report of geotechnical consulting servicesrp.dot.state.al.us/i59_20/pdf/phase_iii/bridge foundation...

Report of Geotechnical Consulting Services

Bridge Foundation Report

Birmingham Central Business District Bridge #24

I-59/20 Superstructure Replacement From

South of 15th Street North to North of CSX

Railroad

Birmingham, Jefferson County, Alabama ALDOT PE Project No.: IM-I059 (367) CN Project No.: ACIM-I059 (383)

Thompson Engineering Project No.: 15-1101-0091

Submitted By:

Thompson Engineering October 8, 2015

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES ................................................................................................. 1 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................ 1 3.0 HISTORICAL INFORMATION ....................................................................................... 2 4.0 GEOLOGIC SETTING ................................................................................................... 2 5.0 OBSERVED SITE CONDITIONS .................................................................................. 2 6.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION PROGRAM ................................................................ 2

6.1 Standard Penetration Test Borings ............................................................................ 3 6.2 Rock Core Sampling ................................................................................................. 3

7.0 LABORATORY TESTING ............................................................................................. 3 8.0 SUBSURFACE FINDINGS ............................................................................................ 3

8.1 Subsurface Conditions .............................................................................................. 4 8.2 Groundwater Conditions ............................................................................................ 4 8.3 Electrochemical Testing ............................................................................................ 5

9.0 BRIDGE FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................................... 5 9.1 General ..................................................................................................................... 5 9.2 Pile Foundations........................................................................................................ 5 9.3 Soil Design Parameters ............................................................................................. 6 9.4 Pile Installation .......................................................................................................... 6 9.5 Pile Settlement .......................................................................................................... 6 9.6 Storm Runoff and Surface Water Control .................................................................. 6 9.7 Sinkholes (Limesinks) ............................................................................................... 6

10.0 BRIDGE APPROACHES ............................................................................................. 7 10.1 Slope Stability Analyses ............................................................................................ 7 10.2 Recommendations .................................................................................................... 7 10.3 Settlement ................................................................................................................. 8

11.0 PLAN NOTES ............................................................................................................. 8 11.1 Construction Notes .................................................................................................... 8 11.2 General Notes ........................................................................................................... 8

12.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS ................................................................................................ 8 PLATE Plate 1 – Bridge #24 location and immediate surrounding area ............................................... 1 TABLE Table 1 – Groundwater Measurements .................................................................................... 4 Table 2 – Summary of Electrochemical Test Results ............................................................... 5 APPENDICES Figure 1 – Topographic Map Figure 2 – County Highway Figure 3 – Geology Map Figure 4 – Sinkhole Map Appendix A – Pile Tip Elevations and Soil Design Parameters (LPILE) Appendix B – Plan and Profile Drawings Appendix C – Test Boring Records Appendix D – Laboratory Test Results ALDOT Lab Summary ALDOT BMT-5’s Total Sulfates/Total Chlorides/pH/Resistivity

Report of Geotechnical Consulting Services Birmingham Central Business District (Bridge #24), Jefferson County, AL October 8, 2015 TE Project No.: 15-1101-0091 Page 1 of 9

1.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES

The scope of work includes geotechnical engineering evaluations and development of bridge foundation design and construction recommendations, in satisfaction of the contracted scope of work between the Alabama Department of Transportation (ALDOT) and Thompson Engineering (TE). 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The overall project site is located at the bridge on I-59/20 over 28th Street in Birmingham, Jefferson County, Alabama. The project includes widening the existing bridge on the southern side identified as Bridge #24. This report covers the geotechnical recommendations for Bridge #24.

We understand that plans are to construct pile supported footing foundations to support the new bridge at the two (2) bent locations and piles for the abutment structures. The bridge is approximately 173 feet in length. Plate 1 below depicts the proposed bridge and immediate surrounding areas. Figures 1 and 2 are appended for reference purposes.

Plate 1 – Bridge 24 General Location

Structural loading information was not available at the time of this report; however we have assumed foundations will be constructed with steel H-piles similar to the existing foundations.

Bridge #24


3.0 HISTORICAL INFORMATION

Historical information was obtained through the ALDOT Materials and Test Bureau. The existing bridge was constructed in 1971. The bridge card indicated that the existing bridge abutments are supported on reinforced concrete and steel piles with the internal bents supported on pile footings. The type and size of the steel piles were not provided on the bridge card. 4.0 GEOLOGIC SETTING The project site is located in Birmingham, Jefferson County, Alabama which is within the Warrior Basin Physiographic District of the Cumberland Plateau Physiographic Section. The district has an altitude range from 350 feet near the Black Warrior River to over 700 feet along several ridges in the basin. Drainage within the basin is primarily west to Locust Fork of the Black Warrior River and to the main channel of Black Warrior River. According to the Geologic Map of Alabama, the project site is overlying the Ketona Dolomite and Copper Ridge Dolomite formations of Cambrian age. The Ketona Dolomite is light-to-medium gray thick-bedded coarsely crystalline dolomite. The Copper Ridge Dolomite is light-gray finely to coarsely crystalline, thick-bedded siliceous dolomite. A review of the sinkhole map for Jefferson County, Alabama indicates the project site falls within the area of carbonate rock where sinkholes have been known to occur. Additionally, based on the sinkhole map, the project area is located near known active subsidence or sinkhole activity. Figures 3 and 4 provide excerpts of the Geological Map of Alabama and sinkhole map of Jefferson County representing the project area. 5.0 OBSERVED SITE CONDITIONS

The project site was visited by TE geotechnical engineering personnel as part of the field data collection activities. 28th St N is a two-lane, two-way asphalt surfaced roadway. Overhead and underground power lines run north and south, parallel to 28th St N and beneath the existing bridge. Fencing also extends parallel to 28th St N on the north and south of the bridge. The area immediately located on the south side of I-20/59 eastbound was observed to be grassed and over grown, steeply sloping away from the edge of the highway. The bridge slopes beneath the existing bridge were armored with on-grade concrete panels. Guardrails extended the full project length along shoulder of interstate. 6.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION PROGRAM

Geotechnical drilling crews from ALDOT and TTL, Inc. (a subcontractor to Thompson Engineering) performed soil test borings and sampling operations between May 27 and August 25, 2015. Boring locations were selected by TE, and located in the field by ALDOT. Offsets for the borings were made due to drill rig access and terrain. Offset borings were resurveyed by ALDOT. Boring locations are shown on the appended Plan and Profile drawings located in Appendix B. CME 75 and CME 850 geotechnical drilling rigs, equipped with automatic standard penetration test (SPT) hammers, were utilized to advance the borings, using hollow stem auger drilling and rock coring techniques. All boreholes were backfilled to grade upon field work completion.


The overall intent of the subsurface exploration program was to establish a site-specific subsurface conditions database. Brief descriptions of the testing protocols are presented below. 6.1 Standard Penetration Test Borings

SPT borings were performed in general accordance with AASHTO T-206 guidelines. Recovered samples were initially examined and visually classified in the field by TE personnel. Samples were returned to TE’s geotechnical laboratory for review by a geotechnical engineer and for additional laboratory testing. The results of the classification and stratification are shown on the appended Test Boring Records. 6.2 Rock Core Sampling Rock cores were recovered utilizing the NQ wireline system with a diamond cutting head. Rock coring was initiated when the dolomite unit was encountered prior to boring termination. Samples were collected per AASHTO T-225 and returned to TE’s geotechnical laboratory. 7.0 LABORATORY TESTING

Samples selected for laboratory testing included soils that were deemed to be within the depths of influence beneath the proposed structures. Laboratory tests included moisture contents, Atterberg Limits, sieve, and hydrometer analyses. In addition, soil corrosion tests were performed on select soil samples. Test results are included in the Appendix D of this report. 8.0 SUBSURFACE FINDINGS While establishment of generalized subsurface conditions is useful for the geotechnical engineering evaluation process, such generalizations should be reviewed with caution as they promote extrapolation of recovered data between soil test boring locations. The stratifications shown on the Test Boring Records represent the conditions only at the actual boring locations. The actual transition between soil types may be more gradual than those depicted. Boring Plan and Profile sheets showing the boring locations and subsurface profile information are included in Appendix B. Test Boring Records are included in Appendix C.


8.1 Subsurface Conditions The following soil profile was encountered at the boring locations:

From existing ground surface to depths ranging between 2 and 20 feet, various soils appearing to be fill materials from prior construction were noted in the abutments. These soils are predominately firm to stiff fat clays (CH). A very loose, clayey sand (SC) was observed at the surface of TH-BR24-1. TH-BR24-1 also encountered a very dense, clayey gravel (GC) at a depth of approximately 16 feet.

Below and extending to auger refusal, generally stiff to firm, fat clay (CH), was encountered above the rock. Borings TH-BR24-2 and 3 encountered a very stiff to hard, fat clay (CH) from the surface to approximately 17 feet below the existing ground surface. Most of the samples of this material that were tested indicated high to very high plasticity indices. Please reference the boring logs.

Beneath and extending to boring termination depths ranging between 93 and 144 feet

below the existing ground surface, Very Poor to Good Dolomite rock was encountered. Sporadic voids were also encountered in this zone, particularly near Bents 2, 3 and Abutment 4. Please reference the boring logs.

8.2 Groundwater Conditions Due to relatively impermeable characteristics of the soils within the upper horizon on this project site, perched groundwater conditions may develop during the project and temporary dewatering may be required, particularly during the construction of below grade structures. At the time of the field activities, groundwater was encountered in Borings 2, 3 and 4 during drilling at approximate depths provided in Table 1 below. Additional, delayed groundwater measurements were obtained, whenever possible.

Table 1: Groundwater Measurements

Boring No.

Completion of Borehole

Groundwater Depth, ft.

Delayed Groundwater

Depth, ft. Driller

TH-BR24-01 N.E. Not Obtained ALDOT

TH-BR24-02 29(1)

21.5 TTL

TH-BR24-03 54(1)

Not Obtained TTL

TH-BR24-04 73 27.8 ALDOT

Note: (1) Groundwater was noted from saturated samples obtained from the boring.

Groundwater measurements at the time of borehole completion or delayed measurements may be influenced from the drilling method used to advance the borehole. Fluctuations of the groundwater level on this project may be expected to occur seasonally as a result of rainfall, surface runoff, and immediate area construction activities.


