SVBX Section 31 63 29 Drilled Concrete Piers and Shafts AACvtaorgcontent.s3-us-west-1.amazonaws.com/Site... · SVBX - Berryessa Extension SUBMITTAL REVIEW Submittal Title: The Crossings

Skanska Shimmick Herzog

Phone: 951.368.6402Milpitas, CA 95035

1436 California Circle

PROJECT:

JOB NO:CONTRACT NO:

98005

VTA Berryessa Extension ProjectC700

31 63 29 - 1.05A

TO:

FROM:

TITLE: The Crossings Pre-Cast Wall CIDH

Thomas W. SuttonSkanska Shimmick Herzog RECOMMENDED CONTACT:

DESCRIPTION/REMARKS STATUSRECEIVED SENT RETURNEDREVISION

NO.

SUBMITTAL

SUBMITTAL NO:

John Engstrom

The Crossings Pre-Cast Wall CIDH Pile OPN7/14/20157/14/20150

REMARKS:

f_sb_01_usac_01_ws_098005

Received July 14, 2015 PDCC P0728-C700-316329-1.05A.R0

SVBX - Berryessa Extension

SUBMITTAL REVIEW

Submittal Title: Document Control

Spec Section & P a r a g r a p h # (i.e, 01 31 01-1.04B): Sub No.:

Discipline: Rev No.:

□ For EOR Approval □ For VTA Approval □ For VTA Information Only □ For Third Party

Description of Item Submitted

(Type size, model #, etc)

Type of Submittal( Shop

dwg, samples, matls)

Spec Parameter & Section #

(General Req, Contract, Performance Spec, Tech Spec)

Drawing Sheet #

Submittal Prepared By: Date Submitted: Requested Response Date:

Subcontractor/Supplier, If Applicable:

Deviation: No( ) Yes( ) See Notes Substitution: No( ) Yes( ) See Attached Information

Deviation/Substitution Notes (attach additional pages if necessary):

YES NO N/A

Submittal Reviewer's Checklist

1. Are specification and contract drawing references correct and included? (If not change or add them) □ □ □

2. Are the submittal date & requested return date included? (ASAP is not acceptable) □ □ □

3. Have you reviewed the specification section which requires this submittal? □ □ □

4. Do all materials submitted meet the applicable specification(s)? □ □ □

5. Are any deviations or substitutions clearly defined in the submittal notes above? □ □ □

6. Have all resubmittal comments been addressed? □ □ □

7. If required, does the submittal have a PE stamp from a Professional Engineer? □ □ □

8. Has the subcontractor/supplier signed and dated the submittal? □ □ □

9. Have you spot checked dimensions, unit weights, quantities, size, etcB with Plans? □ □ □

10. If required, are samples the correct quantity, size, type, and are labeled correctly? □ □ □

11. Is the presentation satisfactory (pages numbered, bound, tabs, spelling/grammar, etc.)? □ □ □

12. Is the correct number of legible copies being submitted? □ □ □

SSH Coordina

(PRINT NAME)

Signature:

Expected Rev

tor:

Date:

iew Hours:

Issue Cost Code:______________________________________

□ Civil □ Structures □ Utililities □ Stations □ Landscape □ Geotech □ Traffic □ Guideway □ Track□ Systems □ Electrical

The Crossings Pre-Cast Wall CIDH Pile

31 63 29 Drilled Concrete Piers and Shafts 31 63 29-005

00

COM, SCVWD

Precast Concrete Wall Panel Drawings/Calcs Drawings/CalcsProposed CIDH Locations (Optimal Location)Mstr. Spec. 31 63 29 Drilled Concrete Piers/ShaSCVWD/VTA/SSHJV Email Correspondance

SpecificationCorrespondance

As-BuiltMaster Specification 31 63 29 pgs. 3-11 of 34

pgs. 14-24 of 34pgs. 25-34 of 34

pgs. 12-13 of 34

Renato Carlos 07/13/15 07/14/15

Old Castle Precast, Inc.

The attached proposed CIDH Locations show an optimal spacing between the CIDH piles and SCVWD easement. Due to designrestrictions, the precast panel is limited to a 20 center to center spacing of the CIDH pile; a greater span will require an intermediate pilewhich would be placed directly above the SCVWD 42" waterline or require a spread footing along the length of the precast wall.

✔

✔ ✔

✔ ✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

Renato Carlos

1

Approval

Renato Carlos

APPROVAL ACTION (This Section to be completed by EOR)

Discipline Reviewed:

Initial Reviewer & Date: Hours Used Reviewing:

Final Reviewer & Title: Date: Review Code:

Engineer Review Code: ( ANN-Exceptions Noted, No Re-submittal Required), (ANR-Exceptions Noted, Re-submittal Required),

(FRO-For Record Only), (NET-No Exceptions Taken), (RRR-Rejected, Revised & Resubmit)

EOR Comments:



Initial Reviewer & Title: Date: Hours Used Reviewing:




EOR Comments:



Initial Reviewer & Title: Date: Hours Used Reviewing:




EOR Comments:

Reviewer & Title:

Design Coordinator :

Initial Reviewer &

Final Reviewer & Title:

Reviewer & Title:


Initial Reviewer &

Final Reviewer & Title:

Reviewer & Title:


1

Oldcastle Precast Page 2 of

PROJECT Crossing at Montague Apartments By : R Strand

PRODUCT 9.0' H (max) Concrete Wall Date : 5/18/2015

TRACT # Checked :

Wall Design Parameters Date :

MATERIALS:

CONCRETE : f'c = 2500 psi , 28 days compressive strength

REINFORCEMENT : ASTM A-615 or ASTM A-706, Grade 60

STEEL: ASTM A582, fy = 50,000 psi

SPECIFICATIONS:

2013 CBC: California Building Code

ACI-318-11: American Concrete Institute

ASCE 7-10: Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures

LOADS: DESIGN LOAD FACTORS:

Wind Load: 110mph Kz: 0.57 Table 29.3-1 Dead Load: 1.2

Exposure : B Kzt: 1 Sec. 26.8.1 Wind Load: 1.6

Kd: 0.85 Table 26.6-1 Lateral Earth Load: 1.6

Gust Effect Factor G: 0.85 Seismic Load: 1.0

Force Coeff Ct: 1.3 Figure 29.4-1 through 29.5-3

qz = .00256*Kz*Kzt*Kd*V^2*I: 15.01 psf

Zip Code Ss: 1.62 ap: 1.0

Lat: 37.410378 Fa: 1.00 Rp: 2.5

Long: -121.8941 Sds = .67*Fa*Ss: 1.09 Ip: 1.0

Seismic Design Cat: D

Lateral Load Diagram for Soundwalls

Wind/Seismic

Load

Horz Pressure from wt of

soil

Soil Parameters

Bearing Capacity: 0 psf

Active Pressure: 0 pcf

Increases at Passive Pressure: 200 pcf

0. kcf/ft Skin Friction: 250 psf

Soil Depth: 0.00 ft max.

Wind:F=qz*G*Ct: 16.58 psf Strength Design

Seismic: Fp=.4*Sds*I*Ww: 21.53 psf 4" wall Strength Design

Panel Dimension

t= 0.33 ft

Wall Height Retained Ht h= 9.00 ft

9 ft 0 ft s= 20.00 ft

4"

9'-

0"

max

2

Page 3 of

PROJECT Crossing at Montague Apartments By : R.Strand


TRACT Checked :

Wall Panel Design Date :

Non Retaining

LATERAL LOADS:

Wind Load: 16.58 psf

Seismic Load 21.53 psf Governs Wind: Ww= 1.0W

Seismic: We= 1.0E

Panel Length: 20.0 ft

Panel Height: 9.0 ft

Retained Soil Height: 0.0 ft

Wall Thickness: 4.00 in

Pier Spacing = 17.20 ft Seismic Governs MOMENT: Mu = w*l2/8 = 0.80 K-ft

Wu = 0.02 ksf WALL SHEAR: Vu = w*(l/2-d) = 0.18 Kips

Concrete Shear Strength fVc = 2.04 Kips > Vu OK

REINFORCEMENT DESIGN

b = 12 in

d = 2 in ρmax = 0.0302

fy = 60,000 psi ρmin = 0.0033

f'c = 2,500 psi ρ = As/bd 0.0039

Mu = 0.80 K-ft a = As*fy/(.85*f'c*b) = 0.38

As = 0.09 sq. in. Φ = 0.90

c = a/β1 = 0.44

β1 = 0.85

check Φ

εt = .003*(d-c)/c = 0.0105

Φ = 0.483+(83.3*εt) = 0.9

As Supplied 0.16 sq. in.

===> USE : 1 , # 4 Bar Approx. Spacing 15.00 in. o/c

ΦMn =Φ*As*fy(d-a/2)/12= 1.30 K-ft

SHRINKAGE REINFORCEMENT

As = 0.0018bt = 0.09 in


===> USE : 1 , # 3 Bar Approx. Spacing 15.28 in. o/c

Wall

Heig

ht

Reta

ined H

eig

ht

3




TRACT Checked :

Pilaster Design Date :

LATERAL LOADS:

Wind Load: 16.58 psf

Seismic Load 21.53 psf Governs Wind: Ww= 1.0W

Seismic: We= 1.0E

Panel Length: 20.0 ft

Panel Height: 9.0 ft

DESIGN PILASTER

Pilaster Spacing = 20.00 ft MOMENT : Mu = wl^2/2 19.79 K-ft

w = 0.49 k/ft PILASTER SHEAR : Vu = w*(l-d) = 4.40 Kips


PILASTER REINFORCEMENT

b = 16 in Pw= h=

d = 12 in ρmax = 0.0302 4399 lbs. 4.50 ft

fy = 60,000 psi ρmin = 0.0033

f'c = 2,500 psi ρ = As/bd 0.0020 Shear at Pilaster Base

Mu = 19.79 K-ft a = As*fy/(.85*f'c*b) = 0.66 Wind:

As = 0.38 sq. in. Φ = 0.90 Seismic: 4399 lbs.

===> USE : 2- # 4 Each Face c = a/β1 = 0.78

As Supplied 0.40 sq. in. β1 = 0.85

check Φ

εt = .003*(d-c)/c = 0.0431

Φ = 0.483+(83.3*εt) = 0.9

ΦMn =Φ*As*fy(d-a/2)/12= 21.00 K-ft

SHEAR REINFORCEMENT

1/2fVc = 16320 lbs. > Vu, NO SHEAR REINFORCEMENT REQUIRED

IF SHEAR REINF. IS REQ'D. USE: * 3 TIES @ 6.00 IN OC

f (Vc + Vs ) = 27586 lbs. > Vu, O.K.

=====> USE #3 TIES @ 18 IN. O.C.

4

Old

castl

e P

recast

Pag

e 5

of

PR

OJ

EC

TC

ross

ing a

t M

onta

gue

Ap

artm

ents

By :

R.S

tran

d

PR

OD

UC

T9

.0' H

(m

ax)

Concr

ete

Wal

lD

ate

:5

/18

/20

15

TR

AC

TC

hec

ked

:

D

ate

:

Post

Des

ign:

Pen

etra

tion

into

pila

ster

The

heig

ht o

f the

pos

t pro

trudi

ng o

ut o

f the

gro

und

and

into

the

pila

ster

Is d

icta

ted

by th

e st

reng

th o

f the

pila

ster

to re

sist

pun

chin

g sh

ear.

Firs

t, de

term

ine

the

pila

ster

s re

sist

ance

to p

unch

ing

shea

r bas

ed o

nth

e s

teel section s

ele

cte

d. T

he top 2

½”

of

the p

ost bears

again

st th

e

conc

rete

.

The

punc

hing

she

ar s

treng

th is

: .75

Vc=.

75*(

4)*(

fc^.

