Report_2_Soils_ _Foundations.pdf

SOILS AND FOUNDATIONS REPORT

NO. 14-14

PROJECT PRA-NATR 3C12, 3D32

LAKESHIRE DRIVE BRIDGE APPROACHES REPAIR (MP 263.34)

(Structure Number 5570-043P)

NATCHEZ TRACE PARKWAY

LEE COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI

U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division

21400 Ridgetop Circle Sterling, VA 20166

December 2014

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 General

1.2 Project Description

2 GEOLOGIC SETTING

2.1 Regional Geology

2.2 Soil Survey

3 PROCEDURES AND RESULTS

3.1 General

3.2 Sampling

3.3 Field Tests and Measurements

3.4 Data Summary

3.5 Laboratory Testing

3.6 Findings

4 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION

5 RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Bridge Approach Fill Stabilization

6 REFERENCES

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A – Figures APPENDIX B – Boring Location Map and Subsurface Profile APPENDIX C – Boring Logs APPENDIX D – Laboratory Testing Results APPENDIX E – Representative Photographs APPENDIX F – Recommended Special Contract Requirements

Note: Design changes made subsequent to distribution of this report and prior to project advertisement will be documented in a memo inserted after the title page.

SOILS AND FOUNDATIONS REPORT

NO. 14-14

PROJECT PRA-NATR 3C12, 3D32

LAKESHIRE DRIVE BRIDGE APPROACHES REPAIR (MP 263.34)

(Structure Number 5570-043P)

NATCHEZ TRACE PARKWAY

LEE COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 General

This report summarizes the results of our subsurface exploration, laboratory testing, and design analyses and presents our evaluations and recommendations for the Lakeshire Drive Bridge approaches repair. The site is located along the Natchez Trace Parkway in Lee County, Mississippi. A project location map is provided as Figure 1 of Appendix A.

1.2 Project Description

The existing single-span bridge was built in 1959 and is supported on spread footings.

The bridge inspection report of May 31, 2012 indicated that the bridge approaches were experiencing excessive settlements. The report recommended that corrective actions should be taken to prevent the development of more serious and costly problems in the future.

2 GEOLOGIC SETTING

2.1 Regional Geology

Available geologic data1 indicates that the subject site is predominantly underlain by the Coffee Sand Formation. However, it is possible that the Demopolis Chalk Formation is likely interbedded with the Coffee Sand Formation in the project location. Both the Coffee Sand and Demopolis Chalk Formations are described as Cretaceous in age. A Site Geologic Map is included as Figure 2 of Appendix A.

2.2 Soil Survey

According to the United States Department of Agriculture Web Soil Survey2 for Lee County, Mississippi, the Lakeshire Drive Bridge is predominantly underlain by the Providence silt loam (PtC2). This map unit is described as silt loam, silty clay loam, and silty clay marine deposits. A Soil Survey Map is included as Figure 3 of Appendix A.

Project: PRA-NATR 3C12, 3D32 Soils and Foundations Report Lakeshire Drive Bridge Repair (MP 263.34) No. 14-14 Natchez Trace Parkway, Lee County, Mississippi

4 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VA

3 PROCEDURES AND RESULTS

3.1 General

The Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division’s (EFLHD) Subsurface Exploration Team performed the drilling operations for this site between February 6th and 7th, 2014. Two

(2) borings were drilled – one at each of the existing abutments. The borings, designated B-1 and B-2, were extended to depths of 36.4 ft and 37.0 ft below existing site grades, respectively. The borings were drilled using a CME 750, rotary, all-terrain vehicle (ATV)-mounted drill rig. Borings were laid out in the field by EFLHD field personnel by referencing ground surface topography, measuring distances from existing surface features, and estimating right angles. Due to the methods used to locate the borings in the field, borings location shown in Appendix B should be considered approximate. Ground surface elevations at the boring locations were determined from the topography plans provided by the Survey Division. Appendix B contains the Boring Location Plan and Subsurface Profile.

3.2 Sampling

Borings were advanced using 3-¾ inch (ID) hollow-stem augers. Standard Penetration Tests (SPT) were performed using a 2.0-inch (OD) split-spoon sampler in accordance with AASHTO T206. SPT samples were recovered by driving the split-spoon sampler a distance of 24 inches, or until refusal, into the soil under the action of a 140-pound automatic hammer free-falling 30 inches. The number of hammer blows required to advance the split-spoon sampler the middle foot of the 24-inch sample 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 and transported to EFLHD’s Materials Testing Laboratory in Sevierville, Tennessee for testing and storage. Split-spoon refusal is defined by 50 blows per 1 inch of penetration of the split-spoon sampler.

In addition to SPT N-values, the consistency of each cohesive sample was estimated using a calibrated pocket Penetrometer (PP) and the results, in tons per square foot, are included in the boring logs. The sampling sequence and associated jar samples for each boring may be referenced on the boring logs in Appendix C.

3.3 Field Tests and Measurements

A field description by color and texture was made for each recovered soil sample.

