PRELIMINARY FOUNDATION REPORT LITTLE UVAS CREEK BRIDGE ... · PRELIMINARY FOUNDATION REPORT . LITTLE UVAS CREEK BRIDGE (REPLACE) SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA . EXISTING BRIDGE NO.:

PRELIMINARY FOUNDATION REPORT LITTLE UVAS CREEK BRIDGE (REPLACE)

SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA EXISTING BRIDGE NO.: 37C0095

For

CREEGAN + D’ANGELO INFRASTRUCTURE ENGINEERS 170 Columbus Avenue, Suite 240

San Francisco, CA 94133

PARIKH CONSULTANTS, INC.

2360 Qume Drive, Suite A San Jose, CA 95131

April 28, 2014 Job No. 2008-127-010

TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE

1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 1 2.0 SCOPE OF WORK ...................................................................................................... 1 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................ 1 4.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION AND TESTING PROGRAM........................................ 2 5.0 SITE GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ......................................... 3

5.1 Site Geology ....................................................................................................................3 5.2 Subsurface Conditions.....................................................................................................3

6.0 SCOUR EVALUATION .............................................................................................. 5 7.0 CORROSION EVALUATION ................................................................................... 5 8.0 SEISMIC RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................... 6

8.1 Seismic Sources...............................................................................................................6 8.2 Seismic Design Criteria ...................................................................................................6 8.3 Seismic Hazards ..............................................................................................................7

9.0 EXISTING WATER WELL ....................................................................................... 8 10.0 AS-BUILT FOUNDATION DATA ............................................................................ 9 11.0 PRELIMINARY FOUNDATION CONSIDERATION ........................................... 9 12.0 INVESTIGATION LIMITATIONS ......................................................................... 10

LIST OF PLATES Plate No. 1: Project Location Map Plate No. 2: Site Plan Plate No. 3: Geologic Map Plate No. 4: Fault Map Plate No. 5A: ARS Comparison Curves Plate No. 5B: Recommended ARS Curve Appendix A: Log of Test Borings Appendix B: Charts of Embankment Induced Surcharge on Water Well (Draft)

PRELIMINARY FOUNDATION REPORT LITTLE UVAS CREEK BRIDGE (REPLACE)

SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA EXISTING BRIDGE NO.: 37C0095

1.0 INTRODUCTION This preliminary foundation report presents the preliminary geotechnical information for the proposed Little Uvas Creek Bridge (Existing Bridge No.: 37C0095) replacement project in Santa Clara County, California. The proposed bridge will be located on the future realigned Uvas Road, roughly 570 feet to the northwest of the existing bridge. The project site is shown on the Project Location Map, Plate No. 1. The existing bridge was built in 1928. The County plans to replace the existing bridge with a new bridge that will be designed to meet current AASHTO standards. 2.0 SCOPE OF WORK The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate the general soil and groundwater conditions at the project site, to evaluate their engineering properties, and to provide preliminary foundation design recommendations for the proposed project. The scope of work performed for this investigation included a review of the readily available geologic literature pertaining to the site, obtaining representative soil and core samples and logging materials encountered in the exploratory borings, laboratory testing of the collected samples, engineering analysis of the field and laboratory data, and preparation of this report. 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The existing Little Uvas Creek Bridge (Ex. Br. No.: 37C0095) was built in 1928, which is on Uvas Road, about 220 feet north of Little Uvas Road. The bridge has been classified to be functionally obsolete by Caltrans (2010). The County of Santa Clara plans to replace the existing bridge with a new bridge to meet current AASHTO standards. The new bridge will be on the future realigned Uvas Road, approximately 570 feet to the northwest of the existing bridge. Based on the information provided by Creegan + D’Angelo Infrastructure Engineers (Designer), the new bridge is planned to have a single span with Caltrans precast pre-stressed I-Girders and concrete slab. The proposed bridge would be approximately 80 feet in length and 43 feet in total width, with two 12

Creegan + D’Angelo Infrastructure Engineers Little Uvas Creek Bridge (Replace) Job No. 2008-127-010 April 28, 2014 Page 2

feet wide traffic lanes and 8 feet wide shoulders. The approach embankment grading will need approximately 10 feet of cut and up to about 14 feet of fill. Retaining walls up to 10 feet in design height will be required south of the bridge, on the east side of the new roadway for supporting approach embankment. A concrete box culvert of 5 feet square will be located at the depressive area north of the new bridge. There would also be drainage pipes and other minor improvements that can be constructed according to Caltrans or County standards. No special investigation is required for these minor improvements. An existing water well is located at about 20 feet west of the toe of the new embankment at approximate Station 12+71. As requested by the County, the effect of the new embankment fill on the water well should be evaluated. 4.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION AND TESTING PROGRAM A total of five (5) borings (R-14-001 through R-14-005) were drilled or cored for this study along the planned roadway alignment with a truck-mounted rotary wash drill rig from March 17 to 21, 2014. The borings were drilled or cored to depths ranging approximately from 18.5 to 70.5 feet below grade. Selected soil samples were obtained from either a 2.5-inch I.D. Modified California (MC) or 1.4-inch I.D. Standard Penetration Test (SPT) sampler at various depths. The samplers were driven into subsurface soils under the impact of a 140-pound hammer having a free fall of 30 inches. The blow counts required to drive the sampler for the last 12 inches are presented on the Log of Test Borings (LOTBs) in Appendix A. The drilling subcontractor was Pitcher Drilling, Co. from East Palo Alto, California. Based on the hammer energy calibration information provided, the hammer energy of the drill rig (Failing 1500) used is approx. 65%. Using a method suggested by Daniel, Howie and Sy (2003), when correlating standard penetration data, the blow counts for the Modified California Sampler may be converted to equivalent SPT blow counts by multiplying a conversion factor of 0.65. Core samples of bedrocks were obtained approximately from 26 to 70.5 feet in R-14-002 and from 15 to 55 feet in R-14-003. The soil and core samples were sealed and transported to our laboratory for further evaluation and testing. In addition, two bulk soil samples were gathered within the upper about 5 feet for R-value tests for pavement design. The field investigation was conducted under the supervision of our field engineer who logged the test


borings and prepared the samples for subsequent laboratory testing and evaluation. The approximate boring locations are shown on the Site Plan, Plate No. 2. 5.0 SITE GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

5.1 Site Geology General geologic features pertaining to the project site were evaluated by reference to the Geologic Map and Structure Sections of the Southern Santa Clara Valley and Southern Santa Cruz Mountains, Santa Clara and Santa Cruz Counties, California, by McLaughlin, et al. (2001). A portion of the published USGS Geologic Map that includes the project location is presented on Plate No. 3. Based on the publication, the project site and its vicinity are generally underlain by the following geologic units:

Qhf - Alluvium fan deposits (Holocene). Unsorted boulders, gravel, sand, silt, and soil deposited in Holocene alluvial fans.

Qpf - Alluvium fan deposits (Pleistocene). Unsorted boulders, gravel, sand, silt, and soil deposited in older alluvial fans. Includes deposits of older Pleistocene alluvial fans incised by younger Pleistocene and Holocene alluvial deposits.

Fm - Melange of the central belt (Upper Cretaceous). The matrix consists of penetratively sheared argillite and lithic metasandstone metamorphosed to pumpellyite- and, locally, to lawsonite-bearing assemblages.

Fpv - Volcanic rocks (Lower Cretaceous). Pillowed basalt flows, flow breccias, and andesitic tuff; locally, at Uvas Reservoir, contains siliceous tuff near top of volcanic sequence.

