.

Lean Concrete Not applicable

Can be used to level subgrades between foundations and

bedrock. Lean concrete should be flowable, self-compacting

concrete with a compressive strength between 300 and

2,000 psi.







4.2.3 Compaction Requirements

Item Description

Fill Lift Thickness 8 inches or less in loose thickness

Compaction Requirements1 95 percent maximum modified Proctor dry density (ASTM

D1557, Method C)

Moisture Content – Granular Material Workable moisture levels

1. We recommend fill be tested for moisture content and compaction during placement. Should the

results of the in-place density tests indicate the specified moisture or compaction limits have not

been met, the area represented by the test should be reworked and retested, as required, until the

specified moisture and compaction requirements are achieved.

4.2.4 Grading and Drainage

Adequate drainage should be provided at the site to reduce the likelihood of an increase in

moisture content of the foundation soils/rock. Final site grading should be away from the tower

and equipment shelter to reduce the likelihood of water ponding near the structures.

4.2.5 Earthwork Construction Considerations

Temporary excavations should be sloped or braced as required by Occupational Safety and

Health Administration (OSHA) regulations to provide stability and safe working conditions. The

contractor, by his contract, is usually responsible for designing and constructing stable,

temporary excavations and should shore, slope or bench the sides of the excavations, as

required, to maintain stability of both the excavation sides and bottom. All excavations should

comply with applicable local, State, and federal safety regulations, including the current OSHA

Excavation and Trench Safety Standards.

The geotechnical engineer should be retained during the construction phase of the project to

observe earthwork and to perform necessary tests and observations during subgrade

preparation; placement and compaction of controlled compacted fills; backfilling of excavations

into the completed subgrade, and just prior to construction of foundations.

4.3 Foundation Recommendations

4.3.1 Tower Foundation

We recommend the proposed lattice telecommunications tower be supported on either a

monolithic mat or pier-and-pad foundations placed directly on the bedrock or on a leveling matof minus ¾-inch crushed stone or lean concrete placed over the bedrock. Sand and gravel

should not be placed directly on the bedrock surface. The size of the footing will be dictated by

providing overturning and sliding resistance. As an alternative, the proposed telecommunications

tower may be supported on drilled shaft foundations. Design recommendations and construction

considerations for the recommended foundation systems are presented in the following tables

and paragraphs.







4.3.1.1 Mat/Pad Foundat ion Design Recommendat ions

Description Value

Net allowable bearing pressure 1 10,000 psf

Minimum embedment below fini shed grade for frost p rotection 2 42 inches (Town of Berne)

Approx imate total sett lement 3 Negligible

Estimated d ifferential settlement 3 Negligible

Total Unit Weight (γ)

Bedrock 145 pcf

Passive p ressure coefficient, Kp4

(compacted fill around base of foundation)3.0 (ultimate)

Passive p ressure coefficient, Kp5

(foundation concrete cast against rock face)6.0 (ultimate)

Coefficient of sliding friction 6 0.7 (ultimate)

1. The recommended net allowable bearing pressure is the pressure in excess of the minimum

surrounding overburden pressure at the foundation base elevation.

2. According to the 2010 Building Code of New York State, Section 1805.2.1, minimum embedment

below finished grade for frost protection is not required when foundations bear on bedrock.

3. Foundation settlement should be negligible if founded directly on bedrock or on a few inches of ¾-

inch minus crushed stone or lean concrete over bedrock.

4. Passive pressure calculated with this parameter should be reduced by at least a factor of safety of 3,

to reflect the amount of movement required to mobilize the passive resistance.

5. Passive pressure calculated with this parameter should be reduced by at least a factor of safety of 1.5.

6. A factor of safety of at least 1.5 should be applied to the sliding resistance.

Uplift resistance for tower foundation may be computed as the sum of the weight of the foundation

element and the weight of the soil overlying the foundation. For this computation, we recommend

using a soil unit weight of 100 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) for engineered fill overlying the footing

placed as described in this section of this report. A unit weight of 150 pcf may be used for

reinforced foundation concrete. A factor of safety of 1.0 may be applied to calculations of dead

load; a higher factor of safety may be appropriate for loadings resisted by dead load.