5)*b

o*d

d =

(pila

ster

thic

knes

s-a)

/2-1

.25

bo =

2*(

2.5+

d)+2

*(bf

+d)

h =

Pw*h

(Pw

)/.75

Vc

h =

min

. of 2

'

Seco

nd, d

eter

min

e ho

w ta

ll th

e po

st m

ust b

e su

ch th

at th

e fa

ctor

ed fo

rce

forc

e fro

m th

e to

p of

the

post

is le

ss th

an th

e co

ncre

te s

treng

th.

Plas

tic d

esig

n sh

all b

e us

ed in

det

erm

inin

g st

eel p

ost s

ize.

fc

=2

50

0 p

si

fy=

50

,00

0p

si

Wal

l

Hei

ght

Shap

e

Use

d

Fla

nge

Wid

th"a

" d

im"b

" d

im"b

o"

.75

Vc

Pw

Mu

Ben

din

g

Str

ess

Des

ign "

h"

post

Use

"h"

post

h (

Pw

)

Pil

aste

r

Thic

knes

sd

(ft)

(in)

(in)

(in)

(in)

(lb

s)(l

bs)

(k-f

t)(p

si)

(ft)

(ft)

(ft)

(in)

(in)

9.0

'W

6x1

56

.00

6.2

53

.88

23

.50

57

28

43

99

19

.79

21

98

93

.46

3.4

64

.50

12

.01

.62

5

h-post

h

Pw

Pt

ba

212"

2.5+d

a

bf+d

5




TRACT Checked :

Pier Design Date :

PIER "EFFECTIVE BEAM DIMENSIONS"

PIER DIAMETER, Dp = 16 IN.

REBAR DIAMETER, Rd = 0.625 IN.

NUMBER OF REBAR = 2

Z = DISTANCE TO CL OF REBAR FROM CL OF PIER = 4.3125 IN.

Y = VERTICAL DIST. FROM CL OF REBAR TO HORIZONTAL CL = 3.0489375 IN.

X = DISTANCE FROM CL REBAR TO PIER OUTSIDE DIAMETER = 3.6875 IN.

d = BEAM EFFECTIVE DEPTH = Y + Dp/2 = 11.0489375 IN.

b = BEAM EFFECTIVE WIDTH = 2Y + 1.414X = 11.312 IN.

6




TRACT Checked :

16" Dia. Pier Design Date :

Calculation to determine the depth of pier per CBC equation

in sect. 1807.3.2.1of the 2013 CBC. (Non-constrained formula):

Note that you must guess at "d" on line 1a. of the calc.

below until it agrees with the answer on line 1.

1. d = (A/2) * ( 1 + [ 1 + (4.36h/A)]^.5 ) 9.69 ft

d = guess at depth of embedment in earth 9.70ft

2 Passive pressure acting on # pier dia.(pd) 2.0

3 A = 2.34 * P / (S1 * b) 5.984

4 P = applied lateral force in pounds 4399lbs.

at base of pilaster

5 S1 = Allow lateral soil bearing pressure per 647 psf

table 29-B.

6 Pd = diameter of round pier in feet. 1.33ft

7 h = distance above ground that lateral load 5.50ft (neglet top 1' soil)

P is applied to the pier.

8 d/3 = one third the guess at depth of embedment 3.23 ft

9 Lateral bearing per foot of depth (Pp) = 200psf/ft

Point of zero shear

Xo = (P/(0.5*Pp*Pd*pd))^0.5 4.07ft

Max. moment @ point zero shear

Mmax = P*h 24195lbs-ft

Max Shear

Vmax = P 4399lbs.

7




CLIENT 0 Checked :

16" Dia. Pier Design Date :

APPLIED LOADS

M (DL) = 0.0 KIP-FT.

M (LL) = 0.0 KIP-FT.

M(E) = 24.2 KIP-FT.

Mu = 24.2 KIP-FT.

V (DL) = 0.0 KIPS

V (LL) = 0.0 KIPS

V (E) = 4.4 KIPS

Vu = 4.4 KIPS

BENDING ANALYSIS


b = 11.31 in. ρmax = 0.0302

d = 11.04 in. ρmin = 0.0033

fy = 60,000 psi ρ = As/bd 0.0041

f'c = 2,500 psi a = As*fy/(.85*f'c*b) = 1.29

Mu = 24.19 ft-kips Φ = 0.90

As = 0.52 sq. in. c = a/β1 = 1.52

β1 = 0.85

===> USE : 1- # 7 Each Face


check Φ

εt = .003*(d-c)/c = 0.0189

Φ = 0.483+(83.3*εt) = 0.90

ΦMn =Φ*As*fy(d-a/2)/12= 28.07 K-ft

8

Future Columns

10'-6"

2'-6"

3'-6"

5'-9" 20' 20'

9'

See Note #1

Note #1:

Future column needs to be exactly where existing column

is to match with existing precast wall panel. Requested

6-ft. clearance from centerline of pipe cannot be held.

Column will encroach approximately 1'-3".

Future Pre-Cast Panels

49'

Datum 53.00 ft

Existing Precast Panel

SCVWD

42" Waterline

Inv. 38.27

9

3

4

"

11'-7"

Pile Tip

42.65

Typ.

26'-4"

SCVWD

Requested Clearance

2'-7" 3'-2"

Existing Column

Elevation View

Page 1 of 2

3'-2" 20'

3'-3"

Pre-Cast Wall Construction at The Crossings at Montague

Station 12+54.87

renato.carlos

Typewritten Text

3'-10"

renato.carlos

Polygon

renato.carlos

Polygon

renato.carlos

Cloud

42"SCVWD

Waterline

SCVWD

Requested Clearance

Future

16" dia. x 10'-9" CIDH

2,500 psi

2'-7" 3'-2" 10' 10' 20'

Plan View

Page 2 of 2

20' 3'-3"

2'-1

3

4

"

3'-10

3

4

"

3'-10

3

4

"

2'-1

3

4

"

Pre-Cast Wall Construction at The Crossings at Montague

Station 12+54.87

P a r t 7

Skanska Shimmick Herzog

t% J;* it Vcni vt c *-.i L»j UMITYlM

Master Specifications Revision 0 Approval Seal

n il< iy/ /. /jr Project Engineer Registered D A T E Civil Engineer

Specifications:

0 3 01 08 - Concrete Restoration 0 3 15 13 - Waterstops 0 3 40 00 - Precast Concrete 0 3 82 13 - Concrete Core Drilling 31 09 00 - Geotechnical Instrument & Monitoring of Earthwork 3 I 23 19 - Dewatering 31 40 00 - Shoring and Underpinning 31 50 00 - Excavation Support and Protect ion 31 62 00 - Driven Piles 3 1 63 29 - Drilled Concrete Piers and Shaf t s

/ / & ' / v A ff&Y . \ m if o'j / ODEONM.IJ \Vi,v

u

j i g I I mi ! ! : \ L \ No> C0S1895 J Mil \ j A Exp.12-31 - \ ? j f h V V \ / • & ; /

''v.. > < — Op

S a n t a C l a r a Valley T r a n s p o r t a t i o n A u t h o r i t y

• NO EXCEPTIONS TAKEN (NET) M A K E C O R R E C T I O N S N O T E D ( M C N ) A M E N D AND R E S U B M I T (A/R)

Any action shown above is subject to tlie terms of (lie contract and does not relieve the Contractor of any of its obligations

under the contract, including design and detailing.

C o n t r a c t No. :

Bv

DB11002K

Date: 8/14/13

IFY- L tiM IN' I'ERMAI ION AL tttrcj-'Pwr-s | pk r̂-iv̂ ro | iCGlwiMv;:

Design Unit Approval

For Construction (Only documents on attached index statused MCN or NET)

• fii\*-/thiL fl/rtk EmileJilwan Date BART Project Manager

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS

July 17, 2013 31 63 29 - 1 Contract C700

Drilled Concrete Piers and Shafts Rev. 0

SECTION 31 63 29

DRILLED CONCRETE PIERS AND SHAFTS

The provisions of BART Facilities Standards, Standard Specifications, Release R2.1, dated October

2009, Section 31 63 29, Drilled Concrete Piers and Shafts, shall apply to the Work, except as

modified herein.

PART 1 - GENERAL

Add Article 1.02 as follows:

1.02 RELATED SECTIONS

A. Section 01 33 23, Shop Drawings, Product Data and Samples.

B. Section 01 45 00, Quality Control.

C. Section 03 05 15, Portland Cement Concrete.

D. Section 03 20 00, Concrete Reinforcing.

E. Section 05 05 22, Metal Welding.

Renumber Article 1.02, “Measurement and Payment” to Article 1.03, “Measurement and Payment”

as follows:

1.03 MEASUREMENT AND PAYMENT

Delete Articles 1.03A, 1.03B, and 1.03C and substitute therefor the following:

Separate measurement or payment will not be made for Work required under this Technical

Specifications Section. All costs in connection with the Work specified in this Technical

Specifications Section will be considered to be included with the related item of Work in the Price

Schedule or incidental to the Work.

Renumber Article 1.03, “Definitions” to Article 1.04, “Definitions”.

Renumber Article 1.04, “References” to Article 1.05, “References”.

1.04 REFERENCES

Delete Articles 1.04A through 1.04C and substitute therefor Articles 1.05A through 1.05C as

follows:

A. Association of Drilled Shaft Contractors (ADSC):

1. "Standards and Specifications for the Foundation Drilling Industry"


Contract C700 31 63 29 - 2 July 17, 2013

Rev. 0 Drilled Concrete Piers and Shafts

B. American Concrete Institute (ACI):

1. ACI 336.1 Specification for the Construction of Drilled Piers

C. ASTM International (ASTM):

1. ASTM D1143/D1143M Standard Test Methods for Deep Foundations Under

Static Axial Compressive Load

2. ASTM D3689 Standard Test Methods for Deep Foundations Under

Static Axial Tensile Load

3. ASTM D3966 Standard Test Methods for Deep Foundations Under

Lateral Load

Renumber Article 1.05, “Submittals” to Article 1.06, “Submittals”.

1.05 SUBMITTALS

F. Delete the words “Standards and Specifications” and substitute therefor the words

“Standards and Specifications for the Foundation Drilling Industry”.

Renumber Article 1.06, “Quality Assurance” to Article 1.07, “Quality Assurance”.

1.06 QUALITY ASSURANCE

D. Inspection of Shaft Excavations:

1. Delete the word “Engineer” and substitute therefor the words “independent testing

laboratory”.

2. Delete the word “Engineer” and substitute therefor the words “independent testing

laboratory”.

Add Articles 1.07E and 1.07F as follows:

E. Sampling, Testing and Inspection:

1. The Contractor’s approved independent testing laboratory shall perform sampling,

testing, and inspections in accordance with the provisions herein and Section 01 45 00

- Quality Control.

2. Cooperate with and notify the VTA at least 48 hours in advance of sampling, tests

and inspections, being performed by the independent testing laboratory. The VTA

may elect to observe these procedures. Provide samples and facilities for inspection

to the VTA without extra charge if requested.

3. The independent testing laboratory shall collect samples of materials for testing in

accordance with the provisions outlined herein and as directed by the VTA.


July 17, 2013 31 63 29 - 3 Contract C700

Drilled Concrete Piers and Shafts Rev. 0

F. Qualifications of the independent testing laboratory: Refer to Section 01 45 00 - Quality

Control.

Renumber Article 1.07, “Sequencing and Scheduling” to Article 1.08, “Sequencing and Scheduling”.

1.07 SEQUENCING AND SCHEDULING

A. Delete the word “Engineer” and substitute therefor the word “VTA”.

PART 2 – PRODUCTS

2.01 MATERIALS

In Article 2.01B, delete the words “Contract Drawings” and substitute therefor with the words

“Construction Drawings”.

PART 3 - EXECUTION

3.01 METHOD TEST SHAFTS

B. Delete the word “Engineer” and substitute therefor the word “VTA”.

C. Delete the word “Engineer” and substitute therefor the word “VTA”.

D. Delete the word “Engineer” and substitute therefor the word “VTA”.

3.03 EXCAVATION

A. General:

2. Delete the word “Engineer” and substitute therefor the word “VTA”.

B. Ground Water Control:

2. Delete the word “Engineer” and substitute therefor the word “VTA”.

C. Delete the word “Engineer” and substitute therefor the word “independent testing

laboratory”.

