T10.3_Specs 1 of 4__Paving.pdf

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY

FOR

PROPOSED ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE EXISTING

WORLD TRADE BRIDGE PORT OF ENTRY

LAREDO, WEBB COUNTY, TEXAS

Raba Kistner, Inc.

800 East Hackberry McAllen, TX 78501 www.rkci.com

P 956.682.5332 F 956.682.5487

TBPE Firm F‐3257

TBAE Firm BR 3427

CONSULTANTS • ENVIRONMENTAL • PROGRAM MANAGEMENT • INFRASTRUCTURE

O:\Active Projects\McAllen\2023\AMA23\AMA23-001-00 Prop. Roadway Improvements-World Trade Bridge\Reporting\AMA23-001-00 Revised.docx

Project No. AMA23-001-00 (Revised) February 22, 2023

Ms. Elizabeth Chodosh, AIA Project Manager Cushing Terrell 316 W. 12th Street, Suite 300 Austin, Texas 78701

Re: Geotechnical Engineering Study

Proposed Roadway Improvements Within the Existing World Trade Bridge Port of Entry 715 Bob Bullock Loop Laredo, Webb County, Texas

Dear Ms. Chodosh:

RABA KISTNER, Inc. (RKI) is pleased to submit the report of our Geotechnical Engineering Study for the above-referenced project. This study was performed in accordance with RKI Authorization Form No.

PMA22-079-00 (Revised), dated December 13, 2022. Written authorization to proceed with this study was received by our office via electronic-mail attachment on Tuesday, December 20, 2022, by means of the executed Standard Form of Agreement Between Architect and Consultant dated, December 15, 2022.

Further, based on the subsurface conditions encountered during our field exploration phase conducted on Saturday, January 21, 2023, we were asked by you to reduce the number of borings to four from the originally authorized five borings.

The purpose of this study was to drill borings within the site, to perform laboratory testing to classify and characterize subsurface conditions, and to prepare an engineering report presenting pavement design and construction recommendations for the proposed roadway improvements.

The following report contains our pavement design recommendations and considerations based on our current understanding of the traffic data. If any of these parameters change, then there may be alternatives for value engineering of the pavement systems, and RKI recommends that a meeting be held with Cushing Terrell (CLIENT) and design team to evaluate these alternatives.

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY

For

PROPOSED ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE EXISTING

WORLD TRADE BRIDGE PORT OF ENTRY

715 BOB BULLOCK LOOP

LAREDO, WEBB COUNTY, TEXAS

Prepared for

CUSHING TERRELL

Austin, Texas

Prepared by

RABA KISTNER, INC.

McAllen, Texas

PROJECT NO. AMA23-001-00

Revised February 22, 2023

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

LIMITATIONS

BORINGS AND LABORATORY TESTS

GENERAL SITE CONDITIONS

GEOLOGY

STRATIGRAPHY

GROUNDWATER

PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS

SUBGRADE CONDITIONS

SULFATE CORROSION POTENTIAL

CONCRETE PAVEMENT DESIGN INFORMATION

CONTINUOUSLY REINFORCED CONCRETE PAVEMENT (CRCP)

CONCRETE PAVEMENT REINFORCEMENT

PAVEMENT CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS

SUBGRADE PREPARATION

DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS

ON-SITE SOILS FILL

SELECT FILL

FLEXIBLE BASE MATERIAL (CEMENT-TREATED BASE)

HOT-MIX ASPHALT BASE LAYER AND HOT-MIX ASPHALT BOND BREAKER

PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE

PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE

CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC

CONSTRUCTION RELATED SERVICES

CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS TESTING AND OBSERVATION SERVICES

BUDGETING FOR CONSTRUCTION TESTING

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ii

ATTACHMENTS

Boring Location Map ......................................................................................................................... Figure 1 Logs of Borings ................................................................................................................ Figures 2 through 5 Key to Terms and Symbols ................................................................................................................ Figure 6 Results of Soil Sample Analyses ........................................................................................................ Figure 7 Moisture-Density Relationship Test (with CBR Laboratory Test Results)……………………………………….Figure 8 CRCP Pavement Outputs ............................................................................................... Figures 9 through 12 TxDOT CRCP Details ........................................................................................................... Figures 13 and 14 Important Information About Your Geotechnical Engineering Report

INTRODUCTION

RABA KISTNER, Inc. (RKI) has completed the authorized subsurface exploration and pavement recommendations for the proposed roadway improvements planned to be located along the southeast portion of the existing Laredo World Trade Bride, situated at 715 Bob Bullock Loop in Laredo, Webb County, Texas. This report briefly describes the procedures utilized during this study and presents our findings along with our recommendations for pavement design and construction considerations.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

We understand that the proposed project consists of the design and reconstruction of an about 1,000 ft long, roadway alignment located along the southeast portion of the existing Laredo World Trade Bride, situated at 715 Bob Bullock Loop in Laredo, Webb County, Texas. At the time of our field activities, the project site can be described as an existing concrete-paved, roadway alignment. In general, the topography at the subject site is relatively flat, with a visually estimated vertical relief of about 3 ft across the site. Surface drainage is estimated to be fair. The subject site is bounded to the north, east, and west by the existing Laredo World Trade Bride facility; and to the south by an undeveloped tract of land, followed by the existing Rio Grande River.

The pavement system is anticipated to consist of a rigid (concrete) pavement system. On the basis of the electronic-mail attachment received by our office from Ms. Kim Vongries, P.E., Project Manager, with Cushing Terrell (CLIENT) on Saturday, February 4, 2023, we understand that the proposed roadway alignment is anticipated to carry the following vehicular traffic for a design period of 20 years:

Vehicle Classification Total Vehicles Per Day

2 Axle – 6 Tire 286

3 Axle – Single 719

4 Axle - Single 1

<5 Axle – Double 9

5 Axle Double 6,199

>6 Axle - Double 10

It should be noted that the axle loading for each of the vehicle classification was not provided to us for the pavement design purposes. The assumptions utilized in our pavement design are stated in the Design Information subsection of the Pavement Recommendations section in this report. It is recommended that the project Civil Engineer review the above-mentioned levels of traffic and design period to ensure that they are appropriate for the intended use of this project.

LIMITATIONS

This engineering report has been prepared in accordance with accepted Geotechnical Engineering practices in the region of South Texas for the use of Cushing Terrell and its representatives for design purposes. This report may not contain sufficient information for purposes of other parties or other uses.

This report is not intended for use in determining construction means and methods.

The recommendations submitted in this report are based on the data obtained from four borings drilled along the subject site, our understanding of the project information provided to us by the CLIENT, and the assumption that site grading will result in only minor changes in the topography existing at the time of our study. If the project information described in this report is incorrect, is altered, or if new information is available, we should be retained to review and modify our recommendations.

