Soils_and_Foundation_Report.pdf

SOILS AND FOUNDATION REPORT

NO. 17-12

PROJECT RRP-NLS 10(1)

REPLACEMENT OF NORTH BRIDGE ALONG PACIFIC STREET

NEAL SMITH NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE

JASPER COUNTY, IOWA

U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division 21400 Ridgetop Circle

Sterling, VA 20166

July 2013

TABLE OF CONTENTS

REPORT PAGE

INTRODUCTION

General Project Description

GEOLOGIC SETTING

Regional Geology Soil Survey

PROCEDURES AND RESULTS

General Sampling Field Tests and Measurements Data Summary Laboratory Testing Findings

DESIGN ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS

Bridge Foundations Scour Results Bearing Resistance Uplift Resistance Settlement Lateral Capacity

RECOMMENDATIONS

Bridge Foundations

CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS

DISCLAIMER/LIMITATIONS CLAUSE

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A – Figures APPENDIX B – Boring Locations Plan and Subsurface Profile APPENDIX C – Boring Logs APPENDIX D – Laboratory Data APPENDIX E – Design Analysis APPENDIX F – Representative Photographs APPENDIX G – Special Contract Requirements

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.

Project: RRP-NLS 10(1) Replacement and Widening of Bridges Neal Smith National Wildlife Refuge Soils and Foundation Report Jasper County, Iowa No. 17-12

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VA

SOILS AND FOUNDATION REPORT

NO. 17-12

PROJECT RRP-NLS 10(1)

REPLACEMENT OF NORTH BRIDGE ALONG PACIFIC STREET

NEAL SMITH NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE

JASPER COUNTY, IOWA

INTRODUCTION

General

This report summarizes the results of our subsurface exploration, laboratory testing, and design analyses and presents our evaluations and recommendations for the proposed replacement of the North Bridge along Pacific Street located within Neil Smith National Wildlife Refuge in Jasper County, Iowa.

The project site is located along the Pacific Street, in Neal Smith National Wildlife Refuge, in Jasper County, Iowa.

The general site location is shown on Figure 1, Appendix A.

Project Description

A storm event during the summer of 2011 caused severe damage to the road, parking areas, and structures along the Pacific Street. The event also caused the existing single span North Bridge to be compromised. We also understand that bridges and roadways experience frequent overtopping during flash floods which occurs frequently at the refuge.

This project consists of replacing the existing timber North Bridge, with a new single span reinforced concrete slab, 31 feet long and 32 feet wide.

It should be noted that the South Bridge will not addressed in this report.

GEOLOGIC SETTING

Regional Geology

According to the United States Geological Survey (USGS), Geologic Map of Iowa (2010), the project site is located in the Cherokee Group of the Pennsylvanian-Middle Des Moines Series. The Cherokee Group consists primarily of cyclic deposits with carbonaceous shale, EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VA

clay, siltstone, with lesser sandstone, and thick coal beds; minor but persistent limestone beds; may include parts of Atoka or Morrow Series.

The geologic map of the site is shown in Figure 2, Appendix A.

Soil Survey

According to the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Web Soil Survey for Jasper County, Iowa (2010), the project site is underlain predominantly by Ackmore silt loam soils.

A soil survey map of the site is shown on Figure 3, Appendix A.

PROCEDURES AND RESULTS

General

A subsurface exploration program was conducted in July 2012 by the Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division (EFLHD) Subsurface Exploration Team. A total of four (4) soil borings were drilled; one (1) soil boring was drilled in the vicinity of each bridge abutment. Borings B-1 and B-2 were drilled at the South Bridge to a termination depth of 61 feet below existing site grades. Borings B-3 and B-4 were drilled at the North Bridge to auger refusal depths of 61ft and 58 ft below existing site grades, respectively. The borings were advanced to the termination depths using a CME 750, rotary, ATV-mounted drill rig.

Sampling

Borings were advanced to the termination depths using 3¾-in. (inside diameter) hollow stem augers. Standard Penetration Testing (SPT) was performed using a 2¼-in. (outside diameter) split-spoon sampler. SPT soil samples were typically recovered at 2.5 and 5-foot intervals.

Samples were obtained by driving the split-spoon sampler a distance of 24-inch into the undisturbed soil under the impact of a 140-lb. automatic hammer free-falling 30 inches. The number of hammer blows required to advance the split-spoon sampler the middle foot of the 24-in. sample interval is designated as the “Standard Penetration Resistance” or N-value. The number of blows required to advance the sampler through each 6-in. interval was recorded on field boring logs. Representative portions of split-spoon samples were preserved in glass jars for laboratory testing. Shelby tube samples were also collected from Borings B-2 and B-4.

The samples were collected in accordance with AASHTO T207. The undisturbed soil samples were preserved within their respective tubes. All samples were later transported to EFLHD’s Materials Testing Laboratory in Sevierville, Tennessee for laboratory testing and storage. The sampling sequence and associated jar samples for each boring are presented on its appropriate Boring Log in Appendix C.

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VA

Water levels, if present, were measured when first encountered, at the time of completion of each boring, prior to backfilling the borehole, and, if possible, at 24-hours after completion of drilling. The borings were backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion of the drilling.

Field Tests and Measurements

The Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division (EFLHD) Subsurface Exploration Team performed the following field tests and took measurements during the course of the subsurface exploration. A field description by color and texture was made for each recovered sample.

The soil borings were laid out in the field by referencing ground-surface topography, measuring distances from existing surface features, and estimating right-angles. Due to the field methods used in locating the boring, the location of borings indicated on the Boring Locations Plan should be considered approximate. Ground surface elevations at the boring locations were determined from the topography plans provided by the Survey Division. The relative consistency of cohesive samples was estimated in the field using a calibrated pocket penetrometer.

A Boring Locations Plan and generalized Subsurface Profile sheet are attached in Appendix B.

Data Summary

The results of field tests and measurements were recorded on the driller’s logs and appropriate data sheets in the field. These data sheets and logs contain information concerning the boring methods, samples attempted and recovered, indications of the presence of various materials such as gravel, pebbles, organic matter, and observations of groundwater. They also contain interpretations by the crew foreman of the subsurface conditions based on the performance of the equipment and cuttings brought to the surface by the drilling tools. Therefore, the field data represents both factual and interpretative information.

The boring logs in Appendix C of this report represent compilation of field and laboratory data and description of the soil samples by a geotechnical engineer. These records may not include all data recorded on driller’s logs and field data sheets, but do include all information considered relevant to the design and preparation of this report.

