Soils and Foundation Report.pdf

SOILS AND FOUNDATION LETTER REPORT

NO. 04-10

PROJECT APPA-LEHIGH GAP

SLOPE STABILIZATION/ROCKFALL MITIGATION

LEHIGH GAP CERCLA SITE

APPALACHIAN NATIONAL SCENIC TRAIL

NORTHAMPTON AND CARBON COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA

U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division 21400 Ridgetop Circle

Sterling, VA 20166

March 2010

TABLE OF CONTENTS

REPORT PAGE

INTRODUCTION

General Project Description Regional Geology

PROCEDURES AND RESULTS

General Sampling Field Tests and Measurements Laboratory Testing

DESIGN ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS

Slope Stabilization/Rockfall Mitigation Rockfall Simulation Results

RECOMMENDATIONS

General Rockfall Barrier Fences and Gabions Pinned Net Drape Rock Glue (PUR) Rock Bolts Scaling Talus Removal

CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS

DISCLAIMER/LIMITATIONS CLAUSE

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A – Figures APPENDIX B – Laboratory Test Results APPENDIX C – Design Analysis Results APPENDIX D – Proposed Mitigation Plans and Photographs APPENDIX E – Golder Associates Preliminary Reports

Note: Design changes subsequent to publication of this report and prior to the project’s advertisement will be documented by a memo inserted after the title page.

SOILS AND FOUNDATION LETTER REPORT

NO. 04-10

PROJECT APPA-LEHIGH GAP

SLOPE STABILIZATION/ROCKFALL MITIGATION

LEHIGH GAP CERCLA SITE

APPALACHIAN NATIONAL SCENIC TRAIL

NORTHAMPTON AND CARBON COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA

INTRODUCTION

General

This report presents the results of geotechnical and geological field investigations and design analyses, and presents our recommendations for construction of rockfall mitigation and slope stabilization systems for Project APPA-LEHIGH GAP. The project site is located within the Appalachian National Scenic Trail, south of the city of Palmerton in Northampton and Carbon Counties, Pennsylvania. The general site location is shown on Figure 1 in Appendix A, “Site Location and Vicinity Map.”

Project Description

Project APPA-LEHIGH GAP is located on the eastern flank of Blue Mountain, east of and above Pennsylvania Route 248 and the Lehigh River, near Palmerton, Pennsylvania. The Appalachian Trail traverses Blue Mountain in the vicinity of the site, and the Winter Trail of the Appalachian Trail is located partially on the project site. Pollution from smelters led to deforestation and erosion of Blue Mountain, causing the greater Palmerton Superfund Site to be listed on the National Priorities List (NPL). Deforestation of trees and vegetation eliminated natural barriers to rockfall and erosion of the slopes. Talus and bedrock are now exposed throughout the project site, and soil containing hazardous substances continues to migrate to the land and waterways below the site. Route 248 is at risk of a catastrophic rockfall event. In addition, NPS has determined that the revegetation effort planned for the Lehigh Gap area in the Palmerton NPL Site has little chance to succeed without a prior engineered slope stabilization effort.

This project was undertaken by the National Park Service (NPS) as a response action pursuant to the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), and is separate from, but supplemental to, the cleanup activities planned as part of the Palmerton NPL Site. NPS has determined that the release of hazardous substances at Lehigh Gap and the resultant deforestation, destabilized slope, and ongoing migration of hazardous substances off Site, pose an imminent and substantial danger to public health, welfare and the environment, such that this project is now designated as a time-critical removal action under CERCLA. Consequently, NPS has expressed an intent to initiate this project as soon as possible and has requested that Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division (EFLHD) carry the project from preliminary design, performed by Golder Associates, to complete design.

Project: APPA-LEHIGH GAP Lehigh Gap CERCLA Site Appalachian National Scenic Trail Soils and Foundation Letter Report Northampton and Carbon Counties, PA No. 04-10

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VA

Regional Geology

According to the “Geologic Map of Pennsylvania,” the project site is underlain by Ordovician- and Silurian-aged formations, consisting of sandstones, conglomerates, shales, and limestones. Refer to Figure 2 in Appendix A for a Geologic Map of the project area.

See the Geologic Setting section of Golder’s report for a more detailed description of geology at the site.

PROCEDURES AND RESULTS

General

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division (EFLHD) conducted a field investigation at the project site from December 8 - 11, 2009. The field investigation consisted mainly of visual observation of the rock and slope conditions and collection of additional survey data. No drilling or core sampling was conducted for this field investigation because the proposed construction is almost entirely on bedrock and exposed talus, and because of difficult access on the steep and unstable slopes.

A site visit was conducted by Golder Associates of Manchester, New Hampshire, on May 14, 2008. Golder used information they gathered and the results of this site visit and to conduct rockfall simulation and calibration. Golder then developed and located slope stabilization/rockfall mitigation measures (fences, drapes, and hybrid barriers) based on preliminary analyses. Details of their observation and analyses may be found in their redacted rockfall mitigation reports dated August 23, 2007 and October 8, 2008, included in Appendix E.

Sampling

EFLHD collected bulk rock samples for laboratory testing. Water levels were not measured, but water seepage was observed at the rock face at a few locations.

Field Tests and Measurements

The EFLHD geotechnical and survey crew took survey measurements, photographs and noted existing conditions. The main purpose of EFLHD’s field investigation was to gather information to confirm or revise Golder’s preliminary design based on observed site conditions and additional rockfall analyses.

Laboratory Testing

EFLHD selected representative rock samples from the site for rock strength testing.

EFLHD’s Sevierville, Tennessee laboratory cored cylindrical samples from the bulk samples and conducted laboratory testing. Eight (8) samples were tested for unconfined compressive strength. Measured unconfined compressive strengths ranged from 1,880 to 9,260 psi.

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VA

Results of laboratory testing are summarized in Table 1. Laboratory data sheets are included in Appendix B.

Table 1 - Summary of Laboratory Test Results

Sample Rock Type

UCS

(psi)

B-1C Metasandstone 5,780

B-1D Metasandstone 6,230

B-2A Metaconglomerate 4,980

B-2B Metaconglomerate 2,960

B-3A Metasandstone 1,880

B-3B Metasandstone 5,870

B-4A Metasandstone 4,160

B-4B Metasandstone 9,260

DESIGN ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS

Slope Stabilization/Rockfall Mitigation

The proposed rockfall mitigation is achieved primarily through six (6) techniques.

1. Rockfall Barrier Fences and Gabions;

2. Pinned Net Drape;

3. Rock Gluing (PUR);

4. Rock Bolting;

5. Rock Scaling; and

6. Talus Removal

A combination of these six mitigation measures was analyzed to provide an economical design. Rockfall barrier fences are proposed in places that require rockfall protection during and after construction. Proposed rockfall barrier fences are permanent. Pinned net drapes are intended to stabilize prominent rock outcrops that otherwise would continue to generate large rock pieces and increase rockfall. Rock gluing and rock bolting are intended to stabilize rock masses and rock faces as an alternative to pinned net drapes in many areas. Rock scaling and

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VA

talus removal will remove rock pieces that contribute to ongoing rockfall, as well as provide more storage area on the slopes for future talus blocks.

Rockfall Simulation

Rockfall was analyzed by Golder Associates using the program Rocfall (Rocscience, 2008).

See Golder’s reports in Appendix E for more detailed information. EFLHD analyzed three additional sections as a confirmation of the adequacy of the proposed slope stabilization/rockfall mitigation measures, as well as for adjustments to the preliminary design.

EFLHD analyzed Section 1 to check the adequacy of Fences No. 1 and 4, and Section 2 to check the adequacy of Fences No. 1 and 3. EFLHD analyzed Section 3 to confirm that fencing was not necessary on the more gradual continuous talus slope. EFLHD used the computer program Colorado Rockfall Simulation Program (CRSP 5.0) to simulate rockfall at the site.