This report may not reflect the actual variations of the subsurface conditions across the site. The nature and extent of variations across the site may not become evident until construction commences. The construction process itself may also alter subsurface conditions. If variations appear evident at the time of construction, it may be necessary to reevaluate our recommendations after performing on-site observations and tests to establish the engineering impact of the variations.

The scope of our Geotechnical Engineering Study does not include an environmental assessment of the air, soil, rock, or water conditions either on or adjacent to the subject site. No environmental opinions are presented in this report. RKI’s scope of work does not include the investigation, detection, or design related to the prevention of any biological pollutants. The term “biological pollutants” includes, but is not limited to, mold, fungi, spores, bacteria, and viruses, and the byproduct of any such biological organisms.

If final grade elevations are significantly different from the grades existing at the time of our study (more than plus or minus 1 ft), our office should be informed about these changes. If needed and/or desired, we will reexamine our analyses and make supplemental recommendations.

BORINGS AND LABORATORY TESTS

The subsurface conditions within the proposed parking lot were evaluated by four borings extending down to a maximum depth of about 5 ft each below the pavement surface elevations existing at the time of our study. Further, based on the subsurface conditions encountered during our field exploration phase, we were asked by the CLIENT to reduce the number of borings to four from the originally authorized five borings. The borings (designated as “P-”) were drilled on Saturday, January 21, 2023, at the locations shown on the Boring Location Map, Figure 1. The boring locations are approximate and were located in the field by an RKI representative based on Sheet No. 5 of the project plans titled “World Trade Bridge – Laredo, Texas,” dated December 4, 2008, and provided to us by the CLIENT on September 28, 2022. The borings were conducted utilizing straight flight augers and were backfilled with the auger cuttings following completion of the drilling operations. The upper six inches of each boring were topped off with a cement-aggregate mixture and flushed with the adjacent pavement surface elevation. During the drilling activities, Split-Spoon (with Standard Penetration Test, SPT) samples were collected.

The SPT samples were obtained in accordance with accepted standard practices and the penetration test results are presented as “blows per foot” on the boring logs. Representative portions of the samples were sealed in containers to reduce moisture loss, labeled, packaged, and transported to our laboratory for subsequent testing and classification.

In the laboratory, each sample was evaluated and visually classified by a member of our Geotechnical Engineering staff in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). The geotechnical engineering properties of the strata were evaluated by the following laboratory tests: natural moisture content, Atterberg limits, sulfate content determinations, a California Bearing Ratio (CBR) test, and percent passing a No. 200 sieve determinations.

With the exception of the laboratory CBR test result, the results of all laboratory tests are presented in graphical or numerical form on the boring logs illustrated on Figures 2 through 5. A key to the classification of terms and symbols used on the logs is presented on Figure 6. The results of the laboratory and field testing are also tabulated on Figure 7 for ease of reference.

In addition to these tests, one laboratory CBR test was performed by RKI. The CBR test was performed by combining a bulk soil sample collected near Boring P-3. This test was conducted to provide information regarding inundated strength, deflection, and swell characteristics of the subgrade soils for pavement analyses. The subgrade laboratory CBR value was evaluated using American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) D698 Proctor compaction testing procedures. The laboratory CBR test result is presented on Figure 8.

SPT results are noted as “blows per ft” on the boring logs and on Figure 7, where “blows per ft” refers to the number of blows by a falling 140-lb (pound) hammer required for 1 ft of penetration into the subsurface materials.

Samples will be retained in our laboratory for 30 days after submittal of this report. Other arrangements may be provided at the request of the CLIENT.

GENERAL SITE CONDITIONS

GEOLOGY

A cursory review of the Geologic Atlas of Texas, (Laredo Sheet, dated 1976), published by the Bureau of Economic Geology at the University of Texas at Austin, indicates that the subject site appears to be located between the Fluviatile terrace deposits and Laredo formation. The Fluviatile terrace deposits consists of gravel, sand, silt, and clay deposits of the Quaternary epoch (Pleistocene period), while the Laredo formation consists of sandstone and clay of the Tertiary epoch (Eocene period).

According to the Soil Survey of Webb County, Texas, published by the United States Department of Agriculture - Soil Conservation Service, in cooperation with the Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, the project site appears to be located within the Lagloria-Rio Grande soil association consisting of deep, nearly level, non-saline, loamy soils. The corresponding soil symbols appears to be JQD and LgA, Jimenez-Quemado complex and Lagloria silt loam, respectively.

STRATIGRAPHY

It should be noted that the borings were drilled along an existing concrete-paved, roadway alignment.

The existing Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) thickness was measured to range from about 11-3/4 inches to 13 inches, while flexible base material (FBM) thickness underlying the PCC was measured to range from about 2 inches to 2-1/4 inches.

The subsurface stratigraphy can generally be described as intermixed layers of sandy silt soils; sandy, silty clay soils; and silty sand soils. Each stratum has been designated by grouping soils that possess similar physical and engineering characteristics. The boring logs should be consulted for more specific stratigraphic information. Unless noted on the boring logs, the lines designating the changes between various strata represent approximate boundaries. The transition between materials may be gradual or may occur between recovered samples. The stratification given on the boring logs, or described herein, is for use by RKI in its analyses and should not be used as the basis of design or construction cost estimates without realizing that there can be variation from that shown or described.

The boring logs and related information depict subsurface conditions only at the specific locations and times where sampling was conducted. The passage of time may result in changes in conditions, interpreted to exist, at or between the locations where sampling was conducted.

GROUNDWATER

Groundwater was not observed in the borings either during or immediately upon completion of the field drilling activities. However, it is possible for groundwater to exist beneath this site on a transient basis following periods of precipitation. Fluctuations in groundwater levels occur due to variations in rainfall and surface water run-off. The construction process itself may also cause variations in the groundwater level.

Based on the findings in the borings and on our experience in this region, we believe that groundwater seepage encountered during site earthwork activities and shallow foundation construction may be controlled using temporary earthen berms and conventional sump-and-pump dewatering methods.

PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS

Recommendations for rigid pavements for a 20-year design period are presented in this report. Drainage conditions will have a significant impact on long-term performance. Drainage considerations are discussed in more detail in a subsequent section of this report.

SUBGRADE CONDITIONS

A single generalized subgrade condition has been assumed for this site. The predominant subgrade soils used in developing the pavement sections for this project are the surficial non-plastic to marginally plastic, subgrade soils. A laboratory CBR value of 16.6 was measured for these subgrade soils under inundated conditions. On the basis of our past experience with similar subsurface conditions in the vicinity of this area, a design CBR value of 6.0 was assigned to evaluate the pavement components. This design CBR value assumes that the subgrade soils will be prepared in accordance with the recommendations stated in the Subgrade Preparation subsection of the Pavement Construction Guidelines section of this report.