Groundwater level readings were made in the boreholes at the times and under the conditions stated on the boring logs. Fluctuations in groundwater levels due to seasonal variations, rainfall, temperature, and other factors not evident at the time measurements were made should be expected.

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VA

Laboratory Testing

A laboratory testing program was conducted on representative soil samples recovered during the subsurface exploration. The primary purpose of this testing program was to evaluate the engineering soil parameters required for the geotechnical analyses. Laboratory tests included, natural moisture content (AASHTO T-265), Atterberg limits (AASHTO T-89/90), particle size analysis (AASHTO T-88), soil classification (AASHTO M-145), pH (AASHTO T-289), resistivity (AASHTO T-288); and Unconfined Compression Test (ASTM D 2166).

The results of the laboratory testing program are presented in Appendix D and summarized in Tables 1 through 3:

Table 1. Summary of Laboratory Test Results

Table 2. pH and Resistivity

Boring

No.

Sample Depth

(ft)

AASHTO

Classification

USCS

Classification

MC

LL

PL

PI

B-1 20-22 A-6(2) Clayey Sand 24.8 26 15 11

B-1 55-57 A-6(15) Lean Clay 16.6 37 23 14

B-2 10-12 A-6(11) Lean Clay 22.9 34 22 12

B-2 40-42 A-6(15) Lean Clay 25.3 38 24 14

B-3 13-15 A-6(14) Lean Clay 24.4 37 24 13

B-3 35-37 A-6(15) Lean Clay 25.3 36 22 14

B-4 25-27 A-6 Clayey Silt 22.2 38 22 16

Boring No. Sample Depth

(ft) pH Resistivity

(Ohm-cm)

B-4 15-20 7.9 1534

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VA

Table 3. Unconfined Compressive Strength

Findings

A brief description of the subsurface conditions encountered in the soil borings is provided below. The stratification lines designating the interfaces between soil types in the boring logs represent approximate boundaries. In the field, the transition between materials may be gradual or may not exist. It should be noted that one or more of the units may be absent at specific locations.

The subsurface profile encountered in borings B-3 through B-4 can be summarized as follows:

North Bridge

Asphalt Pavement

The depths of asphalt pavement encountered were 0.9 ft and 0.8 ft in B-3 and B-4, respectively.

Fill

The fill material encountered in the soil borings consisted primary of soft to medium stiff, silty clay and clay extended to depths of 8.4 and 9.7 ft below existing site grades. Standard Penetration Test (SPT) N-values within this layer ranged between 4 and 6 blows per foot (bpf).

Natural Deposits

Clayey Silt [A-6], Lean Clay [A-6(14), A-6(15)], Sandy Clay, and Clay – Very soft to

Stiff cohesive and semi-cohesive soils were encountered underneath the fill materials and extended to an approximate depth of 42.0 ft below existing site grades. N-values within this layer ranged between 0 and 10 bpf.

Boring No. Sample Depth

Unconfined Compressive Strength

(ksf)

B-4 25-27 1.03

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VA

Sand – Underneath the above mentioned layer, sand was encountered. The sand layer extended to an approximate depth of 58 ft below existing site grade in Boring B-3 and to the auger refusal depth of 58.5 ft below exiting site grade in Boring B-4. It should be noted that, due to the presence of “running sand conditions”, the drilling crew was not able to collect SPT samples from this layer.

Shale – Hard blue shale was encountered underneath the sand layer in the soil boring B-3 and extended to the auger refusal depth of 61.0 ft. below existing site grade

Auger Refusal – Auger refusal was encountered at depths of 61 ft and 58.5 ft below existing site grades in Borings B-3 and B-4, respectively.

Groundwater – Groundwater was encountered at a depth of 13 ft below existing site grades.

However, fluctuations in the groundwater conditions due to seasonal weather changes should be anticipated.

DESIGN ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS

Bridge Foundations

A shallow foundation system is not recommended to support the new bridge due to the presence of very soft and loose fill materials and natural deposits that were encountered in the soil borings. Such soils are expected to provide low bearing capacity and are likely to exhibit excessive total and differential settlements.

Based on soils profile encountered and anticipated structural loads, we concluded that a deep foundation system consisting of steel H-piles offers the most suitable and economic alternative to support the proposed bridges. For this project, HP 14x102 and 14x117 piles were considered in our analysis. The size of the H-piles was determined in coordination with the Bridge Division.

Soil Parameters The soil parameters presented in Table 4, were used for the design analysis and were developed based on empirical correlations between available laboratory test results, field SPT N-values, and our familiarity with similar subsurface conditions.

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VA

Table 4. North Bridge - Soil Parameters for Design Analysis

Material Type

Effective Unit Weight, γ’

(pcf)

SPT

Navg.

(bpf)

Friction Angle, Φ

(deg.)

Cohesion, c

(psf)

Clayey Silt 32 0 25 30 Very Soft to Soft

Lean Clay 31 0 0 50

Medium stiff to stiff Lean Clay 55 7 0 900

Sand 52 10 34 0 Shale 65 50 45 6000

Bottom of pile cap elevation

Bottom of pile cap elevation was provided by the Bridge Division and is listed in Table 5.

Table 5. Pile Cap Information for Analysis

Bridge Structure Bottom-of-Pile Cap Elev.

(ft)

North Bridge Abutment 1 813.50

Abutment 2 813.15

Scour Results Scour results provided by the Hydraulic Section are summarized in Table 6.

Table 6. North Bridge Scour Data

Event Scour Elevation

N. Abutment (ft)

Scour Elevation S. Abutment

100 yr 804.20 804.20

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VA

Bearing Resistance Nominal and factored bearing resistances of individual piles as function of depth are presented in Appendix E. A resistance factor of 0.65 was used in accordance with AASHTO (2010), LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, 5th Edition, Table 10.5.5.2.3-1. The computer program AllPile7 was used to calculate both skin friction and end bearing resistances of the piles.

Uplift Resistance Nominal and factored uplift resistances of individual piles as function of depth are presented in Appendix E. A resistance factor of 0.5 was used in accordance with AASHTO (2010), LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, 5th Edition, Table 10.5.5.2.3-1. The computer program AllPile7 was used to calculate skin friction of the piles.

Settlement Settlement of driven piles foundations bearing at the proposed depths was estimated to be less than 1.0 –inch. Vertical loads as a function of total settlement are presented in Appendix E.