4.3.1.2 Mat/Pad Foundation Construct ion Considerat ions

Bedrock very close to the ground surface around the proposed tower location. Excavation into

the bedrock will be required in order for the foundation to provide adequate resistance tooverturning. Although bedrock excavation can generally be carried out either by explosive or

non-explosive methods, the most cost-effective means of rock removal will depend upon the

final design of the foundation and the quantity of rock to be removed. We consider mechanical

methods, such as a large excavator and backhoe-mounted ram, to be appropriate for the upper

6 to 8 feet, or so. Bedrock removal will likely increase in difficulty with depth.







Bedrock subgrades should be no steeper than 4H:1V and free of loose rock or soil. Bedrock

subgrades steeper than 4H:1V should be benched to provide a relatively level bearing surface.

Minor irregularities in the level of the rock surface may be filled with lean concrete or minus ¾-

inch crushed stone to provide a level working surface. The joints in competent bedrock should

be tight; care should be taken not to displace the joints in the bedrock during excavation.

The base of the foundation excavation should be free of water and loose broken rock prior to

placing concrete. Concrete should be placed soon after excavating to reduce the likelihood of

disturbance. The geotechnical engineer should be retained to observe the foundation bearing

materials.

4.3.1.3 Dri lled Shaf t Des ign Recommendat ions

Description Value

Net Allowable Bearing Capacity 1

Bedrock (>10 feet) 15 ksf

Ultimate Bond 2

Bedrock (Below 3.5 feet) 70 psi

Strain Factor - k rm 3

Bedrock 0.0005

Angle of In ternal Fr iction

Bedrock 45 degrees

Estimated In-situ Soil Unit Weight

Bedrock 145 pcf

Approximate Groundwater Depth (10/21/15) Not encountered

Concrete Minimum 28-day Unconfined

Compressive Strength 44,000 psi

Minimum Dr illed Shaft Diameter 3 feet

Al lowable Deflection at Top of Shaft 0.5 inch

1. The allowable end bearing capacity assumes that loose material at the base of the shafts has

been removed.

2. Contribution to shaft capacity above the frost depth of 3.5 feet should be ignored. The uplift

capacity of the shafts will be based on bond and the dead weight of the shafts.

3. For use with LPile computer program.

4. Use air entrained concrete.

We anticipate the design length of the shafts will be primarily dependent on the embedment/lateral

capacity required to resist live loading, such as the combination of wind and ice loads. The base of

the drilled shafts should be at least 10 feet below ground surface. The drilled shafts will be

designed to resist tension loads and therefore should have reinforcing steel installed throughout the

entire length of the shafts. Technical specifications should be prepared that require material and







installation detail submittals, proof of experience in drilled shaft installation, concrete placement

methods.

4.3.1.4 Dr il led Shaf t Construct ion Considerat ions

The drilled shafts should be aligned vertically. The drilling method or combination of methodsselected by the contractor should be submitted for review by the geotechnical engineer, prior to

mobilization of drilling equipment. Shale bedrock was encountered at the ground surface and,

therefore, will be encountered for the full length of the drilled shafts. The contractor should take

these aspects into account in his proposed drilling method(s).

Groundwater, was not encountered in the boring, however water may become temporarily

perched above the bedrock. Concrete should be placed either by pumping through a discharge

line lowered to the bottom of the shaft holes or by being directed down the center of the shafts,

to reduce likelihood of concrete segregation from hitting the reinforcing steel cage. Accumulated

water at the base of the shafts should be removed prior to placing concrete.

4.3.2 Equipment Foundations

Equipment shelters and ancillary structures may be supported on a slabs-on-grade bearing on a

thin layer of minus ¾-inch crushed stone placed on bedrock. Sand and gravel should not be

placed on the bedrock surface. Design and construction recommendations for the proposed

slabs-on-grade are presented in the following table:

4.3.2.1 Slab-on-Grade Design Recommendat ions

Description Value

Net allowable bearing pressure 5,000 psf

Modulus of subgrade reaction300 pounds per square inch per in (psi/in) for

point load condition

Minimum embedment below finished grade for

frost protection 1,2

Not required when foundations bear on

competent bedrock

Approx imate total sett lement Negligible

Estimated d ifferential settlement Negligible

Coefficient of sliding friction 3 0.7 (ultimate)

1. According to the 2010 Building Code of New York State, Section 1805.2.1, minimum embedment

below finished grade for frost protection is not required when foundations bear on bedrock.

