SUB-0284 PDA49B_A.pdf

vurgen.alvarado Text Box vurgen.alvarado Text Box vurgen.alvarado Text Box

SUB-0284

vurgen.alvarado Text Box 01.23.2025 rwhitsel Typewritten Text A A rwhitsel Typewritten Text All rwhitsel Typewritten Text

17FEB2025

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

January 3, 2025 GTR Project No. 24.107

John McNulty Coastal Marine Construction LLC.

630 Park Street Stoughton, MA 02072

Re: Dynamic Pile Testing Report – Pier Bent 49’ 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 December 30, 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 49’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 M&N SD Stamp

NOAA OMAO Ship & Support Facility Relocation – Pier PDA Report January 3, 2025 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.

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 49’B was installed with the vibratory hammer to approximately 88 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 117.7 feet below falsework. At EOD, the pile was driven to 10 blows for 1/2 inch.

The BSP CG240 hydraulic hammer was operated at a stroke of approximately 4.25 feet, corresponding to an average transferred energy of approximately 115 kip-ft at EOD.

After the initial end of driving, the pile was impacted for an additional few blows with the hammer operating at the “maximum” setting to observe the transferred energy increase with the hammer operating at a higher setting. The hammer was operated at a 4.5 to 5 foot stroke, resulting in an average transferred energy of approximately 128 kip-ft. 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 49’B was approximately 1797 kips at a driving resistance of 10 blows for 1/2 inch. The corresponding EOD CAPWAP capacity was 1810 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 49’B the EOD CAPWAP capacity was 1810 kips. The pile was driven to 10 blows for ½ inch. The hammer was reportedly operated at a stroke of approximately 4.25 feet, resulting in approximately 115 kip-ft of energy.

2. The EOD CAPWAP analysis indicates that approximately 75% 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.

GTR Project No. 24.107 Page 4

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.

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

1/3/2025 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)

117.2 10 for 1/2" 1125-1134 ~4.25 114.6 1.46 34.8 24.9 1797 1610 1810

117.3 7 for less than 1/2" 1135-1141 ~4.5 to 5 128.3 1.56 36.3 25.8 1812 1615 -

Notes:

49'B EOD 11/22/24

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.

matt.Colman Line matt.Colman Text Box 12.30.24 rwhitsel Highlight rwhitsel Highlight rwhitsel Highlight rwhitsel Highlight

Highlight

1/3/2025 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)

49'B EOD 1131 450 1360 1810 75% 0.10 0.13 0.25 0.07

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: 31-December-2024 Test started: 30-December-2024

24.107 NOAA PIER - 49'B EOD

PP30x0.5

EMX (k-ft) Maximum Energy

DMX (in) Maximum Displacement

80.00

85.00

90.00

95.00

100.00

105.00

110.00

115.00

120.00

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 31-December-2024

Case Method & iCAP® Results

24.107 NOAA PIER - 49'B EOD PP30x0.5

OP: ANS Date: 30-December-2024 AR: 46.34 in² SP: 0.492 k/ft³ LE: 118.00 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