Lateral Capacity Design analyses were performed for a group of 6 - HP 14 x 102 and HP 14 x 117 driven steel piles, arranged in one row, with an estimated embedment length of 53 ft.

Lateral capacity analyses were performed using the factored loads and moments, provided by the Bridge Section, as presented in Table 7.

Table 7. Vertical and Lateral Loading Conditions

Loads

Abutments

Max. Factored Vertical Load (kips) 780

Max. Factored Shear Load (kips)

Factored Moment Load

(kips-ft)

Trans N/A

Long N/A

Analysis results indicate that the lateral resistance provided by subsurface soils is adequate to limit pile head deflections to less than 1-in. The output files from the AllPile7 analyses are provided in Appendix E.

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VA

RECOMMENDATIONS

Bridge Foundations

A deep foundation system comprised of steel H- piles (HP) is the recommended foundation system for the bridge. Two pile sizes (HP 14 x 102 and HP 14 x 117) were evaluated in our analyses.

A wave equation analysis of the contractor’s proposed hammer and driving system should be submitted to the CO for review prior to mobilization of the equipment to the site. The proposed hammer should have adequate energy to efficiently install the piles to the specified capacities without inducing excessive driving stresses.

It is recommended to perform a minimum of one pile driving analyzer (PDA) testing at the location of each foundation element. Center-to-center spacing of piles should be a minimum of three pile widths.

CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS

Excavations: All excavations are to be performed in accordance with applicable OSHA standards and in accordance with Section 204 of the FP-03 Specifications. Temporary excavation in fill and/or natural material should be achievable using conventional earthmoving equipment in proper working condition.

Structural Backfill: Backfill behind abutment walls should consist of structural backfill in accordance with Section 704 of the FP-03 Specifications.

Pile Pick-up and Handling: Pick-up and handling should be conducted in accordance with Section 551 of the FP-03 Specifications. Because displacement piles are being recommended, heave of previously installed piles should be monitored during pile driving operations. Pile heave should be monitored (and piles re-driven as required) in accordance with Section 551 of the FP-03.

Pile Installation Sequence: Piles should be installed from the center of the pile group and outwards, or from one side of the group progressively to the other. Under no circumstances should piles be installed from outside of the group towards the center.

Dynamic Pile Load Testing: Dynamic pile load testing is to be performed in accordance with Subsection 551.11 of the FP-03 Specifications. Perform dynamic pile load test on a minimum test pile to be driven at the location presented in Table 6 below.

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VA

Table 8. – Dynamic Test Pile Location

Structure Location

North Bridge Both Abutments At either of the two piles nearest the centerline of the structure.

Ground and Surface Water Management: On-site soils can be very susceptible to disturbance following contact with water. Control of storm water or seepage water flowing into open excavations may be necessary in order to retain the integrity of the natural bearing soils. The contractor should control the flow of surface water and seepage water into excavations at all times. Storm water collection and control during construction may be performed using collection trenches and sumps, if accumulation does occur.

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VA

DISCLAIMER/LIMITATIONS CLAUSE

The subsurface explorations and test described in the section Procedures and Results have been conducted in accordance with standard practices and procedures (except as specifically noted). The results of these exploration and tests represent conditions at the specific locations indicated at the time of our subsurface exploration. Further assumptions has been made that the limited borings, in relation both the areal extent of the site and to depth, are representative of conditions across the site. Subsurface conditions between these locations may vary. The Analysis and Conclusions sections and the Recommendations section of this report include interpretations and recommendations developed by the Government in the process of preparing the design. These interpretations are not intended as a substitute for the personal investigation, independent interpretation, and judgment of the Contractor.

Prepared by:

Maria Rosa, E.I.T.

Geotechnical Engineer

Reviewed by:

Mounir Abouzakhm, P.E.

Division Geotechnical Engineer

APPENDIX A

Figures

STATEREG

RRP-NLS 10(1)

TOTAL

SHEETS

SHEET

NO. PROJECT

13 1IA

FIGURE 1

PROJECT LOCATION MAP

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VIRGINIA

RRP NLS 10(1)

Entry Road South Bridge

RRP NLS 10(1)

Entry Road North Bridge

Source: United States Geological Survey (USGS), "Geologic Map of Iowa (1969)" Google Earth, 2012

CHEROKEE GROUP - Phanerozoic/Paleozoic/Carboniferous Pennsylvanian-Middle [Des Moines]: Cyclic deposits with carbonaceous shale, clay, siltstone, with lesser sandstone, and thick coal beds; minor but persistent limestone beds; may include parts of Atoka or Morrow Series. Approximately thickness 775 ft.

Primary Rock Type, Shale: A laminated, indurated rock having more than 67% clay-sized minerals.

Secondary Rock Type, Claystone: An indurated rock having more than 67% clay-sized minerals.

SHEET

NO. PROJECT

STATEREG

RRP-NLS 10(1)

TOTAL

SHEETS

1IA

FIGURE 2

GEOLOGIC MAP

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VIRGINIA

RRP-NLS 10(1)

Entry Road North Bridge

RRP NLS 10(1)

Entry Road South Bridge

Jasper County, Iowa (2010) Source: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx

314 Lawson-Nodaway-Colo Complex, 0 to 2 percent slopes, occasionally flooded.

Parent material: Silty alluvium Typical profile Typical profile Typical profile 0 to 12 inches: Silt loam 0 to 7 inches: Silt loam 0 to 8 inches: Silty clay loam 12 to 30 inches: Silt loam 7 to 31 inches: Stratified silt loam to silty clay loam 8 to 40 inches: Silty clay loam 30 to 60 inches: Silt loam 31 to 42 inches: Stratified silt loam to silty clay loam 40 to 46 inches: Silty clay loam

42 to 80 inches: Stratified silt loam to silty clay loam 46 to 60 inches: Silty clay loam

430 Ackmore silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes.

Parent material: Silty alluvium Typical profile 0 to 8 inches: Silt loam 8 to 25 inches: Silt loam 25 to 60 inches: Silty clay loam

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

1IA

FIGURE 3

SOIL SURVEY MAP EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VIRGINIA

TOTAL

SHEETS

SHEET

NO. PROJECT

STATEREG

RRP-NLS 10(1)

RRP-NLS 10(1)

Entry Road North Bridge

RRP-NLS 10(1)

Entry Road South Bridge

APPENDIX B

Boring Location Plan and Subsurface Profile

REG STATE PROJECT SHEET NO.