2. Air entraining admixtures should be used for concrete exposed to freezing.

3. A factor of safety of at least 1.5 should be applied to the sliding resistance.

4.3.2.2 Slab-on-Grade Construction Considerat ions

The exposed subgrade will be bedrock, therefore proofrolling will not be required. Removal of

high spots in the bedrock surface may be required in order to achieve subgrade elevation.

Bedrock subgrades should prepared as recommended in Section 4.3.1.2.







4.4 Seismic Considerations

Description Value

Code Used 1 2010 Building Code of New York State (NYS Code)

Site Class 2 B

Maximum considered earthquake ground

motions (5 percent damping)

0.070g (S1 – 1.0 second spectral response acceleration)

0.200g (Ss – 0.2 second spectral response acceleration)

Liquefaction potential in event of an

earthquakeNot susceptible

1. The NYS Code incorporates the Seismic Design Category approach from the 2006 International

Building Code.

2. The NYS Code requires a site soil; profile determination extending to a depth of 100 feet for seismic

site classification. The current scope requested does not include the required 100-foot soil profile

determination; the boring performed for this report extended to a depth of 20.2 feet. However, the

encountered bedrock will extend to at least 100 feet.

5.0 GENERAL COMMENTS

Terracon should be retained to review the final design plans and specifications, so comments

can be made regarding interpretation and implementation of our geotechnical recommendations

in the design and specifications. Terracon also should be retained to provide observation and

testing services during grading, excavation, foundation construction, and other earth-related

construction phases of the project.

The analysis and recommendations presented in this report are based upon the data obtained

from the exploration performed at the indicated location and from other information discussed in

this report. This report does not reflect variations that may occur across the site or due to the

modifying effects of weather. The nature and extent of such variations may not become evident

until during or after construction. If variations appear, we should be immediately notified, so that

further evaluation and supplemental recommendations can be provided.

Resistivity testing may be influenced by the presence of certain anomalies within the test area,

including proximity to overhead power lines, unseasonal flooding, or the presence of cobbles or

boulders. Resistivity results will also fluctuate depending on the moisture content, soil

constituent solubility, and temperature. Field resistivity values should be evaluated based on

the measured data in conjunction with published values for the material.

The scope of services for this project does not include either specifically or by implication any

environmental or biological (e.g., mold, fungi, bacteria) assessment of the site or identification or







prevention of pollutants, hazardous materials or conditions. If the owner is concerned about the

potential for such contamination or pollution, other studies should be undertaken.

This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of our client for specific application to the

project discussed and prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineeringpractices. No warranties, either express or implied, are intended or made. Site safety,

excavation support, and dewatering requirements are the responsibility of others. In the event

that changes in the nature, design, or location of the project as outlined in this report are

planned, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report shall not be considered

valid unless Terracon reviews the changes and either verifies or modifies the conclusions of this

report in writing.



APPENDIX A

FIELD EXPLORATION



1 KILOMETER0.51

1 MILE

7000 FEET60005000400030002000100001000

01/21

NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988

CONTOU R INTERVAL 20 FEET

SCALE: 1:24 000

Project Mngr:CBR

Drawn By:

CBRChecked By:

RWM Approved By:

RWM

Project No.J5155124

Quadrangle:RENSSELAERVILLE,NY -2013

GALLUPVILLE,NY -2013

ALTAMONT, NY - 2013

WESTERLO, NY -2013

File No. J5155124.dwg

Date:

SITE LOCATION MAP EXHIB

A-

PROPOSED TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWER28 JANSEN LANE

BERNE, NEW YORK

QUADRANGLE LOCATIO

OCTOBER 201515 Marway Circle, Suite 2BPH. (585 )247 3471

Rochester, NY 14624FAX.(585)363 7025

Consulting Engineers and Scientists



Project Mngr:CBR

Drawn By:

CBRChecked By:

SCL

Approved By:RWM

Project No.J5155124

Scale:

1" = 16'

File No. J5155124.dwgDate:

EXPLORATION LOCATION DIAGRAM EXHIB

A-2

LEGEND

TEST BORING LOCATION

RESISTIVITY TEST LOCATION (TYP)

B-1

PROPOSED TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWER28 JANSEN LANE

BERNE, NEW YORK

NOTES:

1. THIS DIAGRAM WAS PREPARED BASED ON A PLAN BY INFINIGY SOLUTIONS

LLC OF ALBANY, NEW YORK, , SHEET No. C3A, TITLED "OVERALL SITE PLAN

REVISED FEBRUARY 28, 2015.