8.3 Electrochemical Testing

Electrochemical series soil testing was performed on select samples for environment classification and involves total chlorides, total sulfate, resistivity and pH. ALDOT provided the following soil limit conditions for corrosive environments for steel piles based upon the corrosive environment classification as presented below. Steel Piles:

Resistivity less than 3,000 ohm-cm

pH less than 5 or greater than 10

Chlorides greater than 50 ppm

Sulfates greater than 100 ppm

Summary of the electrochemical test results are summarized in Table 2 below and appended in Appendix D of this report.

Table 2: Summary of Electrochemical Test Results

Boring No. Sample

No. pH

Chlorides (ppm)

Sulfates (ppm)

Resistivity (ohms-cm)

Classification

TH-BR24-04 S-3 8 <25 46 290,000 Non-Aggressive

TH-BR24-04 S-8 5 <28 <28 3,100,000 Non-Aggressive

TH-BR24-04 S-13 6 <28 <28 3,400,000 Non-Aggressive

The test results indicate the site is a non-aggressive environment within the depths tested. 9.0 BRIDGE FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS

9.1 General

We understand that Steel H-Piles are the preferred foundation types for the abutment and bents, respectively. Drilled shafts were not chosen due to increased cost, and because steel H-piles are consistent with the foundations of the existing surrounding structures. Structural loading information was not available at the time of this report. 9.2 Pile Foundations The recommended pile tip elevations for the H-piles have been selected based upon ALDOT Bridge Bureau guidelines, ALDOT Procedure 398, FHWA NHI-05-042 Design and Construction of Driven Pile Foundations, NAVFAC DM-7, and TE experience in these formations. Recommended pile tip elevations have a minimum Factor of Safety of 2.0. We recommend that the steel H-piles be driven until refusal on top of the rock formation at approximate elevations as presented in Table A-1, and Appendix A. HP 10x42 piles are not recommended for designs where “drive to refusal” criteria is specified for pile installation. Please reference Table A-1 and Appendix A for Allowable Compressive Capacities.


We recommend Pay Items 505G-003 (Type A, 12”) and 505G-004 (Type A, 14”) be welded to the H-piles prior to installation. We do not recommend a compression pile load test for H-pile driven to refusal on top of the rock formation. 9.3 Soil Design Parameters Lateral analysis will be performed by the bridge designers for the piles. Soil design parameters for the abutment and bent locations are provided in Table A-2 in Appendix A. Lateral pile efficiencies may need to be accounted for and will be dependent on the actual pile spacing. We recommend the piles be installed with a minimum pile center-to-center spacing to pile diameter ratio (S/D) of 3. Maintaining this recommended S/D ratio should result in negligible single pile capacity reduction due to pile group effect action. 9.4 Pile Installation Pile installation shall be performed by conventional impact hammer driving to refusal at the top of the rock formation. A pile drivability analysis should be performed based on equipment information provided by the successful piling contractor in order to establish a recommended pile penetration set (minimum blows per foot) criteria for the project, and to ensure that the piles are not damaged from driving operations. Penetration set (blow count) data shall be recorded by a qualified soils inspector during the installation procedures to provide a pile-by-pile correlation of dynamically formulated (empirical) capacities. If a pile gains capacity significantly higher than the average refusal depth of the other piles in the group, the pile should have a restrike with a minimum of 10 strokes of the hammer operating at its rated capacity subsequent to driving the adjacent piles. A dynamic load test shall also be included for the restrike. 9.5 Pile Settlement

Based upon the anticipated structural loadings, soil consistency and pile tip bearing elevations, we estimate total pile settlements of less than 1/4 inch. 9.6 Storm Runoff and Surface Water Control

We recommend positive drainage measures be established and maintained on the project site during construction. Temporary site dewatering measures may be required during excavations for the pile cap or seasonal rain; however this should be determined by the contractor based on field conditions during construction. 9.7 Sinkholes (Limesinks) The project is located in an area of known sinkhole activity and Karst topography. Karst topography is characterized by soluble limestone. Over geologic time the limestone dissolves forming cavities. Soil located above the soluble limestone ravels into these cavities forming depressions or holes at the surface. Sinkholes will not always be evident during the field exploration and may be encountered during construction activities. If sinkholes are encountered


during construction, then a supplemental agreement addressing the sinkhole remediation will be provided at that time. Voids within the rock formation were encountered at borings TH-BR24-2, 3 and 4. Therefore, there is greater potential for Limesinks from Bent 2, 3 and Abutment 4. 10.0 BRIDGE APPROACHES Typical bridge foundation reports include stability and recommendations for the 50 feet of the approaches on either end of the bridge. 10.1 Slope Stability Analyses We understand that embankment soils on this project will consist of imported A-4 or better material, in accordance with the ALDOT Standard Specifications for Highway Construction Section 210. Since design drawings have not been provided with information concerning the spill-through slopes, we have assumed the abutments will be constructed with a 3:1 (H:V) spill-through slope, with concrete slope paving to match the bridge. Based on the type of select fill, the planned side slopes and the recommendations provided below, the factor of safety for slope stability is greater than 1.5. 10.2 Recommendations We recommend embankment slopes on this project be constructed with 3:1 (H:V) or flatter slopes to help control surface erosion and facilitate maintenance. We also recommend that prior to embankment placement, surface vegetation and topsoil should be removed along with any soft or deleterious materials. Placement of embankment material on the existing slope should be constructed from the bottom to the top and using a benched approach with a minimum bench width of six (6) feet into the existing slope. We recommend the slope should be constructed extending a minimum of five (5) feet beyond the proposed slope limits for uniform compaction. Subsequent to compaction, the overbuilt slope can be cut to the proposed slope design limits. Embankment construction should be constructed in accordance with the Alabama Department of Transportation Standard Specifications for Highway Construction, Latest Edition and the project plans. Further, the embankment soils used for the construction of the slopes should be classified as A-4 or better material. We recommend sodding and planting of exposed slopes (permanent and temporary slopes) to mitigate the potential for shallow slope sloughing.


10.3 Settlement Considering the anticipated surface loadings on this project, the anticipated embankment at the abutments, firm to very stiff clay sub-soils, and the recommended geotechnical site preparation activities, we estimate the total settlement of the embankment slope at the abutments to be on the order of one (1) inch or less. A significant portion of the settlement should be anticipated to occur coincidental with or shortly after dead load (embankment placement and compaction) application during construction. We recommend construction of the embankments occur during the early phases of the construction process to prevent any potential delays in the construction schedule. 11.0 PLAN NOTES Plan notes should be developed based on the listed notes below to ensure the geotechnical recommendations and requirements are executed during construction. In contrast, these notes may not cover all of the recommendations and requirements that can be achieved through engineering judgement and review of this report in its entirety. 11.1 Construction Notes When H-piles are driven on the project site, the following notes should be used

1. Type A – pile point protects should be used to prevent any incidental damage to piles during driving operations

Pay item 505G-003 (Type A, 12”) per pile

Pay item 505G-004 (Type A, 14”) per pile 2. No test piles are recommended 3. All piles shall be driven to refusal.

Drive to refusal Criteria is defined as 5 blows per ¼ inch as specified in Section 505 of the ALDOT Standard Specifications.

4. If a pile gains capacity significantly higher than the average refusal depth of the other piles in the group, the pile should have a restrike with a minimum of 10 strokes of the hammer operating at its rated capacity subsequent to driving the adjacent piles. A dynamic pile load test shall be included during the restrike.

11.2 General Notes A plan note is recommended for inclusion in the final plan assembly which advises the potential contractors of the existence of a Foundation Report and core borings pertaining to this project. Access to the report and core borings can be arranged by contacting the Geotechnical Division of the Alabama Department of Transportation. 12.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS This Geotechnical Report has been prepared for the exclusive use of the Alabama Department of Transportation for the specific project discussed herein. This Geotechnical Report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted local geotechnical engineering practices; no other warranty is expressed or implied.


Our description of the project’s design parameters represents our understanding of the significant aspects relevant to soil and foundation characteristics. In the event that any changes in the design or location or elevation of any of the project elements as outlined in this report are planned, or if any structures are included or added that are not discussed in this report, the conclusions and recommendations contained herein shall not be considered valid unless the changes are reviewed and the conclusions modified or approved by Thompson Engineering.

FIGURES

PROJECT NO.: DATE:

³1:24,000

0 2,000 4,000Feet

15-1101-0091 SEPTEMBER 2015

FIGURE 1 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP

BRIDGE #24 CBD I-20/59SUPERSTRUCTURE REPLACEMENT

ALDOT PN: IM-1059(367)BIRMINGHAM, JEFFERSON COUNTY,

ALABAMA

Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed - Birmingham North Quadrangle 1 inch = 2,000 feet

BRIDGE #24IM-1059 (367)

P:\201

5\1101

\15-11

01-009

1 IM-I05

9 ALD

OT CB

D Bridg

e 24 a

nd 25

Jeffers

on - S

. Stern

berg\D

RAWI

NGS\M

XD\FIG

1_BRID

GE 24

.mxd

0 0.5 1Miles

PROJECT NO.: DATE:

³1:24,000

0 2,000 4,000Feet

15-1101-0091 SEPTEMBER 2015

FIGURE 2 HIGHWAY MAP



ALABAMA

© OpenStreetMap (and) contributors, CC-BY-SA 1 inch = 2,000 feet

BRIDGE #24IM-1059 (367)

P:\201

5\1101

\15-11

01-009

1 IM-I05

9 ALD

OT CB

D Bridg

e 24 a

nd 25

Jeffers

on - S

. Stern

berg\D

RAWI

NGS\M

XD\FIG

2_BRID

GE 24

.mxd

0 0.5 1Miles

PROJECT NO.: DATE:

³1:24,000

0 2,000 4,000Feet

15-1101-0091 SEPTEMBER 2015

FIGURE 3 GEOLOGIC MAP



ALABAMA

1 inch = 2,000 feet

BRIDGE #24IM-1059 (367)