A C

T U

A L F I L E R

X X

M N

G

B O

R I N

G

L D

.D

G N

7. GEOPHYSICAL TEST SITE: SEISMIC RESISTIVITY

6. BHR - BORE HOLE REFUSAL

5. BHT - BORE HOLE TERMINATED

4. RQD - ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION

3. CR% - PERCENT OF RECOVERY

2. R - REFUSAL, SPT 100 BLOWS/12"

1. SPT - STANDARD PENETRATION TEST - AASHTO T206-74 STERLING, VIRGINIA

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

CONDITIONS MAY VARY BETWEEN THESE LOCATIONS.

AT THE BORING LOCATIONS SHOWN. SUBSURFACE

THE SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED

THE BORING LOGS ON THIS SHEET REPRESENT

AND SUBSURFACE PROFILE

BORING LOCATION PLAN

TYPE OF MATERIAL TEST BORING MISCELLANEOUS

SCALE

BORING NUMBER B-N

(24 HOURS)

WATER LEVEL (WL)

(TIME OF DRILLING)

WATER LEVEL (WL)

DEPTH MARKS

N BLOWS/12" (SPT)

J-N JAR SAMPLE NO.

CR% RQD

N

N N

N

BHT OR BHR

S R

SYMBOLTYPE OF MATERIALSYMBOL

e f l-f il e s h a r e .f lh d .f h w a .d o t.

g o v d a ta P

R O J E

C T

S F

W S N

E S

M n ls

(1

T e c h s e r v G e o te c h C

A D

D R

X X

N L S

(1

B O

R

IN

G

N O

R T

H

S O

U T

H

B R

G .D

G N

T

IM

E

1-

M a r -2

1:

P

M

NLS 10(1)IAXX XX

ELEVATION

N

1:

at of structure

Existing ground line

Profile Grade at 17’-0" right of

Existing ground line

CL

CL

at 17’-0" left of

Exisiting ground line

CL

Timber railing ground line

Proposed

2%

PLAN

NORTH BRIDGE

ENTRY ROAD

GEOTECHNICAL REPORT NO. 0X-XX

PROJECT NLS 10(1)

SCALE IN FEET

0 10 20

20°

Begin Bridge

Elev. 825.46

Sta. 138+32.00

End Bridge

138+00

138+50

CL

Bridge Length: 30’-0"

Edge of roadway

Edge of shoulder bridge

Existing

Elev. 825.02

Sta. 138+62.00

Roadway

CL

Sta. 138+47)

(tangent to

Structure

760760

ASPHALT SILTY CLAY

GRAVEL

SAND

SANDY CLAY

SHALE

61.0

60.0

20.0

17.0

15.0

0.9

8.4

22.0

32.0

37.0

42.0

58.0

50/3"

13.0 ft13.0 ft

50/1"

B-4

B-3

CLAY WITH SAND

CLAY/ LEAN CLAY CLAYEY SILT

0.8

9.7

27.0

35.8

41.6

57.0

58.6

Sta. 138+26.1

Sta. 138+68.7

APPENDIX C

Boring Logs

J-1

J-2

J-3

J-4

J-5

J-6

J-7

J-8

J-9

J-10

J-11

Asphalt Pavement

Soft to medium stiff, brownish orange, CLAY (Moist)

-FILL-

Medium stiff to stiff, gray, LEAN CLAY [A-6(14)] (Moist)

Very soft to soft, brown and gray, SANDY CLAY (Moist to wet)

Very soft, gray, CLAY, trace sand (Wet)

0.9

8.4

15.0

22.0

0.3

1.0

1.2

1.0

1.1

1.6

0.4

1.4

2.0

2.0

2-2-3-3

1-2-2-2

2-3-3-3

3-4-6-8

3-4-5-9

2-2-3-3

0-2-2-2

0-1-1-1

0-0-0-0

0-0-0-0

(Blows / ft)

13.0 ft Groundwater Depth:

At Completion:

La ye r D ep th

(f t)

D ep th S ca le

(f t)

Completed:

Hole Diameter:

Boring Method:

Rock Core Diam:

Vane Shear

Density, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions, Moisture Ty pe

Boring Location:

Boring No.:

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Auger Cuttings UD

30 in.

20 60 80

140 lbs/Automatic 3 3/4 in

824.5 ft

BORING LOG

Caved at:

Hammer Drop:

Hammer Wt. & Type:

Surface Elevation: Boring Began: 7/20/12

HSA

7/21/12

KT/MR

RK/DH

Very Hot

Project Name:

E le va tio n (fe et

Water Content %

SPT Rock Core Penetrometer

N o.

Sample Types:

Encountered at:

After

Liquid Limit Standard Penetration Test Data

B-3

Weather:

Operator:

Inspector:

Project Location:

Plastic Limit

North Bridge, South Abutment Sta. 138+68.7

Sheet: 1 of 2

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

Boring was backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion.

R ec

SAMPLE

RRP-NLS 10(1)

Jasper County, IA hrs

B lo w s pe r in

Remarks:

G ra ph ic

Lo g

B O

R

IN

G L

O G

N

LS

0(

1) M

A .G

P J

F H

W A

_V A

.G D

T

/5 /1

823.6

816.1

809.5

802.5

J-11

J-12

J-13

J-14

J-15

J-16

J-17

Medium stiff, gray and brown, LEAN CLAY [A-6(15)] (Wet)

SAND

(Wet)

Note: Unable to sample due to running sand.

Hard, gray, SHALE (Moist)

Auger refusal at 61 ft

32.0

42.0

58.0

61.0

2.0

2.0

1.7

0.3

0-0-0-0

0-2-4-4

4-4-4-6

50/3"

(Blows / ft)

13.0 ft Groundwater Depth:

At Completion:

La ye r D ep th

(f t)

D ep th S ca le

(f t)

Completed:

Hole Diameter:

Boring Method:

Rock Core Diam:

Vane Shear

Density, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions, Moisture Ty pe

Boring Location:

Boring No.:

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Auger Cuttings UD

30 in.

20 60 80

140 lbs/Automatic 3 3/4 in

824.5 ft

BORING LOG

Caved at:

Hammer Drop:

Hammer Wt. & Type:

Surface Elevation: Boring Began: 7/20/12

HSA

7/21/12

KT/MR

RK/DH

Very Hot

Project Name:

E le va tio n (fe et

Water Content %

SPT Rock Core Penetrometer

N o.