Results

Results of analyses show that rockfall barriers with minimum rated energies of 2,000 to 3,000 kJ and heights of 12 to 16 feet are appropriate for arresting rockfall at various locations on site. At Section 2, analysis was originally performed assuming only rock gluing and rock bolting would be needed below Fence No. 3. However, since rockfall could occur during construction of Fence No. 3 and prior to or during gluing and bolting, analysis was run assuming rocks could be generated from just below Fence No. 3. The topography at this location includes several short, horizontal plateaus that act as launching pads for rocks rolling down the slope. The resulting 71-foot maximum bounce height results in a very high risk to the trail and to Route 248. Two primary options were considered to mitigate this specific risk: softening the material properties at this plateau through a significant thickness of topsoil and seed, or installing pinned net drape over isolated high risk areas. Because topsoil and seed quantity would be very minimal and difficult to place and maintain, this area was selected for treatment with additional pinned net drape. Results of EFLHD’s rockfall analysis are shown in Table 2, and CRSP 5 output and plan locations of Sections 1 through 3 are included in Appendix C.

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VA

Table 2 – Summary of EFLHD’s Rockfall Analysis

Maximum Energy Section Station

Analysis Point

Condition Maximum

Bounce Height (ft) ft-kip kJ

3+10 skewed section Fence No. 4

Upper Rockfall

12 694 944

3+10 skewed section Fence No. 6

Protect Winter Trail

4 295 401

2 5+00 Fence No. 3 Upper

Rockfall 6 190 258

2 5+00 Fence No. 1 No Drape

Net 71 1,059 1,440

2 5+00 Fence No. 1 With Drape

Net 15 718 976

9+99 skewed section West Side

Winter Trail No Fences 0 0 0

RECOMMENDATIONS

General

The following recommendations are based on field observations and rockfall simulations from EFLHD and Golder Associates. Based on the rockfall analysis we recommend that the slope stabilization/rockfall mitigation be accomplished through a combination of rockfall barriers, pinned net drapes, rock glue, rock bolts, scaling, and removal of talus.

Rockfall Barrier Fences and Gabions

Two rockfall barriers are proposed. The first is a rockfall barrier system consisting of vertical I-beams anchored to the bedrock, and a gabion basket wall. The rockfall barrier functions to arrest movement of rocks tumbling down the slope. It is recommended to install a rockfall barrier fence system designed for maximum energy levels of 2,000 and 3,000 kJ, depending on the fence location, as noted in Table 3. Submittals should contain detailed calculations and test data supporting the maximum rated energy level, and foundations should be designed to perform with a design life at least equal to that of the rockfall barrier fence. The second is a gabion basket system that matches the existing gabion walls on site.

The gabion wall, located at the north end of the project site, is meant to provide a barrier for sloughing and rolling of small talus material (generally up to 6 inches in diameter) with low energy.

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VA

Table 3 – Summary of Rockfall Barrier Fence Design

Design Maximum

Energy Fence

No.

Approximate Beginning Station &

Offset

Minimum Height (ft) ft-kip kJ

1 3+25, 15 L 16 2,205 3,000

2 7+60, 50 R 12 1,470 2,000

3 5+75, 175 R 16 2,205 3,000

4 3+80, 260 R 16 2,205 3,000

5 13+10, 10 R 12 1,470 2,000

6 2+50, 45 R 12 1,470 2,000

Pinned Net Drape

Continuous drape, consisting of ring nets or other combinations of high and low strength wire mesh systems, should be secured directly on the slope surface, on all sides of the drape, using grouted bars drilled into the bedrock. The purpose of this system is to stabilize the slope, reduce erosion and inhibit movement of talus blocks and prevent rockfall. EFLHD recommends five (5) pinned net drapes to stabilize talus blocks in place. Pinned net drapes should be capable of incorporating future topsoil and seeding as part of the future revegetation effort.

Rock Glue (PUR)

Rock gluing is the process of injecting a chemical grout Polyurethane Resin (PUR) into a rock mass for the purpose of bonding individual blocks into larger, more stable, continuous rock masses. Rock gluing has been used in the tunneling and mining industries. The primary advantages of PUR are that it is available with a variety of characteristics, can be specified with a compressive strength double or triple the compressive strength of cementitious grout, can penetrate fine rock cracks forming a larger stable mass that can be further stabilized using rock bolts or anchors, forms a water barrier, reduces freeze-thaw effects, has a controlled set time, and is less conspicuous than other stabilization techniques. A disadvantage is that there are constraints with respect to ambient air temperature (50 to 120 degrees F) to effectively install PUR. Another disadvantage is that higher costs could result if PUR overruns are encountered.

The general procedure used to install PUR for rock slope stabilization is:

1. Establish an injection hole pattern on the rock face.

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VA

2. Drill first injection hole to desired depth of treatment. Injection holes are typically

1.5 inches in diameter.

3. Inject grout through a rod using a packer to seal off the hole. PUR grouts commonly come as a two-component system, much like a two-part epoxy grout, which when mixed produces PUR.

4. Pressurize and pump grout in the injection hole until termination criteria are met.

Termination is typically dictated by grout take or setting time, or when grout is observed to flow from surface cracks around the injection hole. For this project, we recommend termination criteria also include pumping pressure threshold to reduce the risk for pressure-induced rockfall.

5. Stop pumping grout and hold for setting time.

6. Pressurize and pump grout in the same hole for second stage of pumping. Since the grout introduced during the first stage has sealed some paths, the grout will enter other cracks, if present. These second stage cracks are usually above the first-stage cracks.

7. Fill hole with grout and top off with dark-colored epoxy to hide hole.

8. Move to the second, adjacent injection hole and perform the same process as above.

9. For verification, an intermediate hole may be drilled between the first two holes and injected. If no grout is taken, then the grout from the first two holes has sufficiently covered the distance between them. The verification holes allow the contractor some “assurance” that the discontinuities and joints are being filled with glue.

10. Record grout take and time and provide to the CO.

11. Proceed or adjust hole spacing as necessary and continue grouting.

12. For cleanup, remove the excess PUR material that came out of the cracks at the slope face.

Some locations identified for PUR stabilization contain wide joint spacing. For these locations, inject glue without drilling to bond blocks together. Additional stabilization measures, such as rock bolts, may also be required.

Rock Bolts

The stabilization design includes rock bolting in conjunction with rock gluing. The rock bolts are intended to reduce future propagation and opening of existing fractures, and development of additional fractures. We recommend passive rock bolts because actively tensioned bolts may redistribute stresses and further destabilize surrounding rock. Passive bolts develop their capacity through shear and pullout resistance.

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VA

Rock bolts are to be designed by a registered professional geotechnical engineer or registered professional geologist, and submitted to the CO and EFLHD’s Division Geotechnical Engineer for approval:

Size bolts to carry a minimum design load of 40 kips. Use a minimum Grade 75 rock bolt.

Determine lengths of bolts in the field based on site conditions. Estimated average lengths typically range from 15 to 20 feet, with a minimum of 10 feet and a maximum of 45 feet.

Corrosion protection - Epoxy-coated or galvanized and completely surrounded with cement grout

Scaling

Scaling involves removal of loose or potentially unstable rock blocks from the slope face by manual scaling (with pry bars) or mechanical scaling (with hydraulic or pneumatic splitters).

The appropriate scaling methods selected for this project should be submitted to the CO for review and approved by EFLHD’s Geotechnical Section.

Scaling should proceed with caution and under the direction of a registered professional geotechnical engineer or registered professional geologist with rock slope remediation experience. Care should be taken not to over-excavate such that the stability of the overlying or adjacent rocks are compromised.

Talus Removal

Seven (7) areas of talus removal are identified. Talus removal along and near the centerline of the alignment is intended to maintain clearance width and remove talus debris. Removal of the large talus pile on the natural bench behind Fence No. 3 is intended to reduce the rockfall risk and provide additional storage area for future rock toppling immediately above this bench. Extreme caution should be practiced during removal of the large boulders forming the talus pile located at the first bench approximately between Stations 5+00 and 7+50. There is a potential for triggering flow of the boulders down the slope and possibly onto the highway.

CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS

The proposed construction consists of installation of slope stabilization/rockfall mitigation systems at various locations throughout the site. Based on the field investigations and design analysis results, construction recommendations are as follows:

Construction Sequence and Rockfall Observation/Monitoring: The potential for naturally-occurring or construction-induced instability and rockfall is high. An observation and

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VA

monitoring program should be in place and to survey, photograph and/or install crack monitors at high risk locations (loose or severely overhanging blocks) prior to the beginning of construction activities. Phase construction to prevent disturbance of these locations until rockfall barriers or other preventative measures are in place. At a minimum, monitor as follows: Prior to the first day of construction and twice weekly after construction commences. The CO may increase the frequency of monitoring based on the need for additional information.

The suggested construction sequence is listed below. Refer to Appendix D for identification of individual mitigation element numbers. Actual construction sequence will be submitted to the CO prior to construction activities for approval. Submittal should include provisions for safety of the Contractor, Appalachian Trail visitors, and PA State Route 248.

1. Remove and dispose of Talus Piles 2 through 6

2. Install Pinned Net Drapes 3 and 4

3. Install Fences 1, 2 and 6

4. Install Fences 3, 4 and 5; install Pinned Net Drape 5; drill and glue; install rock bolts; install gabion wall; and scale slopes

5. Remove and dispose of Talus Pile 1

6. Install Pinned Net Drapes 1 and 2

Contaminated Soil: This site a Superfund Cleanup Site. Chemical pollution has deforested the slopes and hazardous substances remain in the soil. Contractors must implement a health and safety plan for construction. Waste soils and talus generated or displaced at the site are to be disposed of off-site in accordance with applicable federal and state environmental laws.

Chemical testing will be required to determine whether soil is clean fill, regulated fill or hazardous waste.

APPENDIX A

Figures

TOTAL

SHEETS

2NE

SHEET

NO.

PROJECT

FIGURE 1

SITE LOCATION AND VICINITY MAP

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VIRGINIA

STATEREG

APPA LEHIGH GAPPA

Project: APPA-LEHIGH GAP

Red and gray sandstone, conglomerate, shale, and limestone.

Shale, limestone, dolomite and sandstone.

Geologic Map of Pennsylvania

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

Department of Conservation and Natural Resources

SILURIAN

ORDOVICIAN

PA

FIGURE 2

GEOLOGIC MAP

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

TOTAL

SHEETS

Source:

APPA-LEHIGH GAPSTERLING, VIRGINIA NE

SHEET

NO.

PROJECT

STATEREG

Project: APPA-LEHIGH GAP

APPENDIX B

Laboratory Test Results

Federal Lands Highway Office

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division Materials Testing Laboratory

1827 Jack Delozier Drive Sevierville, TN 37876

APPA LEHIGH GAP

APPA LEHIGH GAP Palmerton

PA

B. Lawrence

B-1 C

Project Name: State:

County:

Submitted By:

Field Sample No:

Project Number:

Report of Unconfined Compressive Strength of Intact Rock Cores

Unconfined Compressive Strength of Intact Rock Core (ASTM 2938)

Unconfined Compressive Strength, psi 5780

Page 1 of 1 1/25/2010 01:22 PM

Charles W. McCown, Jr. - Laboratory Team Leader Date

Lab Control No: E-10-0034

Uncontrolled Copy

Federal Lands Highway Office

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division Materials Testing Laboratory

1827 Jack Delozier Drive Sevierville, TN 37876

APPA LEHIGH GAP

APPA LEHIGH GAP Palmerton

PA

B. Lawrence

B-1 D

Project Name: State:

County:

Submitted By:

Field Sample No:

Project Number:

Report of Unconfined Compressive Strength of Intact Rock Cores

Unconfined Compressive Strength of Intact Rock Core (ASTM 2938)

Unconfined Compressive Strength, psi 6230

Page 1 of 1 1/25/2010 01:23 PM

Charles W. McCown, Jr. - Laboratory Team Leader Date

Lab Control No: E-10-0035

Federal Lands Highway Office

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division Materials Testing Laboratory

1827 Jack Delozier Drive Sevierville, TN 37876

APPA LEHIGH GAP

APPA LEHIGH GAP Palmerton

PA

B. Lawrence

B-2 A

Project Name: State:

County:

Submitted By:

Field Sample No:

Project Number:

Report of Unconfined Compressive Strength of Intact Rock Cores

Unconfined Compressive Strength of Intact Rock Core (ASTM 2938)

Unconfined Compressive Strength, psi 4980

Page 1 of 1 1/25/2010 01:25 PM

Charles W. McCown, Jr. - Laboratory Team Leader Date

Lab Control No: E-10-0036

Federal Lands Highway Office

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division Materials Testing Laboratory

1827 Jack Delozier Drive Sevierville, TN 37876

APPA LEHIGH GAP

APPA LEHIGH GAP Palmerton

PA

B. Lawrence

B-2 B

Project Name: State:

County:

Submitted By:

Field Sample No:

Project Number:

Report of Unconfined Compressive Strength of Intact Rock Cores

Unconfined Compressive Strength of Intact Rock Core (ASTM 2938)

Unconfined Compressive Strength, psi 2960

Page 1 of 1 1/25/2010 01:26 PM

Charles W. McCown, Jr. - Laboratory Team Leader Date

Lab Control No: E-10-0037

Federal Lands Highway Office

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division Materials Testing Laboratory

1827 Jack Delozier Drive Sevierville, TN 37876

APPA LEHIGH GAP

APPA LEHIGH GAP Palmerton

PA

B. Lawrence

B-3 A

Project Name: State:

County:

Submitted By:

Field Sample No:

Project Number:

Report of Unconfined Compressive Strength of Intact Rock Cores

Unconfined Compressive Strength of Intact Rock Core (ASTM 2938)

Unconfined Compressive Strength, psi 1880

Page 1 of 1 1/25/2010 01:27 PM

Charles W. McCown, Jr. - Laboratory Team Leader Date

Lab Control No: E-10-0038

Federal Lands Highway Office

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division Materials Testing Laboratory

1827 Jack Delozier Drive Sevierville, TN 37876

APPA LEHIGH GAP

APPA LEHIGH GAP Palmerton

PA

B. Lawrence

B-3 B

Project Name: State:

County:

Submitted By:

Field Sample No:

Project Number:

Report of Unconfined Compressive Strength of Intact Rock Cores

Unconfined Compressive Strength of Intact Rock Core (ASTM 2938)

Unconfined Compressive Strength, psi 5870

Page 1 of 1 1/25/2010 01:28 PM

Charles W. McCown, Jr. - Laboratory Team Leader Date

Lab Control No: E-10-0039

Federal Lands Highway Office

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division Materials Testing Laboratory

1827 Jack Delozier Drive Sevierville, TN 37876

APPA LEHIGH GAP

APPA LEHIGH GAP Palmerton

PA

B. Lawrence

B-4 A

Project Name: State:

County:

Submitted By:

Field Sample No:

Project Number:

Report of Unconfined Compressive Strength of Intact Rock Cores

Unconfined Compressive Strength of Intact Rock Core (ASTM 2938)

Unconfined Compressive Strength, psi 4610

Page 1 of 1 1/25/2010 01:29 PM

Charles W. McCown, Jr. - Laboratory Team Leader Date

Lab Control No: E-10-0040

Federal Lands Highway Office

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division Materials Testing Laboratory

1827 Jack Delozier Drive Sevierville, TN 37876

APPA LEHIGH GAP

APPA LEHIGH GAP Palmerton

PA

B. Lawrence

B-4 B

Project Name: State:

County:

Submitted By:

Field Sample No:

Project Number:

Report of Unconfined Compressive Strength of Intact Rock Cores

Unconfined Compressive Strength of Intact Rock Core (ASTM 2938)

Unconfined Compressive Strength, psi 9260

Page 1 of 1 1/25/2010 01:30 PM

Charles W. McCown, Jr. - Laboratory Team Leader Date

Lab Control No: E-10-0041

APPENDIX C

Design Analysis Results

...\D01-APPA248_pln.dgn 2/3/2010 2:20:25 PM

Colorado Rockfall Simulation Program--CRSP 5.0

CRSP Rockfall Analysis

PROJECT INFORMATION

Company Name: FHWA Project Name: SECTION 1 Station: 3+10 skew Location: Palmerton, PA Analysis By: BL Analysis Case: Fence [4] Date: 1/26/10

CRSP was used to determine the expected kinetic energy and bouncing height of falling rocks at various points along the slope. In the analysis, it was assumed that rounded boulders with a maximum diameter of 5.0 feet would impact the rockfall retaining system. For each simulation, the model rolled 200 spherical shaped rocks from a source area at 757 - 833 feet. A slope surface roughness of 0.1 - 1.0, and hardness of 0.4 - 1.0 were used.