5.2 Subsurface Conditions

The subsurface conditions on the site are based on the field exploration. The ground surface elevations at locations of Borings R-14-001, -002, -003, -004 and -005 are estimated to be at approximately 598, 618, 594, 590 and 590 feet, respectively, based on the plan and profile provided by the Designer (2013). Except R-14-002, the borings generally encountered about 13 to 15 feet of interbedded medium dense to very dense granular soils and medium stiff to hard clayey


materials in the top subsurface profiles. From about 13 to 15 feet to the maximum depths drilled, the borings mostly encountered metamorphosed sandstone, meta-graywacke and sheared shale (mélange). Boring R-14-002 was drilled on a berm north of the creek, which encountered about 8 feet of fill followed by about 15 feet of dense sand and hard clay underlain by the bedrocks same as those encountered in other borings. The bedrocks were generally moderately hard to hard, moderately weathered, and intensely to moderately fractured. The sheared shale was moderately soft. Groundwater was encountered at approximately 6 (Elev. 592 ft), 12.5 (Elev. 581.5 ft), and 7 (Elev. 583 ft) feet below the existing grade in Borings R-14-001, R-14-003, and R-14-005, respectively, during drilling. The groundwater in R-14-003 was measured after about 15 hours (overnight). The groundwater was not measured in the other two borings due to rotary wash drilling method and time limit. Groundwater may vary with the passage of time due to seasonal groundwater fluctuation, water level in the creek, surface and subsurface flows, ground surface run-off, and other factors that may not be present at the time of investigation. The boring logs presented in Appendix A were prepared from the field logs, which were edited after visual re-examination of the soil samples in the laboratory and results of classification tests on selected soil samples as indicated on the logs. The abrupt stratum changes shown on these logs may be gradual and relatively minor changes in soil types within a stratum may not be noted on the logs due to field limitations. Due to limitations inherent in geotechnical investigations, it is neither uncommon to encounter unforeseen variations in the soil conditions during construction nor is it practical to determine all such variations during an acceptable program of drilling and sampling for a project of this scope. Such variations, when encountered, generally require additional engineering services to attain a properly constructed project. We, therefore, recommend that a contingency fund be provided to accommodate any additional charges resulting from technical services that may be required during construction.


6.0 SCOUR EVALUATION The subject should be determined by the project hydraulic study. The abutments should be set back adequate distance or appropriate bank protection measures should be considered to protect from potential scour along the creek banks. Ultimate design should be based on the findings of hydraulic study for the project. 7.0 CORROSION EVALUATION The corrosion investigation for this project was performed on selected samples in general accordance with the provisions of California Test Method 643, 417 and 422. A summary of the corrosion test results is presented in Table 7.1. For structural elements, Caltrans Corrosion Guidelines (November 2012) consider a site to be corrosive if one or more of the following conditions exist for the representative soil/water samples at the site: Chloride concentration is 500 ppm or greater; Sulfate concentration is 2,000 ppm or greater; or the pH value is 5.5 or less.

TABLE 7.1 - CORROSION TEST RESULTS Boring

No. Depth

(ft) pH Minimum Resistivity (ohms-cm)

Chloride Content (ppm)

Sulfate Content (ppm)

R-14-001 3 7.17 7,240 5.8 14.3 R-14-002 26 7.64 780 27.0 615.6 R-14-003 3 6.63 3,220 5.8 9.2

Based on the test results, the on-site subsurface materials are considered non-corrosive according to the Corrosion Guidelines by Caltrans Division of Engineering Services (2012). Standard Type II modified or Type I-P (MS) modified cement may be used for the concrete substructures. Caltrans Bridge Design Specifications (September 2003), Section 8.22, for the minimum cement factor and cover thickness may be used for the bridge substructure.


8.0 SEISMIC RECOMMENDATIONS

8.1 Seismic Sources The project site is located in a seismically active part of northern California. Many faults in the San Francisco Bay Area are capable of producing earthquakes, which may cause strong ground shaking at the site. The proposed bridge is located at coordinates of approximately 37.1116 degrees north latitude and 121.7365 degrees west longitude (Google Earth, 2013). Information of the closest faults to the bridge site in the area, based on the Caltrans ARS Online Report (V2, 2012), is summarized below in Table 8.1. The maximum magnitudes (Mmax) represent the largest earthquake that a fault is capable of generating and are related to the seismic moment. The attached Fault Map, Plate No. 4, presents the location of the fault system relative to the project site.

TABLE 8.1 - FAULT INFORMATION

Fault Fault ID

Maximum Magnitude, Mmax

Fault Type

Approx. Nearest Distance Rrup

(miles) Calaveras (Central) 2011 CFM 151 6.9 SS 8.32

Silver Creek 148 6.9 R 6.74 Cascade Fault 153 6.7 R 5.60 Sargent Fault

(Northwestern Section ) 164 7.0 SS 3.17

San Andreas (Santa Cruz Mts) 2011CFM 158 8.0 SS 5.92

Zayante-Vergeles Upper 2011 CFM 162 7.0 SS 9.50 R = Reverse fault SS = Strike-slip fault

8.2 Seismic Design Criteria

The Caltrans ARS Online program (V2, 2012) was used for producing acceleration response spectra. Development of the design ARS curve is based on several input parameters, including site location (longitude/latitude), average shear wave velocity for the top 100 feet of soils (Vs30), and other site parameters, such as fault characteristics and site-to-fault distances. The design methods incorporate both deterministic and probabilistic seismic hazards to produce the Design


Response Spectrum. The probabilistic response spectrum to be used for design of structures is based on the data from the USGS Interactive Deaggregations (Beta) program (2008) for a 5% in 50 years probability of exceedance (975-year return period) or the Caltrans ARS Online program (V2, 2012). The controlling spectrum (upper envelope) is adopted for the design response spectrum. The average shear wave velocity for the top 100 feet of soils at the project site was estimated by using the established correlations and guidelines in Caltrans Methodology for Developing Design Response Spectrum for Use in Seismic Design Recommendations (November 2012). An average shear wave velocity of 365 m/s was adopted. According to the Caltrans guidelines, the USGS Beta program should be checked and compared with the Caltrans ARS Online program for four spectral probabilistic values (at periods of 0, 0.3, 1 and 3 sec.). If the discrepancy between the USGS spectral acceleration values and the Caltrans Online results is less than 10%, then the probabilistic ARS curve generated by Caltrans ARS Online tool is acceptable for design. Otherwise, the probabilistic curve obtained from the USGS Beta program should be used. For this project, the probabilistic spectrum generated by Caltrans ARS program governs. The spectral acceleration values corresponding to periods of 1 sec. and longer have been increased by 20% to accounted for near fault effect, and linearly tapered to zero at a period of 0.5 sec. No adjustment for basin effect is required for this site. The generated Acceleration Response Spectra Comparison Curves are presented on Plate No. 5A and the Recommended ARS Curve is presented on Plate No. 5B.

8.3 Seismic Hazards Faulting The site is located outside the designated State of California “Earthquake Fault Zones (2010)” for active faulting and no mapped evidence of active or potentially active faulting was found for the site. The potential for fault rupture at the site appears to be low.


Liquefaction Liquefaction is a phenomenon in which saturated cohesionless soils are subject to a temporary but essentially total loss of shear strength under the reversing, cyclic shear stresses associated with earthquake shaking. Submerged cohesionless sands and low-plastic silts of low relative density are the type of soils that usually are susceptible to liquefaction. Clay is generally not susceptible to liquefaction. The liquefaction potential at the site was evaluated according to the procedure proposed by Youd, et al. (2001). Using the Caltrans ARS online and reference to the USGS Beta online program, peak ground acceleration was estimated to be 0.72g and the moment magnitude was estimated to be 7.9, representing a hazardous level of 5% exceedance in 50 years. The above seismic parameters were incorporated into the liquefaction analysis. Since the project site is primarily underlain by meta-sandstone and meta-graywacke bedrocks, and no saturated loose sand was encountered during drilling, liquefaction potential at the bridge site is considered low. It is our opinion that the liquefaction should not be a design concern for this project. Ground Subsidence Ground subsidence can occur as a result of "shakedown" when dry, low cohesion soils are subjected to earthquake vibrations of high amplitude. In general, significant deposits of loose sandy soils do not exist at the site; therefore, seismic induced ground subsidence is not considered a geologic hazard on the site. 9.0 EXISTING WATER WELL