Sample Types:

Encountered at:

After

Liquid Limit Standard Penetration Test Data

B-3

Weather:

Operator:

Inspector:

Project Location:

Plastic Limit

North Bridge, South Abutment Sta. 138+68.7

Sheet: 2 of 2

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

Boring was backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion.

R ec

SAMPLE

RRP-NLS 10(1)

Jasper County, IA hrs

B lo w s pe r in

Remarks:

G ra ph ic

Lo g

B O

R

IN

G L

O G

N

LS

0(

1) M

A .G

P J

F H

W A

_V A

.G D

T

/5 /1

792.5

782.5

766.5

763.5

3"

J-1

J-2

J-3

J-4

J-5

J-6

J-7

J-8

J-9

ST-1

J-11

Asphalt Pavement Soft, brown, SILTY CLAY, trace sand (Moist)

-FILL-

Very soft to soft, gray and brown, CLAYEY SILT [A-6] (Moist to wet) Unconfined Compressive Strenght = 1.03 ksf

Soft, brownish orange, CLAY, trace gravel, trace sand (Wet to moist)

0.8

9.7

27.0

1.2

0.4

0.3

1.3

1.7

1.8

1.9

2.0

2.0

1.0

1-2-2-3

2-2-2-2

1-2-2-3

1-2-3-3

1-1-2-3

0-1-3-4

0-0-2-3

0-0-2-3

0-0-0-1

0-0-0-0

(Blows / ft)

13.0 ft Groundwater Depth:

At Completion:

La ye r D ep th

(f t)

D ep th S ca le

(f t)

Completed:

Hole Diameter:

Boring Method:

Rock Core Diam:

Vane Shear

Density, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions, Moisture Ty pe

Boring Location:

Boring No.:

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Auger Cuttings UD

30 in.

20 60 80

140 lbs/Automatic 3 3/4 in

824.2 ft

BORING LOG

Caved at:

Hammer Drop:

Hammer Wt. & Type:

Surface Elevation: Boring Began: 7/21/12

HSA

7/22/12

KT/MR

RK/DH

Very Hot

Project Name:

E le va tio n (fe et

Water Content %

SPT Rock Core Penetrometer

N o.

Sample Types:

Encountered at:

After

Liquid Limit Standard Penetration Test Data

B-4

Weather:

Operator:

Inspector:

Project Location:

Plastic Limit

North Bridge, North Abutment Sta. 138+26.1

Sheet: 1 of 2

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

Boring was backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion.

Bucket sample taken from 15 ft to 20 ft.

R ec

SAMPLE

RRP-NLS 10(1)

Jasper County, IA hrs

B lo w s pe r in

Remarks:

G ra ph ic

Lo g

B O

R

IN

G L

O G

N

LS

0(

1) M

A .G

P J

F H

W A

_V A

.G D

T

/5 /1

823.4

814.5

797.2

J-11

J-12

J-13

J-14

J-15

J-16

J-17

Soft, brownish orange, CLAY, trace gravel, trace sand (Wet to moist) (Continued)

Medium stiff to stiff, gray, CLAY (Moist to wet)

SAND

(Wet)

Note: Unable to sample due to running sand.

Auger refusal at 58.5 ft

35.8

41.6

58.5

1.7

1.8

2.0

0-0-3-3

1-3-6-6

0-2-6-10

50/1"

(Blows / ft)

13.0 ft Groundwater Depth:

At Completion:

La ye r D ep th

(f t)

D ep th S ca le

(f t)

Completed:

Hole Diameter:

Boring Method:

Rock Core Diam:

Vane Shear

Density, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions, Moisture Ty pe

Boring Location:

Boring No.:

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Auger Cuttings UD

30 in.

20 60 80

140 lbs/Automatic 3 3/4 in

824.2 ft

BORING LOG

Caved at:

Hammer Drop:

Hammer Wt. & Type:

Surface Elevation: Boring Began: 7/21/12

HSA

7/22/12

KT/MR

RK/DH

Very Hot

Project Name:

E le va tio n (fe et

Water Content %

SPT Rock Core Penetrometer

N o.

Sample Types:

Encountered at:

After

Liquid Limit Standard Penetration Test Data

B-4

Weather:

Operator:

Inspector:

Project Location:

Plastic Limit

North Bridge, North Abutment Sta. 138+26.1

Sheet: 2 of 2

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

Boring was backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion.

Bucket sample taken from 15 ft to 20 ft.

R ec

SAMPLE

RRP-NLS 10(1)

Jasper County, IA hrs

B lo w s pe r in

Remarks:

G ra ph ic

Lo g

B O

R

IN

G L

O G

N

LS

0(

1) M

A .G

P J

F H

W A

_V A

.G D

T

/5 /1

788.4

782.6

765.7

1"

APPENDIX D

Laboratory Data

SOIL DATA

NO.

USCSDESCRIPTION

DEPTHSAMPLE

SOURCESYMBOL

Project No.:

Project:

Client:

Particle Size Distribution Report

P E

R C

E N

T F

IN

E

R

100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001200 GRAIN SIZE - mm

% + 3"

% GRAVEL

CRS. FINE

% SAND

CRS. MEDIUM FINE

% FINES

SILT CLAY

in in in

1- 1/ in in

3/ in

1/ in

3/ in

#4 #1

#2

#3

#4

#6

#1

#1

#2

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 8.8 40.8 49.7

(ft.)

RRP-NLS 10(1)

FHWA/EFLHD

Jasper Co. B-1/J-9 20-22 Clayey sand SC

Particle Size Distribution Report

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.6 98.4

Jasper Co. B-1/J-16 55-57 Lean clay CL

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.3 8.1 89.6

Jasper Co. B-2/J-5 10-12 Lean clay CL

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 2.2 97.1

Jasper Co. B-2/J-12 40-42 Lean clay CL

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 1.0 98.1

Jasper Co. B-3/J-6 13-15 Lean clay CL

NO.

USCSDESCRIPTION

DEPTHSAMPLE

SOURCESYMBOL

Project No.:

Project:

Client:

Particle Size Distribution Report

P E

R C

E N

T F

IN

E

R

100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001200 GRAIN SIZE - mm

% + 3"

% GRAVEL

CRS. FINE

% SAND

CRS. MEDIUM FINE

% FINES

SILT CLAY

in in in

1- 1/ in in

3/ in

1/ in

3/ in

#4 #1

#2

#3

#4

#6

#1

#1

#2

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.4 0.7 98.8

(ft.)