SULFATE CORROSION POTENTIAL

As discussed in a previous section of this report, the potential concentration of soluble sulfates along the roadway alignment were preliminarily evaluated by conducting laboratory sulfate content tests. The results of these laboratory tests are as follows:

Boring Location

Approximate Depth Below the Pavement Surface

Elevations Existing at the Time of our Study (ft)

Sulfate Content (ppm)

P-1 2 2,860

P-4 2 2,830

Where ppm = parts per million

On the basis of these sulfate content test results, the tested on-site soils do not appear to have a potential to cause sulfate-induced heave. Typically, the concentration of soluble sulfate on soils becomes a concern when the concentration reaches about 3,000 ppm and higher. The sulfate concentration in soils may vary over short distances, and as such, additional testing is recommended at the time of construction to confirm the concentration of sulfates in the exposed subgrade soils within the subject pavement areas.

CONCRETE PAVEMENT DESIGN INFORMATION

As previously mentioned, on the basis of the electronic-mail attachment received by our office from the CLIENT on Saturday, February 4, 2023, we understand that the proposed roadway alignment is anticipated to carry the following vehicular traffic for a design period of 20 years:

Vehicle Classification

Total Vehicles Per Day

2 Axle – 6 Tire 286

3 Axle – Single 719

4 Axle - Single 1

<5 Axle – Double 9

5 Axle Double 6,199

>6 Axle - Double 10

The axle loading for each of the vehicle classification was not provided to us for the pavement design purposes. It is recommended that the project Civil Engineer review the above-mentioned levels of traffic and design period to ensure that they are appropriate for the intended use of this project. The following truck factors were assumed in order to estimate the Equivalent Single Axle Loads (ESAL's) for a 20-year design period.

Vehicle Classification

Total Per Day Truck Factors for Rigid Pavement

Estimated ESAL's 20-Year Design Period

2 Axle – 6 Tire 286 0.24 501,000

3 Axle – Single 719 1.15 6,036,000

4 Axle - Single 1 7.0 51,100

<5 Axle – Double 9 1.59 104,450

5 Axle Double 6,199 2.40 108,606,500

>6 Axle - Double 10 1.42 103,650

Total Estimated ESAL's 20-Year Design Period

115,402,700

On the basis of our conference call with the CLIENT on Wednesday, February 15, 2023, we understand that the pavement system for the proposed roadway alignment may be divided into two general areas, each with different loading conditions and performance criteria. These may include the following:

• More than three traffic lanes (medium vehicular traffic); and

• Three or less traffic lanes (heavy vehicular traffic).

Further, based on the same conference call held with the CLIENT on Wednesday, February 15, 2023, we were asked by the CLIENT to consider the following estimated ESAL's for each of the pavement areas:

Vehicular Traffic Distribution of the Total

Estimated ESAL's

Estimated ESAL's 20-Year Design Period

(Millions)

Medium 1/8 15

Heavy 1/2 58

CONTINUOUSLY REINFORCED CONCRETE PAVEMENT (CRCP)

The parameters used for CRCP section designs are in accordance with TxDOT Pavement Manual (Revised January 2021), Chapter 8, Section 3 and the TxDOT Standard Specifications for Construction and Maintenance of Highways, Streets, and Bridges, Item 360, Concrete Pavement. Based on the referenced design parameters and using the TxDOT TxCRCP-ME Design Program, the following pavement thicknesses were computed for a 20-year design life. The results are also shown on Figures 9 through 12 of the Attachments of this report.

Medium Vehicular Traffic - More Than Three Traffic Lanes

Pavement Area Option

HMAC/

Asphalt-

Treated Base (in.)

Flexible Base Material with

3% Cement by Weight (Cement-

Treated Base) (in.)

Hot-Mix Bond

Breaker (in.)

Concrete Pavement

Thickness (in.)

Estimated ESAL’s

(in Millions)

Roadway Alignment

I 4 -- -- 11 15

II -- 6 1 10 15

Heavy Vehicular Traffic – Less Than Three Traffic Lanes

Pavement Area Option

HMAC/

Asphalt-

Treated Base (in.)

Flexible Base Material with

3% Cement by Weight (Cement-

Treated Base) (in.)

Hot-Mix Bond

Breaker (in.)

Concrete Pavement

Thickness (in.)

Estimated ESAL’s

(in Millions)

Roadway Alignment

I 4 -- -- 13-1/2 58

II -- 6 1 12-1/2 58

The recommended pavement thicknesses include the use of a durable, stabilized, and non-erodible base for the long-term performance of the concrete pavement.

CONCRETE PAVEMENT REINFORCEMENT

Details for longitudinal and transverse reinforcing steel requirements in continuously reinforced concrete pavements are presented in TxDOT Pavement Detail CRCP (1)-20, “Continuously Reinforced Concrete Pavement, One Layer Steel Bar Placement, T – 7 to 13 Inches”, dated April 2020. For ease of reference, this detail is presented in Figures 13 and 14.

PAVEMENT CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS

SUBGRADE PREPARATION

The areas to support fill should be stripped of all existing pavement constituents, all vegetation, organic topsoil, existing pavement sections, and associated backfill. Exposed subgrades should be thoroughly proofrolled in order to locate any weak, compressible zones. A fully-loaded dump truck or a similar heavily loaded piece of construction equipment should be used for planning purposes. Proofrolling operations should be observed by the Geotechnical Engineer or his/her representative to document subgrade condition and preparation. Weak or soft areas identified during proofrolling should be removed and replaced with a suitable, compacted backfill.

After completion of the proofrolling operations and just prior to base placement, the exposed subgrade, should be moisture conditioned by scarifying to a minimum depth of 6 in. and recompacting to a minimum of 95 percent of the maximum density determined from the Texas Department of Transportation Compaction Test (TxDOT, Tex-114-E). The moisture content of the subgrade should be maintained within the range of optimum moisture content to 3 percentage points above optimum until permanently covered.

It is imperative that the subgrade modulus utilized in the pavement design process be met or exceeded by any fill material. If the soil fill used is different than the existing subgrade, the recommendations in this report could be invalidated and the design engineer must be consulted to determine if additional testing and thicker pavement sections are required.

DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS

As with any soil-supported structure, the satisfactory performance of a pavement system is contingent on the provision of adequate surface and subsurface drainage. Insufficient drainage which allows saturation of the pavement subgrade and/or the supporting granular pavement materials will greatly reduce the performance and service life of the pavement systems.