END OF SECTION 31 63 29

RELEASE - R2.1 SECTION 31 63 29 BART FACILITIES STANDARDS Issued: 10/01/2009 PAGE 1 OF 7 STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS

SECTION 31 63 29

DRILLED CONCRETE PIERS AND SHAFTS PART 1 - GENERAL 1.01 SECTION INCLUDES

A. Method Test Shaft B. Load Test C. Excavation D. Installation of Concrete Reinforcement E. Concrete Placement F. Withdrawal of Temporary Steel Casing G. Field Quality Control

1.02 MEASUREMENT AND PAYMENT

A. General: Measurement and payment for drilled shaft foundations will be either by the lump-sum method or by the unit-price method as determined by the listing of the bid item for drilled shaft foundations indicated in the Bid Schedule of the Bid Form.

B. Lump Sum: If the Bid Schedule indicates a lump sum for drilled shaft foundations, the

lump-sum method of measurement and payment will be in accordance with Section 01 20 00 - Price and Payment Procedures, Article 1.03, and will include reinforcing steel.

C. Unit Price: If the Bid Schedule indicates a unit price for drilled shaft foundations, the unit-

price method of measurement and payment will be as follows:

1. Measurement:

a. Concrete for drilled shaft foundations, of each diameter, including test shaft foundations, will be measured for payment by the linear foot of shaft depth, measured from the cut-off line to the bottom of the shaft.

b. Reinforcing steel will be measured separately for payment as specified in

Section 03 20 00 - Concrete Reinforcing. c. Drilling of shafts (excavation), including drilling of method test shafts, will be

measured for payment as individual units (each), per each shaft drilled and accepted.

d. Load testing of drilled shaft foundations, both compressive load tests and lateral

load tests, will be measured for payment per each load test performed.



e. Groundwater control, exploratory drilling, support of excavation for shaft foundations, and steel casing, whether withdrawn or left in place, will not be measured separately for payment; and all costs in connection therewith will be considered incidental to and included with the construction of drilled shaft foundations.

2. Payment: Drilled shaft foundations will be paid for at the indicated Contract unit

prices for the computed quantities as determined by the measurement method specified in Article 1.02.C.1.

1.03 DEFINITIONS

A. The words and terms used in these Specifications conform with the definitions given in ACI 336.1.

B. The terms "drilled shaft" and "cast in drilled hole (CIDH) piles" are used interchangeably.

1.04 REFERENCES

A. ADSC: Association of Drilled Shaft Contractors:

1. "Standards and Specifications for the Foundation Drilling Industry"

B. American Concrete Institute (ACI):

1. ACI 336.1 Reference Specification for the Construction of Drilled Piers

C. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM):

1. ASTM D1143 Method of Testing Piles Under Static Axial Compressive Load 2. ASTM D3689 Method of Testing Individual Piles Under Static Axial Tensile

Load 3. ASTM D3966 Method of Testing Piles Under Lateral Loads

1.05 SUBMITTALS

A. General: Refer to Section 01 33 00 - Submittal Procedures, and Section 01 33 23 - Shop Drawings, Product Data, and Samples, for submittal requirements and procedures.

B. Concrete Reinforcement: Provide submittals in accordance with the requirements of Section

03 20 00 - Concrete Reinforcing. C. Qualifications of Welders and Welding Procedures: Provide submittals in accordance with

requirements of Section 03 20 00 - Concrete Reinforcing, for reinforcing steel, and with requirements of Section 05 05 22 - Metal Welding, for casing steel.

D. Portland Cement Concrete: Provide submittals in accordance with the requirements of Section 03 05 15 - Portland Cement Concrete. Include submittal for tremie concrete equipment and placement method.



E. Drilling Equipment: Submit description of equipment including but not limited to power rating, torque, downward thrust, and type and size of drilling tools to be used.

F. Records and Reports: Submit daily reports and shaft record reports or logs as required by

ADSC's "Standards and Specifications," using ADSC formats for forms. 1.06 QUALITY ASSURANCE

A. Construction Standards: Drilled shaft foundations shall be constructed in accordance with applicable requirements of ACI 336.1 and ADSC's "Standards and Specifications for the Foundation Drilling Industry."

B. Design Criteria:

1. Drilled shaft foundations shall consist of monolithically cast-in-place concrete piles of

the sizes indicated.

2. Shaft foundations shall be straight cylindrical shaft type as indicated. 3. Shaft foundations shall extend from the indicated concrete cutoff elevation to the

indicated tip elevation.

C. Tolerances:

1. Maximum variation of the center of any shaft foundation from the required location: 3 inches, measured at the ground surface.

2. Bottom Diameter: minus zero, plus 6 inches, measured in any direction.

3. Maximum variation from plumb: 1:40.

4. Maximum bottom level tolerance: plus or minus 2 inches.

D. Inspection of Shaft Excavations: 1. The Contractor shall provide equipment for checking the dimensions and alignment of

each shaft excavation. Dimensions and alignment shall be determined jointly by the Contractor and the Engineer. Final shaft depths shall be measured with an appropriate weighted tape measure or other approved method after final cleaning.

2. A minimum of 50 percent of the base of each shaft shall have less than 1/2 inch of

sediment at the time of placement of concrete. Maximum depth of sediment or debris at any place on the base of the shaft shall not exceed 1-1/2 inches. Shaft cleanliness will be determined by the Engineer by visual inspection.

1.07 SEQUENCING AND SCHEDULING

A. Unless otherwise permitted by the Engineer, the Contractor shall schedule drilling or excavating, installation of reinforcing steel, and concrete placement so that each excavated shaft is poured the same day that the drilling is performed.



B. Do not permit vibration or excessive wheel loads within the immediate vicinity of any shaft excavation until placement of concrete is complete. Maintain excavation stability at all times.