Analysis Points

AP-1 @ X = 287 ft

INPUT PARAMETERS

Slope Properties Cells Roughness Hardness 1-11,17-20,24-29,37-39 0.4-1.0 0.5 12-16,21-23,30-36 0.1-0.2 1 40-44 0.2 0.35 45-47 0.1 0.9 48-57 0.1-0.2 0.8 58-65 0.1 1

Rock Properties Cells Number of Rocks Density Shape Size 13-15 100 170 Sphere 2-5 21-24 100 170 Sphere 2-5

The Developers are not responsible for the reliability of the parameters and improper use of the software.

CRSP Rockfall Results for Station 3+10 skew and Analysis Point 1

Rock Distribution Rock Size Rock Number Start Cell 2-5 100 13-15 2-5 100 21-24

Summary of Results Max Bounce Ht, ft Max Energy, ft-kips Max Velocity, ft/s Percent Passing 12 694 67 100%

The Developers are not responsible for the reliability of the parameters and improper use of the software.

Velocity

Height

Kinetic Energy

The Developers are not responsible for the reliability of the parameters and improper use of the software.

CRSP Rollout Start Results for Station 3+10 skew

CRSP Rollout Stop Results for Station 3+10 skew

OUTPUT STATS

Kinetics

Analysis Pnt X (ft) Diameter (ft) Mass (lbm) V (ft/s) W (rad/s) Height (ft) KE (ft-kips) 287 4.0 5782 46.7 -21.1 5.7 261 287 4.6 8955 38.5 -15.5 6.6 278 287 4.4 7679 49.1 -17.0 2.9 355 287 4.0 5924 43.8 -19.2 4.2 233 287 4.6 8292 56.5 -22.1 7.5 542 287 2.4 1147 32.9 -25.2 8.4 26 287 2.4 1115 35.9 -24.4 2.1 28 287 2.2 1018 55.9 -34.4 4.3 59 287 4.4 8072 36.0 -15.0 5.2 220 287 4.6 8723 47.8 -17.8 3.7 401 287 2.0 766 51.3 -47.9 3.2 43 287 2.8 2067 45.8 -30.2 5.1 91 287 4.2 6385 45.3 -20.6 4.3 276 287 2.6 1602 40.4 -28.7 4.0 55 287 4.0 5943 48.8 -21.9 4.9 293 287 2.2 1016 44.7 -36.3 5.0 42 287 4.6 8192 46.3 -14.3 8.6 326 287 3.6 3950 37.5 -19.7 8.4 116 287 3.2 2771 46.5 -29.1 2.0 129 287 4.6 8724 50.2 -21.7 3.0 478 287 3.4 3464 66.4 -26.2 9.2 280 287 2.0 728 47.8 -31.6 4.2 30 287 4.2 6853 43.2 -18.7 2.9 266 287 5.0 11120 40.7 -14.7 6.4 378 287 2.8 2023 287 2.8 1777 39.3 -27.4 2.7 58 287 4.2 6197 43.2 -19.0 6.0 238 287 4.2 6669 34.7 -15.2 6.9 168 287 3.6 4391 38.4 -19.7 5.6 136 287 2.2 1075 40.4 -33.6 6.7 37 287 2.4 1189 38.4 -30.7 5.9 37 287 3.2 2744 33.0 -19.7 5.6 63 287 2.0 723 40.1 -37.7 4.6 25 287 4.0 5884 59.0 -19.1 3.4 373 287 4.4 7495 51.8 -17.7 4.9 381 287 4.0 6122 47.3 -21.0 6.1 283 287 2.8 2097 47.4 -32.4 2.2 101 287 4.4 7881 33.1 -14.4 7.0 185 287 3.0 2356 44.1 -29.1 2.0 99 287 2.0 737 53.4 -36.1 2.3 39 287 2.8 1815 50.5 -24.9 9.7 85 287 2.6 1680 39.7 -26.3 6.4 54 287 4.0 5580 41.5 -19.8 4.3 203 287 2.8 2123 39.9 -25.8 7.4 71 287 3.2 3039 60.7 -26.1 10.7 208

The Developers are not responsible for the reliability of the parameters and improper use of the software.

Kinetics

Analysis Pnt X (ft) Diameter (ft) Mass (lbm) V (ft/s) W (rad/s) Height (ft) KE (ft-kips) 287 2.2 866 51.1 -28.7 5.3 40 287 5.0 10594 54.9 -22.3 3.0 694 287 3.0 2439 41.7 -26.9 4.9 91 287 2.0 754 39.9 -37.2 4.6 25 287 3.6 4396 34.9 -18.6 10.8 115 287 3.2 3182 40.7 -21.9 5.8 108 287 4.4 7368 38.0 -15.7 7.0 220 287 2.6 1696 40.1 -29.1 3.1 58 287 5.0 10504 53.1 -21.0 3.5 632 287 3.4 3703 43.1 -22.9 5.6 143 287 4.2 6401 33.4 -14.7 6.5 148 287 2.8 1933 55.3 -22.6 5.9 104 287 4.0 6122 43.0 -18.1 3.3 228 287 2.4 1090 45.8 -37.0 6.5 48 287 4.8 9728 37.3 -14.1 6.5 278 287 3.6 4194 48.7 -26.0 2.7 212 287 3.8 4647 48.3 -25.1 2.7 232 287 3.6 4276 40.9 -21.8 5.0 153 287 2.8 1974 27.5 -19.1 10.8 32 287 2.6 1568 54.0 -23.4 3.3 80 287 3.6 4332 37.9 -18.7 6.7 128 287 3.4 3424 38.1 -21.5 5.3 105 287 3.0 2350 60.9 -22.3 5.6 152 287 5.0 10832 47.7 -18.4 4.3 524 287 4.8 9775 43.6 -15.7 4.1 375 287 4.8 9523 48.8 -18.2 3.9 464 287 3.0 2611 34.8 -20.9 5.8 66 287 3.2 3000 33.2 -20.0 7.6 71 287 2.4 1336 51.9 -41.0 2.0 77 287 4.8 10136 35.9 -12.5 4.2 261 287 4.8 9769 53.3 -17.5 4.6 538 287 2.4 1113 43.6 -34.8 5.1 44 287 4.4 7095 37.1 -16.2 5.6 205 287 4.0 5943 44.0 -20.6 5.6 243 287 4.6 8112 46.0 -17.6 5.4 346 287 2.8 2119 46.6 -25.9 7.3 90 287 5.0 10506 41.0 -16.2 6.3 378 287 2.2 910 40.0 -30.3 7.9 29 287 4.2 6493 40.4 -17.7 5.4 219 287 4.2 6476 46.0 -20.6 4.1 287 287 4.6 8829 56.1 -15.1 6.7 498 287 3.4 3615 40.0 -23.0 8.0 125 287 3.6 4431 40.4 -21.4 2.7 155 287 4.4 7195 46.6 -20.1 6.0 327 287 2.4 1209 43.3 -33.7 10.3 47

The Developers are not responsible for the reliability of the parameters and improper use of the software.