Surface and subsurface drainage considerations crucial to the performance of pavements at this site include (but are not limited to) the following:

1) Any known natural or man-made subsurface seepage at the site which may occur at sufficiently shallow depths as to influence moisture contents within the subgrade should be intercepted by drainage ditches or below grade French drains.

2) Final site grading should eliminate isolated depressions adjacent to curbs which may allow surface water to pond and infiltrate into the underlying soils. Curbs should completely penetrate flexible base materials and should be installed to sufficient depth to reduce infiltration of water beneath the curbs.

3) Pavement surfaces should be maintained to help minimize surface ponding and to provide rapid sealing of any developing cracks. These measures will help reduce infiltration of surface water downward through the pavement section.

ON-SITE SOILS FILL

The pavement recommendations presented in this report were prepared assuming that on-site soils will be used for site grading in the proposed pavement areas. If used, we recommend that on-site soils be placed in loose lifts not exceeding 8 in. in thickness and compacted to a minimum of 98 percent of the maximum dry density as determined from Tex-114-E. The moisture content of the subgrade should be maintained within the range of two percentage points below the optimum moisture content to two percentage points above the optimum moisture content until permanently covered. We recommend that on-site fill materials be free of roots, vegetation, and/or other organic or degradable material. We also recommend that the maximum particle size not exceed 4 in. or one half the lift thickness, whichever is smaller.

SELECT FILL

If implemented, materials used as select fill for final site grading preferably should be crushed stone or gravel aggregate. We recommend that materials specified for use as select fill meet the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) 2014 Standard Specification for Construction and Maintenance of Highways, Streets, and Bridges, Item 247, Flexible Base, Type A through Type E, Grades 1, 2, 3, and 5.

Alternatively, the following soils, as classified according to the USCS, may be considered satisfactory for use as select fill materials at this site: SC, GC, CL, and combinations of these soils. In addition to the USCS classification, alternative select fill materials shall have a maximum liquid limit of 40 percent, a plasticity index between 7 and 18 percent, and a maximum particle size not exceeding 4 inches or one-half the loose lift thickness, whichever is smaller. In addition, if these materials are utilized, grain size analyses and Atterberg Limits must be performed during placement at a minimum rate of one test each per 5,000 cubic yards of material due to the high degree of variability associated with pit-run materials.

If the above listed alternative materials are being considered for bidding purposes, the materials should be submitted to the Geotechnical Engineer for pre-approval a minimum of 10 working days or more prior to the bid date. Failure to do so will be the responsibility of the General Contractor. The General Contractor will also be responsible for ensuring that the properties of all delivered alternate select fill materials are similar to those of the pre-approved submittal. It should also be noted that when using alternative fill materials, difficulties may be experienced with respect to moisture control during and subsequent to fill placement, as well as with erosion, particularly when exposed to inclement weather. This may result in sloughing of beam trenches and/or pumping of the fill materials.

Soils classified as CH, MH, ML, SM, GM, OH, OL, and Pt under the USCS and not meeting the alternative select fill material requirements, are not considered suitable for use as select fill materials at this site.

Select fill should be placed in loose lifts not exceeding 8 in. in thickness and compacted to a minimum of 98 percent of the maximum dry density as determined from Tex-114-E. The moisture content of the fill should be maintained within the range of two percentage points below the optimum moisture content to two percentage points above the optimum moisture content until permanently covered.

The select fill should be properly compacted in accordance with these recommendations and tested by RKI personnel for compaction as specified.

FLEXIBLE BASE MATERIAL (CEMENT-TREATED BASE)

The cement-treated base course should be in accordance with the TxDOT 2014 Standard Specifications for Construction and Maintenance of Highways, Streets and Bridges, Item 276, Cement Treatment (Plant Mixed), with a minimum 7-day unconfined compressive strength requirement of 500 psi in accordance with Class L. The raw flexible base shall meet the requirement of the TxDOT 2014 Standard Specification for Construction and Maintenance of Highways, Streets, and Bridges, Item 247, Flexible Base, Type D, Grades 1 or 2. The percent of Portland cement is anticipated to be on the order of 3 percent, depending on the quality of the raw flexible base material used.

The cement-treated base course should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by TEX-120-E. The moisture content of the base course materials should be maintained within the range of two percentage points below the optimum moisture content to two percentage points above the optimum moisture content until permanently covered.

HOT-MIX ASPHALT BASE LAYER AND HOT-MIX ASPHALT BOND BREAKER

The hot-mix asphalt base layer and hot-mix asphalt bond breaker should be in accordance with the TxDOT 2014 Standard Specifications for Construction and Maintenance of Highways, Streets and Bridges, Item 340, Dense-Graded Hot-Mix Asphalt (Small Quantity), Types B and D, respectively, a Performance Graded Binder 76-22 (PG-76-22), and designed with a laboratory density target of 97.5 percent. The asphalt aggregates should conform to the requirements presented in Table 1, Item 340. A release agent from TxDOT’s approved Material Producer List (MPL) should be used to clean and to coat the inside of the truck beds for hauling material. Hauling equipment shall be cleaned prior to hauling material to the jobsite. A copy of the bill of lading should be submitted to the project engineer as part of the Quality Control Plan (QCP).

PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE

The Portland cement concrete should be in accordance with Class P concrete of the TxDOT 2014 Standard Specifications for Construction and Maintenance of Highways, Streets and Bridges, Item 421, Portland Cement Concrete. The Portland cement concrete pavement should be air entrained to result in a 4 percent plus/minus 1 percent air, should have a maximum slump of 5 inches, and should have a minimum average compressive strength of 3,200 psi or a minimum average flexural strength of 450 psi at 7 days or a minimum average compressive strength of 4,000 psi or a minimum average flexural strength of 570 psi at 28 days. A liquid membrane-forming curing compound should be applied as soon as practical after broom finishing the concrete surface. The curing compound will help reduce the loss of water from the concrete.

The reduction in the rapid loss in water will help reduce shrinkage cracking of the concrete.

PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE

Regular pavement maintenance is critical in maintaining pavement performance over a period of several years. Periodic inspection and repair of cracks in pavement sections should be routed and sealed regularly as part of routine facility maintenance. The underlying base should be checked for contamination or loss of support. Joints in concrete pavements should be maintained to reduce the influx of incompressible materials that restrain joint movement and cause spalling and/or cracking. This is particularly true at this site when various debris was observed along the existing roadway alignment during the field exploration phase of this project. Other typical TxDOT maintenance techniques should be followed as required.

CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC

Construction traffic on prepared subgrade should be restricted as much as possible until the concrete pavement is applied. Significant damage to the underlying layers resulting in weakening may occur if heavily loaded vehicles are allowed to use these areas. If it is considered to keep the bridge operations open during the reconstruction of the pavement areas, considerations should be given to the means and method to safely protect and isolate the construction work area from the vehicular traffic.

