DYNAMIC PILE TESTING REPORT - WordPress.com · ft upstream of the existing dam. The proposed bridge will be supported on timber piles with 8 inch diameter tips. The piles have a design

DYNAMIC PILE TESTING REPORT

Queens Lake Pedestrian and Pipe Bridge York County, Virginia Schnabel Reference # 16C33018 October 27, 2016 Prepared For:

T/ 757-947-1220 F/ 757-947-122511836 Canon Blvd, Suite 400 / Newport News,VA / 23606

schnabel-eng.com

October 27, 2016 Mr. Kevin C. Campbell Engineer I Department of Environmental & Development Services York County 105 Service Drive Yorktown, VA 23690 Subject: Project 16C33018, Dynamic Pile Testing and Test Pile Observation Report –

Queens Lake Sanitary Sewer Project - Pedestrian & Pipe Bridge, Queens Lake, York County, Virginia

Dear Mr. Campbell: SCHNABEL ENGINEERING, LLC (Schnabel) is pleased to submit our report for the dynamic pile testing performed for the above project. These services were provided in accordance with our proposal dated February 22, 2016 and PO 27775. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project consist of a pile supported pedestrian and pipe bridge across Queens Lake approximately 80 ft upstream of the existing dam. The proposed bridge will be supported on timber piles with 8 inch diameter tips. The piles have a design capacity of 12 tons, except for Sta 18+88 to 19+44 that have design capacity of 20 tons (Test Pile 6). Considering the design factor of safety of 2, the required ultimate capacities are 24 tons (48 kips) and 40 tons (80 kips), respectively for pedestrian and pipe bridge. The test pile program for this project includes driving and dynamically testing the restrike of seven test piles. We understand the allowable compression and tension driving stresses for timber piles is three time the allowable working stress. The allowable working stress is 1,200 psi. Therefore, the allowable driving stresses are 3,600 psi. PILE HAMMER The hammer for this project is an ICE I-8v2 single acting diesel impact hammer with a manufacturer’s maximum rated energy of 21,120ft-lbs.

York County Queens Lake Pedestrian and Pipe Bridge

October 27, 2016 Page 2 Schnabel Engineering, LLC Project 16C33018 @2016 All Rights Reserved

DYNAMIC TESTING On October 24, 2016 we observed the restriking of all seven test piles. The restrike of the test piles were dynamically tested with a PAK Model Pile Driving Analyzer (PDA) manufactured by Pile Dynamics, Incorporated. The results of these analyses are summarized in Table 1.

Table 1 – Dynamic Pile Test Results, Restrike

Test Pile

Tip Grade at Time of

Restrike (ft)

Restrike Blowcount

(bpi)

CASE Method Capacity (kips)

(BOR) Test Pile No.

1 -15 2 42

Test Pile No.

2 -36 2 52

Test Pile No. 3

-46 2 58

Test Pile No. 3A

-34 2 39

Test Pile No. 4

-41 3 87

Test Pile No. 5

-29 5 128

Test Pile No. 6

-30 5 136

*BOR- beginning of restrike CASE Method results are dependent on an assumed damping factor. Based on local experience and the soil conditions on site, we considered a CASE damping factor of 0.5 when establishing CASE Method capacities reported in Table 1. It should be noted that CASE method results assume uniform pile section. Since the cross section of the piles varies along their length, CASE Method capacities are not representative of actual pile capacity. We conducted CAPWAP analyses on selected hammer blows near the beginning of the restrike. The results of these analyses are included as Appendix A and are summarized in Table 2. As driven and restrike test pile logs are included in Appendix B.



Table 2 – Summary of CAPWAP Results, Restrikes

Test Pile Tip Grade at

Time of Restrike (ft)

CAPWAP Capacities (kips)

Total Shaft Friction End-Bearing

Test Pile No. 1

-15 56 28 28

Test Pile No. 2

-36 60 53 7

Test Pile No. 3

-46 82 15 67

Test Pile No. 3A

-34 39 25 14

Test Pile No. 4

-41 95 81 14

Test Pile No. 5

-29 76 30 46

Test Pile No. 6

-30 76 31 45

CONCLUSIONS Based on the results of the dynamic testing performed on the above piles, we believe the piles develop ultimate capacities in excess of the required ultimate compressive capacity (24 kips and 40 kips) and will provide a factor of safety of at least 2.0 in compression when driven to the design minimum tip grades specified Addendum No. 2 IFB No. 1980 prepared by York County dated February 11, 2016. We have endeavored to prepare this report in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practice and make no warranties, either express or implied, as to the professional advice provided under the terms of our agreement and included in this report.



We appreciate the opportunity to be of service for this project. Please contact either of the undersigned if clarification is needed for any aspect of this report. Sincerely, SCHNABEL ENGINEERING, LLC Donald J. Smith, PE Senior Engineer Gilbert T. Seese, PE Principal DJS:GTS:dah Appendices:

A) CAPWAP Results, Restrike B) Test Pile Logs

dharmon

Donald Smith

dharmon

Gib Seese

dharmon

Donald Smith

October 27, 2016 Schnabel Engineering, LLC Project 16C33018 @2016 All Rights Reserved

APPENDIX A

CAPWAP ANALYSIS, RESTRIKES

5 195

-80

0

80

160

ms

kips

66 L/c

Force MsdForce Cpt

5 195

-80

0

80

160

ms

kips

66 L/c

Force MsdVelocity Msd

Pile

0

1

2

3

4

kips

/ft

0

15

30

45

60

kips

Shaft ResistanceDistribution

Pile Forceat Ru

0 15 30 45 600.000

0.500

1.000

1.500

2.000

Load (kips)

Dis

plac

emen

t (in

)

Pile TopBottom

Ru = 56.5 kipsRs = 27.6 kipsRb = 28.9 kipsDy = 1.37 inDx = 1.87 in

queens lake dam sanitary projec; Pile: Test Pile 1 Restrike; 14" timber; Blow: 2 (Test: 01-Jan-2001 00:13:) 26-Oct-2016Schnabel Engineering CAPWAP(R) 2006-3