Kinetics

Analysis Pnt X (ft) Diameter (ft) Mass (lbm) V (ft/s) W (rad/s) Height (ft) KE (ft-kips) 287 4.6 8960 39.9 -15.9 6.0 299 287 2.8 1852 46.4 -31.6 1.8 84 287 2.8 1876 43.5 -30.3 6.2 76 287 4.2 6363 42.9 -18.0 4.2 238 287 4.2 6647 41.5 -18.9 4.4 243 287 2.8 1804 40.4 -27.5 6.1 61 287 2.0 816 37.0 -35.0 8.4 24 287 3.6 4023 65.4 -24.3 9.5 315 287 2.6 1457 50.4 -22.5 6.6 65 287 2.8 2136 31.4 -21.0 11.3 45 287 3.8 5180 45.6 -16.1 3.4 199 287 4.2 6258 21.3 -7.1 2.6 52 287 2.2 1002 28.3 -22.2 3.7 16 287 5.0 11099 22.8 -8.8 3.3 123 287 3.4 3499 37.1 -19.9 3.5 100 287 2.8 2154 20.0 -12.5 2.6 18 287 2.2 859 27.0 -19.6 4.4 12 287 2.4 1326 31.9 -24.3 2.9 28 287 2.8 1764 36.5 -18.3 1.7 43 287 3.0 2193 37.3 -22.9 4.8 63 287 2.6 1493 35.7 -22.2 3.1 37 287 2.8 2130 27.9 -17.9 4.9 35 287 4.6 9217 24.9 -10.0 3.3 121 287 4.8 10095 29.8 -10.8 7.6 182 287 3.4 3677 22.1 -8.6 3.0 33 287 3.8 5258 28.6 -11.6 6.2 84 287 4.0 5723 32.1 -13.4 4.3 117 287 2.4 1292 27.1 -15.2 2.2 18 287 2.8 2105 33.1 -21.8 5.3 49 287 4.8 9892 32.6 -13.3 3.3 226 287 3.4 3647 38.7 -21.7 3.3 116 287 2.8 1855 24.3 -15.7 2.0 22 287 4.4 7917 32.4 -11.7 5.1 163 287 2.6 1426 38.8 -22.2 2.8 40 287 4.2 7003 28.8 -10.0 4.0 110 287 4.2 7060 28.2 -10.0 3.2 107 287 2.8 2007 32.4 -22.0 4.7 45 287 2.2 972 33.6 -27.2 5.8 23 287 2.4 1121 31.7 -18.3 2.2 21 287 4.0 5775 29.6 -12.0 3.7 100 287 4.2 6888 29.6 -11.0 4.5 117 287 4.6 8344 34.5 -13.3 3.5 201 287 3.0 2523 33.7 -20.0 7.9 59 287 2.4 1211 31.8 -21.9 5.0 24 287 2.2 898 30.9 -26.7 3.9 18

The Developers are not responsible for the reliability of the parameters and improper use of the software.

Kinetics

Analysis Pnt X (ft) Diameter (ft) Mass (lbm) V (ft/s) W (rad/s) Height (ft) KE (ft-kips) 287 3.2 3070 29.8 -15.3 5.5 54 287 5.0 10782 37.1 -13.0 5.7 300 287 3.0 2239 29.3 -15.7 4.4 37 287 4.4 7902 20.2 -8.0 3.0 66 287 4.2 6735 33.8 -12.7 4.0 149 287 3.0 2324 40.0 -21.4 4.7 72 287 3.4 3349 22.7 -11.0 2.5 34 287 2.8 1942 28.9 -16.8 5.2 32 287 3.2 2949 26.3 -13.5 4.7 40 287 2.0 747 29.4 -27.4 2.0 14 287 4.6 8808 28.2 -11.8 6.6 150 287 3.6 4295 33.6 -14.6 2.8 94 287 3.6 4148 25.9 -12.7 7.6 57 287 5.0 10800 31.8 -10.6 4.7 217 287 3.4 3379 29.8 -17.1 2.6 64 287 4.8 9685 33.7 -13.4 3.0 233 287 2.4 1236 28.3 -13.3 2.4 17 287 4.6 8310 25.0 -10.4 7.1 110 287 2.6 1398 22.5 -17.2 2.2 15 287 2.4 1258 37.3 -25.2 1.9 35 287 2.8 2043 33.3 -20.7 6.6 46 287 2.6 1737 36.1 -21.9 4.7 44 287 3.6 4337 32.7 -15.2 5.5 93 287 2.4 1331 33.2 -18.1 4.8 27 287 4.0 5427 34.6 -15.9 6.1 134 287 3.4 3671 39.2 -21.8 3.0 120 287 2.8 1920 34.2 -23.5 2.3 48 287 4.4 8058 31.9 -11.4 4.6 160 287 2.0 810 36.5 -30.5 3.4 22 287 2.6 1521 20.7 -14.9 2.6 14 287 2.2 959 32.1 -27.6 2.3 21 287 4.4 7555 30.0 -13.0 3.1 144 287 2.8 1819 24.8 -16.5 6.0 23 287 3.4 3350 30.2 -14.1 6.1 59 287 2.0 807 30.6 -29.0 5.7 16 287 3.2 2963 30.2 -13.8 3.9 51 287 3.6 4199 19.9 -7.5 3.3 31 287 3.6 4010 24.2 -11.9 4.7 48 287 3.0 2466 35.6 -21.7 2.9 65 287 3.6 4165 34.6 -14.8 3.3 96 287 3.4 3200 21.2 -11.9 2.5 30 287 3.0 2449 30.8 -15.7 4.1 45 287 2.4 1188 31.0 -25.3 2.1 24 287 3.2 3009 21.2 -9.8 3.2 26 287 3.8 4982 31.2 -13.6 4.0 96

The Developers are not responsible for the reliability of the parameters and improper use of the software.

Kinetics

Analysis Pnt X (ft) Diameter (ft) Mass (lbm) V (ft/s) W (rad/s) Height (ft) KE (ft-kips) 287 3.2 2806 33.5 -18.8 7.4 64 287 4.0 5563 31.3 -15.1 7.7 115 287 2.2 870 27.8 -17.8 2.9 12 287 4.0 6006 29.4 -11.5 4.3 101 287 3.6 4170 29.2 -13.1 4.0 70 287 5.0 10747 32.5 -12.0 4.1 234 287 2.6 1542 44.6 -23.6 3.3 57 287 4.2 6140 29.6 -11.7 4.6 105 287 3.0 2634 34.7 -16.7 2.8 60 287 4.4 7824 39.9 -17.3 3.5 266 287 4.2 6676 27.9 -12.6 8.4 110 287 4.6 8987 33.0 -12.8 8.9 202 287 3.2 2678 26.5 -15.9 8.0 39 287 3.2 2977 23.6 -13.8 8.6 35 287 3.0 2582 28.0 -15.6 5.4 41 287 3.6 4264 41.6 -21.9 3.0 157 287 2.2 1069 34.2 -24.8 7.6 25 287 3.6 4422 41.8 -21.7 2.8 164 287 2.2 844 28.9 -26.8 6.9 15 287 4.8 10226 19.9 -8.0 3.0 87

The Developers are not responsible for the reliability of the parameters and improper use of the software.