CONSTRUCTION RELATED SERVICES

CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS TESTING AND OBSERVATION SERVICES

As presented in the attachment to this report, Important Information About Your Geotechnical Engineering Report, subsurface conditions can vary across a project site. The conditions described in this report are based on interpolations derived from a limited number of data points. Variations will be encountered during construction, and only the geotechnical design engineer will be able to determine if these conditions are different than those assumed for design.

Construction problems resulting from variations or anomalies in subsurface conditions are among the most prevalent on construction projects and often lead to delays, changes, cost overruns, and disputes. These variations and anomalies can best be addressed if the geotechnical engineer of record, RKI is retained to perform construction observation and testing services during the construction of the project. This is because:

RKI has an intimate understanding of the geotechnical engineering report’s findings and recommendations. RKI understands how the report should be interpreted and can provide such interpretations on site, on the client’s behalf.

RKI knows what subsurface conditions are anticipated at the site.

RKI is familiar with the goals of the owner and project design professionals, having worked with them in the development of the geotechnical workscope. This enables RKI to suggest remedial measures (when needed) which help meet the owner’s and the design teams’ requirements.

RKI has a vested interest in client satisfaction, and thus assigns qualified personnel whose principal concern is client satisfaction. This concern is exhibited by the manner in which contractors’ work is tested, evaluated and reported, and in selection of alternative approaches when such may become necessary. RKI cannot be held accountable for problems which result due to misinterpretation of our findings or recommendations when we are not on hand to provide the interpretation which is required.

RKI cannot be held accountable for problems which result due to misinterpretation of our findings or recommendations when we are not on hand to provide the interpretation which is required.

BUDGETING FOR CONSTRUCTION TESTING

Appropriate budgets need to be developed for the required construction testing and observation activities.

At the appropriate time before construction, we advise that RKI and the project designers meet and jointly develop the testing budgets, as well as review the testing specifications as it pertains to this project.

Once the construction testing budget and scope of work are finalized, we encourage a preconstruction meeting with the selected contractor to review the scope of work to make sure it is consistent with the construction means and methods proposed by the contractor. RKI looks forward to the opportunity to provide continued support on this project, and would welcome the opportunity to meet with the Project Team to develop both a scope and budget for these services.

ATTACHMENTS

REVISIONS:

BORING LOCATION MAP

PROPOSED ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS

WORLD TRADE BRIDGE PORT OF ENTRY

LAREDO, WEBB COUNTY, TEXAS

800 E. Hackberry McAllen, Texas 78501

(956)682-5332 TEL

(956)682-5487 FAX

www.rkci.com

Engineering Testing Environmental

Facilities Infrastructure

TBPE Firm F-3257

P-1

P-2

P-3

P-4

Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) - 12 in.

Flexible Base Material (FBM) - 2 in

SANDY SILT (ML)

very stiff, dark brown to brown

Sulfate Content = 2,860 ppm

Boring terminated at a depth of about 5 ft.

NOTES:

Upon completion of the drilling operations, the boring was observed dry.

LOG OF BORING NO. P-1

PL

AS

TI

CI

TY

IN

D

EX

SURFACE ELEVATION: Existing Grade, ft

Straight Flight Auger

-2

DRILLING

METHOD: LOCATION:

PLASTIC

LIMIT

LIQUID

LIMIT

WATER

CONTENT

BL

O

W S

PE

R

FT

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL

0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0

SHEAR STRENGTH, TONS/FT2

U N

IT

D

RY

W

EI

G

H T, p cf

See Figure 1

N O

TE

: T

H

ES

E

LO

G S

SH

O

U

LD

N O

T

BE

U

SE

D S

EP

AR

AT

EL

Y

FR

O M

T H

E

PR

O

JE

CT

R

EP

O

RT

DEPTH DRILLED:

DATE DRILLED:

DEPTH TO WATER:

DATE MEASURED:

SY

M

BO

L

SA

M

PL

ES

Proposed Roadway Improvements World Trade Bridge Port of Entry

Laredo, Webb County, Texas

DRY

1/21/2023

D

EP

TH

, F

T

5.0 ft 1/21/2023

AMA23-001-00

PROJ. No.:

FIGURE:

TBPE Firm Registration No. F-3257

Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) - 12 in.

Flexible Base Material (FBM) - 2-1/4 in

SANDY, SILTY CLAY (CL-ML)

stiff, dark brown to greenish-brown

Boring terminated at a depth of about 5 ft.

NOTES:

Upon completion of the drilling operations, the boring was observed dry.

LOG OF BORING NO. P-2

PL

AS

TI

CI

TY

IN

D

EX

SURFACE ELEVATION: Existing Grade, ft

Straight Flight Auger

-2

DRILLING

METHOD: LOCATION:

PLASTIC

LIMIT

LIQUID

LIMIT

WATER

CONTENT

BL

O

W S

PE

R

FT

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL

0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0

SHEAR STRENGTH, TONS/FT2

U N

IT

D

RY

W

EI

G

H T, p cf

See Figure 1

N O

TE

: T

H

ES

E

LO

G S

SH

O

U

LD

N O

T

BE

U

SE

D S

EP

AR

AT

EL

Y

FR

O M

T H

E

PR

O

JE

CT

R

EP

O

RT

DEPTH DRILLED:

DATE DRILLED:

DEPTH TO WATER:

DATE MEASURED:

SY

M

BO

L

SA

M

PL

ES

Proposed Roadway Improvements World Trade Bridge Port of Entry

Laredo, Webb County, Texas

DRY

1/21/2023

D

EP

TH

, F

T

5.0 ft 1/21/2023

AMA23-001-00

PROJ. No.:

FIGURE:

TBPE Firm Registration No. F-3257

Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) - 13 in.

Flexible Base Material (FBM) - 2 in

SILTY SAND (SM)

loose, dark brown

SANDY SILT (ML)

hard, brown, with gravel

Boring terminated at a depth of about 5 ft.

NP

NOTES:

Upon completion of the drilling operations, the boring was observed dry.

LOG OF BORING NO. P-3

PL

AS

TI

CI

TY

IN

D

EX

SURFACE ELEVATION: Existing Grade, ft

Straight Flight Auger

-2

DRILLING

METHOD: LOCATION:

PLASTIC

LIMIT

LIQUID

LIMIT

WATER

CONTENT

BL

O

W S

PE

R

FT

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL

0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0

SHEAR STRENGTH, TONS/FT2

U N

IT

D

RY

W

EI

G

H T, p cf

See Figure 1

N O

TE

: T

H

ES

E

LO

G S

SH

O

U

LD

N O

T

BE

U

SE

D S

EP

AR

AT

EL

Y

FR

O M

T H

E

PR

O

JE

CT

R

EP

O

RT

DEPTH DRILLED:

DATE DRILLED:

DEPTH TO WATER:

DATE MEASURED:

SY

M

BO

L

SA

M

PL

ES

Proposed Roadway Improvements World Trade Bridge Port of Entry

Laredo, Webb County, Texas

DRY

1/21/2023

D

EP

TH

, F

T

5.0 ft 1/21/2023

AMA23-001-00

PROJ. No.:

FIGURE:

TBPE Firm Registration No. F-3257

50/7"

Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) - 11-3/4 in.