3.4 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

5 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VA

presence of various materials such as gravel, pebbles, organic matter, and other non-soil materials and observations of groundwater. They also contain interpretations by the exploration 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 represent an interpretation of field data and description of the soil samples by a geotechnical engineer. These records occasionally do 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 memorandum.

Groundwater readings were made at the time of drilling and are included in the boring logs. Fluctuations in groundwater level due to seasonal variations, rainfall, temperature, and other factors not evident at the time measurements were made should be expected.

3.5 Laboratory Testing

A laboratory testing program was conducted on representative soil samples recovered during the subsurface exploration. The primary purpose of the testing program was to aid in classification and evaluation of the engineering properties of soils present at the site.

Laboratory testing included gradation analysis by sieve (AASHTO T 11/T 27), natural moisture content (AASHTO T 265), Atterberg limits (AASHTO T 89 & T 90) and classification (AASHTO M 145). All tests were conducted in general accordance with applicable ASTM/AASHTO standard test methods. The results of the laboratory testing program are presented in Appendix D and are summarized in Table 1 below:

Table 1 - Summary of Laboratory Testing Results

NT = Not tested, ND = Not determined.

B or in g

S am p le

D ep th ft

S am p le

N o.

P as si n g

#2

S ie ve

F in es

P la st ic

L im it

P L

L iq u id

L im it

L L

P la st ic it y

In d ex

(P I) at u ra l M oi st u re

C on te n t

A A

S H

T O

C la ss

D es cr ip ti on

B-1 3-5 J-1 NT 18 31 13 18.4 ND Sandy clay, some silt

B-1 15-17 J-6 69.9 16 35 19 12.5 A-6 Silty clay, some sand

B-2 5-7 J-2 70.6 18 30 12 16.8 A-6 Silty clay, some sand

B-2 20-22 J-8 40.2 15 33 18 18.9 A-6 Sandy clay, some silt

B-2 30-32 J-10 NT 19 43 24 23.7 ND Clay, trace of sand.

6 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VA

3.6 Findings

A brief description of the soil and groundwater conditions encountered during our drilling operation is presented below. The stratification lines designating the interfaces between soil types on the boring logs in Appendix C represent approximate boundaries. The transition between materials may be gradual. It should be noted that one or more of the units may be absent at specific locations.

Pavement – Pavement and base course thicknesses encountered measured 3.0 ft and 1.1 ft in borings B-1 and B-2, respectively.

Fill – Fill material was encountered below the base course materials and extended to an approximate depth of 25 ft below existing site grades. The fill consisted primarily of soft to stiff sandy clay and silty clay. SPT N-values in this layer range from 4 to 14 blows per foot (bpf).

Natural Deposits – Below the fill materials, marine deposits were encountered in both borings. This stratum consisted primarily of very soft to soft clay, with some shell fragments, with thickness ranging from 6 feet to 10 feet. SPT N-values in this layer ranged from 1 to 4 bpf. (possible Coffee Sand Formation)

Medium Stiff to Hard Silty Clay – Below the very soft to soft clay, medium stiff to hard silty clay with some sand was encountered. N-values in this layer ranged from 5 bpf to 50 blows for 4 inches of split-spoon penetration.

Groundwater – Groundwater was encountered at depths of 33 feet and 32 ft below existing site grades in borings B-1 and B-2, respectively

4 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION

Based on the subsurface profile encountered and the proposed construction, four alternatives were considered to stabilize the approach settlements. Decision criteria included owner preference, cost, constructability, limits of disturbance, and familiarity with similar projects and soil profiles. Settlement stabilization alternatives considered included:

1. Excavate and Replace with Engineered Fill

2. Mechanically Compacted Aggregate Columns with Load Transfer Platform

3. Geofoam Lightweight Fill

4. Polyurethane Grout Injection

7 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VA

Excavate and Replace with Engineered Fill

This approach would involve the excavation of a large proportion of the existing approach fill to a depth of approximately 35 feet, and replacement with engineered fill meeting modern specifications for gradation and compaction. Excavation (and resulting disposal) and replacement quantities would be relatively large compared to the other two alternatives. Total construction duration and traffic impacts could be expected to be greatest for this alternative.

Mechanically Compacted Aggregate Columns with Load Transfer Platform

This approach involves the partial replacement or displacement of unsuitable subsurface soils with a compacted vertical column of stone, transferring loads to a suitable bearing stratum. Stone columns can be used to support bridge approach slabs, to provide stability, and to reduce the costly maintenance problem at the joint between the fill and the bridge. Load transfer platforms consist of a composite of engineered fill and geosynthetic reinforcement designed to improve load distribution from the embankment being supported to the columns. This approach will require a specialty contractor.

Geofoam Lightweight Fill

EPS geofoam densities can range from 0.75 to 3.0 pounds per cubic foot. Lightweight fill technologies can be applied to solve a variety of geotechnical problems, the most significant advantages expected for this project include:

Reduction in the overburden stress applied to the foundation soils, resulting in decreased settlement

Increase in the strength and stiffness of approach fill materials, resulting in decreased settlement

Reduction in moisture content variation and resulting volume changes within the replaced approach fill.