Ck

Ck

Cc

Ccr

§̈¦20§̈¦65

£¤31£¤78

£¤11

£¤31

£¤78

ST79

22nd St

24th St

27th Ave

40th

St

Coosa St

31st St

17th St

CR 77

8th Ave

Airport Hwy

3rd Ave

39th

St

Fin ley Blvd

12th Ave

Richard Ar rington Jr Blvd N

25th St

Vander b il t Rd

Cla irmont Ave S

14th Ave

CR 77

17th St

20th St

25t h St

20th St

P:\201

5\1101

\15-11

01-009

1 IM-I05

9 ALD

OT CB

D Bridg

e 24 a

nd 25

Jeffers

on - S

. Stern

berg\D

RAWI

NGS\M

XD\FIG

3_BRID

GE 24

.mxd

0 0.5 1Miles

LEGENDNHDFlowlineCc - Conasauga Formation

Ccr - Copper Ridge DolomiteCk - Ketona Dolomite

APPENDIX A

Table A-1: Pile Tip Elevations

Table A-2: Soil Design Parameters (LPILE)

TABLE A-1: Minimum and Recommended Pile Tip Elevations Bridge No. 24 I-20/59 Superstructure Replacement from South of 15th St. North to North of CSX Railroad - Jefferson County, Alabama

TE Project No.: 15-1101-0091

Bridge Structure (Boring)

Station on Centerline(1)

Pile Type

Allowable Compression

Capacity, Tons/Pile

Approximate Top of Pile

Elevation, (ft.)(2)

Approximate Design Tip Elevation,

(ft.)(3)(4)

Abutment 1 (TH-BR24-01)

179+64.81 12”x53 H-Pile 45 637 564


179+64.81 14”X73 H-Pile 60 637 564


179+64.81 14”X89 H-Pile 75 637 564


179+64.81 14”X102 H-Pile 90 637 564

( Abutment 1 (TH-BR24-01)

179+64.81 14”X117 H-Pile 100 637 564

Bent 2 (TH-BR24-02)

180+15.58 12”x53 H-Pile 45 614 555

Bent 2 (TH-BR24-02)

180+15.58 14”X73 H-Pile 60 614 555

Bent 2 (TH-BR24-02)

180+15.58 14”X89 H-Pile 75 614 555

Bent 2 (TH-BR24-02)

180+15.58 14”X102 H-Pile 90 614 555

Bent 2 (TH-BR24-02)

180+15.58 14”X117 H-Pile 100 614 555


TE Project No.: 15-1101-0091

Bridge Structure (Boring)

Station on Centerline(1)

Pile Type

Allowable Compression

Capacity, Tons/Pile

Approximate Top of Pile

Elevation, (ft.)(2)

Approximate Design Tip Elevation,

(ft.)(3)(4)

Bent 3 (TH-BR24-03)

180+86.66 12”x53 H-Pile 45 615 544(5)

Bent 3 (TH-BR24-03)

180+86.66 14”X73 H-Pile 60 615 544(5)

Bent 3 (TH-BR24-03)

180+86.66 14”X89 H-Pile 75 615 544(5)

Bent 3 (TH-BR24-03)

180+86.66 14”X102 H-Pile 90 615 544(5)

Bent 3 (TH-BR24-03)

180+86.66 14”X117 H-Pile 100 615 544(5)


181+37.41 12”x53 H-Pile 45 635 554(5)


181+37.41 14”X73 H-Pile 60 635 554(5)


181+37.41 14”X89 H-Pile 75 635 554(5)


181+37.41 14”X102 H-Pile 90 635 554(5)


181+37.41 14”X117 H-Pile 100 635 554(5)


TE Project No.: 15-1101-0091

Notes: (1) Stations were taken from TS&L Drawings provided by ALDOT.

(2) Estimated from TS&L Drawings provided by ALDOT. (3) Factor of Safety = 2.0 based on ALDOT Procedure.

(4) Note that tip elevations are approximate and may vary due to variations in top of rock elevations and voids in the rock core (5) Significant voids exist below this pile tip. Piles may be deeper at this location depending upon driving conditions.

General Note: Tip elevations may change based upon conditions encountered at the proposed pile location during construction. In addition, we recommend Pay Items 505G-003 (Type A, 12”) and 505G-004 (Type A, 14”) be welded to the H-pile prior to installation. Piles shall be driven to refusal. Drive to refusal criteria is defined as 5 blows per ¼ inch as specified in Section 505 of the ALDOT Standard Specifications for Highway Construction.

TABLE A-2: GENERALIZED SOIL PARAMETERS FOR LPILE DESIGN Bridge No. 24 I-20/59 Superstructure Replacement from South of 15th St. North to North of CSX Railroad - Jefferson County, Alabama

TE Project No.: 15-1101-0091

Begin Bridge Abutment 1 (Station 179+64.81)

Borings Stratum Description Stratum

Thickness

Approximate Existing Elevation

Soil Design Parameters

Top Bottom 𝛾 𝛾eff cu ϕ k ε50

TH-BR24-01

Generalized

Very loose, Clayey Sand (SC)

3 feet +638 +635 110 pcf 55 pcf -- 28° 25 pci --

Stiff Fat Clay (CH) with Sand

14 feet +635 +621 113 pcf 55 pcf 1500 psf -- -- 0.007

Dense Clayey Gravel (GC)

5 feet +621 +616 130 pcf 65 pcf -- 34° 180 pci --

Very stiff to stiff, Fat Clay (CH) with Sand

33 feet +616 +583 115 pcf 55 pcf 1500 psf -- -- 0.007

Firm Fat Clay (CH) 18 feet +583 +565 105 pcf 50 pcf 750 psf -- -- 0.010

Bent 2 (Station 180+15.58)


Thickness




TH-BR24-02

Generalized

Stiff Fat Clay (CH) 2 feet +618 +616 110 pcf 55 pcf 1000 psf -- -- 0.007

Very Stiff Fat Clay (CH)

15 feet +616 +601 115 pcf 55 pcf 3000 psf -- -- 0.005




TE Project No.: 15-1101-0091

Bent 3 (Station 180+86.66)


Thickness




TH-BR24-03

Generalized


19 feet +621 +602 115 pcf 55 pcf 3000 psf -- -- 0.005







Hard Fat Clay (CH) with Sand

5 feet +562 +557 120 pcf 60 pcf 4000 psf -- -- 0.005

Very Dense Poorly Graded Sand with

Gravel (SP)

2 feet +557 +555 130 pcf 65 pcf -- 34° 125 pci --


TE Project No.: 15-1101-0091 Abutment 4 (Station 181+37.41)


Thickness




TH-BR24-04

Generalized




10 feet +628 +618 115 pcf 55 pcf 3000 psf -- -- 0.005

Stiff Fat Clay (CH) to Fat Clay (CH) with

Gravel 40 feet +618 +578 113 pcf 55 pcf 1000 psf -- -- 0.007

Firm Fat Clay (CH) with Gravel

5 feet +578 +573 105 pcf 50 pcf 500 psf -- -- 0.010


APPENDIX B

Plan and Profile Drawings

STA. 594+03.63 CTL. LINE I-59

STA. 13+25.36 | 28TH STREET

(SHLDR.)

6’-0"

(VARIES)

GORE

(SHLDR.)

10’-0"

LA

NE

12’-

0"

LA

NE

12’-

0"

LA

NE

12’-

0"

LA

NE

12’-

0"

LA

NE

12’-

0"

LA

NE

12’-

0" N 29°58’0

9"

ELEGENDBoring Number

Boring Location

PLAN

SCALE: 1"=30’-0"

TH-BR24-1

EXISTING BRIDGE

N

L

OVERALL BRIDGE LENGTH = 172’-7"

180+00 181+00

50’-9" 71’-1" 50’-9"

POVC

A

A

593+00 594+00 595+00

6’-

0"

50’-

0"

19’-

9"

| I-59/20

STA. 593+17.34

BEGIN BRIDGE

N 52°55’37" E

(TYP.)

82°53’46"

| BENT 2

STA. 593+68.09

82°53’46"

| 28TH ST.

14’-

0"

N 52°54’23" E

STA. 181+37.41

109’-

1�

"

50’-

7�

"

20’-

0"

68’-

6"

STA. 594+89.92

END BRIDGE

OVER 28th STREET

B & PGL I-59/20 EB

94’-

3"

RO

AD

WA

Y

PGL I-59/20 EB

GIRDER

| EXISTING EXTERIOR

SAW CUT LINE AT

STA. 179+64.81

(TYP.)

82°52’32" 82°52’32"

19’-

10�

"

LANE

EDGE OF TRAVEL

19’-

10�

"1’-

4�

"

1’-

4�

"19’-

9"

38’-

6�

"

CLR 15’-6"

MIN. HORZ.

CLR. 16’-5"

MIN. HORZ.

BRIDGE PLANS.

DENOTES: DIMENSIONS ARE TAKEN FROM EXISTING

RT65’

STA. 179+55

TH-BR24-1

RT53’

STA. 180+12

TH-BR24-2

RT50’

STA. 180+94

TH-BR24-3

RT58’

STA. 181+29

TH-BR24-4

| BENT 3

STA. 594+39.17

Alabama Department of Transportation

APPROVED :

DATE :

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER

Bridge Sheet of

2970 COTTAGE HILL RD.

MOBILE, AL 36606

Sheet of

PLAN SHEET1 6

PROJECT NUMBER

REFERENCE

YEAR

FISCAL

NUMBER

SHEET

PROJECT NO.

BRIDGE FOUNDATION REPORT

JEFFERSON COUNTY, ALABAMA

REPLACEMENT (BRIDGE 24)

I-59/I-20 SUPERSTRUCTURE

Preliminary Project No: IM-1059(367)

SAM STERNBERG III, P.E.

ELEVATION

SCALE: 1"=30’-0"

STRATA SYMBOLS

S - SPT Sample

T - Shelby Tube Sample

Ground Water, ATD

MR - Mud Rotary

NE - Not Encountered

SSA - Solid Stem Auger

NO - Not Obtained

HSA - Hollow Stem Auger

REC Recovery

pp - Pocket Penetrometer24 Hr./Delayed Ground Water

RQD Rock Quality Designation

4

10

12

13

35

23

12

11

14

10

14

11

7

4

5

B.T. at 94.0 ft.

RQD(%)=63.2REC(%)=87.7

RQD(%)=73.3REC(%)=100.0

RQD(%)=66.7REC(%)=137.5

TH-BR24-1

SC

CH

GC

CH

CH

CH

NUSCS

9282726272226201212

11

7

B.T. at 93.5 ft.