Flexible Base Material (FBM) - 2-1/2 in

SILTY SAND (SM)

medium dense, brown, with black ferrous stains

Sulfate Content = 2,830 ppm

SANDY SILT (ML)

stiff, brown

Boring terminated at a depth of about 5 ft.

NOTES:

Upon completion of the drilling operations, the boring was observed dry.

LOG OF BORING NO. P-4

PL

AS

TI

CI

TY

IN

D

EX

SURFACE ELEVATION: Existing Grade, ft

Straight Flight Auger

-2

DRILLING

METHOD: LOCATION:

PLASTIC

LIMIT

LIQUID

LIMIT

WATER

CONTENT

BL

O

W S

PE

R

FT

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL

0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0

SHEAR STRENGTH, TONS/FT2

U N

IT

D

RY

W

EI

G

H T, p cf

See Figure 1

N O

TE

: T

H

ES

E

LO

G S

SH

O

U

LD

N O

T

BE

U

SE

D S

EP

AR

AT

EL

Y

FR

O M

T H

E

PR

O

JE

CT

R

EP

O

RT

DEPTH DRILLED:

DATE DRILLED:

DEPTH TO WATER:

DATE MEASURED:

SY

M

BO

L

SA

M

PL

ES

Proposed Roadway Improvements World Trade Bridge Port of Entry

Laredo, Webb County, Texas

DRY

1/21/2023

D

EP

TH

, F

T

5.0 ft 1/21/2023

AMA23-001-00

PROJ. No.:

FIGURE:

TBPE Firm Registration No. F-3257

CLAY-SHALE

SAMPLE TYPES

NO INFORMATION

BLANK PIPE

ASPHALT

IGNEOUS

LIMESTONE

FILL

GEOPROBE

SAMPLER

TEXAS CONE

PENETROMETER

DISTURBED

METAMORPHIC

MARL

MUD

ROTARY

NO

RECOVERY SPLIT BARREL

SPLIT SPOONNX CORE

SHELBY TUBE

CALCAREOUS

CLAY

CLAYEY

GRAVEL

GRAVELLY

WELL CONSTRUCTION AND PLUGGING MATERIALS

SILTSTONE

CALICHE

CONGLOMERATE

AIR

ROTARY

GRAB

SAMPLE

DOLOMITE

BENTONITE

CORE

SOIL TERMS OTHER

NOTE: VALUES SYMBOLIZED ON BORING LOGS REPRESENT SHEAR

STRENGTHS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED

BASE

KEY TO TERMS AND SYMBOLS

CUTTINGS

SAND

SANDY

SILT

SILTY

CHALK

STRENGTH TEST TYPES

CEMENT GROUT GRAVEL

SAND

POCKET PENETROMETER

TORVANE

UNCONFINED COMPRESSION

TRIAXIAL COMPRESSION

UNCONSOLIDATED-UNDRAINED

TRIAXIAL COMPRESSION

CONSOLIDATED-UNDRAINED

BRICKS /

PAVERS

SCREEN

MATERIAL TYPES

VOLCLAY

SANDSTONE

SHALE

ROCK TERMS

WASTE

CONCRETE/CEMENT

PEAT

BENTONITE &

CUTTINGS

CONCRETE/CEMENT

CLAYSTONE

ROTOSONIC

-DAMAGED

ROTOSONIC

-INTACT

PITCHER

FIGURE 6aREVISED 04/2012

KEY TO TERMS AND SYMBOLS (CONT'D)

TERMINOLOGY

RELATIVE DENSITY PLASTICITYCOHESIVE STRENGTH

Penetration Resistance

Blows per ft Degree of Plasticity

Plasticity Index

Relative Density

Resistance Blows per ft

Very Loose

Loose

Medium Dense

Dense

Very Dense

Consistency Cohesion

TSF

Benzene

Toluene

Ethylbenzene

Total Xylenes

Total BTEX

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons

Not Detected

Not Analyzed

Not Recorded/No Recovery

Organic Vapor Analyzer

Parts Per Million

Very Soft

Soft

Firm

Stiff

Very Stiff

Hard

0.125

0.25

0.5

1.0

0.125

0.25

0.5

1.0

2.0

2.0

None

Low

Moderate

Plastic

Highly Plastic

ABBREVIATIONS

Qam, Qas, Qal

Qat

Qbc

Qt

Qao

Qle

Q-Tu

Ewi

Emi

Mc

EI

Kknm

Kpg

Kau

Kef

Kbu

Kdr

Kft

Kgt

Kep

Kek

Kes

Kew

Kgr

Kgru

Kgrl

Kh

Quaternary Alluvium

Low Terrace Deposits

Beaumont Formation

Fluviatile Terrace Deposits

Seymour Formation

Leona Formation

Uvalde Gravel

Wilcox Formation

Midway Group

Catahoula Formation

Laredo Formation

Navarro Group and Marlbrook Marl

Pecan Gap Chalk

Austin Chalk

Eagle Ford Shale

Buda Limestone

Del Rio Clay

Fort Terrett Member

Georgetown Formation

Person Formation

Kainer Formation

Escondido Formation

Walnut Formation

Glen Rose Formation

Upper Glen Rose Formation

Lower Glen Rose Formation

Hensell Sand

B

T

E

X

BTEX

TPH

ND

NA

NR

OVA

ppm

Terms used in this report to describe soils with regard to their consistency or conditions are in general accordance with the discussion presented in Article 45 of SOILS MECHANICS IN ENGINEERING PRACTICE, Terzaghi and Peck, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1967, using the most reliable information available from the field and laboratory investigations. Terms used for describing soils according to their texture or grain size distribution are in accordance with the UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM, as described in American Society for Testing and Materials D2487-06 and D2488-00, Volume 04.08, Soil and Rock; Dimension Stone;

Geosynthetics; 2005.

The depths shown on the boring logs are not exact, and have been estimated to the nearest half-foot. Depth measurements may be presented in a manner that implies greater precision in depth measurement, i.e 6.71 meters. The reader should understand and interpret this information only within the stated half-foot tolerance on depth measurements.