211 110.00 10 AV211 106.8 1.73 33.0 18.2 827 801 782 46.8

STD 6.5 0.07 1.1 1.8 130 136 144 0.7

MAX 116.5 1.88 34.7 22.0 979 966 956 48.0

MIN 80.7 1.63 28.1 13.1 511 481 456 44.2

286 111.00 75 AV75 113.6 1.67 34.3 15.4 952 937 928 46.6

STD 2.2 0.02 0.4 0.7 37 39 40 0.3

MAX 116.2 1.71 34.9 17.4 1,033 1,015 1,006 47.2

MIN 108.8 1.63 33.3 14.4 897 878 867 46.1

408 112.00 122 AV122 109.2 1.56 33.9 18.8 1,152 1,104 1,090 47.3

STD 3.8 0.06 0.6 1.3 61 54 46 3.3

MAX 115.7 1.65 34.9 21.4 1,242 1,204 1,173 48.7

MIN 98.4 1.39 32.7 16.9 1,022 1,001 993 11.8

529 113.00 121 AV121 104.6 1.47 33.1 23.0 1,219 1,201 1,194 48.5

STD 3.0 0.02 0.6 1.1 21 25 27 0.4

MAX 109.8 1.51 34.3 24.5 1,269 1,256 1,247 49.1

MIN 100.3 1.44 32.1 20.5 1,187 1,143 1,128 47.9

647 114.00 118 AV118 106.0 1.47 33.2 23.7 1,278 1,242 1,239 48.4

STD 1.0 0.01 0.3 0.4 39 14 14 0.2

MAX 108.3 1.49 33.9 24.8 1,355 1,279 1,273 49.0

MIN 103.3 1.44 32.6 23.0 1,225 1,212 1,208 47.9

797 115.00 150 AV150 99.6 1.40 31.8 24.4 1,481 1,322 1,300 50.3

STD 3.5 0.02 1.1 0.7 70 48 34 7.2

MAX 105.7 1.45 33.8 26.6 1,585 1,416 1,385 62.4

MIN 93.9 1.36 30.1 22.8 1,351 1,239 1,234 9.8

957 116.00 160 AV160 93.8 1.35 30.8 23.8 1,579 1,416 1,373 44.2

STD 1.2 0.02 0.4 0.9 26 29 21 17.7

MAX 96.6 1.39 31.9 26.3 1,639 1,483 1,421 73.3

MIN 89.9 1.28 30.1 21.8 1,517 1,349 1,317 10.1

968 116.08 132 AV11 94.8 1.35 30.9 23.2 1,564 1,394 1,355 50.5

STD 0.9 0.01 0.2 0.3 10 11 10 0.2

MAX 96.3 1.36 31.1 23.7 1,579 1,409 1,369 50.7

MIN 93.6 1.33 30.5 22.6 1,551 1,377 1,337 50.1

978 116.17 120 AV10 93.7 1.33 30.9 22.7 1,568 1,400 1,345 38.3

STD 0.7 0.01 0.2 0.6 12 13 10 18.5

MAX 94.6 1.35 31.3 23.9 1,589 1,421 1,359 50.8

MIN 92.6 1.31 30.5 22.0 1,548 1,377 1,330 10.1

991 116.25 156 AV13 94.4 1.34 30.8 22.7 1,570 1,401 1,350 38.1

Pile Dynamics, Inc. Page 2

Case Method & iCAP® Results

24.107 NOAA PIER - 49'B EOD PP30x0.5

OP: ANS Date: 30-December-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 1.1 0.01 0.1 0.3 16 18 11 18.6