CAPWAP(R) 2006-3 Licensed to Schnabel Engineering

queens lake dam sanitary projec; Pile: Test Pile 1 Restrike Test: 01-Jan-2001 00:13:14" timber; Blow: 2 CAPWAP(R) 2006-3Schnabel Engineering OP: D. Smith,PE

Page 1 Analysis: 26-Oct-2016

CAPWAP SUMMARY RESULTS

Total CAPWAP Capacity: 56.5; along Shaft 27.6; at Toe 28.9 kips

Soil Dist. Depth Ru Force Sum Unit Unit SmithSgmnt Below Below in Pile of Resist. Resist. DampingNo. Gages Grade Ru (Depth) (Area) Factor

ft ft kips kips kips kips/ft ksf s/ft

56.51 6.7 1.7 3.8 52.7 3.8 2.28 1.09 0.0502 10.0 5.0 2.3 50.4 6.1 0.69 0.33 0.0503 13.3 8.3 0.6 49.8 6.7 0.18 0.09 0.0504 16.7 11.7 0.0 49.8 6.7 0.00 0.00 0.0005 20.0 15.0 0.0 49.8 6.7 0.00 0.00 0.0006 23.3 18.3 2.3 47.5 9.0 0.69 0.33 0.0507 26.7 21.7 8.9 38.6 17.9 2.67 1.28 0.0508 30.0 25.0 9.7 28.9 27.6 2.91 1.39 0.050

Avg. Shaft 3.4 1.10 0.53 0.050

Toe 28.9 82.78 0.000

Soil Model Parameters/Extensions Shaft Toe

Quake (in) 0.064 0.953Case Damping Factor 0.072 0.000Damping Type SmithUnloading Quake (% of loading quake) 100 75Reloading Level (% of Ru) 100 100Unloading Level (% of Ru) 43Soil Plug Weight (kips) 0.04

CAPWAP match quality = 4.14 (Wave Up Match) ; RSA = 0Observed: final set = 0.500 in; blow count = 24 b/ftComputed: final set = 0.802 in; blow count = 15 b/ftReplay Factor: F3:1.000; V3:1.000; V4:1.000;

max. Top Comp. Stress = 0.8 ksi (T= 29.2 ms, max= 1.410 x Top)max. Comp. Stress = 1.1 ksi (Z= 23.3 ft, T= 30.6 ms)max. Tens. Stress = -0.17 ksi (Z= 26.7 ft, T= 139.7 ms)max. Energy (EMX) = 5.9 kip-ft; max. Measured Top Displ. (DMX)= 1.40 in



EXTREMA TABLE

Pile Dist. max. min. max. max. max. max. max.Sgmnt Below Force Force Comp. Tens. Trnsfd. Veloc. Displ.No. Gages Stress Stress Energy

ft kips kips ksi ksi kip-ft ft/s in

1 3.3 89.5 -14.0 0.8 -0.12 5.89 6.7 1.4242 6.7 87.3 -13.8 0.9 -0.14 5.88 7.5 1.4153 10.0 80.8 -11.6 1.0 -0.14 5.33 7.8 1.4054 13.3 75.7 -10.4 1.0 -0.14 4.99 8.0 1.3945 16.7 72.3 -10.0 1.0 -0.14 4.88 8.0 1.3826 20.0 70.4 -9.8 1.1 -0.15 4.86 7.7 1.3697 23.3 66.0 -9.7 1.1 -0.16 4.83 8.9 1.3538 26.7 53.6 -8.7 1.0 -0.17 4.49 9.6 1.3369 30.0 40.2 -4.6 0.8 -0.09 2.03 10.0 1.321

Absolute 23.3 1.1 (T = 30.6 ms) 26.7 -0.17 (T = 139.7 ms)

CASE METHOD

J = 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9RP 71.1 58.4 45.7 33.0 20.3 7.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0RX 71.1 68.3 66.0 64.0 62.6 62.2 62.1 62.0 61.9 61.9RU 71.1 58.4 45.7 33.0 20.3 7.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

RAU = 61.2 (kips); RA2 = 69.8 (kips)

Current CAPWAP Ru = 56.5 (kips); Corresponding J(RP)= 0.12;

RMX requires higher damping; see PDA-W

VMX TVP VT1*Z FT1 FMX DMX DFN SET EMX QUSft/s ms kips kips kips in in in kip-ft kips

6.63 28.89 121.8 76.2 111.0 1.397 0.500 0.500 5.9 74.5

PILE PROFILE AND PILE MODEL

Depth Area E-Modulus Spec. Weight Perim.ft in2 ksi lb/ft3 ft

0.00 113.10 2019.7 65.000 2.094 5.00 95.03 2019.7 65.000 2.094 10.00 78.54 2019.7 65.000 2.094 15.00 70.88 2019.7 65.000 2.094 20.00 63.62 2019.7 65.000 2.094 25.00 50.27 2019.7 65.000 2.094 30.00 50.27 2019.7 65.000 2.094

Toe Area 0.349 ft2



Segmnt Dist. Impedance Imped. Tension Compression Perim.Number B.G. Change Slack Eff. Slack Eff.

ft kips/ft/s % in in ft

1 3.33 19.04 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0942 6.67 16.02 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0943 10.00 14.15 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0944 13.33 12.79 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0945 16.67 11.94 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0946 20.00 11.12 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0947 23.33 9.96 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0948 26.67 8.65 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0949 30.00 8.46 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.094

Pile Damping 2.0 %, Time Incr 0.278 ms, Wave Speed 12000.0 ft/s, 2L/c 5.0 ms

5 205

-100

0

100

200

ms

kips

40 L/c

Force MsdForce Cpt

5 205

-100

0

100

200

ms

kips

40 L/c


Pile

0

1

2

3

4

kips

/ft

0

20

40

60

80

kips


Pile Forceat Ru

0 20 40 60 800.000

0.400

0.800

1.200

1.600

Load (kips)