The greatest disadvantages of this alternative include staging challenges and increased costs that would be required to maintain traffic during construction.

8 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VA

Polyurethane Grout Injection

Pressure grouting consists of injecting a material (grout) under pressure to fill joints and other defects in rock, soil, concrete, masonry, and other materials. The primary benefits of grouting in soil are increased bulk soil density, stiffness, and strength, and increased resistance to flow of subsurface moisture. Polymeric polyurethanes are a type of non-cementitious grout that are used to solve a wide variety of challenging subsurface problems.

5 RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Bridge Approach Fill Stabilization

Based on the decision criteria previously mentioned, we conclude that the Polyurethane Grout Injection alternative offers the best value for stabilization of approach settlement at the Lakeshire Drive Bridge. Recommended Special Contract Requirements are included in Appendix F.

DISCLAIMER/LIMITATIONS CLAUSE

The subsurface explorations and tests described in the section on Procedures and Results have been conducted in accordance with standard practices and procedures (except as specifically noted). The results of these explorations and tests represent conditions at the specific locations indicated. Subsurface conditions between these locations may vary.

The Design Analysis and Conclusions section and the Recommendations section in 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:

Christopher Lynch, EIT Geotechnical Engineer

Reviewed by:

Mounir Abouzakhm, P.E.

Division Geotechnical Engineer

9 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VA

6 REFERENCES

1 Moore, William Halsell. (1969). reprinted 1985, Geologic Map of Mississippi, Compiled by Bicker, A. R., Jr., a revision of the geologic map published by the MS Geological Survey in 1945 in cooperation with the USGS, revised from data submitted by Dr. E. E. Russell of MS State University from published reports of the MS Geological Survey and from field revisions, Mercury Maps Inc., Jackson, MS.

http://mrdata.usgs.gov/geology/state/state.php?state=MS

2 Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States

Department of Agriculture. Web Soil Survey. Available online at http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/. Accessed March 26, 2014.

APPENDIX A

Figures

STATEREG

NATR 3C12, 3D32

TOTAL

SHEETS

SHEET

NO.

PROJECT

1SE 1MS

FIGURE 1

PROJECT LOCATION MAP

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VIRGINIA

Name: Demopolis chalk Geologic Age: Upper Cretaceous

Description: Chalk and mostly chalk containing fewer impurities than underlying and overlying formations.

Primary Rock Type : Carbonate rock Secondary Rock Type: Other Rock Type:

Name: Coffee Sand Geologic Age: Upper Cretaceous

Description: Coffee Formation of Selma Group is the uppermost unit of Cretaceous age present in Tishomingo Co., and the only unit representing the Selma. No complete section is present in the report area as the unit is truncated by erosion. It is composed of very fine- to medium-grained, micaceous, glauconitic, quartz sand, thinly interbedded and interlaminated with light- to medium-gray, silty clay. The Coffee is replaced by the main body of chalky Selma strata in southern Lee and northwestern Itawamba Cos. The Tupelo Tongue is a very fossiliferous phase representing the southernmost extension of the Coffee Formation. Outcrop belt attains a maximum width of 8 mi in northwestern part of Tishomingo Co. Thickness is 150 ft at the surface of northwestern Tishomingo Co., 275 ft in Prentiss Co. to the south, and only about 100 ft in Lee Co. Disconformably overlies the Tombigbee Sand Member of the Eutaw Formation; unconformably underlies Tennessee River terrace deposits.

Primary Rock Type : sand Secondary Rock Type: clay or mud Other Rock Type: calcarenite

Source: Moore, William Halsell, 1969, reprinted 1985, Geologic Map of Mississippi, Compiled by Bicker, A. R., Jr., a revision of the geologic map published by the MS Geological Survey in 1945 in cooperation with the USGS, revised from data submitted by Dr. E. E. Russell of MS State University from published reports of the MS Geological Survey and from field revisions, Mercury Maps Inc., Jackson, MS.

http://mrdata.usgs.gov/geology/state/state.php?state=MS

SE

SHEET

NO.

PROJECT

STATEREG

NATR 3C12, 3D32 1MS

FIGURE 2

GEOLOGIC MAP

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VIRGINIA

TOTAL

SHEETS

NATR 3C12, 3D32

Bridge over Lakeshire Drive

Kc

Kd

Kc

Kd

US

US

MS

MS

US 45

/278

Lee County, Mississippi (MS081) Source: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx

- Providence silt loam, heavy substratum, 5 to 8 percent slopes, eroded (dulac) Parent material: Silty loess over sandy marine deposits

Typical profile 0 to 6 inches: Silt loam 6 to 23 inches: Silty clay loam 23 to 37 inches: Silty clay loam 37 to 72 inches: Silty clay

- Providence silt loam, heavy substratum, 2 to 5 percent slopes, eroded (dulac) Parent material: Silty loess over sandy marine deposits

Typical profile 0 to 6 inches: Silt loam 6 to 23 inches: Silty clay loam 23 to 37 inches: Silty clay loam 37 to 72 inches: Silty clay

SE

SHEET

NO.