Rollout

Diameter (ft) Start X (ft) Start Y (ft) Stop X (ft) Stop Y (ft)

4.0 123 834 529 491

4.6 146 808 529 491

4.4 145 809 756 398

4.0 137 816 752 398

4.6 124 833 530 491

2.4 133 819 751 396

2.4 128 827 754 396

2.2 122 833 756 404

4.4 143 811 529 491

4.6 123 833 529 491

2.0 124 831 753 409

2.8 128 827 751 396

4.2 128 828 753 398

2.6 124 831 751 398

4.0 126 830 529 491

2.2 122 833 753 407

4.6 137 815 529 491

3.6 134 819 751 398

3.2 136 816 755 401

4.6 122 835 754 398

3.4 122 834 757 399

2.0 128 826 752 407

4.2 135 819 752 398

5.0 140 814 528 492

2.8 146 808 152 806

2.8 133 819 751 406

4.2 126 830 751 398

4.2 141 812 529 491

3.6 130 824 529 491

2.2 129 825 751 405

2.4 134 818 750 398

3.2 132 822 752 397

2.0 122 833 751 398

4.0 131 823 529 491

4.4 133 822 750 398

4.0 127 829 754 398

2.8 138 814 752 406

4.4 142 812 529 491

3.0 136 816 751 398

2.0 125 829 755 406

2.8 127 828 754 404

2.6 131 823 751 398

4.0 137 815 755 404

2.8 131 822 752 401

3.2 124 831 751 398

The Developers are not responsible for the reliability of the parameters and improper use of the software.

Rollout

Diameter (ft) Start X (ft) Start Y (ft) Stop X (ft) Stop Y (ft)

2.2 136 815 756 404

5.0 125 832 752 400

3.0 123 833 750 398

2.0 127 828 753 402

3.6 124 832 752 397

3.2 122 833 752 397

4.4 141 812 751 398

2.6 141 812 754 404

5.0 129 828 529 492

3.4 133 821 752 397

4.2 141 812 529 491

2.8 129 825 752 402

4.0 139 814 528 491

2.4 130 823 757 397

4.8 142 812 529 492

3.6 133 821 751 397

3.8 137 815 756 399

3.6 135 818 528 491

2.8 134 818 753 396

2.6 140 812 753 397

3.6 142 811 754 398

3.4 140 813 754 395

3.0 127 828 753 404

5.0 136 817 752 397

4.8 132 823 754 398

4.8 127 830 529 492

3.0 142 811 753 396

3.2 144 809 753 397

2.4 127 828 754 396

4.8 144 810 754 404

4.8 133 821 750 398

2.4 127 828 752 398

4.4 143 811 529 491

4.0 125 832 529 491

4.6 132 822 529 491

2.8 134 819 751 397

5.0 128 829 755 398

2.2 136 815 753 404

4.2 140 813 754 397

4.2 124 833 755 398

4.6 128 828 529 491

3.4 125 831 753 399

3.6 142 811 528 491

4.4 127 830 754 404

2.4 127 828 751 407

The Developers are not responsible for the reliability of the parameters and improper use of the software.

Rollout

Diameter (ft) Start X (ft) Start Y (ft) Stop X (ft) Stop Y (ft)

4.6 145 809 529 491

2.8 134 818 755 403

2.8 128 826 751 403

4.2 137 816 755 398

4.2 133 821 528 491

2.8 127 828 754 398

2.0 126 829 751 399

3.6 123 833 752 397

2.6 130 823 752 407

2.8 132 822 753 397

3.8 186 786 752 397

4.2 210 761 754 398

2.2 196 775 753 405

5.0 208 763 529 492

3.4 186 786 754 398

2.8 207 762 753 396

2.2 204 765 752 396

2.4 199 773 751 396

2.8 202 769 752 396

3.0 186 786 753 397

2.6 188 783 751 404

2.8 196 776 754 397

4.6 211 760 529 491

4.8 194 778 529 492

3.4 210 760 528 491

3.8 196 776 529 491

4.0 200 773 528 491

2.4 211 759 751 401

2.8 184 787 751 397

4.8 200 774 529 492

3.4 182 791 753 397

2.8 205 764 750 397

4.4 201 773 529 491

2.6 191 781 753 399

4.2 205 767 529 491

4.2 209 762 752 398

2.8 191 781 754 397

2.2 184 787 753 396

2.4 204 767 751 402

4.0 203 770 528 491

4.2 197 776 529 491

4.6 197 776 752 397

3.0 185 787 752 398

2.4 195 777 752 398

2.2 189 782 750 399

The Developers are not responsible for the reliability of the parameters and improper use of the software.

Rollout

Diameter (ft) Start X (ft) Start Y (ft) Stop X (ft) Stop Y (ft)

3.2 198 774 751 397

5.0 188 785 529 492

3.0 194 777 753 398

4.4 210 761 529 491

4.2 196 777 530 491

3.0 186 785 755 399

3.4 206 764 753 397

2.8 196 776 753 396

3.2 207 763 752 398

2.0 200 771 755 399

4.6 187 786 529 491

3.6 193 779 530 491

3.6 195 777 528 491

5.0 200 774 529 492

3.4 203 768 529 491

4.8 197 776 529 492

2.4 204 766 753 396

4.6 198 775 529 491

2.6 208 761 754 396

2.4 197 775 751 406

2.8 188 783 752 397

2.6 188 783 751 399

3.6 192 780 753 404

2.4 199 773 751 397

4.0 184 788 751 397

3.4 184 788 530 491

2.8 200 772 751 402

4.4 196 777 529 491

2.0 187 784 751 398

2.6 211 759 753 396

2.2 191 781 750 397

4.4 206 765 529 491

2.8 202 770 754 399

3.4 196 776 751 397

2.0 187 784 751 396

3.2 205 764 752 397

3.6 211 760 530 491

3.6 208 763 528 491

3.0 184 788 751 397

3.6 196 776 752 397

3.4 211 760 528 491

3.0 203 769 752 397

2.4 204 766 750 397

3.2 206 763 753 397

3.8 193 779 755 398

The Developers are not responsible for the reliability of the parameters and improper use of the software.

Rollout

Diameter (ft) Start X (ft) Start Y (ft) Stop X (ft) Stop Y (ft)

3.2 188 784 751 397

4.0 184 788 530 491

2.2 207 762 752 404

4.0 204 767 529 491

3.6 198 774 528 491

5.0 185 788 529 492

2.6 189 782 754 404

4.2 200 773 529 491

3.0 193 779 751 397

4.4 185 787 529 491

4.2 185 787 530 491

4.6 185 788 529 491

3.2 183 789 751 397

3.2 191 780 752 397

3.0 203 768 753 397

3.6 182 790 753 397

2.2 186 785 754 399

3.6 184 788 528 491

2.2 187 784 750 397

4.8 209 762 754 397

The Developers are not responsible for the reliability of the parameters and improper use of the software.

PROJECT INFORMATION

Company Name: FHWA Project Name: SECTION 1B Station: 3+10 skew Location: Palmerton, PA Analysis By: BL Analysis Case: Fence [6] boulders with a maximum diameter of 5.0 feet would impact the rockfall retaining system. For each simulation, the model rolled 100 spherical shaped rocks from a source area at 632 - 700 feet. A slope surface roughness of 0.1 - 1.0, and hardness of 0.4 - 1.0

AP-1 @ X = 478 ft

INPUT PARAMETERS

Slope Properties Cells Roughness Hardness 1-11,17-20,26-28,36-38 0.4-1.0 0.5 12-16,21-25,29-35 0.1-0.2 1 39-43 0.2 0.35 44-46 0.1 0.9 47-56 0.1-0.2 0.8 57-64 0.1 1

31-35 100 170 Sphere 2-5

The Developers are not responsible for the reliability of the parameters and improper use of the software.

Rock Distribution Rock Size Rock Number Start Cell 2-5 100 31-35

4 295 58 100%

The Developers are not responsible for the reliability of the parameters and improper use of the software.

Velocity

The Developers are not responsible for the reliability of the parameters and improper use of the software.