Dis

plac

emen

t (in

)

Pile TopBottom


queens lake dam sanitary projec; Pile: Test Pile 2 restrike; 12" timber; Blow: 3 (Test: 01-Jan-2001 00:39:) 26-Oct-2016Schnabel Engineering CAPWAP(R) 2006-3


queens lake dam sanitary projec; Pile: Test Pile 2 restrike Test: 01-Jan-2001 00:39:12" timber; Blow: 3 CAPWAP(R) 2006-3Schnabel Engineering OP: D. Smith,PE




Soil Dist. Depth Ru Force Sum Unit Unit Smith QuakeSgmnt Below Below in Pile of Resist. Resist. DampingNo. Gages Grade Ru (Depth) (Area) Factor

ft ft kips kips kips kips/ft ksf s/ft in

60.81 13.8 5.8 0.0 60.8 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.2882 20.6 12.6 0.0 60.8 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.2883 27.5 19.5 0.0 60.8 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.2884 34.4 26.4 1.3 59.5 1.3 0.19 0.01 0.119 0.2885 41.3 33.3 9.0 50.5 10.3 1.31 0.05 0.119 0.2886 48.1 40.1 18.6 31.9 28.9 2.71 0.11 0.119 0.2887 55.0 47.0 24.2 7.7 53.1 3.52 0.14 0.119 0.280

Avg. Shaft 7.6 1.13 0.04 0.119 0.285

Toe 7.7 22.06 0.049 0.272


Case Damping Factor 0.333 0.020Damping Type SmithUnloading Quake (% of loading quake) 29 29Reloading Level (% of Ru) 100 100Unloading Level (% of Ru) 43Soil Plug Weight (kips) 0.09

CAPWAP match quality = 4.68 (Wave Up Match) ; RSA = 0Observed: final set = 0.500 in; blow count = 24 b/ftComputed: final set = 0.309 in; blow count = 39 b/ft




EXTREMA TABLE



1 3.4 118.6 -37.3 1.0 -0.33 5.66 6.7 0.7572 6.9 117.2 -39.1 1.1 -0.35 5.65 6.8 0.7503 10.3 115.4 -40.7 1.1 -0.38 5.65 7.0 0.7434 13.8 112.8 -42.1 1.1 -0.40 5.65 7.1 0.7365 17.2 109.4 -43.5 1.1 -0.42 5.64 7.2 0.7276 20.6 106.1 -44.4 1.1 -0.46 5.64 7.3 0.7187 24.1 102.9 -45.1 1.1 -0.49 5.63 7.4 0.7088 27.5 99.7 -45.2 1.2 -0.53 5.62 7.6 0.6989 30.9 99.3 -45.4 1.2 -0.57 5.62 7.8 0.68610 34.4 100.3 -45.0 1.3 -0.60 5.61 7.9 0.67311 37.8 93.4 -43.3 1.3 -0.63 5.45 7.9 0.65812 41.3 94.7 -42.5 1.5 -0.66 5.45 8.1 0.64213 44.7 85.7 -35.4 1.4 -0.59 4.49 7.6 0.62814 48.1 89.4 -34.7 1.6 -0.62 4.49 7.9 0.61315 51.6 67.1 -20.9 1.3 -0.39 2.74 8.8 0.60316 55.0 55.9 -20.4 1.1 -0.40 0.37 9.3 0.592

Absolute 48.1 1.6 (T = 25.5 ms) 41.3 -0.66 (T = 49.6 ms)

CASE METHOD

J = 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9RP 100.0 86.3 72.7 59.1 45.5 31.8 18.2 4.6 0.0 0.0RX 125.9 115.8 106.2 96.5 86.9 78.0 72.0 66.3 63.6 62.3RU 100.0 86.3 72.7 59.1 45.5 31.8 18.2 4.6 0.0 0.0

RAU = 59.3 (kips); RA2 = 58.8 (kips)

Current CAPWAP Ru = 60.8 (kips); Corresponding J(RP)= 0.29; matches RX9 within 5%


10.78 21.77 205.3 30.9 138.9 0.895 0.501 0.500 4.7 80.3



0.00 113.10 2019.7 65.000 25.130 10.00 107.51 2019.7 65.000 25.130 15.00 103.87 2019.7 65.000 25.130 20.00 95.03 2019.7 65.000 25.130





25.00 86.59 2019.7 65.000 25.130 30.00 78.54 2019.7 65.000 25.130 35.00 70.88 2019.7 65.000 25.130 40.00 63.62 2019.7 65.000 25.130 45.00 56.75 2019.7 65.000 25.130 55.00 50.27 2019.7 65.000 25.130

Toe Area 0.349 ft2



1 3.44 19.04 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 25.1302 6.88 18.56 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 25.1303 10.31 18.23 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 25.1304 13.75 17.85 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 25.1305 17.19 17.31 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 25.1306 20.63 16.32 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 25.1307 24.06 15.33 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 25.1308 27.50 14.37 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 25.1309 30.94 13.44 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 25.13010 34.38 12.54 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 25.13011 37.81 11.67 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 25.13012 41.25 10.83 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 25.13013 44.69 10.02 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 25.13014 48.13 9.40 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 25.13015 51.56 9.03 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 25.13016 55.00 8.65 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 25.130


5 105

-150

0

150

300

ms

kips

16 L/c

Force MsdForce Cpt

5 105

-150

0

150

300

ms

kips

16 L/c


Pile

0

1

2

3

4

kips

/ft

0

30

60

90

120

kips


Pile Forceat Ru

0 30 60 90 1200.000

0.300

0.600

0.900

1.200

Load (kips)

Dis

plac

emen

t (in

)