RRP-NLS 10(1)

FHWA/EFLHD

Jasper Co. B-3/J-12 35-37 Lean clay CL

Particle Size Distribution Report

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

INDEXLIMITLIMITCONTENTNO.

PLASTICITYLIQUIDPLASTICWATERDEPTHSAMPLE

NATURAL

SOURCESYMBOL

Project No.:

Project:

Client:

LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMITS TEST REPORT

(ft.)

AASHTO

RRP-NLS 10(1)

FHWA/EFLHD

A-6(2)11261524.820-22B-1/J-9Jasper Co.

LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMITS TEST REPORT

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

A-6(15)14372316.655-57B-1/J-16Jasper Co.

A-6(11)12342222.910-12B-2/J-5Jasper Co.

A-6(15)14382425.340-42B-2/J-12Jasper Co.

A-6(14)13372424.413-15B-3/J-6Jasper Co.

10 30 50 70 90 110

LIQUID LIMIT

P

LA

S T

IC

IT

Y

IN

D E

X

PI

=L

L-

A-4 or A-2-4 A-5 or A-2-5

A-7-6

A-6 or A-2-6

A-7-5 or A-2-7

INDEXLIMITLIMITCONTENTNO.

PLASTICITYLIQUIDPLASTICWATERDEPTHSAMPLE

NATURAL

SOURCESYMBOL

Project No.:

Project:

Client:

LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMITS TEST REPORT

(ft.)

AASHTO

RRP-NLS 10(1)

FHWA/EFLHD

A-6(15)14362225.335-37B-3/J-12Jasper Co.

LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMITS TEST REPORT

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

10 30 50 70 90 110

LIQUID LIMIT

P

LA

S T

IC

IT

Y

IN

D E

X

PI

=L

L-

A-4 or A-2-4 A-5 or A-2-5

A-7-6

A-6 or A-2-6

A-7-5 or A-2-7

Date: S&ME Project No.: Transmittal No.:

Document Type:

Client:

Submitted To: Name:

Address:

Phone No.:

Fax No:

N. Randy Rainwater, P.E. Date

Remarks:

S&ME, Inc.

N. Randy Rainwater, P.E.

1413 Topside Road

Louisville, Tennessee 37777

Phone No.: (865) 970-0003

Fax No.: (865) 970-2312 sample on 11/13/12 (only B-4 ST-1 was received); AASHTO T 88, T 89, T 90, T 265, and ASTM D2166.

865-286-6120

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division

FHWA-Eastern Federal lands Highway Division

December 4, 2012

1413 Topside Road, Louisville, Tennessee 37777

Document Transmittal Sheet

1827 Jack Delozier Drive

Sevierville, TN 37876

Charles McCown

FHWA

1439-11-042(04) 1

Lab Test Reports

CopiesRev.DateDocument

Particle Size Analysis Report B-4, ST-1, 25 - 27 ft 12/4/2012 NA 1

Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plastic Index Report B-4, ST-1, 25 - 27 ft 12/4/2012 NA 1

Unconfined Compressive Strength Reports (with Moisture) B-4, ST-1, 25 - 27 ft 12/4/2012 NA 1

Performed in general accordance with the Geotechnical Request for Laboratory Tests delivered with the

12/4/2012

Contract Purchase Order Service Agreement

Revision Amendment Other

S&ME, Inc. - Knoxville 1413 Topside Road, Louisville, Tennessee 37777

Page 1 of 6 Pages

A

B

C

D

E

F

N

LL

Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plastic Index

Pan #

1.014

29 1.018

1.009

N

N Factor

Log No.:9084

Tare #:

9/13/2012

Plastic Limit

7/19/12

1439-11-042 (04)

Depth:South Bridge o

0.995

0.974

Date

15.52

11 2

15.43 15.71

Dry Preparation

12/4/2012 Technical Responsibility

No. 40 Sieve 26531

Technician Name Date

Wet Preparation

26 1.005

1.02224

Factor

1.000

NP, Non-Plastic

N. Randy Rainwater

Notes / Deviations / References:

25.0 - 27.0 ft

0.979

0.985

0.99

Derek Baker

Air Dried

11/30/2012

AASHTO T90: Determining the Plastic Limit & Plastic Index of Soils

CL

Multipoint Method

AASHTO T89: Determining the Liquid Limit of Soils

Liquid Limit

22.3%

One Point Liquid Limit

Ave. Average

Plastic Index

Liquid Limit

29 35

37.5% 35.3%

31.02

14.33 15.40

LL Apparatus 18414

8/27/2012

34.59

29.01

Wet Soil Weight + A

Dry Soil Weight + A 21.5529.76

36.45

15.62

5.37 5.43

35.13

All Moisture Contents determined by AASHTO T 245

1.95

26.39

8.73 6.05

22.0%

1.33

22.88

22.2%

24.44

15.50

Group Symbol

Plastic Limit

20045

Report Date:

Sample Date:

RRP-NLS 10(1) Test Date(s) 11/30/12

S&ME ID #

10/8/2012

ST-1

x

S&ME ID # Cal Date:

Quality Assurance

S&ME, Inc., 1413 Topside Road, Louisville, TN 37777

4/7/2012

12/3/12

Sevierville, TN

Form No. TR-D4318-T89-90

AASHTO T 90o x

Revision Date: 11/20/07

Revision No. 0

Project #:

Project Name:

ASTM D4318 AASHTO T 89

Client Address:

Client Name:

Grooving tool

Cal Date: Type and Specification

Location:

Boring No.:

Type and Specification

Oven 12872

8/2/2012

18435

FHWA-EFLHD

Balance (0.01 g)

B-4 Sample No:

Water Weight (B-C)

Dry Soil Weight (C-A)

5.58

# OF DROPS

% Moisture (D/E)*100 41.4%

One-point Method

Tare Weight

LL = F * FACTOR

13.49

This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, without the written approval of S&ME, Inc.

15 20 25 30 35 40

35.0

36.0

37.0

38.0

39.0

40.0

41.0

42.0

43.0

44.0

45.0

10 100

M o is tu re

C o n te n t

# of Drops

S&ME, INC. - Corporate 3201 Spring Forest Road

Raleigh, NC. 27616

Plasticity, B-4, ST-1, 25- 27 ft.xls x o x o o

Mechanical Stirring Apparatus A Dispersion Period:

Gravel

Gravel:

Total Sand:

Coarse Sand

1 min. Dispersing Agent:

Signature Position Date

40 g./ Liter

This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, without the written approval of S&ME, Inc.

