Retaining Wall Foundation Reportrp.dot.state.al.us/I59_20/pdf/Phase_III/RetainingWall/RW-3.pdf ·...

Retaining Wall Foundation Report17th Street North Corridor

I-59/I-20 EB Off-Ramp to 31st Street North (Retaining Wall No. 3)ALDOT PE Project No. IM-I059 (367)

ALDOT CN Project no. ACIMF-I059 (385)Jefferson County, Alabama

October 9, 2015Terracon Project E1155135

Prepared for:Alabama Department of Transportation

Montgomery, Alabama

Prepared by:Terracon Consultants, Inc.

Birmingham, Alabama

Terracon Consul tants, Inc. 110 12TH Street North Birmingham, Alabama 35203P [205] 942-1289 F [205] 443- 5302 terracon.com

October 9, 2015

Mr. Scott George, P.E.Materials and Tests EngineerAlabama Department of TransportationBureau of Materials & Tests – Geotechnical Section3700 Fairground RoadMontgomery, AL 36110

Attn: Ms. Kaye Chancellor Davis, P.E. Geotechnical Engineer

Re: Retaining Wall Foundation Report17th Street North CorridorI-59/I-20 EB Off-Ramp to 31st Street North (Retaining Wall No. 3)ALDOT PE Project No. IM-I059 (367)ALDOT CN Project no. ACIMF-I059 (385)Jefferson County, AlabamaTerracon Project No. E1155135

Dear Ms. Davis:

Terracon Consultants, Inc. (Terracon) is pleased to present to the Alabama Department ofTransportation this retaining wall foundation report for the planned I-59/I-20 EB Off-Ramp to31st Street North in Jefferson County, Alabama (Retaining Wall No. 3). Our scope for thisproject was performed in general accordance with our proposal number PE1150526-Revised,dated August 5, 2015.

We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. If you have any questionsconcerning this report, or if we may be of further service, please contact us.

Sincerely,Terracon Consultants, Inc.

Matthew S. McCullough, P.E. David A. Been, P.E.Project Engineer Senior ConsultantAlabama PE 31978 Alabama PE 17306

TABLE OF CONTENTSPage

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................. i1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 12.0 PROJECT INFORMATION ............................................................................................. 13.0 FIELD PROCEDURE ...................................................................................................... 24.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ........................................................................................ 2

4.1 Geology ............................................................................................................... 24.2 Typical Profile ...................................................................................................... 34.3 Groundwater ........................................................................................................ 3

5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION ...................................... 45.1 Settlement and Stability ....................................................................................... 45.2 Lateral Earth Pressures ....................................................................................... 55.3 Backfill and Drainage Considerations ................................................................... 65.4 Foundations ......................................................................................................... 6

5.4.1 Cast-In-Place Concrete Walls ................................................................... 65.4.2 Mechanically Stabilized Earth (MSE) Walls .............................................. 7

5.5 Recommended Plan Notes .................................................................................. 75.4.1 Construction Notes ................................................................................... 75.4.2 General Notes .......................................................................................... 8

APPENDIX A – FIGURESExhibit A-1: Geologic MapExhibit A-2: Site Location MapExhibit A-3: Sinkhole Susceptibility MapExhibit A-4: Boring Location Plan

APPENDIX B – FOUNDATION DESIGNExhibit B-1: Retaining Wall EnvelopeExhibit B-2: Summary of Retaining Wall Foundation Recommendations

APPENDIX C – SOIL BORING DATABoring Log Sheets (2)Boring Log Profile

APPENDIX D – LABORATORY TESTINGSoil Classification SummaryConsolidation Test Results

APPENDIX E – STABILITY ANALYSESSLOPE/W Stability Output for Cast-in-place Concrete WallRETWALL 1.0 Stability Output for Cast-in-place Concrete WallMSEW Stability Output for MSE Wall

Responsive Resourceful Reliable 1

RETAINING WALL FOUNDATION REPORT I-59/I-20 EB OFF-RAMP TO 31st STREET NORTH

(RETAINING WALL NO. 3)ALDOT PE PROJECT NO. IM-I059 (367)