PROJECT

STATEREG

NATR 3C12, 3D32

PtC2

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

1MS

FIGURE 3

SOIL SURVEY MAP EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VIRGINIA

TOTAL

SHEETS

PtB2

Bridge over Lakeshire Drive

APPENDIX B

Boring Location Map and Subsurface Profile

ORIGINAL GROUND (EAST ELEVATION)

CONCRETE SHOULDER

CONCRETE BRIDGE RAIL

PLAN

(EAST)

ELEVATION

NATR 3C12, 3D32

Description Milepost

Actual

Parkway

Schedule (RIP Route #)

Cycle #5

RIP Milepost/

B Pkwy Bridge Over Lakeshire Dr. 263.34 265.73 (0001F)

STRUCTURE NO. 5570-043P

B-2

B-1

Height Units: US Survey Feet

Distance Units: US Survey Feet

Vertical Datum: GEOID12A (CONUS)

Geoid: GEOID12A

Zone: Mississippi East 2301

Datum: NAD 1983 (Conus)

Name: US State Plane 1983

Project Coordinate System

0.5" EXP. JOINT 0.5" EXP. JOINT

-S e p -2

:2

A M

:2

:5

A f h f l1 f il e s e r v 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 n a tr c d T e c h s e r v G e o te c h C

A D

D N

A T

R

C -3

D

B o r in g

L o c a ti o n a p a n d

P r o f il e .d g n

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VIRGINIA

SE MS

REG STATE PROJECT

SHEET

NO.

AND SUBSURFACE PROFILE

BORING LOCATION MAP

1.75:1 SLOPE 1.

:1 S

LOPE

B-2 1743800 1016430

B-1 1743842 1016424

(ft) (ft)

Easting Northing

MP 263.34

BRIDGE OVER LAKESHIRE DRIVE

NATCHEZ TRACE PARKWAY

B-1B-2

Groundwater depth at boring completion.

LEGEND

Groundwater depth monitored after boring completion.

N Standard Penetration Test

Resistance in Blows per Foot

Groundwater depth encountered during drilling.

102'-9 1/2"

26'-0

10° 15'

26'-5"

Asphalt Fill

CONDITIONS MAY VARY BETWEEN THESE LOCATIONS.

AT THE BORING LOCATIONS SHOWN. SUBSURFACE

THE SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED

THE BORING LOGS ON THIS SHEET REPRESENT

1.1

NDepth (ft)

36.4

NDepth (ft)

50/4"

Hard Clay

Clay to Soft

Very Soft

APPENDIX C

Borings Logs

J-1

J-2

J-3

J-4

J-5

J-6

J-7

J-8

J-9

3.0

10.0

25.0

1.0

0.4

0.6

0.4

0.4

1.4

0.3

0.7

0.3

3.5

2.5

4.5

4.5

0.3

3.5

0.2

0.5-ft existing pavement and gravel base course.

Soft to medium stiff, orange and brown, SANDY CLAY, trace of silt.

(Moist)

-FILL-

Medium stiff to stiff, brown, and reddish brown SILTY CLAY, some sand. [A-6] (Moist)

-FILL-

Some small gravel from 16 to 17 feet.

Very soft to soft, brown and gray CLAY, some shell fragments. (Moist)

3-3-4-4

1-2-2-2

3-3-6-5

4-3-4-4

5-5-5-5

3-2-5-6

5-4-6-4

4-8-4-4

1-1-2-2

Standard Penetration Test Data

Boring Began:

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

Inspector:

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Boring No.:

Groundwater Depth:

At Completion:

Completed:

Hole Diameter:

Boring Method:

Rock Core Diam:

Vane Shear

30 in.

140 lbs/Automatic 3.75 in.Hammer Wt. & Type:

Cold

Encountered at:

After

Northing: 1743842 Easting: 1016424

Caved at:

Hammer Drop:

Project Name:

N o.

Natchez Trace Parkway, Lee and Itawamba Couties, Mississippi Project Datum:

(Blows / ft)

355.1 ft

Undisturbed (UD)

2/6/14

R ec ft)

Water Content %

Project Location: Boring Location:

La ye r

D ep th ft)

T yp e

Weather:

SAMPLE

S P

T B lo w s pe r in . Plastic Limit

Boring was backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion.