12/4/2012

Sodium Hexametaphosphate:

Liquid Limit

Description of Sand and Gravel Hard & DurableAngular

Rounded

Silt & Clay (% Passing #200):

Assumed Specific Gravity

0.0%No. 200

2.70

99.1%

Maximum Particle Size:

0.9%

Form No. TR-D422-3

Particle Size Analysis of Soils Revision No. 0

Revision Date: 02/20/08

S&ME Project #:

7/19/12

Project Name:

Client Name:

1439-11-042 (04)

RRP-NLS 10(1) 11/30/12 & 12/3/12

23.8%Clay

Plastic Index

< 0.075 and > 0.002 mm

< 0.425 mm and > 0.075 mm (#200)Fine Sand

Clay

Silt

< 75 mm and > 2.00 mm (#4)

< 2.00 mm and > 0.425 mm (#40) < 0.002 mm

FHWA-EFLHD

Sevierville, TN

Report Date:

Test Date(s):

Depth:

Sample No.:Boring No.: B-4 ST-1 Sample Date:

Sample Log No.:9084 AASHTO T 88

S&ME, Inc., 1413 Topside Road, Louisville, TN 37777

Quality Assurance

12/3/12

Address:

25.0 - 27.0 ft

Technical Responsibility

ASTM D2487 USCS (CL)

References / Comments / Deviations: AASHTO T 88, T89, T 90, M145

N. Randy Rainwater Laboratory Department Manager

Silt

Plastic Limit

Sample Description: A-6 (Clayey Silt), gray

75.3%

Weathered & FriableSoft

1" 3/4" 1/2" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0.0010.010.1110100

P er ce n t P a ss in g

Particle Size (mm)

S&ME, Inc. - Corporate 3201 Spring Forest Road

Raleigh, NC. 27616

Particle Size, B-4, ST-1, 25 - 27 ft.xls

Tested By: Larry Presley Checked By: NRR, 12/4/12

UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST

UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST

S & ME, INC.

Louisville, TN

Project No.: 1439-11-042(04)

Date Sampled: 7/19/12

Remarks:

The specimen failed with bulging and cracking in axial direction. ASTM D2166

Figure

Client: FHWA-EFLHD

Project: RRP-NLS 10(1)

Location: B-4 / ST-1

Sample Number: 9084 Depth: 25 - 27 ft

Description: A-6 (Clayey Silt), gray

LL = 38 PI = 16PL = 22 Assumed GS= 2.70 Type: Intact Tube Sample

Specimen No.

Unconfined strength, ksf

Undrained shear strength, ksf

Failure strain, %

Strain rate, in./min.

Water content, %

Wet density, pcf

Dry density, pcf

Saturation, %

Void ratio

Specimen diameter, in.

Specimen height, in.

Height/diameter ratio

1.03

0.51

15.1

0.050

32.4

118.9

89.8

99.7

0.8771

2.844

5.791

2.04

C o m p re s s iv e S tr e s s k s f

0.5

1.5

Axial Strain, %

0 5 10 15 20

S & ME, Inc.

UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST 12/4/2012

Date: 7/19/12

Client: FHWA-EFLHD

Project: RRP-NLS 10(1)

Project No.: 1439-11-042(04)

Location: B-4 / ST-1

Depth: 25 - 27 ft Sample Number: 9084

Description: A-6 (Clayey Silt), gray

Remarks: The specimen failed with bulging and cracking in axial direction. ASTM D2166

Type of Sample: Intact Tube Sample

Assumed Specific Gravity=2.70 LL=38 PL=22 PI=16

Parameters for Specimen No. 1

Specimen Parameter Initial

Moisture content: Moist soil+tare, gms. 131.400

Moisture content: Dry soil+tare, gms. 100.900

Moisture content: Tare, gms. 6.700

Moisture, % 32.4

Moist specimen weight, gms. 1147.90

Diameter, in. 2.844

Area, in.² 6.353

Height, in. 5.791

Wet density, pcf 118.9

Dry density, pcf 89.8

Void ratio 0.8771

Saturation, % 99.7

Test Readings for Specimen No. 1

Strain rate, in./min. = 0.050

Unconfined compressive strength = 1.03 ksf at reading no. 37

Unconfined ultimate strength = 1.03 ksf at reading no. 37

No.

Def.

Dial in.

Load Dial

Load lbs.

Strain

Deviator Stress ksf

0 0.0000 0.300 0.0 0.0 0.00

1 0.0100 2.200 1.9 0.2 0.04

2 0.0200 3.900 3.6 0.3 0.08

3 0.0400 6.900 6.6 0.7 0.15

4 0.0600 10.700 10.4 1.0 0.23

5 0.0800 14.500 14.2 1.4 0.32

6 0.1000 18.300 18.0 1.7 0.40

7 0.1250 22.300 22.0 2.2 0.49

8 0.1500 25.300 25.0 2.6 0.55

9 0.1750 28.100 27.8 3.0 0.61

10 0.2000 30.600 30.3 3.5 0.66

11 0.2250 32.400 32.1 3.9 0.70

12 0.2500 34.000 33.7 4.3 0.73

13 0.2750 35.700 35.4 4.7 0.76

14 0.3000 36.900 36.6 5.2 0.79

15 0.3250 38.400 38.1 5.6 0.82

S & ME, Inc.

Test Readings for Specimen No. 1

No.

Def.

Dial in.

Load Dial

Load lbs.

Strain

Deviator Stress ksf

16 0.3500 39.200 38.9 6.0 0.83

17 0.3750 40.400 40.1 6.5 0.85

18 0.4000 41.400 41.1 6.9 0.87

19 0.4250 42.400 42.1 7.3 0.88

20 0.4500 43.200 42.9 7.8 0.90

21 0.4750 44.000 43.7 8.2 0.91

22 0.5000 44.900 44.6 8.6 0.92

23 0.5250 45.800 45.5 9.1 0.94

24 0.5500 46.300 46.0 9.5 0.94

25 0.5750 47.200 46.9 9.9 0.96

26 0.6000 47.900 47.6 10.4 0.97

27 0.6250 48.500 48.2 10.8 0.97

28 0.6500 49.200 48.9 11.2 0.98

29 0.6750 49.700 49.4 11.7 0.99

30 0.7000 50.300 50.0 12.1 1.00

31 0.7250 50.800 50.5 12.5 1.00

32 0.7500 51.400 51.1 13.0 1.01

33 0.7750 51.900 51.6 13.4 1.01

34 0.8000 52.500 52.2 13.8 1.02

35 0.8250 53.000 52.7 14.2 1.02

36 0.8500 53.400 53.1 14.7 1.03

37 0.8750 53.700 53.4 15.1 1.03

APPENDIX E

Design Analysis

- Bearing and Uplift Resistance Analysis-

- Settlement Analysis-

-Lateral Capacity Analysis-

-Bearing and Uplift Resistance Analysis-

Project RRP NLS 10(1)