PART 2 - PRODUCTS 2.01 MATERIALS

A. Concrete Reinforcement: Conform with applicable requirements of Section 03 20 00 - Concrete Reinforcing, of grades and sizes indicated.

B. Concrete: Conform with applicable requirements of Section 03 30 00 - Cast-in-Place

Concrete, and Section 03 05 15 - Portland Cement Concrete. Provide class of concrete indicated on the Contract Drawings. Where class of concrete is not indicated, provide Class 3000 concrete.

1. Prepare separate mix designs for each class of concrete. 2. Slump for concrete: Slump shall be 5 inches plus or minus 1 inch for dry shafts

without temporary casing, and 7 inches plus or minus 1 inch for dry shafts with temporary casing.

C. Steel Casing:

1. Where earth wall of drilled shaft is unstable or has a tendency to slough, crumble, or

fall away, provide temporary steel casing to stabilize the shaft wall. 2. Inside diameter of the casing shall be the full diameter of the drilled shaft foundation

as indicated, plus or minus 1/2 inch. 3. Steel casing shall have adequate strength to withstand the pressure of concrete

placement without distortion. 4. Inside surfaces of steel casing shall be smooth and coated to facilitate easy lifting and

removal during placement of concrete. 2.02 EXCAVATING AND DRILLING EQUIPMENT

A. Excavating and drilling equipment shall have adequate capacity, including power, torque, and down thrust to excavate a hole of the maximum diameter and to a depth of 20 percent beyond the depth indicated. Excavation and overreaming tools shall be of adequate design, size, and strength to perform the work indicated.

B. When the material encountered cannot be drilled using conventional earth augers or

overreaming tools, special drilling equipment shall be provided, including rock core barrels, rock tools, air tools, and other equipment as necessary to construct the shaft excavation to the size and depth indicated.

PART 3 - EXECUTION 3.01 METHOD TEST SHAFTS



A. The Contractor shall demonstrate the adequacy of the methods and equipment to be

employed for excavating shafts by successfully constructing method test shafts. A minimum of three test shafts shall be constructed. The method test shafts shall include drilling, reinforcing steel, thread bars, and concrete placement.

B. Method test shafts shall be positioned away from the drilled shafts in the location indicated

or where approved by the Engineer in writing. Method test shafts shall be drilled to the maximum depth of any drilled shaft indicated.

C. Failure to demonstrate the adequacy of methods and equipment shall be sufficient reason for

the Engineer to require alterations in equipment and methods by the Contractor to eliminate unsatisfactory results.

D. Once approval has been given to construct drilled shafts, no change will be permitted in the

methods or equipment used to construct the satisfactory method test shaft without the written approval of the Engineer.

3.02 LOAD TESTS

A. Requirements:

1. The Contractor shall perform compression load tests, tension load tests, and lateral load tests as required to determine whether or not the shafts can carry and withstand the imposed loads. Tests shall be performed on the method test shafts. Except for shafts required for testing, additional shaft construction will not be permitted until the load tests are completed.

2. The Contractor shall provide all equipment and apparatus as required to conduct the

tests. 3. The Contractor shall install, remove, relocate, and reinstall weights and components as

necessary to perform and complete the tests. 4. Tests can be conducted as soon as practicable after the concrete in each drilled shaft

has attained the specified 28-day compressive strength, but not until at least 10 days have elapsed after placing the concrete.

B. Compression Load Tests: Tests shall be performed in accordance with ASTM D1143.

Method of load test shall follow "Quick Load Test Method for Individual Piles" as specified in ASTM D1143, Section 5.6. The maximum test load shall be at least twice the design load as prescribed by the Engineer. Apply the load in increments equal to 10 percent of the maximum test load, with a constant time interval between increments of 5 minutes. Maintain the maximum test load for not less than 15 minutes, unless the shaft has failed as determined by the Engineer. Remove the test load in increments equal to 25 percent of the maximum test load, with a constant time interval between increments of 5 minutes.

C. Tension Load Tests: Tests shall be performed in accordance with ASTM D3689. Method

of load test shall follow "Quick Load Test Method for Individual Piles" as specified in ASTM D3689, Section 7.7. The maximum test load shall be at least twice the design load as prescribed by the Engineer. Apply the load in increments equal to 10 percent of the



maximum test load, with a constant time interval between increments of 5 minutes. Maintain the maximum test load for not less than 15 minutes, unless the shaft has failed as determined by the Engineer. Remove the test load in increments equal to 25 percent of the maximum test load, with a constant time interval between increments of 5 minutes.

D. Lateral Load Tests: Tests shall be performed in accordance with ASTM D3966. Method of

load test shall follow "Standard Loading Procedures" as specified in ASTM D3966, Section 6.1.

3.03 EXCAVATION

A. General:

1. Excavate for shaft foundations by drilling or by other methods, as approved by method test shafts, to advance the excavation to the required bottom elevation. Avoid over excavation. Excavation shall be performed through whatever materials are encountered to the dimensions, depths, and tolerances indicated. Bottoms of excavations shall be level and flat.

2. When required by the Engineer, drill and core an exploratory hole, approximately 3 to

4 inches in diameter, to a depth of 15 feet below the excavation invert and backfill with grout.

3. Protect excavated walls with temporary steel casing as necessary to prevent cave-ins,

displacement of the surrounding earth, water incursion, injury to personnel, and damage from construction operations. Maintain indicated neat lines of excavation for cased areas.

4. Make bottom surfaces level within the tolerances specified herein. Remove loose

material, debris, and muck with cleaning buckets.

B. Ground Water Control:

1. Notify the Engineer immediately when ground water is encountered. 2. Suitable steel casings shall be furnished and placed when necessary to control water.

Drilling mud or chemical stabilizers shall not be used unless permitted by the Engineer.

C. Inspection: After completion of excavation and prior to placement of reinforcing steel, the

condition of the excavation will be inspected by the Engineer. Use clean-out buckets or air-lifts to remove any sloughage or other loose material from the shaft prior to placing reinforcing steel and concrete. An accumulation of soil or rock in the bottom of the excavation will not be permitted.