Liquid Limit

SPT

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Penetrometer (PP in tsf) Rock Core (RQD in %)

Surface Elevation:

Sample Types:

BORING LOG

N/A

2/6/14 K. Thornton D.HutchinsOperator:

North Abut., Bridge over Lakeshire Dr., MP 263.35 hrs

33.0 ft

Remarks:

Auger Cuttings

G ra ph ic

L og

NATR 3C12

Density, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions, Moisture

D ep th S ca le ft)

E le va tio n (f ee t)

HSA

B-1

P P

US State Plane 2301, MS East; NAVD 88

B O

R

IN

G L

O G

/2

1/

:5

\\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 T

A \P

R O

JE

C

T S

\N A

T R

\3 C

_3

D

\T E

C H

S E

R V

\G E

O T

E C

H \S

U B

S U

R F

A C

E I

N V

E S

T

IG

A T

IO

N

\B O

R

IN

G L

O G

S \N

A T

R

C

.G P

J

352.1

345.1

330.1

Sheet: 1 of 2

J-10

J-11

35.0

36.4

0.5 0.5

Very soft to soft, brown and gray CLAY, some shell fragments. (Moist) (Continued)

Hard, blue-gray CLAY. (Wet)

Boring was terminated at 36.4 ft.

0-0-2-4

8-33-50/4"

Standard Penetration Test Data

Boring Began:

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

Inspector:

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Boring No.:

Groundwater Depth:

At Completion:

Completed:

Hole Diameter:

Boring Method:

Rock Core Diam:

Vane Shear

30 in.

140 lbs/Automatic 3.75 in.Hammer Wt. & Type:

Cold

Encountered at:

After

Northing: 1743842 Easting: 1016424

Caved at:

Hammer Drop:

Project Name:

N o.

Natchez Trace Parkway, Lee and Itawamba Couties, Mississippi Project Datum:

(Blows / ft)

355.1 ft

Undisturbed (UD)

2/6/14

R ec ft)

Water Content %

Project Location: Boring Location:

La ye r

D ep th ft)

T yp e

Weather:

SAMPLE

S P

T B lo w s pe r in . Plastic Limit

Boring was backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion.

Liquid Limit

SPT

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Penetrometer (PP in tsf) Rock Core (RQD in %)

Surface Elevation:

Sample Types:

BORING LOG

N/A

2/6/14 K. Thornton D.HutchinsOperator:

North Abut., Bridge over Lakeshire Dr., MP 263.35 hrs

33.0 ft

Remarks:

Auger Cuttings

G ra ph ic

L og

NATR 3C12

Density, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions, Moisture

D ep th S ca le ft)

E le va tio n (f ee t)

HSA

B-1

P P

US State Plane 2301, MS East; NAVD 88

B O

R

IN

G L

O G

/2

1/

:5

\\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 T

A \P

R O

JE

C

T S

\N A

T R

\3 C

_3

D

\T E

C H

S E

R V

\G E

O T

E C

H \S

U B

S U

R F

A C

E I

N V

E S

T

IG

A T

IO

N

\B O

R

IN

G L

O G

S \N

A T

R

C

.G P

J

320.1

318.7

Sheet: 2 of 2

10"

J-1

J-2

J-3

J-4

J-5

J-6

J-7

J-8

J-9

1.1

20.0

25.0

0.9

1.1

0.4

0.6

0.5

1.4

0.4

1.5

0.2

3.0

4.0

4.5

4.5

4.0

4.5

1.0

1.0

1.1-ft existing pavement and gravel base course.

Soft to stiff, orange and brown, SILTY CLAY, some sand. [A-6] (Moist)

-FILL-

Some small gravel from 18 to 20 feet.

Soft, brown, SANDY CLAY, trace silt. [A-6] (Moist)

-FILL-

Very soft, brown, CLAY. (Moist)

5-5-5-6

4-5-5-6

5-7-7-7

3-4-6-7

4-4-5-6

4-6-5-7

4-4-2-3

5-2-2-3

0-0-1-1

Standard Penetration Test Data

Boring Began:

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

Inspector:

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Boring No.:

Groundwater Depth:

At Completion:

Completed:

Hole Diameter:

Boring Method:

Rock Core Diam:

Vane Shear

30 in.

140 lbs/Automatic 3.75 in.Hammer Wt. & Type:

Cold

Encountered at:

After

Northing: 1743800 Easting: 1016430

Caved at:

Hammer Drop:

Project Name:

N o.

Natchez Trace Parkway, Lee and Itawamba Couties, Mississippi Project Datum:

(Blows / ft)

353.7 ft

Undisturbed (UD)

2/7/14

R ec ft)

Water Content %

Project Location: Boring Location:

La ye r

D ep th ft)

T yp e

Weather:

SAMPLE

S P

T B lo w s pe r in . Plastic Limit

Boring was backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion.