2. THE TEST BORING B-1 WAS ADVANCED ON OCTOBER 21, 2015 UNDER TH

DIRECTION OF TERRACON WITH EQUIPMENT OWNED AND OPERATED BY

NORTHEAST SPECIALIZED DRILLING, INC. OF LIVERPOOL, NEW YORK.

3. RESIST IVITY TESTING WAS PERFORMED ON OCTOBER 21, 2015 BY A

TERRACON FIELD ENGINEER.

4. THE APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF THE EXPLORATION WAS STAKED BY

OTHERS PRIOR TO OUR ARRIVAL. RESISTIVITY TEST LOCATIONS WERE

MEASURED BY TAPING FROM EXISTING SITE FEATURES AND BY ESTIMATING

RIGHT ANGLES. THE LOCATIONS SHOULD BE CONSIDERED ACCURATE ONLY

TO THE DEGREE IMPLIED BY THE METHOD USED.

5. USE OF THIS DIAGRAM IS LIMITED TO THE ILLUSTRATION OF THE

APPROXIMATE LOCATIONS OF THE EXPLORATION, RESISTIVITY TESTING, AND

OTHER PERTINENT SITE FEATURES. ANY OTHER USE OF THIS DIAGRAM

WITHOUT PERMISSION FROM TERRACON IS PROHIBITED.

APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET

016 168

NOVEMBER 2015 15 Marway Circle, Suite 2BPH. (585)247 3471

Rochester, NY 14624FAX.(585)3 63 7025

Consulting Engineers and Scientists

LINE 1

L I N E

2

LINE 1

B-1






Exhibit A-3

Field Exploration Description

The approximate boring location, which is shown on Exhibit A-2, was staked in the field by others

prior to our arrival. The approximate resistivity testing locations were measured by taping from

existing features in the field and by estimating right angles. Existing elevation at the boring location,

shown on the boring log, was estimated based on contours of existing grades provided on a plantitled “Overall Site Plan”, Sheet No. C3A, Revision B, dated February 23, 2015, by Infinigy of

Albany, New York. The location and elevation of the exploration and the locations of the resistivity

testing should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the method used to define

them.

Terracon observed the advancement of a single test boring (B-1) close to the proposed tower

center on October 21, 2015 using a truck-mounted CME 55 rotary drill rig, owned and operated by

Northeast Specialized Drilling, Inc. of Liverpool, New York. The exploration was advanced using

3¼-inch inside diameter hollow-stem augers and terminated at a depth of about 20 feet, after

drilling through about 18.5 feet of shale bedrock.

In the split-barrel sampling procedure utilized in B-1, the number of blows required to advance a

standard 2-inch O.D. split-barrel sampler typically the middle 12 inches of the total 24-inch

penetration by means of a 140-pound safety hammer with a free fall of 30 inches is the Standard

Penetration Test (SPT) resistance value “N”. This “N” value is used to estimate the in-situ relative

density of cohesionless soils and consistency of cohesive soils.

The soil/rock samples were placed in labeled glass jars and taken to our laboratory for further

review, possible testing, and classification. Information provided on the boring log attached to this

report includes soil/rock descriptions, relative density and/or consistency evaluations, boring depth,

sampling intervals, and groundwater conditions. The boring was backfilled with auger cuttings prior

to the drill crew leaving the site.

A field log of the exploration, which included visual classifications of the materials encountered

during drilling as well as interpretation of the subsurface conditions between samples, was

prepared. The final exploration log included with this report represents further interpretation by the

geotechnical engineer of the field log and incorporates, where appropriate, modifications based on

laboratory classification of the samples.



1448.5+/-

1447.5+/-

1429+/-

6

2

3

2

2

1

1

2-2-5-100/3"N=7

100/3"

100/4"

100/3"

100/3"

100/3"

100/2"

0.5

1.5

20.2

FOREST MAT

SILTY SAND (SM), with fragmented shale, brown, loose, (SUBSOIL)

SEDIMENTARY BEDROCK - SHALE, moderately weathered, weak, very thin bedding, gray,(BEDROCK)

Boring Terminated at 20.2 Feet

Stratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.