RQD(%)=16.0REC(%)=19.2

RQD(%)=52.5REC(%)=100.0

RQD(%)=66.7REC(%)=100.0

CH

TH-BR24-2

NUSCS

CH

RQD(%)=48.3REC(%)=100.0

RQD(%)=19.2REC(%)=58.3

283123222318

12

8

11

5

12

9

9

5

45

50/2

B.T. at 144.0 ft.

RQD(%)=41.7REC(%)=80.0

RQD(%)=18.3REC(%)=75.0

RQD(%)=14.7REC(%)=33.3

RQD(%)=24.7REC(%)=68.0

RQD(%)=27.5REC(%)=40.0

CH

CH

CH

SP

TH-BR24-3

NUSCS

CH

CHRQD(%)=0.0REC(%)=25.0

9

6

18

20

14

12

13

11

13

10

10

12

8

10

12

9

B.T. at 132.0 ft.

CH

CH

CH

CH

TH-BR24-4

RQD(%)=39.7REC(%)=79.4

RQD(%)=19.2REC(%)=49.2

NUSCS

RQD(%)=5.0

RQD(%)=15.8REC(%)=34.2

RQD(%)=34.2REC(%)=61.7

RQD(%)=4.2REC(%)=4.2

REC(%)=49.2

CH

CH

CH

CH

CH

CH

CH

CH

CH

ABUT.1 2 3

| BENT 2 | BENT 3

50’-9"

ABUT.4

LINE (PGL)

EXISTING GROUND

APPROXIMATE

71’-1" 50’-9"

28TH ST.

E

630

620

610

670

640

650

660

600

STA. 179+64.81

BEGIN BRIDGE

BACKFACE ABUT. 1

STA. 181+37.41

END BRIDGE

BACKFACE ABUT. 4

PLATE GIRDERS

NON-COMPOSITE STEEL

CONTINUOUS SPANS

END SLAB

VARIES

E

CL.=XX’-X"

MIN. VERT.

E

GRADE: SEE PROFILE GRADE LINE, SKEW: 82°52’32"

OVERALL BRIDGE LENGTH = 172’-7" ALIGNMENT: TANGENT,

F

END SLAB

VARIES

590

580

570

560

550

540

530

520

510

500

490

480

630

620

610

670

640

650

660

600

590

580

570

560

550

540

530

520

510

500

490

480

470


APPROVED :

DATE :


Bridge Sheet of


MOBILE, AL 36606

Sheet of

PROJECT NUMBER

REFERENCE

YEAR

FISCAL

NUMBER

SHEET







PROJECT NO.

SAND (SP)

SILT (MH) TOPSOIL

CLAYEY SAND (SC)

CLAYEY SILTY SAND (SC-SM)SILTY SAND (SM)

ORGANIC SOILS (OL)

Paving

GRAVEL (GP)

POORLY GRADED SAND

with SILT (SP-SM)

LEAN CLAY (CL)

FAT CLAY (CH)

SILTY CLAY (CL-ML)

WELL GRADED SAND WITH

SILT AND GRAVEL (SW-SM)

PROFILE SHEET

CLAYEY GRAVEL (GC)

SILTY GRAVEL (GM)

DOMOLITE

APPENDIX C

Test Boring Records

STRATA SYMBOLS

S - SPT Sample


Ground Water, ATD

MR - Mud Rotary



NO - Not Obtained


REC Recovery



Rock Core Sample

2 6

REFERENCE

PROJECT NUMBER

FISCAL

YEAR

SHEET

NUMBER

TEST BORING RECORD Sheet of


APPROVED :

DATE :


Bridge Sheet of


MOBILE, AL 36606

PROJECT NO.







SAND (SP)

SILT (MH) TOPSOIL

CLAYEY SAND (SC)


ORGANIC SOILS (OL)

Paving

GRAVEL (GP)

POORLY GRADED SAND

with SILT (SP-SM)

LEAN CLAY (CL)

FAT CLAY (CH)

SILTY CLAY (CL-ML)



A-7-6(33)

A-2-7(3)

41

26

78.5

32.4

22.8

18.7

62

51

4

10

12

13

35

23

12

11

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

S-7

S-8

CLAYEY

SAND (SC)

FAT CLAY

with SAND

(CH)

CLAYEY

GRAVEL

(GC)

FAT CLAY

(CH)

Very loose, moist, dark brown, fine grained

Stiff, moist, brown, with trace gravel

Stiff, with trace gravel


Dense, moist, brown, coarse to fine grained

Very stiff, moist, brown and light brown

Stiff

Stiff

Sa

mple T

ype

AASHTO (GI) PI % #200

NORTHING: HAMMER TYPE:

N.O.

1284768.983

2181221.805 T206 & T225

179+55 RT 65’

IM-I059(367)

WC

(%)LL

N V

alu

e

Sa

mple

No.

BORING NO.: GROUND ELEVATION: DRILL RIG:

DRILLER:GR. WATER DEPTH (ATD):

PROJECT NO.: DRILLING METHOD:24 HR. GR. WATER DEPTH:

PROJECT:

RECORD OF TEST BORING

CLIENT:

This record of Test Boring is part of the project Geotechnical Report. Actual strata changes may be gradual over depth.

EASTING: AASHTO METHOD(S):

STATION:

DATE DRILLED:

USCS

Gra

phic

Log

I-59/I-20 Superstructure Replacement (Bridge 24)

8/24/2015

N.E.

ALDOT

CME 75

ALDOT

Automatic

Ele

vation

(ft)

635.0

630.0

625.0

620.0

615.0

610.0

605.0

Depth

(ft)

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

TH-BR24-1

TE PROJECT NO.:15-1101-0091

637.8 ft.

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

3 1/4" HSA

A-7-6(45)

A-7-6(29)

55

30

77.0

89.2

34.6

35.7

83

52

14

10

14

11

7

4

5

S-9

S-10

S-11

S-12

S-13

S-14

S-15

FAT CLAY

(CH)

(continued)

FAT CLAY

with SAND

(CH)

FAT CLAY

(CH)

Stiff, brown

Stiff, moist, brown and light brown, with trace

gravel

Stiff, moist, brown, with trace gravel

Stiff, brown and light brown, with trace gravel

Firm, brown, with trace gravel

Soft, with trace sand and trace gravel

No Recovery

Sa

mple T

ype



N.O.

1284768.983

2181221.805 T206 & T225

179+55 RT 65’

IM-I059(367)

WC

(%)LL

N V

alu

e

Sa

mple

No.




PROJECT:


CLIENT:



STATION:

DATE DRILLED:

USCS

Gra

phic

Log


8/24/2015

N.E.

ALDOT

CME 75

ALDOT

Automatic

Ele

vation

(ft)

600.0

595.0

590.0

585.0

580.0

575.0

570.0

Depth

(ft)

35.0

40.0

45.0

50.0

55.0

60.0

65.0

70.0

TH-BR24-1


637.8 ft.


3 1/4" HSA

C-1

C-2

C-3

FAT CLAY

(CH)

(continued)

DOLOMITE

DOLOMITE

DOLOMITE

Gray, slightly to moderately weathered, moderately

fractured, good recovery, fair rock quality

RQD(%)=63.2 REC(%)=87.7

Gray, slightly weathered, slightly fractured,

excellent recovery, fair rock quality RQD(%)=73.3

REC(%)=100.0

Gray, slightly weathered, slightly to highly

fractured, excellent recovery, fair rock quality

RQD(%)=66.7 REC(%)=137.5

Boring Terminated at 94.0 ft.

Sa

mple T

ype



N.O.

1284768.983

2181221.805 T206 & T225

179+55 RT 65’

IM-I059(367)

WC

(%)LL

N V

alu

e

Sa

mple

No.




PROJECT:


CLIENT:



STATION:

DATE DRILLED:

USCS

Gra

phic

Log


8/24/2015

N.E.

ALDOT

CME 75

ALDOT

Automatic

Ele

vation

(ft)

565.0

560.0

555.0

550.0

545.0

Depth

(ft)

70.0

75.0

80.0

85.0

90.0

TH-BR24-1


637.8 ft.


3 1/4" HSA

C/L C/LC/L

Note: The rock core samples are stored at the ALDOT Warehouse in Montgomery.CLAYEY GRAVEL (GC)

SILTY GRAVEL (GM)

DOMOLITE

STRATA SYMBOLS

S - SPT Sample


Ground Water, ATD

MR - Mud Rotary



NO - Not Obtained


REC Recovery



Rock Core Sample

3 6

REFERENCE

PROJECT NUMBER

FISCAL

YEAR

SHEET

NUMBER



APPROVED :

DATE :


Bridge Sheet of


MOBILE, AL 36606

PROJECT NO.







SAND (SP)

SILT (MH) TOPSOIL

CLAYEY SAND (SC)


ORGANIC SOILS (OL)

Paving

GRAVEL (GP)

POORLY GRADED SAND

with SILT (SP-SM)

LEAN CLAY (CL)

FAT CLAY (CH)

SILTY CLAY (CL-ML)



A-7-6(55)

A-7-5(53)

A-7-6(86)

A-7-6(38)

54

47

74

38

90.9

95.1

99.1

88.9

24.8

32.4

34.5

33.9

78

79

101

65

9

28

27

26

27

22

26

20

12

12

11

7

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

S-7

S-8

S-9

S-10

S-11

S-12

FAT CLAY

(CH)

Approximately 12 inches of topsoil

Very stiff, white, orange, and tan, with trace sand

Very stiff, red, yellow and white

Very stiff, red, yellow and tan, with trace gravel

Very stiff, red, yellow and white, with trace gravel

Very stiff, orange, white and tan, with trace sand

Very stiff, white and reddish orange, with trace

gravel

Very stiff, reddish brown and light tan, with trace

gravel

Stiff, wet, tan and red

Stiff

Stiff, red, tan, and black

Firm, tan, reddish brown, and white, with trace

sand and trace gravel

Sa

mple T

ype



21.5 ft.

1284812.495

2181260.36 T206 & T225

180+12 RT 53’

IM-I059(367)

WC

(%)LL

N V

alu

e

Sa

mple

No.




PROJECT:


CLIENT:



STATION:

DATE DRILLED:

USCS

Gra

phic

Log


5/27/2015

29.0 ft.