An existing water well is located at west of the planned approach embankment, at approximate Sta. 12+71.00. Based on the plan and profile and cross section provided by the Designer, the water well is at about 20 feet to the toe of the embankment. The embankment at that location is about 35 feet wide on the top and less than 5 feet in height with a 3H:1V (horizontal to vertical) side slope. The


horizontal and vertical pressures induced by the embankment fill on the water well were analyzed using elastic solution as recommended in NAVFAC (1986). It is estimated that the induced maximum horizontal pressure is less than 400 psf, and the induced maximum vertical pressure is less than 200 psf. The induced pressures increase from zero at the ground surface to the maximum at about 23 feet below grade horizontally and 80 feet below grade vertically. Draft charts of embankment induced surcharge at water well location are included in Appendix B. Based on Boring R-14-005 drilled just north of the water well, the top of approximately 14 feet of soils were mostly composed of medium dense to very dense gravel overlying hard clay, and below about 14 feet, meta-sandstone meta-graywacke / shale bedrocks. Groundwater was encountered at about 7 feet below grade. No saturated soft clay and loose sand was encountered during drilling. It is estimated that the settlement and lateral movement caused by the embankment fill at the water well location is about half an inch above the bedrocks. The bedrock settlement can be ignored. It appears that the new embankment induced pressures and displacements at the existing water well location are insignificant. However, whether or not to keep the water well at its current location should be determined by the owner of the water well based on considerations such as tolerance of the water well. 10.0 AS-BUILT FOUNDATION DATA According to National Bridge Inventory (2010), the existing Little Uvas Bridge (Br. No. 37C0095) was built in 1928. The bridge has a single span with total length of 53.2 feet (16.2 m) and total width of 24.0 feet (7.3 m). The bridge is evaluated to be functionally obsolete by Caltrans (2010). The foundation information is not available. 11.0 PRELIMINARY FOUNDATION CONSIDERATION As discussed earlier, the subsurface profile at the bridge site predominately consists of medium dense to very dense granular soils and medium stiff to hard clayey materials underlain by meta


bedrocks (mélange). Based on the subsurface conditions and proposed structure, foundation system consisting of Caltrans cast-in-drilled-hole (CIDH) concrete piles (minimum diameter of 24 inches) is considered feasible for this project. It is our understanding that the abutment foundation design will be based on Working Stress Design (WSD) method using LRFD Service-I limit state load. Both the axial and lateral pile capacities should be analyzed during design phase to determine the controlling pile tip elevations. The piles will derive the capacity primarily from skin friction. A minimum pile spacing of three (3) times the pile diameter, center to center, is recommended. It is anticipated that pile tip elevations are controlled by lateral load. 12.0 INVESTIGATION LIMITATIONS Our services consist of professional opinions and recommendations made in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering principles and practices and are based on our site reconnaissance and the assumption that the subsurface conditions do not deviate from observed conditions. All work done is in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering principles and practices. No warranty, expressed or implied, of merchantability or fitness, is made or intended in connection with our work or by the furnishing of oral or written reports or findings. The scope of our services did not include any environmental assessment or investigation for the presence or absence of hazardous or toxic materials in structures, soil, surface water, groundwater or air, below or around this site. Unanticipated soil conditions are commonly encountered and cannot be fully determined by taking soil samples and excavating test borings; different soil conditions may require that additional expenditures be made during construction to attain a properly constructed project. Some contingency fund is thus recommended to accommodate these possible extra costs. This report has been prepared for the proposed project as described earlier, to assist the engineer in the design of this project. In the event any changes in the design or location of the facilities are planned, or if any variations or undesirable conditions are encountered during construction, our


conclusions and recommendations shall not be considered valid unless the changes or variations are reviewed and our recommendations modified or approved by us in writing. This report is issued with the understanding that it is the designer's responsibility to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are incorporated into the project and that necessary steps are also taken to see that the recommendations are carried out in the field. The findings in this report are valid as of the present date. However, changes in the subsurface conditions can occur with the passage of time, whether they are due to natural processes or to the works of man, on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in applicable or appropriate standards occur, whether they result from legislation or from the broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, the findings in this report might be invalidated, wholly or partially, by changes outside of our control. Respectfully submitted, PARIKH CONSULTANTS, INC. Peter Haoli Wei, PE, GE 2922 Y. David Wang, PhD, PE 52911 Project Engineer Project Manager

PARIKH CONSULTANTS, INC.GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTSMATERIALS TESTING JOB NO.: 2008-127-010 PLATE NO.: 1

LITTLE UVAS CREEK BRIDGE REPLACEMENT SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

PROJECT LOCATION MAP

Approximate Project Location

PARIKH CONSULTANTS, INC.GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTSMATERIALS TESTING JOB NO.: 2008-127-010


PLATE NO.: 2

SITE PLAN

R-14-002

R-14-001

R-14-005

LEGEND:

Approx. Boring Location

R-14-004

R-14-003



PLATE NO.: 3

Source: Geologic Maps and Structure Sections of the Southwestern Santa Clara Valley and Southern Santa Cruz Mountains, Santa Clara and Santa Cruz Counties, California by R. J. McLaughlin, et al, 2001 USGS Miscellaneous Field Studies Map MF-2373

Legend: Qhf - Alluvium fan deposits (Holocene) Qpf - Alluvium fan deposits (Pleistocene) fm - Melange of the central belt (Upper Cretaceous) fpv - Volcanic rocks (Lower Cretaceous)

GEOLOGIC MAP




PLATE NO.: 4

Legend: 151 - Calaveras (Central) 2011 CFM (Mmax=6.9) 148 - Silver Creek (Mmax=6.9) 153 - Cascade Fault (Mmax=6.7) 164 - Sargent Fault (Northwestern Section) (Mmax=7.0) 158 - San Andreas (Santa Cruz Mts) 2011 CFM (Mmax=8.0) 162 - Zayante-Vergeles Upper 2011 CFM (Mmax=7.0) Source: Caltrans ARS Online (V2, 2012) FAULT MAP


153

158

164

148 151

162

3/31/2014 Acceleration_Response_Spectrum_V2.0 Little Uvas Creek Bridge.xlsxT:\Ongoing Projects\2008\208127 C+D Engineers Little Uvas Bridge SCC\analysis little uvas Creek\

Site InformationLatitude: 37.1116 0.0 0.366 0.401 0.475 0.225 0.725 0.659

Longitude -121.7365 0.1 0.635 0.684 0.857 0.422 1.367 #N/A

VS30 (m/s) = 365 0.2 0.810 0.864 1.061 0.523 1.644 #N/A

Z 1.0 (m) = N/A 0.3 0.800 0.853 1.001 0.481 1.584 1.429

Z 2.5 (km) = N/A 0.5 0.713 0.741 0.801 0.373 1.325 #N/A

1.0 0.605 0.545 0.521 0.197 1.007 0.935

9.3 2.0 0.347 0.263 0.195 0.085 0.532 #N/A

3.0 0.227 0.160 0.095 0.049 0.346 0.334

4.0 0.165 0.111 0.059 0.033 0.249 #N/A

5.0 0.131 0.085 0.044 0.025 0.199 #N/A

Source:

1. Caltrans ARS Online tool (V2, http://dap3.dot.ca.gov/shake_stable/v2/index.php)

2. USGS Deaggregation 2008 beta (http://eqint.cr.usgs.gov/deaggint/2008/index.php)

Plate No.: 5AProject No.: 2008-127-010

3. Caltrans Methodology for Developing Design Response Spectrum for Use in Seismic Design Recommendations, November 2012

Little Uvas Creek Bridge Replacement Santa Clara County, California

Sargent Fault (Northwestern

Section)

Minimum Deterministic

Final Adjusted Spectral Accelerations (g)

Near Fault Factor, Derived from USGS Deagg. Dist (km) =

Cascade FaultPeriod (sec)

San Andreas (Santa Cruz

Mts) 2011 CFM

Caltrans Probabilistic

USGS Deaggregation

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0

Spec

tral A

ccel

erat

ion,

Sa

(g)

Period (sec)

ACCELERATION RESPONSE SPECTRUM COMPARISON (Deterministic & Probablistic Curves)

USGS Deaggregation

Caltrans Probabilistic

San Andreas (Santa Cruz Mts) 2011 CFM

Sargent Fault (Northwestern Section)

Cascade Fault

Minimum Deterministic

3/31/2014 Acceleration_Response_Spectrum_V2.0 Little Uvas Creek Bridge.xlsxT:\Ongoing Projects\2008\208127 C+D Engineers Little Uvas Bridge SCC\analysis little uvas Creek\