Samples taken with a 2" O.D. split spoon sampler driven by an auto-hammer operated by cathead.

G R A

P H I C L O G

T H I S B O R I N G L O G I S N O T V A L I D I F S E P A R A T E D F R O M O R I G I N A L R E P O R T .

G E O S M A R T L O G - N O W E L L

B E R N E . G P J

28 Jansen Lane Berne, New York

SITE:

Page 1 of 1

Advancement Method:3 1/4-inch inside diameter hollow stem auger

Abandonment Method:Boring backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion.

15 Marway Circle, Suite 2BRochester, New York

Notes:

Project No.: J5155124

Drill Rig: CME 55

Boring Started: 10/21/2015

BORING LOG NO. B-1

Pyramid Network Services LLCCLIENT:East Syracuse, New York

Driller: A. Linstruth

Boring Completed: 10/21/2015

Exhibit: A-4

See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures.

See Appendix B for description of laboratoryprocedures and additional data (if any).

See Appendix C for explanation of symbols andabbreviations.

PROJECT: Proposed Telecommunications Tower

Approximate Surface Elev: 1449 (Ft.) +/-

ELEVATION (Ft.) S

A M P L E T Y P E

W A T E R L E V E L

O B S E

R V A T I O N S

D E P T H ( F t . )

5

10

15

20

R E C O

V E R Y ( I n . )

F I E

L D T E S T

R E

S U L T S

DEPTH

LOCATION See Exhibit A-2

No free water observed

WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS



APPENDIX B

LABORATORY TESTING






Exhibit B-1

Laboratory Testing

Descriptive classifications of the soils indicated on the Terracon boring log are in accordance

with the enclosed General Notes and the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). USCS

symbols are also shown. A brief description of the USCS is attached to this report.

Classification was by visual/manual procedures. A guide to bedrock classification, Description of Rock Properties, is also attached to this report.



APPENDIX C

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS



TraceWithModifier

Water Level After a Specified Period of Time

GRAIN SIZE TERMINOLOGYRELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF SAND AND GRAVEL

TraceWithModifier

Standard Penetration or N-Value

Blows/Ft.

Descriptive Term(Consistency)

Loose

Very Stiff

Exhibit C-1

Standard Penetration or N-Value

Blows/Ft.

Ring Sampler Blows/Ft.

Ring Sampler Blows/Ft.

Medium Dense

Dense

Very Dense

0 - 1 < 3

4 - 9 2 - 4 3 - 4

Medium-Stiff 5 - 9

30 - 50

W A T E R

L E V E L

Auger

Shelby Tube

Ring Sampler

Grab Sample

8 - 15

Split Spoon

Macro Core

Rock Core

PLASTICITY DESCRIPTION

Term

< 1515 - 29> 30

Descriptive Term(s)of other constituents

Water InitiallyEncountered

Water Level After aSpecified Period of Time

Major Componentof Sample

Percent of Dry Weight

(More than 50% retained on No. 200 sieve.)Density determined by Standard Penetration Resistance

Includes gravels, sands and silts.

Hard

Very Loose 0 - 3 0 - 6 Very Soft

7 - 18 Soft

10 - 29 19 - 58

59 - 98 Stiff

less than 500

500 to 1,000

1,000 to 2,000

2,000 to 4,000

4,000 to 8,000> 99

LOCATION AND ELEVATION NOTES

S A M P L I N G

F I E L D T E S T S

(HP)

(T)

(b/f)

(PID)

(OVA)

DESCRIPTION OF SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS

Descriptive Term(Density)

Non-plasticLowMediumHigh

BouldersCobblesGravelSandSilt or Clay

10 - 18

> 50 15 - 30 19 - 42

> 30 > 42

_

Hand Penetrometer

Torvane

Standard PenetrationTest (blows per foot)

Photo-Ionization Detector

Organic Vapor Analyzer

Water levels indicated on the soil boring

logs are the levels measured in theborehole at the times indicated.Groundwater level variations will occur over time. In low permeability soils,accurate determination of groundwater levels is not possible with short termwater level observations.