MAX 95.7 1.36 31.1 23.4 1,594 1,428 1,369 50.9

MIN 92.0 1.32 30.5 22.3 1,538 1,365 1,330 10.1

1001 116.33 120 AV10 93.5 1.33 31.2 22.3 1,559 1,390 1,347 42.5

STD 1.7 0.02 0.4 0.4 16 19 13 16.2

MAX 95.9 1.36 32.3 22.9 1,577 1,410 1,368 50.9

MIN 89.7 1.27 30.7 21.7 1,531 1,359 1,322 10.1

1011 116.42 120 AV10 93.3 1.33 31.1 22.3 1,553 1,382 1,350 55.9

STD 1.7 0.02 0.4 0.3 13 13 12 5.9

MAX 95.9 1.35 31.9 22.8 1,571 1,402 1,377 62.1

MIN 90.9 1.28 30.5 21.9 1,533 1,362 1,330 49.4

1022 116.50 132 AV11 93.3 1.33 31.0 22.3 1,547 1,375 1,358 51.8

STD 1.9 0.03 0.3 0.5 14 15 15 4.7

MAX 95.5 1.35 31.5 23.2 1,573 1,400 1,398 62.1

MIN 89.5 1.27 30.6 21.7 1,532 1,355 1,344 49.4

1033 116.58 132 AV11 92.5 1.31 31.0 22.4 1,562 1,392 1,367 54.1

STD 2.2 0.03 0.3 0.5 18 15 14 6.0

MAX 95.6 1.35 31.5 23.1 1,584 1,414 1,389 62.3

MIN 89.3 1.27 30.5 21.7 1,525 1,370 1,349 49.4

1044 116.67 132 AV11 92.1 1.31 31.0 22.4 1,566 1,398 1,377 50.8

STD 1.7 0.03 0.2 0.4 24 25 22 3.5

MAX 95.2 1.34 31.3 23.1 1,619 1,454 1,420 61.9

MIN 89.9 1.27 30.6 21.7 1,536 1,364 1,340 49.3

1056 116.75 144 AV12 92.7 1.30 31.3 22.1 1,586 1,414 1,394 43.9

STD 0.8 0.01 0.2 0.2 17 16 16 15.6

MAX 93.7 1.33 31.6 22.5 1,616 1,445 1,419 62.0

MIN 91.1 1.29 30.8 21.7 1,562 1,392 1,361 9.9

1068 116.83 144 AV12 91.9 1.31 31.2 22.2 1,586 1,417 1,393 49.6

STD 1.5 0.02 0.4 0.4 17 17 12 13.1

MAX 94.3 1.34 31.8 22.7 1,610 1,442 1,411 62.6

MIN 88.5 1.27 30.5 21.6 1,560 1,392 1,375 9.9

1081 116.92 156 AV13 91.5 1.29 31.4 22.1 1,605 1,436 1,404 51.3

STD 1.9 0.02 0.2 0.3 15 17 10 5.2

MAX 95.1 1.34 31.8 22.7 1,624 1,458 1,421 69.4

MIN 87.5 1.26 31.0 21.5 1,573 1,399 1,384 49.6

1094 117.00 156 AV13 101.2 1.35 32.9 23.2 1,676 1,495 1,467 42.3

STD 4.2 0.03 0.6 0.7 32 28 23 13.1

MAX 106.7 1.39 33.6 24.4 1,728 1,542 1,506 49.3

MIN 93.4 1.30 31.5 22.0 1,608 1,437 1,426 11.6

1110 117.08 192 AV16 110.9 1.42 34.2 24.3 1,752 1,563 1,519 41.9

STD 4.0 0.03 0.6 0.5 22 21 19 12.2

MAX 115.9 1.47 35.0 25.2 1,790 1,601 1,547 60.9

MIN 103.4 1.36 33.1 23.4 1,710 1,528 1,482 11.2

Pile Dynamics, Inc. Page 3

Case Method & iCAP® Results

24.107 NOAA PIER - 49'B EOD PP30x0.5

OP: ANS Date: 30-December-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

1124 117.17 168 AV14 114.5 1.45 34.7 24.8 1,788 1,597 1,542 38.8

STD 2.2 0.02 0.3 0.5 17 18 16 15.4

MAX 118.1 1.48 35.3 26.1 1,821 1,634 1,581 59.1

MIN 111.3 1.41 34.3 24.2 1,763 1,571 1,516 10.9

1134 117.21 240 AV10 114.6 1.46 34.8 24.9 1,797 1,610 1,549 38.7

STD 1.2 0.01 0.4 0.3 14 17 15 14.8

MAX 116.7 1.47 35.6 25.6 1,829 1,640 1,576 60.2

MIN 112.2 1.43 34.3 24.6 1,776 1,586 1,520 10.9

1141 117.25 168 AV7 128.3 1.56 36.3 25.8 1,812 1,615 1,579 40.4

STD 6.1 0.05 0.8 0.6 18 18 17 17.0

MAX 138.2 1.64 37.6 26.5 1,841 1,648 1,612 54.1

MIN 123.1 1.52 35.6 24.8 1,782 1,597 1,562 1.9

Average 103.2 1.50 32.6 21.5 1,279 1,191 1,169 47.1 Std. Dev. 7.8 0.15 1.4 3.1 302 244 238 9.3 Maximum 138.2 1.88 37.6 26.6 1,841 1,648 1,612 73.3 Minimum 80.7 1.26 28.1 13.1 511 481 456 1.9

