SUB-0262 Interim PDA Test Pile Logs for Pier Piles - Bent 35 B - A.pdf

vurgen.alvarado Text Box 12/04/2024 vurgen.alvarado Text Box

SUB-0262

vurgen.alvarado Text Box vurgen.alvarado Text Box rwhitsel Typewritten Text A A rwhitsel Typewritten Text All rwhitsel Typewritten Text

16DEC25

55 Middlesex Street, Suite 225 80 Business Park Drive, Suite 306 No. Chelmsford, MA 01863 Armonk, NY 10504

(978) 251-9395 (914) 600-8101 www.gtrinc.net

November 27, 2024 GTR Project No. 24.107

John McNulty Coastal Marine Construction LLC.

630 Park Street Stoughton, MA 02072

Re: Dynamic Pile Testing Report – Pier Bent 35’ NOAA OMAO Ship & Support Facility Relocation

Newport, Rhode Island

Dear John:

At your request, Geosciences Testing and Research, Inc. (GTR) performed dynamic pile testing at the above-referenced site on November 22, 2024. Dynamic testing was performed to evaluate pile capacity, driving stresses, and hammer performance during production pile installation. Dynamic testing was conducted using the Pile Driving AnalyzerTM (PDA) Model 8G, which records, digitizes, and processes the force and acceleration signals for use in the Case Method and CAPWAP analyses. The dynamic testing was carried out in general accordance with ASTM D4945, “Standard Test Method for High Strain Dynamic Testing of Piles” and the Project Specifications.

One (1) Open-Ended Steel 30”x0.5” Pipe pile, designated as Pile 35’B, was dynamically tested during End of Drive (EOD). Refer to Table 1 for further details regarding the dynamic test results, dates of testing and pile designations.

Field Details

Subsurface Conditions

The generalized subsurface profile based on Borings WB-03, WB-02, WB-01 and LB-09 consists of the following stratum from mudline: A weight of rod to a medium dense estuarine deposits extending approximately 20 feet below mudline. Underlying the estuarine deposits is an approximate 20 to 35 thick layer of dense glacial till. Below the glacial till is an approximate 5 to 15 foot thick layer of highly weather bedrock, which extends to bedrock at approximately 35 to 55 feet below the existing mudline. Mudline elevation ranges between approximately -15 to -30 feet. Refer to the Boring Logs prepared by Haley and Aldrich for more information regarding the site specific conditions encountered.

Pile Details

Open-Ended Steel 30”x0.5” Pipe piles were driven for the support of the proposed structure. The cross-sectional area of the pipe section is 46.34 square inches. The required design compression load for the pile is 800 kips. The required ultimate bearing capacity for the pile is 1800 kips based on a factor of safety of 2.25. The maximum allowable compressive and tensile rwhitsel Highlight rwhitsel Highlight rwhitsel Highlight rwhitsel M&N SD Stamp

NOAA OMAO Ship & Support Facility Relocation – Pier PDA Report November 27, 2024 GTR Project No. 24.107 Page 2 driving stress for the piles is 54 kips per square inch (ksi), based on 90% of the yield strength (0.9*Fy) of the minimum yield strength of 60 ksi per the project specifications. Reinforced driving shoes were welded to the tips of the piles.

Driving System Details

A BSP CG240 hydraulic hammer was used to drive the piles. The maximum rated energy for the hammer is 175.9 kip-ft (based on a ram weight of 35.3 kips and a maximum stroke 5.0 feet).

Instrumentation

The instrumentation consists of two strain gages and two accelerometer transducers attached below the tops of the piles. One strain gage and one accelerometer were placed on opposite sides of the pile to minimize the effects of uneven impact and pile bending. This instrumentation provides information about driving stresses (compressive and tensile), hammer performance (transferred energy), and pile bearing capacity.

The PDA is a computer fitted with a data acquisition and signal conditioning system.

During driving, the strain and acceleration signals are recorded and processed for each hammer blow. The strain signal is converted to a force record and the acceleration signal is converted to a velocity record. The PDA saves selected hammer blows containing this information to disk and determines the compressive stresses, displacement, and energy at the point of measurement (pile top). In addition, the pile bearing capacity can be estimated in the field using the Case Method and Energy Approach. This information can be viewed on the computer screen during driving. Selected blows can be further processed to predict the static pile capacity using the CAPWAP analysis. Refer to Appendix A for literature on the dynamic testing, the Case Method, and CAPWAP.