CONSISTENCY OF FINE-GRAINED SOILS

(50% or more passing the No. 200 sieve.)Consistency determined by laboratory shear strength testing, field

visual-manual procedures or standard penetration resistance

DESCRIPTIVE SOIL CLASSIFICATION

> 8,000

Unless otherwise noted, Latitude and Longitude are approximately determined using a hand-held GPS device. The accuracyof such devices is variable. Surface elevation data annotated with +/- indicates that no actual topographical survey wasconducted to confirm the surface elevation. Instead, the surface elevation was approximately determined from topographicmaps of the area.

Soil classification is based on the Unified Soil Classification System. Coarse Grained Soils have more than 50% of their dryweight retained on a #200 sieve; their principal descriptors are: boulders, cobbles, gravel or sand. Fine Grained Soils haveless than 50% of their dry weight retained on a #200 sieve; they are principally described as clays if they are plastic, andsilts if they are slightly plastic or non-plastic. Major constituents may be added as modifiers and minor constituents may beadded according to the relative proportions based on grain size. In addition to gradation, coarse-grained soils are definedon the basis of their in-place relative density and fine-grained soils on the basis of their consistency.

Plasticity Index

01 - 1011 - 30

> 30

RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF FINES

Descriptive Term(s)of other constituents

Percent of Dry Weight

< 55 - 12> 12

No Recovery

RELATIVE DENSITY OF COARSE-GRAINED SOILS

Particle Size

Over 12 in. (300 mm)12 in. to 3 in. (300mm to 75mm)3 in. to #4 sieve (75mm to 4.75 mm)#4 to #200 sieve (4.75mm to 0.075mmPassing #200 sieve (0.075mm)

S T R E N G T H T

E R M S Unconfined Compressive

Strength, Qu, psf

4 - 8

GENERAL NOTES



UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM

Exhibit C-2

Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tests A

Soil Classification

Group

SymbolGroup Name

B

Coarse Grained Soil s:

More than 50% retained

on No. 200 sieve

Gravels:

More than 50% of

coarse fraction retained

on No. 4 sieve

Clean Gravels:

Less than 5% fines C

Cu 4 and 1 Cc 3 E

GW Well-graded gravelF

Cu 4 and/or 1 Cc 3 E

GP Poorly graded gravelF

Gravels with Fines:

More than 12% fines C

Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silty gravelF,G,H

Fines classify as CL or CH GC Clayey gravelF,G,H

Sands:

50% or more of coarse

fraction passes No. 4

sieve

Clean Sands:

Less than 5% fines D

Cu 6 and 1 Cc 3 E

SW Well-graded sandI

Cu 6 and/or 1 Cc 3 E SP Poorly graded sand I

Sands with Fines:

More than 12% fines D

Fines classify as ML or MH SM Silty sandG,H,I

Fines classify as CL or CH SC Clayey sandG,H,I

Fine-Grained Soil s:

50% or more passes the

No. 200 sieve

Silts and Clays:

Liquid limit less than 50

Inorganic:PI 7 and plots on or above “A” line

J CL Lean clay

K,L,M

PI 4 or plots below “A” line J ML Silt

K,L,M

Organic:Liquid limit - oven dried

0.75 OLOrganic clay

K,L,M,N

Liquid limit - not dried Organic siltK,L,M,O

Silts and Clays:

Liquid limit 50 or more

Inorganic:PI plots on or above “A” line CH Fat clay

K,L,M

PI plots below “A” line MH Elastic SiltK,L,M

Organic:Liquid limit - oven dried

0.75 OHOrganic clay

K,L,M,P

Liquid limit - not dried Organic siltK,L,M,Q

Highly organic soils: Primarily organic matter, dark in color, and organic odor PT Peat

ABased on the material passing the 3-inch (75-mm) sieve

BIf field sample contained cobbles or boulders, or both, add “with cobbles

or boulders, or both” to group name.C

Gravels with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: GW-GM well-graded

gravel with silt, GW-GC well-graded gravel with clay, GP-GM poorly

graded gravel with silt, GP-GC poorly graded gravel with clay.D

Sands with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: SW-SM well-graded

sand with silt, SW-SC well-graded sand with clay, SP-SM poorly graded

sand with silt, SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay

ECu = D60/D10 Cc =

6010

2

30

DxD

)(D

FIf soil contains 15% sand, add “with sand” to group name.