Liquid Limit

SPT

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Penetrometer (PP in tsf) Rock Core (RQD in %)

Surface Elevation:

Sample Types:

BORING LOG

N/A

2/7/14 K. Thornton D.HutchinsOperator:

South Abut., Bridge over Lakeshire Dr., MP 263.35 hrs

32.0 ft

Remarks:

Auger Cuttings

G ra ph ic

L og

NATR 3C12

Density, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions, Moisture

D ep th S ca le ft)

E le va tio n (f ee t)

HSA

B-2

P P

US State Plane 2301, MS East; NAVD 88

B O

R

IN

G L

O G

/2

1/

:5

\\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 T

A \P

R O

JE

C

T S

\N A

T R

\3 C

_3

D

\T E

C H

S E

R V

\G E

O T

E C

H \S

U B

S U

R F

A C

E I

N V

E S

T

IG

A T

IO

N

\B O

R

IN

G L

O G

S \N

A T

R

C

.G P

J

352.6

333.7

328.7

Sheet: 1 of 2

J-10

J-11

31.1

37.0

1.1

2.0

1.0

4.5

Very soft, brown, CLAY. (Moist) (Continued)

Medium stiff to hard, gray CLAY, trace of sand. (Wet)

Hard augering at 34 feet.

Boring was terminated at 37.0 ft.

1-2-3-5

20-35-30-43

Standard Penetration Test Data

Boring Began:

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

Inspector:

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Boring No.:

Groundwater Depth:

At Completion:

Completed:

Hole Diameter:

Boring Method:

Rock Core Diam:

Vane Shear

30 in.

140 lbs/Automatic 3.75 in.Hammer Wt. & Type:

Cold

Encountered at:

After

Northing: 1743800 Easting: 1016430

Caved at:

Hammer Drop:

Project Name:

N o.

Natchez Trace Parkway, Lee and Itawamba Couties, Mississippi Project Datum:

(Blows / ft)

353.7 ft

Undisturbed (UD)

2/7/14

R ec ft)

Water Content %

Project Location: Boring Location:

La ye r

D ep th ft)

T yp e

Weather:

SAMPLE

S P

T B lo w s pe r in . Plastic Limit

Boring was backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion.

Liquid Limit

SPT

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Penetrometer (PP in tsf) Rock Core (RQD in %)

Surface Elevation:

Sample Types:

BORING LOG

N/A

2/7/14 K. Thornton D.HutchinsOperator:

South Abut., Bridge over Lakeshire Dr., MP 263.35 hrs

32.0 ft

Remarks:

Auger Cuttings

G ra ph ic

L og

NATR 3C12

Density, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions, Moisture

D ep th S ca le ft)

E le va tio n (f ee t)

HSA

B-2

P P

US State Plane 2301, MS East; NAVD 88

B O

R

IN

G L

O G

/2

1/

:5

\\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 T

A \P

R O

JE

C

T S

\N A

T R

\3 C

_3

D

\T E

C H

S E

R V

\G E

O T

E C

H \S

U B

S U

R F

A C

E I

N V

E S

T

IG

A T

IO

N

\B O

R

IN

G L

O G

S \N

A T

R

C

.G P

J

322.6

316.7

Sheet: 2 of 2

APPENDIX D

Laboratory Testing Results

SOIL DATA

NO.

AASHTODESCRIPTION

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 6.5 0.9 2.0 20.7 69.9

(ft.)

NATR 3C12,3D32

Natchez Trace Parkway

FHWA/EFLHD

MP 263.5 NB B-1/J-6 15-17

Particle Size Distribution Report

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

NO.

AASHTODESCRIPTION

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 0.2 8.6 1.8 18.8 70.6

(ft.)

NATR 3C12,3D32

Natchez Trace Parkway

FHWA/EFLHD

MP 263.5 SB B-2/J-2 5-7

Particle Size Distribution Report

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

0.0 0.0 5.7 15.1 2.9 36.1 40.2

MP 263.5 SB B-2/J-8 20-22

INDEXLIMITLIMITCONTENTNO.

PLASTICITYLIQUIDPLASTICWATERDEPTHSAMPLE

NATURAL

SOURCESYMBOL

Project No.:

Project:

Client:

LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMITS TEST REPORT

(ft.)

AASHTO

NATR 3C12,3D32

Natchez Trace Parkway

FHWA/EFLHD

13311818.43-5B-1/J-1MP 263.5 NB

LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMITS TEST REPORT

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

19351612.515-17B-1/J-6MP 263.5 NB

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

NATR 3C12,3D32

Natchez Trace Parkway

FHWA/EFLHD

12301816.85-7B-2/J-2MP 263.5 SB

LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMITS TEST REPORT

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

18331518.920-22B-2/J-8MP 263.5 SB

24431923.730-32B-2/J-10MP 263.5 SB

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

Sample # Jar # Wet Wt (g) Dry Wt (g) Jat Wt (g) Total Sample

Wt (g)

Moisture Content

E-14-0121 B-1/J-1 1020.1 928.1 428.5 499.6 18.4

0122 B-1/J-6 932.2 876.1 428.2 447.9 12.5 0123 B-2/J-2 980.2 901.1 430.3 470.8 16.8 0124 B-2/J-8 1276.3 1142.0 430.7 711.3 18.9 0125 B-2/J-10 863.6 780.8 430.7 350.1 23.7

AASHTO T 265 - Moisture Content

APPENDIX E

Representative Photographs

E-1

Photo 1 – Typical settlement of approach shoulder and pavement patching, west side.

Photo 2 – Typical settlement of approach shoulder and pavement patching, west side.