FIGURE 6bREVISED 04/2012

KEY TO TERMS AND SYMBOLS (CONT'D)

TERMINOLOGY

SOIL STRUCTURE

SAMPLING METHODS

Having planes of weakness that appear slick and glossy.

Containing shrinkage or relief cracks, often filled with fine sand or silt; usually more or less vertical.

Inclusion of material of different texture that is smaller than the diameter of the sample.

Inclusion less than 1/8 inch thick extending through the sample.

Inclusion 1/8 inch to 3 inches thick extending through the sample.

Inclusion greater than 3 inches thick extending through the sample.

Soil sample composed of alternating partings or seams of different soil type.

Soil sample composed of alternating layers of different soil type.

Soil sample composed of pockets of different soil type and layered or laminated structure is not evident.

Having appreciable quantities of carbonate.

Having more than 50% carbonate content.

Slickensided Fissured Pocket Parting Seam Layer Laminated Interlayered Intermixed Calcareous Carbonate

RELATIVELY UNDISTURBED SAMPLING

NOTE: To avoid damage to sampling tools, driving is limited to 50 blows during or after seating interval.

STANDARD PENETRATION TEST (SPT)

Cohesive soil samples are to be collected using three-inch thin-walled tubes in general accordance with the Standard Practice for Thin-Walled Tube Sampling of Soils (ASTM D1587) and granular soil samples are to be collected using two-inch split-barrel samplers in general accordance with the Standard Method for Penetration Test and Split-Barrel Sampling of Soils (ASTM D1586). Cohesive soil samples may be extruded on-site when appropriate handling and storage techniques maintain sample integrity and moisture content.

Description

25 blows drove sampler 12 inches, after initial 6 inches of seating.

50 blows drove sampler 7 inches, after initial 6 inches of seating.

50 blows drove sampler 3 inches during initial 6-inch seating interval.

Blows Per Foot

50/7" Ref/3"

FIGURE 6c

A 2-in.-OD, 1-3/8-in.-ID split spoon sampler is driven 1.5 ft into undisturbed soil with a 140-pound hammer free falling 30 in.

After the sampler is seated 6 in. into undisturbed soil, the number of blows required to drive the sampler the last 12 in. is the Standard Penetration Resistance or "N" value, which is recorded as blows per foot as described below.

REVISED 04/2012

SPLIT-BARREL SAMPLER DRIVING RECORD

P-1 1.2 to 2.7 27 16 25 22 3 ML

3.5 to 5.0 28 14 52

P-2 1.2 to 2.7 12 16 29 22 7 CL-ML

3.5 to 5.0 12 16

P-3 1.3 to 2.8 6 17 42

3.5 to 4.6 50/7" 17 CNBD CNBD NP ML

P-4 1.2 to 2.7 17 18 38

3.5 to 5.0 14 32 46 28 18 ML

Plasticity Index

Liquid Limit

PP = Pocket Penetrometer TV = Torvane UC = Unconfined Compression FV = Field Vane

Plastic Limit

Water Content

Dry Unit Weight (pcf)

PROJECT NAME:

FILE NAME: AMA23-001-00.GPJ

USCS % -200

Sieve

Shear Strength

(tsf)

Strength Test

Boring No.

2/9/2023

UU = Unconsolidated Undrained Triaxial

Sample Depth

(ft)

CU = Consolidated Undrained Triaxial

Proposed Roadway Improvements World Trade Bridge Port of Entry Laredo, Webb County, Texas

CNBD = Cound Not Be Determined NP = Non-Plastic

RESULTS OF SOIL SAMPLE ANALYSES

Blows per ft

FIGURE 7

5 10 15 20 25 30 35

MOISTURE-DENSITY RELATIONSHIP

D

RY

D

EN

SI

TY

, p cf

CURVES OF 100%

SATURATION FOR

SPECIFIC GRAVITY

EQUAL TO:

WATER CONTENT, %

TEST RESULTS

2.80 2.70 2.60

Project Number:

Boring Number:

Sample Depth:

Maximum Dry Density:

Optimum Moisture:

Method Used:

Prepared:

Ram Used:

Date:

AMA23-001-00

Near P-3 2 ft

113.6 pcf 13.3% 698A Moist Mechanical 2-13-23

Soil Type:

16.6 0.2

CBR:

% Swell:

Near Boring P-3 (2 ft) Silty Sand (SM), dark brown

CBR (California Bearing Ratio) of Laboratory-Compacted Soils (ASTM D 1889):

Remolded at 98.1% of the maximum dry density determined above.

Borrow Source Description:

Classification (Visual):

TBPE Firm Registration No. F-3257

Proposed Roadway Improvements World Trade Bridge Port of Entry

Laredo, Webb County, Texas

800 E. Hackberry McAllen, Texas 78501

(956) 682-5332

(956) 682-5487 fax www.rkci.com

R -K

C O

M P

A C

T

IO

N

C B

R A

M A

-0

-0

0.

G

P J

R K

C I.G

D T

/3

/2

Figure 8

RKCI Project No. AMA23-001-00 Figure No. 9

Figure No. 10

Figure No. 11

Figure No. 12

F I

L E

D A

T E

DN: CK: DW: CK:FILE:

JOB

COUNTY

SECT

DIST

HIGHWAY

SHEET NO.

CONT

TxDOT

CONTINUOUSLY REINFORCED

CRCP(1)-20

Standard Division Design crcp120.dgn

REVISIONS

10/10/2011 ADD GN #12

04/09/2013 REMOVE 6" AND 6.5"

ADD CTE REQUIREMENTS

CONCRETE PAVEMENT

T - 7 to 13 INCHES

ONE LAYER STEEL BAR PLACEMENT

SHEET 1 OF 2

REGULAR

AND BAR SIZE

SLAB THICKNESS

(IN.)

T

SIZE

BAR

SPACING

2 x c

(IN.)

SPACING

c

(IN.)

LENGTH

L

(IN.)

#6 8.5 3 TO 4

#6 3 TO 4

#5 6.0 3 TO 4

#5 3 TO 4

TABLE NO.1 LONGITUDINAL STEEL

STEEL BARS

OR JOINT

AT EDGE

SPACING

FIRST

7.0

7.5

8.0

8.5

#6 3 TO 4

#6 3 TO 4 16

9.0

9.5

6.5

9.0

8.0

7.5

#6 3 TO 4

#6 6.25 3 TO 4

#6 3 TO 4

#6 3 TO 4

#6 3 TO 4 14 50

10.0

10.5

11.0

11.5

12.0

7.0

6.75

6.5

6.0

12.5

#6 3 TO 4

#6 3 TO 4

12.5

13.0

5.75

5.5

13.5

11.5

Z Y Y

Z

TRAVEL LANE

OR SHOULDER TRAVEL LANE TRAVEL LANE

TRAVEL LANE

OR SHOULDER

PAVEMENT OR

SHOULDER EDGE

PAVEMENT OR

TRANSVERSE

LONGITUDINAL

cc c c

SHOULDER EDGE

X

X

STEEL

STEEL

TIE BARS

SINGLE PIECE

TIE BARS

(SECTION X-X)

CONSTRUCTION JOINT

BARS AT TRANSVERSE

ADDITIONAL STEEL

8.0 - 13.0

STEEL

TRANSVERSE

TABLE NO.2 TRANSVERSE STEEL AND TIE BARS

(SECTION Y-Y)

CONSTRUCTION JOINT

AT LONGITUDINAL

TIE BARS

(SECTION Z-Z)

CONTRACTION JOINT

AT LONGITUDINAL

TIE BARS

#5

#5

SIZE

BAR

(IN.)