Total number of blows analyzed: 1141

BL# Sensors 1-1141 F2: [Z232] 91.3 (1.00); F3: [Z800] 96.9 (1.00); A1: [K12833] 408.6 (1.00);

A4: [K12837] 450.6 (1.00)

Time Summary Drive 35 minutes 30 seconds 2:56 PM - 3:31 PM BN 1 - 1141

Case Method & iCAP® Results

24.107 NOAA PIER - 49'B EOD PP30x0.5

OP: ANS Date: 30-December-2024 AR: 46.34 in² SP: 0.492 k/ft³ LE: 118.00 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 1125 117.17 240 115.5 1.46 34.8 25.6 1,788 1,596 1,548 43.6 1126 117.18 240 114.4 1.46 34.3 25.1 1,784 1,597 1,541 43.6 1127 117.18 240 113.8 1.45 34.5 24.8 1,776 1,586 1,520 60.2 1128 117.18 240 114.5 1.46 34.5 24.9 1,799 1,614 1,553 43.6 1129 117.19 240 116.7 1.47 34.9 24.7 1,784 1,590 1,543 43.7 1130 117.19 240 112.2 1.43 35.0 24.6 1,800 1,612 1,546 10.9 1131 117.20 240 113.5 1.43 35.6 25.1 1,829 1,640 1,567 10.9 1132 117.20 240 115.3 1.47 34.3 24.7 1,798 1,613 1,556 43.4 1133 117.20 240 114.2 1.47 34.5 25.2 1,810 1,630 1,542 43.9 1134 117.21 240 115.7 1.47 35.4 24.7 1,802 1,619 1,576 43.7

Average 114.6 1.46 34.8 24.9 1,797 1,610 1,549 38.7 Std. Dev. 1.2 0.01 0.4 0.3 14 17 15 14.8 Maximum 116.7 1.47 35.6 25.6 1,829 1,640 1,576 60.2 Minimum 112.2 1.43 34.3 24.6 1,776 1,586 1,520 10.9

Total number of blows analyzed: 10

BL# Sensors 1-1141 F2: [Z232] 91.3 (1.00); F3: [Z800] 96.9 (1.00); A1: [K12833] 408.6 (1.00);

A4: [K12837] 450.6 (1.00)

Case Method & iCAP® Results

24.107 NOAA PIER - 49'B EOD PP30x0.5

OP: ANS Date: 30-December-2024 AR: 46.34 in² SP: 0.492 k/ft³ LE: 118.00 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 1135 117.21 168 138.2 1.64 37.2 26.5 1,782 1,597 1,590 1.9 1136 117.22 168 136.7 1.61 37.6 25.7 1,816 1,612 1,612 40.0 1137 117.23 168 129.2 1.57 36.3 25.2 1,814 1,609 1,586 39.7 1138 117.23 168 123.5 1.52 35.6 26.3 1,830 1,635 1,562 53.5 1139 117.24 168 123.1 1.52 36.3 25.8 1,802 1,603 1,573 54.1 1140 117.24 168 123.8 1.53 35.6 24.8 1,800 1,601 1,571 40.1 1141 117.25 168 123.4 1.52 35.6 26.1 1,841 1,648 1,562 53.6

Average 128.3 1.56 36.3 25.8 1,812 1,615 1,579 40.4 Std. Dev. 6.1 0.05 0.8 0.6 18 18 17 17.0 Maximum 138.2 1.64 37.6 26.5 1,841 1,648 1,612 54.1 Minimum 123.1 1.52 35.6 24.8 1,782 1,597 1,562 1.9