E-2

Photo 3 – Typical settlement in approach shoulders, east side at south approach shown

(from Bridge Inspection Report, May 31, 2012).

E-3

Photo 4 – Typical deterioration of vertical expansion joints, northeast corner shown (from Bridge

Inspection Report, May 31, 2012).

Photo 5 – Typical deterioration of expansion joints in curb.

APPENDIX F

Recommended Special Contract Requirements

F-1

Section 270. — SOIL GROUTING

Description

270.01 This work consists of furnishing and injecting high density polyurethane (HDPU) grout into voids and soft subgrade through the asphalt concrete pavement roadway.

Material

270.02 Conform to the following Subsection:

High density polyurethane (HDPU) 725.19

Construction Requirements

270.03 General. The CO may modify the procedures described herein to accommodate actual conditions encountered. Deliver all HDPU grout materials to the site undamaged in unopened containers bearing the manufacturer's original labels and handled and stored according to the manufacturer's instructions. Stabilize areas indicated on the plans.

270.04 Qualifications. Submit documentation at least 10 days before starting the HDPU grout operations to demonstrate that Contractor or subcontractor meets the following qualifications.

Acceptance of Contractor or subcontractor personnel does not relieve the Contractor of the responsibility for obtaining the required results in the completed work.

(a) Contractor. Completion of at least 5 HDPU grout injection projects within the last 5 years. Include brief description of each project including the owning agency’s name and current telephone number.

(b) Personnel. On-site supervisors and drill operators with at least 3 years’ experience installing HDPU grout. Identify the on-site supervisor and drill operators assigned to the project and submit a summary of each individual’s experience. Provide personnel on the project with expertise in determining injection hole patterns and jacking sequences.

270.05 Submittals. Submit the following at least 10 days before the start of HDPU grout injection operations.

(a) HDPU Product information. Include the following:

(1) Description and manufacturer certification that the HDPU grout is a two-part, one-to-one ratio by volume, closed-cell, hydro-insensitive, high-density polyurethane system.

(2) Initial and final set times.

(3) Water absorption.

(4) Average cured density (under dry injection conditions).

F-2

(5) Maximum percent volume expansion in presence of water.

(6) Compressive strength.

(7) Tensile strength.

(8) Shear strength.

(9) Viscosity.

(10) Elongation.

(11) Flash point.

(12) Manufacturer’s recommended soil injection temperature range.

(13) Toxicity rating when cured.

(14) Provide HDPU grout information sheets and Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) for HDPU grout components.

(15) Manufacturer certification of HDPU grout characteristics.

(16) Proportioning of accelerators and water, if used.

(b) HDPU grout samples. Provide cured samples of HDPU grout injected. The CO will determine at the pre-construction meeting if sampling and testing during progression of HDPU grout injection are necessary.

(c) Drilling and site access equipment. Provide a description of the drilling equipment to be used, including power and operating requirements, approximate dimensions of the drill equipment, and range of hole sizes and depths to be drilled. Provide a description of proposed ancillary access equipment, including lifts and cranes, if needed. Describe temporary ground support measures that may be required during drilling, HDPU grout injection, or both.

(d) Injection equipment. Provide a description of the pumping system, power requirements, operating pressure ranges, HDPU grout component conveyance system, injection pump type and pressure capacity, quantity and injection pressure measurement systems, flow meter, component mixing system, and injection nozzle/packer assemblies and installation.

(e) Injection plan. Provide the approximate number, spacing and depths of required drill holes, and describe the general progression of work. Anticipate HDPU grout injection to stabilize up to a depth of 35 feet (10.7 meters) below the existing pavement surface. Provide an estimate of the quantity of HDPU grout take for each hole. Provide a description of proposed monitoring methods and procedures for HDPU grout injection. Provide a description of the proposed monitoring sytem to be used, with a minimum accuracy of 1/16 inch (1 millimeter) and method of protection during HDPU grout injection.

(f) Traffic control. Provide a proposed construction traffic control plan, according to Section 156 for both drilling and HDPU grout injection operations. Include provisions for

F-3 minimizing HDPU grout drips onto vehicles and nearby structures.

(g) Site cleanup. Describe the methods and equipment to remove HDPU grout overruns, including the estimated time interval between injection and start of cleanup. Describe the expected degree or percent that the proposed methods can successfully remove overruns.

Describe waste disposal requirements.

270.06 Equipment. Conform to the following.

(a) Use drills capable of drilling 5/8-inch to 2-inch (16- to 51-millimeter) diameter injection holes, up to a maximum depth of 35 feet (10.7 meters), through the pavement without damaging the structural integrity of the existing pavement.

(b) Provide a pumping unit capable of controlling the rate of flow of material to densify soils and prevent pavement blowouts. Equip pumping unit with a certified flow meter to measure flow of each component material separately to measure the amount of HDPU grout injected at each location. Ensure the flow meter includes a digital output to show both pounds and gallons of each component material.