Results

General

The results of the dynamic testing are summarized in Table 1, which includes the driven depth, blow count, stroke, maximum transferred energy, maximum pile top displacement, and maximum compressive stress at the gage location and at the pile tip. GTR observed the blow count and hammer stroke. The PDA at the gauge locations determines the transferred energy, maximum pile top displacement, and maximum pile top compressive stress. The PDA estimates the maximum compressive stress at the pile tip.

Also included in Table 1 is the pile bearing capacity as determined by the Case Method in the field and CAPWAP analysis in the office. Three separate PDA plots of various parameters (maximum transferred energy and displacement - left plot, RMX Case Method capacity with Jc=0.5 and Jc=0.7 - middle plot, and maximum measured compressive stress at the pile top and maximum estimated compressive stress at the pile tip - right plot) are presented for the test pile in Appendix B. Appendix B also contains the above data, and additional data, in tabular form.

rwhitsel Highlight

Highlight

GTR Project No. 24.107 Page 3

In Table 1, the Case Method capacity represents an average over the blows indicated for EOD. CAPWAP analyses were performed on a selected blow from EOD. Appendix C contains the full results of the CAPWAP analysis and Table 2 summarizes the CAPWAP results.

Field Observations and Hammer Performance

Prior to dynamic testing, Pile 35’B was installed with the vibratory and impact hammers to approximately 90 feet below the reference elevation (taken as the falsework). The dynamic testing gages were then attached, and the pile was impact driven to a final depth of approximately 97.7 feet below falsework. At EOD, the pile was driven to 12 blows for 1/2 inch.

The BSP CG240 hydraulic hammer was operated at a stroke of approximately 4 feet, corresponding to an average transferred energy of approximately 92 kip-ft at EOD. Refer to Appendix D for a copy of the draft pile log.

Pile Integrity and Stresses

The field data indicated that the maximum compressive driving stresses were below the allowable limit throughout testing. The pile cap should be positioned directly over the pile axial center of gravity to maintain good hammer alignment during driving. This minimizes bending stresses and keeps local stress concentrations to a minimum.

Pile Bearing Capacity

The EOD Case Method field capacity (RX5) for Pile 35’B was approximately 1861 kips at a driving resistance of 12 blows for 1/2 inch. The corresponding EOD CAPWAP capacity was 1815 kips. Table 2 presents the results of the CAPWAP analysis in more detail. The total capacity, frictional capacity, end-bearing capacity, and percent capacity in the bearing layer are included.

The quake and damping soil parameters as determined from the CAPWAP analysis are also presented in Table 2.

Conclusions

The presented data from the dynamic measurements and their analyses leads to the following findings and conclusions.

1. For Pile 35’B the EOD CAPWAP capacity was 1815 kips. The pile was driven to 12 blows for ½ inch. The hammer was reportedly operated at a stroke of approximately 4 feet, resulting in approximately 92 kip-ft of energy.

2. The EOD CAPWAP analysis indicates that approximately 80% of the pile capacity was developed in end bearing.

3. Pile stresses were below the allowable limit of 54 ksi throughout PDA testing. The dynamic records did not indicate pile damage.

4. Based on dynamic testing to date, we recommend the remaining production piles be driven to 20 bpi for one inch with the hammer operating at a stroke of 4.25 feet, corresponding to an average transferred energy of approximately 100 kip-ft to 120 kip-ft.

rwhitsel Highlight rwhitsel Highlight rwhitsel Highlight rwhitsel Highlight rwhitsel Highlight rwhitsel Highlight rwhitsel Highlight rwhitsel Highlight

GTR Project No. 24.107 Page 4

Static pile capacity evaluations determined from dynamic testing provide an estimate of the axial pile bearing capacity at the time of testing. At very high blow counts (low pile set), the Case Method and CAPWAP analyses tend to predict lower capacities, since not all of the soil resistance may be fully mobilized, particularly at the pile toe. Other factors not considered in this analysis are bending, down drag, lateral and uplift requirements, cyclic loading, effective stress changes (e.g. due to changes in the water table, excavations, and/or fills), settlement, and pile group effects. The foundation designer should evaluate if any of these issues are applicable to the pile design.

This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering principles with specific application to this project. Our conclusions are based on applicable standards of practice, including any information reported to and/or prepared for us.

No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made.

If you have any questions regarding this report, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Sincerely, GTR

William D. Oder, P.E. (RI) Les R. Chernauskas, P.E.