ALDOT

CME 75

TTL

Automatic

Ele

vation

(ft)

615.0

610.0

605.0

600.0

595.0

590.0

585.0

Depth

(ft)

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

TH-BR24-2


617.8 ft.


3 1/4" HSA

C-1

C-2

FAT CLAY

(CH)

(continued)

DOLOMITE

DOLOMITE

DOLOMITE

DOLOMITE

DOLOMITE

Approximately 12 inches of topsoil

slightly weathered, poor recovery, poor rock quality

RQD(%)=16.0 REC(%)=19.2

Void encountered from 39.8 to 41.8 feet.


Clay-filled void encountered at 51.0 feet. Advanced

casing to 58.5 feet.


Tan and gray, moderately fractured, slight to

moderately weathered, fair recovery, very poor

rock quality RQD(%)=19.2 REC(%)=58.3

Sa

mple T

ype



21.5 ft.

1284812.495

2181260.36 T206 & T225

180+12 RT 53’

IM-I059(367)

WC

(%)LL

N V

alu

e

Sa

mple

No.




PROJECT:


CLIENT:



STATION:

DATE DRILLED:

USCS

Gra

phic

Log


5/27/2015

29.0 ft.

ALDOT

CME 75

TTL

Automatic

Ele

vation

(ft)

580.0

575.0

570.0

565.0

560.0

555.0

550.0

Depth

(ft)

35.0

40.0

45.0

50.0

55.0

60.0

65.0

70.0

TH-BR24-2


617.8 ft.


3 1/4" HSA

C-3

C-4

C-5

DOLOMITE

(continued)

DOLOMITE

DOLOMITE

Tan and gray, moderately to slightly fractured,

slightly weathered, excellent recovery, poor rock

quality RQD(%)=48.3 REC(%)=100.0

Gray and tan, moderately fractured, slightly

weathered, excellent recovery, fair rock quality

RQD(%)=52.5 REC(%)=100.0

Dark gray and light gray, moderately fractured,

slightly weathered, excellent recovery, fair rock



Sa

mple T

ype



21.5 ft.

1284812.495

2181260.36 T206 & T225

180+12 RT 53’

IM-I059(367)

WC

(%)LL

N V

alu

e

Sa

mple

No.




PROJECT:


CLIENT:



STATION:

DATE DRILLED:

USCS

Gra

phic

Log


5/27/2015

29.0 ft.

ALDOT

CME 75

TTL

Automatic

Ele

vation

(ft)

545.0

540.0

535.0

530.0

525.0

Depth

(ft)

70.0

75.0

80.0

85.0

90.0

TH-BR24-2


617.8 ft.


3 1/4" HSA

Tan and light gray, slightly fractured,

Tan and light gray, slightly fractured,

slightly weathered

C/LC/L C/L


SILTY GRAVEL (GM)

DOMOLITE

STRATA SYMBOLS

S - SPT Sample


Ground Water, ATD

MR - Mud Rotary



NO - Not Obtained


REC Recovery



Rock Core Sample

4 6

REFERENCE

PROJECT NUMBER

FISCAL

YEAR

SHEET

NUMBER



APPROVED :

DATE :


Bridge Sheet of


MOBILE, AL 36606

PROJECT NO.







SAND (SP)

SILT (MH) TOPSOIL

CLAYEY SAND (SC)


ORGANIC SOILS (OL)

Paving

GRAVEL (GP)

POORLY GRADED SAND

with SILT (SP-SM)

LEAN CLAY (CL)

FAT CLAY (CH)

SILTY CLAY (CL-ML)



A-7-6(53)

A-7-5(61)

A-7-6(53)

48

61

48

95.0

88.3

96.1

27.6

29.7

33.5

74

91

73

28

31

23

22

23

18

12

8

11

5

S-1

S-2

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

S-7

S-8

S-9

CONCRETE

FAT CLAY

(CH)

Augered through concrete revetment.

Very stiff, dry, reddish orange and tan

Hard, dry, reddish orange and tan, with trace sand

and trace gravel

Very stiff

Very stiff, red

Very stiff, with trace gravel

Stiff, orange and black, with trace organics, trace

sand, and trace gravel

Stiff, red, gray, and tan, with trace gravel

Firm, orange and tan, with trace gravel

Stiff, moist, orange, tan and white, with trace sand

and trace gravel

Firm, brown, with trace gravel

Sa

mple T

ype



N.O.

1284864.354

2181324.336 T206 & T225

180+94 RT 50’

IM-I059(367)

WC

(%)LL

N V

alu

e

Sa

mple

No.




PROJECT:


CLIENT:



STATION:

DATE DRILLED:

USCS

Gra

phic

Log


5/28/2015

54.0 ft.

ALDOT

CME 75

TTL

Automatic

Ele

vation

(ft)

620.0

615.0

610.0

605.0

600.0

595.0

590.0

Depth

(ft)

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

TH-BR24-3


620.9 ft.


3 1/4" HSA

A-7-6(18)

A-7-6(36)

34

41

61.2

81.7

35.7

45.8

54

64

12

9

9

5

45

50/2

S-10

S-11

S-12

S-13

S-14

S-15

FAT CLAY

(CH)

(continued)

GRAVELLY

FAT CLAY

with SAND

(CH)

FAT CLAY

with SAND

(CH)

POORLY

GRADED

SAND with

GRAVEL

(SP)

Stiff, tan and white, with trace gravel

Stiff, moist, dark tan and reddish orange

Stiff, reddish orange and tan

Firm, wet, orange and brown

Hard, wet, red and brown

Very dense, wet, red and brown, with trace clay

Clay-filled void encountered from 66.0 to 72.0 feet.

Sa

mple T

ype



N.O.

1284864.354

2181324.336 T206 & T225

180+94 RT 50’

IM-I059(367)

WC

(%)LL

N V

alu

e

Sa

mple

No.




PROJECT:


CLIENT:



STATION:

DATE DRILLED:

USCS

Gra

phic

Log


5/28/2015

54.0 ft.

ALDOT

CME 75

TTL

Automatic

Ele

vation

(ft)

585.0

580.0

575.0

570.0

565.0

560.0

555.0

Depth

(ft)

35.0

40.0

45.0

50.0

55.0

60.0

65.0

70.0

TH-BR24-3


620.9 ft.


3 1/4" HSA

C-1

C-2

C-3

DOLOMITE

DOLOMITE

DOLOMITE

DOLOMITE

DOLOMITE

DOLOMITE


Gray, moderately fractured, slightly to moderately

weathered, poor recovery, very poor rock quality

RQD(%)=0.0 REC(%)=25.0


Gray, dark gray and pale brown, moderately

fractured, slightly to moderately weathered, good

recovery, poor rock quality RQD(%)=41.7

REC(%)=80.0


Gray, dark gray and pale brown, moderately

fractured, slightly to moderately weathered

Pale brown, gray, and dark gray, moderately to

highly fractured, slightly to moderately weathered,

good recovery, very poor rock quality

RQD(%)=18.3 REC(%)=75.0


Pale brown, gray, and dark gray, moderately to

highly fractured, slightly to moderately weathered

Gray and dark gray, slightly fractured, slightly


RQD(%)=14.7 REC(%)=33.3

Void encountered from 99.0 ft. to 116.0 ft.

Sa

mple T

ype



N.O.

1284864.354

2181324.336 T206 & T225

180+94 RT 50’

IM-I059(367)

WC

(%)LL

N V

alu

e

Sa

mple

No.




PROJECT:


CLIENT:



STATION:

DATE DRILLED:

USCS

Gra

phic

Log


5/28/2015

54.0 ft.

ALDOT

CME 75

TTL

Automatic

Ele

vation

(ft)

550.0

545.0

540.0

535.0

530.0

525.0

520.0

Depth

(ft)

70.0

75.0

80.0

85.0

90.0

95.0

100.0

105.0

TH-BR24-3


620.9 ft.


3 1/4" HSA

C/LC/L C/L


SILTY GRAVEL (GM)

DOMOLITE

STRATA SYMBOLS

S - SPT Sample


Ground Water, ATD

MR - Mud Rotary



NO - Not Obtained


REC Recovery



Rock Core Sample

5 6

REFERENCE

PROJECT NUMBER

FISCAL

YEAR

SHEET

NUMBER



APPROVED :

DATE :


Bridge Sheet of


MOBILE, AL 36606

PROJECT NO.







SAND (SP)

SILT (MH) TOPSOIL

CLAYEY SAND (SC)


ORGANIC SOILS (OL)

Paving

GRAVEL (GP)

POORLY GRADED SAND

with SILT (SP-SM)

LEAN CLAY (CL)

FAT CLAY (CH)

SILTY CLAY (CL-ML)



C-4

C-5

C-6

DOLOMITE

DOLOMITE

DOLOMITE

DOLOMITE

Void encountered from 99.0 ft. to 116.0 ft.

Tan and gray, moderately fractured, moderately


RQD(%)=14.7 REC(%)=33.3

Gray, tan, and pale brown, highly fractured,

moderately to highly weathered, fair recovery, poor



Gray, tan, and pale brown, highly fractured,

moderately to highly weathered

Gray and pale brown, slightly to moderately

fractured, slightly weathered, poor recovery, poor


Sa

mple T

ype



N.O.

1284864.354

2181324.336 T206 & T225

180+94 RT 50’

IM-I059(367)

WC

(%)LL

N V

alu

e

Sa

mple

No.




PROJECT:


CLIENT:



STATION:

DATE DRILLED:

USCS

Gra

phic

Log


5/28/2015

54.0 ft.

ALDOT

CME 75

TTL

Automatic

Ele

vation

(ft)

515.0

510.0

505.0

500.0

495.0

490.0

485.0

Depth

(ft)

105.0

110.0

115.0

120.0

125.0

130.0

135.0

140.0

TH-BR24-3


620.9 ft.


3 1/4" HSA

DOLOMITE

(continued)

Gray and pale brown, slightly to moderately

fractured, slightly weathered, poor recovery, poor



*GR. WATER DEPTH (ATD) was observed as the

depth at which a saturated sample was retrieved.

Sa

mple T

ype



N.O.

1284864.354

2181324.336 T206 & T225

180+94 RT 50’

IM-I059(367)

WC

(%)LL

N V

alu

e

Sa

mple

No.