3.04 INSTALLATION OF CONCRETE REINFORCEMENT

A. Where it is not practicable to deliver the cage assembly to the jobsite as a complete unit ready for installation, make the remaining connections or splices, as indicated on the approved Shop Drawings, at-grade prior to lowering the assembly into the hole.



B. Lower reinforcing steel into the hole in such a manner as to prevent damage to the walls, and place and tie or clip symmetrically about the axis of the shaft. Use centering devices, securely attached to the cage, to clear the shaft walls and to maintain the cage in place throughout the concrete placement.

3.05 CONCRETE PLACEMENT

A. Place concrete in dry excavations whenever practicable. Use all practicable means to obtain a dry excavation before and during concrete placement.

3.06 WITHDRAWAL OF TEMPORARY STEEL CASING

A. Where temporary steel casings are used to support the excavation walls, withdraw the casing as the concrete is being placed, unless otherwise indicated or unless the Engineer requires that the casing be permanently grouted in place. Remove the steel casing in such a manner so that the lower edge of the steel liner will always remain a minimum of 5 feet below the surface of the concrete as placed to prevent water from entering the casing from the bottom. Vibrate concrete during withdrawal of the steel casing.

3.07 FIELD QUALITY CONTROL

A. Inspections and Tests: The Contractor shall perform inspections and tests of concrete as specified in Section 03 05 15 - Portland Cement Concrete.

B. Records and Reports: Keep a record, on an approved form, for each drilled shaft foundation

installed. Record on the form the location, dimensions, elevations of top and bottom, depth of stratum penetration, condition of bottom of excavation, concrete placement data, a continuous record of actual concrete volume placed versus theoretical volume, and any other data called for on the approved report form or pertinent to the foundation.

END OF SECTION 31 63 29

1

Carlos, Renato

From: Dave Hook <[email protected]>

Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2015 5:24 PM

To: Metzger, Chris; John Morris, VTA; McKiernan, Sean; Carlos, Renato

Cc: Sue Tippets; Samuel Yung; Daniels, Allison; Noriega, Rene

Subject: RE: The Crossings at Montague Pre-Cast Wall

Chris, thanks.

SCVWD is struggling here, although we are as committed as ever to helping VTA succeed. SCVWD has gone a long way

and made many compromises to keep this BART Extension Project moving and allow the critical path relocation of our

pipes, etc.

VTA had originally agreed to install a gate for SCVWD here. SCVWD very reluctantly agreed to accept a wall without a

gate.

This wall was removed for construction some time ago, but the VTA's contractor clearly did not spend any time on this

for many months (over a year is my first guess).

Today we find out the easement expires in 31 days.

This is an area with a number of parallel pipelines that are very close together. Although SCVWD does hope that no

maintenance or excavation is needed for a long time, we do need to be able to do it someday. We find out that the

proposed configuration includes drilled piers that are within our 12' trench envelope (needed to install shoring in the

future), which will block shoring installation in the area. This makes it either very difficult or impossible to install shoring

in this area without first removal of the drilled piers, and we're still waiting to find out how hard that might be and

whether doing so would damage either the SCVWD pipe or adjacent pipelines.

So far, we have not seen a proposal that assuages our concerns.

One idea would be for VTA and SSH to come up with a physical option that would be easy to remove and replace and

that would not prevent installation of shoring. This might not look the same as the current pre-cast wall. This would

address both Points 1 and 2, although it would require going back to the Crossings.

Another would be to move the drilled piers back to 12' perpendicular (6' on each side from pipe centerline) and pre-

install sheet piles or another shoring system acceptable to SCVWD now. This would require re-design of the wall as well

structurally.

Another option is for VTA to accept full responsibility for the costs and potential damages of removal of the piers and

protection of the pipelines in the area, along with impacts on shoring cost, etc. One way that SCVWD would clearly

accept would be revised easement language.

Right now, we need to see more creative options that do not involve SCVWD just leaving it at "well, this is in the future,

and it may not happen for a long time or ever".

We are open to meeting and talking about this, as long as we discuss real options that address our issues and concerns

as noted here.

David E. Hook, PE

2

Senior Engineer, CPRU

408-624-2040 cell

________________________________________

From: Metzger, Chris [[email protected]]


To: Dave Hook

Cc: Daniels, Allison; Noriega, Rene


Dave, a couple of points here. We did not ever discuss with the owner anything other than putting their wall back

where it was. We currently have not resolved with the owner any of our issues and are not in a positive negotiating

situation with them.

Our easement runs out in 31 days. (7/31/15) We need to get the wall re-installed by then. My understanding is the

panels are ready, we just need to figure out the foundation.

I Have not looked at the plans, but could the foundations form part of the shoring for removal/replacement option?

(shore up to either side)?

I know Bijal is out this week. I am out next week. There will be stiff penalties/problems created if we are not off the

Crossing property by the end of the month.

While I appreciate the long term concerns, we must also balance those what-ifs with the short term realities of impacts

to the public $ (that's yours and mine) that would result from lack of decisions/actions at this time....so help and

creativity are appreciated on this one at this time.

I will spool Rene up (he knows most of this already) so he can try to push the baton forward next week while I'm out.

Thanks all - we can do this, right???

-----Original Message-----

From: Dave Hook [mailto:[email protected]]


To: Metzger, Chris

Cc: Yung, Samuel


Chris, glad you enjoyed the show last week. It's always good to have people listening.

Thanks for working with legal/real estate. yes, this would need to be addressed in the easement language. Like the

Central Pipeline, we would need to see the language and concur.

We are working with Sean on Point 1, and still waiting for an answer to our question of how big of a deal would it be to

remove the piers before we install shoring.

David E. Hook, PE

3


408-624-2040 cell

________________________________

From: Metzger, Chris [[email protected]]

Sent: Monday, June 29, 2015 3:03 PM

To: Dave Hook


Dave,

I'll work with our legal/real estate folks. I'm assuming this will be resolved similar to issues with the 66" line. Of course

there will have to be some limitations related to expectations that any work would be done in a reasonable manner to

control overall costs - to SCVWD and VTA. The potential is great for the pipeline to outlive the wall in this location...so

risk needs to be put in proper context.