Site Information Recommended Response Spectrum

Latitude: 37.1116

Longitude -121.7365

VS30 (m/s) = 365 0.0 0.725 1 1 0.725

Z 1.0 (m) = N/A 0.1 1.367 1 1 1.367

Z 2.5 (km) = N/A 0.2 1.644 1 1 1.644

0.3 1.584 1 1 1.584

9.3 0.5 1.325 1 1 1.325

1.0 0.839 1.2 1 1.007

2.0 0.443 1.2 1 0.532

Governing Curve: 3.0 0.288 1.2 1 0.346

4.0 0.208 1.2 1 0.250

5.0 0.166 1.2 1 0.199

Source:

1. Caltrans ARS Online tool (V2, http://dap3.dot.ca.gov/shake_stable/v2/index.php)

2. USGS Deaggregation 2008 beta (http://eqint.cr.usgs.gov/deaggint/2008/index.php)

Project No.: 2008-127-010 Plate No.: 5B

Near Fault Factor, Derived from USGS Deagg. Dist (km) =

Caltrans Online Probabilistic ARS

3. Caltrans Methodology for Developing Design Response Spectrum for Use in Seismic Design Recommendations, November 2012

Little Uvas Creek Bridge Replacement Santa Clara County, California

Period (sec)

Caltrans Online Probabilistic

Spectral Acceleration (g)

Adjusted for Near Fault Effect

Adjusted For Basin Effect

Final Adjusted Spectral

Acceleration (g)

Note:

The curve has been modified to account for the proximity of the site to the fault. The spectral accelerations corresponding to periods of 1.0 sec. and longer have been increased 20% and a liner interpolation is used between 0.5 and 1.0 sec.

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0

Spec

tral A

ccel

erat

ion,

Sa

(g)

Period (sec)

RECOMMENDED ACCELERATION RESPONSE SPECTRUM Probabilistic Approach (5% Damping)

APPENDIX A

Job No.: 2008-127-010

LITTLE UVAS CREEK BRIDGE REPLACEMENT

SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

GROUP SYMBOLS AND NAMES

DRILLING METHOD SYMBOLS

Auger Drilling

FIELD AND LABORATORY TESTS

WATER LEVEL SYMBOLS

Dynamic Coneor Hand Driven Diamond CoreRotary Drilling

Static Water Level Reading (long-term)

Shelby Tube

NX Rock Core

Bulk Sample

Piston Sampler

HQ Rock Core

Other (see remarks)

Static Water Level Reading (short-term)

First Water Level Reading (during drilling)

SILTY, CLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL

CLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL

SILTY SAND with GRAVEL

COBBLES

Standard Penetration Test (SPT)

Well-graded GRAVEL with SAND

Well-graded GRAVEL with SILT

Well-graded GRAVEL with CLAY and SAND(or SILTY CLAY and SAND)

Well-graded SAND with CLAY (or SILTY CLAY)

Poorly graded GRAVEL

Poorly graded GRAVEL with CLAY(or SILTY CLAY)

Poorly graded SAND with SILT

Poorly graded SAND with CLAY (or SILTY CLAY)

Poorly graded SAND with CLAY and GRAVEL(or SILTY CLAY and GRAVEL)

Lean CLAY

ORGANIC elastic SILT with SAND

SANDY ORGANIC elastic SILT with GRAVELGRAVELLY ORGANIC elastic SILT

GRAVELLY ORGANIC elastic SILT with SAND

GW-GC

GP-GM

GP-GC

GM

SAMPLER GRAPHIC SYMBOLS

OL

OL

CH

MH

OH

OL/OH

ORGANIC SOIL

ORGANIC SOIL with SAND

ORGANIC SOIL with GRAVEL

SANDY ORGANIC SOIL

SANDY ORGANIC SOIL with GRAVELGRAVELLY ORGANIC SOIL

GRAVELLY ORGANIC SOIL with SAND

OH

SM

SC

GW

GW-GM

CL

CL-ML

ML

COBBLES and BOULDERSBOULDERS

PT

SILTY GRAVEL

CLAYEY GRAVEL

SILTY, CLAYEY GRAVEL

SILTY SAND

CLAYEY SAND

SILTY CLAY

SILTY CLAY with SAND

SILTY CLAY with GRAVEL

SANDY SILTY CLAY

SANDY SILTY CLAY with GRAVELGRAVELLY SILTY CLAY

GRAVELLY SILTY CLAY with SAND

SILT with SAND

SILT with GRAVEL

SANDY SILT

SANDY SILT with GRAVEL

PEAT

Well-graded GRAVEL with SILT and SAND

Well-graded GRAVEL with CLAY (or SILTY CLAY)

Well-graded SAND

Well-graded SAND with GRAVEL

Well-graded SAND with SILT and GRAVEL

Poorly graded GRAVEL with SAND

Poorly graded GRAVEL with SILT and SAND

Poorly graded GRAVEL with CLAY and SAND(or SILTY CLAY and SAND)

Poorly graded SAND

Poorly graded SAND with GRAVEL

Poorly graded SAND with SILT and GRAVEL

SANDY lean CLAY

GRAVELLY lean CLAY

SANDY ORGANIC fat CLAY with GRAVELGRAVELLY ORGANIC fat CLAY

GRAVELLY ORGANIC fat CLAY with SAND

Elastic SILT

ORGANIC elastic SILT with GRAVEL

SANDY elastic ELASTIC SILT

SILTY, CLAYEY SAND

Group Names

SC-SM

Graphic / Symbol Graphic / Symbol Group Names

GC

GP

GC-GM

SP-SC

SW

SP

SW-SM

SILTY, CLAYEY GRAVEL with SAND

CLAYEY GRAVEL with SAND

SILTY GRAVEL with SAND

Standard California Sampler

Modified California Sampler

Well-graded SAND with SILT

SW-SC

SP-SM

Consolidation (ASTM D 2435-04)

Compaction Curve (CTM 216 - 06)

Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, Plasticity Index(AASHTO T 89-02, AASHTO T 90-00)

Collapse Potential (ASTM D 5333-03)

Sand Equivalent (CTM 217 - 99)

Corrosion, Sulfates, Chlorides (CTM 643 - 99; CTM 417- 06; CTM 422 - 06)

GRAVELLY SILT

GRAVELLY SILT with SAND

SILT

ORGANIC SILT with SAND

ORGANIC SILT with GRAVEL

SANDY ORGANIC SILT

C

Consolidated Undrained Triaxial (ASTM D 4767-02)

Lean CLAY with SAND

Lean CLAY with GRAVEL

SANDY lean CLAY with GRAVEL

ORGANIC lean CLAY

GRAVELLY ORGANIC lean CLAY

GRAVELLY ORGANIC lean CLAY with SAND

Fat CLAY

Elastic SILT with GRAVEL

SANDY elastic SILT

SANDY elastic SILT with GRAVELGRAVELLY elastic SILT

GRAVELLY elastic SILT with SAND

ORGANIC elastic SILT

SANDY ORGANIC SILT with GRAVELGRAVELLY ORGANIC SILT

GRAVELLY ORGANIC SILT with SAND

ORGANIC SILT

PI

Particle Size Analysis (ASTM D 422-63 [2002])

Point Load Index (ASTM D 5731-05)

R-Value (CTM 301 - 00)

Specific Gravity (AASHTO T 100-06)

Shrinkage Limit (ASTM D 427-04)

Swell Potential (ASTM D 4546-03)

Pocket Torvane

Unconfined Compression - Soil (ASTM D 2166-06)Unconfined Compression - Rock (ASTM D 2938-95)

CL

CU

PL

Pressure MeterPM

Pocket Penetrometer

SG

SW

TV

UC

Well-graded SAND with CLAY and GRAVEL(or SILTY CLAY and GRAVEL)

ORGANIC lean CLAY with SAND

ORGANIC lean CLAY with GRAVEL

SANDY ORGANIC lean CLAY

SANDY ORGANIC lean CLAY with GRAVEL

Fat CLAY with SAND

Fat CLAY with GRAVEL

SANDY fat CLAY

SANDY fat CLAY with GRAVELGRAVELLY fat CLAY

GRAVELLY fat CLAY with SAND

ORGANIC fat CLAY

ORGANIC fat CLAY with SAND

ORGANIC fat CLAY with GRAVEL

SANDY ORGANIC fat CLAY

Elastic SILT with SAND

UU Unconsolidated Undrained Triaxial(ASTM D 2850-03)

UW Unit Weight (ASTM D 4767-04)

Vane Shear (AASHTO T 223-96 [2004])VS

CP

PP

R

SL

CR

SE

Direct Shear (ASTM D 3080-04)DS

Expansion Index (ASTM D 4829-03)EI

Moisture Content (ASTM D 2216-05)M

OC Organic Content (ASTM D 2974-07)

Permeability (CTM 220 - 05)P

PA

Well-graded GRAVEL

Poorly graded GRAVEL with SILT

GRAVELLY lean CLAY with SAND

BORING RECORD LEGEND

Date: 3/28/2014

A-i

Plate:This log is part of the report prepared by Parikh Consultants, Inc. for the named project and should be read together with that report for completeinterpretation. This summary applies only at the location of this boring and at the time of drilling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other locationsand may change at this location with the passage of time. The data presented is a simplification of actual conditions encountered.