PROJECT:


CLIENT:



STATION:

DATE DRILLED:

USCS

Gra

phic

Log


5/28/2015

54.0 ft.

ALDOT

CME 75

TTL

Automatic

Ele

vation

(ft)

480.0

Depth

(ft)

140.0

TH-BR24-3


620.9 ft.


3 1/4" HSA

A-7-6(28)

A-7-5(71)

33

68

82.3

90.2

22.2

39.5

54

99

9

6

18

20

14

12

13

11

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

S-7

S-8

FAT CLAY

with SAND

(CH)

SANDY FAT

CLAY with

GRAVEL

(CH)

FAT CLAY

(CH)

Stiff, moist, brown

Firm

Very stiff, moist, brown

Very stiff, moist, brown, with trace gravel

Stiff, brown and light brown

Stiff


Stiff

Sa

mple T

ype



27.8 ft.

1284879.982

2181357.046 T206 & T225

181+29 RT 58’

IM-I059(367)

WC

(%)LL

N V

alu

e

Sa

mple

No.




PROJECT:


CLIENT:



STATION:

DATE DRILLED:

USCS

Gra

phic

Log


8/25/2015

73.0 ft.

ALDOT

CME 75

ALDOT

Automatic

Ele

vation

(ft)

630.0

625.0

620.0

615.0

610.0

605.0

600.0

Depth

(ft)

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

TH-BR24-4


634.6 ft.


3 1/4" HSA

C/L C/LC/L


SILTY GRAVEL (GM)

DOMOLITE

STRATA SYMBOLS

S - SPT Sample


Ground Water, ATD

MR - Mud Rotary



NO - Not Obtained


REC Recovery



Rock Core Sample

6 6

REFERENCE

PROJECT NUMBER

FISCAL

YEAR

SHEET

NUMBER



APPROVED :

DATE :


Bridge Sheet of


MOBILE, AL 36606

PROJECT NO.







SAND (SP)

SILT (MH) TOPSOIL

CLAYEY SAND (SC)


ORGANIC SOILS (OL)

Paving

GRAVEL (GP)

POORLY GRADED SAND

with SILT (SP-SM)

LEAN CLAY (CL)

FAT CLAY (CH)

SILTY CLAY (CL-ML)



A-7-5(47) 55 76.252.4 94

13

10

10

12

8

10

12

S-9

S-10

S-11

S-12

S-13

S-14

S-15

FAT CLAY

(CH)

(continued)

FAT CLAY

with GRAVEL

(CH)

Stiff


Stiff

Stiff, brown, tan, and white, with trace sand

Firm

Stiff

Stiff

Sa

mple T

ype



27.8 ft.

1284879.982

2181357.046 T206 & T225

181+29 RT 58’

IM-I059(367)

WC

(%)LL

N V

alu

e

Sa

mple

No.




PROJECT:


CLIENT:



STATION:

DATE DRILLED:

USCS

Gra

phic

Log


8/25/2015

73.0 ft.

ALDOT

CME 75

ALDOT

Automatic

Ele

vation

(ft)

595.0

590.0

585.0

580.0

575.0

570.0

565.0

Depth

(ft)

35.0

40.0

45.0

50.0

55.0

60.0

65.0

70.0

TH-BR24-4


634.6 ft.


3 1/4" HSA

9S-16

C-1

C-2

C-3

FAT CLAY

with GRAVEL

(CH)

(continued)

DOLOMITE

DOLOMITE

DOLOMITE

DOLOMITE

DOLOMITE

DOLOMITE

DOLOMITE

Stiff, no recovery

Gray, moderately weathered, moderately fractured,

good recovery, poor rock quality RQD(%)=39.7

REC(%)=79.4


Gray, slightly to highly weathered, highly fractured,

poor recovery, very poor rock quality RQD(%)=19.2

REC(%)=49.2



8/25/2015

73.0 ft.

ALDOT

CME 75

ALDOT

Automatic

Ele

vation

(ft)

560.0

555.0

550.0

545.0

540.0

535.0

530.0

Depth

(ft)

70.0

75.0

80.0

85.0

90.0

95.0

100.0

105.0

TH-BR24-4


634.6 ft.


3 1/4" HSA

Clay-filled void encountered from 91.0 to 100.0

feet.

Recovered 5 inches RQD(%)=4.2 REC(%)=4.2


feet.

Sa

mple T

ype



27.8 ft.

1284879.982

2181357.046 T206 & T225

181+29 RT 58’

IM-I059(367)

WC

(%)LL

N V

alu

e

Sa

mple

No.




PROJECT:


CLIENT:



STATION:

DATE DRILLED:

USCS

Gra

phic

Log


C-4

C-5

C-6

DOLOMITE

(continued)

DOLOMITE

DOLOMITE

DOLOMITE

DOLOMITE

DOLOMITE

Sa

mple T

ype



27.8 ft.

1284879.982

2181357.046 T206 & T225

181+29 RT 58’

IM-I059(367)

WC

(%)LL

N V

alu

e

Sa

mple

No.




PROJECT:


CLIENT:



STATION:

DATE DRILLED:

USCS

Gray, highly weathered, highly fractured, poor

recovery, very poor rock quality RQD(%)=5.0

REC(%)=49.2


feet.


feet.


feet.

Gray, slightly to moderately weathered, slightly to

moderately fractured, good recovery, poor rock



feet.

Clay-filled void encountered from 122.4 to 128 feet.

Gray, moderately fractured, slightly weathered,

poor recovery, very poor rock quality RQD(%)=15.8

REC(%)=34.2


feet.


Gra

phic

Log


8/25/2015

73.0 ft.

ALDOT

CME 75

ALDOT

Automatic

Ele

vation

(ft)

525.0

520.0

515.0

510.0

505.0

Depth

(ft)

105.0

110.0

115.0

120.0

125.0

130.0

TH-BR24-4


634.6 ft.


3 1/4" HSA

C/LC/L C/L


SILTY GRAVEL (GM)

DOMOLITE

APPENDIX D

Laboratory Test Results

ALDOT Lab Summary

ALDOT BMT-5’s

Total Sulfates/Total Chlorides/pH/Resistivity

Station & Offset Boring No. Sample ID Depth (ft)Water

Content (%)Liquid Limit Plastic Limit

Plasticity

Index% Gravel % Sand D50 (mm) USCS

AASHTO

Classification

179+55 RT 65' TH-BR24-01 S-3 8.0 22.8 62 21 41 6.9 14.6 -- CH A-7-6(33)

S-5 18.0 18.7 51 25 26 54.7 12.9 9.4962 GC A-2-7(3)

S-10 43.0 34.6 83 28 55 1.9 21.1 -- CH A-7-6(45)

S-14 63.0 35.7 52 22 30 4.2 6.6 -- CH A-7-6(29)

180+12 RT 53' TH-BR24-02 S-2 1.5 24.8 78 24 54 3.6 5.5 -- CH A-7-6(55)

S-6 7.5 32.4 79 32 47 0.0 4.9 -- CH A-7-5(53)

S-9 19.0 34.5 101 27 74 0.0 0.9 -- CH A-7-6(86)

S-12 33.0 33.9 65 27 38 6.8 4.3 -- CH A-7-6(38)

180+94 RT 50' TH-BR24-03 S-2 3.0 27.6 74 26 48 1.9 3.1 -- CH A-7-6(53)

S-5 14.0 29.7 91 30 61 5.4 6.3 -- CH A-7-5(61)

S-8 29.0 33.5 73 25 48 2.8 1.1 -- CH A-7-6(53)

S-11 44.0 35.7 54 20 34 22.1 16.7 -- CH A-7-6(18)

S-14 59.0 45.8 64 23 41 0.9 17.4 -- CH A-7-6(36)

181+29 RT 58' TH-BR24-04 S-2 3.5 22.2 54 21 33 2.3 15.4 -- CH A-7-6(28)

S-7 28.5 39.5 99 31 68 2.0 7.8 -- CH A-7-5(71)

S-12 53.5 52.4 94 39 55 18.2 5.6 -- CH A-7-5(47)

ALDOT PE Project No.: IM-I059 (367)

Jefferson County, Alabama

Soil Classification Summary


Project Name: Birmingham Central Business District (Bridge #24)

CBD I-59/I-20 Superstructure Replacement from S of 15th St N to N of CSX

RR

Sheet 1 of 1

% Pass 200

% Silt % Clay

(if hydrometer data available)

78.5

32.4

77.0

95.0

88.3

61.2

81.7

96.1

89.2

90.9

88.9

95.1

99.1

82.3

90.2

76.2

BMT-5

Page 1

Client: Alabama Department of Transportation Project No.: 15-1101-0091

Project: Division: East Central

Date: 9/23/2015

ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

SOILS AND BASE COURSE ANALYSIS

Boring No. TH-BR24-1 TH-BR24-1 TH-BR24-1 TH-BR24-1 TH-BR24-2 TH-BR24-2

Station 179+55 179+55 179+55 179+55 180+12 180+12

Offset RT 65 RT 65 RT 65 RT 65 RT 53 RT 53

Sample ID S-3 S-5 S-10 S-14 S-2 S-6

Depth (ft) 8.0 18.0 43.0 63.0 1.5 7.5

TOTAL PASSING (%)

3" SIEVE (75mm) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

2 1/2" " (63mm) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

2 " (50mm) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

1 1/2" " (37.5mm) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

1" " (25mm) 100.0 66.7 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

3/4" " (19mm) 100.0 59.7 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

1/2" " (12.5mm) 94.1 51.6 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

3/8" " (9.5mm) 94.1 50.0 100.0 98.9 100.0 100.0

#4 " (4.75mm) 93.1 45.3 98.1 95.8 96.4 100.0

#10 " (2.00mm) 89.5 42.0 90.8 93.8 94.9 99.3

#20 " (0.85mm) 86.1 40.2 85.0 92.6 94.2 98.6

#40 " (425um) 83.9 38.8 81.7 91.8 93.6 97.9

#60 " (250um) 82.3 35.7 79.7 91.1 92.9 97.2

#100 " (150um) 80.6 33.9 78.3 90.4 92.1 96.3

#140 " (106um) 79.6 33.2 77.7 89.9 91.5 95.8

#200 " (75um) 78.5 32.4 77.0 89.2 90.9 95.1

Clay

Silt

Total Sand 14.6 12.9 21.1 6.6 5.5 4.9

Total Gravel 6.9 54.7 1.9 4.2 3.6 0.0

ATTERBERG LIMITS

Liquid Limit 62 51 83 52 78 79

Plastic Limit 21 25 28 22 24 32

Plasticity Index 41 26 55 30 54 47

USCS CH GC CH CH CH CH

AASHTO A-7-6(33) A-2-7(3) A-7-6(45) A-7-6(29) A-7-6(55) A-7-5(53)