ALDOT CN PROJECT NO. ACIMF-I059 (385)JEFFERSON COUNTY, ALABAMA

Terracon Project No. E1155135October 9, 2015

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This geotechnical exploration has been performed for the proposed retaining wall for theproposed I-59/I-20 EB Off-Ramp to 31st Street North (Retaining Wall No. 3) in JeffersonCounty, Alabama. The plans present this structure as two separate adjacent walls (Wall 3A andWall 3B). A total of three (3) SPT and rock core borings were performed to depths ranging from15 to 93 feet below the existing surface grades. Boring No. T-165 is also being utilized forpreparation of the Bridge Foundation Report for Bridge No. 23, submitted under a separatecover. Boring location plans are included in Appendix A of this report. Logs of the borings areincluded in Appendix C.

The purpose of these services is to provide information and geotechnical engineeringrecommendations relative to construction of the new retaining wall foundations in accordancewith ALDOT design criteria.

2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION

The overall project area is located along Interstate 59/20 and Interstate 65 through Birmingham,Jefferson County, Alabama. The project includes the replacement of several bridges along I-59/I-20, as well as the construction of several new bridges and retaining walls, and the wideningof several existing bridges on I-65. The field procedures and foundation recommendationsdiscussed in this report apply to Retaining Wall No 3.

Retaining Wall No. 3 will be constructed near the existing I-59/I-20 eastbound off-ramp to 31 st

Street North (see Figure No. 2, Site Location Map) in conjunction with the east abutment of theproposed new Bridge No. 23. Plans indicate that the new wall will be approximately 185 feet inlength, and will have a maximum height of about 20 feet. Design considerations for bothMechanically Stabilized Earth (MSE) and cast-in-place concrete walls are presented in thisreport.

Retaining Wall Foundation ReportI-59/I-20 EB Off-Ramp to 31st Street North (Retaining Wall No. 3)Jefferson County, Alabama October 9, 2015 Terracon Project E1155135


3.0 FIELD PROCEDURE

A Terracon drilling crew conducted soil boring and sampling operations at designated locationson the project site using both trailer-mounted and ATV-mounted Mobile B-47 drill rigs. The rigswere fitted with manual hammers (AASHTO T-206). A total of three (3) test borings wereperformed on August 24, 2015. Borings T-166, T-167, and T-170 were surveyed for this projectbut were not performed due to both utility conflicts and a wall alignment change. The boringlocations are indicated on the boring location plans in Appendix A. The approximate roadwaystations/offsets and corresponding retaining wall stations/offsets are shown in the table below:

Boring No.

ApproximateRoadway

Station andOffset

ApproximateRetaining Wall No. 3Station and Offset

T-169187+43

66’ LT of BL0+53

T-165187+48.98

18’ LT of BL1+38

T-168188+49.973’ LT of BL

2+3810’ LT

Boring T-165 will serve to evaluate the bridge foundation bearing strata as well as the retainingwall foundation bearing strata. Therefore, this boring was extended to auger refusal depths andinto the underlying bedrock using rock coring techniques (ASTM D-2113). The rock coringinformation can be seen on the boring logs in Appendix C, but has been omitted from the boringlog profile sheet to improve its legibility.

A Terracon engineer evaluated the recovered soil and rock samples and logged the probablesite stratigraphy. Selected soil samples were tested at the Terracon laboratories in Birmingham,Alabama and Chattanooga, Tennessee. A summary of the laboratory test results has beenincluded with this report as Exhibit D-1 in Appendix D.

4.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

4.1 Geology

Published maps indicate that the project is located in the Alabama Valley and Ridge Provinceand is underlain by the Copper Ridge Dolomite. The Copper Ridge Dolomite consists of light to



medium-gray, laminated to stromatolitic, finely crystalline, cherty dolomite; and producesabundant dense, stromatolitic chert residuum. Please see Exhibit A-1: Geologic Map located inAppendix A.

The site is underlain by carbonate formations which are susceptible to dissolution and formationof sinkholes. A sinkhole susceptibility map of the site vicinity has been included as Exhibit A-3in Appendix A.

4.2 Typical Profile

Based on the results of the test borings, subsurface conditions on the project site can begeneralized as follows:

Boring T-169 encountered previously-placed fill soils consisting of foundry waste. The foundrywaste fill extended to a depth of about 3.5 feet.