Geotechnical & Materials EngineeringPARIKH CONSULTANTS, INC.

Job No.: 2008-127-010



2.0 - 4.0

> 4.0

2.0 - 4.0

PocketPenetrometer (tsf)

Soft 0.25 - 0.50 0.25 - 0.50 0.12 - 0.25

< 0.25

0.25 - 0.500.50 - 1.00.50 - 1.0Medium Stiff

Hard

Very Stiff

Low

Very Loose

Loose

SPT N60 - Value (blows / foot)

PLASTICITY OF FINE-GRAINED SOILS

Cobble

Coarse

Fine No. 4 Sieve to 3/4 inch

Coarse No. 10 Sieve to No. 4 Sieve

No. 40 Sieve to No. 10 SieveMedium

Fine No. 200 Sieve to No. 40 Sieve

0.50 - 1.01.0 - 2.01.0 - 2.0Stiff

CONSISTENCY OF COHESIVE SOILS

SizeDescriptor

Silt and Clay Passing No. 200 Sieve

Absence of moisture, dusty, dry to the touchDry

Damp but no visible water

Descriptor

Dense

Medium Dense

5 - 10

11 - 30

0 - 4

31 - 50

Descriptor

Moist

MOISTUREAPPARENT DENSITY OF COHESIONLESS SOILS

Wet

> 50Very Dense

Criteria

Visible free water, usually soil is belowwater table

Descriptor Field ApproximationUnconfined CompressiveStrength (tsf) Torvane (tsf)

Easily penetrated several inches by thumb

Can be penetrated several inches by thumbwith moderate effort

Readily indented by thumb but penetrated onlywith great effort

PERCENT OR PROPORTION OF SOILS

Sand

Boulder

Criteria

Trace

Gravel

Descriptor

> 12 inches

3/4 inch to 3 inches

3 to 12 inches

5 to 10%Few

15 to 25%Little

30 to 45%Some

50 to 100%Mostly

Nonplastic

High

Easily penetrated several inches by fist

Readily indented by thumbnail

Indented by thumbnail with difficulty

Descriptor Criteria

A 1/8-inch thread cannot be rolled at any water content.

The thread can barely be rolled, and the lump cannot be formed when drier than the plastic limit.

The thread is easy to roll, and not much time is required to reach the plastic limit; it cannot be rerolled after reaching theplastic limit. The lump crumbles when drier than the plastic limit.

CEMENTATION

Descriptor Criteria

Medium

Strong

Moderate

Weak

Crumbles or breaks with considerablefinger pressure.

Particles are present but estimatedto be less than 5%

Will not crumble or break with fingerpressure.

Crumbles or breaks with handling or littlefinger pressure.

SOIL PARTICLE SIZE

It takes considerable time rolling and kneading to reach the plastic limit. The thread can be rerolled several times afterreaching the plastic limit. The lump can be formed without crumbling when drier than the plastic limit.

Very Soft < 0.25 < 0.12

1.0 - 2.0

> 2.0> 4.0

NOTE: This legend sheet provides descriptors and associatedcriteria for required soil description components only.

REFERENCE: Caltrans Soil and Rock Logging, Classification, andPresentation Manual (2010).


Date: 3/28/2014

A-ii



Job No.: 2008-127-010



WEATHERING DESCRIPTORS FOR INTACT ROCKDiagnostic Features

Texture and Solutioning

Descriptor Body of Rock Fracture Surfaces

Chemical Weathering-Discoloration-Oxidation

Texture Solutioning General Characteristics

Decomposed Discolored of oxidizedthroughout, but resistantminerals such as quartz maybe unaltered; all feldspars andFe-Mg minerals arecompletely altered to clay

Complete separation ofgrain boundaries(disaggregated)

Resembles a soil; partial orcomplete remnant rock structuremay be preserved; leaching ofsoluble minerals usuallycomplete

Can be granulated by hand.Resistant minerals such asquartz may be present as"stringers" or "dikes".

IntenselyWeathered

Discoloration or oxidationthroughout; all feldspars andFe-Mg minerals are altered toclay to some extent; orchemical alteration producesin situ disaggregation (refer tograin boundary conditions)

All fracturesurfaces arediscolored oroxidized; surfacesare friable

Partial separation, rock isfriable; in semi-aridconditions, granitics aredisaggregated

Altered bychemicaldisintegrationsuch as viahydration orargillation

Leaching ofsoluble mineralsmay be complete

Dull sound when struck withhammer; usually can be brokenwith moderate to heavy manualpressure or by light hammerblow without reference to planesof weakness such as incipient orhairline fractures or veinlets.Rock is significantly weakened.

ModeratelyWeathered

Discoloration or oxidationextends from fractures usuallythroughout; Fe-Mg mineralsare "rusty"; feldspar crystalsare "cloudy"

Mechanical Weatheringand Grain Boundary

Conditions

Very thickly bedded

ROCK GRAPHIC SYMBOLS

Descriptor Thickness or Spacing

Massive

Thickly beddedModerately beddedThinly beddedVery thinly beddedLaminated

> 10 ft3 to 10 ft

< 3/8 inch

1 to 3 ft3-5/8 inches to 1 ft1-1/4 to 3-5/8 inches3/8 inch to 1-1/4 inches

BEDDING SPACING

All fracturesurfaces arediscolored oroxidized

Partial separation ofboundaries visible

Generallypreserved

Soluble mineralsmay be mostlyleached

Hammer does not ring whenrock is struck. Body of rock isslightly weakened.

SlightlyWeathered

Discoloration or oxidation islimited to surface of, or shortdistance from, fractures; somefeldspar crystals are dull

Minor to completediscoloration oroxidation of mostsurfaces

No visible separation,intact (tight)

Preserved Minor leaching ofsome solubleminerals may benoted

Hammer rings when crystallinerocks are struck. Body of rocknot weakened.

Hammer rings when crystallinerocks are struck.

No solutioningNo changeNo separation, intact(tight)

IGNEOUS ROCK

SEDIMENTARY ROCK

METAMORPHIC ROCK

No discolorationor oxidation

No discoloration, not oxidizedFresh

Note: Combination descriptors (such as "slightly weathered to fresh") are used where equal distribution of both weathering characteristics is present oversignificant intervals or where characteristics present are "in between" the diagnostic feature. However, combination descriptors should not be used wheresignificant identifiable zones can be delineated. Only two adjacent descriptors shall be combined. "Very intensely weathered" is the combination descriptor for"decomposed to intensely weathered".