Pile TopBottom


queens lake dam sanitary projec; Pile: Test Pile 3; 12" timber; Blow: 3 (Test: 01-Jan-2001 01:23:) 26-Oct-2016Schnabel Engineering CAPWAP(R) 2006-3


queens lake dam sanitary projec; Pile: Test Pile 3 Test: 01-Jan-2001 01:23:12" timber; Blow: 3 CAPWAP(R) 2006-3Schnabel Engineering OP: D. Smith,PE






82.51 20.5 5.0 0.0 82.5 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0002 27.3 11.8 0.0 82.5 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0003 34.2 18.7 0.4 82.1 0.4 0.06 0.03 0.0494 41.0 25.5 0.5 81.6 0.9 0.07 0.03 0.0495 47.8 32.3 0.5 81.1 1.4 0.07 0.03 0.0496 54.7 39.2 4.2 76.9 5.6 0.61 0.29 0.0497 61.5 46.0 10.2 66.7 15.8 1.49 0.71 0.049

Avg. Shaft 2.3 0.34 0.16 0.049

Toe 66.7 191.08 0.063


Quake (in) 0.049 0.200Case Damping Factor 0.041 0.221Unloading Quake (% of loading quake) 30 74Reloading Level (% of Ru) 100 100Unloading Level (% of Ru) 0Soil Plug Weight (kips) 0.07





EXTREMA TABLE



1 3.4 180.1 -28.6 1.6 -0.25 4.05 10.8 0.6142 6.8 175.9 -4.0 1.7 -0.04 4.02 11.0 0.6153 10.3 172.9 -5.1 1.8 -0.05 3.99 11.2 0.6094 13.7 170.3 -8.5 1.8 -0.09 3.95 11.3 0.5975 17.1 167.7 -11.7 1.9 -0.13 3.91 11.5 0.5806 20.5 165.1 -16.5 1.9 -0.19 3.88 11.6 0.5607 23.9 162.5 -19.1 1.9 -0.23 3.84 11.8 0.5488 27.3 160.0 -19.4 1.9 -0.24 3.80 11.9 0.5359 30.8 157.6 -22.0 2.0 -0.28 3.75 12.1 0.51810 34.2 155.2 -21.2 2.0 -0.28 3.70 12.2 0.49711 37.6 152.3 -25.6 2.1 -0.35 3.62 12.4 0.47512 41.0 149.9 -24.9 2.1 -0.35 3.57 12.5 0.46113 44.4 146.8 -25.1 2.1 -0.36 3.47 12.7 0.44514 47.8 144.2 -23.4 2.2 -0.35 3.41 12.9 0.42315 51.3 140.8 -21.8 2.2 -0.34 3.31 13.1 0.39616 54.7 141.7 -21.4 2.4 -0.36 3.24 12.9 0.37117 58.1 132.8 -20.4 2.4 -0.36 2.93 13.1 0.35118 61.5 122.0 -19.4 2.3 -0.37 2.50 14.2 0.327

Absolute 58.1 2.4 (T = 25.6 ms) 61.5 -0.37 (T = 44.7 ms)

CASE METHOD

J = 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9RP 84.2 72.1 60.1 48.0 35.9 23.8 11.7 0.0 0.0 0.0RX 163.0 154.5 146.0 137.5 129.0 120.5 111.9 106.3 106.0 105.7RU 84.2 72.1 60.1 48.0 35.9 23.8 11.7 0.0 0.0 0.0

RAU = 77.4 (kips); RA2 = 108.4 (kips)




11.29 21.07 215.0 -10.0 257.4 0.800 0.200 0.200 1.7 42.0





0.00 113.10 2019.7 65.000 2.094 10.00 95.03 2019.7 65.000 2.094 20.00 86.59 2019.7 65.000 2.094 30.00 78.54 2019.7 65.000 2.094 40.00 70.88 2019.7 65.000 2.094 50.00 63.62 2019.7 65.000 2.094 61.50 50.27 2019.7 65.000 2.094

Toe Area 0.349 ft2



1 3.42 19.04 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0942 6.83 17.48 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0943 10.25 16.44 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0944 13.67 15.72 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0945 17.08 15.23 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0946 20.50 14.75 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0947 23.92 14.28 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0948 27.33 13.82 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0949 30.75 13.35 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.09410 34.17 12.91 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.09411 37.58 12.46 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.09412 41.00 12.03 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.09413 44.42 11.60 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.09414 47.83 11.18 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.09415 51.25 10.75 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.09416 54.67 10.13 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.09417 58.08 9.46 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.09418 61.50 8.80 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.094


10 60

-100

0

100

200

ms

kips

9 L/c

Force MsdForce Cpt

10 60

-100

0

100

200

ms

kips

9 L/c


Pile

0

1

2

3

4

kips

/ft

0

20

40

60

80

kips


Pile Forceat Ru

0 20 40 60 800.000

0.300

0.600

0.900

1.200

Load (kips)

Dis

plac

emen

t (in

)

Pile TopBottom


queens lake dam sanitary projec; Pile: Test Pile 3A; 12" timber; Blow: 8 (Test: 01-Jan-2001 01:08:) 26-Oct-2016Schnabel Engineering CAPWAP(R) 2006-3


queens lake dam sanitary projec; Pile: Test Pile 3A Test: 01-Jan-2001 01:08:12" timber; Blow: 8 CAPWAP(R) 2006-3Schnabel Engineering OP: D. Smith,PE






45.51 14.0 5.0 0.0 45.5 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0002 21.0 12.0 0.0 45.5 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0003 28.0 19.0 0.0 45.5 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0004 35.0 26.0 0.9 44.6 0.9 0.13 0.06 0.0245 42.0 33.0 7.7 36.9 8.6 1.10 0.53 0.0246 49.0 40.0 15.8 21.1 24.4 2.26 1.08 0.024