Technical Manager Principal

Attachments: Appendices A through D

TABLES

11/27/2024 24.107 NOAA Pipe Piles - PDA Tables.xlsx

Driven 2 Observed3 Hammer3 Maximum 4 Maximum 4 Maximum 4 Maximum 5 Test Time of 1 Date Depth Blow Count Blow Stroke Transferred Pile Top Comp. Stress Comp. Stress CAPWAP Pile Driving Number(s) Energy Displacement Pile Top Pile Tip RX5 RX7 Capacity

(feet) (blows per inch) (feet) (kip-ft) (in) (ksi) (ksi) (kips) (kips) (kips)

35'B EOD 11/22/24 97.7 12 for 1/2 inch 353-364 ~4 91.6 1.24 33.6 30.2 1861 1701 1815

Notes:

TABLE 1

SUMMARY OF DYNAMIC TESTING

Case Method Field Capacity

NOAA OMAO EAST COAST CENTER RELOCATION

NEWPORT, RHODE ISLAND

BSP CG240 HYDRAULIC HAMMER - OPEN ENDED PIPE PP30"x0.5" PILES

1. Indicates that the data was obtained at End of Drive (EOD).

2. Depth is referenced from reference elevation (top of falsework). Refer to pile installation logs for final pile cutoff and tip elevation.

3. The blow count and stroke were reported by GTR.

4. The maximum transferred energy, maximum pile top displacement, and maximum pile top compressive stress are determined by the PDA at the gage locations.

These values represent an average over the blow(s) indicated.

5. The maximum pile tip compressive stress is estimated by the PDA. These values represent an average over the blow(s) indicated.

6. The Case Method capacity was determined using the RMX method (JC values of 0.5 & 0.7). These values represent an average over the blow(s) indicated.

rwhitsel Highlight rwhitsel Highlight rwhitsel Highlight

11/27/2024 24.107 NOAA Pipe Piles - PDA Tables.xlsx

TABLE 2

SUMMARY OF CAPWAP RESULTS

Test Time of Blow Percent Quake Damping Pile Driving Number Side Tip Total End Bearing Side Tip Side Tip

(inch) (inch) (sec/ft) (sec/ft)

35'B EOD 362 390 1425 1815 79% 0.10 0.07 0.23 0.06

NOAA OMAO EAST COAST CENTER RELOCATION

BSP CG240 HYDRAULIC HAMMER - OPEN ENDED PIPE PP30"x0.5" PILES

Capacity (kips)

NEWPORT, RHODE ISLAND

APPENDIX A

DYNAMIC TESTING LITERATURE

GTR HSDPT Method rev. 1/2012

HIGH STRAIN DYNAMIC PILE TESTING

Introduction

Dynamic pile testing (a.k.a. High Strain Dynamic Pile Testing - HSDPT) is commonly employed for evaluating the capacity of driven piles. It is also provides information about hammer performance and pile integrity/stresses. Dynamic testing is carried out in accordance with ASTM D4945, “Standard Test Method for High Strain Dynamic Testing of Piles”. Dynamic pile testing involves using strain gages and accelerometers to record an impact wave and its reflections generated by a piling hammer. Both driven piles and drilled foundations can be tested (provided that an impact hammer is used to create the high strain wave for the drilled foundations).

Procedure

Dynamic pile testing was performed using a Pile Driving Analyzer (PDA®), such as the PAK®, PAL®, or PAX® systems, manufactured by Pile Dynamics, Inc. (PDI) of Cleveland, Ohio. These systems are computers fitted with data acquisition and signal conditioning components. The instrumentation consists of two strain gages and two accelerometer transducers attached a minimum of

1.5 pile diameters below the pile top. During impact, the strain and acceleration signals are recorded and processed for each hammer blow. The strain signal is converted to a force record and the acceleration signal is converted to a velocity record. The PDA® saves selected hammer blows containing this information to disk and determines the transferred energy, compressive/tensile stresses, displacement, pile integrity, and the estimated pile bearing capacity using the Case Method. This information can be viewed on the computer screen during driving. A screen shot of data collection in the PDA® Windows (PDA-W®) Program is provided in Figure 1. Selected blows can be further processed to predict the static pile capacity using signal matching programs.

Figure 1. Data collection during pile driving in the (PDI - PDA®-Win Program).

Theory

When a ram strikes the pile head, it initiates a large strain wave that propagates down the pile as illustrated in Figure 2. External soil resistance or changes in the pile’s impedance (due to variations in the pile’s material or geometry) causes reflection waves that are recorded by the instrumentation.

Knowing the material properties and pile geometry at the point of measurement, the strain can be converted to force, while the acceleration is integrated with time to produce velocity.

Figure 2. Pile instrumentation and hammer impact.