Total number of blows analyzed: 7

BL# Sensors 1-1141 F2: [Z232] 91.3 (1.00); F3: [Z800] 96.9 (1.00); A1: [K12833] 408.6 (1.00);

A4: [K12837] 450.6 (1.00)

APPENDIX C

CAPWAP RESULTS

5 115 ms

-875

-438 kips

13 L/c

Force Msd Force Cpt

5 115 ms

-875

-438 kips

13 L/c

Force Msd Velocity Msd ki ps

/ft ki ps

Length b. Sensors 118.0 ft Embedment 117.2 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 4.90 Top Compr. Stress 36.9 ksi Max Compr. Stress 37.3 ksi Max Tension Stress -10.41 ksi

Avg. Shaft Quake 0.10 in Toe Quake 0.13 in Avg. Shaft Smith Dpg. 0.25 s/ft Toe Smith Damping 0.07 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 = 1810.0 kips SF = 450.0 kips EB = 1360.0 kips Dy = 1.96 in Dx = 2.01 in SET/Bl = 0.05 in

24.107 NOAA PIER; Pile: 49'B EOD; PP30x0.5; Blow: 1131 (Test: 30-Dec-2024 15:29:) 31-Dec-2024 Geosciences Testing & Research Inc CAPWAP(R) 2014-3

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

24.107 NOAA PIER; Pile: 49'B EOD Test: 30-Dec-2024 15:29

PP30x0.5; Blow: 1131 CAPWAP(R) 2014-3 Geosciences Testing & Research Inc OP: ANS

Page 2 Analysis: 31-Dec-2024

CAPWAP SUMMARY RESULTS

Total CAPWAP Capacity: 1810.0; along Shaft 450.0; at Toe 1360.0 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

1810.0 1 10.1 9.3 0.0 1810.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 16.9 16.1 0.0 1810.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 23.6 22.8 0.0 1810.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 4 30.3 29.5 0.0 1810.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 5 37.1 36.3 0.0 1810.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 6 43.8 43.0 0.0 1810.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 7 50.6 49.8 2.5 1807.5 2.5 0.37 0.05 0.25 8 57.3 56.5 2.5 1805.0 5.0 0.37 0.05 0.25 9 64.1 63.3 2.5 1802.5 7.5 0.37 0.05 0.25 10 70.8 70.0 2.5 1800.0 10.0 0.37 0.05 0.25 11 77.5 76.7 2.5 1797.5 12.5 0.37 0.05 0.25 12 84.3 83.5 22.5 1775.0 35.0 3.34 0.42 0.25 13 91.0 90.2 35.0 1740.0 70.0 5.19 0.66 0.25 14 97.8 97.0 50.0 1690.0 120.0 7.42 0.94 0.25 15 104.5 103.7 115.0 1575.0 235.0 17.06 2.17 0.25 16 111.3 110.5 115.0 1460.0 350.0 17.06 2.17 0.25 17 118.0 117.2 100.0 1360.0 450.0 14.83 1.89 0.25

Avg. Shaft 26.5 3.84 0.49 0.25

Toe 1360.0 277.06 0.07

Soil Model Parameters/Extensions Shaft Toe

Quake (in) 0.10 0.13 Case Damping Factor 1.36 1.15 Damping Type Viscous Viscous Unloading Quake (% of loading quake) 30 32 Reloading Level (% of Ru) 100 100 Soil Plug Weight (kips) 1.602

CAPWAP match quality = 4.90 (Wave Up Match) ; RSA = 0 Observed: Final Set = 0.05 in; Blow Count = 240 b/ft Computed: Final Set = 0.02 in; Blow Count = 783 b/ft Transducer F2 (Z232) CAL: 91.3; RF: 1.00; F3 (Z800) CAL: 96.9; RF: 1.00