Below the fill at the above-referenced boring, and at just below the ground surface at the otherboring locations, native soils were noted. The native soils consisted of gravelly lean clay, lean claywith gravel, fat clay, or clayey sand. The native soils exhibited consistencies of very stiff to hard ormedium dense to very dense near the proposed retaining wall footing elevations. At borings T-168and T-169, the very stiff to hard or medium dense to very dense residual soils extended to a boringtermination depth of 15 feet. At boring T-165, medium stiff fat clay was noted at depths belowabout 28.5 feet, and very dense poorly-graded sand was noted just above auger refusal whichoccurred at a depth of 52 feet.

Boring T-165 will serve to evaluate the bridge foundation bearing strata as well as the retainingwall foundation bearing strata. Therefore, this boring was extended to auger refusal depths andinto the underlying bedrock using rock coring techniques (ASTM D-2113). The coringoperations penetrated light brownish-gray, moderately hard to hard fractured dolomitecontaining sand-filled voids and clay filled voids and seams. Recovery for the rock core runsranged from about 0 to 100 percent, and the Rock Quality Designation (RQD) ranged from 0 to59 percent. The rock coring information can be seen on the boring logs in Appendix C, but hasbeen omitted from the boring log profile sheet to improve its legibility.

Further details for each of the borings can be found on the boring logs and boring log profilesheets in Appendix C.

4.3 Groundwater

The boreholes were observed during drilling and after completion for the presence and level ofgroundwater. No groundwater was encountered at any of the boring locations during drilling.Due to the relatively short time frame of the field exploration, the groundwater may not have had



sufficient time to stabilize in the borings. We note that fluctuations in the level of thegroundwater may occur due to variations in rainfall, temperature, and other factors not evidentat the time the measurement was made and reported herein.

5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION

5.1 Settlement and Stability

Settlement analysis was performed on a relatively undisturbed Shelby tube sample of the soilsobtained from boring T-165. Based on our analysis, it is our opinion that total settlements for thewall will be within tolerable limits (about 1 inch). Results of the consolidation tests performed forthis project can be found in Appendix D. Based on our consolidation data, the settlement periodwas calculated to be greater than 9 years.

Retaining Wall No. 3 will support the east abutment embankment for Bridge No. 23. Due to thelow permeability of the foundation soils and excessive length of settlement period, it will not bepractical to delay embankment construction until the end of the settlement period. Therefore,the driven piles at this abutment will likely be subjected to additional downdrag forces. Based onour analyses, these downdrag forces will be on the order of 36 tons for pile size HP 12x53 and45 tons for pile sizes HP 14x73, 14x89, 14x102, and 14x117. These downdrag forces should beincluded in the required foundation design capacities and should be considered when selectingpile sizes for Bridge No. 23. For further details, please refer to the Bridge Foundation Report forBridge No. 23 prepared by Terracon and submitted under a separate cover.

Checks of sliding, overturning, and external stability were performed using the computerprograms RETWALL 1.0, Slope/W, and MSEW. Both cantilevered cast-in-place wall and MSEwall options were considered. The factors of safety determined by our analyses are presented inthe table below. The factors of safety presented in Table 5.1 represent an active earth pressurecondition. The stability model output pages are included in Appendix E.

Table 5.1: Calculated Factors of SafetyWall Type Sliding FOS1 Overturning FOS2 External FOS3

Cast-in-place Concrete4 1.8 2.8 3.6

MSE5 3.6 9.2 2.7

1. FOS of 1.5 required by ALDOT BMT-3982. FOS of 2.0 required by ALDOT BMT-3983. FOS of 1.5 required by ALDOT BMT-398



4. Backfill behind cast-in-place concrete walls should consist of AASHTO A-4 orbetter soils

5. To provide the necessary pullout resistance, reinforcement strips for MSEwalls should be at least 115% of the wall height.

Plan Note: The minimum wall reinforcement ratio (the ratio of width of wall reinforcedzone to the wall height) shall be 1.15 (reinforcement length 115% of wallheight), with a minimum reinforcement length of 8 feet.