95.1

CBD I-59/I-20 Superstructure Replacement from S of 15th St N to N of CSX RR

ALDOT Project No.: IM-1059(367)

90.989.278.5 32.4 77.0

BMT-5

Page 2



Date: 9/23/2015



Boring No. TH-BR24-2 TH-BR24-2 TH-BR24-3 TH-BR24-3 TH-BR24-3 TH-BR24-3

Station 180+12 180+12 180+94 180+94 180+94 180+94

Offset RT 53 RT 53 RT 50 RT 50 RT 50 RT 50

Sample ID S-9 S-12 S-2 S-5 S-8 S-11

Depth (ft) 19.0 33.0 3.0 14.0 29.0 44.0

TOTAL PASSING (%)

3" SIEVE (75mm) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

2 1/2" " (63mm) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

2 " (50mm) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

1 1/2" " (37.5mm) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

1" " (25mm) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

3/4" " (19mm) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

1/2" " (12.5mm) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 97.3 96.5

3/8" " (9.5mm) 100.0 96.7 100.0 100.0 97.3 89.2

#4 " (4.75mm) 100.0 93.2 98.1 94.6 97.2 77.9

#10 " (2.00mm) 99.8 91.9 97.0 92.3 96.8 69.7

#20 " (0.85mm) 99.7 91.1 96.4 91.3 96.6 66.1

#40 " (425um) 99.6 90.5 96.0 90.5 96.4 64.4

#60 " (250um) 99.4 90.0 95.7 89.8 96.3 63.6

#100 " (150um) 99.3 89.5 95.4 89.1 96.2 62.7

#140 " (106um) 99.1 89.2 95.2 88.8 96.2 62.0

#200 " (75um) 99.1 88.9 95.0 88.3 96.1 61.2

Clay

Silt

Total Sand 0.9 4.3 3.1 6.3 1.1 16.7

Total Gravel 0.0 6.8 1.9 5.4 2.8 22.1

ATTERBERG LIMITS

Liquid Limit 101 65 74 91 73 54

Plastic Limit 27 27 26 30 25 20

Plasticity Index 74 38 48 61 48 34

USCS CH CH CH CH CH CH

AASHTO A-7-6(86) A-7-6(38) A-7-6(53) A-7-5(61) A-7-6(53) A-7-6(18)

61.2



96.199.1 88.388.9 95.0

BMT-5

Page 3



Date: 9/23/2015



Boring No. TH-BR24-3 TH-BR24-4 TH-BR24-4 TH-BR24-4

Station 180+94 181+29 181+29 181+29

Offset RT 50 RT 58 RT 58 RT 58

Sample ID S-14 S-2 S-7 S-12

Depth (ft) 59.0 3.5 28.5 53.5

TOTAL PASSING (%)

3" SIEVE (75mm) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

2 1/2" " (63mm) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

2 " (50mm) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

1 1/2" " (37.5mm) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

1" " (25mm) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

3/4" " (19mm) 100.0 100.0 100.0 84.0

1/2" " (12.5mm) 100.0 100.0 100.0 84.0

3/8" " (9.5mm) 100.0 100.0 100.0 84.0

#4 " (4.75mm) 99.1 97.7 98.0 81.9

#10 " (2.00mm) 92.8 92.0 95.3 80.5

#20 " (0.85mm) 89.1 88.9 93.2 79.6

#40 " (425um) 87.2 87.1 92.1 78.9

#60 " (250um) 86.1 85.7 91.5 78.3

#100 " (150um) 84.5 84.2 90.9 77.6

#140 " (106um) 83.2 83.3 90.6 77.1

#200 " (75um) 81.7 82.3 90.2 76.2

Clay

Silt

Total Sand 17.4 15.4 7.8 5.6

Total Gravel 0.9 2.3 2.0 18.2

ATTERBERG LIMITS

Liquid Limit 64 54 99 94

Plastic Limit 23 21 31 39

Plasticity Index 41 33 68 55

USCS CH CH CH CH

AASHTO A-7-6(36) A-7-6(28) A-7-5(71) A-7-5(47)



90.2 76.282.381.7

ANALYTICAL REPORTTestAmerica Laboratories, Inc.TestAmerica Pensacola3355 McLemore DrivePensacola, FL 32514Tel: (850)474-1001

TestAmerica Job ID: 400-110522-1Client Project/Site: ALDOT CBD Bridge 24 & 25/ 15-1101-0091

For:Thompson Engineering Inc2970 Cottage Hill Rd.Suite 190Mobile, Alabama 36606

Attn: Chris Dugger

Authorized for release by:9/18/2015 11:50:25 AM

Mike Nance, Service Center Manager(251)[email protected]

The test results in this report meet all 2003 NELAC and 2009 TNI requirements for accreditedparameters, exceptions are noted in this report. This report may not be reproduced except in full,and with written approval from the laboratory. For questions please contact the Project Managerat the e-mail address or telephone number listed on this page.

This report has been electronically signed and authorized by the signatory. Electronic signature isintended to be the legally binding equivalent of a traditionally handwritten signature.

Results relate only to the items tested and the sample(s) as received by the laboratory.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

https://secure.testamericainc.com/TotalAccess/login.aspx

http://www.testamericainc.com/AskTheExpert/Expert_index.htm

http://www.testamericainc.com

mailto:[email protected]

Definitions/GlossaryTestAmerica Job ID: 400-110522-1Client: Thompson Engineering Inc

Project/Site: ALDOT CBD Bridge 24 & 25/ 15-1101-0091

Qualifiers

General Chemistry

Qualifier Description

F3 Duplicate RPD exceeds the control limit

Qualifier

Glossary

These commonly used abbreviations may or may not be present in this report.

¤ Listed under the "D" column to designate that the result is reported on a dry weight basis

Abbreviation

%R Percent Recovery

CFL Contains Free Liquid

CNF Contains no Free Liquid

DER Duplicate error ratio (normalized absolute difference)

Dil Fac Dilution Factor

DL, RA, RE, IN Indicates a Dilution, Re-analysis, Re-extraction, or additional Initial metals/anion analysis of the sample

DLC Decision level concentration

MDA Minimum detectable activity

EDL Estimated Detection Limit

MDC Minimum detectable concentration

MDL Method Detection Limit

ML Minimum Level (Dioxin)

NC Not Calculated

ND Not detected at the reporting limit (or MDL or EDL if shown)

PQL Practical Quantitation Limit

QC Quality Control

RER Relative error ratio

RL Reporting Limit or Requested Limit (Radiochemistry)

RPD Relative Percent Difference, a measure of the relative difference between two points

TEF Toxicity Equivalent Factor (Dioxin)

TEQ Toxicity Equivalent Quotient (Dioxin)

TestAmerica Pensacola

Page 2 of 14 9/18/2015

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Case NarrativeClient: Thompson Engineering Inc TestAmerica Job ID: 400-110522-1Project/Site: ALDOT CBD Bridge 24 & 25/ 15-1101-0091

Job ID: 400-110522-1

Laboratory: TestAmerica Pensacola

Narrative

Job Narrative400-110522-1

Comments

No additional comments.

Receipt

The samples were received on 9/3/2015 11:45 AM; the samples arrived in good condition, properly preserved and, where required, on ice.

The temperature of the cooler at receipt was 22.0º C.

HPLC/IC No analytical or quality issues were noted, other than those described in the Definitions/Glossary page.

General Chemistry Method(s) 9050A: The sample duplicate precision for the following sample associated with preparation batch 400-273984 and analytical batch 400-273985 was outside control limits: (400-110522-A-1-F DU). Non-homogeneity of the sample matrix is suspected. The associated laboratory control sample (LCS) recovery met acceptance criteria.

Method(s) 9050A: The procedure for Resistivity by Method 9050A is applicable to liquid samples and has been modified to provide the enclosed results on the soil matrix. The modification involves a DI leach of the soil followed by electrometric measurement of the leachate. The values provided are a measure of the leachable components resistance for a given mass to volume of water, rather than the Resistivity of the soil itself.

No additional analytical or quality issues were noted, other than those described above or in the Definitions/Glossary page.

Lab Admin No analytical or quality issues were noted, other than those described in the Definitions/Glossary page.

TestAmerica PensacolaPage 3 of 14 9/18/2015

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Client Sample ResultsTestAmerica Job ID: 400-110522-1Client: Thompson Engineering Inc


Lab Sample ID: 400-110522-1Client Sample ID: BORING # 25-15 -S #2Matrix: SolidDate Collected: 09/03/15 09:00

Date Received: 09/03/15 11:45

General Chemistry - SolubleNONE NONE

pH 7.77 SU 09/08/15 08:39 1

Analyte Dil FacAnalyzedPreparedUnit DResult Qualifier

RL MDL

Specific Conductance 930 100 umhos/cm 09/11/15 09:57 1


20 ohm-m 09/11/15 09:57 1Resistivity 4300


Percent Solids: 74.2Date Received: 09/03/15 11:45

Method: 9056 - Anions, Ion Chromatography - SolubleRL MDL

Chloride <26 26 mg/Kg ☼ 09/10/15 19:49 1


26 mg/Kg 09/10/15 19:49 1☼Sulfate 33




pH 7.70 SU 09/08/15 08:39 1


RL MDL







Chloride <26 26 mg/Kg ☼ 09/10/15 20:58 1


26 mg/Kg 09/10/15 20:58 1☼Sulfate <26




pH 8.07 SU 09/08/15 08:39 1


RL MDL





Page 4 of 14 9/18/2015

1

2

3

4

5

6

7






Chloride <26 26 mg/Kg ☼ 09/10/15 21:20 1


26 mg/Kg 09/10/15 21:20 1☼Sulfate 73

Lab Sample ID: 400-110522-4Client Sample ID: BORING # 25-19 S #4Matrix: SolidDate Collected: 09/03/15 09:00



pH 7.23 SU 09/08/15 08:39 1


RL MDL




Lab Sample ID: 400-110522-4Client Sample ID: BORING # 25-19 S #4Matrix: SolidDate Collected: 09/03/15 09:00