A1 (K12833) CAL: 409; RF: 1.00; A4 (K12837) CAL: 451; RF: 1.00

max. Top Comp. Stress = 36.9 ksi (T= 36.9 ms, max= 1.011 x Top) max. Comp. Stress = 37.3 ksi (Z= 104.5 ft, T= 28.1 ms) max. Tens. Stress = -10.41 ksi (Z= 91.0 ft, T= 62.2 ms) max. Energy (EMX) = 114.7 kip-ft; max. Measured Top Displ. (DMX)= 1.43 in

Geosciences Testing & Research Inc OP: ANS

Page 3 Analysis: 31-Dec-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 1709.2 -204.2 36.9 -4.41 114.7 19.4 1.43 2 6.7 1697.0 -215.6 36.6 -4.65 112.3 19.4 1.39 4 13.5 1633.9 -227.1 35.3 -4.90 107.5 19.4 1.30 6 20.2 1622.5 -227.0 35.0 -4.90 103.5 19.4 1.23 8 27.0 1642.6 -259.7 35.4 -5.60 100.5 19.4 1.16 10 33.7 1611.8 -294.6 34.8 -6.36 97.5 19.4 1.10 12 40.5 1607.9 -323.8 34.7 -6.99 94.4 19.4 1.03 14 47.2 1614.3 -350.1 34.8 -7.56 91.2 19.3 0.97 16 53.9 1607.0 -368.6 34.7 -7.95 87.1 19.2 0.90 18 60.7 1599.9 -377.8 34.5 -8.15 83.2 19.2 0.83 20 67.4 1592.8 -390.1 34.4 -8.42 79.0 19.1 0.76 22 74.2 1598.2 -416.6 34.5 -8.99 74.3 18.8 0.69 24 80.9 1652.2 -444.7 35.7 -9.60 69.2 18.1 0.61 26 87.7 1632.7 -460.9 35.2 -9.95 59.9 17.0 0.52 28 94.4 1614.0 -454.1 34.8 -9.80 49.4 15.3 0.44 29 97.8 1702.6 -479.2 36.7 -10.34 46.6 14.2 0.39 30 101.1 1601.2 -436.0 34.6 -9.41 38.8 13.0 0.35 31 104.5 1728.4 -446.8 37.3 -9.64 36.0 11.6 0.30 32 107.9 1517.8 -323.3 32.8 -6.98 25.7 10.1 0.26 33 111.3 1590.5 -330.3 34.3 -7.13 23.0 8.0 0.22 34 114.6 1437.9 -210.5 31.0 -4.54 16.1 7.1 0.18 35 118.0 1441.7 -211.8 31.1 -4.57 13.1 6.8 0.14

Absolute 104.5 37.3 (T = 28.1 ms)

91.0 -10.41 (T = 62.2 ms)

Geosciences Testing & Research Inc OP: ANS

Page 4 Analysis: 31-Dec-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 2295.3 2200.3 2105.2 2010.1 1915.1 1820.0 1724.9 1629.9 1534.8 1439.7

RX 2295.3 2200.3 2105.2 2010.1 1915.1 1820.0 1724.9 1629.9 1564.1 1564.1

RU 2286.7 2190.8 2094.9 1998.9 1903.0 1807.1 1711.1 1615.2 1519.3 1423.4

RAU = 1415.4 (kips); RA2 = 1445.1 (kips)

Current CAPWAP Ru = 1810.0 (kips); Corresponding J(RP)= 0.51; J(RX) = 0.51

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

19.6 21.46 1623.3 1622.7 1650.4 1.43 0.04 0.05 113.7 1838.7 10616

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

118.0 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 0.00 %, Time Incr 0.201 ms, 2L/c 14.0 ms Total volume: 37.972 ft3; Volume ratio considering added impedance: 1.000

APPENDIX D

TEST PILE INSTALLATION LOGS

DRAFT***

rwhitsel Highlight rwhitsel Highlight rwhitsel Highlight