RELATIVE STRENGTH OF INTACT ROCK ROCK HARDNESS

Extremely Strong

Descriptor

Very Strong

Strong

Medium Strong

Weak

Very Weak

Extremely Weak

14,500 - 30,000

7,000 - 14,500

3,500 - 7,000

700 - 3,500

150 - 700

> 30,000

< 150

Descriptor Criteria

Extremely Hard

Very hard

Hard

ModeratelyHard

Very Soft

Soft

Moderately Soft

Specimen can be scratched with pocket knife or sharp pick with heavypressure; heavy hammer blows required to break specimen

Specimen can be readily indented, grooved, or gouged with fingernail, orcarved with pocket knife; breaks with light hand pressure

UniaxialCompressive Strength (psi)

Specimen cannot be scratched with pocket knife or sharp pick; can only bechipped with repeated heavy hammer blowsSpecimen cannot be scratched with pocket knife or sharp pick; breaks withrepeated heavy hammer blows

Specimen can be grooved or gouged with pocket knife or sharp pick with lightpressure, breaks with light to moderate hand pressure

Specimen can be scratched with pocket knife or sharp pick with light or moderatepressure; breaks with moderate hammer blowsSpecimen can be grooved 1/6 in. with pocket knife or sharp pick with moderate orheavy pressure; breaks with light hammer blow or heavy hand pressure

Lengths mostly in range of 4 in. to 1 ft, with most lengths about 8 in.

No fracturesLengths greater 3 ft

Lengths average from 1 in. to 4 in. with scattered fragmented intervalswith lengths less than 4 in.

Lengths from 1 to 3 ft, few lengths outside that range

Mostly chips and fragments with few scattered short core lengths

Unfractured

Moderately FracturedIntensely Fractured

Very Slightly FracturedSlightly Fractured

Very Intensely Fractured

Criteria

FRACTURE DENSITY

Descriptor

Length of the recovered core pieces (in.)

CORE RECOVERY CALCULATION (%)

Total length of core run (in.)x 100

REFERENCE: Caltrans Soil and Rock Logging,Classification, and Presentation Manual (2010).

RQD CALCULATION (%)

Length of intact core pieces > 4 in.Total length of core run (in.)

x 100


Date: 3/28/2014

A-iii



CR

PI

17

15

16

9

10

101

116

112

1

2

3

4

5

7424

51010

141732

151920

50/3"

SILTY SAND with GRAVEL (SM/SM); medium dense;brown; moist; coarse to fine GRAVEL; coarse to fineSAND; Gravel size up to 2.5 inches.

Lean CLAY (CL/CL); stiff; brown; wet; high plasticityfines; (LL=46, PI=28).

Lean CLAY with SAND (CL/CL); hard; gray; moist; fineSAND; medium to high plasticity fines.

METAMORPHIC ROCK, METAMORPHOSEDSANDSTONE, Meta-Graywacke / Shale, fine sand,hard, gray, moist (driving SPT sampler only, no coresamples).

Bottom of borehole at 18.5 ft bgs/Elev. 579.5 ft.

Free groundwater was encountered at about 6 ft duringdrilling

This Boring Record was developed in accordance withthe Caltrans Soil & Rock Logging, Classification, andPresentation Manual (2010) except as noted on the Soilor Rock Legend or below.

AFTER DRILLING (DATE)

SURFACE ELEVATION

~598.0 ftDRILLING METHOD

Rotary Wash

GROUNDWATERREADINGS

BOREHOLE LOCATION (Lat/Long or North/East and Datum)

WGS84HOLE ID

R-14-001

DURING DRILLING

6.0 ft

HAMMER EFFICIENCY, ERi

65%SAMPLER TYPE(S) AND SIZE(S) (ID)

MC (2.5" I.D.) / SPT (1.4" I.D.)TOTAL DEPTH OF BORING

18.5 ft

BOREHOLE DIAMETER

5 inSPT HAMMER TYPE

Auto 140 lbs / 30 inches

DRILL RIG

Failing 1500

BOREHOLE BACKFILL AND COMPLETION

DRILLING CONTRACTOR

Pitcher Drilling Co.

LOGGED BY

L. S. BhangooBEGIN DATE

3-21-14COMPLETION DATE

3-21-14BOREHOLE LOCATION (Offset, Station, Line)

Mat

eria

lG

raph

ics

Cas

ing

Dep

th

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft)

596.00

594.00

592.00

590.00

588.00

586.00

584.00

582.00

580.00

578.00

576.00

574.00

DE

PT

H (

ft)

A-1

Remarks

Dri

lling

Met

hod

RQ

D (

%)

Rec

over

y (%

)

Moi

stur

eC

onte

nt (

%)

Dry

Uni

t W

eigh

t(p

cf)

Job No.: 2008-127-010Date: 3/28/2014

Sam

ple

Dep

th

Sam

ple

Num

ber

Blo

ws

per

6 in

.

Blo

ws

per

foot

DESCRIPTION

LOG OF TEST BORING

She

ar S

tren

gth

(tsf

)




PC

I-C

T 5

BR

200

8-12

7-01

0 (N

EW

201

4).

GP

J T

EM

PLA

TE

7-2

2-11

.GD

T 4

/9/1

4


28

20

49

39

REF

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

PI

PA

5

10

11

12

10

103

120

117

125

1

2

3

4

5

101115

223242

272432

243240

2450/6"

SANDY lean CLAY with GRAVEL (CL); very stiff;yellowish brown; moist; coarse to fine GRAVEL; coarseto fine SAND; low plasticity fines; (fill).

(LL=25, PI=10).

SANDY lean CLAY (CL); hard; yellowish brown; moist;coarse to fine SAND; low plasticity fines; (fill).

SILTY SAND with GRAVEL (SM); dense; brown; moist;coarse to fine GRAVEL; coarse to fine SAND; (possiblefill).

(+#4=39.3%, -#200=14.5%).

SANDY lean CLAY with GRAVEL (CL); hard; brown;moist; fine GRAVEL; coarse to fine SAND; low plasticityfines.

METAMORPHIC ROCK, METAMORPHOSEDSANDSTONE, Meta-Graywacke, hard, gray, moist,(driving SPT sampler only, no core samples).


SURFACE ELEVATION


Rotary Wash

GROUNDWATERREADINGS


WGS84HOLE ID

R-14-002

DURING DRILLING



MC (2.5" I.D.) / SPT (1.4" I.D.) / CORE (2.5" I.D.)TOTAL DEPTH OF BORING

70.5 ft

BOREHOLE DIAMETER

5 inSPT HAMMER TYPE


DRILL RIG

Failing 1500


Neat Cement Grout Backfill

DRILLING CONTRACTOR


LOGGED BY




Mat

eria

lG

raph

ics

Cas

ing

Dep

th

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft)

616.00

614.00

612.00

610.00

608.00

606.00

604.00

602.00

600.00

598.00

596.00

594.00

DE

PT

H (

ft)

A-2A

Remarks

Dri

lling

Met

hod

RQ

D (

%)

Rec

over

y (%

)

Moi

stur

eC

onte

nt (

%)

Dry

Uni

t W

eigh

t(p

cf)

Job No.: 2008-127-010Date: 3/28/2014

Sam

ple

Dep

th

Sam

ple

Num

ber

Blo

ws

per

6 in

.

Blo

ws

per

foot

DESCRIPTION

LOG OF TEST BORING

She

ar S

tren

gth

(tsf

)




PC

I-C

T 5

BR

200

8-12

7-01

0 (N

EW

201

4).

GP

J T

EM

PLA

TE

7-2

2-11

.GD

T 4

/28

/14


(continued)

26

74

56

72

50

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

CRCore samples from 26to 70.5 ft

UC

0

23

10

17

21

36

33

75

25

70

69

83

75

94

83

97

25

70

69

83

75

94

83

97

117

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

4450/6"

METAMORPHIC ROCK (continued).

METAMORPHIC ROCK, METAMORPHOSEDSANDSTONE, Meta-Graywacke, fine sand, dark gray,moderately weathered, moderately hard to hard,intensely to moderately fractured, with thin veins of whitequartz, 100-150 psi, (sheared Shale moderately soft).Sheared Shale.

Sandstone, 150-200 psi.

Sheared Shale beds/slicks.

150 psi.

100 psi.

Sandstone, 150 psi.

Sheared Shale.

Sandstone (UC=8,805 psi).

Mat

eria

lG

raph

ics

Cas

ing

Dep

th

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft)

592.00

590.00

588.00

586.00

584.00

582.00

580.00

578.00

576.00

574.00

572.00

570.00

568.00

566.00

564.00

DE

PT

H (

ft)

A-2B

Remarks

Dri

lling

Met

hod

RQ

D (

%)

Rec

over

y (%

)

Moi

stur

eC

onte

nt (

%)

Dry

Uni

t W

eigh

t(p

cf)

Job No.: 2008-127-010Date: 3/28/2014

Sam

ple

Dep

th

Sam

ple

Num

ber

Blo

ws

per

6 in

.

