W911SA-19-B-2008_Solicitation_Amendment_0002.docx
DOCX document 29 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Construct Pre-Cast Concrete Arch River Crossing, Fort McCoy, WI Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- W911SA19B2008
About this file
Solicitation Amendment 0002
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| W911SA-19-B-2008_Bid_Opening.pdf | ||
| W911SA-19-B-2008_Site_Visit_Sign_in_Sheet.pdf | ||
| W911SA-19-B-2008_Geotechnical_Investigation_Report.pdf | ||
| W911SA-19-B-2008_Solicitation_Amendment_0001.docx | DOCX document |
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
W911SA19B2008
SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE
SUMMARY OF CHANGES
SECTION 00010 - SOLICITATION CONTRACT FORM
The following have been added by full text:
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
Loading for the structure:
Confirming the MLC 80 ton loading is required… ANSWER: To clarify, MLC 80 one-way for tracked and wheeled vehicles.
Footings:
1) Is there a full geotech report that can be provided?
ANSWER: Sent out after Site Visit
2) With the MLC 80 ton loading and the bearing capacity provided in the plan set a full slab invert will be required.
ANSWER: To clarify, please look at sheet S0.3 requiring a minimum 4 foot deep sub cut under the footings with a replacement of structural fill.
3) If we are able to review a geotech report we should be able to design a base reinforcement under the foundations which will enable conventional spread foundations to be used.
ANSWER: sent out after Site Visit
Just verifying – in the plans it states that the headwalls shall be designed for earth pressure only. Is this correct?
ANSWER: Yes. The headwalls shall be designed for earth pressure only.
Design forces for guardrail posts attached to headwalls.
ANSWER: The design follows a Type 2 WisDOT.
We are working on a foundation design for the contractors to utilize for bidding purposes on the Range 29 Bridge. We are not able to get a strip foundation to work with the given 2,500 psf factored soil bearing resistance. A full bottom slab probably doesn’t work either with this bearing. A geogrid and stone raft to improve bearing under the foundation is another option but that looks sizeable and challenging due to the soils and ground water but we are currently evaluating this option and will know more shortly. It is looking like the most feasible option to get a foundation to work would be to utilize a pile supported foundation. Is the following information available to be used for a deep foundation design?
ANSWER: Please follow the original representation on the drawings for providing pre-cast concrete footings.
Deep Foundation Design Info:
- Pile recommendation (i.e. HP 14 x 73, 12” concrete pile, etc.)
- Estimated pile tip elevation or length of pile
- The pile’s axial capacity
- The pile’s lateral capacity OR the soils information for us to run LPile (see attached for the soil model info.)
(End of Summary of Changes) image1.wmf
File details come from the government source that posted it.