CRSP Rollout Start Results for Station 3+10 skew

CRSP Rollout Stop Results for Station 3+10 skew

Kinetics

Analysis Pnt X (ft) Diameter (ft) Mass (lbm) V (ft/s) W (rad/s) Height (ft) KE (ft-kips) 478 3.2 2846 41.2 -25.8 2.1 105 478 2.0 732 49.1 -48.0 1.6 38 478 3.6 4267 48.9 -26.3 2.3 219 478 4.2 6636 2.6 -1.1 2.6 1 478 2.6 1483 7.2 -5.6 1.6 2 478 2.7 1677 57.1 -39.9 2.4 114 478 2.7 1723 20.2 -14.3 1.7 15 478 4.8 9551 2.9 -1.1 3.0 2 478 4.8 9931 2.8 -1.1 3.0 2 478 4.2 6766 2.8 -1.2 2.6 1 478 4.1 6057 2.8 -1.3 2.6 1 478 2.4 1273 12.2 -10.1 1.5 4 478 4.1 6022 2.7 -1.2 2.5 1 478 3.0 2295 5.6 -3.7 1.8 2 478 2.4 1264 50.1 -36.6 2.8 65 478 4.4 7567 2.8 -1.2 2.8 1 478 3.6 4040 2.8 -1.4 2.3 1 478 2.2 991 26.4 -23.0 1.5 15 478 3.1 2650 5.5 -3.6 1.9 2 478 2.2 897 6.3 -5.3 1.4 1 478 2.6 1626 5.7 -4.4 1.6 1 478 3.3 3258 2.6 -1.4 2.1 0 478 4.7 9066 2.8 -1.1 2.9 2 478 3.7 4366 9.2 -5.1 2.4 8 478 4.2 6690 2.7 -1.1 2.6 1 478 3.9 5428 2.7 -1.2 2.4 1 478 4.5 8309 2.9 -1.2 2.8 1 478 2.6 1541 5.6 -4.3 1.7 1 478 3.3 3211 2.5 -1.4 2.0 0 478 3.7 4394 6.1 -3.3 2.3 4 478 3.2 2920 6.2 -3.4 2.0 2 478 3.4 3516 2.7 -1.4 2.1 1 478 4.6 8627 2.8 -1.1 2.8 1 478 4.3 7217 2.8 -1.2 2.7 1 478 2.3 1123 10.4 -7.9 1.5 2 478 5.0 10908 2.8 -1.0 3.1 2 478 3.4 3389 2.7 -1.4 2.1 0 478 4.7 9417 2.7 -1.1 2.9 1 478 2.9 2183 5.5 -3.8 1.8 1 478 4.8 9756 2.9 -1.1 2.9 2 478 4.1 5966 2.7 -1.2 2.5 1 478 2.5 1439 6.1 -4.5 1.6 1 478 4.1 6246 4.4 -2.2 2.6 3 478 3.8 4903 2.6 -1.3 2.4 1 478 3.2 3034 5.7 -3.4 2.1 2

The Developers are not responsible for the reliability of the parameters and improper use of the software.

Kinetics

Analysis Pnt X (ft) Diameter (ft) Mass (lbm) V (ft/s) W (rad/s) Height (ft) KE (ft-kips) 478 2.6 1498 6.4 -4.5 1.5 1 478 4.0 5666 2.6 -1.2 2.5 1 478 2.6 1603 25.0 -18.4 1.6 21 478 2.1 792 6.2 -5.9 1.3 1 478 3.8 4917 2.8 -1.3 2.3 1 478 4.7 9465 2.8 -1.1 3.0 2 478 4.0 5749 2.7 -1.2 2.4 1 478 2.4 1208 37.3 -30.5 1.7 36 478 4.6 8426 2.9 -1.2 2.8 1 478 2.2 982 6.1 -5.0 1.4 1 478 2.5 1409 44.7 -36.1 1.6 62 478 4.5 8018 12.0 -5.5 2.9 25 478 3.7 4397 2.7 -1.4 2.2 1 478 2.5 1380 37.6 -28.4 1.8 41 478 3.5 3701 2.6 -1.4 2.1 1 478 4.1 5953 2.7 -1.2 2.6 1 478 4.8 9957 2.9 -1.1 3.0 2 478 2.9 2141 46.5 -32.3 1.8 101 478 2.6 1653 6.0 -4.2 1.6 1 478 3.3 3192 2.5 -1.4 2.0 0 478 4.3 6918 2.7 -1.2 2.6 1 478 3.9 5391 2.7 -1.3 2.4 1 478 2.6 1603 5.5 -4.3 1.7 1 478 3.0 2299 31.3 -21.0 1.8 49 478 3.3 3130 30.3 -18.7 2.0 63 478 2.7 1699 30.2 -22.3 1.7 34 478 4.8 9689 2.7 -1.1 3.0 2 478 3.8 4972 2.6 -1.3 2.5 1 478 3.5 3689 2.5 -1.3 2.2 0 478 3.1 2740 5.9 -3.5 2.0 2 478 4.8 9549 2.8 -1.1 3.1 2 478 4.0 5578 2.6 -1.2 2.5 1 478 3.5 3956 2.5 -1.3 2.2 1 478 4.8 9930 36.8 -15.5 3.0 295 478 3.6 4173 2.6 -1.3 2.2 1 478 2.3 1046 6.2 -5.2 1.3 1 478 2.6 1560 38.4 -29.9 1.7 50 478 2.2 940 9.5 -8.7 1.4 2 478 2.4 1159 42.0 -33.6 2.2 43 478 3.3 3282 2.6 -1.5 2.1 0 478 2.6 1517 6.3 -4.4 1.5 1 478 3.4 3444 2.6 -1.4 2.1 0 478 5.0 11038 2.8 -1.1 3.1 2 478 2.3 1014 45.0 -40.0 1.6 45 478 2.3 1065 47.2 -39.4 2.0 50

The Developers are not responsible for the reliability of the parameters and improper use of the software.

Kinetics

Analysis Pnt X (ft) Diameter (ft) Mass (lbm) V (ft/s) W (rad/s) Height (ft) KE (ft-kips) 478 3.3 3089 2.5 -1.4 2.1 0 478 3.9 5192 2.7 -1.3 2.4 1 478 2.6 1495 5.7 -4.4 1.6 1 478 3.3 3300 2.5 -1.4 2.1 0 478 4.7 9375 22.9 -9.8 3.0 108 478 4.1 6065 2.7 -1.2 2.5 1 478 4.5 8073 2.7 -1.1 2.8 1 478 3.9 5476 2.7 -1.3 2.4 1 478 2.5 1309 5.8 -4.6 1.6 1 478 2.5 1439 6.1 -4.4 1.6 1

The Developers are not responsible for the reliability of the parameters and improper use of the software.

Rollout

Diameter (ft) Start X (ft) Start Y (ft) Stop X (ft) Stop Y (ft)

3.2 305 678 751 397

2.0 297 687 751 397

3.6 295 694 530 491

4.2 341 634 529 491

2.6 324 657 751 396

2.7 294 695 750 397

2.7 297 688 751 396

4.8 305 679 529 491

4.8 323 661 529 492

4.2 338 639 529 491

4.1 319 664 529 491

2.4 322 660 751 396

4.1 319 664 528 491

3.0 319 664 752 397

2.4 304 678 750 398

4.4 312 671 529 491

3.6 307 676 528 491

2.2 316 666 752 396

3.1 325 657 753 397

2.2 341 633 752 396

2.6 336 640 750 396

3.3 323 660 529 491

4.7 323 661 529 491

3.7 300 684 528 491

4.2 339 637 529 491

3.9 341 634 528 491

4.5 327 656 529 491

2.6 337 639 752 396

3.3 311 672 528 491

3.7 320 663 529 491

3.2 315 667 753 397

3.4 308 675 529 491

4.6 339 637 529 491

4.3 299 687 529 491

2.3 322 660 751 396

5.0 317 667 529 492

3.4 327 654 529 491

4.7 305 679 529 491

2.9 326 656 751 397

4.8 301 684 529 491

4.1 335 644 529 491

2.5 333 645 751 396

4.1 310 673 529 491

3.8 328 653 530 491

3.2 315 668 529 491

The Developers are not responsible for the reliability of the parameters and improper use of the software.