Avg. Shaft 4.1 0.61 0.29 0.024

Toe 21.1 60.44 0.001


Quake (in) 0.148 0.148Case Damping Factor 0.031 0.001Unloading Quake (% of loading quake) 79 30Reloading Level (% of Ru) 100 100Unloading Level (% of Ru) 0Soil Plug Weight (kips) 0.32





EXTREMA TABLE



1 3.5 110.8 -2.9 1.0 -0.03 2.57 6.3 0.7462 7.0 109.1 -2.5 1.0 -0.02 2.56 6.9 0.7413 10.5 107.4 -2.3 1.0 -0.02 2.55 7.0 0.7364 14.0 105.4 -5.0 1.0 -0.05 2.54 6.7 0.7315 17.5 103.2 -2.0 1.0 -0.02 2.53 6.6 0.7266 21.0 100.2 -1.9 1.0 -0.02 2.51 6.8 0.7217 24.5 97.0 -2.8 1.1 -0.03 2.49 6.9 0.7158 28.0 94.0 -4.5 1.1 -0.05 2.48 7.1 0.7079 31.5 91.1 -1.6 1.2 -0.02 2.46 7.3 0.69910 35.0 88.3 -1.3 1.2 -0.02 2.45 7.5 0.69111 38.5 85.1 -1.1 1.2 -0.02 2.39 7.7 0.68312 42.0 84.7 -1.3 1.3 -0.02 2.38 7.7 0.67513 45.5 91.2 -0.9 1.6 -0.01 1.96 7.8 0.66914 49.0 87.4 -1.2 1.7 -0.02 1.04 8.4 0.661

Absolute 49.0 1.7 (T = 24.5 ms) 28.0 -0.05 (T = 35.0 ms)

CASE METHOD

J = 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9RP 36.5 21.3 6.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0RX 82.4 78.5 74.7 70.8 67.0 63.2 59.3 55.5 51.6 47.8RU 36.5 21.3 6.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

RAU = 5.2 (kips); RA2 = 1.1 (kips)

Current CAPWAP Ru = 45.5 (kips); Corresponding J(RP)= 0.00; matches RX9 within 5%


10.41 21.00 198.2 -10.2 128.1 0.988 0.499 0.500 1.3 20.3



0.00 113.10 2019.7 65.000 2.095 10.00 103.87 2019.7 65.000 2.095 20.00 95.03 2019.7 65.000 2.095 30.00 78.54 2019.7 65.000 2.095 40.00 63.62 2019.7 65.000 2.095 49.00 50.27 2019.7 65.000 2.095



Toe Area 0.349 ft2



1 3.50 19.04 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0952 7.00 18.23 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0953 10.50 17.68 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0954 14.00 17.15 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0955 17.50 16.63 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0956 21.00 16.09 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0957 24.50 15.24 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0958 28.00 14.26 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0959 31.50 13.30 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.09510 35.00 12.41 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.09511 38.50 11.53 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.09512 42.00 10.65 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.09513 45.50 9.77 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.09514 49.00 8.90 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.095


5 105

-100

0

100

200

ms

kips

16 L/c

Force MsdForce Cpt

5 105

-100

0

100

200

ms

kips

16 L/c


Pile

0

1

2

3

4

kips

/ft

0

25

50

75

100

kips


Pile Forceat Ru

0 25 50 75 1000.000

0.250

0.500

0.750

1.000

Load (kips)

Dis

plac

emen

t (in

)

Pile TopBottom










95.31 27.3 6.8 2.4 92.9 2.4 0.35 0.17 0.047 0.2792 34.2 13.7 6.1 86.8 8.5 0.89 0.43 0.047 0.2783 41.0 20.5 10.7 76.1 19.2 1.57 0.75 0.047 0.2784 47.8 27.3 21.2 54.9 40.4 3.10 1.48 0.047 0.2785 54.7 34.2 19.4 35.5 59.8 2.84 1.36 0.047 0.2686 61.5 41.0 21.5 14.0 81.3 3.15 1.50 0.047 0.241

Avg. Shaft 13.6 1.98 0.95 0.047 0.266

Toe 14.0 40.10 0.272 0.053


Case Damping Factor 0.202 0.200Damping Type SmithUnloading Quake (% of loading quake) 100 120Reloading Level (% of Ru) 100 100Unloading Level (% of Ru) 0Resistance Gap (included in Toe Quake) (in) 0.014Soil Plug Weight (kips) 0.04





EXTREMA TABLE



1 3.4 175.7 0.0 1.6 0.00 3.77 10.5 0.6122 6.8 169.9 0.0 1.6 0.00 3.72 10.8 0.5983 10.3 164.4 0.0 1.7 0.00 3.67 11.0 0.5824 13.7 158.9 0.0 1.7 0.00 3.59 11.3 0.5625 17.1 154.3 0.0 1.8 0.00 3.49 11.6 0.5396 20.5 151.0 0.0 1.9 0.00 3.41 11.8 0.5177 23.9 148.5 0.0 1.9 0.00 3.33 11.9 0.4958 27.3 146.3 0.0 2.0 0.00 3.23 12.0 0.4709 30.8 142.4 0.0 2.0 0.00 3.04 12.1 0.44410 34.2 141.1 0.0 2.0 0.00 2.93 12.1 0.41611 37.6 134.8 0.0 2.0 0.00 2.66 12.1 0.39212 41.0 134.6 0.0 2.1 0.00 2.58 12.1 0.36713 44.4 126.4 0.0 2.0 0.00 2.22 11.9 0.34314 47.8 128.9 0.0 2.2 0.00 2.14 11.6 0.31715 51.3 112.9 0.0 2.0 0.00 1.65 11.4 0.29716 54.7 114.5 0.0 2.1 0.00 1.61 11.2 0.27917 58.1 90.3 -0.9 1.7 -0.02 1.31 12.1 0.26718 61.5 86.4 -1.6 1.7 -0.03 1.04 12.5 0.255