Blo

ws

per

foot

DESCRIPTION

LOG OF TEST BORING

She

ar S

tren

gth

(tsf

)




PC

I-C

T 5

BR

200

8-12

7-01

0 (N

EW

201

4).

GP

J T

EM

PLA

TE

7-2

2-11

.GD

T 4

/28

/14


(continued)

5025

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

75

72

42

8

27

97

97

83

75

80

97

97

83

75

80

14

15

16

17

18

14

15

16

17

18


200 psi.

Sheared Shale.

Sandstone.


Free groundwater was not measured due to rotarycoring method during drilling


Mat

eria

lG

raph

ics

Cas

ing

Dep

th

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft)

562.00

560.00

558.00

556.00

554.00

552.00

550.00

548.00

546.00

544.00

542.00

540.00

538.00

536.00

534.00

DE

PT

H (

ft)

A-2C

Remarks

Dri

lling

Met

hod

RQ

D (

%)

Rec

over

y (%

)

Moi

stur

eC

onte

nt (

%)

Dry

Uni

t W

eigh

t(p

cf)

Job No.: 2008-127-010Date: 3/28/2014

Sam

ple

Dep

th

Sam

ple

Num

ber

Blo

ws

per

6 in

.

Blo

ws

per

foot

DESCRIPTION

LOG OF TEST BORING

She

ar S

tren

gth

(tsf

)




PC

I-C

T 5

BR

200

8-12

7-01

0 (N

EW

201

4).

GP

J T

EM

PLA

TE

7-2

2-11

.GD

T 4

/28

/14


56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

CR

PA

Core samples from 15to 55 ft

27

40

75

100

75

100

17

12

14

92

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

227

142018

50/3"

Lean CLAY (CL); medium stiff; brown; moist; fine SAND;medium plasticity fines.

SILTY SAND with GRAVEL (SM); medium dense;brown; wet; coarse to fine GRAVEL; coarse to fineSAND.

(+#4=38.2%, -#200=15.7%).

Very dense.

METAMORPHIC ROCK, METAMORPHOSEDSANDSTONE, Meta-Graywacke, fine sand, dark gray,moderately weathered, moderately hard to hard,intensely to moderately fractured, with thin white quartzveins, with moderately bedded sheard Shale, 100-150psi, (sheared Shale moderately soft).

Dip ~65 deg.


SURFACE ELEVATION


Rotary Wash

GROUNDWATERREADINGS


WGS84HOLE ID

R-14-003

DURING DRILLING

12.5 ft



MC (2.5" I.D.) / SPT (1.4" I.D.) / CORE (2.5" I.D.)TOTAL DEPTH OF BORING

55.0 ft

BOREHOLE DIAMETER

5 inSPT HAMMER TYPE


DRILL RIG

Failing 1500


Neat Cement Grout Backfill

DRILLING CONTRACTOR


LOGGED BY




Mat

eria

lG

raph

ics

Cas

ing

Dep

th

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft)

592.00

590.00

588.00

586.00

584.00

582.00

580.00

578.00

576.00

574.00

572.00

570.00

DE

PT

H (

ft)

A-3A

Remarks

Dri

lling

Met

hod

RQ

D (

%)

Rec

over

y (%

)

Moi

stur

eC

onte

nt (

%)

Dry

Uni

t W

eigh

t(p

cf)

Job No.: 2008-127-010Date: 3/28/2014

Sam

ple

Dep

th

Sam

ple

Num

ber

Blo

ws

per

6 in

.

Blo

ws

per

foot

DESCRIPTION

LOG OF TEST BORING

She

ar S

tren

gth

(tsf

)




PC

I-C

T 5

BR

200

8-12

7-01

0 (N

EW

201

4).

GP

J T

EM

PLA

TE

7-2

2-11

.GD

T 4

/28

/14


(continued)

9

38

REF

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UC

37

17

23

53

37

33

100

87

100

100

100

100

100

87

100

100

100

100

6

7

8

9

10

11

6

7

8

9

10

11


Shale, pebbly.

Sandstone with thinly bedded sheared Shale.

Dip ~20 to 30 deg.

(UC=10,995 psi).Dip ~50 deg.

Free groundwater was encountered at about 12.5 ftduring drilling


Bottom of borehole at 55.0 ft bgs/Elev. 539 ft.

Mat

eria

lG

raph

ics

Cas

ing

Dep

th

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft)

568.00

566.00

564.00

562.00

560.00

558.00

556.00

554.00

552.00

550.00

548.00

546.00

544.00

542.00

540.00

DE

PT

H (

ft)

A-3B

Remarks

Dri

lling

Met

hod

RQ

D (

%)

Rec

over

y (%

)

Moi

stur

eC

onte

nt (

%)

Dry

Uni

t W

eigh

t(p

cf)

Job No.: 2008-127-010Date: 3/28/2014

Sam

ple

Dep

th

Sam

ple

Num

ber

Blo

ws

per

6 in

.

Blo

ws

per

foot

DESCRIPTION

LOG OF TEST BORING

She

ar S

tren

gth

(tsf

)




PC

I-C

T 5

BR

200

8-12

7-01

0 (N

EW

201

4).

GP

J T

EM

PLA

TE

7-2

2-11

.GD

T 4

/28

/14


25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

UC28

16

11

17

15

99

114

1

2

3

4

5

335

111235

123250

253443

658

Lean CLAY (CL); medium stiff; dark brown; moist.

(UC=0.55 tsf).

Hard.

GRAVELLY lean CLAY with SAND (CL); hard; browngray; moist; coarse to fine GRAVEL; coarse to fineSAND.

METAMORPHIC ROCK, METAMORPHOSEDSANDSTONE, Meta-Graywacke / Shale, fine sand,hard, gray, moist (driving SPT sampler only, no coresamples).

Stiff.

UC =0.55


SURFACE ELEVATION


Rotary Wash

GROUNDWATERREADINGS


WGS84HOLE ID

R-14-004

DURING DRILLING




26.5 ft

BOREHOLE DIAMETER

5 inSPT HAMMER TYPE


DRILL RIG

Failing 1500


DRILLING CONTRACTOR


LOGGED BY




Mat

eria

lG

raph

ics

Cas

ing

Dep

th

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft)

588.00

586.00

584.00

582.00

580.00

578.00

576.00

574.00

572.00

570.00

568.00

566.00

DE

PT

H (

ft)

A-4A

Remarks

Dri

lling

Met

hod

RQ

D (

%)

Rec

over

y (%

)

Moi

stur

eC

onte

nt (

%)

Dry

Uni

t W

eigh

t(p

cf)

Job No.: 2008-127-010Date: 3/28/2014

Sam

ple

Dep

th

Sam

ple

Num

ber

Blo

ws

per

6 in

.

Blo

ws

per

foot

DESCRIPTION

LOG OF TEST BORING

She

ar S

tren

gth

(tsf

)




PC

I-C

T 5

BR

200

8-12

7-01

0 (N

EW

201

4).

GP

J T

EM

PLA

TE

7-2

2-11

.GD

T 4

/3/1

4


(continued)

8

47

82

77

13

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

8

6 2330

50/4"



Free groundwater was not measured due to rotarycoring method during drilling


Mat

eria

lG

raph

ics

Cas

ing

Dep

th

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft)

564.00

562.00

560.00

558.00

556.00

554.00

552.00

550.00

548.00

546.00

544.00

542.00

540.00

538.00

536.00

DE

PT

H (

ft)

A-4B

Remarks

Dri

lling

Met

hod

RQ

D (

%)

Rec

over

y (%

)

Moi

stur

eC

onte

nt (

%)

Dry

Uni

t W

eigh

t(p

cf)

Job No.: 2008-127-010Date: 3/28/2014

Sam

ple

Dep

th

Sam

ple

Num

ber

Blo

ws

per

6 in

.

Blo

ws

per

foot

DESCRIPTION

LOG OF TEST BORING

She

ar S

tren

gth

(tsf

)




PC

I-C

T 5

BR

200

8-12

7-01

0 (N

EW

201

4).