SPACING

(IN.)

THICKNESS

SLAB

SIZE

BAR

SIZE

BAR

(IN.)

SPACING

(IN.)

SPACING

7.0 - 7.5 c

(IN.)

SPACING

TRANSVERSE BARS

L

T

T

STEEL BARS

ADDITIONAL

L=50"

LONGITUDINAL BARS

NO SPLICES ALLOWED WITHIN 10 FT OF THE JOINT.

MATERIAL

JOINT SEALING

cc

T

T c c

LONGITUDINAL BARS TRANSVERSE BARS

TRANSVERSE BARS

IN SAME PLANE AS

TIE BARS MAY BE

21" FOR #5 BAR

25" FOR #6 BAR

50" FOR #6 BAR, 42" FOR #5 BAR

OR MULTIPLE-PIECE

TIE BARS,SINGLE

MATERIAL

JOINT SEALING

SAW CUT

T

T cc c c

TRANSVERSE BARS

50" FOR #6 BAR, 42" FOR #5 BAR

21" FOR #5 BAR

25" FOR #6 BAR

LONGITUDINAL BARS FOR 10.0 IN. TO 13.0 IN. SLABS.

7.0 IN. TO 9.5 IN. SLABS. MAY BE PLACED ABOVE

SHOULD BE IN SAME PLANE AS TRANSVERSE BARS FOR

SINGLE PIECE TIE BARS

MATERIAL

JOINT SEALING

c2

2/ 2/c c

LONGITUDINAL

CONTRACTION JOINT

LONGITUDINAL

CONSTRUCTION JOINT

LONGITUDINAL CONTRACTION JOINT

SECTION Z - Z

#5

#6

#5

#6

T

BARS

LONGITUDINAL

LONGITUDINAL

c/2 c/2

TYPICAL PAVEMENT LAYOUT

PLAN VIEW (NOT TO SCALE)

LONGITUDINAL

STEEL BARS

ADDITIONAL

TRANSVERSE

CONSTRUCTION

JOINT

" 2

MIN.CLEAR 2"

LONGITUDINAL CONSTRUCTION JOINT

SECTION Y - Y

TRANSVERSE CONSTRUCTION JOINT

SECTION X - X

CONTRACTION JOINT

CONSTRUCTION JOINT

T x

D O

T a s s u m e s n o r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r t h e c o n v e r s i o n o f t h i s s t a n d a r d t o o t h e r f o r m a t s o r f o r i n c o r r e c t r e s u l t s o r d a m a g e s r e s u l t i n g f r o m i t s u s e

T h e u s e o f t h i s s t a n d a r d i s g o v e r n e d b y t h e

T e x a s

E n g i n e e r i g

P r a c t i c e

A t

N o w r r a n t y o f a n y k i n d i m d e b y

T x

D O

T f o r a n y p u r p o h a t s o e v e

D

S C

L A I

M E

R

-6

GENERAL NOTES

C TxDOT:

05/05/2017 CoTE AS RATED 4.3 aa a a a a

STANDARD SHEET "CONCRETE PAVING DETAILS, JOINT SEALS."

11. THE DETAIL FOR THE JOINT SEALANT AND RESERVOIR IS SHOWN ON

AND 2-FT. LENGTH OF THE PAVEMENT.

OF THE LONGITUDINAL STEEL IS SPLICED IN ANY GIVEN 12-FT. WIDTH

OF 25 IN. STAGGER THE LAP LOCATIONS SO THAT NO MORE THAN 1/3

10. LONGITUDINAL REINFORCING STEEL SPLICES SHALL BE A MINIMUM

TO ALL FORMED JOINTS.

IMMERSION VIBRATORS TO CONSOLIDATE THE CONCRETE ADJACENT

CONSTRUCTION JOINTS (SECTION X-X). USE HAND-OPERATED

9. OMIT TIE BARS LOCATED WITHIN 18-IN. OF THE TRANSVERSE

REQUIREMENTS IN ITEM 361.

BARS WITH TYPE III, CLASS C EPOXY. MEET THE PULL-OUT TEST

COMPENSATION BY DRILLING MIN.10 IN. DEEP AND GROUTING TIE

8. REPLACE MISSING OR DAMAGED TIE BARS WITHOUT ADDITIONAL

CONCRETE COVER FROM THE BACK OF GUTTER TO THE END OF TIE BAR.

BAR LENGTH OR POSITION MAY BE ADJUSTED. PROVIDE 3 IN. OF

7. WHEN TYING CONCRETE GUTTER AT A LONGITUDINAL JOINT, THE TIE

(SECTION Z-Z) SHALL BE ONE THIRD OF THE SLAB THICKNESS (T/3).

6. THE SAW CUT DEPTH FOR THE LONGITUDINAL CONTRACTION JOINT

IS SHOWN ELSEWHERE ON THE PLANS.

LOCATED WITHIN 6 IN. OF THE LANE LINE UNLESS THE JOINT LOCATION

JOINT (SECTION Z-Z OR SECTION Y-Y). THESE JOINTS SHALL BE

5. PAVEMENT WIDTHS OF MORE THAN 15 FT. SHALL HAVE A LONGITUDINAL

CONFORM TO TABLE NO.1

(CONCRETE PLACEMENT WIDTH / NUMBER OF LONGITUDINAL BARS) SHALL

AND +/- 0.5 IN. VERTICALLY. CALCULATED AVERAGE BAR SPACING

4. STEEL BAR PLACEMENT TOLERANCE SHALL BE +/- 1 IN. HORIZONTALLY

TO TABLE NO.1 AND TABLE NO.2.

(GRADE 60) OR ABOVE. STEEL BAR SIZES AND SPACINGS SHALL CONFORM

STEEL BARS CONFORMING TO ASTM A 615 (GRADE 60) OR ASTM A 996

3. ALL THE REINFORCING STEEL AND TIE BARS SHALL BE DEFORMED

LISTED IN THE CONCRETE RATED…