I presume the design is progressing to get to the point of technical (structural) approval and not slowing down for item

2??

Chris

p.s. listened to you a bit (last Monday?) on your evening show...good stuff


Sent: Monday, June 22, 2015 10:51 AM

To: McKiernan, Sean; Carlos, Renato; Yung, Samuel; Morris, John

Cc: Sue Tippets; Metzger, Chris


Sean,

Point taken on 1. We are not at all excited about a spread footing either.

Please advise us regarding what it would take in terms of equipment and effort to remove the drilled piers before we

install sheet piling for the future shoring, when needed. This is needed for us to get an idea about what the future

implications are to SCVWD. Given that there are a lot of parallel nearby pipelines, this is not a minor issue.

Point 2 will need to be resolved before we are OK with anything here.

Thanks,

David E. Hook, PE

Senior Engineer

CPRU

408 624-2040 cell

From: McKiernan, Sean [mailto:[email protected]]

Sent: Monday, June 22, 2015 10:36 AM

To: Dave Hook; Carlos, Renato; Samuel Yung; John Morris, VTA

Cc: Sue Tippets; Metzger, Chris


4

Good morning Dave.

In response to your two options below:

1. You provide an installation with a pier to pier distance of 31', centered on the pipe. That will work for us,

although it's not clear to us if you can really do that from a technical perspective.

RESPONSE: It is possible to span the 31ft, but creates a bigger issue for maintenance/repair on the line because we

would have to construct a CIP Spread Footing to support the wall for the entire length of the zone over the pipe. This

creates the same issue on a larger scale for reinstallation of the wall should any maintenance/repair need to be done in

the future on the line.

2. VTA provides clear, documented evidence of taking complete responsibility for paying for removal and

reinstallation of the pre-cast wall and drilled piers, along with taking responsibility for coordination with the property

owner.

RESPONSE: Chris Metzger (cc'd on this email) will be the point of contact for resolving item #2.

The current design with the wall centered over the water line is the best possible option taking into account all of these

variables. Both, Renato and I, are available for any questions on the design and installation plan. Thank you for

providing this topic attention.

Sean McKiernan, P.E.

Skanska/Shimmick/Herzog JV

1001 Montague Court

Milpitas, CA 95035

5

C: (510) 460-8302

O: (408) 678-0152

[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>

-----Original Message-----


Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2015 5:57 PM

To: Carlos, Renato; Samuel Yung; John Morris, VTA

Cc: McKiernan, Sean; Sue Tippets


Renato,

thanks for your hard work on this.

My apologies - I just realized how substantial the skew angle was on The Crossing wall vs. our pipe is.

Unfortunately, that has a substantial impact on the distance needed from pier to pier to miss our 12' trench envelope

(centered on the pipe) for a shored future excavation. Looking at the dimensions on your latest figure, that means we

would need 31' from center to center to provide a 12' trench envelope.

6

20', even centered on the pipe as we previously requested, would still leave the piers well within the area the piles

would have to go. If we leave it at that, or anything close to that, we would have to remove the piers before installing

shoring (sheetpiles).

So, I'm seeing two options here.

1. You provide an installation with a pier to pier distance of 31', centered on the pipe. That will work for us, although it's

not clear to us if you can really do that from a technical perspective.

2. VTA provides clear, documented evidence of taking complete responsibility for paying for removal and reinstallation

of the pre-cast wall and drilled piers, along with taking responsibility for coordination with the property owner.

We do not anticipate this needing to occur very often.

However, with piers within the trench (shoring) envelope, removal of the piers becomes a fairly big deal, and is a fairly

large change from the conditions facing SCVWD before the relocation of our pipe.

7

We may need to discuss this after you and John Morris think further.

Thanks,

David E. Hook, PE


408-624-2040 cell

________________________________

From: Carlos, Renato [[email protected]]

Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2015 2:03 PM

To: Dave Hook; Samuel Yung



Dave,

Attached is a revised package that is hopefully what you are looking for with the placement of the encroaching CIDH

pile.

I will follow up on Item #1 once I get more information/updates.

8

Thank you,

Renato


Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2015 10:56 AM

To: Carlos, Renato; Samuel Yung



Carlos,

SCVWD has two issues here.

1. As you noted, VTA (and other VTA agents) need to resolve VTA responsibility for future removal.

2. The drilled piers need to be centered across the pipe - i.e., 10'0" from pipe centerline to pier centerline on both

sides. Offset as proposed is not acceptable to SCVWD, due to impacts to future maintenance and/or replacement. While

we recognize the desire to match the existing wall segments, that is not a sufficient reason for SCVWD to accept that.

Thanks,

David E. Hook, PE

Senior Engineer

CPRU

9

408 624-2040 cell

From: Carlos, Renato [mailto:[email protected]]

Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2015 10:24 AM

To: Samuel Yung; Dave Hook

Cc: McKiernan, Sean

Subject: The Crossings at Montague Pre-Cast Wall

Sam,

Following up with what we spoke about earlier, I have attached a drawing and other pertinent references regarding the

construction of the proposed Sound Wall. Please review the drawings in reference to the requested SCVWD easement

and the encroachment of the CIDH pile. As we discussed, I will follow up with the following information:

1. Responsible party for handling of the sound wall panel for future removal.

2. Structural integrity of the CIDH pile for future excavation.

Please contact me if you have any further questions or concerns. 510-459-7842

Thank you,

Renato Carlos

Skanska-Shimmick-Herzog JV

10

SOE Engineer

Office: (408)678-0156

Moblie: (510)459-7842

This message, including any attachments hereto, may contain privileged or confidential information and is sent solely for

the attention and use of the intended addressee(s). If you are not an intended addressee, you may neither use this

message nor copy or deliver it to anyone. In such case, you should immediately destroy this message and kindly notify

the sender by reply email.

Thank you.

Documents

SVBX Section 31 63 29 Drilled Concrete Piers and Shafts AACvtaorgcontent.s3-us-west-1.amazonaws.com/Site... · SVBX - Berryessa Extension SUBMITTAL REVIEW Submittal Title: The Crossings