Absolute 47.8 2.2 (T = 24.5 ms) 61.5 -0.03 (T = 50.7 ms)

CASE METHOD

J = 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9RP 171.0 154.5 138.0 121.5 104.9 88.4 71.9 55.4 38.8 22.3RX 171.0 154.5 139.9 138.7 137.5 136.3 135.4 135.4 135.4 135.4RU 171.0 154.5 138.0 121.5 104.9 88.4 71.9 55.4 38.8 22.3

RAU = 91.3 (kips); RA2 = 100.6 (kips)




10.41 20.78 198.3 138.0 201.0 0.719 0.250 0.250 3.2 79.5





0.00 113.10 2019.7 65.000 2.095 10.00 95.03 2019.7 65.000 2.095 20.00 78.54 2019.7 65.000 2.095 30.00 70.88 2019.7 65.000 2.095 40.00 63.62 2019.7 65.000 2.095 50.00 56.75 2019.7 65.000 2.095 61.50 50.27 2019.7 65.000 2.095

Toe Area 0.349 ft2



1 3.42 19.04 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0952 6.83 17.48 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0953 10.25 16.44 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0954 13.67 15.45 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0955 17.08 14.51 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0956 20.50 13.56 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0957 23.92 12.94 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0958 27.33 12.50 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0959 30.75 12.06 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.09510 34.17 11.63 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.09511 37.58 11.21 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.09512 41.00 10.80 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.09513 44.42 10.40 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.09514 47.83 10.00 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.09515 51.25 9.61 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.09516 54.67 9.27 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.09517 58.08 8.95 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.09518 61.50 8.63 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.095


5 185

-60

0

60

120

ms

kips

42 L/c

Force MsdForce Cpt

5 185

-60

0

60

120

ms

kips

42 L/c


Pile

0

1

2

3

4

kips

/ft

0

20

40

60

80

kips


Pile Forceat Ru

0 20 40 60 800.000

0.400

0.800

1.200

1.600

Load (kips)

Dis

plac

emen

t (in

)

Pile TopBottom










76.31 17.3 2.3 0.0 76.3 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.1102 24.2 9.2 0.7 75.6 0.7 0.10 0.05 0.160 0.1103 31.2 16.2 4.8 70.8 5.5 0.69 0.33 0.160 0.1104 38.1 23.1 10.2 60.6 15.7 1.47 0.70 0.160 0.1105 45.0 30.0 14.1 46.5 29.8 2.04 0.97 0.160 0.102

Avg. Shaft 6.0 0.99 0.47 0.160 0.106

Toe 46.5 133.20 0.047 0.547


Case Damping Factor 0.250 0.114Damping Type SmithUnloading Quake (% of loading quake) 30 100Reloading Level (% of Ru) 100 100Resistance Gap (included in Toe Quake) (in) 0.000Soil Plug Weight (kips) 0.06





EXTREMA TABLE



1 3.5 84.5 -23.5 0.7 -0.21 3.90 5.4 0.7912 6.9 82.8 -23.6 0.8 -0.23 3.87 5.4 0.7783 10.4 81.2 -23.6 0.8 -0.24 3.83 5.3 0.7644 13.8 82.2 -23.6 0.9 -0.26 3.78 5.3 0.7485 17.3 83.1 -23.7 1.0 -0.28 3.74 5.2 0.7326 20.8 80.3 -23.9 1.0 -0.30 3.68 5.5 0.7137 24.2 76.9 -24.1 1.0 -0.32 3.65 5.8 0.6938 27.7 78.1 -23.5 1.1 -0.34 3.54 6.0 0.6729 31.2 80.1 -23.6 1.2 -0.37 3.54 5.8 0.64710 34.6 75.2 -19.0 1.2 -0.31 2.98 5.4 0.62411 38.1 77.1 -19.0 1.3 -0.33 2.91 5.3 0.59912 41.5 64.3 -9.4 1.2 -0.17 2.17 5.6 0.57713 45.0 63.7 -9.5 1.2 -0.18 1.23 6.0 0.553

Absolute 38.1 1.3 (T = 38.4 ms) 31.2 -0.37 (T = 122.0 ms)

CASE METHOD

J = 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9RP 76.0 66.1 56.2 46.4 36.5 26.6 16.8 6.9 0.0 0.0RX 100.1 95.8 92.1 88.5 86.9 86.9 86.9 86.9 86.9 86.9RU 76.0 66.1 56.2 46.4 36.5 26.6 16.8 6.9 0.0 0.0

RAU = 78.5 (kips); RA2 = 86.0 (kips)




5.66 27.69 107.8 66.9 82.0 0.803 0.200 0.200 3.9 93.4

Possible Pile Damage at 0.16 L Below Gages?



0.00 113.07 2019.7 65.000 2.095 10.00 95.03 2019.7 65.000 2.095 20.00 78.54 2019.7 65.000 2.095 30.00 63.62 2019.7 65.000 2.095





45.00 50.27 2019.7 65.000 2.095

Toe Area 0.349 ft2



1 3.46 19.04 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0952 6.92 17.46 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0953 10.38 16.41 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0954 13.85 15.41 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0955 17.31 14.45 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0956 20.77 13.49 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0957 24.23 12.59 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0958 27.69 11.73 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0959 31.15 10.88 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.09510 34.62 10.28 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.09511 38.08 9.76 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.09512 41.54 9.24 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.09513 45.00 8.72 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.095


5 185

-60

0

60

120

ms

kips

42 L/c

Force MsdForce Cpt

5 185

-60

0

60

120

ms

kips

42 L/c


Pile

0

1

2

3

4

kips

/ft

0

20

40

60

80

kips


Pile Forceat Ru

0 20 40 60 800.000

0.400

0.800

1.200

1.600

Load (kips)

Dis

plac

emen

t (in

)