Neal Smith National Wildlife Refuge Jasper County, Iowa

Entry Road North Bridge Sta.138+31.00 to 138+63.00

14x102 14x117 14x102 14x117 14x102 14x117 14x102 14x117 14x102 14x117 14x102 14x117

0.00 813.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

9.50 804.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

15.39 798.11 0.93 0.94 0.58 0.68 1.51 1.62 0.98 1.05 0.93 0.94 0.47 0.47

20.03 793.47 2.05 2.07 1.21 1.40 3.26 3.47 2.12 2.26 2.05 2.07 1.03 1.04

25.18 788.32 10.10 10.21 1.84 2.11 11.94 12.32 7.76 8.01 10.10 10.21 5.05 5.11

30.33 783.17 32.31 32.65 2.08 2.43 34.39 35.08 22.35 22.80 32.31 32.65 16.16 16.33

35.48 778.02 49.05 49.62 7.52 8.81 56.57 58.43 36.77 37.98 49.05 49.62 24.53 24.81

40.12 773.38 56.14 56.92 10.72 12.97 66.86 69.89 43.46 45.43 56.14 56.92 28.07 28.46

45.27 768.23 64.30 65.27 33.26 39.23 97.56 104.50 63.41 67.93 64.30 65.27 32.15 32.64

46.82 766.68 66.21 67.36 45.08 53.21 111.29 120.57 72.34 78.37 66.21 67.36 33.11 33.68

48.88 764.62 69.67 70.81 67.79 79.27 137.46 150.08 89.35 97.55 69.67 70.81 34.84 35.41

50.42 763.08 71.90 73.13 91.59 106.73 163.49 179.86 106.27 116.91 71.90 73.13 35.95 36.57

51.45 762.05 99.36 100.91 93.21 108.63 192.57 209.54 125.17 136.20 99.36 100.91 49.68 50.46

51.97 761.53 114.70 116.43 92.89 108.28 207.59 224.71 134.93 146.06 114.70 116.43 57.35 58.22

53.00 760.50 146.49 148.60 92.85 108.27 239.34 256.87 155.57 166.97 146.49 148.60 73.25 74.30

Resistance Factors were used in accordance with Table 10.5.5.2.3-1 EL 813.5: Bottom of the pile cap for the Abutments provided by the Bridge Section

Location Depth (ft)

Elevation (ft)

Abutment

Skin Friction (kips) Factored Uplift

Resistance (kips)

End Bearing (kips) Resistance Factor

0.65 0.5

Resistance Factor

Nominal Bearing Resistance

(kips)

Factored Bearing Resistance

(kips)

Nominal Uplift Resistance

(kips)

U. S DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

Neal Smith National Wildlife Refuge Jasper County, Iowa

U. S DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

0.00 50.00 100.00 150.00 200.00 250.00 300.00

D ep th (f t)

Nominal (Ultimate) Bearing Resistance (kips)

NOMINAL BEARING RESISTANCE vs. DEPTH Entry Road North Bridge Sta. 138+31.00 to 138+63.00

HP 14x102

HP 14x117

Notes:

Depth = 0 = Elevation 814.50 ft

Neal Smith National Wildlife Refuge Jasper County, Iowa

U. S DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00 120.00 140.00 160.00 180.00

D ep th (f t)

Factored Bearing Resistance (kips)

FACTORED BEARING RESISTANCE vs. DEPTH Entry Road North Brige Sta. 138+31.00 to 138+63.00

HP 14x102

HP 14x117

Neal Smith National Wildlife Refuge Jasper County, Iowa

U. S DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00 120.00 140.00 160.00

D ep th (f t)

Nominal (Ultimate) Uplift Resistance (kips)

NOMINAL UPLIFT RESISTANCE vs. DEPTH Entry Road North Bridge Sta. 138+31.00 to 138+63.00

HP 14x102

HP 14x117

Entry Road north Bridge Neal Smith National Wildlife Refuge Jasper County, Iowa

U. S DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00 70.00 80.00

D ep th (f t)

Factored Uplift Resistance (kips)

FACTORED UPLIFT RESISTANCE vs. DEPTH Entry Road North Bridge Sta. 138+31.00 to 138+63.00

HP 14x102

HP 14x117

-Settlement Analysis-

0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.10 0.11 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.15 0.16 0.17 0.18 0.19 0.20

Total Side Tip

Total Settlement, X -in

C om pr es si on

L oa d, Q dw -k p Vertical Load vs. Total Settlement

ALL-PILE CivilTech Software www.civiltech.com Licensed to

CivilTech Software

RRP-NLS 10(1) - Neal Smith National Wildlife Refuge North Bridge (HP 14 x 102) - Fixed Head

-Lateral Capacity Analysis-

0 0

50 50

100 100

150 150

200 200

250 250

300 300

350 350

400 400

450 450

500 500

0.0 00.5 601.0 1201.5 1802.0 2402.5 3003.0 3603.5 4204.0 4804.5 5405.0 600

Top Deflection, yt -in Max. Moment in Single Pile, Mmax -kp-f

La te ra l L oa d, P -k p

La te ra l L oa d, P -k p

X-Direction, Group Piles

LATERAL LOAD vs DEFLECTION & MAX. MOMENT

ALL-PILE CivilTech Software www.civiltech.com Licensed to

CivilTech Software

RRP-NLS 10(1) - Neal Smith National Wildlife Refuge North Bridge (HP 14 x 102) - Fixed Head

APPENDIX F

Representative Photographs

Photo 1: North Bridge

Photo 2: South Bridge

Photo 3: Drilling at South Abutment of South Bridge

APPENDIX G

Special Contract Requirements

Section 551. —DRIVEN PILES

551.06 Delete the second paragraph and add the following:

Use the wave equation to determine the ultimate capacity of the in-place pile.

551.11 Delete the first paragraph and add the following:

Dynamic load testing is required.

511.11(a) Delete the first sentence of fifth paragraph and substitute the following:

48-hrs after the initial driving, re-drive each dynamic load test pile with instrument attached.