5.2 Lateral Earth Pressures

The retaining walls should be designed for earth pressures at least equal to those indicated inTable 5.2 and Figure 5.2 below. Active earth pressure should be used for designs allowing wallmovement. The recommended design lateral earth pressures do not include a factor of safetyand do not provide for possible hydrostatic pressure on the walls.

Figure 5.2: Wall Restraint Conditions

Table 5.2: Lateral Earth PressuresEarth Pressure

ConditionsCoefficient forBackfill Type

Equivalent FluidDensity (pcf)

SurchargePressure, p1 (psf)

Earth Pressure,p2 (psf)

Active (Ka) Crushed Stone - 0.26AASHTO A-4 - 0.36

2945

(0.26)S(0.36)S

(29)H(45)H

Passive (Kp) Crushed Stone – 3.85AASHTO A-4 – 2.77

424346

--

--



Applicable conditions to the above include:For active earth pressure, wall must rotate about base, with top lateral movements of about0.002 H to 0.004 H, where H is wall heightFor passive earth pressure to develop, wall must move horizontally to mobilize resistanceUniform surcharge, where S is surcharge pressure. A traffic surcharge of 250 psf has beenconsidered for this projectSoil backfill weight a maximum of 125 pcfHorizontal backfill, compacted between 95 and 98 percent of standard Proctor maximum drydensityLoading from heavy compaction equipment not includedNo hydrostatic pressures acting on wallNo dynamic loadingNo safety factor included in soil parameters

Plan Note: Heavy construction equipment and or stockpiles of materials will not beallowed atop walls or construction slope during construction withoutapproval from the Bureau of Materials and Tests, Geotechnical Section

5.3 Backfill and Drainage Considerations

Backfill placed against walls should conform to the requirements of Section 529 of the ALDOTStandard Specifications for Highway Construction. For cast-in-place concrete walls, weep holesspaced at a maximum of 10 feet on center are recommended to prevent hydrostatic loading. Adrainage layer of backfill (minimum 1 foot wide by 1 foot deep) behind the base of the walls inline with the weep holes is also recommended per Section 529. The granular backfill andexpected placement of a perforated drain pipe within the reinforced zone are anticipated toprevent hydrostatic loading for MSE walls.

5.4 Foundations

Based on the results of our borings, the existing very stiff to hard residual soils will provideadequate foundation support for both the Cast-In-Place Concrete and Mechanically StabilizedEarth (MSE) wall options. Exhibit B-2 in Appendix B presents the allowable bearing capacitiesand elevations.

Pay Item No. 529A-011 – Retaining Wall (Cast In Place), per square footPay Item No. 529A-012 – Retaining Wall (MSE), per square foot

5.4.1 Cast-In-Place Concrete WallsIf cast-in-place concrete walls are selected for this project, shallow spread footings may besized for an allowable bearing pressure of 3 kips per square foot at all locations and for all wallheights indicated on the plans. Temporary excavations for footing construction should be cut no



steeper than 1.5(H):1.0(V) to maintain a minimum factor of safety of 1.2 per ALDOT BMT-398,or be properly shored. Foundation recommendations are summarized on Exhibit B-2 inAppendix B.

5.4.2 Mechanically Stabilized Earth (MSE) WallsOur analysis indicates that MSE walls will require allowable soil bearing pressures of 3 kips persquare foot or less. Therefore, if MSE walls are selected for this project, they may be supportedon the residual soils encountered by our borings. A summary of the foundationrecommendations is included as Exhibit B-2.

A separation geotextile should be placed between freely-draining granular backfill and soil.

Pay Item No. 608A-000 – Separation Geotextile, per square yard

5.5 Recommended Plan Notes

Plan notes should be developed based off the below listed notes to ensure geotechnicalrecommendations and requirements are executed. In contrast, these notes may not cover allrecommendations and requirements that can be achieved through engineering judgment andreview of this report in its entirety.

5.4.1 Construction Notes

Cast-in-place Retaining WallWe anticipate that the cantilever retaining walls would exhibit designs based on ALDOT

Standard Drawings.Pay Item for CIP Wall: 529A-011 – Retaining Wall (Cast In Place), per square foot

Estimated Quantity: 2,500 ft2

MSE Retaining Wall The minimum wall reinforcement ratio (the ratio of width of wall reinforced zone to the wall

height) shall be 1.15 (reinforcement length 115% of wall height), with a minimumreinforcement length of 8 feet.