As long as there is no change in the pile impedance and there are no external forces (i.e.

friction), the force and velocity are proportional (equal). Reflections at the tip can be explained by two classical boundary conditions. Free end conditions (analogous to easy driving through soft clay) require zero force and no velocity restrictions at the tip, resulting in a compression wave returning as a tension wave and an increase in velocity (theoretically doubling). Figure 3 graphically presents a typical reflection from a pipe pile during penetration into soft clay. Fixed end conditions (analogous to hard driving into bedrock) require zero velocity and no force restrictions at the tip, resulting in a compression wave being reflected with a greater magnitude than the incident wave (theoretically doubling) and the tip velocity at theoretically zero. Figure 4 graphically presents a typical reflection from an H-pile driven to bedrock. The time the wave takes to travel down to the tip and reflect back to the transducers is twice the pile length divided by the wave speed of the pile material (2L/C).

Accelerometer Strain Gage

RAM

Figure 3. Typical Force and Velocity traces for a pipe pile driven into soft clay (high velocity and low force at tip - 2L/C).

Figure 4. Typical Force and Velocity traces for an H-pile driven into bedrock (high force and low velocity at tip - 2L/C).

If a pile contains a defect or is damaged (e.g. reduction in impedance) during driving, the wave reflecting from the zone of decreased impedance will show a reduction in the force and increase in the velocity (somewhat comparable to “free end conditions”). These reflections would arrive to the measuring transducers before the expected reflections associated with the pile tip as the damaged zone is at a point along the pile between the transducer location and pile tip. The detection of damage during driving is usually easily identifiable and typically associated with cracking of concrete piles or splice breakage.

Dynamic Testing Summary Output

After data collection, the most pertinent output quantities from the dynamic pile testing can be summarized in a graphical manner. The data can be also presented in tabular format, averaging the results based on penetration depth or blow number as specified by the user. Figure 5 shows typical graphical output. Each of the three plots presents two quantities sharing the vertical (penetration) axis.

Figure 5. Typical Dynamic Testing summary Output (PDI Plot® Program)

Signal Matching Analyses

Signal matching using the dynamic testing data can be performed to predict the static pile capacity. Programs such as CAPWAP® (developed by Pile Dynamics, Inc.) or TEPWAP/PWAP (developed by GTR) are numerical analyses used to solve the one dimensional wave equation using the measured force and velocity. E.A Smith (1960) suggested modeling the hammer-pile-soil system for use in the wave equation by a series of masses, springs and dashpots as shown in Figure 6. The signal matching programs determine the best match between measured and calculated pile top forces and replace the hammer input with the measured force and velocity. The pile is separated into many small segments, often 1 meter in length. The velocity record obtained from the dynamic pile testing transducers is used as input to the top pile segment. The resistance, damping, and quake are the primary soil parameters assigned by the user to each pile segment below grade. The signal matching programs will calculate the displacement, velocity, and stresses (forces) for each pile segment based on the input velocity record and the user assigned soil parameters. These parameters are adjusted and modified in an iterative fashion until the best match is obtained between the force calculated for the pile top segment and the force measured at the pile top during testing. The user assigned soil parameters based on the best match represent the “actual soil conditions”, including the resistance (and therefore pile capacity). This capacity is based on the resistance at the time of the testing. Static load tests are typically conducted several days or weeks after driving. Therefore, restrike tests are recommended to be performed some time after driving to assess time dependent changes in pile capacity, such as setup or relaxation.

New PDA Appendix.docx

Figure 6. Signal Matching Model (i.e. CAPWAP® or TEPWAP/PWAP).

Actual Model

F and V Input

Soil Model

Pile Model

APPENDIX B

PDA VARIABLES

• Plot 1 (left plot): Max Transferred Energy and Maximum Displacement

• Plot 2 (middle plot): Case Method Capacity

• Plot 3 (right plot): Max Measured Compression Stress at Pile Top and Max

Computed Compression Stress at the Pile Tip

Pile Dynamics, Inc. - PDIPLOT2 Ver 2022.1.62.0 - Case Method & iCAP® Results Printed: 25-November-2024 Test started: 22-November-2024

24.107 NOAA PDA - 35'B EOD

30"x0.5" PP

EMX (k-ft) Maximum Energy

DMX (in) Maximum Displacement

94.00

94.50

95.00

95.50

96.00

96.50

97.00

97.50

98.00

0.0 40.0 80.0 120.0 160.0

0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00

RX5 (kips) Maximum Case Method Capacity (JC=0.5)

RX7 (kips) Maximum Case Method Capacity (JC=0.7)