Pile TopBottom










76.71 17.3 2.3 0.8 75.9 0.8 0.35 0.17 0.139 0.2122 24.2 9.2 1.4 74.5 2.2 0.20 0.10 0.139 0.2123 31.2 16.2 4.0 70.5 6.2 0.58 0.28 0.139 0.2124 38.1 23.1 9.8 60.7 16.0 1.42 0.68 0.139 0.2125 45.0 30.0 15.8 44.9 31.8 2.28 1.09 0.139 0.197

Avg. Shaft 6.4 1.06 0.51 0.139 0.204

Toe 44.9 128.62 0.035 0.572


Case Damping Factor 0.232 0.083Damping Type SmithUnloading Quake (% of loading quake) 40 100Reloading Level (% of Ru) 100 100Unloading Level (% of Ru) 87Soil Plug Weight (kips) 0.24





EXTREMA TABLE



1 3.5 82.6 -23.3 0.7 -0.21 3.92 5.5 0.8172 6.9 80.8 -23.4 0.8 -0.23 3.88 5.5 0.8043 10.4 79.1 -23.5 0.8 -0.24 3.84 5.5 0.7904 13.8 79.3 -23.5 0.9 -0.26 3.80 5.4 0.7745 17.3 84.2 -23.5 1.0 -0.27 3.75 5.3 0.7586 20.8 84.7 -22.8 1.1 -0.28 3.64 5.4 0.7407 24.2 82.6 -22.9 1.1 -0.31 3.58 5.5 0.7218 27.7 75.8 -21.7 1.1 -0.31 3.41 5.9 0.7009 31.2 75.7 -21.9 1.2 -0.34 3.34 6.2 0.67710 34.6 73.7 -18.6 1.2 -0.30 2.98 6.1 0.65311 38.1 75.7 -18.7 1.3 -0.32 2.90 5.5 0.62812 41.5 63.9 -10.5 1.2 -0.19 2.22 5.5 0.60513 45.0 65.3 -10.6 1.3 -0.20 1.22 6.0 0.582

Absolute 38.1 1.3 (T = 38.4 ms) 31.2 -0.34 (T = 122.3 ms)

CASE METHOD

J = 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9RP 76.0 66.1 56.2 46.4 36.5 26.6 16.8 6.9 0.0 0.0RX 100.1 95.8 92.1 88.5 86.9 86.9 86.9 86.9 86.9 86.9RU 76.0 66.1 56.2 46.4 36.5 26.6 16.8 6.9 0.0 0.0

RAU = 78.5 (kips); RA2 = 86.0 (kips)




5.66 27.69 107.8 66.9 82.0 0.803 0.200 0.200 3.9 93.4



0.00 113.07 2019.7 65.000 2.095 10.00 95.03 2019.7 65.000 2.095 20.00 78.54 2019.7 65.000 2.095 30.00 63.62 2019.7 65.000 2.095 45.00 50.27 2019.7 65.000 2.095

Toe Area 0.349 ft2





1 3.46 19.04 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0952 6.92 17.46 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0953 10.38 16.41 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0954 13.85 15.41 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0955 17.31 14.45 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0956 20.77 13.49 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0957 24.23 12.59 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0958 27.69 11.73 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.0959 31.15 10.88 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.09510 34.62 10.28 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.09511 38.08 9.76 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.09512 41.54 9.24 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.09513 45.00 8.72 0.00 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 2.095


October 27, 2016 Schnabel Engineering, LLC Project 16C33018 @2016 All Rights Reserved

APPENDIX B

TEST PILE LOGS

Job No.Project Name:Contractor:Inspector:

Hammer Type: Pile Location: 7Hammer Energy: Date Driven: 4:07 P Stop: 4:13 PM

Pile Type & Size:Design Capacity: (tons)Pile Length: (ft)Pile Batter:

Plumbness: (%)(%)

Date: 10/24Inch Blows

1 32 23 14 1567891011121314151617181920212223

Pile Driving Log

Sequence:Start:

Depth Blows Depth Blows Depth Blows

Ice 8v2- Single Action

1Depth Blows

26 51Depth Blows

76 1012 27 52 77 1023 28 53 78 1034 W.O.H. 29 54 79 1045 30 55 80 1056 31 56 81 1067 32 57 82 1078 33 58 83 1089 34 59 84 10910 35 60 85 11011 36 61 86 11112 37 62 87 11213 38 63 88 11314 39 64 89 11415 40 65 90 11516 41 66 91 11617 42 67 92 11718 43 68 93 11819 44 69 94 11920 45 70 95 12021 2 46 71 96 12122 5 47 72 97 12223 5 48 73 98 12324 5 49 74 99 12425 5 50 75 100

Remarks:

Restrike Data

125

10/20/16(ft-lbs)17,600TP-1

16C33018.00Queens Lake Sanitary Sewer ProjectWaterfront Design & Construction/ J. Sanders Constru D. Smith, PE

N/S Ground Surface EL: 4

8" tip timber1250

Design12.75-34 -34

End of Initial Final

E/W Blowcount Reference EL: 9

Top of PileTip Grade

24




Plumbness: (%)(%)


1 22 23 14567891011121314151617181920212223



2712.75-38


-38

N/S Ground Surface EL:

8" tip timber1265

Design

16C33018.00Queens Lake Sanitary Sewer ProjectWaterfront Design & Construction/ J. Sanders Constru D. Smith, PE

10/20/16(ft-lbs)17,600TP-2

Restrike Data

125

Remarks:

12425 2 50 75 100

12324 49 74 99

12223 48 73 98

12122 47 15 72 97

12021 46 15 71 96

11920 45 15 70 95

11819 44 15 69 94

11718 43 14 68 93

11617 42 11 67 92

11516 41 11 66 91

11415 40 10 65 90

11314 39 12 64 89

11213 38 8 63 88

11112 37 8 62 87

11011 36 7 61 86

10910 35 5 60 85

1089 34 5 59 84

1078 33 4 58 83

1067 32 2 57 82

1056 31 1 56 81

1045 30 1 55 80

1034 W.O.H. 29 5 54 79

1023 28 5 53 78

1012 27 5 52 77

51Depth Blows

761Depth Blows

26 1

Pile Driving Log

Sequence:Start:




Hammer Type: Pile Location: 4Hammer Energy: Date Driven: 11:56 AStop: 12:06


Plumbness: (%)(%)

Date: 10/24/16Inch Blows

1 42 33 24567891011121314151617181920212223



1912.75-46


-46


8" tip timber1265

Design

16C33018.00Queens Lake Sanitary Sewer ProjectWaterfront Design & Construction/ J. Sanders Constru R. Rountree

10/19/16(ft-lbs)17,600TP-3

Restrike Data

125

Remarks:

12425 50 6 75 100

12324 49 5 74 99

12223 48 8 73 98

12122 47 9 72 97

12021 46 9 71 96

11920 45 6 70 95

11819 44 4 69 94

11718 43 4 68 93

11617 42 4 67 92

11516 41 5 66 91

11415 40 4 65 90

11314 39 2 64 89

11213 38 2 63 88

11112 37 2 62 87

11011 36 4 61 86

10910 35 4 60 85

1089 34 59 84

1078 33 58 83

1067 32 57 82

1056 31 56 81

1045 30 55 7 80

1034 29 54 7 79

1023 28 53 6 78

1012 27 52 7 77

51 6Depth Blows

761Depth Blows

26

Pile Driving Log

Sequence:Start:






Plumbness: (%)(%)


1 22 13 14 1567891011121314151617181920212223

Pile Driving Log

Sequence:Start:



1Depth Blows

26 51Depth Blows

76 1012 27 52 77 1023 28 53 78 1034 29 54 79 1045 30 55 80 1056 31 56 81 1067 32 57 82 1078 33 58 83 1089 34 59 84 10910 35 60 85 11011 36 61 86 11112 37 62 87 11213 38 63 88 11314 39 64 89 11415 40 65 90 11516 41 2 66 91 11617 42 2 67 92 11718 43 2 68 93 11819 44 69 94 11920 45 70 95 12021 46 71 96 12122 47 72 97 12223 48 73 98 12324 49 74 99 12425 50 75 100

Remarks:

Restrike Data

125

10/19/16(ft-lbs)17,600TP-3A



8" tip timber1250

Design12.75-34 -34




16


Hammer Type: Pile Location: 3Hammer Energy: Date Driven: 9:46 A Stop: 9:58 AM


Plumbness: (%)(%)


1 42 23 14 1567891011121314151617181920212223

Pile Driving Log

Sequence:Start:



1Depth Blows

26 51Depth Blows

76 1012 27 1 52 77 1023 28 1 53 78 1034 29 3 54 79 1045 30 6 55 80 1056 31 4 56 81 1067 32 5 57 82 1078 33 4 58 83 1089 34 4 59 84 10910 35 6 60 85 11011 36 6 61 86 11112 37 7 62 87 11213 38 10 63 88 11314 39 10 64 89 11415 40 12 65 90 11516 41 12 66 91 11617 42 11 67 92 11718 43 11 68 93 11819 44 11 69 94 11920 45 12 70 95 12021 46 13 71 96 12122 47 13 72 97 12223 48 13 73 98 12324 49 11 74 99 12425 50 11 75 100

Remarks:

Restrike Data

125

10/19/16(ft-lbs)17,600TP-4



8" tip timber1260

Design12.75-41 -41




19


Hammer Type: Pile Location: 2Hammer Energy: Date Driven: 11:59 AStop: 12:06 PM


Plumbness: (%)(%)


1 32 23 24 1567891011121314151617181920212223



2012.75-30


-30


8" tip timber1250

Design


10/18/16(ft-lbs)17,600TP-5

Restrike Data

125

Remarks:

12425 3 50 75 100

12324 1 49 74 99

12223 2 48 73 98

12122 1 47 72 97

12021 1 46 71 96

11920 45 70 95

11819 44 69 94

11718 43 68 93

11617 42 67 92

11516 41 66 91

11415 40 65 90

11314 39 64 89

11213 38 16 63 88

11112 37 15 62 87

11011 36 14 61 86

10910 35 9 60 85

1089 34 11 59 84

1078 33 10 58 83

1067 32 5 57 82

1056 31 4 56 81

1045 30 4 55 80

1034 W.O.H. 29 5 54 79

1023 28 7 53 78

1012 27 7 52 77

51Depth Blows

761Depth Blows

26 7

Pile Driving Log

Sequence:Start:




Hammer Type: Pile Location: 1Hammer Energy: Date Driven: 11:59 AStop: 12:06 PM


Plumbness: (%)(%)


1 42 33 24567891011121314151617181920212223

Pile Driving Log

Sequence:Start:



1Depth Blows

26 12 51Depth Blows

76 1012 27 12 52 77 1023 28 13 53 78 1034 W.O.H. 29 14 54 79 1045 30 18 55 80 1056 31 18 56 81 1067 32 15 57 82 1078 33 16 58 83 1089 34 13 59 84 10910 35 14 60 85 11011 36 16 61 86 11112 37 25 62 87 11213 38 31 63 88 11314 39 36 64 89 11415 40 28 65 90 11516 41 32 66 91 11617 42 35 67 92 11718 43 68 93 11819 44 69 94 11920 1 45 70 95 12021 1 46 71 96 12122 1 47 72 97 12223 2 48 73 98 12324 4 49 74 99 12425 11 50 75 100

Remarks:

Restrike Data

125

10/18/16(ft-lbs)17,600TP-5



8" tip timber2050

Design12.75-30 -30




20

Documents

DYNAMIC PILE TESTING REPORT - WordPress.com · ft upstream of the existing dam. The proposed bridge will be supported on timber piles with 8 inch diameter tips. The piles have a design