GIf fines classify as CL-ML, use dual symbol GC-GM, or SC-SM.

HIf fines are organic, add “with organic fines” to group name.

IIf soil contains 15% gravel, add “with gravel” to group name.

JIf Atterberg limits plot in shaded area, soil is a CL-ML, silty clay.

KIf soil contains 15 to 29% plus No. 200, add “with sand” or “with gravel,

whichever is predominant.L

If soil contains 30% plus No. 200 predominantly sand, add “sandy” to

group name.M

If soil contains 30% plus No. 200, predominantly gravel, add

“gravelly” to group name.N

PI 4 and plots on or above “A” line.O

PI 4 or plots below “A” line.P

PI plots on or above “A” line.Q

PI plots below “A” line.



DESCRIPTION OF ROCK PROPERTIES

WEATHERING

Term Description

Unweathered No visible sign of rock material weathering, perhaps slight discoloration on major discontinuity surfaces.

Slightlyweathered

Discoloration indicates weathering of rock material and discontinuity surfaces. All the rock material may bediscolored by weathering and may be somewhat weaker externally than in its fresh condition.

Moderatelyweathered

Less than half of the rock material is decomposed and/or disintegrated to a soil. Fresh or discolored rock ispresent either as a continuous framework or as corestones.

Highlyweathered

More than half of the rock material is decomposed and/or disintegrated to a soil. Fresh or discolored rock ispresent either as a discontinuous framework or as corestones.

Completelyweathered

All rock material is decomposed and/or disintegrated to soil. The original mass structure is still largelyintact.

Residual soil All rock material is converted to soil. The mass structure and material fabric are destroyed. There is alarge change in volume, but the soil has not been significantly transported.

STRENGTH OR HARDNESS

Description Field IdentificationUniaxial CompressiveStrength, PSI (MPa)

Extremely weak Indented by thumbnail 40-150 (0.3-1)

Very weakCrumbles under firm blows with point of geological hammer, canbe peeled by a pocket knife

150-700 (1-5)

Weak rock Can be peeled by a pocket knife with difficulty, shallowindentations made by firm blow with point of geological hammer

700-4,000 (5-30)

Medium strongCannot be scraped or peeled with a pocket knife, specimen can befractured with single firm blow of geological hammer

4,000-7,000 (30-50)

Strong rockSpecimen requires more than one blow of geological hammer tofracture it

7,000-15,000 (50-100)

Very strong Specimen requires many blows of geological hammer to fracture it 15,000-36,000 (100-250)

Extremely strong Specimen can only be chipped with geological hammer >36,000 (>250)

DISCONTINUITY DESCRIPTION

Fracture Spacing (Joints, Faults, Other Fractures) Bedding Spacing (May Include Foliation or Banding )

Description Spacing Description Spacing

Extremely close < ¾ in (<19 mm) Laminated < ½ in (<12 mm)

Very close ¾ in – 2-1/2 in (19 - 60 mm) Very th in ½ in – 2 in (12 – 50 mm)Close 2-1/2 in – 8 in (60 – 200 mm) Thin 2 in – 1 ft (50 – 300 mm)

Moderate 8 in – 2 ft (200 – 600 mm) Medium 1 ft – 3 ft (300 – 900 mm)

Wide 2 ft – 6 ft (600 mm – 2.0 m) Thick 3 ft – 10 ft (900 mm – 3 m)

Very Wide 6 ft – 20 ft (2.0 – 6 m) Massive > 10 ft (3 m)

Discontinuity Orientation (Angle): Measure the angle of discontinuity relative to a plane perpendicular to the longitudinal axis ofthe core. (For most cases, the core axis is vertical; therefore, the plane perpendicular to the core axis is horizontal.) Forexample, a horizontal bedding plane would have a 0 degree angle.

ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION (RQD*)

Descripti on RQD Value (%)

Very Poor 0 - 25

Poor 25 – 50

Fair 50 – 75

Good 75 – 90

Excellent 90 - 100

*The combined length of all sound and intact core segments equal to or greater than 4 inches in length, expressed as apercentage of the total core run length.

Reference: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Publication No FHWA-NHI-10-034, December 2009

Technical Manual for Design and Construction of Road Tunnels – Civil Elements

Documents

J5155124 Berne, NY Tower Geotechnical Report (Sealed) 11-6-15