Pay Item for MSE Walls: 529A-012 – Retaining Wall (MSE), per square foot Estimated Quantity: 2,500 ft2

A separation geotextile should be placed between freely-draining granular backfill and soilo Pay Item 608A-000 – Separation Geotextile, per square yard

Estimated Quantity: 100 yd 2

Heavy Construction EquipmentHeavy construction equipment shall be located at least 10 feet from the crest of anytemporary slope or within 10 feet of the face of the constructed wall unless approved on



a case by case basis by the M&T Geotechnical Division. The bearing capacity of theexisting natural soils for heavy construction loads such as a crane) shall be evaluated bythe contractor before construction starts and provided to the ALDOT GeotechnicalEngineer for review.

5.4.2 General Notes

This office recommends the inclusion of a plan note advising potential contractors of theexistence of a Foundation Report and core borings pertaining to this project. Access tothe report and core borings can be arranged by contacting the Geotechnical Division ofthe Alabama Department of Transportation.

APPENDIX A

FIGURES

IM-I059(367)I-59/I-20 EB OFF-RAMP TO 31st STREET NORTH

(RETAINING WALL NO. 3)JEFFERSON COUNTY

110 12th Street North Birmingham, Alabama 35203

PH. (205) 942-1289 FAX. (205) 443-5302

A-1

EXHIBITGEOLOGIC MAPProject Manager:

Drawn by:

Checked by:

Approved by:

MSM

MSM

DAB

DAB

Project No.

Scale:

File Name:

Date:

E1155135

9/21/2015

NTS

PROJECTLOCATION

110 12th Street North Birmingham, Alabama 35203

PH. (205) 942-1289 FAX. (205) 443-5302

SITE LOCATION MAPProject Manager:

Drawn by:

Checked by:

Approved by:

MSM

MSM

DAB

DAB

Project No.

Scale:

File Name:

Date:

E1145115

9/21/2015

1:24,000

PROJECTLOCATION

A-2

EXHIBITIM-I059(367)

I-59/I-20 EB OFF-RAMP TO 31ST STREET NORTH(RETAINING WALL NO. 3)

JEFFERSON COUNTY

SIN

KH

OLE

SU

SC

EP

TIB

ILIT

YM

AP

A-3

110

12th

Stre

etN

orth

Birm

ingh

am,

Alab

ama

3520

3

PH

.(20

5)94

2-12

89F

AX.(

205)

443-

5302

E114

5115

9/21

/201

5

MSM

MSM DAB

DAB

Not

toS

cale

Proj

ectM

anag

er:

Draw

nby:

Chec

kedb

y:

Appr

oved

by:

Proj

ectN

o.

Scale

:

File

Name

:

Date

:

EXH

IBIT

I-59/

I-20

EB

Off-

Ram

pto

31st

Stre

etN

orth

(Ret

aini

ngW

allN

o.3)

Birm

ingh

am,J

effe

rson

Cou

nty,

Ala

bam

a

PRO

JEC

TLO

CAT

ION

BO

RIN

GLO

CA

TIO

NP

LAN

I-59/

I-20

EB

OFF

-RA

MP

TO31

ST

STR

EET

NO

RTH

(RET

AIN

ING

WA

LLN

O.3

)JE

FFE

RS

ON

CO

UN

TY,A

LAB

AM

A

A-4

110

12th

Stre

etN

orth

Birm

ingh

am,

Alab

ama

3520

3

PH

.(20

5)94

2-12

89FA

X.(

205)

443-

5302

E115

5135

9/21

/201

5

MSM

MSM DAB

DAB

NTS

Proj

ectM

anag

er:

Draw

nby:

Chec

kedb

y:

Appr

oved

by:

Proj

ectN

o.

Scale

:

File

Nam

e:

Date

:

Exhi

bit

DIA

GR

AM

ISFO

RG

EN

ER

AL

LOC

ATI

ON

ON

LY,A

ND

ISN

OT

INTE

ND

ED

FOR

CO

NS

TRU

CTI

ON

PU

RP

OS

ES

BO

RIN

GLO

CAT

ION

T-16

9

T-16

5T-

168

APPENDIX B

FOUNDATION DESIGN

IM-I0

59(3

67)

I-59/

I-20

EBO

ff-R

amp

to31

stSt

reet

Nor

th(R

etai

ning

Wal

lNo.

3)Je

ffers

onC

ount

y,A

laba

ma

Exhi

bitB

-2:

Sum

mar

yof

Ret

aini

ngW

allF

ound

atio

nR

ecom

men

datio

ns

RET

AIN

ING

WAL

LST

ATIO

N

APPR

OXI

MAT

ER

OAD

WAY

STAT

ION

I-59/

I-20

EBO

FF-

RAM

PTO

31ST

STRE

ETNO

RTH

BO

RING

(S)

MAX

IMU

MW

ALL

HEIG

HT(F

T)

ALLO

WAB

LEB

EAR

ING

PRES

SUR

E

(KSF

)

ESTI

MAT

EDG

RO

UND

ELEV

ATIO

N

(FT)

ESTI

MAT

EDB

OTT

OM

OF

FOO

TING

ELEV

ATIO

N(F

T)

0+53

.49

–1+

61.6

118

7+38

.71

–18

7+73

.70

T-16

9,T-

165

203.

062

5–

627

620.

5

1+61

.61

–1+

96.6

118

7+73

.70

–18

8+08

.70

---16

3.0

627

–63

162

3.0

1+96

.61

–2+

37.8

818

8+08

.70

-18

8+49

.97

T-16

811

3.0

631

–63

462

7.0

Note

:Su

mm

ary

appl

ies

tobo

thC

ast-I

n-Pl

ace

Con

cret

ean

dM

echa

nica

llySt

abili

zed

Eart

h(M

SE)W

alls

APPENDIX C

SOIL BORING DATA

APPENDIX D

LABORATORY TESTING

Shee

t1of

1

Stat

ion

&O

ffset

Borin

gSa

mpl

eD

epth

Wat

erLi

quid

Pla

stic

Plas

ticity

%G

rave

l%

Sand

%Pa

ssD

50U

SCS

AASH

TON

o.ID

(ft)

Con

tent

Lim

itLi

mit

Inde

x20

0(m

m)

Cla

ssifi

catio

n(%

)18

7+48

.49,

18’L

Tof

BLT-

165

T165

-11.

0–

2.5

12.5

2916

1325

.723

.051

.3---

CL

A-6

(3)

187+

48.4

9,18

’LT

ofBL

T-16

5T-

165-

48.

5–

10.0

23.8

6926

434.

98.

886

.3---

CH

A-7-

6(41

)18

8+49

.97,

3’LT

ofBL

T-16

8T1

68-3

6.0

–7.

512

.567

2245

35.4

36.7

27.9

2.8

SCA-

2-7

(5)

187+

43,6

6’LT

ofBL

T-16

9T1

69-2

3.5

–5.

023

.749

2029

13.9

12.6

73.5

---C

LA-

7-6

(21)

SOIL

CLA

SSIF

ICA

TIO

NSU

MM

AR

YAl

abam

aD

epar

tmen

tofT

rans

porta

tion

IM-I0

59(3

67)

17th

Stre

etN

orth

Cor

ridor

I-59/

I-20

EBO

ff-R

amp

to31

stSt

reet

Nor

th(R

etai

ning

Wal

lNo.

3)Je

ffers

onC

ount

y

CONSOLIDATION TEST REPORTV

oid

Rat

io

0.475

0.500

0.525

0.550

0.575

0.600

0.625

0.650

0.675

0.700

0.725

Applied Pressure - tsf0.1 1 10

Natural Dry Dens. LL PI Sp. Gr. Overburden Pc Cc CrInitial Void

Saturation Moisture (pcf) (tsf) (tsf) Ratio75.8 % 19.4 % 99.6 X X 2.7 0.45 8.08 0.21 0.05 0.692

Yellowish Red Clay with Chert Fragments X X

E1155135CBD Phase 3 Bridges and Retaining Walls Swell pressure of 1275psf.

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION USCS AASHTO

Project No. Client: Remarks:Project:

Source of Sample: T-165 Depth: 7.0-9.0 ft Sample Number: TubeTerracon Consultants, Inc.

Chattanooga, TN

Dial Reading vs. TimeProject No.:Project:

Source of Sample: T-165 Depth: 7.0-9.0 ft Sample Number: Tube

Load No.=Load=

D0 =D90 =

D100 =T90 =

Cv @ T90

0.0006 cm.2/sec.

Load No.=Load=

D0 =D90 =

D100 =T90 =

Cv @ T90

0.0063 cm.2/sec.

E1155135CBD Phase 3 Bridges and Retaining Walls

21.00 tsf

-0.2074-0.2058-0.205637.45 min.

32.00 tsf

-0.1981-0.1963-0.19613.50 min.

Dia

lRea

ding

(in.)

-0.2046

-0.2049

-0.2052

-0.2055

-0.2058

-0.2061

-0.2064

-0.2067

-0.2070

-0.2073

-0.2076

Square Root of Elapsed Time (min.)0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

t90

Dia

lRea

ding

(in.)

-0.1940

-0.1944

-0.1948

-0.1952

-0.1956

-0.1960

-0.1964

-0.1968

-0.1972

-0.1976

-0.1980


t90

Terracon Consultants, Inc.



Load No.=Load=

D0 =D90 =

D100 =T90 =

Cv @ T90

0.0075 cm.2/sec.

Load No.=Load=

D0 =D90 =

D100 =T90 =

Cv @ T90

0.0052 cm.2/sec.


44.00 tsf

-0.1852-0.1835-0.18332.90 min.

58.00 tsf

-0.1660-0.1632-0.16294.00 min.

Dia

lRea

ding

(in.)

-0.1808

-0.1813

-0.1818

-0.1823

-0.1828

-0.1833

-0.1838

-0.1843

-0.1848

-0.1853

-0.1858


t90

Dia

lRea

ding

(in.)

-0.158

-0.159

-0.160

-0.161

-0.162

-0.163

-0.164

-0.165

-0.166

-0.167

-0.168

Square Root of Elapsed Time (min.)0 2.5 5 7.5 10 12.5 15 17.5 20 22.5 25

t90




Load No.=Load=

D0 =D90 =

D100 =T90 =

Cv @ T90

0.0069 cm.2/sec.

Load No.=Load=

D0 =D90 =

D100 =T90 =

Cv @ T90

0.0052 cm.2/sec.


616.00 tsf

-0.1415-0.1362-0.13562.89 min.

732.00 tsf

-0.1089-0.0998-0.09873.53 min.

Dia

lRea

ding

(in.)

-0.131

-0.132

-0.133

-0.134

-0.135

-0.136

-0.137

-0.138

-0.139

-0.140

-0.141


t90

Dia

lRea

ding

(in.)

-0.0930

-0.0945

-0.0960

-0.0975

-0.0990

-0.1005

-0.1020

-0.1035

-0.1050

-0.1065

-0.1080


t90




Load No.=Load=

D0 =D90 =

D100 =T90 =

Cv @ T90

0.0021 cm.2/sec.

Load No.=Load=

D0 =D90 =

D100 =T90 =

Cv @ T90

0.0053 cm.2/sec.


816.00 tsf

-0.1060-0.1077-0.10788.71 min.

98.00 tsf

-0.1154-0.1178-0.11813.46 min.

Dia

lRea

ding

(in.)

-0.1080

-0.1078

-0.1076

-0.1074

-0.1072

-0.1070

-0.1068

-0.1066

-0.1064

-0.1062

-0.1060

Square Root of Elapsed Time (min.)0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2 2.4 2.8 3.2 3.6 4

t90

Dia

lRea

ding

(in.)

-0.1192

-0.1188

-0.1184

-0.1180

-0.1176

-0.1172

-0.1168

-0.1164

-0.1160

-0.1156

-0.1152


t90




Load No.=Load=

D0 =D90 =

D100 =T90 =

Cv @ T90

0.0029 cm.2/sec.

Load No.=Load=

D0 =D90 =

D100 =T90 =

Cv @ T90

0.0064 cm.2/sec.