(c) Pressure and temperature control devices capable of maintaining proper temperature and proportionate mixing of the polyurethane component materials.

(d) Laser levels or dial indicator devices capable of monitoring movement at the surface of the pavement to verify that the injected base and foundation soils have been properly densified.

270.07 Installation. Conform to the following.

(a) Mix and handle HDPU grout in accordance with manufacturer recommendations and all applicable safety codes to minimize hazards to personnel and the environment. Proportion accelerators and water, if required, according to the manufacturer's recommendations.

(b) Provide a pavement profile from laser level measurements of the area where polyurethane soil stabilization is required. Provide a post-injection pavement profile for each work area.

(c) Densify and and compact weak foundation soils, stabilize asphalt concrete pavement, composite pavement, or concrete pavement, by drilling a series of 5/8-inch to 2-inch (16- to 51-millimeter) diameter holes at approximately 3- to 4-foot (0.9- to 1.2-meter) spaced intervals through the pavement in the area requiring soil remediation up to a depth of 35 feet (10.7 meters) below ground surface. Inject the polyurethane material through injection tubes inserted into the drilled holes to the proper depths. Select the injection hole location, spacing, size, and depth. Determine the required injection rates and amount of material to obtain proper densification of the subgrade and foundation soils.

(d) When edge drains are present, provide a minimum 18-inch (0.45-meter) clear depth between point of injection and the bottom of the drain for injections within 4 feet (1.2 meters) of the edge drains.

F-4

(e) Follow the manufacturer's instructions or recommendations for grouting procedure to achieve best results.

(f) Provide laser levels or dial indicator devices capable of monitoring movement at the surface of the pavement to verify proper densification of subgrade and foundation soils.

Visually monitor beneath the bridge, and when grout is observed exiting from weepholes or expansion joints of the bridge, stop grout injection and advance to next grout injection depth.

(g) Remove excess HDPU grout on the surface at completion of grouting so that the surface is clean and visible.

(h) For areas that require stabilization, inject to a pre-determined pressure and/or pre-determined quantity as deemed appropriate at the pre-construction meeting and by communication between CO and the Contractor during installation. Estimate the required pressure to avoid grout overrun and clogging of adjacent drainage systems.

(i) Repair any pavement blowouts, excessive pavement lifting or pavement damage that may occur. Clean and restore weepholes along the bridge abutment wall that become filled with grout to ensure proper function. Repair any subject areas to the satisfaction of the CO.

270.08 Storing and Handling. Handle and store HDPU grout according to the manufacturer’s recommendations to avoid extreme temperature variations, reduce the potential for spillage, mitigate vapors and fumes in confined transportation vehicles or enclosures, and protect against fire hazards. Provide required cleanup equipment and resources to quickly respond to HDPU grout component spills. Use metal or plastic containers and tanks for mixing or storage provided they are clean and non-reactive with the material used and are all fitted with lids for air tight, long-term storage. Package HDPU grout components in containers that are clearly marked with a warning of the hazards involved in handling the material.

270.09 Records. Maintain accurate records of all HDPU grout injection operations and furnish to the CO at the end of each work shift. Include records of work times, locations of all injection holes, and leakage before and after grouting, hole diameters and depths, injection packer placement depths, average and maximum injection pressures, drilling and injection times per hole, quantities injected in each hole, any occurrences of excessive overruns, observations of grout return, ground deformations or failures, or unplanned formation of cracks.

270.10 Acceptance. Injection of polyurethane grout will be evaluated under Subsections 106.02 and 106.04. Demonstrate proposed means and methods through a sacrificial injection hole in a Test area to be designated by the CO.

Measurement

270.11 Measure the Section 270 items listed in the bid schedule according to subsection 109.02 and the following as applicable.

The unit of measurement will be by the gallon (liter) of raw (unexpanded) HDPU grout successfully injected into the voids and joints in areas indicated on the plans and placed to the satisfaction of the CO. Measure HDPU grout using an approved metering system.

F-5

Payment

270.12 The accepted quantities will be paid at the contract unit price per unit of measurement for the Section 270 pay item listed in the bid schedule. Payment will be full compensation for the work prescribed in this Section. See Subsection 109.05.

Section 725. — MISCELLANEOUS MATERIAL

Add the following after Subsection 725.18:

725.19 High Density Polyurethane (HDPU). Furnish water blown formulation of high-density, closed cell, hydrophobic polyurethane.

(a) Properties. Conform to the following:

(1) Free Rise Density, minimum, ASTM D1622

4 pounds per cubic foot (64 kilograms per cubic meter)

(2) Compressive Strength, minimum, ASTM D1621

50 pounds per square inch (344 kPa)

(3) Tensile Strength, minimum, ASTM D1623

50 pounds per square inch (344 kPa)

(b) Physical characteristics. Conform to the following:

(1) Resistant to oils, gasoline and most solvents.

(2) Reaches 90% of full compressive strength within 30 minutes from injection such that traffic may return to roadway within 30 minutes after last injection of material.

Store product in accordance with manufacturer’s recommendations.