0 600 1,200 1,800 2,400

0 600 1,200 1,800 2,400

CSX (ksi) Compression Stress Maximum

CSB (ksi) Compression Stress at Bottom of Pile

0.0 18.0 36.0 54.0 72.0

0.0 18.0 36.0 54.0 72.0

Pile Dynamics, Inc. Page 1 PDIPLOT2 2022.1.62.0 Printed 25-November-2024

Case Method & iCAP® Results

24.107 NOAA PDA - 35'B EOD 30"x0.5" PP

OP: ANS Date: 22-November-2024 AR: 46.34 in² SP: 0.492 k/ft³ LE: 107.75 ft EM: 30,000 ksi WS: 16,807.9 f/s JC: 0.90 EMX: Maximum Energy RX5: Maximum Case Method Capacity (JC=0.5) DMX: Maximum Displacement RX7: Maximum Case Method Capacity (JC=0.7) CSX: Compression Stress Maximum RX9: Maximum Case Method Capacity (JC=0.9) CSB: Compression Stress at Bottom of Pile BPM: Blows/Minute BL# Depth BLC TYPE EMX DMX CSX CSB RX5 RX7 RX9 BPM ft bl/ft k-ft in ksi ksi kips kips kips bpm

63 95.00 63 AV63 110.7 1.51 35.0 27.0 1,462 1,416 1,387 47.0

STD 11.2 0.09 1.7 1.5 59 59 59 2.4

MAX 135.9 1.73 38.6 29.2 1,537 1,487 1,474 50.5

MIN 89.9 1.38 31.6 21.1 1,240 1,197 1,194 42.0

164 96.00 101 AV101 101.5 1.41 33.6 27.3 1,508 1,486 1,471 49.6

STD 1.6 0.02 0.3 0.7 35 42 51 2.0

MAX 106.3 1.47 34.5 28.9 1,571 1,559 1,555 64.0

MIN 95.3 1.37 32.3 26.0 1,433 1,404 1,377 47.8

266 97.00 102 AV102 102.9 1.39 33.5 26.7 1,586 1,545 1,542 50.8

STD 1.8 0.02 0.3 0.8 44 16 16 4.2

MAX 108.1 1.43 34.2 28.8 1,702 1,579 1,579 68.5

MIN 97.4 1.35 32.2 24.8 1,531 1,504 1,495 49.1

274 97.08 96 AV8 104.1 1.38 33.9 28.3 1,684 1,547 1,540 60.8

STD 1.4 0.01 0.3 0.3 9 19 20 6.5

MAX 106.1 1.40 34.2 28.9 1,698 1,577 1,573 65.1

MIN 102.0 1.36 33.3 27.7 1,668 1,521 1,513 49.5

285 97.17 132 AV11 104.0 1.38 34.0 28.4 1,700 1,547 1,540 59.3

STD 1.1 0.01 0.3 0.5 11 14 13 7.2

MAX 105.8 1.39 34.5 29.5 1,715 1,569 1,559 65.1

MIN 102.6 1.36 33.6 27.5 1,676 1,526 1,517 49.4

296 97.25 132 AV11 104.0 1.38 34.0 28.3 1,694 1,551 1,544 62.3

STD 0.7 0.00 0.3 0.6 16 15 17 5.8

MAX 104.9 1.39 34.4 29.5 1,716 1,567 1,564 65.4

MIN 102.8 1.37 33.4 27.2 1,667 1,524 1,511 49.8

305 97.33 108 AV9 103.6 1.37 33.9 28.8 1,713 1,563 1,556 59.8

STD 0.8 0.01 0.2 0.4 11 14 18 7.0

MAX 104.8 1.38 34.1 29.4 1,731 1,587 1,574 65.0

MIN 101.8 1.36 33.5 28.0 1,692 1,539 1,520 49.8

315 97.42 120 AV10 103.5 1.37 33.8 29.0 1,716 1,568 1,559 63.5

STD 1.1 0.01 0.2 0.4 9 15 14 4.4

MAX 105.0 1.39 34.2 29.6 1,732 1,584 1,579 65.5

MIN 101.2 1.35 33.5 28.5 1,700 1,535 1,533 50.2

328 97.50 156 AV13 103.7 1.37 34.1 29.4 1,740 1,584 1,576 60.9

STD 1.3 0.01 0.2 0.2 21 15 16 6.1

MAX 106.0 1.39 34.5 29.8 1,776 1,610 1,605 65.0

MIN 101.8 1.35 33.7 29.0 1,707 1,559 1,551 49.5

340 97.58 144 AV12 96.0 1.29 33.6 29.3 1,779 1,605 1,565 61.1

Pile Dynamics, Inc. Page 2

Case Method & iCAP® Results

24.107 NOAA PDA - 35'B EOD 30"x0.5" PP

OP: ANS Date: 22-November-2024 BL# Depth BLC TYPE EMX DMX CSX CSB RX5 RX7 RX9 BPM ft bl/ft k-ft in ksi ksi kips kips kips bpm