GP

J T

EM

PLA

TE

7-2

2-11

.GD

T 4

/3/1

4


80/4"25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

PA5

12

12

11

16

1

2

3

4

5

111517

4150

192243

2050/6"

50/2"

Well-graded GRAVEL with SAND (GW); medium dense;brown; moist; coarse to fine GRAVEL; coarse to fineSAND.

(+#4=67.2%, -#200=2.7%).

Very dense; gravel size up to 3 inches.

GRAVELLY lean CLAY with SAND (CL); hard; browngray; moist; coarse to fine SAND.

METAMORPHIC ROCK, METAMORPHOSEDSANDSTONE, Meta-Graywacke / Shale, fine sand,hard, gray, moist, little coarse sand, (driving SPTsampler only, no core samples).


Free groundwater was encountered at about 7 ft duringdrilling



SURFACE ELEVATION


Rotary Wash

GROUNDWATERREADINGS


WGS84HOLE ID

R-14-005

DURING DRILLING

7.0 ft




18.5 ft

BOREHOLE DIAMETER

5 inSPT HAMMER TYPE


DRILL RIG

Failing 1500


DRILLING CONTRACTOR


LOGGED BY




Mat

eria

lG

raph

ics

Cas

ing

Dep

th

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft)

588.00

586.00

584.00

582.00

580.00

578.00

576.00

574.00

572.00

570.00

568.00

566.00

DE

PT

H (

ft)

A-5

Remarks

Dri

lling

Met

hod

RQ

D (

%)

Rec

over

y (%

)

Moi

stur

eC

onte

nt (

%)

Dry

Uni

t W

eigh

t(p

cf)

Job No.: 2008-127-010Date: 3/28/2014

Sam

ple

Dep

th

Sam

ple

Num

ber

Blo

ws

per

6 in

.

Blo

ws

per

foot

DESCRIPTION

LOG OF TEST BORING

She

ar S

tren

gth

(tsf

)




PC

I-C

T 5

BR

200

8-12

7-01

0 (N

EW

201

4).

GP

J T

EM

PLA

TE

7-2

2-11

.GD

T 4

/3/1

4


32

50/5"

65

50

REF

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

APPENDIX B

Lateral Surahcrge due to Strip Load (Elastic Solution) Date 4/25/2014

Water Well Job No. 2008-127-010

0input

q = 875 psfa = 25.0 ftb = 70.0 ft

= atan((a+b)/2z) = atan(b/z) - atan(a/z)

h = 2q(-sincos2)/

Segmentalz (ft) h (psf) Load (kips)1.00 1.550 0.026 28.612.00 1.529 0.051 57.00 0.0433.00 1.508 0.077 84.96 0.0714.00 1.487 0.102 112.27 0.0995.00 1.466 0.126 138.75 0.1266.00 1.445 0.150 164.23 0.1517.00 1.424 0.173 188.55 0.1768.00 1.404 0.196 211.58 0.2009.00 1.384 0.218 233.23 0.222

10.00 1.363 0.239 253.40 0.24311.00 1.343 0.259 272.04 0.26312.00 1.323 0.278 289.12 0.28113.00 1.304 0.296 304.62 0.29714.00 1.284 0.313 318.55 0.31215.00 1.265 0.329 330.93 0.32516.00 1.246 0.345 341.79 0.33617.00 1.227 0.359 351.18 0.34618.00 1.209 0.372 359.16 0.35519.00 1.190 0.385 365.79 0.36220.00 1.172 0.396 371.15 0.368

q lb/ft2a b

z

0

5

10

15

20

0 100 200 300 400 500t)

Induce Lateral Pressure (psf)

21.00 1.155 0.407 375.30 0.37322.00 1.137 0.417 378.33 0.37723.00 1.120 0.426 380.31 0.37924.00 1.103 0.435 381.32 0.38125.00 1.086 0.442 381.43 0.38126.00 1.070 0.449 380.72 0.38127.00 1.054 0.456 379.27 0.38028.00 1.038 0.461 377.14 0.37829.00 1.023 0.467 374.40 0.37630.00 1.007 0.471 371.11 0.37331.00 0.993 0.475 367.34 0.36932.00 0.978 0.479 363.13 0.36533.00 0.964 0.482 358.55 0.36134.00 0.950 0.485 353.63 0.35635.00 0.936 0.487 348.43 0.35136.00 0.922 0.489 342.99 0.34637.00 0.909 0.490 337.34 0.34038.00 0.896 0.492 331.53 0.33439.00 0.883 0.492 325.58 0.32940.00 0.871 0.493 319.52 0.323

p= 11.83 kips/ft

Point of Action = 23.170 ft below top

20

25

30

35

40

45

Dep

th (f

t)Draft

Vertical Surahcrge due to Strip Load (Elastic Solution) Date 4/25/2014

Water Well Job No. 2008-127-010

0input

q = 875 psfa = 25.0 ftb = 70.0 ft

= atan((a+b)/2z) = atan(b/z) - atan(a/z)

v = q(sincos2)/

Segmentalz (ft) sv (psf) Load (kips)1.00 1.550 0.026 0.012.00 1.529 0.051 0.06 0.0003.00 1.508 0.077 0.19 0.0004.00 1.487 0.102 0.45 0.0005.00 1.466 0.126 0.86 0.0016.00 1.445 0.150 1.46 0.0017.00 1.424 0.173 2.28 0.0028.00 1.404 0.196 3.34 0.0039.00 1.384 0.218 4.65 0.004

10.00 1.363 0.239 6.22 0.00511.00 1.343 0.259 8.05 0.00712.00 1.323 0.278 10.15 0.00913.00 1.304 0.296 12.52 0.01114.00 1.284 0.313 15.13 0.01415.00 1.265 0.329 17.99 0.01716.00 1.246 0.345 21.06 0.02017.00 1.227 0.359 24.35 0.02318.00 1.209 0.372 27.83 0.02619.00 1.190 0.385 31.47 0.03020.00 1.172 0.396 35.26 0.03321 00 1 155 0 407 39 18 0 037

q lb/ft2a b

z

0

10

20

30

40

0 100 200 300 400 500t)

Induced Vertical Pressure (psf)

21.00 1.155 0.407 39.18 0.03722.00 1.137 0.417 43.20 0.04123.00 1.120 0.426 47.31 0.04524.00 1.103 0.435 51.49 0.04925.00 1.086 0.442 55.71 0.05426.00 1.070 0.449 59.96 0.05827.00 1.054 0.456 64.21 0.06228.00 1.038 0.461 68.47 0.06629.00 1.023 0.467 72.70 0.07130.00 1.007 0.471 76.90 0.07531.00 0.993 0.475 81.06 0.07932.00 0.978 0.479 85.15 0.08333.00 0.964 0.482 89.18 0.08734.00 0.950 0.485 93.14 0.09135.00 0.936 0.487 97.01 0.09536.00 0.922 0.489 100.79 0.09937.00 0.909 0.490 104.47 0.10338.00 0.896 0.492 108.05 0.10639.00 0.883 0.492 111.52 0.11040.00 0.871 0.493 114.89 0.11341.00 0.859 0.493 118.15 0.11742.00 0.847 0.493 121.29 0.12043.00 0.835 0.493 124.31 0.12344.00 0.824 0.493 127.23 0.12645.00 0.812 0.492 130.02 0.12946.00 0.801 0.492 132.70 0.13147.00 0.791 0.491 135.27 0.13448.00 0.780 0.490 137.72 0.13649.00 0.770 0.488 140.06 0.13950.00 0.760 0.487 142.29 0.14151.00 0.750 0.485 144.41 0.14352.00 0.740 0.484 146.42 0.14553.00 0.731 0.482 148.33 0.14754.00 0.721 0.480 150.14 0.14955.00 0.712 0.478 151.85 0.151

50

60

70

80

90

100

Dep

th (f

t)Draft

Documents

PRELIMINARY FOUNDATION REPORT LITTLE UVAS CREEK BRIDGE ... · PRELIMINARY FOUNDATION REPORT . LITTLE UVAS CREEK BRIDGE (REPLACE) SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA . EXISTING BRIDGE NO.: