HomeMy WebLinkAbout020 Geotech Solvent Site Wtr Main Y
t
.:..,:. 1
ea
ALLIED
ENGINEERING
SERVICES, INC.
February 15, 2001
Rick Hixson, PE
City of Bozeman Engineering Department
P.O. 1230
Bozeman,MT 59771-1230
RE: Geotechnical Report for City of Bozeman Water Main Extension
Bozeman,Montana
Dear Mr. Hixson:
The attached report describes our geotechnical exploration, analysis and recommendations for
the proposed City of Bozeman Water Main Extension. The purpose of the work was to evaluate
the subsurface conditions and make geotechnical recommendations for the construction of the
water main extension and related activities.
We understand the work will entail the construction of approximately 17,000 lineal feet of water
main including five borings. The proposed water main extension will serve properties located
within the plume of the Bozeman Solvent Site. This area is currently under an order from the
Montana Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) to receive connection to an alternate
municipal water supply system.
The subsurface materials along the proposed alignment generally consist of soft to medium stiff
fine-grain flood deposits of silt and clay overlying sand and gravel at depth. In several of the
explorations, fill material was encountered overlying the native materials. Groundwater depths
ranged substantially across the site, but generally were highest in the vicinity of Campbell Road
and Gibson Drive. Groundwater levels in this area were as shallow as 3.25 feet. Based on our
explorations, we expect dewatering will be required in areas. This is further discussed in the
report.
We conducted our explorations along Highway 10, Reeves Road East, Campbell Road,
Springhill Road, and Valley Center Road. The deep snow conditions at the time of the
explorations made accessing the proposed water main alignment from Mandeville Lane to US
32 Discovery Drive ♦ Bozeman, MT 59718 ♦ (406) 582-0221 ♦ Fax (406) 582-5770
Rick Hinson,PE
February 15, 2001 Project:00-091
Highway 10 difficult. HKM Associates performed a detailed soil investigation along this portion
of the alignment as part of a sewer improvement project in the late 1980s. We chose to utilize
their soil data developed along this portion of the alignment. Generally, their data is in
agreement with ours. Sheet G3 of 3 provides a summary of their investigations along this
portion of the alignment.
We appreciate the opportunity to perform these services. Please call if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Allied Engineering Services,Inc.
Cra1'`�R. Madson,PE Douglas . Chandler,PhD,PE
Geotechnical Engineer Principal
Server E:\projects\2000\00-091\Geotechnical\report\00-091 cover.doc
Allied Engineering Services,Inc. Page 2
,NNW 110�
ALLIED
ENGINEERING
SERVICES, INC_
INTRODUCTION
In the 1970s a dry cleaning business located in the Buttreys Shopping Center in Bozeman,
Montana discharged a chemical known as tetrachloroethylene (PCE) into a leaky sewer
collection system. Since that time, PCE has seeped into the groundwater aquifer and traveled
downgradient creating a plume of impacted groundwater. The contaminated area and the plume
are commonly referred to as the Bozeman Solvent Site. Some of the wells within this area
contain PCE levels near or above the level EPA has deemed safe for people to consume.
Over the last several years, groundwater monitoring has been conducted through samples taken
from selected wells in the plume boundaries. The samples are tested for concentration levels of
PCE. If two consecutive samples meet or exceed the method detection limit (MDL) of 0.5 parts
per billion (ppb) for tetrachloroethylene (PCE) then the affected properties must be connected to
an alternate municipal water supply system under a Montana Department of Environmental
Quality (MDEQ) order. Allied Engineering Services, Inc. was retained in September of 2000 to
design a water main to serve properties currently affected by the groundwater contamination and
under orders from MDEQ to connect to an alternative water supply.
This report provides our geotechnical recommendations for the proposed water main extension.
The purpose of the work was to evaluate the subsurface conditions and make geotechnical
recommendations for the construction of the water main extension and related activities.
Primary issues are cut and fill properties of the native soils and depth to groundwater. Our scope
of work consisted of a geologic reconnaissance, drilling of nine exploratory borings to depths of
up to 20 feet, reviewing previous geotechnical work performed by HKM, and performing a
geotechnical analysis of the data. This report summarizes the work, conclusions, and
recommendations.
32 Discovery Drive ♦ Bozeman,MT 59718 ♦ (406)582-0221 ♦ Fax(406) 582-5770
Rick Hinson,PE
February 15,2001 Project: 00 091
PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION
The area affected by the MDEQ order to receive connection to an alternative municipal water
supply is generally described as north of I-90 and south of the East Gallatin River(Fig. 1 —Quad
Map).
The proposed work will consist of installation of about 17,000 lineal feet of water main and will
include five road bores. Generally, the new water main will extend from an existing waterline on
Mandeville Lane and continue north to Highway 10. The line will extend west along Highway
10 to Reeves Road East and follow Reeves Road East and Campbell Road, eventually meeting
Springhill Road. The waterline will also extend through Bogart Subdivision. A second road
bore will be performed under Interstate 90 from Springhill Road extending to Valley Center
Road where the new line will connect to a second existing water main.
SITE GEOLOGY
The site is located on a geologic formation known as the Bozeman fan, which consists of
Quaternary-aged alluvium (Qf) made up predominately of alluvial sand and gravel eroded from
the Gallatin Range. Figure 2 is the geologic map of the area prepared by Hackett, et al., (1960).
At the site, a mantling of fine-grain flood deposits of silt and clay overlie the alluvial sand and
gravel. A geologic and hydrogeologic report prepared by Hackett, et al., (1960) indicates that
the alluvial fan deposits overlie Tertiary-aged deposits consisting of semi-consolidated silt, sand,
and gravel (Tb), which are generally considered "bedrock". The depth to the Tert ary-aged
deposits at this site is unknown, but normally ranges from 400 to 800 feet in this area. The
Tertiary-aged deposits are underlain by even older Precambrian rock. The depth to the
Precambrian basement rock is unknown at this location.
GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATIONS AND TESTING
Exploration Borings
The site was explored by means of nine borings with a hollow stem auger, the approximate
locations of which are shown on Sheets GI and G2. The explorations were conducted on
December 71h and December 8`h, 2000 under the direction of Craig Madson, PE. These
Allied Engineering Services,Inc. Page 2
Rick Hinson,PE
February 15,2001 Project:00-091
explorations were generally conducted along Highway 10 and the Springhill area. We have also
incorporated the test pit results from explorations conducted by HKM Associates from
Mandeville Lane to Highway 10 performed in conjunction with sewer main improvements in the
late 1980s. The results of their explorations through this area are summarized on Sheet G3
enclosed. Snow conditions in December prevented us from obtaining access to the area between
Mandeville Lane and US Highway 10 without extreme and expensive effort.
The explorations were performed using a Mobile B-61 exploratory rig operated by O'Keefe
Drilling of Butte, Montana under the direction of Mr. Madson. The boreholes were as deep as 20
feet in depth. Soil relative densities presented in the borehole logs were estimated based upon
standard blow counts and difficulty or ease of auger advancement. BH-3 was eliminated due to
inaccessibility to the site of the planned boring.
Standard penetration tests were performed as indicated in the boring logs to obtain samples
and penetration resistance (N-values) of the subsurface materials. The Standard Penetration test
consists of driving a 1-3/8-inch I.D. split-spoon sampler a distance of 18 inches into the bottom
of a borehole using a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches. The number of blows required to
drive the samples each of three six inch increments is recorded, with the number of blows
required to drive the last 12 inches recorded as the Uncorrected Standard Penetration Resistance
(N-value). This value is normally used as an indicator of the relative density or consistency of a
given soil.
Laboratory Testing
In order to determine the engineering properties of the soils encountered, laboratory testing was
conducted on representative samples taken from the exploration bore holes. The tests were
conducted in accordance with the appropriate ASTM test procedure. The samples tested are
identified by the borehole from which the sample was taken, as well as the depth at which the
sample was taken. Testing included natural moisture content testing for all samples; compaction
tests for the native soils; liquid and plastic limits for the fine-grain soils; and percent passing the
#200 sieve. The laboratory testing results are included in Appendix A at the end of this report.
Allied Engineering Services,Inc. Page 3
Rick Hixson,PE Project: 00-091
February 15,2001
Subsurface Conditions
The subsurface conditions encountered and location of each exploration is provided on Sheets
G1 through G3. An overall summary of the conditions encountered is provided below.
Fill: Fill material consisting of a mixture of silt, clay, and gravel was encountered in several of
the explorations as shown on the logs. Generally, fill depths were four feet or less in all of the
explorations.
Topsoil: Up to two feet of silty CLAY topsoil was encountered in several of the borings. In
some instances, the topsoil was found underlying the fill material. Generally this material was
moist to wet.
SILT and CLAY: Soft to medium stiff, fine-grain floodplain deposits of SILT and CLAY were
often encountered underlying the topsoil. These materials were generally moist to wet. Blow
counts were as low as 2 - 4 in this material. HKM performed a direct shear test of this material,
and found the friction angle to be approximately 24 degrees. The maximum dry density and
optimum moisture content of this material as determined by ASTM D-698 (Standard Proctor)
were 107 pcf and 16 percent,respectively.
Medium Dense to Very Dense native Gravels: Native gravels were encountered in all the
explorations at depths ranging from the ground surface down to depths as great as 11 feet. In
most instances, gravel was encountered within about six feet of the ground-surface. This
material is an alluvial deposit with rounded gravel and cobbles up to about eight inches in
diameter. Generally, the upper material consisted of a transition zone of silty sandy GRAVEL
and was less dense than the clean sand and gravels at depth.
Groundwater
Groundwater was encountered in the majority of the explorations. Depths to groundwater ranged
from about 3.25 to as great as 11.7 feet. Generally, the highest groundwater conditions were
encountered along Campbell Road in the vicinity of Kean Drive and Gibson Drive, however,
depending on water main depths and the time of the year in which the work is performed,
dewatering may be required at several other points along the proposed alignment.
Allied Engineering Services,Inc. Page 4
Rick Hixson,PE
February 15,2001 Project: 00-091
Groundwater levels in the Bozeman fan fluctuate seasonally. Based on observations of
monitoring wells installed on the Bozeman fan during other projects, groundwater levels are
typically highest during the irrigation season (July, August, and early September), but can also
rise in the spring during significant extended wet periods or snow melts. This same trend of
seasonal fluctuations is consistent with the monitoring well data provided by Hackett et al.,
(1960). By this trend, the water levels observed during the explorations conducted in December
are probably representative of the lowest levels.
GEOTECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Overview
Geotechnical analyses were performed to evaluate the suitability of the native soils to support
water thrust forces at bends using conventional thrust blocks and mega-lugs with joint restraint.
Based on previous experience, MPWSS assumes fairly conservative allowable bearing pressures
of native soils in providing thrust block sizes. However, in weak clays and silts similar to those
found in areas at this site, the assumptions of MPWSS can be unconservative resulting in
undersized thrust blocks or inadequate joint restraint. Undersized thrust blocks or inadequate
joint restraint in conjunction with the use of mega-lugs can lead to joint separation. Below is an
overview of our analysis and assumptions made as well as our recommendations.
Joint Restraint at Bends
Along a relatively large portion of the proposed alignment, standard bury depths of the water
main at 6.5 feet will likely place the excavation in dense native gravels that will support water
thrust with standard thrust blocks or mega-lugs with standard joint restraint. However, in the
area between TP #101 and TP #102, and in the vicinities of BH-1,BH-4, and BH-8, there may be
areas where the excavation ends in soft deposits of silt and clay. Assuming a friction angle of 24
degrees for this material based on direct shear testing performed by HKM, the allowable soil
bearing of this material at the water line depth is about 1027 psf with a factor of safety of 1.5. At
test pressures of 195 pounds per square inch (psi), the calculated bearing pressure at bends could
be as great as 1500 psf assuming conventional thrust blocks sized in accordance with MPWSS.
Allied Engineering Services,Inc. Page 5
Rick Hixson,PE
February 15,2001 Project:00-091
Based on the above,we make the following recommendations:
❖ If concrete thrust blocking is to be used, the bearing area of any thrust block that will
be founded in the soft native silts and clays should be two times that recommended in
MPWSS. If the concrete thrust block is to be founded in the native dense gravels, the
thrust block size recommended in MPWSS may be used.
❖ If mega-lugs are to be used for restraint, the following criteria should be followed for
horizontal bends at standard water line depth(i.e. 6.5 feet of cover).
90 degree bends should be restrained for a length of 28 feet
45 degree bends should be restrained for a length of 11 feet
22.5 degree bends should be restrained for a length of 6 feet
❖ If mega-lugs are to be used for restraint in vertical bends, we should evaluate each on
a case-by-case basis since the vertical drop distance will affect the length of restraint
required.
CONSTRUCTION
Suitability of Native Soil for Backfill
Based on the explorations, utility trench subgrades will likely range from moist to wet silt and
clay to moist to wet sand and gravel. The moisture content will, to a large extent, affect the
suitability of this material as trench backfill. Under roads and paved areas, we recommend
backfill be compacted to 95 percent of ASTM D-698. In these areas, backfill will need to be
within +/- two percent of its optimum moisture content in order to compact to the above
indicated standard. This will exclude quite a bit of backfill from reuse due to high moisture
contents. Where compaction is less important such as under landscaped or cultivated areas,
backfill shall be compacted to 90 percent of ASTM D-698. In these areas, moisture content
standards may be relaxed somewhat due to the lower compaction requirements. Some judgment
will be required to evaluate the suitability of a particular material for backfill. The above
provided compaction requirements are consistent with MPWSS.
Allied Engineering Services,Inc. Page 6
Rick Hutson,PE Project: 00-091
February 15,2001
The native gravels contained a substantial amount of cobbles. In order to protect water mains
from damage, four inches of Type I bedding as defined by the Montana Public Works Standard
Specifications (MPWSS) should be placed under the pipe to a point six inches over the top of the
pipe. In soft or unstable soils, Type R pipe bedding may be required under the pipe in order to
provide adequate support. If such is the case,we recommend over-excavation a minimum of one
foot and replacement with suitable Type H pipe bedding. Some of the native gravels may be
suitable for reuse as Type II pipe bedding provided the moisture content is near optimum. Type
H pipe bedding should be compacted to 95 percent of ASTM D-698.
Dewatering
As indicated earlier, dewatering will likely be required along some areas of the proposed
alignment. The extent of the dewatering required will vary depending on the time of year in
which the work is performed. Some thought will need to be given to the discharge of
contaminated groundwater. We understand from DEQ contaminated groundwater may be land
applied back to the same aquifer without a permit. However, a permit issued by DEQ is required
if the water is to be discharged to state surface waters. We recommend the Contractor contact
the Department of Environmental Quality concerning appropriate dewatering practices prior to
construction.
LIMITATIONS
In our opinion, the most likely damages from geotechnical-related problems in this area are with
regard to the potential for post construction settlement of inadequately compacted backfill
materials or improperly constructed thrust restraints in the soft soil areas. To minimize these
potential problems, we recommend that we be retained for the duration of the project to observe
excavation, backfill placement, and thrust blocking to assure the conditions encountered are as
expected and our recommendations are being followed.
The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report assume that site conditions are
not substantially different than those exposed by the explorations. If during construction,
subsurface conditions different from those encountered in the explorations are observed or
appear to be present, we should be advised at once such that we may review those conditions and
reconsider our recommendations where necessary.
Allied Engineering Services,Inc. Page 7
Rick Hixson,PE
February 15,2001 Project:00-091
This report was prepared for the use of the City of Bozeman in the planning of the water main
extension. It should be made available to prospective contractors or the contractor for
information on factual data only and not as a warranty of subsurface conditions, such as those
interpreted from the exploration logs and discussion of subsurface conditions.
We appreciate the opportunity to perform these services. Please call if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Allied Engineering Services,Inc.
t t `
Cra adson, PE Douglas S. Chandler, PE, PhD
Geotec leal Engineer Principal Geotechnical Engineer
enc: Figure 1 —Vicinity Map
Figure 2—Geologic Map
Sheet G1 —G3 Exploration Logs and Location Map
Important Information About Your Geotechnical Report
Appendices
Appendix A—Laboratory Testing Results
Appendix B—Joint Restraint Analysis
\ l
° CRAIG R.
MADSDN -
° p11605 P eLU
�,•�f�ENg�ca,' �C
Allied Engineering Services,Inc. Page 8
Rick Hixson,PE Project: 00-091
February 15,2001
REFERENCES
Hackett, O.M., Visher, F.N., McMurtrey, R.G., and Steinhilber, W.L. (1960), "Geology and
Ground-Water Resources of the Gallatin Valley, Gallatin County, Montana", U.S. Geologic
Survey Water-Supply Paper 1482,United States Government Printing Office, Washington I .C.
Server E:\projects\2000\00-091\geotecbnical\report\00-09Ireport.doc
Allied Engineering Services,Inc. Page 9
,♦
t
% �
I
4f54PA t,
905; a_•t
763 }�
f 2-268 \ } �� % 9�l 4651A( V
9662T i \�
- I_tE
1 +
-- jfl
t �
35 Bt3Z SEi1 E �`j
47
Grade :• Ors✓�`,1
'f � ���.. i 1 f' 1 •
' 9728T i I
f
--- 1 1
47ZS T
k ` -
t t I .. � 1 \ � • i � • •
f J, \t • •
i 1 t i
�-
'i
1 t2
17,
`: _' i (� I Tra,j/CPI. t I--'�_ •• \ �:y/l_ si
�x
0 2000 4000 6000
USGS QUAD: BOZEMAN, MONTANA
CONTOUR INTERVAL: 20 FEET
SCALE: 1 INCH = 2000 FEET
COB WATER MAIN EXT., SOLV. SITE FIGURE 1
jV Civil Engineering 101 E-MAIN,SUITE A
BOZEMAN,MT 59715 DRAWN BY: PJS
VICIl�TI�'�' A� ALLIED Lana surveying PHONE(406)582-0221 DATE: 11/21/2000
BOZEMAN, MONTA.NA ENGINEERING Geotechnical Engineering FAX(406)582-5770
PROJECT t 00-091
Fig 1-Stream Permt
ti it a,F"� �:'"i 4S♦ E�px� ��§ -,: "i' sTs a r�.��• s t
s
eat. . *. t !°} {� -` ti! �`ar :,y�' ''� r'•'w�p
�"'`g - ,�� `'�9� k�«� �t�€ .«.".."-p fix,,.' "E'�,: t +q #'w'F"'. ",.` � • �W _r'� �•
NIVII
sv ,ter
XI
`•
:
"_ .: {�� _ •.. ., .} ,�$j �$aa�_.*..,...�s�+'' .r... ,.,�Z-x.... ,- �_ .•. .....s r........a ..,.....,.;�. at x' s °o
j
2
} x .t 1
x
40
tv
e•
k �
W x>
P JECT SITE a
.;, Q f �.
NO
of � ^'y@F. �� ``s_� �y J `�• #�^y' .,� ;�.
Qf = Iluvium - P�edominately'alluval fan cleposis ., l
0 2000 4000 6000
Base Map from Geological Survey Water Supply
Paper 1482 by Hackett, et. al., (1960) SCALE: 1 INCH =2000 FEET
PROJECT ENGINEER: DSC _ ///,_
DESIGNED BY: CRM COB Water .Main '•��1--�?"x'to / � Civil Engineering 32 DISCOVERY DRIVE FIGURE 2
L� Land Surve n BOZEMAN,MT 59718
DRAWN BY:CRM Ge®l® � � ALLIED �' g PHONE(406)592-0221 PROJECT*: 00-091
Geotechnical Engineering FAX(406)582-5770
REVIEWEDBY: DSC Bozeman,Montana ENGINEERING DATE: 2/2001
sersv�ces.1 - FIGURE2.DWG
tt
gt.+'{16 stY.s
{ I
NOTE:
BORE HOLE LOCATIONS
ARE APPROXIMATE.
1i
x r
BH-1 BH-2 BH-4 BH-5
Other Other Other Other
C u n o= m., (Sample g 3 ai o= @-, (Sample " = t:a (Sample s' " m o= E-. (Sample
z o MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONS m _ 2 2 character, t o MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONS e b character, MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONS S m character, z o MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONS _ m character,
c m o E o 'o c Laboratory o io o ry =0 8 o Laboratory o 0 o E 8 0 0 o Laboratory c ii o E o 0 o Laboratory
o t5-u m z m `f 0 Testing,etc.) G -+ rn z E f 0 Testing,etc.) o t7 h z m O TesOng,etc. c u 3 m z a 20
Testing,eta)
2 inches of silty CLAY topsoil,moist(in zen)
Medium stiff,dark brown,silty CLAY Very soft,brown,lean CLAY,very moist(fill)
moist,appears to be some organics
Dense,dark brown,silly sandy GRAVEL, in upper 1' S-1 25%
moist(Till) Sack
S-1 25% -- G.W.at 3.25'on 12/07100
Sack
T Very kxrse,brown,silty SAND,wet(fill) _ 2 22%
5.0 - S-2 - 5.0 ,-• 5.0 S-1 4 25% 5.0
SSS 15 27% Sand=9.5% S-1 So+ --- S� -I- 52%
Stiff,dark brown,lean CLAY,moist to wet SSS for 5% _ Very sob,dark brown/black organic silty
Fines=90.5%
S-3 26% Max.7Sd=107 pcf 4' __ Soft,tan,lean CLAY,moist to very mast Sand=90.% ° CLAY,wet native
G.W.at 6.75'on 12(08/00 Sack Opt.MC=16% -- fines=90.5% ( )
S-2 22% .L=39
_ SackP.I.=18.3 1
""_ --- ax.7Sd-107 pcF Medium dense,brown,sandy GRAVEL,wet
o
Dense to very dense,brown,silty SAND with pt.MC=16% T
S-3 NA 10%
gmvei grading to silty sandy GRAVEL a[depth, -- gS5
moist to wet
so
10.0 - S-4 50+ 10.0 ° -� 10.0 == 5-3 or
for 14% 50+ SSS 19�
SSS 5- S-2 for 14% Dense,brown,sandy GRAVEL,slightly moist to � 4-
SSS 5• moist
G.W.at 11.T on 12/07/00 S /00
5% maybe just touching groundwater-12/07
Sack
Max.ild=135 pd -
Opt.MC=9%
Very dense,brown,sandy GRAVEL with -T- -
15.0 sand lense at about 155to 16.6,wet S-5 15.0 S
12%
SSS64 5%
i
i
e
d
S o
50+
20.0 for 17% 20.0 S-5 for 17% i
SSS 5- SSS 3-
i
NO. REVISIONS DRAWN BY DATE 0 300 600 900 PROJECT t 00-091 SHEET y
COB WATER MAIN EXTENSION � Civil Engineering DATE: 02/2001
32 DISCOVERY DRIVE /f-Y n 3
oewR G1 OF
SCALE: 1 INCH - 600 FEET * BORE HOLE LOGS AND LOCATION MAC ALLIED
Land Surveying PHONE(N,MT592217 18 BL LOCATION MATER
^ �- ALLIED eeoNE(ao6>ssz-ozzl COB WATER MAIN EXT.
PROJECT ENGINEER: SRS DRAWN BY: LJG _:�'h Geotechnical Engineering FAX(406)582-5770
��' �j>®�Ej�/j��3�/j��TT��� ENGINEERING BORE LOG LOCATION MAP
DESIGNED BY: CRM REVIEWED BY: TLT, SRS, CRM
` 147/,
NOTE:
IMBORE HOLE LOCATIONS
r _ co
ARE APPROXIMATE
BH-6
- - Other
k u u r (Sample
oMATERIAL
MAT RIAL DESCRIPTIONS
Character,
3,
E La
o o boratory
m
N.,� �,r `�, � o 0, m z m 20 Testing,etc.)
_ F
�t Medium,brown,silty SAND w/gravel,
moist to very moist(fill)
Soft,brown,sandy SILT,moist
Medium dense,brown,silty SAND with gravel, T
very moist to wet S-122 4
0 G.W.atNon 12/07/00 SSS
r
Medium dense,black,SAND with gravel,wet
LEY
10.0 SSS 29 lilts
9bG
BH-7 BH-8 BH-9 BH-10
Other Other Other Other
o e; c ? (Sample Z o c'r -- (Sample r u o c m (Sample s, y m t x i.. (sample
6 MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONS — character, o MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONS �g` Character, S o MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONS �» �m character, 5 o MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONS a �% 6 Character,
m °mo m '—c o c Laboratory °a o 0 o Laboratory m o a E —o 'o o Laboratory E �,o c c Laboratory
o O.°u m z m f 0 Testng,eta) e H z m f O Testing.eta) o O-°+ mm z m E O Testing,etc.) o t7 y z mE O Testi
ng,etc.)
Medium dense,brown,silty sandy Medium stiff,black,silty CLAY,topsoil,moist Soft,dark brown,silty CLAY,topsoil
GRAVEL(fill),moist very moist(topsoil) GRAVEL(fill)
Black,silty CLAY,topsoil,very mast Medium stiff,dark brown,silty CLAY with S-1 20%
-- =Soft to medium stiff,brown,sandy lean Medium stiff,light brown/brown,silty CLAY, organics,moist SSS
_--- __
CLAY and sandy SILT,(native)very moist —" _ slightly mist
IS—
to wet
_ Sand=3.5%
G.W.at 4.2'on 12/07/00 Medium stiff,brown,lean CLAY, Fines=96.5% —�-
T mast to very moist S 6 26% .L=41 T _C Medium stiff to stiff,brown,sandy SILT,moist S-2
5.0 S-1 5.0 --- SSS 24% P.I.=19.5 5.0 •` S 1 74 5.0 = SSS 15 21
SSS 17 12% -.6d=107 pcf SSS for J—
L S-2 pt.MC=16% f0'
Sack
--� - Very dense,brown,sandy GRAVEL,and silty
Medium dense,brown,sandy GRAVEL,wet sandy GRAVEL with cobbles,slightly moist
to wet
Very dense,gray,sandy GRAVEL,
slightly mist 50 G.W.at 9'on 12/07/00
T s=3 for 2% — T so,
S-2 SSS 3' - T S-3 for 14%
10.0 _. 52 12% 10.0 S-2 10.0 SSS
SSS rock 52 f0% 5
SSS G.W.at 10.5'on 12/07/00 �
i
Dense to very dense,brown,silty sandy —
GRAVEL,moist to wet
S-4
SSS 76 _
i
i
3
T 50
S-5 for 12%
SSS 5.
NO. REVISIONS DRAWN BY DATE 0 300 600 900 _ PROJECT* 00-091 SHEET N
COB WATER ER MAIN EXTENSION Civil Engineering 32 DISCOVERY DRIVE DATE: 02/2001 '��11 'yy
SCALE: 1 INCH = 600 FEET aeosoa LZ Land S rveying ROZEMAN,MT59718 BL LOCATION MAP.DWG G2 OF .11
BORE HOLE LOGS AND LOCATION MAP ALLIED PHONE(406)582-0221
�i;' Geotechnical Engineering FAX(4oa)582-577o COB WATER MAIN EXT.
PROJECT ENGINEER:CRM: SIRS DRAWN BY: LJG =t�4 o BOZEMAN,MONTANA ENGINEERING BORE' LOCI LOCATION:yIAI�
DESIGNED BY: CRM REVIEWED BY: TIT, SRS, CRM
NOTES:
TEST PIT LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE
LOGS OF TP#101 TO TP#105 ARE REPRODUCED
DIRECTLY FROM EXPLORATIONS PERFORMED BY HKM
ASSOCIATES IN 1988 FOR SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS,
BOZEMAN,MONTANA
r TP#104
Other
a »m Character,
g o t c (Sample
a o MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONS a 0 3 Lobo
ratory
r y , r.o
` c O vi z m s°cot Testing, tc.)
TOPSOIL;with organic matter
SILT;ML;slightly moist,firm.
light yellow brown,salt abundant
e
WELL GRADED GRAVEL
WITH SAND;GW;moist,
, 1
c brown, ACK 3.0% Cobbles>3"diameter=10%
ompact,dark W;
a Gravel=3%rounded cobbles 6"diameter 6
h Sand=26.%
3%
. T Silt and Clay=1.7%
w ;
V
POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH
SILT AND SAND;GP-GM;
very moist-wet,compact,
v.. .. t«.. light yellow brown.3%rounded
s
cobbles,6"diameter,
10.0 occasional B"rFameter
TP#101 TP#102 TP#103 TP#105
Other Other Other Other
ffi u .. (Sample s o e .• (Sample r u o B„ (Sample : `x B„ (Sample
p `m Character, r o MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONS n m o character, _o a m character, o �' character,
s MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONS a ; -„ MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONS a s MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONS a ; a
o m e o o`o Laboratory m o o m o m C Laboratory m Y o m o e c Laboratory a °m$ a. o c Laboratory
o t7 w z m f V Testing,eta) o O-r w z m f o Testing,eta) o O-+ w z m f 0 Testing,eta.) o O rn z F. f c> Tasting,etc.)
TOPSOIL:with organic matter ;;: TOPSOIL TOPSOIL;with organic matter � TOPSOIL;with organic matter
-- _, POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH
SILT AND SAND;GP-GM;
mast,compact-dense,light yellow - WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH
brown,4%rounded boulders 3"•12" SAND;GW;moist,compact
-- diameter dark yellow brown,
'"— SILT;ML;slightly moist to very moist, Sack 25% Sand=10%
4%rounded cobbles 6"-8" a
-- Sift and Clay=90% SACK 10% Gravel=73% - in diameter '
soft-firm,light yellow brown,increasing —� L.L=29 Sand=21.2%
5.0 — moisture with depth.No salts present. SA 22% Direct shear 5.0 -• SILT;ML;slightly moist(1.0-4.0), 5.0 5.0
P.1.=5 Silt and Clay=5.8%
_= Roots at four feet on Shelby tube —� moist(4.0-9.5),very mast(9.5-11.0), Max.]f d=107.1 pct L.L.=31 -
-- sample firm to soft,light brown,no salt present
-- _= Opt.MC=17.3% P.I.=8
0=24°
C=0 — Sulfate content=<0.01% <
__ _ POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH
Dry unit wt.
=95 2 SILT AND SAND;GP-GM; POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH
wet-saturated,compact-dense, SILT AND SAND; o
light yellow brown,4%rounded a very mast-saturated,compact SACK 10% Minimum Electrical i
—� Resistivity=4320
boulders 3"-12"diameter, light yellow brown,3%cobbles
WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND;GW; OHM-CM 3
very moist to wet,compact,dark brown, Iron staining at 10.0 8"in diameter, perforation of
Years to— p B
3%cobbles 5"in diameter
G.W.6/24/88 16 gage metal>_39
10.0 t 10.0 _= 10.0 10.0 om
-
-- G.W.6/24188
G.W.6/24168
WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND;GW;
wet to saturated,compact-dense,dark brown
i
N0. REVISIONS DRAWN BY DATE 0 300 600 900 ,* SHEET
PROJECT 00-091
COB WATER MAIN EXTENSION ,,� Civil Engineering 32 DISCOVERY DRIVE DATE: 02/2001
ar.o R OF
�� 130ZEMAN,MT 59718 BL LOCATION MAP.DWG �J1
SCALE: 1 INCH soo FEET _�a TEST PIT LOGS AND LOCATION MAP Land Surveying BOZEMAN. SOLVENT SITE
ALLIED PHONE(406)-57 0221
PROJECT ENGINEER: SRS DRAWN BY: LJG - -'- �` Geotechnical Engineering FAX(406)582-5770
`'ina,a' $���,��,� MflI�T I'AI®TA ENGINEERING BORE LOG LOCATION MAP
DESIGNED BY: CRM RENEWED BY: TILT, SRS 1 sEa ... rNc.
r
ALLIED
ENGINEERING
SERVICES, IN(--_
Important Information about your Geotechnical Report
CONSULTING SERVICES ARE PERFORMED FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES AND FOR SPECIFIC CLIENTS
Consultants prepare reports to meet the specific needs of specific individuals. A report prepared for a civil engineer
may not be adequate for a construction contractor or even another civil engineer. Unless indicated otherwise,your
consultant prepared your report expressly for you and expressly for the purposes you indicated. No one other than
you should apply this report for its intended purpose without first conferring with the consultant. No party should
apply this report for any purpose other than that originally contemplated without first conferring with the consultant.
THE CONSULTANT'S REPORT IS BASED ON PROJECT-SPECIFIC FACTORS.
A geotechnical report is based on a subsurface exploration plan designed to consider a unique set of project-specific
factors. Depending on the project,these may include:the general nature of the structure and property involved;its
size and configuration; its historical use and practice;the location of the structure on the site and its orientation;
other improvements such as access roads,parking lots,and underground utilities;and the additional risk created by
scope-of-service limitations imposed by the client. To help avoid costly problems,ask the consultant to evaluate
how any factors that change subsequent to the date of the report may affect the recommendations. Unless your
consultant indicates otherwise,your report should not be used: 1)when the nature of the proposed project is changed
(for example,if an office building will be erected instead of a parking garage,of if a refrigerated warehouse will be
built instead of an unrefrigerated one,or chemicals are discovered on or near the site);2)when the size,elevation, or
configuration of the proposed project is altered;3)when the location or orientation of the proposed project is
modified;4)when there is a change of ownership;or 5)for application to an adjacent site. Consultants cannot
accept responsibility for problems that may occur if they are not consulted after factors,which were considered in
the development of the report,have changed.
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS CAN CHANGE
Subsurface conditions may be affected as a result of natural processes or human activity. Because a geotechnical
report is based on conditions that existed at the time of subsurface exploration;construction decisions should not be
based on a report whose adequacy may have been affected by time. Ask the consultant to advise if additional tests
are desirable before construction starts;for example,groundwater conditions commonly vary seasonally and nearby
cuts or fills can affect the stability of sloping terrain.
Construction operations at or adjacent to the site and natural events such as floods,earthquakes,or groundwater
fluctuations may also affect subsurface conditions and,thus,the continuing adequacy of a geotechnical report. The
consultant should be kept apprised of any such events,and should be consulted to determine if additional tests are
necessary.
MOST RECOMMENDATIONS ARE PROFESSIONAL JUDGEMENTS.
Site exploration and testing identifies actual surface and subsurface conditions only at those points where samples
are take.The data was extrapolated by your consultant,who then applied judgment to render an opinion about over-
all subsurface conditions. The actual interface between materials may be far more gradual or abrupt than your report
indicates. Actual conditions in areas not sampled may differ from those predicted in your report. While nothing can
be done to prevent such situations,you and your consultant can work together to help reduce their impacts.
Retaining your consultant to observe subsurface construction operations can be particularly beneficial in this respect.
City of Bozeman Water Main Extension Projects:00-091
February 16,2001
A REPORT'S CONCLUSIONS ARE PRELIMINARY.
The conclusions contained in your consultant's report are preliminary because they must by based on the assumption
that conditions revealed through selective exploratory sampling are indicative of actual conditions throughout a site.
A more complete view of subsurface conditions is often revealed during earthwork;therefore,you should retain
your consultant to observe earthwork and to provide revised recommendations if necessary. Only the consultant
who prepared the report if fully familiar with the background information needed to determine whether or not the
report's recommendations based on those conclusions are valid and whether or not the contractor is abiding by
applicable recommendations. The consultant who developed your report cannot assume responsibility to liability for
the adequacy of the report's recommendations if another party is retained to observe construction.
THE CONSULTANT'S REPORT IS SUBJECT TO MISINTERPRETATION.
Costly problems can occur when other design professionals develop their plans based on misinterpretation of a
geotechnical report. To help avoid these problems,the consultant should be retained to work with other project
design professionals to explain relevant geotechnical,geological,and hydrogeological findings and to review the
adequacy of their plans and specifications relative to these issues.
BORING LOGS AND/OR MONITORING WELL DATA SHOULD NOT BE SEPARATED FROM THE
REPORT.
Final boring logs developed by the consultant are based upon interpretation of field logs(assembled by site
personneI),field test results,and laboratory and/or office evaluation of field samples and data. Only final boring
logs and data are customarily included in geotechnical/environmental reports. These final logs should not,under
any circumstances,be redrawn for inclusion in Architectural or other design drawings,because drafters may commit
errors or omissions in the transfer process.
To reduce the likelihood of boring log or monitoring well misinterpretation,contractors should be given ready
access to the complete geotechnical report prepared or authorized for their use. If access is provided only to the
report prepared for you,you should advise contractors of the report's limitations,assuming that a contractor was not
one of the specific persons for whom the report was prepared,and that developing construction cost estimates was
not one of the specific purposes for which it was prepared. While a contractor may gain important knowledge from
a report prepared for another party,the contractor should discuss the report with your consultant and perform the
additional or alternative work believed necessary to obtain the data specifically appropriate for construction cost
estimating purposes. Some clients hold the mistaken impression that simply disclaiming responsibility for the
accuracy of subsurface information always insulates them from attendant liability.Providing the best available
information to contractors helps prevent costly construction problems and the adversarial attitudes that aggravate
them to a disproportionate scale.
READ RESPONSIBILITY CLAUSES CLOSELY.
Because geotechnical engineering is based extensively on judgment and opinion,it is far less exact than other design
disciplines. This situation has resulted in wholly unwarranted claims being lodged against consultants. To help
prevent this problem consultants have developed a number of clauses for use in their contracts,reports and other
documents. These responsibility clauses are not exculpatory clauses designed to transfer the consultant's liabilities
to other parties;rather,they are defmition clauses that identify where the consultant's responsibilities begin and end.
Their use helps all parties involved recognize their individual responsibilities and take appropriate action. Some of
these definitive clauses are likely to appear in your report,and you are encouraged to read them closely. Your
consultant will be pleased to give full and frank answers to your questions.
The preceding paragraphs are based on information provided by the ASFE
Association of Engineering Firms practicing in the Geosciences, Silver Spring,Maryland
Allied Engineering Services,Inc. Page 2
9 .j
f 'P-Nm
ALLIED
ENGINEERING
SERVICES, INC.
LOGS OF EXPLORATIONS
EXPLANATION OF ABBREVIATIONS AND DESCRIPTIVE TERMS
SSS Standard penetration resistance test--results recorded as the number of blows of a 140-
pound hammer falling 30 inches required to drive a 2-inch O.D. split sample spoon the
second and third 6-inch increments of an 18-inch distance.
LSS Modified penetration test--results recorded as the number of blows of a 140-pound
hammer falling 30 inches required to drive a 2.5-inch O.D. split spoon the second and
third 6-inch increments of an 18-inch distance.
SRS Split barrel ring sampler 2-inches I.D. for taking undisturbed samples.
LRS Split barrel ring sampler 2.5-inches I.D.for taking undisturbed samples.
STS Shelby tube sampler for taking undisturbed samples(2"to 3-5/16"I.D.).
Sack Sample of disturbed soil placed in canvas sack or plastic bag.
GWL Groundwater level on the date shown on the logs.
RQD Rock quality designation(RQD)for the bedrock samples are determined for each core
run by surmising the length of all sound,hard pieces of core over four inches in length,
and dividing this number by the total length of the core run. This value, along with the
core recovery percentage,is recorded on the drill logs.
LL
U.S.Standard Series Sieve Clear Square Sieve Openings
200 40 10 4 3/4" 3" 12"
Silts&Clays SAND GRAVEL Cobbles Boulders
Distinguished
on Basis of Fine Medium Coarse Fine Coarse
Plasticity
CONSISTENCY RELATIVE DENSITY
Clays&Silts SPT* Sands&Gravels SPT*
Blows/foot Blows/foot
Very Soft 0-2 Very Loose 0-4
Soft 2-4 Loose 5-10
Medium Stiff 4-8 Medium 11-30
Stiff 8-15 Dense 31-50
Very Stiff 15-30 Very Dense Over 50
Hard Over 30
*Standard Penetration Test;PL=Plastic Limit;LL=Liquid Limit
APPENDICES ES
APPENDIX A
Laboratory ory Testing Results
MOISTURE CONTENT DETERMINATION (ASTM D-2216) `ilJ
Project: North 19th Water Main Extension ALLIED
Project Number: 00 091
Date sampled: 1129E00 ENGINEERING
Date Tested: 1/28/01
SERVICES, INC.
Sample Identification: S-1 S 2 S-3 S-4 S-5 S-6 8-1 S-2 S-3 S-4
Test Pit Designation BH-1 BH-1 BH-1 BH-1 BH-1 BH-1 131-1-2 BH-2 BH-2 BH-2
Depth (feet) 3-4 4.5-6 6-8.5 915-11 14.5-16 19.5-21 5-6.5 10-11.5 10-15 15
Container Number: A BH-1 C D E F G H I J
Weight of Container: 32.14 31.81 31.90 31.85 32.55 31.86 31.91 31.75 32.01 31.86
Container+Wet Soil: 94.37 92.99 77.19 06.46 110.24 91.12 65.38 95.28 86.98 96.32
Container+ Dry Soil: 81.83 79..94 67.74 87.63 101.79 82.59 63.42 87.66 84.32 93.40
Weight of Water: 12.54 13.05 9.45 7.83 8.45 8.53 1.96 7.62 2.66 2.92
Weight of Dry Soil: 49.69 48.13 35.84 55.78 69.24 50.73 31.51 55.91 52.31 61.54
Water Content: 1 25.2%1 27.1% 26.4% 14.0% 12.2%1 16.8%1 6.2% 13.6%1 5.17/7 1 4.7%
Sample Identification: S-5 S-1 S-2 S-3 . S-1 S-2A S-213 S-3 S-1 S-2
Test Pit Designation BH-2 BH-4 BH-4 BH-4 BH-5 BH-5 BH-5 131-1-5 BH-6 BH-6
Depth (feet) 19.8-21.3 4.3-5.8 7-9 9.6-11.1 2-3 3.8-5.3 3.8-5.3 8-9.5 4.2-5.7 9.2-10.7
Container Number: K L: JJ KK LL. MM FF NN 04 PP
Weight of Container: 32.14 32.15 31.02 31.28 31.21 31.15 49.51 30.93 31.16 30.95
Container+Wet Soil: 89.62 71.14 82.55 101.18 86.06 97.99 90.13 67.29 87.00 114.89
Container+ Dry Soil: 81.11 63.37 73.19 90.04 75.18 85.92 76.26 63.96 76.17 103.41
Weight of Water: 8.51 7.77 9.36 11.14 10.88 12.07 13.87 3.33 10.83 11.48
Weight of Dry Soil: 48.97 31.22 42.17 58.76 43.97 54.77 26.75 33.03 45.01 72.46
Water Content: 17.4% 24.97/0 22.2% 19.07/6 24.7% 22.0% 51.9% 10.1%1 24.1% 15.8%
MOISTURE CONTENT DETERMINATION (ASTM - 16)
Project: North 19th Water Main Extension ALLIED
Project Number: 00-091
Date Tested:
1 v29 o0 ENGINEERING
Date ested. /28/01
SERVICES, INC.
Sample Identification: 8-1 S-2 S-1 S-2 S-3 S-2 S-1 S-2 S-3 S-5
Test Pit Designation BH-7 BH-7 BH-8 BH-8 BH-8 BH-9 SH-10 BH-10 BH-10 BH-10
Depth (feet) 4.5-6 9.2-10.7 4.4-5.9 5 9.2-10 9.5-11 2-3 4-5.5 9-10.5 18.8-20.3
Container Number: QQ RR SS TT uu AA BB CG DO EE
Weight of Container: 31.30 31.31 31.10 30.97 31.92 48.97 48.40 49.82 48.87 49.00
Container+Wet Soil: 101.70 106.00 77.62 100.42 69.33 132.35 106.15 108.03 115.79 `114.70
Container+ Dry Soil: 94.29 98.22 68.14 86.80 68.76 124.93 95.78 97.99 107.81 107.76
Weight of Water: 7.41 7.78 9.48 13.62 0.57 7.42 9.37 10.04 7.98 6.94
Wei ht of Dry Soil: 62.99 66.91 37.04 55.83 36.84 75.96 47.38 48.17 58.94 58.76
Water Content: 11.8%1 11.6%1 25.6% 24.4% 1.5% 9.8% 19.8% 20.8% 13.5%1 11.8%
Sample Identification:
Test Pit Designation
Depth (feet)
Container Number:
Weight of Container:
Container+Wet Soil
Container+ Dry Soil
Weight of Water:
Weight of Dry Soil
Water Content:
f..
% Passing #200 Sieve (ASTM D 1140)
Project: N. 19th Water main Extension ALLIED
Project Number: 00-091
Date Sampled: 12/712000 ENGINEERING
Date Tested:2/10/01 SERVICES, I N C_
Borehole Designation BH-8 BH-4, BH-1
Depth 5'
Container Number: 11 12
Weight of Container: 477.40 476.70
Container+Wet Soil: 682.60 694.60
Container+ Dry Soil: 643.20 654.00
Weight of#200 Sieve 477.E 476.6
Sieve + Dry Soil After Wash 483.4 493.5
Weight of Water: 39.40 40.60
Weight of Dry Soil: 165.80 177.30
Water Content: 23.8% 22.9%
Dry Soil After Wash 5.8 16.9
Soil Passing#200 Sieve 160 160.4
Passing #200 Sieve 1 96.5%1 90.5%
Compaction Test Results -
Project: North 19th Watermain Extension
Project Number: 00-091
Sample Identification: S-3, S-4: BH-2 ALLIED
Date Sampled:
Date Tested: 2/10/01 ENGINEERING
Soil Classification: Sandy GRAVEL SERVICES, �ivc_
Summary of Lab Test Data
Test Method: ASTM D-698 (Std. Proctor) Natural Moisture Content:
Test Procedure: B Optimum Moisture Content: 8.79%
No Oversize Correction Applied Maximum Dry Unit Weight: 134.85 PCF
Compaction Curve
f—Corn action Curve
f Zero Air Voids for S.G.=2.5
{ -0—Zero Air Voids for S.G.=2.65
Zero Air Voids for S.G.=2.8
150
i
140
U _
130
a 120 —
t
110
t
100
6% 7% 8% 9% 10% 11% 12%
M6sture Content(%)
Compaction Test Results t
Project: North 19th Watermain Extension
Project Number: 00-091 r F
Sample Identification: S-2, 131-1-4, S-3 BH-1, and S-2, 131-1-8 ALLIED
Date Sampled:
Date Tested: 2/10/01 ENGINEERING
Soil Classification: Sandy Lean CLAY SERVICES, �rvc_
Summary of Lab Test Data
Test Method: ASTM D-698 (Std. Proctor) Natural Moisture Content:
Test Procedure:A Optimum Moisture Content: 16%
No Oversize Correction Applied Maximum Dry Unit Weight: 107 PCF
Compaction Curve
120 m•, �•.—,—,- —,
3
I
i
110
{
-
a I
.2 I
100 — _` -— — One-Pt, Proctor —
0
90
3
--*—Compaction Curve
f-Zero Air Voids for S.G.=2.5
—0—Zero Air Voids for S.G.=2.65
—0 Zero Air Voids for S.G.=2.8 {
i
80
10% 11% 12% 13% 14% 15% 16% 17% 18% 19% 20%
Moisture Content(%)
ATTERBERG LIMITS DETERMINATION
(ASTM D-4318)
Aif #V�
Project: City of Bozeman Watermain Extension
Project Number: io 091 ALLIED
Sample Identification S-2:8H 4
Date Sampled: ENGINEERING
Date Tested: 12/14/00
Soil Classification: CL-Lean Clay SEEFZ\/ICES, INC_
so --w.--___ __._„_ _.r ._ Plasticit Chart
Test Summary Results
A Line
Plastic Limit: 20.7
40 Liquid Limit: 39
CH ; Plasticity Index: 18.3
30
u µ _
MH or H'
a
20
CL
10
4 L-Mt u
o ML
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Liquid Limit
ATTERBERG LIMITS DETERMINATION
(ASTM D-4318)
'i
Project: City of Bozeman Watermain Extension
Project Number: io 091 ALLIED
Sample Identification S 2:BH_g
Date Sampled: ENGINEERING
Date Tested: 12/14/00
SERVICES, INC_
Sail Classification: CL-Lean Clay
60 Plasticit Chart
50 I
Test Summary Results
( Plastic Limit: 21.5
40 1 Liquid Limit: 41
CH Plasticity Index: 19.5
30
MH or OH
a
20
CL
10
CL-M:i, f ML W e L
ML
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Liquid Limit
11PPENDIlXB
JOINT RES TRA INT A NA L YSIS
Pruject Name COB Watermain ExtIllikilill
ension
Drawing Location �-
Piping Materials Installation Conditions
Prpe Material DuctilelPol
y J Soil Type CL
IUomrnai Sizze 12" Trench Type . 5
Fiftmg Tyge . Horizontal Bend Test Pressure. 200 psi_
Bend Angle 90' Safety Factor ' 1.5 to 1
Depth of Bury
Click here to Restrained Length Calculation Results: - -------
i review Fs and Calculate
Rs values. Length To Be Restrained = 28 ft.
Fs,Rs Clear
Project Name ICOB Watermain Extension
Drawing Location I 1 1:&,%
-
Piping Materials Installation Conditions
Pipe Material DuctilelPoly Soil T
yPe. CL
IVoinrnal Size _ 12" Trench Type 5
Fitting Type Horizontal Bend Test Pressure 260 psi_
BeadAngte 45 _1
Safety Factor_ 1.5 to 1
-
Depth of Bury 6 ft_
Click here to Restrained Length Calculation Results:
i review Fs and Calculate
Rs values. Length To Be Restrained
Fs.Rs : Clear
PrJject Name 1COR Watermain Extension
Drawing Location
Pipinq Materials Installation Conditions
Pipe Material, Ductile/Poly Soil Type CL
Nomrnal4Siz 12" T x
Trench Tgpe 5
Fittrn T g yp Horizontal Bend Test Pressure 200 psi.
T
Bend An le , 22h
Safety Factor 1.5 to 1
Depth of Bury 6 ft_
Click here to Restrained Length Calculation Results:
review Fs and Calculate
Rs values. Length To Be Restrained = 6 ft. ---.�'
Fs:Rs Clean Exrt °]
_ _•_ t Cob Wa:!ma n Fr a
CA
J }
2
i
Force Q+ a 9v°
`� '� �• 225'2c•;e
VX
x
I es {
F }
€ S
i
`t,
1 i
S
"(W, )�I(2�,o��Z s 3 ,18�l6$ �.�. : 3,,1 actLs
a
y
i
qX
i
�y = rz� Gnu - "�•,. [,;. s,-,�I;° 15,595165 y
3
f
F
}
1
t
Ly !
Al
F
if
gg�
z
I {� 1 fall is E
i N
i -
'� t1tS,���ar =d
I
I
i
(1'' p 4
t
1>
I.S
L c+s Cansefc m�, {,. 1`t+C 9�°3e Gn -k ((V-PAmh<, rac\P` i+'� cl-p{ ` p° I
?WZ