STD 4.5 0.04 0.5 0.4 14 16 15 7.3

MAX 104.0 1.37 34.4 30.2 1,804 1,638 1,602 68.4

MIN 90.2 1.24 33.1 28.5 1,758 1,584 1,542 49.5

352 97.67 144 AV12 91.4 1.24 33.4 29.8 1,831 1,667 1,572 60.8

STD 0.9 0.01 0.1 0.4 17 18 11 7.9

MAX 93.4 1.27 33.5 30.4 1,860 1,698 1,589 67.6

MIN 89.4 1.21 33.2 29.2 1,798 1,631 1,550 51.3

364 97.71 288 AV12 91.6 1.24 33.6 30.2 1,861 1,701 1,582 61.9

STD 1.4 0.01 0.2 0.6 10 12 9 7.5

MAX 93.3 1.26 33.9 31.1 1,875 1,718 1,596 68.3

MIN 88.5 1.21 33.3 29.2 1,837 1,669 1,569 51.1

Average 103.0 1.40 33.9 27.5 1,588 1,520 1,501 52.6 Std. Dev. 6.8 0.08 0.9 1.4 119 77 74 7.0 Maximum 135.9 1.73 38.6 31.1 1,875 1,718 1,605 68.5 Minimum 88.5 1.21 31.6 21.1 1,240 1,197 1,194 42.0

Total number of blows analyzed: 364

BL# Sensors

1-364 F7: [M189] 147.2 (1.00); F8: [Z294] 88.3 (1.00); A5: [K5814] 342.0 (1.00);

A6: [K11322] 368.4 (1.00)

Time Summary

Drive 7 minutes 27 seconds 11:02 AM - 11:09 AM BN 1 - 364

Pile Dynamics, Inc. Page 1

Case Method & iCAP® Results

24.107 NOAA PDA - 35'B EOD 30"x0.5" PP

OP: ANS Date: 22-November-2024 AR: 46.34 in² SP: 0.492 k/ft³ LE: 107.75 ft EM: 30,000 ksi WS: 16,807.9 f/s JC: 0.90 EMX: Maximum Energy RX5: Maximum Case Method Capacity (JC=0.5) DMX: Maximum Displacement RX7: Maximum Case Method Capacity (JC=0.7) CSX: Compression Stress Maximum RX9: Maximum Case Method Capacity (JC=0.9) CSB: Compression Stress at Bottom of Pile BPM: Blows/Minute BL# Depth BLC EMX DMX CSX CSB RX5 RX7 RX9 BPM ft bl/ft k-ft in ksi ksi kips kips kips bpm 353 97.67 288 91.8 1.24 33.6 29.7 1,862 1,702 1,593 66.5 354 97.67 288 88.5 1.22 33.3 29.2 1,851 1,697 1,569 67.8 355 97.68 288 91.8 1.24 33.4 29.7 1,857 1,694 1,575 51.5 356 97.68 288 92.0 1.24 33.9 30.3 1,868 1,707 1,590 67.2 357 97.68 288 92.2 1.25 33.3 29.6 1,861 1,701 1,576 51.4 358 97.69 288 92.9 1.24 33.8 29.9 1,837 1,669 1,579 67.5 359 97.69 288 91.7 1.23 33.4 30.6 1,875 1,718 1,580 66.4 360 97.69 288 92.6 1.24 33.5 30.3 1,862 1,704 1,582 66.9 361 97.70 288 89.2 1.21 33.6 30.1 1,868 1,710 1,570 67.5 362 97.70 288 90.6 1.23 33.6 31.1 1,852 1,691 1,585 68.3 363 97.70 288 93.3 1.26 33.6 30.4 1,865 1,706 1,594 51.2 364 97.71 288 92.1 1.24 33.8 31.1 1,873 1,714 1,596 51.1

Average 91.6 1.24 33.6 30.2 1,861 1,701 1,582 61.9 Std. Dev. 1.4 0.01 0.2 0.6 10 12 9 7.5 Maximum 93.3 1.26 33.9 31.1 1,875 1,718 1,596 68.3 Minimum 88.5 1.21 33.3 29.2 1,837 1,669 1,569 51.1

Total number of blows analyzed: 12

BL# Sensors

1-364 F7: [M189] 147.2 (1.00); F8: [Z294] 88.3 (1.00); A5: [K5814] 342.0 (1.00);

A6: [K11322] 368.4 (1.00)