Rollout

Diameter (ft) Start X (ft) Start Y (ft) Stop X (ft) Stop Y (ft)

2.6 330 649 751 396

4.0 341 634 528 491

2.6 305 678 750 396

2.1 336 640 752 396

3.8 315 668 529 491

4.7 332 648 529 491

4.0 298 688 528 491

2.4 300 682 750 396

4.6 336 642 529 491

2.2 336 640 752 396

2.5 300 683 751 400

4.5 307 677 529 491

3.7 337 640 528 491

2.5 292 698 754 397

3.5 314 669 528 491

4.1 322 662 528 491

4.8 316 668 529 492

2.9 300 683 751 398

2.6 336 640 753 396

3.3 293 698 530 491

4.3 326 656 529 491

3.9 296 691 528 491

2.6 339 636 752 396

3.0 315 668 752 397

3.3 298 686 750 397

2.7 311 671 752 396

4.8 334 646 529 491

3.8 337 640 528 491

3.5 305 678 529 491

3.1 341 633 750 397

4.8 320 663 529 491

4.0 320 663 528 491

3.5 314 669 528 491

4.8 295 694 529 492

3.6 331 649 528 491

2.3 335 642 751 396

2.6 319 664 752 397

2.2 320 661 751 396

2.4 296 688 753 397

3.3 321 662 751 397

2.6 335 643 753 396

3.4 296 692 528 491

5.0 306 678 529 492

2.3 296 689 753 396

2.3 294 694 755 398

The Developers are not responsible for the reliability of the parameters and improper use of the software.

Rollout

Diameter (ft) Start X (ft) Start Y (ft) Stop X (ft) Stop Y (ft)

3.3 329 652 751 397

3.9 326 656 528 491

2.6 328 652 753 396

3.3 314 668 528 491

4.7 294 696 529 491

4.1 338 639 528 491

4.5 327 655 529 491

3.9 297 690 528 491

2.5 328 652 751 396

2.5 313 669 751 396

The Developers are not responsible for the reliability of the parameters and improper use of the software.

PROJECT INFORMATION

Company Name: FHWA Project Name: SECTION 2B Station: 5+00 Location: Palmerton, PA Analysis By: BL Analysis Case: Fence [3] boulders with a maximum diameter of 5.0 feet would impact the rockfall retaining system. For each simulation, the model rolled 300 spherical shaped rocks from a source area at 685 - 897 feet. A slope surface roughness of 0.0 - 2.0, and hardness of 0.4 - 1.0

AP-1 @ X = 478 ft

INPUT PARAMETERS

Slope Properties Cells Roughness Hardness 1-2,11-13,25,34,35,44-47,52-67 0.1-0.2 1 3-10,14-24,26-33,36-43,48-51,72-73,76-81 0.6-2 0.5 74-75 0.1 0.4 82-84 0 0.9 68-71 0.3 0.8

1-8 100 170 Sphere 2-5 24-26 100 170 Sphere 2-5 31-44 100 170 Sphere 2-5

The Developers are not responsible for the reliability of the parameters and improper use of the software.

CRSP Rockfall Results for Station 5+00 and Analysis Point 1

Rock Distribution Rock Size Rock Number Start Cell 2-5 100 1-8 2-5 100 24-26 2-5 100 31-44

6 190 33 15%

The Developers are not responsible for the reliability of the parameters and improper use of the software.

Velocity

The Developers are not responsible for the reliability of the parameters and improper use of the software.

CRSP Rollout Start Results for Station 5+00

CRSP Rollout Stop Results for Station 5+00

Kinetics

Analysis Pnt X (ft) Diameter (ft) Mass (lbm) V (ft/s) W (rad/s) Height (ft) KE (ft-kips) 478 4.1 6347 478 4.8 9838 478 3.7 4392 478 4.9 10556 478 3.8 4835 478 2.8 2049 478 2.7 1827 478 4.7 9462 478 4.3 6871 478 3.3 3200 478 3.8 4931 478 3.7 4422 478 4.2 6689 478 4.9 10595 478 2.1 806 478 2.2 973 478 2.2 984 478 4.3 7031 478 4.1 6071 478 4.1 5998 478 2.8 1982 478 3.3 3271 478 4.0 5833 478 4.4 7393 478 2.0 715 478 4.8 9782 478 4.4 7795 478 3.0 2512 478 3.6 4094 478 3.9 5223 478 2.5 1424 478 2.6 1573 478 2.8 2039 478 3.9 5400 478 4.0 5670 478 3.5 3847 478 2.2 967 478 2.6 1553 478 4.8 9628 478 2.3 1134 478 3.9 5442 478 4.9 10441 478 2.3 1065 478 4.6 8601 478 2.3 1099

The Developers are not responsible for the reliability of the parameters and improper use of the software.

Kinetics

Analysis Pnt X (ft) Diameter (ft) Mass (lbm) V (ft/s) W (rad/s) Height (ft) KE (ft-kips) 478 4.5 8151 478 3.2 2833 478 4.6 8825 478 3.4 3544 478 4.0 5857 478 3.1 2742 478 2.1 835 478 3.4 3528 478 4.2 6767 478 2.7 1704 478 4.4 7688 478 3.9 5192 478 2.7 1704 478 4.6 8947 478 3.5 3787 478 3.9 5117 478 2.8 1967 478 4.1 5958 478 3.9 5133 478 2.2 916 478 4.1 6046 478 2.5 1310 478 4.4 7778 478 3.4 3553 478 3.0 2291 478 4.8 9900 478 2.0 734 478 2.1 875 478 3.8 4953 478 3.1 2759 478 2.6 1591 478 4.1 6034 478 4.1 6231 478 3.0 2371 478 3.3 3281 478 4.8 10129 478 2.9 2191 478 3.5 3922 478 4.9 10610 478 4.2 6685 478 3.2 2990 478 2.2 972 478 2.4 1204 478 2.9 2176 478 2.2 890

The Developers are not responsible for the reliability of the parameters and improper use of the software.

Kinetics

Analysis Pnt X (ft) Diameter (ft) Mass (lbm) V (ft/s) W (rad/s) Height (ft) KE (ft-kips) 478 3.5 3767 478 3.4 3382 478 4.1 6083 478 2.9 2248 478 2.2 940 478 2.2 954 478 3.0 2377 478 4.6 8580 478 4.7 9005 478 4.6 8463 478 4.1 6099 478 4.1 5944 478 2.1 836 478 4.3 6840 478 3.3 3207 478 4.9 10515 30.0 -10.4 5.1 189 478 2.5 1364 478 4.3 7024 24.0 -10.2 2.7 84 478 4.4 7519 478 4.6 8448 478 3.7 4388 478 2.0 763 478 4.3 6997 478 4.1 6143 478 5.0 10982 478 2.5 1472 478 5.0 10977 478 4.7 9309 21.7 -8.2 4.2 90 478 2.6 1580 478 2.7 1756 478 3.0 2509 478 4.2 6662 478 3.0 2305 478 3.9 5182 478 4.3 6973 478 2.2 910 478 3.3 3284 478 2.0 742 478 2.7 1842 478 4.8 10075 478 3.4 3378 478 5.0 11000 478 3.5 3691 478 2.6 1505 478 4.4 7586

The Developers are not responsible for the reliability of the parameters and improper use of the software.

Kinetics

Analysis Pnt X (ft) Diameter (ft) Mass (lbm) V (ft/s) W (rad/s) Height (ft) KE (ft-kips) 478 3.2 2978 478 3.5 3743 478 4.0 5808 478 3.7 4607 478 4.8 9936 478 4.5 7864 478 4.3 7305 478 2.6 1618 478 2.2 952 478 4.7 9140 478 4.4 7695 478 3.4 3558 478 4.6 8881 478…