104.00 tsf

-0.1227-0.1261-0.12656.46 min.

112.00 tsf

-0.1291-0.1325-0.13293.00 min.

Dia

lRea

ding

(in.)

-0.131

-0.130

-0.129

-0.128

-0.127

-0.126

-0.125

-0.124

-0.123

-0.122

-0.121


t90

Dia

lRea

ding

(in.)

-0.138

-0.137

-0.136

-0.135

-0.134

-0.133

-0.132

-0.131

-0.130

-0.129

-0.128


t90




Load No.=Load=

D0 =D90 =

D100 =T90 =

Cv @ T90

0.0011 cm.2/sec.

Load No.=Load=

D0 =D90 =

D100 =T90 =

Cv @ T90

0.0017 cm.2/sec.


121.00 tsf

-0.1374-0.1420-0.142517.73 min.

130.50 tsf

-0.1451-0.1471-0.147411.72 min.

Dia

lRea

ding

(in.)

-0.146

-0.145

-0.144

-0.143

-0.142

-0.141

-0.140

-0.139

-0.138

-0.137

-0.136


t90

Dia

lRea

ding

(in.)

-0.153

-0.152

-0.151

-0.150

-0.149

-0.148

-0.147

-0.146

-0.145

-0.144

-0.143


t90


APPENDIX E

STABILITY ANALYSES

3.60

3

Con

cret

eW

all

150

pcf

CBD

Wal

l3S

ta.1

87+4

9F

ofS:

3.60

3

Surc

harg

e(U

nitW

eigh

t):25

0pc

f

Nam

e:V

ery

Stif

fGra

velly

Lean

Cla

yU

nitW

eigh

t:12

5pc

fC

ohes

ion'

:100

psf

Phi':

30°

Nam

e:S

tifft

oM

ediu

mSt

iffFa

tCla

yU

nitW

eigh

t:12

0pc

fC

ohes

ion'

:60

psf

Phi':

25°

Nam

e:W

allB

ackf

illU

nitW

eigh

t:12

5pc

fC

ohes

ion'

:60

psf

Phi':

28°

Dis

tanc

e-9

0-8

0-7

0-6

0-5

0-4

0-3

0-2

0-1

00

1020

3040

5060

7080

90

Elevation

590

600

610

620

630

640

650

RETWALL - Version 1.0 (c) 1994 by Prentice Hall, Inc. Stability of Cantilever Retaining Walls

Title: CBD Retaining Wall 3

Date: ********** Time: 01:43 PM

Units of Measurement : English (Press ALT-U to change)

Pressure Behind Wall : Active (Press ALT-P to change)

Earth Pressure Method: Coulomb (Press ALT-E to change)

************************************** INPUT DATA * RESULTS* ** Stem Height = 20.00 ft * Sliding FS = 1.83* Stem Thickness (top) = 1.00 ft * Overturning FS = 2.83* Stem Thickness (bot) = 2.50 ft * In Middle Third? Yes* Footing Thickness = 2.50 ft * Toe Bearing Pressure = 2706psf * Toe Extension = 5.75 ft * Heel Bearing Pressure = 1574psf * Heel Extension = 4.70 ft * Equiv Bearing Pressure = 2347psf * Key Offset = 0.00 ft * All Bearing Capacity = 7976psf * Key Width = 1.70 ft * Bearing OK? Yes* Key Depth = 1.70 ft * Va/Pf = 0.20* Front Cover = 2.00 ft * Eccentricity = 0.57ft * Backfill Angle = 0.00 deg************************************** Center of Overturn = 0.00 ft Soil Below Footing Cohesion = 100 psf Friction Angle = 30 deg Unit Weight = 125.0 pcf Ftg Friction = 30 deg Soil Behind Wall Cohesion = 60 psf Friction Angle = 28 deg Unit Weight = 125.0 pcf Wall Friction = 25 deg

Retaining Wall Foundation Reportrp.dot.state.al.us/I59_20/pdf/Phase_III/RetainingWall/RW-3.pdf ·...

Documents

Transcript of Retaining Wall Foundation Reportrp.dot.state.al.us/I59_20/pdf/Phase_III/RetainingWall/RW-3.pdf ·...