Chloride <27 27 mg/Kg ☼ 09/10/15 21:43 1


27 mg/Kg 09/10/15 21:43 1☼Sulfate 47




pH 6.44 SU 09/08/15 08:39 1


RL MDL

Specific Conductance <100 100 umhos/cm 09/11/15 09:57 1






Chloride <28 28 mg/Kg ☼ 09/10/15 22:06 1


28 mg/Kg 09/10/15 22:06 1☼Sulfate <28




pH 8.24 SU 09/08/15 08:39 1



Page 5 of 14 9/18/2015

1

2

3

4

5

6

7





RL MDL







Chloride <29 29 mg/Kg ☼ 09/10/15 23:15 1


29 mg/Kg 09/10/15 23:15 1☼Sulfate <29

Lab Sample ID: 400-110522-7Client Sample ID: BORING # 24-4- S #3Matrix: SolidDate Collected: 09/03/15 09:00



pH 8.20 SU 09/08/15 08:39 1


RL MDL







Chloride <25 25 mg/Kg ☼ 09/10/15 23:37 1


25 mg/Kg 09/10/15 23:37 1☼Sulfate 46




pH 4.76 SU 09/08/15 08:39 1


RL MDL







Chloride <28 28 mg/Kg ☼ 09/11/15 00:00 1


28 mg/Kg 09/11/15 00:00 1☼Sulfate <28


Page 6 of 14 9/18/2015

1

2

3

4

5

6

7



Lab Sample ID: 400-110522-9Client Sample ID: BORING #24-4- S #13Matrix: SolidDate Collected: 09/03/15 09:00



pH 6.28 SU 09/08/15 08:39 1


RL MDL




Lab Sample ID: 400-110522-9Client Sample ID: BORING #24-4- S #13Matrix: SolidDate Collected: 09/03/15 09:00



Chloride <28 28 mg/Kg ☼ 09/11/15 00:23 1


28 mg/Kg 09/11/15 00:23 1☼Sulfate <28


Page 7 of 14 9/18/2015

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

QC Sample ResultsTestAmerica Job ID: 400-110522-1Client: Thompson Engineering Inc


Method: 9056 - Anions, Ion Chromatography

Client Sample ID: Method BlankLab Sample ID: MB 400-273872/1-AMatrix: Solid Prep Type: SolubleAnalysis Batch: 273900

RL MDL

Chloride <20 20 mg/Kg 09/10/15 18:41 1

MB MB

Analyte Dil FacAnalyzedPreparedDUnitResult Qualifier

<20 20 mg/Kg 09/10/15 18:41 1Sulfate

Client Sample ID: Lab Control SampleLab Sample ID: LCS 400-273872/2-AMatrix: Solid Prep Type: SolubleAnalysis Batch: 273900

Chloride 100 94.6 mg/Kg 95 80 - 120

Analyte

LCS LCS

DUnitResult Qualifier %Rec

Spike

Added

%Rec.

Limits

Sulfate 100 106 mg/Kg 106 80 - 120

Client Sample ID: Lab Control Sample DupLab Sample ID: LCSD 400-273872/3-AMatrix: Solid Prep Type: SolubleAnalysis Batch: 273900

Chloride 100 95.6 mg/Kg 96 80 - 120 1 15

Analyte

LCSD LCSD


Spike

Added

%Rec.

Limits LimitRPD

RPD

Sulfate 100 104 mg/Kg 104 80 - 120 2 15

Client Sample ID: BORING # 25-15 -S #2Lab Sample ID: 400-110522-1 MSMatrix: Solid Prep Type: SolubleAnalysis Batch: 273900

Chloride <26 133 117 mg/Kg 85 80 - 120☼

Analyte

MS MS


Spike

Added

Sample

Result

Sample

Qualifier

%Rec.

Limits

Sulfate 33 133 149 mg/Kg 87 80 - 120☼

Client Sample ID: BORING # 25-15 -S #2Lab Sample ID: 400-110522-1 MSDMatrix: Solid Prep Type: SolubleAnalysis Batch: 273900

Chloride <26 134 123 mg/Kg 89 80 - 120 5 15☼

Analyte

MSD MSD


Spike

Added

Sample

Result

Sample

Qualifier

%Rec.

Limits LimitRPD

RPD

Sulfate 33 134 154 mg/Kg 91 80 - 120 3 15☼

Method: 9050A - Specific Conductance

Client Sample ID: Method BlankLab Sample ID: MB 400-273984/1-AMatrix: Solid Prep Type: SolubleAnalysis Batch: 273985

RL MDL

Specific Conductance <100 100 umhos/cm 09/11/15 09:57 1

MB MB

Analyte Dil FacAnalyzedPreparedDUnitResult Qualifier

NA 20 Mohm-cm 09/11/15 09:57 1Resistivity


Page 8 of 14 9/18/2015

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

QC Sample ResultsTestAmerica Job ID: 400-110522-1Client: Thompson Engineering Inc


Method: 9050A - Specific Conductance (Continued)

Client Sample ID: Lab Control SampleLab Sample ID: LCS 400-273984/2-AMatrix: Solid Prep Type: SolubleAnalysis Batch: 273985

Specific Conductance 200 198 umhos/cm 99 98 - 102

Analyte

LCS LCS


Spike

Added

%Rec.

Limits

Client Sample ID: BORING # 25-15 -S #2Lab Sample ID: 400-110522-1 DUMatrix: Solid Prep Type: SolubleAnalysis Batch: 273985

Specific Conductance 930 1080 F3 umhos/cm 15 2

Analyte

DU DU

DUnitResult Qualifier

Sample

Result

Sample

Qualifier LimitRPD

RPD

Resistivity 4300 3690 ohm-m NC 2


Page 9 of 14 9/18/2015

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Lab ChronicleClient: Thompson Engineering Inc TestAmerica Job ID: 400-110522-1Project/Site: ALDOT CBD Bridge 24 & 25/ 15-1101-0091

Client Sample ID: BORING # 25-15 -S #2 Lab Sample ID: 400-110522-1Matrix: SolidDate Collected: 09/03/15 09:00


Leach DI Leach 09/08/15 07:45 LSS273283 TAL PEN

Type

Batch Batch

MethodPrep Type LabAnalystRun

Prepared

or Analyzed

Batch

Number

Dilution

Factor

Soluble

Analysis 9045C 1 273300 09/08/15 08:39 LSS TAL PENSoluble

Leach DI Leach 273984 09/10/15 11:14 CAC TAL PENSoluble

Analysis 9050A 1 273985 09/11/15 09:57 CAC TAL PENSoluble

Analysis Moisture 1 273391 09/08/15 14:17 SCA TAL PENTotal/NA



Leach DI Leach 09/10/15 14:23 TAJ273872 TAL PEN

Type

Batch Batch


Prepared

or Analyzed

Batch

Number

Dilution

Factor

Soluble

Analysis 9056 1 273900 09/10/15 19:49 TAJ TAL PENSoluble




Type

Batch Batch


Prepared

or Analyzed

Batch

Number

Dilution

Factor

Soluble








Type

Batch Batch


Prepared

or Analyzed

Batch

Number

Dilution

Factor

Soluble





Type

Batch Batch


Prepared

or Analyzed

Batch

Number

Dilution

Factor

Soluble





Page 10 of 14 9/18/2015

1

2

3

4

5

6

7




Analysis Moisture 09/08/15 14:17 SCA1 273391 TAL PEN

Type

Batch Batch


Prepared

or Analyzed

Batch

Number

Dilution

Factor

Total/NA




Type

Batch Batch


Prepared

or Analyzed

Batch

Number

Dilution

Factor

Soluble


Client Sample ID: BORING # 25-19 S #4 Lab Sample ID: 400-110522-4Matrix: SolidDate Collected: 09/03/15 09:00



Type

Batch Batch


Prepared

or Analyzed

Batch

Number

Dilution

Factor

Soluble





Client Sample ID: BORING # 25-19 S #4 Lab Sample ID: 400-110522-4Matrix: SolidDate Collected: 09/03/15 09:00



Type

Batch Batch


Prepared

or Analyzed

Batch

Number

Dilution

Factor

Soluble





Type

Batch Batch


Prepared

or Analyzed

Batch

Number

Dilution

Factor

Soluble






Page 11 of 14 9/18/2015

1

2

3

4

5

6

7





Type

Batch Batch


Prepared

or Analyzed

Batch

Number

Dilution

Factor

Soluble





Type

Batch Batch


Prepared

or Analyzed

Batch

Number

Dilution

Factor

Soluble








Type

Batch Batch


Prepared

or Analyzed

Batch

Number

Dilution

Factor

Soluble


Client Sample ID: BORING # 24-4- S #3 Lab Sample ID: 400-110522-7Matrix: SolidDate Collected: 09/03/15 09:00



Type

Batch Batch


Prepared

or Analyzed

Batch

Number

Dilution

Factor

Soluble








Type

Batch Batch


Prepared

or Analyzed

Batch

Number

Dilution

Factor

Soluble



Page 12 of 14 9/18/2015

1

2

3

4

5

6

7





Type

Batch Batch


Prepared

or Analyzed

Batch

Number

Dilution

Factor

Soluble








Type

Batch Batch


Prepared

or Analyzed

Batch

Number

Dilution

Factor

Soluble


Client Sample ID: BORING #24-4- S #13 Lab Sample ID: 400-110522-9Matrix: SolidDate Collected: 09/03/15 09:00



Type

Batch Batch


Prepared

or Analyzed

Batch

Number

Dilution

Factor

Soluble





Client Sample ID: BORING #24-4- S #13 Lab Sample ID: 400-110522-9Matrix: SolidDate Collected: 09/03/15 09:00



Type

Batch Batch


Prepared

or Analyzed

Batch

Number

Dilution

Factor

Soluble


Laboratory References:

TAL PEN = TestAmerica Pensacola, 3355 McLemore Drive, Pensacola, FL 32514, TEL (850)474-1001


Page 13 of 14 9/18/2015

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

of 14 9/18/2015

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

report of geotechnical consulting servicesrp.dot.state.al.us/i59_20/pdf/phase_iii/bridge foundation...

Documents