Time Summary

Drive 7 minutes 27 seconds 11:02 AM - 11:09 AM BN 1 - 364 rwhitsel Highlight

APPENDIX C

CAPWAP RESULTS

5 105 ms

-875

-438 kips

13 L/c

Force Msd Force Cpt

5 205 ms

-875

-438 kips

14 2L/c

Force Msd Velocity Msd ki ps

/ft ki ps

Length b. Sensors 107.8 ft Embedment 97.7 ft Top Area 46.3 in2

End Bearing Area 4.91 ft2

Top Perimeter 7.85 ft Top E-Modulus 30000 ksi Top Spec. Weight 492.0 lb/ft3

Top Wave Spd. 16808 ft/s Overall W.S. 16808 ft/s

Match Quality 4.66 Top Compr. Stress 35.4 ksi Max Compr. Stress 36.8 ksi Max Tension Stress -9.93 ksi

Avg. Shaft Quake 0.10 in Toe Quake 0.07 in Avg. Shaft Smith Dpg. 0.23 s/ft Toe Smith Damping 0.06 s/ft

Shaft Resistance Distribution

Pile Force at Ru

EB

SF

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

Load (kips)

D is pl ac em en t ( in

Pile Top Bottom

RU = 1815.0 kips SF = 390.0 kips EB = 1425.0 kips Dy = 1.79 in Dx = 1.83 in SET/Bl = 0.04 in

24.107 NOAA PDA; Pile: 35'B EOD; 30"x0.5" PP; Blow: 362 (Test: 22-Nov-2024 11:09:) 25-Nov-2024

Geosciences Testing & Research Inc CAPWAP(R) 2014-3

CAPWAP(R) 2014-3 Licensed to Geosciences Testing & Research Inc

24.107 NOAA PDA; Pile: 35'B EOD Test: 22-Nov-2024 11:09

30"x0.5" PP; Blow: 362 CAPWAP(R) 2014-3 Geosciences Testing & Research Inc OP: ANS

Page 2 Analysis: 25-Nov-2024

CAPWAP SUMMARY RESULTS

Total CAPWAP Capacity: 1815.0; along Shaft 390.0; at Toe 1425.0 kips

Soil Dist. Depth Ru Force Sum Unit Unit Smith Sgmnt Below Below in Pile of Resist. Resist. Damping No. Gages Grade Ru (Depth) (Area) Factor ft ft kips kips kips kips/ft ksf s/ft

1815.0 1 13.5 3.4 0.0 1815.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 20.2 10.2 0.0 1815.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 26.9 16.9 0.0 1815.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 4 33.7 23.6 0.0 1815.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 5 40.4 30.4 0.0 1815.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 6 47.1 37.1 0.0 1815.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 7 53.9 43.8 0.0 1815.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 8 60.6 50.6 0.0 1815.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 9 67.3 57.3 10.0 1805.0 10.0 1.48 0.19 0.23 10 74.1 64.0 10.0 1795.0 20.0 1.48 0.19 0.23 11 80.8 70.8 10.0 1785.0 30.0 1.48 0.19 0.23 12 87.5 77.5 30.0 1755.0 60.0 4.45 0.57 0.23 13 94.3 84.2 80.0 1675.0 140.0 11.88 1.51 0.23 14 101.0 91.0 125.0 1550.0 265.0 18.56 2.36 0.23 15 107.8 97.7 125.0 1425.0 390.0 18.56 2.36 0.23

Avg. Shaft 26.0 3.99 0.51 0.23

Toe 1425.0 290.30 0.06

Soil Model Parameters/Extensions Shaft Toe

Quake (in) 0.10 0.07 Case Damping Factor 1.08 1.03 Damping Type Viscous Sm+Visc Unloading Quake (% of loading quake) 63 80 Reloading Level (% of Ru) 100 100 Soil Plug Weight (kips) 1.747

CAPWAP match quality = 4.66 (Wave Up Match) ; RSA = 0 Observed: Final Set = 0.04 in; Blow Count = 288 b/ft Computed: Final Set = 0.05 in; Blow Count = 255 b/ft Transducer F7 (M189) CAL: 147.2; RF: 1.00; F8 (Z294) CAL: 88.3; RF: 1.00

A5 (K5814) CAL: 342; RF: 1.00; A6 (K11322) CAL: 368; RF: 1.00

max. Top Comp. Stress = 35.4 ksi (T= 35.9 ms, max= 1.041 x Top) max. Comp. Stress = 36.8 ksi (Z= 94.3 ft, T= 27.2 ms) max. Tens. Stress = -9.93 ksi (Z= 87.5 ft, T= 60.3 ms) max. Energy (EMX) = 98.8 kip-ft; max. Measured Top Displ. (DMX)= 1.40 in

Geosciences Testing & Research Inc OP: ANS

Page 3 Analysis: 25-Nov-2024

EXTREMA TABLE

Pile Dist. max. min. max. max. max. max. max.

Sgmnt Below Force Force Comp. Tens. Trnsfd. Veloc. Displ.

No. Gages Stress Stress Energy ft kips kips ksi ksi kip-ft ft/s in

1 3.4 1638.8 -185.7 35.4 -4.01 98.8 18.4 1.31 2 6.7 1625.5 -212.2 35.1 -4.58 96.6 18.4 1.27 4 13.5 1582.4 -234.1 34.1 -5.05 91.9 18.4 1.19 6 20.2 1582.4 -263.8 34.1 -5.69 86.7 18.4 1.11 8 26.9 1626.9 -296.0 35.1 -6.39 83.5 18.4 1.05 10 33.7 1633.5 -304.6 35.3 -6.57 80.4 18.4 0.98 12 40.4 1571.6 -308.9 33.9 -6.67 77.3 18.4 0.91 14 47.1 1522.9 -311.1 32.9 -6.71 74.1 18.4 0.84 16 53.9 1523.2 -308.9 32.9 -6.67 70.8 18.4 0.77 18 60.6 1537.2 -323.5 33.2 -6.98 67.2 18.2 0.70 20 67.3 1561.4 -363.2 33.7 -7.84 63.2 17.9 0.63 22 74.1 1603.3 -395.2 34.6 -8.53 57.1 17.5 0.55 23 77.4 1612.3 -408.9 34.8 -8.83 53.2 17.3 0.51 24 80.8 1603.5 -438.4 34.6 -9.46 50.7 16.9 0.47 25 84.2 1574.6 -446.8 34.0 -9.64 46.8 16.2 0.43 26 87.5 1617.8 -460.0 34.9 -9.93 44.1 15.4 0.38 27 90.9 1592.6 -429.0 34.4 -9.26 38.1 14.4 0.34 28 94.3 1705.2 -432.0 36.8 -9.32 35.2 13.1 0.30 29 97.6 1573.6 -335.6 34.0 -7.24 26.5 11.7 0.25 30 101.0 1669.8 -340.4 36.0 -7.35 23.6 9.7 0.21 31 104.4 1529.7 -199.6 33.0 -4.31 15.7 8.5 0.17 32 107.8 1649.9 -201.0 35.6 -4.34 12.9 6.9 0.12

Absolute 94.3 36.8 (T = 27.2 ms)

87.5 -9.93 (T = 60.3 ms)

Geosciences Testing & Research Inc OP: ANS

Page 4 Analysis: 25-Nov-2024

CASE METHOD

J = 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9

RP 2222.7 2136.9 2051.1 1965.4 1879.6 1793.8 1708.1 1622.3 1536.6 1450.8

RX 2222.8 2137.9 2053.0 1968.1 1883.2 1798.2 1713.3 1628.4 1543.9 1515.8

RU 2222.7 2136.9 2051.1 1965.4 1879.6 1793.8 1708.1 1622.3 1536.6 1450.8

RAU = 1297.5 (kips); RA2 = 1317.3 (kips)

Current CAPWAP Ru = 1815.0 (kips); Corresponding J(RP)= 0.48; J(RX) = 0.48

VMX TVP VT1*Z FT1 FMX DMX DFN SET EMX QUS KEB

ft/s ms kips kips kips in in in kip-ft kips kips/in

18.5 21.44 1533.6 1546.7 1555.7 1.40 0.04 0.04 102.8 1717.7 20165

PILE PROFILE AND PILE MODEL

Depth Area E-Modulus Spec. Weight Perim.

ft in2 ksi lb/ft3 ft

0.0 46.3 30000.0 492.000 7.85

107.8 46.3 30000.0 492.000 7.85

Toe Area 4.91 ft2

Top Segment Length 3.37 ft, Top Impedance 83 kips/ft/s

Wave Speed: Pile Top 16807.9, Elastic 16807.9, Overall 16807.9 ft/s Pile Damping 1.00 %, Time Incr 0.200 ms, 2L/c 12.8 ms Total volume: 34.673 ft3; Volume ratio considering added impedance: 1.000

APPENDIX D

TEST PILE INSTALLATION LOGS

DRAFT***

rwhitsel Highlight rwhitsel Highlight rwhitsel Engineer

10.2 cutoff +/- -97.0 tip +/- Driven Length = 107.2 > 105 ft length on SB602

-RDW